Resolving Land Use Disputes with Arbitration and Mediation

Abstract

The River City Council was exasperated. After two years of negotiating and arguing with developer Joe Tycoon about the density of his proposed Tycoon Acres development, Tycoon had still refused to revise his proposal. As a result, both the planning board and the city council had denied his rezoning request. Now Tycoon was threatening a lawsuit alleging a “taking” of his property and talking about going all the way to the U.S. Supreme Court. The cost of defending the suit would be enormous, and the city attorney was already overworked. If only the city council could get Tycoon to agree to let a bunch of neutral arbitrators settle this thing once and for all. After all, arbitration was a whole lot cheaper and quicker than litigation: It was the “wave of the future” that was going to put all those darn lawyers out of work. Better yet, why not just pass an ordinance requiring that all future zoning and subdivision disputes between the city and developers go to binding arbitration instead of trial?