Talk:Land-use planning

Template:WAP assignment This article was the subject of a Wiki Education Foundation-supported course assignment, between 21 January 2020 and 15 May 2020. Further details are available on the course page. Student editor(s): Hannahazimi (article contribs). Peer reviewers: Christinetranster, Arielaxelrad.

Untitled

the present link to german: flächennutzungsplanung (fnp) is not correct. in direct translation lup and fnp have the same meaning but unlike lup, fnp only covers a certain local level of planning. so i will erase this link. on the other hand, the german term for covering all kinds of planning is "raumplanung" (spacial planning) or rather "raum- und umweltplanung" (spacial and environmental planning). these two terms are already linked so it's hard to find a proper link for lup. i'll think about it. Sundar1 20:18, 7 December 2006 (UTC)

Translation

the link to german "flächennutzungsplan" doesn't mak any sense as planning is an activity and plan is the result of it! it should be translated to "Raumordnung" as it is used in many contexts. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 212.186.7.67 (talk) 15:09, 7 December 2007 (UTC)

I removed the interlink "Raumordnung" again, because it refers ONLY to a bigger scale and general development of regions (i. e. a federal state, territory, in Germany Bundesland or part of a Bundesland). The term "Land Use Planning" describes spatial planning in more scales, like community planning though. It is better translated with "Raumplanung", but in deed the German article about that is not vry good. Anyway, I will link it.--Brutus Brummfuß (talk) 12:41, 10 December 2008 (UTC)

Merge proposal

• Spatial planning and Land use planning are two different things. In effect spatial planning is a function of Land Use planning which is the wider activity. They can't be merged. Bjrobinson 14:15, 20 April 2007 (UTC)
• I agree. They dont really seem like the same thing. Mmcknight4 20:12, 23 April 2007 (UTC)
• Land use planning is in fact just one aspect of spatial planning [1]. In this manner, it would rather be more suitable to add 'Land use planning' as a sub-section into 'Spatial planning' article. I am also surprised that the person proposing merge never posted any justification. --IslesCape^Talk 11:39, 29 April 2007 (UTC)
• That's interesting, as i'd say it was the other way around. Spatial planning is about integrating land uses such as balancing jobs and housing, and other facilities including social and transport, a 'spatial strategy' attempts to consider development within the wider context, directing development for wider aims. But Land use planning is the actual activity, spatial planning being a function of that? I'm happy to hear any differing views, maybe I will try and find a proper book! Bjrobinson 09:58, 30 April 2007 (UTC).
• Actually the second paragraph explains that pretty well anyway. The planning portal definition pretty much says the same although; ' Spatial planning goes beyond traditional land use planning ', should not be interpreted as Land Use planning being subservient to spatial planning, especially given that this definition is very uk-centric? Regardless of this debate I think we have decided that a merge should not happen? Bjrobinson 10:03, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

While interrelations may exist at different levels, it is obvious that both artciles have sufficient potential for individual expansion. The perceptions also vary across Europe. So, I agree with you, no merge necessary.--IslesCape^Talk 15:49, 30 April 2007 (UTC)

Great. I'll get rid of that pesky tag then :-) Bjrobinson 10:09, 1 May 2007 (UTC)

academic journals

• I was looking for some academic journals to publish land use planning data in and I thought it would be great to have a resource like this in wokipedia to help readers and authors identify appropriate journals. I hope others can contribute as well. Regards, SoilMan2007 (talk)

Yes, I agree. This is a very good idea. If you check out the WP pages on academic journals, you'll see that this is a whole area that needs expansion. Eyedubya (talk) 22:01, 18 February 2008 (UTC)

Catastrophes

Does anyone know of good examples of catastrophic events that have occurred because of inadaquate land use planning. —Preceding unsigned comment added by SoilMan2007 (talk • contribs) 18:46, 22 February 2008 (UTC)

Brief assessment of this article

I'm planning on editing this article significantly as part of a masters level class in Public Policy. I'm surprised at the lack of information in the article, given the prevalence of the discipline in the public sector.

The major technical issue with this article (as it is written) is that there are no footnotes in the body of the text, so none of the information is verifiable. I will attempt to add references to the information that already exists.

Another issue is the general lack of information. Adding information to the article will provide me with the bulk of my work. I will use information from credible sources such as academic journals, footnote them, and create a reference section. "Real life" examples of land use planning will help to illustrate the topic, and I will reference these from various media sources.

