|
|
The 21st Century Comprehensive Plan |
|
|
David Rouse, AICP, Todd Michael Chandler, and Jon Arason, AICP
|
© & Author Info |
The practice of comprehensive planning is undergoing significant changes as the 20th century draws to a close. In contrast to the top-down, data or policy based plans of the past, contemporary plans are driven by the issues and values identified by citizen participants in the planning process. Although many factors and events will undoubtedly influence planning in the future, several trends are already evident as we approach the new millennium. The emerging 21st century comprehensive plan can be described as values driven, collaborative, thematic based, linking process and outcome, regional in focus, and beyond paper.
The comprehensive or general plan - defined as a plan for the long-term development of a local government jurisdiction such as a city or county - emerged as a core area of planning practice during the 20th century. Various commentators have traced the roots of the comprehensive plan back to mid-19th century Europe (plans by George Eugene Haussmann for Paris and Ildefons Cerda for Barcelona) or to the City Beautiful movement in the United States (e.g., Daniel Burnham's 1909 plan for Chicago). These early plans advocated the imposition of highly formal designs, such as Haussmann's system of boulevards and parks, on the existing fabric of the city.
The 20th century comprehensive plan began to take shape with the ideas of Frederick Law Olmsted, Jr. and Alfred Bettman. At the 1911 National Conference on City Planning, Olmsted described the city plan as addressing "a single complex subject, namely the intelligence, control and guidance of the entire physical growth and alteration of cities," including all public and private uses of the land, recreation, and transportation facilities. Speaking before the same body in 1928, Bettman described a city plan as "a master design for the physical development of the city." Bettman defined more precisely than Olmsted the essential physical elements that should be included in the plan, including public improvements and the distribution of various types of private uses, including residential, commercial, and industrial. Both Olmsted and Bettman were members of the committee that prepared the Standard City Planning Enabling Act, published by the U.S. Department of Commerce. The 1928 Standard Act was eventually adopted by almost all the states and exerted a major influence on the development of the comprehensive plan. However, as described by T. J. Kent, Jr. in The Urban General Plan (1964), this act created confusion about the difference between the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance and failed to clearly define the essential physical elements of the plan, leading to what Kent termed "a twenty-year period of confusion as to the basic purposes and nature of the general plan."
The comprehensive plan came of age in the 1950's, spurred by population growth and the momentum for urban development following World War II, coupled with the adoption of Section 701 of the Housing Act of 1954. Section 701 required local governments applying for urban renewal assistance to adopt long-range general plans, prescribed the contents of the plans, and made money available for their development. During this period, T. J. Kent and F. Stuart Chapin, Jr. emerged as important theorists. In The Urban General Plan, Kent advanced this definition of the comprehensive or general plan:
"The general plan is the official statement of a municipal legislative body which sets forth its major policies concerning desirable future physical development; the published general-plan document must include a single, unified general physical design for the community, and it must attempt to clarify the relationships between physical-development policies and social and economic goals."
Kent believed that the plan should be long-range, comprehensive in its geographic scope, and general and inspirational in nature, with an emphasis on policy rather than specific actions. The client of the plan should be City Council as the elected representatives of the municipal population; the public and interest groups such as private developers and civic organizations are described as being on the "receiving end" of polices adopted by Council. Kent described the components of the general plan in terms similar to the guidelines of the 701 program, including sections on land use, community facilities, civic design, circulation, and utilities.
Although it focused on land use as one component of the general plan, Chapin's Urban Land Use Planning, first published in 1957, is nonetheless a significant landmark in the evolution of 20th century comprehensive planning. Based upon an assessment of land use suitability as the guide for calculating land use supply and matching it with demand, Chapin's theory of land use planning is diametrically opposed to the historical antecedents of the comprehensive plan in city design. Subsequent editions of this book, published in 1965, 1979, and 1995, elaborated upon this quantitative, data-driven approach to urban planning. The planning process set forth in Urban Land Use Planning is the rational model, consisting of a series of sequential steps: data analysis and trends projection; the formulation of alternatives for the future; the evaluation of the projected costs and benefits of the alternatives; and the selection of a preferred alternative for development into a land use plan.
