The planning of cities is by nature a practice of forecasting: imagining, in the arrangement of space and resources, collective futures. However, this pursuit becomes discordant when planners’ interpretations of the future differ, sometimes wildly, from those for whom they claim to plan. The interpretive language of planners, now driven by data analysis and political maneuvers, and that of the public, often motivated by the constraints of lived experience, at times make it unlikely that the futures being planned can ever claim a collective aim. However, a unified basis of interpretative language, shared at different scales between governance and the governed, was once the central concern of spatial management. In the long lineage of those deemed stewards of the built environment, the inclusion of astrologers might appear unexpected or even paradoxical. The distant and perhaps non-existent relationship between the firm concrete of a sidewalk and the untethered vastness of the universe seems obvious. But there have been times, and perhaps there still are now, when builders, architects, planners, and designers asked the question: how can we position ourselves in relation to the vastness of the cosmos? One answer was to look at the skies and see not emptiness, but language.