Speaking as a professional more involved with rural issues I would certainly see more use out of the group if was expanded to include rural and suburban planning issues.
Proposal: Urban Planning
Hmm... Naming was an issue with the last proposal too.
As for the name, it's tricky. Name suggestions have gone from things like "Society Building" to "Urban and Rural Planning." It's tricky because you want to have a bit of a concise name, but also be accepting of everyone too.
So why "Urban Planning?"
I chose that name mostly because it's the more "common" (note the quotes) name for the field. I'm a suburban Toronto guy, and you often hear of the "City Planning" or "Urban Planning" departments of the city/town.
That's just the name. Will "rural" and "suburban" stuff be on-topic?
Of course! Basically, if it's any test to see how communities and infrastructure and stuff form, then it's on-topic!
While I think that Municipal Planning is a more accurate title for the site, the name should more aimed at drawing outside traffic.
From that perspective, the term 'Urban Planning' is searched for on Google far more than 'Municipal Planning'.
Furthermore if you look at hits for 'urban planning blogs' vs. 'municipal planning blogs', you get 5.0 million vs. 2.3 million hits.
I argue that 'Urban Planning' is better at drawing traffic to the proposed site and should be the name.
The problem is less the title and more, that it is missing a target group. There are not that many people out there, who are actually involved within planing for urban areas. And if I look at the horrible job theses people do most of the time, I am sure that only a small percentage of them would be interested in tips or suggestions from other people.
And for the rest of us, it may be funny to talk about how things could be improved or other things, but it wouldn't have not the slightest effect.
How about something like infrastructure considerations?
That way everything under urban planning is covered, but so are questions about things like rural interstates, and it's clear it's not just about the theories to the layout of a city, but the items that make it up. I can't tell you how many questions I've had that could've fit in a site like this. Questions about road/subway layout, stadium design, bus routing science, zoning considerations, fire fighting infrastructure, etc.
I hope it will be open to the right mix of "adjusting the proportionality constant in the Zipf's Law" to "why do McDonalds build near Burger Kings"... namely to be friendly to a wide range of questions, both to the scientists and the novices. Widen out the scope as much as possible, draw in those who have no place to go. Even it means joining up some rather disconnected fields in your mind [we've got the same, for example, with earth sciences stack exchange... as a meteorologist, there are tons of geology questions I'm very poorly qualified to answer. But it keeps it more active, and more interesting in the end. Tiny subtopics, even good ones like meteorology, would struggle. But welcoming places to loosely tied together topic areas help everyone.] And a wider term, more like what I suggested, would seem very useful in doing that.