From the City Beautiful movement through to Kent and Chapin, comprehensive plans shared one common characteristic: planning was essentially an elitist activity, with plans prepared by experts for civic leaders to adopt and implement, either as a physical design for redevelopment of the city or as a policy guide for future decision-making. This top-down approach came under siege as the turbulent events of the 1960's and 1970's (the civil rights movement, Vietnam, urban riots, etc.) unfolded and the nature of American society changed. The focus of planning shifted to new arenas such as grassroots advocacy, environmental protection, and growth management. The very idea of the comprehensive plan was seen as by many as irrelevant.
Despite these challenges, the comprehensive plan has resurfaced as a potent planning tool in the 1990's. Several factors have contributed to this reemergence. Over the past several decades a number of states adopted statutes requiring local jurisdictions to prepare comprehensive plans. These state planning mandates have been subject to criticism that, like the Section 701 program, they result in formulaic "compliance plans" with little incentive for local creativity. Perhaps the most extreme example, Florida's Local Government Comprehensive Planning Act, prescribes plan contents in detail, leaving little latitude for variation or interpretation. Nevertheless, there is little doubt that state planning mandates have provided considerable momentum for local comprehensive planning. More recent statutes, such as Maryland's Economic Growth, Resource Protection, and Planning Act of 1992, allow more flexibility in the content and policy direction of local plans within general guidelines set by the State.
Another powerful force for comprehensive planning is the accelerated pace of change in contemporary society. Diverse trends such as the advent of the post-industrial, global economy; the devolution of responsibilities from the federal to the state and local levels; and technological advances exponentially increasing citizens' access to information have created both uncertainty about the future and the sense of possibility of positive change. This in turn has prompted a fresh look at the comprehensive plan as a proactive tool for communities to engage and shape the issues that affect them.
Beginning with advocacy planning in the 1960's and its emphasis on grassroots citizen participation, comprehensive planning has been reinvigorated by several trends in contemporary practice. Strategic planning, a methodology developed for use by private corporations, is increasingly used by the public sector to evaluate internal and external factors affecting the future of a municipality and to identify specific strategies for dealing with change. Vision planning became popular in the 1980's as a way for a community to articulate a desired future based upon shared values defined through a collaborative planning process. In reaction to the "placelessness" and segregation of land uses characteristic of the urban sprawl that is consuming the American countryside, neo-traditionalism and its allied movements have brought physical design, largely abandoned in the land use and policy plans of earlier decades, back to center stage.
The innovative comprehensive plans of the 1990's draw upon the diverse strands in planning practice as they have evolved through the 20th century. A good example is provided by values-driven plans, such as the Cornerstone 2020 Plan for Louisville and Jefferson County, KY and the FOCUS ("Forging Our Comprehensive Urban Strategy") plan for Kansas City, MO. In contrast to "top-down" approaches that rely heavily upon data analysis and policy formulation by experts, or vision planning which in its purest form can emphasize collaborative processes at the expense of plan outcomes, values-driven planning is a hybrid methodology that incorporates elements of both approaches. Key characteristics of values-driven planning include a structured program of citizen involvement designed to identify community values and build consensus; data inventory and analysis focused on citizen-defined issues; the articulation of an overarching concept for the future based upon citizens' values; and translation of the concept into specific strategies and actions for implementation.
As the preceding commentary clearly details, the comprehensive plan has evolved and changed throughout the twentieth century. Thus, it is only natural to speculate about the ways comprehensive plans will likely change in the next millennium. Although many trends and events will undoubtedly influence planning in the future, several factors are already to helping change the face of planning as we get ready to transition to the 21st century. As described below, the following attributes of comprehensive plans have become apparent in recent years:
For the better part of this century, comprehensive plans were the byproduct of a top-down approach with little or no formal linkage to the constituency to be served by the plan. Over the last fifteen or so years, and as the reference to the Cornerstone 2020 plan for Louisville and Jefferson County and the FOCUS plan for Kansas City illustrates, this orientation has changed. Today, local plans are more likely to be driven by the issues and values expressed by citizens rather than by government fiat. Planning has become a partnership wherein the total community gives tangible expression to the aspirations and values they collectively share. In comprehensive plans, this is typically expressed in a vision statement or other organizing conceptual structure that captures the aspirations of the citizens for the future and provides the foundation for the plan's resulting goals, policies, and implementation strategies.
Closely related to the values-driven concept is the growing realization that meaningful citizen involvement must be part of the plan development process. More and more, comprehensive plans involve elaborate and carefully crafted public involvement programs, utilizing a variety of techniques such as citizens advisory committees, stakeholder interviews, community forums, and focus groups. These programs place a premium on the ability of professional planners to design effective citizen involvement processes that respond to local community characteristics and needs. Throughout the process, planners play a key role in providing relevant information and context, facilitating decision-making and consensus building, and giving expression to the work of citizens.
