|
EDWARD I KAISER AND DAVID R. GODSCHALK
<br />American Law Institute (ALI) Model Land Develop-
<br />ment Code, the 1972 Coastal Zone Management Act,
<br />and the 1973 Oregon Land Use Law.
<br />- The verbal policy plan de- emphasizes mapped policy or
<br />end -state visions and focuses on verbal action policy
<br />statements, usually quite detailed; sometimes called
<br />a strategic plan, it is rooted in Meyerson's (1956)
<br />middle -range bridge to comprehensive planning,
<br />Fagin's (1959) policies plan, and PerlofFs (1980)
<br />strategies and policies general plan-
<br />- The development management plan lays out a specific
<br />program of actions to guide development, such as a
<br />public investment program, a development code,
<br />and a program to extend infrastructure and services;
<br />and it assumes public sector initiative for influenc-
<br />ing the location, type, and pace of growth. The roots
<br />of the development management.plan are in the en-
<br />vironmental movement, and the movements for
<br />state growth management and.community growth
<br />control (DeGrove 1984), as well as in ideas from
<br />Fagin (1959) and the ALI Code.
<br />We looked for, but could not find, examples of
<br />land use plans that could be termed purely prototypi-
<br />cal "strategic plans," in the sense of Bryson and Eins
<br />weiler (1988). Hence, rather than identifying strategic
<br />planning as a separate branch on the family tree of the
<br />land use plan; we see the influence of strategic plan-
<br />ning showing up across a range of contemporary
<br />plaris. We tend to agree with the planners surveyed by
<br />Kaufman and Jacobs (1988) that strategic planning
<br />differs from good comprehensive planning more in
<br />emphasis (shorter range, more realistically targeted,
<br />more market oriented) than in kind.
<br />The Land Use Design Plan
<br />The land use design plan is the most traditional
<br />of the four prototypes of contemporary plans and is
<br />the most direct descendent of the Kent- Chapin -701
<br />plans of the 1950s and 1960s. It proposes a long - range
<br />future urban form as a pattern of retail, office, indus-
<br />trial, residential, and open spaces, and public land uses
<br />and a circulation system. Today's version, however, in-
<br />corporates environmental processes, and sometimes
<br />agriculture and forestry, under the "open space " cate-
<br />gory of land use. Its land uses often include a "mixed
<br />use category, honoring the neotraditional principle
<br />of closer mingling of residential, employment, and
<br />shopping areas. In addition, it may include a develop-
<br />ment strategy map, which is designed to bring about
<br />the future urban form and to link strategy to the com-
<br />munity's financial capacity to provide infrastructure
<br />and services. The plans and strategies are often orga-
<br />nized around strategic themes or around issues about
<br />372 - APA JouRML ■ SUNIM 1995
<br />31
<br />growth, environment, economic development, trans-
<br />portation, or neighborhood /community scale change.
<br />Like the other types of plans in vogue today, the ,
<br />land use design plan reflects recent societal issues, par-
<br />ticularly the environmental crisis, the, infrastructure
<br />crisis, and stresses on local government finance. Con -
<br />temporary planners no longer view environmental
<br />factors as development constraints, but as valuable re-
<br />sources and processes to be conserved. They also may
<br />question assumptions about the desirability and inev-
<br />itability of urban population and economic growth,
<br />particularly as such assumptions stimulate demand
<br />for expensive new roads, sewers, and schools. While
<br />at midcentury plans unquestioningly accommodated
<br />growth, today's plans cast the amount, pace, location,
<br />and costs of growth as policy choices to be determined
<br />in the planning process.
<br />The 1990 Howard County (Maryland) General Plan,
<br />winner of an American Planning Association (APA)
<br />award in 1991 for outstanding comprehensive .plan -
<br />ning, exemplifies contemporary land use design. (See
<br />figure 4.) While clearly a direct descendent of the tradi-
<br />tional general plan, the Howard County plan adds new
<br />types of goals, policies, and planning techniques. To
<br />enhance communication and public understanding, it
<br />is organized strategically around six themes /chapters
<br />(responsible regionalism, preservation of the rural
<br />area, balanced growth, working with nature, commu-
<br />nity enhancement, and phased growth), instead of the
<br />customary plan elements. Along with the traditional
<br />land use design, the plan includes a "policy map"
<br />(strategy map) for each theme and an overall policies
<br />map for the years 2000 and 2010. A planned service
<br />area boundary is used to contain urban growth within
<br />the eastern urbanized part of the county, home to the
<br />well- known. Columbia New Town.10 The plan lays out
<br />specific next steps to, be implemented over the next.
<br />two years, and defines yardsticks for measuring suc-
<br />cess. An extensive public participation process for for-
<br />mulating the plan involved a 32- member General Plan
<br />Task Force, public opinion polling to discover citizen
<br />concerns, circulation of preplan issue papers on devel-
<br />opment impacts, and consideration of six alternative
<br />development scenarios."
<br />The Land Classification Play .
<br />Land classification, or development priorities
<br />mapping, is a proactive effort by government to spec-
<br />ify where and under what conditions growth will oc-
<br />cur. Often, it also regulates the pace or timing of
<br />growth. Land classification addresses environmental
<br />protection by designating "nondevelopment" areas in
<br />especially vulnerable locations. Like the land use de-
<br />sign, the land classification plan is spatially specific
<br />
|