Section 3 - Difference Between MASTER/COMPREHENSIVE PLAN vs. URBAN DESIGN PLAN vs. FRAMEWORK PLAN...HELPPPP

[Shawn Smyth]

One big issue I've been having is figuring out the slight differences between the aforementioned plan types. I don't deal with any of this at my job, so pardon my ignorance.

Here is what I BELIEVE may be correct and this might incidentally be completely incorrect...:

Master/Comprehensive Plan

- Conceptual by design

- Broader ranged

- Includes: Land Uses, Open Space, Urban Design, Housing, Facilities, Econ, Natural Resources, Implementation over 20-30 years, etc.

- Involve community

- Lighter graphics, 3-D drawings

Urban Design Plan

- Shorter term

- Focuses on public realm aka relationship between open space and buildings

- Includes Design Guidelines i.e. facades, signage, streetscape elements, landscaping, furniture, 

- Include utilities

- Site Specific

- Heavy on Graphics and overlay maps

- Implementation plan included

- Involve community

Framework Plan

- Long term - 20-30 years

- Promotes comprehensive development and end to ad-hoc development

- High level and not very detailed, lighter on graphics

- Includes: Improved communities, improved infrastructure, improved transportation (multi-modal encouraged), protects nat. res., promotes econ. growth, promotes sustainable design

- Creates basis for future design

Land use plans seem self explanatory. Preservation plans outline ways to preserve in growing areas. Parks plans are comprehensive approaches promoting interconnected parklands/greenways. Viewshed plans protect viewsheds and can be used for zoning codes/design guidelines. Can anyone help me out or help me better understand the plans? Is there really much difference? Thanks!

[Lhellrei]

This is something I also struggled with while studying for this section. Not all of the plans CLARB specifies are even in the recommended study material. You also can't google the types of plans because CLARB's terminology of them differs from other sources.

You have broken it down really well. Nothing specific that jumps out at me as not belonging to a certain plan. However, I will say that there is a lot of overlap and integration with the plans. You might want to either specifically separate these items a little bit more or make sure you know how each plan specifically overlaps eachother. 

As ironic as it is, try creating a bubble diagram with lists, arrows, bubbles, etc. I found that helped me to study when I had this issue. 

Good luck

[BLC]

Shawn,

You've broken these down pretty well, I too struggle with distinguishing all of these. The major difference I kept noticing between Master plans and Framework plans is that Master Plans focus primarily on the physical layout of a city plan while the Framework Plan is more of a written document that focuses on the character, financials, and desires of a city, used to guide its growth. 

(truth be told in the real world we call all that a Masterplan and I've never heard of a framework plan professionally or in school, but such is the LARE...)

As I studied I often found "Framework plan" and "Vision plan" used interchangeably, think of it as a set of written guidelines not a literal plan drawing. 

Some other notes I have about the Framework plan:

- Provides framework for decision making as the city develops

- Prioritizes the city's investments 

- Identifies infrastructure needs

- Guides sustainable growth

[Cat power]

Framework graphic includes:

• primary circulation structure and primary movement sequence
• Central organizing space
• Primary spatial relationships between spaces and components
• Essential programmatic relationship
• Significant views or visual relationships between components

This is from Design Workshop's publication: Landscape Architecture Documentation.

[haimlan...@gmail.com]

Interesting!  I thought this list better describes an urban design plan.  Now I'm even more confused!

[Fargo DonWargo]

On the LARE practice test here was the answer description for a framework plan: Framework plans are structured as "a series of independent elements that come together within the plan structure." For example, a framework plan might address open space, future land use and circulation - all of which are interrelated considerations that are deployed, constructed or developed as distinct systems in the built environment.

It's not very clear to me.

[Xinyi Ye]

came across this thread as I was studying for section3...you all have probably passed the test at the point, but just posting this in case anyone else needs the info in the future.

Framework plan. Often called a “strategic plan” or a “vision plan,” this document articulates a clear vision for the regeneration project based on the findings of the scoping phase. It has a long-term horizon, explicates the context and rationale for why the regeneration project is important to the city and region, and provides comprehensive goals for the area. It also addresses the interrelationship between the economic, physical, social, and institutional dimensions of the regeneration program. It is necessarily general in nature as it is intended more to articulate the big picture ideas, goals, and principles that will guide the project. This type of plan is to be differentiated from a traditional “comprehensive plan” that attempts to address in depth and in detail all of the elements required to govern the long-range growth of the city. In essence, the planning framework is conceptual. While providing a powerful long-term vision, it does not attempt to define each and every policy and detail necessary to achieve that vision. The data included in these plans are usually only of sufficient detail to support the vision, promote consensus, and motivate action.