AICP Practice Questions (2026) — Free Sample Questions with Answers

Answer: B

1. Difference between estimates = 2,400 − 2,100 = 300.
2. MOE of the difference = √(300² + 350²) = √(90,000 + 122,500) = √212,500 ≈ 461.
3. Since 300 < 461, the difference is not statistically significant at the 90 percent level.

Tract 12 has significantly more, since its estimate is 300 higher: This ignores sampling error. A difference must exceed its own MOE to be significant.

The difference is not significant; 300 is below its MOE of about 461: Correct. The MOE of a difference is the square root of the sum of the squared MOEs: √(300² + 350²) = √212,500 ≈ 461. The 300-household difference is smaller than 461, so the tracts are not statistically different at 90 percent confidence.

The difference is significant because the MOE of the difference is 50: This subtracts the MOEs (350 − 300). MOEs combine as the square root of the sum of squares.

Significance cannot be judged without a decennial census count: The decennial census does not collect poverty data. ACS MOEs are designed for this test.

Before comparing ACS estimates, test the difference: MOE(diff) = √(MOE₁² + MOE₂²); significant only if |difference| > MOE(diff).

Answer: A

ACS 5-year estimates with their margins of error: Correct. ACS 1-year estimates are published only for areas of 65,000 or more people. Tract-level income comes from the 5-year estimates, and the margins of error should be reported because tract samples are small.

American Community Survey 1-year estimates, for the newest data: One-year ACS estimates are not published for areas this small or for tracts.

The 2020 Decennial Census count of household income: The decennial census no longer asks about income. The ACS replaced the old long form.

A survey of residents who attend the next public meeting: A convenience sample of meeting attendees cannot give reliable tract-level income figures.

For small areas (tracts, block groups, places under 65,000), use ACS 5-year estimates and report their margins of error.

Answer: D

An equal protection claim based on unequal effects: Under Village of Arlington Heights (1977), equal protection requires proof of discriminatory intent. Disproportionate effect alone is not enough.

An ADA claim for denial of housing choice: The ADA addresses disability. The alleged harm here is to racial and ethnic groups.

A regulatory takings claim under Penn Central: A takings claim concerns an owner's economic loss, not discriminatory effects on households.

A Fair Housing Act disparate-impact claim: Correct. Texas Dept. of Housing and Community Affairs v. Inclusive Communities Project (2015) held that disparate-impact claims are cognizable under the Fair Housing Act. Plaintiffs must show that the specific policy caused the disparity ("robust causality"). Intent is not required.

Without proof of intent, an FHA disparate-impact claim (Inclusive Communities, 2015) can proceed; equal protection requires intent (Arlington Heights, 1977).

Answer: D

Keep both sign categories and add findings explaining each one's purpose: Reed held that a benign motive or stated purpose does not save a rule that is content based on its face.

Drop the on/off-premises rule because Reed makes it content based: Austin (2022) rejected that reading of Reed. The location-based distinction is content neutral, so dropping it is unnecessary.

Apply the political sign limits to all signs but exempt nonprofit events: An exemption that turns on the event's sponsor and subject is still content based, so the defect remains.

Adopt message-neutral rules and keep the on/off-premises rule: Correct. Under Reed v. Town of Gilbert (2015), rules that depend on a sign's subject or message are content based and face strict scrutiny. City of Austin v. Reagan National Advertising (2022) held that an on/off-premises distinction is content neutral. Neutral time, place and manner rules fix the risky categories while keeping a defensible rule.

Regulate signs by size, location, lighting and duration, not message (Reed, 2015); on/off-premises rules are content neutral (Austin, 2022).

Answer: D

Empower: Empower puts the final decision in the public's hands, but the council keeps the decision here.

Inform: Inform is one-way information with no promise to gather or use feedback, which falls short of what the council wants.

Collaborate: Collaborate makes the public a partner in developing the alternatives and identifying the preferred solution, which promises more influence than the council intends.

Consult: Correct. At the Consult level the promise is to keep the public informed, listen to and acknowledge concerns, and report how input influenced the decision. The council keeps the final choice, and asking for feedback on set alternatives fits that level.

Match the promise to the public's real influence: Inform, Consult, Involve, Collaborate, Empower; feedback on alternatives with a council decision is Consult.

Answer: A

Facilitated small-group sessions at varied times: Correct. The first meeting's time, place and testimony format filtered out working residents and rewarded the angriest speakers. Small facilitated groups at evening and weekend times near the site widen participation and turn complaints into specific concerns the city can document.

A repeat city hall meeting with stricter speaker time limits: This keeps the same time, place and format that limited participation. Shorter limits do not reach new people.

An online-only survey to avoid another confrontational meeting: An online-only format leaves out residents with limited internet or language access, and it avoids conflict rather than managing it.

Limiting attendance to owners within the legal notice radius: Notice rules are a legal minimum, not a limit on who may take part. Restricting attendance is exclusionary.

Design engagement around the people affected: varied times and locations and facilitated small-group formats, not one testimony-style meeting.

