1. Identification of a circumstance that suggests premeditated actions are necessary.
2. Identification of the constituents, the benefactors, of the activity.
3. Identification of the limits of “responsibility”.
4. Identification of a philosophy for the planning activity.
5. Establish the time, responsibility, social, economic, and physical constraints and imperatives for the planning activity.
6. Establishment of a Mission Statement. [The mission statement must include, explicitly or implicitly, the issues of 1 thru 5 above]. 

For planning to be meaningful or to have any sustainability it must have allegiance to the Mission Statement.

Assumptions are both the genesis and the enemy of planning, and must be continually and openly challenged and refined.  They should be well documented and the planning process should include a frequent and honest review of the assumptions throughout the process and most importantly at the completion of the “plan”. 

Future “certainty” and “facts” should be viewed with thoughtful suspicion because they are by definition based on assumptions.  All circumstances and background information’s do not have equal voices.  Power, whether political or physical, can easily dominate otherwise thoughtful and considerate ideas.

Transparency and openness must be the prerequisite of all planning.  They are the proof of success and the safeguard against preconceptions.  However they also add “inefficiency” and challenge even appropriate conclusions.  This is by far the most challenging aspect of planning because it introduces frequently random, assumptions that must and should be addressed.  However a well constructed comprehensive Mission Statement can provide the vehicle for reconciliation. 

It is of paramount importance for the “planner” to recognize that the broader the limits of responsibility, the more challenging the planning process becomes and the more important the issues of transparency and openness. 
 

1. past, present, and possible future modalities
2. historical issues of technological development
3. past, present and future anticipated urban growth patterns
4. social and political acceptance issues and differences
5. densities of existing and anticipated uses
6. And the old evil, “Assumptions” 
 

1. Capacities and frequencies of operation?
2. what distances of travel and speeds are they most affective at?
3. how sympathetic are they to existing adjacent development and movement patterns?
4. how much change can the existing social, physical, and ecological environments support? 
5. List all the alternatives for all the identified [and discovered] needs. 
6. How do the different modalities overlap and support or detract from each other? 
7. Can regional higher speed transit operate in harmony with neighborhood and inter-neighborhood mobility? 
 

After familiarity with the technologies comes the “fact” finding and due diligence:

1. Location of population nodes
2. Location, extent, and composition of existing and possible future circulation corridors
3. Anticipated demands 
4. Demand frequency
5. Coincidence with adjacent, intersecting, or parallel modalities
6. Recognition of coincidental travel and commuter travel differences and conflicts
7. Costs vs. Revenue [cost benefit analysis]
8. Property acquisition costs, obstacles, advantages.
9. Change tolerance
10. Cultural sympathy
11. Environmental consequences
12. short term and life-cycle maintenance consequences
 

The final "plan"  must address all of the due diligence issues and align them with appropriate technologies.  It must then address conflicts and recommend alternatives, each with its own cost [explicit and implicit] benefit analysis.  Again transparency and openness are essential for a successful long term plan.  Lastly it must include a process for periodic reassessment and review of the proposed plan with opportunities for change, including major change.