The role of expectations and promises in land use decisionmaking

Abstract

Land use disputes are often at their center disagreements about the expectations of different parties, public and private, concerning permissible land uses and activities. Expectations are influenced by numerous factors, from broad economic and social trends to specific public planning policies and decisions. One source of land use expectations are promises issued by public planning and decisionmaking bodies. Two types of promises arise: explicit promises (e.g. statements of intention found in an officially-adopted comprehensive plan, publicly issued resolutions, etc.) and tacit promises (e.g. created by a series or pattern of public decisions, or by the clear unwillingness of the public to take actions in the past where opportunities existed to do so). It is argued that public officials and planners should be concerned with promises and that they should be given some degree of moral consideration when debating and resolving land use conflicts. Other things being equal, public planning agencies and decisionmaking bodies ought to acknowledge that the expectations of individuals are influenced by such promises and seek to respect them. Private land use expectations based on public promises are not sacred, however, as many situations arise where land use officials are confronted with conflicting moral demands. Situations where public land use promises may need to be overruled or qualified are considered. At a minimum, public land use officials have an obligation to clarify expressions of land use policy so that the formation of false private land use expectations is minimized.