1

Policies define the “what” or “what to do”; and programs provide the “how” or
“how to do it.”

2
3
A policy may be to “revitalize the downtown.”

Programs for this revitalization would suggest alternative ways of doing it; for
example, tax incentives to businesses coming back to the downtown, provision of
adequate parking facilities in the down town, matching funds to encourage private
business to expand, enhancement of police protection in the area, etc.

4
5
… Unless there is a well articulated methodology, the task of planning will be
impossible.

6
7
8
9
There is undoubtedly a lot of debate among urban planners on the comprehensive
planning process. The comprehensive planning outlined below is one of the most
traditional ones, and it has been used extensively by urban planners in the United
States.

10
The most debate concerning the validity of this specific methodology pertains to the
first step, goal formulation.
The argument is that goal formulation, as the first step of the process, comes too
early; there are no facts available on which to base goals and the goals may be totally
irrelevant due to possible preconceptions.
That argument is valid. In any event, there is a need to explain what each step of the
process involves.

11
12
13
14
The methods do differ significantly, however, in the degree and manner to which they
use rationalized critical processes to establish their methodological approach to
planning/design problems.

15
16
Though we may be unable to determine conclusively that such a method is irrational,
we also may not be able to show it to be completely rational.
Therefore, it is probably most reasonable to acknowledge that there can be a certain
degree of rationality associated with most internalized design methods.

17
The degree to which results are negative is less dependent, however, on the overall
method than on the particular application and individual designer.

18
The internalized method is currently more commonly and readily applied to
developing countries than to more established western nations.
This is due to the distinctively different nature of decision making processes in
developing as opposed to established nations.

19
The role and opinion of experts in the decision making process is held in higher
esteem in developing countries than in more established ones.

20
Because it is not nearly as dependent upon explicit governmental policies or dicta,
the internalized method is thought by many to be less consistent than more
systematic model-based process.

21
22
23
24
25
To avoid any such confusion, the term “synoptic” is more appropriate than “rational”.
The systematic design steps incorporated within this method typically number four
(at a minimum) to six (although twelve or more steps are sometimes used),
depending upon the scale, complexity, and precision sought in the design.

26
The intent of this decision model is to provide a methodology by which a consistent
form of comparability between alternatives can be made.

27
The following example of the synoptic process seeks within a reasonable number of
steps to achieve this ideal and to provide a logical progression by which the
alternatives reviewed can be analyzed and solutions proposed.

28
29
Much of the data is statistical, dealing with quantitative spatial variations and their
relationships, with each statistic tagged by subject, area, time or some combination
of these.

30
Most planners approach this step by collecting a variety of socio-economic data in a
variety of forms and using various methodologies (statistical information, geographic
surveys, aerial photos and so on).

31
Some designers of suburban development have taken the natural environment into
consideration. But rarely has this been true of urban designers.

32
The analysis can incorporate a variety of techniques, each of which promotes
understanding of the basic spatial variations, qualities and relationships captured in
the data or inventory process (Roberts.1974).

33
This step is an important one, as it is often necessary to stimulate and stretch the
imagination, improve the perspective and obtain technical expertise in order to
clarify, define, expand and argue the major issues involved.

34
Quite often, though data analysis and the resulting identification of problems,
opportunities and constraints are combined in step one, to the neglect of the analysis
phase.

35
Technical limitations, as well as lack of planner’s expertise, may also mean that even
a quite elaborate data inventory is not thoroughly analyzed (Lee. 1979).
Despite provisions for data collection and evaluations, inadequate data analysis is a
problem that plagues the various synoptic approaches.

36
37
Theoretically, however, it is the designer’s first task; or to put it slightly differently, it is
the step that leads us into design, wherein we have to differentiate between facts
and values.

38
It is at this stage that citizen advisory committee or some other kind of public
participation is necessary to refine the goals and objectives and structure them
collectively within public conceptions (Shirvani. 1981).

39
When the designer presents alternative solutions to the public, the process is near or
is perceived as being near, completion.
The public is uninformed about the criteria necessary to make a well-qualified
judgment.

40
Such early participation may also provide the designer with additional insights into
the plan.
One of the main issues to be addressed, then, in this third step is a determination of
the degree of abstraction and generality appropriate in a plan’s goals and objectives.

