I am starting to study the latest fad coming out of the planning community:
form based land use codes.? I received an email from Kurt Gaertner at the
Massachusetts Office of Energy and Environmental Affairs and he referred me to
the?Massachusetts Smart Growth Toolkit.? It was just a wild guess,
but I thought that a ?Smart Growth Toolkit? would not provide me with
criticisms of FBCs. So I decided to use a different research technique.? I
asked Mr. Gaertner, an obvious supporter of FBCs, to refer me to the critics of
FBCs.? Here is my request:
Mr. Gaertner:
Thank you for your note. ?I
am aware of the basics of FBCs. ?I am specifically looking for criticisms
of FBCs.For example, it appears that
FBCs lead to a lack of architectural diversity. ?In my travels around the
country, I note that most new urban and suburban construction prescribed by
FBCs is uniformly boring because it all looks the same. ?I have patronized
outdoor cafes in Denver, suburban DC, Phoenix, Raleigh and LA and, for the life
of me, once I sit down I cannot tell where I am. ?There seems to be little
or no distinctive architecture associated with FBCs.Also, it seems that FBCs
violate fundamental property rights. ?Given the Constitution?s protections
of property, homeowners, businesses, etc. should be able to use their property
in ways they see fit not as prescribed by some planner who has lobbied a city
council to adopt a FBC. ?This assumes that the landowner does not create
an identifiable harm (externality). ?FBC advocates seem to argue that
since the public can ?see? a building or house from the street, it makes it
within the ?public realm.? ?Thus, they justify legal restrictions on the
use of other people?s property. ?I suggest that the Founders would find
this absurd. ?Your ugly building is my work of art. While the courts have
ruled that zoning and other land use restrictions are ?legal,? I would ask are
they moral or just? ?What conception of justice supports giving a small
minority in a community the power to dictate the way I use my property? James
Madison might argue that this is the definition of tyranny.Additionally, FBCs seem to
raise the price of development harming low-income residents, minorities, and
entrepreneurs. ?Mom and pop businesses that want to expand are at a
disadvantage when they need a new building because FBCs drive up costs. FBCs
also drive up the price of rental property that entrepreneurs need to expand
their businesses. ?It is my personal observation that FBC developments are
populated by major national chains that have driven local mom and pop
entrepreneurs out of business. ?As a political scientist, it
seems that FBCs are a way for a small minority in a community (usually a
high-income elite) with the help of planners and thousands of dollars of tax
money to use governmental force to impose their values on the rest of the
community. ?Are you aware of published
papers or reports that make these or similar arguments?Thank you for your
assistance.
Michael Sanera?