Answer: A

Apply the changes citywide and document the equity analysis: Correct. Hilltop and Lakeshore are higher-income and near the hospital jobs the package aims to serve. Applying the changes citywide expands housing choice and avoids concentrating change in lower-income renter areas. Under Inclusive Communities (2015), policies with unjustified discriminatory effects can be challenged under the Fair Housing Act.

Accept the proposal, since new housing would go where renters already live: Puts all new housing in lower-income areas and exempts the neighborhoods nearest the hospital. That could invite disparate-impact claims.

Start the changes in Foundry Row and Mill District and revisit the other areas in five years: Phasing that defers the high-opportunity areas has the same exclusionary effect for years.

Let each neighborhood vote on whether to opt in to the changes: Opt-in lets the most organized, highest-income areas exclude housing, the same result as the proposal.

Equitable housing policy opens high-opportunity, job-rich areas to new housing types instead of concentrating change in lower-income neighborhoods. Document the disparate-impact analysis.

Answer: B

1. Annual change = (64,000 − 52,000) ÷ 10 years = 1,200 people per year.
2. 2045 population = 64,000 + (20 × 1,200) = 88,000.
3. Added residents = 88,000 − 64,000 = 24,000.
4. Added housing units = 24,000 ÷ 2.5 persons per household = 9,600.

4,800: Projects only one decade of growth (12,000 ÷ 2.5) instead of the two decades to 2045.

9,600: Correct. Linear growth of 1,200 people a year adds 24,000 residents by 2045, and 24,000 ÷ 2.5 = 9,600 units.

13,180: Uses a compound (geometric) projection of about 23 percent growth per decade, not the linear trend the question asks for.

35,200: Divides the whole 2045 population (88,000) by household size instead of only the added residents.

Linear projection adds a constant amount each year; turn population growth into housing need by dividing by household size.

Answer: D

Confine the businesses to one remote industrial area with few sites: Renton requires that the rules leave reasonable alternative avenues of communication; a zone with almost no available sites risks being an effective ban.

State that the rules protect community morals and family values: Basing the rules on disapproval of the message makes them content based; Renton upheld rules aimed at secondary effects, not at morality.

Require a discretionary permit decided on each site's community input: Open-ended discretion over a speech-related use invites a prior-restraint challenge; Renton relied on fixed, objective location rules.

Tie spacing rules to documented secondary effects and leave sites open: Correct. In Renton the Court treated an ordinance aimed at the secondary effects of adult theaters (such as crime and falling property values) as a content-neutral time, place and manner rule. Such a rule is valid if it serves a substantial interest and leaves reasonable alternative avenues of communication, and the city may rely on other cities' studies that are reasonably relevant.

Under Renton, adult-use zoning aimed at secondary effects is reviewed as a content-neutral time, place and manner rule, and it must leave reasonable alternative sites.

Answer: A

Coordinate one sequence: water main, then resurfacing with the new lane striping: Correct. A "dig once" sequence puts the underground work before paving and lays out the new bus and bike lanes when the street is resurfaced. That avoids rework and repeat disruption for businesses.

Replace the main and resurface, then restripe after transit design: This sequences the utility and paving work but strips and restripes the new pavement later, wasting money and disrupting the corridor twice.

Hold all Segment 2 work until the transit lanes reach final design: Delays funded work unnecessarily; the water main can proceed while lane design is finished before resurfacing.

Let each department keep its own schedule to avoid coordination delays: Uncoordinated projects cause repeated construction, higher costs and more disruption.

Integrate projects through the CIP and interdepartmental coordination: sequence underground work before paving and fold plan elements into scheduled projects.

Answer: D

correct on both points, so only a Penn Central analysis is needed: Koontz rejected both points, so the exactions tests still govern.

correct that denials are exempt, but wrong about monetary demands: Half right in reverse: Koontz held that a denial for refusing a demand is still covered.

wrong that denials are exempt, but correct about monetary demands: Koontz also held that monetary exactions tied to a parcel are subject to Nollan/Dolan.

wrong on both points, so the nexus and proportionality tests still apply: Correct. Koontz held that Nollan/Dolan applies whether the government approves with a condition or denies for refusal to accept it, and that it reaches demands for money as well as land. Taxes and user fees are not affected.

Koontz (2013) extended Nollan/Dolan to permit denials and to monetary exactions, so in-lieu payments need the same nexus and proportionality support.

Answer: C

1. List the paths: 1-3-4-6, 1-3-5-6, 2-3-4-6, 2-3-5-6.
2. Durations: 6+5+3+4 = 18; 6+5+2+4 = 17; 4+5+3+4 = 16; 4+5+2+4 = 15.
3. The critical path is the longest path, 1-3-4-6, at 18 weeks.

15 weeks: This is the shortest path (2 → 3 → 5 → 6). The project cannot finish until its longest path is done.

17 weeks: Follows 1 → 3 → 5 → 6 but misses that Task 6 must also wait for the 3-week fiscal analysis.

18 weeks: Correct. The critical path is 1 → 3 → 4 → 6: 6 + 5 + 3 + 4 = 18 weeks. It is the longest chain of dependent tasks, so it sets the minimum duration.