41
Such goals may be inspiring, non controversial and form the basis on which the plan is
formulated, but what more do they accomplish?
The goals and objectives of a design must be clear, specific and understandable to the
public at large.

42
It is only in this manner that the planner/designer can explain and demonstrate the
clear intent of planning and design.
Unfortunately, in political environments that are so entrenched that they desire
nothing more than universal goals, planning and design are of no value and the
purported policies become nothing more than paper tigers.

43
Generation of alternative concepts has been said to occur in two stages: (1) the
identification of key organizing principles that constitute the generative idea of each
scheme and (2) the definition of a more detailed set of basic attributes for each
alternative as a prelude to elaboration (Boyce et al., 1970).

44
Each alternative derived should seek to represent a comprehensive plan for the
design proposed.
The various alternatives offered can include not only a variety of approaches to a
certain goal but can be of value as a tool to expand on the main alternatives
suggested.

Alternatives, for example, can be used to challenged or confirm a recommendation,

discover or verify some expected advantage inherent in one particular pattern of
development, act as a means to provoke public discussion on critical issues and/or be
used to educate the public as to the values of planning per se (Boyce et al., 1970).

45
The elaboration process seeks to expand upon the previously proposed alternatives
and analyze the concepts, major goals and objectives of each.
Two (2) approaches offer varying criteria by which this step may be approached
1. The first emphasizes comprehensiveness and total consistency within
alternatives.
2. The second emphasizes the effect and interactions of a specific policy or program
within the larger complex of policies and plans that compose the alternatives.
The latter approach, plan evaluation focuses on specific plan or policy elements
rather than on the entire plan.

46
The ultimate intent of the elaboration, or plan-design step, is to review, analyze and
criticize the available alternatives and to categorize them in order of viability within
the framework of the proposed design.
Following the identification and selection of the generative concepts, this portion of
the method usually constitutes a major part of the planning process.

47
There are a number of increasing methods of evaluation at both the macro-scale of
urban design and regional planning and micro-scale of district design, neighborhood
plans, and urban design guidelines.

48
Finally, there are also various methods of simulation for solar access, noise
abatement control and so on, which are helpful for developing design guidelines and
performance standards.

49
It is therefore, a wrap-up or synthesis of the entire process.
Selection of particular planning products such as policies, plans, guidelines or
programs depends on a particular situation or type of planning/urban design activity.
By detailed development of the policies, plans and so forth, based on the selected
alternative, further implications of the solution can be explored.
This in turn may require feedback and reevaluation of the entire process.

50
The method is somewhat cyclical in nature, as each step builds on the last, allowing
for a time lag to review, evaluate and institute changes (if necessary) in order to reach
the ultimate goals and objectives.

51
The designer establishes a goal and then develops incremental steps to achieve it.

52
The specific plan translates the general plan into a more specific one and bridges the
gap between the general plan and project proposals.

53
For example, a designer might start by gathering and analyzing data, then go on to
formulate goals and objectives and finally develop an urban design plan.
In the process, the designer may have merged or even omitted essential steps used in
a synoptic approach.

54
55
The method attempts to avoid operating within a controlled design tradition that has
in the past produced over designed environments (Rapoport.1977).
Instead, open-ended design, with some framework that links and relates the parts, is
used to produce designs for dynamic system (Rapoport.1977).

56
When the vernacular no longer exists or is absent, a framework is proposed to
address the varied cultural and sub cultural character.

57
58
Appleyard (1976). was most concerned with determining why residents recalled
certain elements of the city and identifying the significant characteristics of such
elements.
Pluralistic methods recognize that the users’ values and perception of the city may be
very different from those of the designer.

59
Appleyard (1976) used several surveys to gather data and analyzed the information
thoroughly before proposing strategies.
As his study illustrates, it is the careful attention to analysis that distinguishes the
pluralistic method from other approaches, especially the synoptic method.

60
The way in which pluralistic methods apply to American cities has not been quite
clear. In most cases, the methods have been employed in the third world countries.
Advocacy designers have not really attempted to understand the culture of the
people for whom they are designing.
They respond to apparent needs rather than culture.

61
The under laying concept is that, in order to understand and design for a complex
urban setting, social process must be understood first (Harvey.1973).

62
The approach is not only very difficult to define but its advocates plainly do not
consider urban design a necessary focus for planning.

63
64
65
66
67
68
69
70
71