In urban planning, decision makers often need to take a variety of aspects into account, including stakeholder attitudes. The purpose of this paper is to compare how decision makers and the public assess different criteria in an urban planning project. The study was carried out through interviews and a survey about an urban planning project. By compiling data using multi-attribute utility theory, it was possible to reveal similarities and differences between the decision makers and the public. The findings reveal that the perceived value of the project differed greatly between these two perspectives: The public’s opinion was closer to a status quo perspective, while the decision makers were more optimistic about the project. While some of the differences can partly be explained by uncertainty about the project and the criteria, the results reveal the importance of including the public in an early stage of these initiatives. Furthermore, the multi-attribute utility approach is a useful tool for compiling assessments, but additional data is needed for gaining further understanding of stakeholder preferences. Therefore, a mixed-methods approach to collecting stakeholder preferences is suggested.