4 ms·
1) 7-ll/gas station: Yes, that would be nice! 2) Strip club / bar / music venu: Yes, this would also be nice! As long as it adheres to noise ordinances and pays
by dktoao 4y ago
1) 7-ll/gas station: Yes, that would be nice!
2) Strip club / bar / music venu: Yes, this would also be nice! As long as it adheres to noise ordinances and pays for an appropriate amount of security.
3) Heavy industry: no, but I think most reasonable people and even TFA would make the case that this is an acceptable use of zoning.
Zoning regulation exist for a reason but have gone way way too far in the favor of NIMBYs who like living in food/fun/transportation deserts.
- anon291 4y ago> ) Heavy industry: no, but I think most reasonable people and even TFA would make the case that this is an acceptable use of zoning. It's also a total non-concern. Reasonable regulation can get around this. Here's a law that we can add today before we get rid of zoning. 1. Any business that knowingly engages in activity that leaks toxic materials, noise at night, vibrations, or other nuisances onto adjoining properties preventing neighborhing pre-existing property owners from enjoying their property, owes 200% punitive damages of any revenue derived from such activity or, if no revenue is derived, $1 million. Easy... now no company will possibly build in an area with existing housing because they can face hefty damages. For example, a metal recycling company which deals with potentially hazardous waste can have its revenue turned into a loss if it builds near homes. On the other hand, since the regulation only applies to nuisances towards existing homeowners, no one will develop housing near such a metal recycling facility, because they know they will face nuisances and there's nothing they can do. In fact, this is how it was done for many centuries.