3 ms·
Ok, I agree with this, but in this case there is a direct impact to the adjacent landowner receiving this runoff. So regulate that. For some reason we craft al
by voisin 4y ago
Ok, I agree with this, but in this case there is a direct impact to the adjacent landowner receiving this runoff. So regulate that.
For some reason we craft all these laws to avoid the possibility of bad things happening, creating these broad dragnets that impact so many things unintentionally, rather than just regulating the thing we don’t want directly.
- heretogetout 4y agoRunoff isn't the only concern. There's noise, big-rig traffic, odor, unappealing landscape (important to some). At some point it's a lot cheaper and easier to just regulate with zoning than to regulate each individual component of a site[0]. And frankly both sides -- residential and farmer -- should be happy to be away from each other. 0: Which, of course, developers would also object to and would lead to a lot of patchwork regulation due to grandfathering.
- darkerside 4y agoWhat you're describing is a recipe for a convoluted and incomprehensible zoning code that tries to predict every possible consequence instead of simply stating what people don't want.
- voisin 4y agoAnd yet this is how cities developed for the vast majority of human existence and created the cities that people flock to as tourists.