As an example, Louisville and Jefferson County's Cornerstone 2020 plan featured a collaborative design involving multiple jurisdictions and multiple government agencies, as well as private organizations, businesses, and citizens. Cornerstone 2020 began with a community-based visioning effort involving more than 600 residents from across the community. After several meetings and iterations, a vision and values statement was crafted and endorsed. This statement served as the foundation for the entire Cornerstone 2020 planning initiative, which involved more than 30 technical plans and projects developed over several years. Four citizen advisory committees were established and assigned specific plan development duties commensurate with the vision and values statement.
Pick up most any plan and you will discover a series of chapters devoted to seemingly discrete topics or elements such as housing, land use, and community facilities. This structure is reinforced in some states by statutes that mandate the contents of comprehensive plans. While easy to follow, this structure makes it difficult address the interrelationships between topics such as land use and transportation. To overcome this limitation, plans are now being organized according to broader themes that facilitate a more integrated approach to policy development and implementation. The newly adopted Suffolk, VA plan is representative of this approach.
The City of Suffolk is located in southeastern Virginia. Suffolk, while physically large at 350 square miles, is a sparsely populated community of approximately 55,000 persons. Adjacent communities include the Cities of Portsmouth, Chesapeake, Virginia Beach and Norfolk with nearly one million total residents. As might be imagined, Suffolk, which has been an agricultural community for more than 350 years, is facing a host of growth related pressures.
The city's planning commission, in deciding how best to prepare for the future, decided to revise the city's comprehensive plan. In so doing, a deliberate decision was made to develop the plan according to themes rather than chapters. The themes selected included balanced growth, responsible regionalism, environmental protection, preservation of rural character, core city revitalization, and enhanced economic vitality. As a result of establishing themes, the planning commission felt more confident in its ability to integrate planning policy with planning and community goals. The end product, which was unanimously adopted by the city council, masterfully links the different themes that distinguish Suffolk as a community.
A typical criticism of traditional plans is that they end up on the shelf, having little effect on the real world. Values-driven and collaborative planning processes are designed, in large part, to give citizens a stake in developing the plan and to create momentum for plan implementation. Successful 21st century plans will connect citizen values (as expressed in the vision and goals) with a clearly defined action agenda. The comprehensive plan adopted by Blacksburg, VA in 1996 features this characteristic.
Blacksburg is a community of 38,000 residents located on a plateau in the Alleghany Mountains of Southwest Virginia approximately 40 miles west of Roanoke. Blacksburg is home to Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University (Virginia Tech), which is the largest university in the State of Virginia. A primary goal of the 1996 Blacksburg plan was refinement of a specific schedule for the plan implementation. As a result, the planning commission incorporated within the plan a schedule of action steps tied to specific plan objectives. In addition, the plan identified the party(s) responsible for performing the necessary tasks. A master implementation schedule was developed and incorporated into the plan noting when the various plan elements would be implemented. To date, Blacksburg is ahead of schedule with respect to implementing its local land use plan.
For much of this century, community land use plans were developed with little consideration shown for surrounding localities. Recent technological, economic, and governmental trends have made it clear that localities are interdependent, and that many issues go beyond municipal boundaries. To address this reality, communities such as Suffolk and Annapolis, MD are choosing to incorporate a regional focus within their local plans. This approach allows the community to address problems and opportunities that are regional in scope. As part of implementation of the "Landscapes - Managing Change in Chester County" (PA) Comprehensive Plan, the county provides planning assistance grants for projects involving two or more local communities. As citizen concerns over regional issues such as urban sprawl intensify, multi-jurisdictional planning initiatives are likely to become more prominent in the 21st century.
As the 21st century approaches, the information age is enabling the creation of plans that transcend the traditional limitations of written documents. GIS, the Internet, CD-ROM, and computer visualization are examples of technological advances that have changed or are changing the manner in which plans are prepared and presented. Citizen involvement programs are using local access technology and the Internet to reach wider audiences. Plans are becoming increasingly available on the Internet or on CD-ROM. In the future, interactive formats will likely become commonplace.
