Hacker News Reader

Comment by sneak | Hacker News Reader

Is it just me or is not letting the rightful owners of the land use it for the most productive (and not damaging/harmful/polluting) thing possible seem insane?

Why does Boulder get to decide whether these farmers are allowed to install solar on their own land?

The fact that they had to fight a battle and take time out of their life to obtain permission to do this (on unprofitable farmland) seems tremendously unjust.

My mind reels.

View on HN

In America (land of the free) it is considered normal for all the surrounding landowners and/or voters to decide how you may use your own property. Typically you must ask permission or change local laws to use land in other-than-narrowly-prescribed ways.

Since land covenants were legally neutered in the 60s, law is sort of the only avenue people have left for trying to make sure the community they live in is the kind of place they actually want to live, and doesn't turn into a factory district or a ghetto.

You forgot about trusts. And HOAs. Also, CC&Rs are still a thing.

They exist but you can't do much with them anymore, hence why zoning is such a popular strategy.

There's not a single country in the world that doesn't put restrictions on what land owners can do with their land, on the basis that everywhere in the world has realised that what you do with your land affects the lives of everyone surrounding it.

You can consider that a limit on freedom, or you can consider that allowing a total free-for-all would infringe on the freedom of neighbours to enjoy their land - maximising freedom involves finding compromises that minimises the restrictions, not having none.

The “total free for all” is used as a scare tactic to justify an otherwise unjustifiable infringement on property rights.

Arguing for the us local property zoning scheme is the same as arguing for corrupt local developers to control local land use.

I'm not arguing for the us local property zoning schemes. I'm pointing out that painting giving your neighbours a say as a problem is no more of an argument for liberty than arguing for restrictive zoning.

Both significantly harm any prospect of liberty.

Personally I'm rather glad my neighbor can't turn his property into an industrial hog farm.

yes but the reason is because of smells that will cross onto your property. plain tort law will allow you to seek compensation for that

Seems to me that "land of the status quo" might be a better term.

that or “land of I got mine”

I assume upthread is talking about Boulders “urban growth boundary”.

I think the most likely “free market” result of removing the restrictions would be what they call “suburban sprawl”.

There are a lot of reasons to consider suburban sprawl damaging/harmful/polluting.

There are a lot of valid critiques to be made of an arguably NIMBY policy like the urban growth boundary, but it’s more than just “farms are pretty”.

Because Boulderites love their open space and spend a ton of tax dollars protecting it. It makes for a very nice city.

(I was born and raised in Boulder)

My mind reels

Then you've never lived in a place with no zoning, where someone can open a junk yard next to the home you spent 20 years saving money to buy.

You can do what you want on your land. But at the same time, you have to live in a society with neighbors. There is give-and-take.

If you want to do anything you want on your land without restriction, feel free to save your money and buy your own country with no other residents. Until then, you'll have to learn to get along with other people and understand that what you want may not always be what is best for everyone.

There's a big difference between banning the construction of anything and letting people run a junk yard. And TBH inactive farms tend to have a lot of old junk and falling down buildings anyway.

I lived in incorporated and rural areas most my life and it was never a problem.

Plus for every law prohibiting junk yards and nuances, there are laws and HOAs actively doing harm like yard and lawn requirements.

Yes and... I feel the "it's _my_ land" perspective is constrained by human lifespan.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com