3 ms·
Probably not a good precedent to set.
by almost_usual 8y ago
Probably not a good precedent to set.
- nsnick 8y agoIt's a great precedent to set. First solar then high density zoning.
- dpe82 8y agoHappens all the time, actually. It's called preemption.
- vidarh 8y agoNeither is a blanket ban. A precedent of striking down blanket bans and tell them to instead actually set out criteria that would block the specific things that does not address their concerns would be quite good. E.g. if their concern is the risk ruining views, then ban construction that ruins views, don't ban things you think may ruin views whether or not they actually do, while not banning a near infinite number of things that also might ruin views; if your concern is dust, then require plans and documentation that you're taking sufficient measures to prevent it, don't ban just some of the things that may or may not cause the problem while leaving the door wide open for other projects that would cause the same problem just because people aren't pursuing those other kind of projects right now. [I keep fantasizing about "acceptance tests" for laws and regulations: Too often laws and regulations are set out based on totally untested hypotheses about their effects, but without any kind of process to review efficacy or side-effects, and with an inherent political cost to revisit an issue; imagine if all laws and regulations had to set out intended goals and define an objective set of criteria to measure if they meet the goals, and would automatically be suspended if they do not have the intended effects or have sufficiently large negative side-effects; it wouldn't stop bad laws, but it would at least document what the actual intended direct effects are]
- adrianN 8y agoI'm sure you can find experts in writing laws so that they're technically not a blanket ban, but it's still impossible to fulfill all requirements while still being profitable.
- api 8y agoSure it is. NIMBYs are totally out of control. The time is long past for intervention.
- ngngngng 8y agoWe set it all the time over here in Utah. Some heavy tourist cities wanted to ban plastic bags at grocery stores. The state swooped in and made it illegal to ban plastic bags in the entire state. The "free market" has to decide if we want them or not.
- obtaniumstool 8y agoThat's one of those ironic things that conservative state legislatures do. They're all for small government until a liberal city passes a law they don't like.
- epistasis 8y agoI think it's a great precedent, when branches of governments abuse their authority a different power must step in.
- burlesona 8y agoMore like a desperately needed precedent.