American Planning Association AICP Dumps PDF

Regional governance systems that bridge city-suburb boundaries manage shared resources like transit and housing. Minneapolis/St. Paul (I) has the Metropolitan Council, established in 1967, which oversees transit, wastewater, and housing across the Twin Cities region. Portland (III) has Metro, a directly elected regional government since 1979, managing urban growth boundaries, transit, and parks. The APA’sAICP Certification Exam Content Outline(2022), under “Areas of Practice,” identifies “Minneapolis/St. Paul’s Metropolitan Council and Portland’s Metro as leading examples of regional governance systems managing city-suburb issues.” Orlando (II) and Phoenix (IV) lack similar comprehensive regional bodies—Orlando has some transit coordination, and Phoenix has the Maricopa Association of Governments, but neither has the broad authority of Metro or the Metropolitan Council. TheCPC Study Manual(2024) confirms, “Minneapolis/St. Paul and Portland have formal regional governance systems bridging city-suburb boundaries,” supporting option B (I and III).

A nonconforming use refers to a property use that was lawful when established but does not comply with a subsequently adopted zoning ordinance. Option A correctly defines this as “not complying with the zoning ordinance but lawfully established before the ordinance was adopted.” The APA’sAICP Certification Exam Content Outline(2022), under “Plan and Policy Development,” states, “Nonconforming uses are those that were legal prior to the adoption of a zoning ordinance but do not conform to the new regulations.” Option B (allowed by the zoning appeals board) confuses nonconforming uses with variances. Option C (inconsistent with the neighborhood but permitted) is vague and not the legal definition. Option D (expanding after adoption) is incorrect, as nonconforming uses are typically restricted from expansion. TheCPC Study Manual(2024) confirms, “A nonconforming use is one that was lawfully established before a zoning change and does not comply with the new ordinance,” supporting option A.

New Urbanism promotes walkable, mixed-use communities with interconnected street grids. Option C (connected street grid linking residential and commercial uses in separate areas)contradicts New Urbanism’s core principle of integrating uses within walkable distances, not separating them. Options A (architectural mix), B (reduced environmental impacts), and D (smaller lots, more open space, transit-oriented) align with New Urbanism’s goals. The APA’sAICP Certification Exam Content Outline(2022), under “Fundamental Planning Knowledge,” states, “New Urbanism emphasizes mixed-use development within a connected street grid, not separation of uses.” TheCPC Study Manual(2024) confirms, “New Urbanism integrates residential and commercial uses within walkable areas, making separation of uses inconsistent with its principles,” supporting option C as the incorrect characteristic.

The Opportunity Zone program, created by the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, offers tax incentives to spur investment in distressed areas but can lead to gentrification and displacement of existing residents (option A). The APA’sAICP Certification Exam Content Outline(2022), under “Areas of Practice,” notes, “A potential disadvantage of Opportunity Zones is displacement due to gentrification, as new investments increase property values.” Option B (tax stagnation) is not a typical outcome, as the program generates revenue. Option C (increased economic development) is a goal, not a disadvantage. Option D (reduced standards) is not a primary concern. TheCPC Study Manual(2024) states, “Opportunity Zones can lead to displacement as investments drive up costs, pushing out low-income residents,” supporting option A.