ABSTRACT
In this last chapter, the focus of attention is on the question of whether “the zoning system” might be reformed, or at least improved. The discussion starts with a review of some well-known proposals. The conclusion is quickly reached that most do not even address the most important deficiencies of zoning. Indeed, it has to be recognized that there are no easy solutions to hand. Any theoretical scheme, or any foreign model, which seems to meet the requirements fails to tackle the most important one-public acceptability. For the most part, Americans are not prepared to support a land use planning system that deprives them of control over development in their local area, or of a chance of making a profit from their land. There is a long tradition of belief in the sanctity of the rights of property (which the law can be called upon to enforce) combined with a profligacy in its use (which the law is impotent to control). The “frontier” went many years ago, but it lives on in the national psyche. However, there is a growing number of examples where restrictions have been accepted, perhaps reluctantly, but accepted nevertheless. These exceptional cases are not quite as rare as might be supposed, and they hold some promise for future reform on a wider scale. These innovatory planning systems are discussed later in this chapter, which concludes with the author’s pessimistic view of the possibility of reform. First, however, it is necessary to discuss reforms which, though achieving some popularity, will not work, essentially because they fail to address the right questions.
