Research & Assessment Methods
9%of exam
Fundamental Planning Knowledge
14%of exam
Landmark Case LawPolice PowerZoning TypesPlanning Theory
Communication & Interaction
11%of exam
Plan & Policy Development
16%of exam
Plan Implementation
14%of exam
Variance vs Special PermitNonconforming UseNollan/Dolan TestCapital Improvement Program
Administration & Management
7%of exam
Leadership
6%of exam
Areas Of Practice
13%of exam
Transit-Oriented DevelopmentInclusionary ZoningHazard MitigationBrownfield vs Greenfield
AICP Code Of Ethics
10%of exam
Quick Facts
- Exam
- AICP Certification Exam
- Owner
- APA / AICP
- Questions
- 170 (150 scored + 20 pretest)
- Time
- 3.5 hrs in 4-hr slot
- Fee
- $305 standard / $100 pilot
- Domains
- 9 content areas
- Retake
- 30 days, 3 tries/window
- Validity
- No expiry w/ active membership
Qualitative vs Quantitative Research
Qualitative
- Meaning and context
- Interviews, focus groups
Quantitative
- Numeric measurement
- Surveys, census data
Both are usually triangulated
Research Methods
- Qualitative
- Meaning, context, perception
- Quantitative
- Numeric measurement, comparison
- Triangulation
- Combine multiple methods
- GIS
- Spatial data analysis
- Survey
- Structured numeric questions
- Focus group
- Facilitated qualitative discussion
- Oral history
- Recorded personal narrative
Validity vs Reliability
Validity
- Measures right concept
- Can be invalid
Reliability
- Consistent repeated results
- Can be unreliable
Right concept vs consistency
Data Quality & Bias
- Validity
- Measures the right concept
- Reliability
- Consistent repeated results
- Implicit bias
- Unconscious assumption in data
- Passive data
- Collected without direct contact
- Active data
- Collected via direct engagement
- Margin of error
- Survey result uncertainty range
- Confidentiality
- Protecting respondent identity
Police Power vs Eminent Domain
Police power
- No compensation owed
- Zoning, building codes
Eminent domain
- Just compensation required
- Acquires property outright
Regulate vs acquire
Landmark Planning Cases
- Euclid v. Ambler (1926)
- Zoning upheld as constitutional
- Nectow v. Cambridge (1928)
- Zoning invalid as applied
- Berman v. Parker (1954)
- Broad public-purpose eminent domain
- Belle Terre v. Boraas (1974)
- Household-definition zoning upheld
- Penn Central (1978)
- Three-factor takings balance
- Nollan v. California Coastal Comm'n (1987)
- Exaction needs essential nexus
- Dolan v. City of Tigard (1994)
- Exaction needs rough proportionality
- Kelo v. New London (2005)
- Economic-development taking upheld
Euclidean vs Performance Zoning
Euclidean zoning
- Use-based districts
- Prescriptive dimensional rules
Performance zoning
- Impact-based standards
- Use-neutral measurable limits
Use category vs impact
Core Legal Concepts
- Police power
- Regulate without compensation
- Eminent domain
- Acquire land, pay compensation
- Just compensation
- Fifth Amendment taking payment
- Regulatory taking
- Regulation goes too far
- Euclidean zoning
- Use-based district rules
- Performance zoning
- Impact-standard based rules
- Form-based code
- Building form is primary
Core Planning Values
- Sustainability
- Meet needs without compromise
- Resilience
- Absorb and recover from shock
- Smart growth
- Compact, efficient development pattern
- Sprawl
- Low-density outward expansion
- Planning theory
- Framework guiding planning decisions
Facilitation vs Mediation
Facilitator
- Runs group's own process
- No decision made
Mediator
- Helps parties negotiate
- Voluntary accepted outcome
Process guide vs deal broker
Dispute Resolution Picker
- Group needs its own process→Facilitator(No binding ruling)
- Two parties need a deal→Mediator(Voluntary agreed outcome)
- Need a binding ruling→Arbitrator(Decides for parties)
- Need a court judgment→Litigation(Formal and costly)
- Need shared workable agreement→Consensus building(All can live with)
Public Engagement Tools
- Charrette
- Intensive collaborative design workshop
- Open house
- Informal drop-in format
- Visioning workshop
- Define desired future state
- Advisory committee
- Ongoing stakeholder input group
- Pop-up event
- Engagement at existing gathering
Engagement Concepts
- Arnstein's Ladder
- Participation power ranking framework
- Tokenism
- Informing without real power
- Citizen control
- Highest participation power rung
- Consensus building
- Facilitated mutually acceptable agreement
- Culturally responsive
- Adapts format, trust, timing
Domain Weight Order
Policy > Fundamentals = Implementation > Practice > rest
16% Policy & Plan Dev14% Fundamentals14% Implementation13% Practice
Goal vs Objective
Goal
- Broad aspirational statement
- Not measurable alone
Objective
- Specific measurable target
- Operationalizes the goal
Aspiration vs measurable target
Growth Management Tool Picker
- Need infrastructure timing match→Concurrency(APFO-style requirement)
- Contain outward growth edge→Urban growth boundary(Hard edge limit)
- Preserve farmland, shift density→TDR(Transfer development rights)
- Require affordable unit share→Inclusionary zoning(Mandated or incentivized)
Plan Elements
- Goal
- Broad aspirational end state
- Objective
- Measurable specific target
- Policy
- Rule guiding decisions
- Vision statement
- Qualitative desired-future description
- Alternatives analysis
- Compare consequences of options
Home Rule vs Preemption
Home rule
- Local authority to act
- No state OK needed
Preemption
- State or federal override
- Limits local authority
Local power vs override
