Talk:Comprehensive planning

Urban studies and planning Low‑importance

	Architecture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Urban studies and planning, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Urban studies and planning on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Urban studies and planningWikipedia:WikiProject Urban studies and planningTemplate:WikiProject Urban studies and planningUrban studies and planning articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Untitled

I was thinking I could make some improvements to this article and maybe give it a little more detail. I was thinking of actually defining what a comprehensive plan is and how it is used. I would also like to talk about the process behind creating a comprehensive plan. These are just my ideas for right now, and I am open to any suggestions if anyone has any. (Str0426 (talk) 00:12, 19 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

Edit

I have updated this article and have included the planning process. Let me know if you have any suggestions or if you think I should go into more detail. (Str0426 (talk) 19:56, 27 February 2008 (UTC))[reply]

History

I am thinking of adding a history section to this article. Does anyone have anything specific they would like to see? I think I will just cover when the first comp plan was done and how it has been challenged through court cases perhaps. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Str0426 (talk • contribs) 19:33, 5 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

US-centric article?

I'm not very clear about what the scope of this article is, but would I be correct in thinking that "Comprehensive planning" is primarily an American term? If so, this needs to be made clear in the opening sentence, for example, "Comprehensive planning is a term used by land use planners in the United States to describe a process...".

From what I can tell from the article, this seems to describe the process that in the United Kingdom is known as Development Planning. DWaterson (talk) 19:34, 10 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Legal Basis

I added a section to the article to provide a legal basis for comprehensive planning. I only included the statutes and laws, but if it is neceaary I could add Supreme Court Cases if anyone thiks it is necessary. Str0426 (talk) 17:54, 21 March 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Proposed merge of General plan into Comprehensive planning

The term "General plan" seems to be the California-specific name for a comprehensive plan. The planning process and the output document are best discussed in the same article. California's general plans are better discussed in the context of plans from other areas. Daask (talk) 21:45, 10 April 2020 (UTC)[reply]

"General Plan" as a planning document, is used in other countries (like ru:Генеральный план or de:Masterplan (Stadtplanung)) and context as well, which I belive deserves its own article. Instead I am sure interwikis connected to "Comprehensive planning" are more relevant to "General plan". --Rastrelli F (talk) 09:06, 19 May 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Support merge as initially proposed; the current interwikis seems appropriate to me, and Comprehensive planning seems to have broader use, even within the US. Klbrain (talk) 09:43, 7 November 2020 (UTC)[reply]

Merger complete. Klbrain (talk) 21:40, 16 March 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Term "master plan" missing

Doesn't show up. The disambiguation page master plan links to this article, but that's a case of unrequited love. Is there a nuance of difference? I don't think so. Arminden (talk) 07:32, 11 May 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Are General Plans notable?

Is anyone involved in this page with a stronger grasp of all of Wikipedia's policies than me interested in weighing in on a dispute regarding whether a General Plan for a county is notable information about that county? We're having a dispute on the Ventura County page as to whether including the county's general plan is something notable. Phrynefisher (talk) 03:40, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

@Phrynefisher: it is usually the most important piece of legislation in terms of urban conformation so yes, I'd say it is definitely notable (provided the relevant sources are added). Rkieferbaum (talk) 12:56, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks so much for weighing in. Phrynefisher (talk) 17:03, 22 March 2023 (UTC)[reply]