A fresh example of how zoning has become a micromanaging busybody

I don't think I agree with you, based on the actual wording. But I do agree in that the specificity of zoning is a problem.

I've done some deep research to confirm my understanding of Japanese zoning rules. (a whole minute! :-) ) So what I see there is:

- levels based on "how much nuisance could this generate to close-by properties" [1]

- at a given level, all 'lesser nuisance' uses are permitted. If you want to build a house beside a tannery, bless you

So, if you have 'level 2: residential (apartment buildings .le. 3storey) plus retail commercial (small shops, small restaurants, etc)' [2], nothing stops a mix of that plus single family and duplex (level 0 / level 1).

Now agreed, there needs to be agreement (ideally consensus) that highschool and college are similar enough 'nuisance' as to be in the same bucket. I reckon that an argument that they are not in the same bucket is going to get a rough ride.

[1] the levels approach is deliberately broadly based, so less susceptible to micro-zoning/backroom deals

[2] my understanding of the actual levels is vague at best, this description is extracted from my left ear.