Another trend that is likely to continue in the future is a shift away from sole reliance on text to the use of diagrams and illustrations to depict desired plan outcomes. For example, the Irving, TX Comprehensive Plan, adopted in 1997, includes a series of photographs and sketches to help the reader visualize "before" and "after" conditions associated with the recommendations of the Urban Design Element. While the use of illustrations is facilitated by computer technology, it also is evocative of the roots of comprehensive planning in the physical designs and diagrams of Daniel Burnham and others. A major difference is that contemporary plans use illustrative techniques as part of values-based and collaborative planning processes.
Annapolis is a city of approximately 35,000 people located in Anne Arundel County, MD, within the metropolitan region of Baltimore and Washington, DC. It is known for its historic downtown, the U.S Naval Academy, and the state capital of Maryland. The evolution of the comprehensive plan and comprehensive planning process in Annapolis are representative of the interplay of forces that have altered or will alter the nature of comprehensive planning in the future. Over the last 30 years, Annapolis has developed a number of plans, each of which has incrementally advanced the values-driven, decentralized, and collaborative processes that will be the hallmarks of 21st century planning. Six successive planning documents are of particular note in illustrating this continuum:
The 1985 Comprehensive Plan was a breakthrough effort for Annapolis inasmuch as it began the collaborative process between the city and its citizens. It contrasts with previous planning efforts that were staff/issue driven and focused on land use and ancillary issues (e.g., transportation or the environment), consequently lacking the power to motivate citizens beyond a reformulation of the status quo. In prior plans, the ancillary issues were treated as appendages rather than as integral and interrelated aspects of land use planning.
In the development of the 1985 Comprehensive Plan, the then Planning Director, Ms. Eileen P. Fogarty, began by identifying principal city groups and organizations, including residential, civic, business, and special interests, and bringing them into the planning process at the outset. The result was a plan that was founded on a broader consensus around the form the city should take and actions that were necessary to effectuate this future. The effort to truly involve the public in developing the framework and recommendations of the plan was a first for Annapolis and established the expectation of meaningful citizen participation throughout the long-range planning process.
Involving the public in plan development began to develop the necessary bonds of trust between the citizenry and bureaucracy that was the crucial first step in the evolution of the planning process in use today. Nevertheless, even though the 1985 Annapolis Comprehensive Plan was an important departure from previous planning efforts, it was only a first step.
The Maritime Zoning and Economic Strategy was a plan developed specifically for the city's waterfront. Its importance in the evolution of the comprehensive planning process lies in three areas.
The first is that the Maritime Zoning and Economic Strategy was based upon a consensus-derived vision of the community that contrasted starkly with the actual development trends, which were driven by the value of waterfront property for non-maritime (residential and commercial) uses. 'Vision' - as opposed to 'goal' - is the key word. Residential and non-residential property owners and business people were able to agree upon a vision for Annapolis in which the maritime industry is a key component of city's heritage, future, and self-image.
The second is that by agreeing upon a maritime-centered vision for the community, residential and commercial interests were able to find common ground and work together to develop the policy and regulatory structures necessary to effectuate the vision.
The third is that in developing these policies and regulations, consensus building based upon compromise, with the consequences evaluated against the vision, was the process used. The outcome of this effort was maritime zoning districts that significantly altered uses allowed on the waterfront, resulting in the preservation of maritime uses at the expense of high-density commercial and residential development. The notion of the importance of the city's maritime heritage has remained a strong and effective force in Annapolis to this day.
Eastport Views was a sector study performed for an older part of the city outside of the historic district. Lying across Spa Creek from downtown Annapolis, Eastport had become a very desirable residential location. Being convenient to downtown and lacking the rigorous design review process of the historic district, the character of Eastport was changing from its origins as a Chesapeake Bay waterman's community to an upscale address. Smaller houses were being demolished and lots consolidated to build larger and larger houses. In Eastport Views, the local citizens developed a vision of Eastport based upon the built environment and the effect of the built environment on the notion of community. Two key elements grew out of the community's desire to preserve its neighborhood: 1) a design overlay developed to ensure compatibility of new development with the historic fabric and 2) special attention to maintaining the various nonconforming commercial uses that had evolved over time as an integral part of the community.
Eastport Views was important in the evolution of planning in Annapolis because of its development of a community vision centered around 'neighborhood' and the impact of the built environment on maintaining positive community interactions.
