Regrettably, I think the answer is almost certainly "no," but San Francisco--easily the quirkiest city in America--is setting an example that other cities, large and small, are following.  As this article by Henry Grabar in Salon points out, it has some serious local economic advantages.  Here are some excerpts from the article:  
You might not realize, walking the streets of Nob Hill, that you are 
experiencing an urban economy governed by the tightest big-city 
regulations on “formula retail” in the country. That’s because the San 
Francisco’s anti-chain net, while unique among large cities, is fairly 
permeable: three out of four chains that apply for permission to operate
 in one of the city’s protected zones are approved. Sure, San Francisco 
is quirky and diverse, true to its reputation, and bursting with 
independent bookstores, cafes, restaurants and boutiques. But the city 
isn’t an oasis: as in any other large U.S. city, there are dozens of 
Starbucks and Subway shops here too.
Supporters say the 75 percent
 approval rate does not do justice to the system’s efficacy. Seeking 
authorization forces chains to make concessions to neighborhood 
interests, and the deterrent effect — Qdoba might not even attempt
 to open across from a favorite local burrito joint — is impossible to 
quantify. Two recent high-profile cases – the rejection of Starbucks and Chipotle earlier
 this year – have fueled the sense that neighborhoods wield real power. 
In the case of Starbucks, 453 signatures were submitted in support; 
4,200 signatures in opposition.
The impact of the law has grown over time. . . .
What separates San Francisco’s political achievement from griping in 
Greenwich Village or Venice Beach is the employment of economic data to 
prop up the power of the plebiscite. That data comes largely from one 
firm, Civic Economics, which is responsible for more than half of the 
studies listed in the appendix of the San Francisco Planning Commission 
memo [PDF] that addresses formula retail controls. . . .
The results were
 striking: for every $100 spent at a chain, approximately $13 remained 
in the local economy, largely through wages. For every $100 spent at the
 local outfit, $45 would recirculate locally, thanks to wages, corporate
 profits, locally oriented procurement, and potential future investment 
in the community, ranging from sponsorship of a Little League team to 
opening a second branch. The cost of a book or CD might be marginally 
higher, but the return for the city was nearly three times better at 
Waterloo Records and Book People. Borders didn’t move in.
Since
 then, Civic Economics has performed parallel analyses for other cities,
 including San Francisco, and obtained similar results. “The numbers 
were undeniable,” Houston said. “Nobody ever offers subsidies to the 
local bookstores — it’s crazy to think you’re giving subsidies to these 
non-local restaurants.” . . .
Click here for the rest of this intriguing urban development article.  If it can be done here (so many legal and historical precedents against this kind of thing), it might very well deeply enrich Reston's prospective urban areas as well as the community in which they operate.   
 
No comments:
Post a Comment
Your comments are welcome and encouraged as long as they are relevant, constructive, and decent.