Tuesday, May 19, 2009
One can either frown, chuckle, or ignore the story of the efforts of Reading, Ohio (north of Cincinnati), to regulate the placement of a busty mannequin as an attraction outside a barbecue restaurant. (After asserting that the mannequin was an unpermitted sign, the city’s Design Review Board reportedly required that she be covered up; the barbecue owner reportedly plans to appeal.) One can also not care whether the case raises issues of first amendment rights to free expression, or is just a case of regulating commercial advertisement. But one cannot deny that we will be hearing more land use cases such as these, as American commercial land use advertisements become, like our society as a whole, more confrontational (consider the punch-counterpunch commercials between Apple and Microsoft), more approving of “shocking” behavior, and more obsessed with selling through titillation …
[Comments must be approved and thus take some time to appear online.]
This blog is an Amazon affiliate. Help support Land Use Prof Blog by making purchases through Amazon links on this site at no cost to you.
- Katherine Dentzman on A Coordinated Approach to Food Safety and Land Use Law at the Urban Fringe
- Jesse Richardson on Local Regulation of Hydraulic Fracturing
- Jamie Baker Roskie on Local Regulation of Hydraulic Fracturing
- Samuel on Schleicher and Rauch on local regulation of the sharing economy
- Timothy Wayne George on Is Reed v. Town of Gilbert an important sign case?
- Jan 30 - Boston U Law - The Iron Triangle of Food Policy - AJLM Symposium
- "Basic Human Right" to Farm Your Lawn?
- CFP: Fordham Law: Sharing Economy, Sharing City: Urban Law and the New Economy
- Fennell and Peñalver on Exactions Creep
- March 11-13: Rocky Mountain Land Use Institute's annual conference: Western Places/Western Spaces: Building Fair & Resilient Communities