Cheat sheet
AICP Exam Cheat Sheet
Cheat sheet AICP Exam Cheat Sheet Practice Questions Study Guide Print / Save PDF
Research & Assessment Methods 9% of exam Qualitative vs Quantitative Validity vs Reliability Implicit Bias GIS Analysis
Fundamental Planning Knowledge 14% of exam Landmark Case Law Police Power Zoning Types Planning Theory
Communication & Interaction 11% of exam Arnstein's Ladder Charrette Facilitation vs Mediation Culturally Responsive Outreach
Plan & Policy Development 16% of exam Goal vs Objective Home Rule vs Preemption Concurrency Tribal Sovereignty
Plan Implementation 14% of exam Variance vs Special Permit Nonconforming Use Nollan/Dolan Test Capital Improvement Program
Administration & Management 7% of exam RFP vs RFQ Quality Assurance Performance Management Contract Management
Leadership 6% of exam Leadership vs Management Coaching & Mentoring Public Interest Duty Change Management
Areas Of Practice 13% of exam Transit-Oriented Development Inclusionary Zoning Hazard Mitigation Brownfield vs Greenfield
AICP Code Of Ethics 10% of exam Section A vs Section B Conflict Of Interest Serious Crime Revocation Duty To Cooperate
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 RE
Qualitative Meaning and context Interviews, focus groups
Quantitative Numeric measurement Surveys, census data Both are usually triangulated
Research Methods RE 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 RE
Validity Measures right concept Can be invalid
Reliability Consistent repeated results Can be unreliable Right concept vs consistency
Data Quality & Bias RE 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 FU
Police power No compensation owed Zoning, building codes
Eminent domain Just compensation required Acquires property outright Regulate vs acquire
Landmark Planning Cases FU 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 FU
Euclidean zoning Use-based districts Prescriptive dimensional rules
Performance zoning Impact-based standards Use-neutral measurable limits Use category vs impact
Core Legal Concepts FU 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 FU 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 CO
Facilitator Runs group's own process No decision made
Mediator Helps parties negotiate Voluntary accepted outcome Process guide vs deal broker
Dispute Resolution Picker CO 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 CO 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 CO 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 PO Policy > Fundamentals = Implementation > Practice > rest 16% Policy & Plan Dev 14% Fundamentals 14% Implementation 13% Practice
Goal vs Objective PO
Goal Broad aspirational statement Not measurable alone
Objective Specific measurable target Operationalizes the goal Aspiration vs measurable target
Growth Management Tool Picker PO 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 PO 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 PO
Home rule Local authority to act No state OK needed
Preemption State or federal override Limits local authority Local power vs override
Governance & Authority PO Home rule Local authority without state OK Preemption Higher government overrides local rule Tribal sovereignty Inherent authority over tribal land Concurrency Facilities must match development impact Enabling legislation State authorizes local planning power
Variance vs Special Use Permit IM
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 IM 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 IM 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 IM 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 IM 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 AD 2 grad, 3 bach/non-PAB, 4 other, 8 none PAB grad degree: 2 yrs PAB bach/non-PAB grad: 3 yrs Other degree: 4 yrs No degree: 8 yrs
RFP vs RFQ AD
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 AD 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 AD 170 total, 150 scored, 3.5hrs, 4hr slot 170 total questions 150 scored items 20 unscored pretest items 3.5 hr time limit
Leadership vs Management LE
Leadership Sets direction, advocates change Builds new partnerships
Management Executes established processes Runs daily operations Direction vs execution
Leadership Concepts LE 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 PR
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 PR 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 ET A aspires -> B enforces -> C-E adjudicate A: aspirational principles B: enforceable rules C: advisory opinions D-E: complaints, discipline
Section A vs Section B ET
Section A Aspirational principles only Not independently enforceable
Section B Enforceable Rules of Conduct Basis for discipline Aspire vs enforce
Ethics Code Structure ET 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 ET 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
AICP Practice Questions 207 questions Study Guide 61 topics Cheat Sheet 92 facts Flashcards 50 cards Blogs 1 blog 1 Job Wiki Free CE Podcast
Third-party resources · We may earn a commission from purchases.
AICP Exam Flashcard Study System: AICP Test Practice Questions & Review for the American Institute of Certified Planners Exam (Cards) By AICP Exam Secrets Test Prep Team $54.99 · Buy on Amazon Flashcards on Mometrix
Independent exam preparation notice OpenExamPrep is an independent education provider, not affiliated with or endorsed by the exam sponsors named on this site. Exam and certification names identify what our resources help you study for; they do not imply sponsorship, approval, or review of our materials. Unless a resource expressly identifies authorized public material, our practice questions are independently developed simulations, not actual, recalled, or sponsor-provided exam items. We aim to reflect publicly available exam outlines and topic information in our study resources. Coverage, format, and difficulty may differ from the actual exam, and we cannot guarantee that every detail is accurate or current. Confirm exam requirements, fees, and policies with the official exam sponsor. Updated 2026-10-02 . Official exam sources checked October 2026 (2027 Pilot Content Outline) . This is a study aid only and is not for use during the exam. One Path to AICP (certification home) AICP Certification Exam Content Outline (Updated Oct 2026) Step 2: Take the Exam (current content domains) AICP Code of Ethics and Professional Conduct AICP Certification FAQ AICP Get Assistance (Experience Requirement Chart)