As this article reflects, it is difficult to find one definition that explains precisely what "land use planning" is. The definition that I like the best, so far, is "the systematic assessment of physical, social and economic factors in such a way as to encourage and assist land users in selecting options that increase their productivity, are sustainable and meet the needs of society." Guidelines for Land Use Planning, United Nations, 1993.SylvaSG (talk) 15:03, 5 February 2011 (UTC)

This is a big undertaking - good luck!! As you add to page, I have content and sources on Health Impact Assessment and land use planning and also on US 93 in Montana. A great project, won multiple awards for creating gains in environment, culture,and social capital etc. The US Wiki page on US 93 is not great - here is link http://www.mdt.mt.gov/pubinvolve/us93info/overview.shtml to the MTDOT project overview. The conflict around the project was much more intense than what you will find described by DOT. Although it might be considered transportation planning, it is really about many things - relationships of people with the land, with one another, with the economy, cultural conflict, creative problem-solving and seems relevant to concepts of land use planning. Anne CortesAC19 (talk) 17:06, 29 March 2011 (UTC)

Dr. Cheshire's comment on this article

Dr. Cheshire has reviewed this Wikipedia page, and provided us with the following comments to improve its quality:

Land-use planning is the general term used for a branch of urban planning encompassing various disciplines which seek to order and regulate land use in an efficient and ethical way, thus preventing land-use conflicts.

Comment: land-use conflicts is a vague term: also I think this definition omits the role of Land Use Planning in co-ordinating land infrastructure and development and maintaining the supply of land-based public goods. For example a major role of L-UP is to maintain open land in urbanised development especially for public and strategic uses such as transport corridors and public pen spaces.

In doing so, the governmental unit can plan for the needs of the community while safeguarding natural resources. To this end, it is the systematic assessment of land and water potential, alternatives for land use, and economic and social conditions in order to select and adopt the best land-use options.[1] Comment: at least to an economist this makes no sense. What is described here is exactly what markets (in this case land markets) do. It is necessary to explain what L-UP adds to or regulates markets; and why this is socially beneficial.

The American Planning Association states that the goal of land-use planning is to further the welfare of people and their communities by creating convenient, equitable, healthful, efficient, and attractive environments for present and future generations.[3] Comment: again since this is what markets do (except while they determine distribution they are not concerned with equity) it needs to be explained what palling adds to markets and why necessary/useful.

The ambiguous nature of the term “planning”, as it relates to land use, is historically ... Comment: This is ridiculously US-centric. Historically the Romans 'planned' their cities. The intellectual roots of planning in a modern sense certainly go back to mid-19th C Europe. A good book is Peter Hall's Urban & Regional Planning [Hall, P.G. (1975) Urban and Regional Planning. Harmondsworth/London: Penguin.]. This is h=not referenced here.

This system, combined with the interstate highway system, widespread availability of mortgage loans, growth in the automobile industry, and the over-all post-World War II economic expansion, destroyed most of the character that gave distinctiveness to American cities. The urban sprawl that most US cities began to experience in the mid-twentieth century was, in part, created by a flat approach to land-use regulations. Zoning without planning created unnecessarily exclusive zones. Thoughtless mapping of these zones over large areas was a big part of the recipe for suburban sprawl.[4] It was from the deficiencies of this practice that land-use planning developed, to envision the changes that development would cause and mitigate the negative effects of such change.

Comment: This whole section is judgemental, ill-informed and highly subjective. the main drivers of suburbanisation in the US as elsewhere were cheap cars and rising incomes. In the US the process was greatly amplified by very low taxes on gas and the widespread application of minimum lot sizes. Observers of the Bay Area tell us it is 'built out': but most of Marin County has 50+ acre minimum lot sizes. this produces ultra low density exurban development but careful and rigorous research shows that there has not been an acceleration in this process [see Burchfield et al (2006) Causes of Sprawl: A Portrait from Space' Quarterly Journal of Economics]

We hope Wikipedians on this talk page can take advantage of these comments and improve the quality of the article accordingly.

We believe Dr. Cheshire has expertise on the topic of this article, since he has published relevant scholarly research:

• Reference : Paul Cheshire & Christian A. L. Hilber & Ioannis Kaplanis, 2013. "Land Use Regulation and Productivity - Land Matters: Evidence from a UK Supermarket Chain," SERC Discussion Papers 0138, Spatial Economics Research Centre, LSE.

ExpertIdeasBot (talk) 15:23, 11 July 2016 (UTC)

Let's also specifically point out that Dr. Cheshire is a British academic who was trained as an economist, not an land-use planner, civil engineer or government specialist. While helpful his comments really are better suited to an academic discussion of the meaning of land use planning at a policy level, not Wikipedia. Yes, this text does not work. But it shouldn't over emphasize economics in general. Blanksamurai (talk) 16:40, 16 September 2016 (UTC)