Planning theories and concepts have been evolved from the classical planning to post-modern planning. Which planning theory is appropriate to which community under which circumstances is still a matter of debate to be accentuated, particularly in developing countries. However, planning practice in Turkey is based on comprehensive planning theory, which is a bureaucratic and top-down approach. On the contrary, the contemporary planning approach espouses participation of the local citizens and locale. Public participation as a planning tool has not yet taken its place in Turkish planning rules and laws. So, public participation depends on the goodwill of local planning authorities and is practiced at a limited level. Having limited participation should be closely related with the quality of participants, recognition of planning site or community, awareness of problems of that community and the level of being. So, the following assumptions are of interest of this paper which is thought to be important in planning. Whether urban consciousness is a possessed merit or acquired afterwards, could citizens be enlightened in this matter. Whether being urban and having urban consciousness contribute to the solution of the urban problems through participation in the planning and plan-implementation processes. Whether the level of being urban is similar throughout the community or in the city. Whether being urban is related to the place where people live and to their social status, and if yes, whether being urban could be mapped/charted. Elaboration on the above assumptions/questions is the essence of this paper and the analytical parts of the study will clarify them.