Introduction
This plan is an image of the downtown of Chapel Hill in 2020. It mainly planned to develop the Rosemary Street to renew the visions of the downtown. The visons included in the plan are based on the six themes in the Chapel Hill 2020 comprehensive plan: A Place for Everyone, Community Prosperity and Engagement, Getting Around, Good Places & New Places, Nurturing Our Community, Town and Gown Collaboration. It separated the 16 visions under these six themes and discuss them independently.
The structure of this plan is different from other formal plans, it has no many rational logic analysis but divided the contents of each elements into six parts: Vision, Tactics, Lead, Internal Town Partners External Partners, and ‘What if we’. This …show more content…
For the developers or planners, they are hard to interpret the above tactics into actions straightly. The vague description like ‘clear spaces’, ’possible extension’ leads to a lot of uncertainty. Uncertainty is a double-edged sword, it allows the flexibility to percolate to the plans in different situations, but also increase the cost of using plans. The users have to launch other public decision-making processes like ‘Conduct further discussions with the Town of Carrboro and Triangle Transit’ to confirm the practical actions.
The comprehensive degree of a plan depends on its goals and main users. As mentioned above, every plan involves many different organizations and individuals. It’s impossible for a plan to be reliable to all of them, so we need to take a balance between various groups. The downtown vision plan is not a comprehensive plan or zoning plan in this case, the main purpose of the plan is to present the imagined visions of downtown Chapel Hill to the residents, and get feedback from them. So I think a simplified style is appropriate, but the town hall might need to accomplish some other plans for the other …show more content…
However, these descriptions of interdependency are always a simple statement but don’t included any practical coordinate processes or results due to the character of a vision plan. There is no issue when the coordinating partners are governments or organizations because they can easily build up a communication channel with the planners. However, some of the elements need to negotiate with individuals like residents or property owners. The coordinating process doesn’t offer a channel for the individuals to communicate with the authority.
Another issue about interdependency is the lack of reference of other plans in this case. Although some related plans are mentioned in the implementation parts, it doesn’t give out any citation or details been referred in this plan. When the users want to clarity the information in the related documents, it will cost them a lot of time to find the appropriate sectors. Furthermore, the plan haven’t the rethink of previous plans. I found this part in many other examples (City of Raleigh,2030) and recognize it as a very meaningful method to show the difference between the previous goals and the current
This plan is an image of the downtown of Chapel Hill in 2020. It mainly planned to develop the Rosemary Street to renew the visions of the downtown. The visons included in the plan are based on the six themes in the Chapel Hill 2020 comprehensive plan: A Place for Everyone, Community Prosperity and Engagement, Getting Around, Good Places & New Places, Nurturing Our Community, Town and Gown Collaboration. It separated the 16 visions under these six themes and discuss them independently.
The structure of this plan is different from other formal plans, it has no many rational logic analysis but divided the contents of each elements into six parts: Vision, Tactics, Lead, Internal Town Partners External Partners, and ‘What if we’. This …show more content…
For the developers or planners, they are hard to interpret the above tactics into actions straightly. The vague description like ‘clear spaces’, ’possible extension’ leads to a lot of uncertainty. Uncertainty is a double-edged sword, it allows the flexibility to percolate to the plans in different situations, but also increase the cost of using plans. The users have to launch other public decision-making processes like ‘Conduct further discussions with the Town of Carrboro and Triangle Transit’ to confirm the practical actions.
The comprehensive degree of a plan depends on its goals and main users. As mentioned above, every plan involves many different organizations and individuals. It’s impossible for a plan to be reliable to all of them, so we need to take a balance between various groups. The downtown vision plan is not a comprehensive plan or zoning plan in this case, the main purpose of the plan is to present the imagined visions of downtown Chapel Hill to the residents, and get feedback from them. So I think a simplified style is appropriate, but the town hall might need to accomplish some other plans for the other …show more content…
However, these descriptions of interdependency are always a simple statement but don’t included any practical coordinate processes or results due to the character of a vision plan. There is no issue when the coordinating partners are governments or organizations because they can easily build up a communication channel with the planners. However, some of the elements need to negotiate with individuals like residents or property owners. The coordinating process doesn’t offer a channel for the individuals to communicate with the authority.
Another issue about interdependency is the lack of reference of other plans in this case. Although some related plans are mentioned in the implementation parts, it doesn’t give out any citation or details been referred in this plan. When the users want to clarity the information in the related documents, it will cost them a lot of time to find the appropriate sectors. Furthermore, the plan haven’t the rethink of previous plans. I found this part in many other examples (City of Raleigh,2030) and recognize it as a very meaningful method to show the difference between the previous goals and the current