The construction of places in today´s urban agglomerations is frequently associated to place-making and place-marketing policies. This trend clearly represents a global contemporary planning style. One of its typical manifestations is the insertion of prettified images of places in order to competitively use “urbanity” as a tool to attract people and entertain them in an interspersed assortment of iconic places. Results of empirical research studies demonstrate that stimuli that influence human experiences in the built environment, usually employed in macro levels of urban planning policies, are being increasingly adopted in local level projects, allowing for the presence of global influences in the definition of their identity. This paper addresses the impact global planning transfer renders to the context of local place identities – so as not to distort them exceedingly – and the best ways to evaluate the potential impact of environment-behaviour research on urban-architectural practice.The actual symposium brings a good opportunity to further develop the topic of situating local place identity within a global perspective. From the literature, there are several interesting research inputs that can work as guidance for this purpose. Three of them will be highlighted in the paper, namely the ones that deal with changes: (i) in the control of land (fragments); in the behaviours of people (urbanity); in the uses of vacant land (placeLeaks). Minton’s research indicates that new invented places can create extended fragments, entailing discontinuities in the morphology of the city fabric (Minton 2009:15-18). Consequently, the manifestation of urbanity in these areas may result different from urbanity encountered in spontaneously created places (Castello 2011 a). In other words, place-identity may experience variations, which determine variations in the fruition of urbanity. Finally, as for change in vacant land uses, recent studies argue that people are appropriating cities’ loose spaces and attributing them original uses (Franck and Stevens 2007) besides setting up new informal places of urbanity in the interfaces as PlaceLeaks (Castello 2011 b:3).Figuratively speaking, one can imagine being faced by a sort of a customization of urbanites going on in contemporary places. This disturbing hypothesis implies that design practice and policy, when appropriately managed, can effectively influence – and act – upon the interaction between people and environment, upon present day transactions between urbanites and their places.