The Ward One Sector Study was a major undertaking encompassing Annapolis' historic district, commercial core, and residential districts; the Maryland State Government campus; and the Naval Academy. As the center of the city, Ward One is the area where impacts associated with tourism, entertainment, traffic, conflicts between residential and commercial users, etc. converge. Due to the complexity and seeming enormity of the problems and their interrelations, it was imperative to proceed in an inclusive manner, generating ideas from all segments of the downtown community. This plan also recognized that issues of land use, parking, economics, traffic, design, transit, environment, and preservation needed to be interwoven in order to produce a workable blueprint for progress. By recognizing the dependence of each element on other elements, the Ward One Sector Study drew competing interests together and developed a consensus plan.
The Ward One Sector Study marked the first time that competing, sometimes antagonistic interests were brought together in a long-term and meaningful way in order to find solutions to vexing problems. Each side recognized that the status quo was ultimately unacceptable and therefore developed an understanding of opposing problems and values and built compromise around these values (whether shared or not).
The Clay Street Revitalization Plan was developed to stabilize and improve an inner city neighborhood in Annapolis. The revitalization plan borrowed from the techniques of previous plans and brought together a cross-section of interests to identify the issues and determine appropriate courses of action. It was discovered early on that the issues confronting this neighborhood went beyond traditional planning models and approaches. The community understood its problems and had an unarticulated vision for its future. The Clay Street Revitalization Plan first assisted in articulating a strongly held value of community empowerment and then brought to bear various social service functions, in addition to land use and physical planning, on the identified problems.
Land use and design were ultimately but a small part of the plan. Economic empowerment, public safety, and social services constituted the majority of the study and implementation effort. The Clay Street Revitalization Plan indicated the imperative to develop a holistic approach in the planning effort, in so far as the usual planning process was not capable of effectuating a positive future without addressing more fundamental needs of residents.
Like the 1985 Comprehensive Plan, the 1998 Annapolis Comprehensive Plan was prepared with the assistance of the planning firm Wallace Roberts & Todd. The 1998 plan built upon and formalized the participatory, thematic, and visioning elements that had become a part of the planning process over time, and by building upon the success of previous efforts, provided a model for a new plan development process.
The 1998 plan represented a radical departure from the traditional model of analyzing data, plotting trends, and developing goal and objectives for various planning and public service related activities. Instead, the planning process began with extensive interviews (more than 100) of residents and representatives of businesses and institutions. These interviews developed a picture - a collage actually - of Annapolis from various perspectives, both positively and negatively, and generated issues and ideas. One finding, for example, was that many residents identified more strongly with their neighborhoods than with Annapolis as a whole.
Through these interviews, it was discovered that diverse groups shared many of the same concerns, but for different reasons. For example, the quality of education was seen by commercial interests as a hindrance to business relocation and therefore economic development efforts, and by residents as an area of concern relative to the well-being of their children. This held true in many areas, such as traffic congestion, economic development, and, in an issue that arose for the first time, regional cooperation.
With the perspectives gained from these interviews, a diverse committee of more than 70 members was formed. This committee immediately began to discuss what they valued about Annapolis and what they feared the community could become without careful stewardship. External forces that were having an increasing impact on the quality of life for Annapolitans, including regional development and congestion, evolving workplace needs, access to quality education, and national trends in local industries such as boating, were identified. Through a process that emphasized incremental consensus building, it was found that, in spite of the diversity of the committee, all could agree on core values and could adopt a vision to guide the comprehensive planning effort. These core values are a city characterized by:
The vision emphasizes linkages among the three - both physical and social. The vision further recognizes integration of Annapolis in the larger regional context.
Based upon the identification of these values, the committee organized itself around major themes: regionalism, neighborhoods, economic development, and transportation. Out of the four thematic areas, action recommendations were developed to address a broad range of issues. These actions were required in order to support the community values and ensure progress toward implementing the vision.
As required in part by Maryland's Economic Growth, Resource Protection, and Planning Act, the plan makes recommendations in the traditional areas of land use, transportation, housing, economic development, community facilities, environment, and urban design. In addition, it establishes a framework for the development of a regional body, makes specific recommendations relative to public education, discusses health care and human services, and recommends greater interaction between the city and the housing authority.
The plan represents a true collaborative effort and partnership between the municipal government and citizens. During the painstaking process of agreement on core values and further refinement of a vision, no attempt was made to steer the discussions in any direction other than that chosen by the participants. The collaborative effort took countless hours of discussion, synthesis, and presentation to develop a consensus, but this effort proved more than worthwhile when potential specific recommendations were considered. All recommendations were evaluated against the expressed community values, and if lacking were discarded.
