Laserfiche WebLink
2, A plan report (or separate plan components) addressing thoroughfares, open <br />space, utilities, and land use mainly; <br />3. Typically have no goals or objectives; <br />4. Typical of U.S. plans in the late 1920's through the 1960's (although, of <br />course, there were exceptions); <br />5. Generally exemplified through the U.S. Department of HUD "701" <br />requirements of 1954; <br />5. Advantages: At least provides some basis for the management of future <br />physical development of the city; and, <br />7. Disadvantages: Lacks the depth, stability, and flexibility of land use <br />decisions afforded by goals and objectives. <br />A Policy Plan: <br />1. Contains only policy discussions, with no future land use plan; <br />2. Characterized many plans during the 1970's through the mid- 1980's. A type <br />of this management style is reflected in the "management by objectives <br />(MBO)" approach which was practiced by business, industry, and <br />government during this period, and continues to be a management practice <br />favored by some; <br />3. Advantages: Provides broad -based guidelines for physical growth; <br />4. Disadvantages: <br />A. Does not graphically depict land use locations, and therefore does not <br />visually discern land use compatibility and spatial relationships, the <br />physical form of the community, or urban design opportunities; <br />B. Makes it difficult to prepare master thoroughfare plans, since the plan <br />cannot accurately portray where land uses and/or densities will be and <br />therefore cannot efficiently predict traffic generation or needed <br />thoroughfare rights -of -way. <br />C. Difficult to prepare the city's zoning ordinance and zoning district <br />maps, since these should be based on fixture land use plans; <br />D. Difficult to locate residential areas in relationship to community <br />facilities, schools, parks, commercial and industrial areas; and, <br />