4 ms·
> Author probably tried to pull a fast one onthe govt. In what sense is the author trying to pull a fast one? They own agricultural land. It is legal to conver
by boole1854 4y ago
> Author probably tried to pull a fast one onthe govt.
In what sense is the author trying to pull a fast one? They own agricultural land. It is legal to convert agricultural-use land to non-agricultural-use land. There is a legal procedure for doing so. The author is trying to follow the procedure. The procedure turns out to be very difficult, and they publicize this fact. Where is the 'fast one' being pulled and who is it being pulled on?
- thunkshift1 4y agoWhy dont you try building a residential property or factory on a land zoned for public parks and tell me how that goes in your country?
- gautamcgoel 4y ago...the author owns the land he is trying to build on, which is very different than trying to build something in the middle of a public park.
- asdff 4y agoMost US cities as they exist today would not exist if you could not convert agricultural land to other uses. Where does suburbia come from? Former farms.
- thunkshift1 4y agoFair point.. but most (almost all) US cities do not exist only because their owners wanted to go from farm-land —> city. They could not have existed with a local body of authority/government wanting that to happen and planning for it. The point I am trying to make is, yes the author owns the land and no one is taking away his ownership. However, owner is not the only party who gets a say in what happens with his land which is earmarked for agriculture. I know there are cities in the west where you cant even repaint your own houses without getting the permission from cities.There are local laws and zoning regulations as well you have to abide by which author seems to have conveniently left out.