Variance vs Special Use Permit
Variance
- Relief from dimensional rule
- Hardship must be shown
Special use permit
- Use already contemplated
- Conditions must be met
Hardship vs conditions
Permit Tool Picker
- Need dimensional relief→Variance(Hardship required)
- Allowed use, needs conditions→Special use permit(No hardship shown)
- Change the zoning map→Rezoning(Legislative act)
- Change ordinance text itself→Text amendment(Legislative act)
- Need flexible mixed-use project→PUD(Negotiated standards)
- Split land into new lots→Subdivision plat(Infrastructure review required)
Implementation Tools
- Capital Improvement Program
- Multi-year funded project schedule
- Variance
- Dimensional relief, hardship required
- Special use permit
- Allowed use, conditions required
- Nonconforming use
- Grandfathered, pre-rule use
- Overlay district
- Added rules atop base zoning
- Development agreement
- Negotiated long-term project contract
Takings Test Picker
- Permit condition or dedication→Nollan/Dolan test(Nexus plus proportionality)
- General land-use regulation change→Penn Central test(Three-factor balancing test)
- Regulation removes all value→Lucas test(Categorical per se taking)
- Permanent physical occupation forced→Loretto rule(Per se physical taking)
Takings & Exactions Tests
- Nollan test
- Essential nexus to impact
- Dolan test
- Rough proportionality to impact
- Penn Central factors
- Character, impact, expectations
- Lucas rule
- Total value loss taking
- Loretto rule
- Permanent occupation is taking
Experience By Degree
2 grad, 3 bach/non-PAB, 4 other, 8 none
PAB grad degree: 2 yrsPAB bach/non-PAB grad: 3 yrsOther degree: 4 yrsNo degree: 8 yrs
RFP vs RFQ
RFP
- Qualifications plus priced approach
- Defined scope of work
RFQ
- Qualifications screened first
- Price discussed later
Approach-and-price vs qualifications-first
Admin & Procurement Tools
- RFP
- Qualifications plus priced approach
- RFQ
- Qualifications screened first
- Quality assurance
- Prevent errors before they occur
- Quality control
- Catch errors before release
- Benchmark
- Performance comparison standard
Exam Day Numbers
170 total, 150 scored, 3.5hrs, 4hr slot
170 total questions150 scored items20 unscored pretest items3.5 hr time limit
Leadership vs Management
Leadership
- Sets direction, advocates change
- Builds new partnerships
Management
- Executes established processes
- Runs daily operations
Direction vs execution
Leadership Concepts
- Coaching
- Guide toward skill growth
- Mentoring
- Model professional conduct long-term
- Advocacy
- Advocate for not-yet-popular change
- Change management
- Lead through organizational transition
- Public interest duty
- Explain why action serves community
Mitigation vs Response & Recovery
Mitigation
- Pre-event, sustained action
- Reduces long-term risk
Response/recovery
- Post-event emergency action
- Rebuilds after disaster
Before vs after the event
Areas Of Practice
- Transit-oriented development
- Dense, walkable transit-adjacent development
- Complete streets
- Design for all travel modes
- Inclusionary zoning
- Requires affordable unit share
- Brownfield
- Previously developed, possibly contaminated
- Greenfield
- Undeveloped land converted to use
- Hazard mitigation
- Pre-event, long-term risk reduction
- Level of service
- Letter-graded traffic performance
Ethics Code Sections
A aspires -> B enforces -> C-E adjudicate
A: aspirational principlesB: enforceable rulesC: advisory opinionsD-E: complaints, discipline
Section A vs Section B
Section A
- Aspirational principles only
- Not independently enforceable
Section B
- Enforceable Rules of Conduct
- Basis for discipline
Aspire vs enforce
Ethics Code Structure
- Section A
- Aspirational, not enforceable
- Section B
- Enforceable Rules of Conduct
- Section C
- Advisory opinions process
- Section D
- Complaint adjudication process
- Section E
- Discipline of members
Key Rules Of Conduct
- Conflict disclosure
- Written consent plus public disclosure
- Qualifications honesty
- No misstating own credentials
- Cooperation duty
- Must assist ethics investigations
- Retaliation ban
- No punishing complaint filers
- Serious crime
- Triggers automatic revocation
Common Traps
Zoning Constitutional vs As-Applied
Euclid: zoning itself is valid ≠ Nectow: this parcel wasn't
Public Purpose vs Private Benefit
Berman allowed private resale ≠ Broad judicial deference applied
Hardship vs No-Hardship Permits
Variance needs unique hardship ≠ Special permit needs conditions only
Nexus vs Proportionality
Nollan requires an essential link ≠ Dolan requires matching scale
Translation vs Cultural Response
Translation only converts words ≠ Cultural response adapts trust, timing
Aspire vs Enforce
Section A sets no sanctions ≠ Section B triggers discipline
Standard Window vs Pilot Window
Standard used 2022 weights, $305 ≠ Pilot uses 2027 weights, $100
2022 vs 2027 Outline
Same nine domains kept ≠ Only weights and emphasis changed
Last Minute
- 1.170Q total: 150 scored + 20 pretest
- 2.3.5hr exam inside a 4hr slot
- 3.2027 outline keeps the nine domains
- 4.Biggest domain: Plan & Policy, 16%
- 5.30-day retake wait; 3 tries max
- 6.Scores never expire with active membership
- 7.Section A aspires; Section B enforces
- 8.Conflict rule needs written consent + disclosure
- 9.Variance=hardship; special permit=conditions only
- 10.Experience can finish after exam
- 11.Pilot window only; standard window closed
- 12.Reinstatement wait after revocation: 5 years
1 Job Wiki
Buy on Amazon
Flashcards on Mometrix