3 ms·
Are we talking through each other because I feel like we are arguing the same point. jzymbaluk said "Why shouldn't land owners be able to build whatever they w
by mrep 8y ago
Are we talking through each other because I feel like we are arguing the same point.
jzymbaluk said "Why shouldn't land owners be able to build whatever they want on their own property? It's not your backyard, it's your neighbors property" which screams "No zoning" to me.
Then "saagarjha" said "As long as they follow the noise and disturbance ordinances, then sure." which screams "the market will naturally balance homeowner satisfaction with factories/businesses".
I responded with "Are you suggesting that nightclubs should be banned altogether? If not, then where do you suggest to put them since they are inherently noisy?" as without zoning, homeowners, businesses, and factories could be right next to each other.
- saagarjha 8y agoOverall the point I was trying to get at “if they follow the rules, then I don’t care if they’re next to my house”. Ideally there would be rules protecting me from annoyance such as noise pollution. Zoning rules would allow those that require more lenient regulations their own place to stay (note: this isn’t a NIMBY argument. It’s a “follow the rules” thing, which ideally should be constructed in a way to make it possible to build these while still not making it horrible for everyone else living there, and not putting any other restrictions just because I don’t want it next to my house).
- emodendroket 8y agoI see the rules more as an instrument for guaranteeing a certain quality of life and less as an end unto themselves.