In an opinion piece published on AZCentral yesterday evening, Scottsdale Republic opinions page editor Robert Leger continues to inaccurately characterize the planning and zoning battle in Scottsdale as being about “pro-growth” forces versus “slow-growth” opponents. This is simply a false premise, and writing like this contributes to the Shrinking Republic.
Wikipedia says (along with an interesting example) a false premise is an incorrect assumption on which a logical argument is based which may render a flawed conclusion.
The fight about development is NOT about whether we should allow it, or how rapidly it should proceed. The real argument that Leger either ignores for the convenience of his false conclusions or is too obtuse to grasp himself, is about the legitimacy of the whole notion of city planning and zoning.
For example, let’s look at speed limits. By Leger’s ‘logic,’ speed limits should be–shall we say–flexible. Drivers who have beautiful cars (world-class, iconic?) should be allowed to drive a little faster because their automobiles “enhance” the neighborhoods they transit. Maybe we should also include a speed limit loophole for “high density” limos, too?
No, carpool lanes don’t fit into this argument. While they may allow carpool vehicles greater speed relative to single occupant vehicle lanes, they do NOT permit you to drive faster than the posted speed limit.
The discussion about development IS really about understanding that the purpose of zoning is to, A) separate incompatible uses, and B) prevent development that disrupts the context of the area. Leger and his “pro-growth candidates” are really “pro-loophole.”