Archived Story
Friday, January 26, 2007
Trying to figure out what color to paint your business? Don't bother shelling out big money to consultants. Just ask the city. They'll go ahead and tell you what colors you may choose from.
That city regulations can control how a business chooses to decorate itself is probably not an unfamiliar subject to most adults. But most adults probably wouldn't sit around and listen to a the city planning commission discuss for more than half an hour how many different colors a business can use on its exterior.
Barstow's planning commission did as such a couple of weeks ago when Tanger Outlets looked to get an expansion approved. They approved it, but not after an extremely tiresome, inane discussion of their color choices.
We don't have the space (or the interest, frankly) to get into the details of the discussion. The basic point was that the city established a color scheme and limits for that area as part of a zoning process that came about after the outlet mall was built and spent a seemingly ridiculous amount of staff time and tax dollars figuring out how to deal with it.
Tanger Outlets got its approval of course, because Barstow isn't the type of place to turn down a potential economic development because it might have green doors - at least not yet. Although you have to wonder how the planning commission would have responded if the owners of the outlets told them they'll paint the expansion whatever color they want to and the city needs to stay out of it. Would they have rejected the expansion?
It turns out, however, that we can't put the blame on the city for extending its authority into areas it does not belong. Based on comments from city spokesman John Rader, this is more of a situation of private interests willingly giving up their property rights so they can justify inhibiting the property rights of others.
As Rader explained, many businesses actually look for city regulations that restrict the appearance of commercial properties. That way they don't have to worry about something "garish" or "tacky" being built nearby that might have a negative effect on their own property values.
What we're talking about is trying to apply objective standards to something that is in the eye of the beholder. Most cities have regulations to this effect. Some are more stringent than others. Regardless of the stringency of the regulations, they're all violations of property rights and an abuse of civic government authority.
But it's not likely to change, because too many people believe that the right to property ends at their own borders. In fact, if folks had more respect for the rights of others to do build on their land what they choose, then perhaps what goes on across the borders of their property lines will have less of an impact on their land's value. Nobody would care anymore whether the neighbor has a green house, or a business on the corner is painted pink.
Scott Shackford