24 weeks: Adds every task as if none could run at the same time.

The critical path is the longest sequence of dependent tasks; it sets the minimum project duration, and any delay on it delays the whole project.

Answer: D

Reserve seats for renters while keeping current meeting practices unchanged: Seats may go unfilled if the barriers to participating remain; this is the runner-up.

Post vacancies on the city website and appoint the first qualified applicants: Passive recruitment reaches the same networks and reproduces the current makeup.

Translate the committee application form into other languages: Translation helps, but the meeting times, costs and child-care needs that keep renters and parents away remain.

Remove barriers with interpretation, stipends, childcare and varied times: Correct. Inclusive leadership removes the practical barriers that keep renters, working parents and non-English speakers from serving. Pairing interpretation, stipends or childcare and flexible meeting times with targeted outreach addresses the root causes. Reserving seats alone leaves those barriers in place.

Broadening participation means removing practical barriers (language, cost, timing) and recruiting actively, not just opening seats.

Answer: C

Exclusive agricultural zoning: Zoning pays owners nothing and can be changed by a later rezoning, so the protection is not permanent.

A transfer of development rights program: TDR depends on receiving areas willing to absorb more density, which the stem rules out.

Purchase of agricultural conservation easements: Correct. In a purchase of development rights (PDR) program, the county buys conservation easements from willing owners. The easement permanently bars development while the owner keeps the land and keeps farming. The bond pays for it, and no receiving area is needed. TDR also compensates owners, but it depends on receiving areas the county does not have.

A right-to-farm ordinance: Right-to-farm rules shield farm operations from nuisance claims; they do not stop land from being converted.

PDR (agricultural conservation easements) gives permanent, compensated farmland protection without needing a receiving area for density.

Answer: A

Conduct a community food assessment with residents: Correct. Preparing to plan comes first. A community food assessment, done with residents, documents food retail, prices, transportation, existing assets and community priorities, so later actions respond to actual needs. Each of the other options jumps to a solution before the problem is defined.

Draft an ordinance allowing urban farms in all residential districts: This picks a solution before the problem is diagnosed, and it may not meet residents' main needs.

Offer an incentive package to recruit a new full-service supermarket: Recruitment may be part of the answer, but committing incentives before assessing feasibility and needs is premature.

Map fast-food outlets and propose a moratorium on new ones: This narrows the problem without engagement, and limiting outlets adds no healthy food options.

Food system planning starts with a community food assessment that engages residents before strategies are chosen.

Answer: D

Widen the arterial to six lanes to relieve congestion-related crashes: The problem is conflict, not capacity; more lanes lengthen crossings, raise speeds and tend to induce more traffic.

Remove the marked midblock crosswalks to discourage risky crossings: Pedestrians still cross where destinations are; removing crosswalks suppresses walking instead of making crossings safer.

Raise the speed limit to the observed 85th-percentile travel speed: Higher speeds increase crash severity, especially for pedestrians, and do nothing about left-turn conflicts.

Convert it to two travel lanes, a center turn lane and bike lanes: Correct. A road diet (four-lane to three-lane conversion) is an FHWA Proven Safety Countermeasure. It moves left-turning vehicles out of the through lanes, narrows speed differences and shortens pedestrian crossings, and the leftover width can serve bicycles. Volumes fit a three-lane section, so capacity is not lost where it matters.

Where volumes allow, a four-to-three-lane road diet reduces rear-end, left-turn and pedestrian crashes by separating turning traffic and calming speeds.

Answer: B

Have the consultant adjust assumptions until the failures disappear: This pressures another professional to reach findings the evidence does not support.

Ask for verification of methods, then accept supported findings: Correct. Questioning methods and data is sound review. The Code bars directing or pressuring other professionals to reach findings the evidence does not support, and it bars deliberately failing to provide adequate, timely, clear and accurate information. Verification followed by acceptance of supported findings meets both duties.

Hold the study until after the council votes to avoid controversy: Deliberately delaying the study withholds timely, accurate information from decision makers.

Brief the council on the study but leave out the intersection findings: Omitting the key finding deliberately fails to provide adequate and accurate information.

Planners may challenge methods but must not pressure others toward unsupported findings or withhold accurate information.

Answer: B

Without disclosure, as long as her own fee does not depend on the plan: The conflict is the possible gain to her family, not how her fee is set, so disclosure is still required.

With written disclosure, written consent and public disclosure: Correct. When family members could gain from the work beyond the agreed fee, the Code allows the planner to proceed only if the client consents in writing after full prior written disclosure. She must also disclose the conflict on the public record at every public meeting and in all written reports on the work. Withdrawal is not required if these steps are met.

After mentioning the parcel to the town manager in a private conversation: An oral, private mention is neither the prior written disclosure nor the public-record disclosure the Code requires.

Not at all, because any family interest in a study area bars the work: The Code does not impose an absolute bar; it permits the work with written consent and public disclosure.

A potential personal or family gain requires full prior written disclosure, the client's written consent, and disclosure on the public record throughout the work.