It's as if the City Beautiful movement had never happened.

Forty years of steady drumming from the takings/property rights movement is bound to make some impression.

If nothing is more powerful than an idea whose time has come, then the next most powerful thing is an idea with lots of money, and patience, and 503(c)(1) status.

If I had a think-tank, I'd uses as its motto Gutta cavat lapidem, (Dripping water hollows out a stone).

Guess what, William Saletan?

I just bought the house next door to yours!

And guess what else?

Next week I'm going to tear it down and start my own pig farm!

I'm sure you won't object, being such a committed libertarian and all...

There is a difference here, though.

The purpose of zoning is supposed to be tied to the effects of different types of land uses and building on the physical development and character of the neighborhood. This isn't about that - it's about not liking how the occupants run their businesses.

If Los Angeles passed a zoning ordinance that made it illegal to put your building behind a big parking lot, or have a drive-through, that would be ordinary zoning.

This is more like banning (more) chiropractors' offices in a commercial district that allows doctor's offices because you don't like chiropractic medicine. The spillover effects of the businesses that are allowed, and the styles of buildings they're allowed to construct, are indistinguishable from those of the businesses that are restricted.

I'm not sure Saletan's objection was related mostly to the content of the ban, it seemed like he more found the paternalistic reasoning presented for it by the city council objectionable.

After all, if you wanted to provide "more choice" subsidizing grocery stores or sit-down restaurants (why so many seem to believe that having a server bring the food to you increases its nutritional value is lost on me) seems to be a less intrusive way than banning new construction.

The main problem is, if you're going to ban restaurants in a lower class neighborhood based on the exact characteristics that define them as "lower class" restaurants (no table service, disposable packaging etc) rather than on nutritional guidelines, it won't be difficult to cite it as class-based elitism rather than a genuine health issue.

Citing government zoning prohibitions on bars and strip clubs is a false analogy as well, I'd argue, since the rationale for the decision is entirely different from that of the LA fast-food ban. If you ban bars or strip clubs from a certain neighborhood, it is to protect the neighborhood from noise and other close environmental factors that will severely effect close by residences. No one is trying to get rid of bars - but allowing them to be built next to our elementary schools is obviously a bad thing. This ban is clearly designed to change the behavior of the residents of the affected area, not protect residents from the unavoidable effects of nearby residency.

I'll care about what Saletan has to say when he starts a crusade against "dry counties" in Americans states and objections to the stingy distribution of liquor licenses.

This ban is clearly designed to change the behavior of the residents of the affected area

First, I disagree about the nature of zoning bans themselves: restricting where liquor stores can be located is an initiative to change behavior. Next, the fast food restaurant moratorium isn't primarily about nutrition, though the council may be using that as an excuse. Fast food restaurants are just another sort of urban blight which tends to drag the immediate area down. Now, unlike strip clubs and liquor stores, which tend to be independently owned by small businesses, politicians can't attack the large companies that franchise fast food restaurants directly. But I see the temptation to crack down on them in the same way one might want to prevent too many liquor stores from concentrating themselves in the same place.

Joe, I'm not sure about Lowell, but in every area I do know about, density of a business type is a zoning consideration.

i was going to say something about saletan, but first i'm fascinated by michael t sweeney: why is it "obviously" a bad thing that a bar be built next to an elementary school. what's so "obvious" about the problem? i don't see anything more "obvious" about it than i do about not allowing an excessive density of fast-food restaurants.

but what i really wanted to say was: when william saletan says "we," i often wonder: who else thinks like he does?

i first became aware of saletan as a pretty sane voice at salon during the clinton impeachment, but since then, he's joined the list of people i never bother to read....

Michael Deegan,

I'm a professional urban planner who's worked in three communities, and the only time I've seen "density of business" regulations is in regards to adult entertainment establishments.

Tyro,

Fast food restaurants are just another sort of urban blight which tends to drag the immediate area down.?

That's the problem - this ordinance doesn't address the blighting issue.

A Burger King in a storefront that abuts the sidewalk, with two stories of apartments above it, is not a blighting influence - just the opposite.

On the other hand, a locally-owned, sit-down restaurant located in a one-story building in the middle of a big parking lot is a blighting influence in an urban area, but this law wouldln't effect them

"I'm a professional urban planner who's worked in three communities, and the only time I've seen "density of business" regulations is in regards to adult entertainment establishments."

Which is actually not a bad way of thinking about it. Why shouldn't a community be able to regulate the density of fast food restaurants in the same they regulate, say, adult entertainment establishments?

houston, baby, houston.

Why does anyone pay attention to William Saletan? As Atrios has noted over and over again the guy is a blithering idiot.

Steve,

FWIW, adult entertainment establishments are subject to proximity regulations in order to prevent the development of a Red Light Districts. Patrons of such establishments walking between them will attract similar businesses, legal as well as "street." As this occurs property values will decline, other businesses will leave, and crime related to the adult businesses (prostitution) will increase. That's the theory, anyway.

Is any of this applicable to fast food businesses?

Is any of this applicable to fast food businesses?

Yes.

Look, don't get me wrong. I like liquor stores and am glad there's one nearby. But I recognize that liquor stores, like fast food restaurants, are a form of blight which can bring down property values when they come to dominate the landscape. Even a McDonald's on a street corner in an otherwise vibrant neighborhood can drag things down. So passing a moratorium in South Central counds like a reasonable thing to do.

I'm also someone who questions how effective this zoning regulation is going to be. However, people also need to keep in mind that other, wealthier communities in LA County (Beverly Hills, Pasadena) have zoning regulations on these types of fast food businesses.

Is no one worried about a "slippery slope" here? These fast-food outlets aren't being (temporarily) banned from opening because of their architecture, but because of the type of food they serve. What's next?

You know, even if you wanted to write about zoning regulations against fast food places, this is a stupid column.

There are municipalities all across the US that ban fast-food franchises - mostly wealthy suburbs trying to keep out the riff-raff. And instead of merely keeping places that have a ton of fast food joints from having a few more, they actually ban them, denying people there the choice that Lord Saletan decries.

I strongly recommend taking five minutes to a do a google maps search for restaurants in "South Los Angeles." You get four pages of restaurants and every single one is a fast food establishment save Roscoes Chicken and Waffles.

"Fast food restaurants are just another sort of urban blight which tends to drag the immediate area down."

Uh huh. Tell us more Lord Tyro.

I've been to many places where they do no such thing.

Yet another throw away comment from someone pretending to know something.

ed hardy ed hardy clothing
ed hardy clothing