Abstract
Concerns for the common good in urban planning are relevant in many parts of Europe due to financial crises, lack of public resources, and the impact of climate change. The actualisation of the assessment of the common interests of society is also promoted by processes such as the democratisation of governance and the “right to the city” of residents. The study aimed to evaluate existing municipal master plans in Latvia, reviewing the restrictions on property rights, their proportionality, and the argumentation about the common good of society. This was accomplished through content analysis to evaluate the regulatory enactments and the text of the municipal master plans and their amendments, which are available on the GEOLatvia.LV portal. To compare the content of documents, comparative analysis was used (for example, adoption of historical norms, duplication of content, etc.). For document comparison, term matching analysis and other artificial intelligence tools are used. The results of the study concluded that the practice of local governments in the development and content of municipal master plans is diverse. Municipalities interpret the requirements of regulatory enactments that determine the requirements for developing local government plans in different ways. Generally, it can be concluded that the formal implementation of regulatory requirements does not achieve the goal set in the explanations. To improve the quality of explanations and justifications for municipal master plans and their amendments, it is necessary to popularise and promote the use of additional planning tools, such as research and thematic plans, evaluate development scenarios, and justify interventions in planning documents, especially restrictions set by municipalities.