In order to involve the community at large in plan development, public forums were conducted at key stages to ensure that the public as a whole could agree with the recommendations of the citizens advisory committee.
To disseminate the plan, the Planning Department placed it in its entirety on the departmental web site. As changes in the plan occurred, the web site was also changed. In order to ensure the broadest possible public access to the draft plan, copies were put in a number of unconventional locales, such as coffee shops, doctors and dentist offices, bars, restaurants, libraries, and laundromats.
To planners, the content and processes of the 1998 Annapolis Plan described above may seem intuitive, but in reality the techniques used in plan formulation, development, and dissemination are recent additions to our toolkit. Planning is a dynamic endeavor that is evolving to meet the needs of a changing population in a world characterized by technological and economic change. Values-driven/collaborative planning is a natural outgrowth of the times in which we live and public we are required to serve.
Earlier top-down planning focused on physical form and function or quantifiable data and their role in guiding development. The superficial aspects of this approach have become its primary weakness and impede its use as an effective long-range planning tool today.
For many reasons, Americans are looking for deeper meaning and understand that decisions made by government have an important and direct impact on their lives. Quality of life can no longer be defined by acres of parkland, average commuting time, or distance to the nearest school, but is now stated in terms of values such as fulfillment, empowerment, and human potential. As population growth has magnified pressures on land and public services, made competitive the things we used to take for granted, and generally increased the stress of individual and family life, the public has taken a much more profound interest in the activities of government and seeks to ensure that these activities do not contribute to a downward spiral in quality of life. Also, depersonalization and alienation are giving way to a yearning for a sense of belonging to a community. But local communities exist in a larger region where the decisions of someone else's elected officials can have grave consequences for each individual. Frustration over the inability of neighboring governments to cooperate in any meaningful manner has been growing as seemingly random and/or competitive land use and transportation decisions have incrementally, over time, created what many regard as a mess. The public wants regional solutions but gets local decision-making.
These values cannot be articulated without the meaningful involvement of citizens in planning and cannot be implemented using older models such as policy plans based upon simple objectives or two-dimensional land use plans. Hence collaboration, values, and themes; inclusion, diversity, and understanding. An example of a community adapting to change, Annapolis has witnessed an evolution in planning efforts that culminated in the 1998 Comprehensive Plan. This plan is a model that is suited to the needs of citizens at the end of this century and will become the basis for the city's planning efforts into the next millennium.
Chandler, Michael. "The 21st Century Comprehensive Plan," Planning Commissioners Journal, Number 31, Summer 1998, p. 4.
Hall, Peter. "The Turbulent Eighth Decade: Challenges to American City Planning," APA Journal, Summer 1989, pp. 275-282.
Helling, Amy. "Collaborative Visioning: Proceed With Caution!, Results From Evaluating Atlanta's Vision 2020 Project," Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 64, No. 3, Summer 1998, pp. 335-349.
Hollander, Elizabeth L. et. al. "General Development Plans," The Practice of Local Government Planning, Second Edition. Washington, DC: International City Management Association, 1988, pp. 60-91.
Kaiser, Edward J., and David r. Godschalk. "Twentieth Century Land Use Planning: A Stalwart Family Tree," Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 61, No. 3, Spring 1995, pp. 365-385.
Kaiser, Edward J., David R. Godschalk, and F. Stuart Chapin. Urban Land Use Planning, Fourth Edition. Urbana, IL: University of Illinois Press, 1995.
Kent, T. J., Jr. The Urban General Plan. Chicago: Planners Press, American Planning Association, 1990. First published in 1964 by Chandler Publishing Company.
Neuman, Michael. "Does Planning Need the Plan?," Journal of the American Planning Association, Vol. 64, No. 2, Spring 1998, pp. 208-220.
Oregon Visions Project. A Guide to Community Visioning: Hands-on Information for Local Communities. Oregon Chapter, American Planning Association, 1993.
Rouse, David. "A Values-Driven Approach to Comprehensive Planning," Revolutionary Ideas in Planning: Proceedings of the 1998 National Planning Conference. AICP Press, 1998, pp. 29-42.
David Rouse, AICP
Wallace Roberts &
Todd Michael Chandler
Virginia Tech University
Jon Arason, AICP
City of Annapolis, MD