So what good do use based zoning rules do? I can see prohibiting heavy industrial or chemical in residential areas but outside of that it seems like more harm than good.
They increase property values for existing property owners in high-demand areas by preventing innovative mixed-use implementations. Forcing supply of office space or residential area down, while demand stays high, causes prices to increase.
I guess people might think that while making such policies but I would say it isn't for certain that prices increase. They may actually decrease the value of properties since they cannot be used for more productive purposes. It also increases cost since more transportation (cars) are required, which means more parking, which means less available land for useful things.
Restrictive commercial zoning limits competition for a space, enabling businesses that could not otherwise afford to be there. It’s a way for a community to inject some central planning and override the market when they disagree with its wisdom, e.g to kill the local independent coffee shop in favor of Blue Bottle.
It’s also a way to concentrate traffic where there’s infrastructure to support it, and limit it where there isn’t.
Proponents would say that that a good central plan adds value more value to the city as a whole than it costs in local inefficiencies.
It is about unaccountable government servants having power over serfs. People have to justify their existence and hence every day they go to their work thinking "what new rules can I enforce today". This was inevitable.
Comments
So what good do use based zoning rules do? I can see prohibiting heavy industrial or chemical in residential areas but outside of that it seems like more harm than good.
They increase property values for existing property owners in high-demand areas by preventing innovative mixed-use implementations. Forcing supply of office space or residential area down, while demand stays high, causes prices to increase.
I guess people might think that while making such policies but I would say it isn't for certain that prices increase. They may actually decrease the value of properties since they cannot be used for more productive purposes. It also increases cost since more transportation (cars) are required, which means more parking, which means less available land for useful things.
Restrictive commercial zoning limits competition for a space, enabling businesses that could not otherwise afford to be there. It’s a way for a community to inject some central planning and override the market when they disagree with its wisdom, e.g to kill the local independent coffee shop in favor of Blue Bottle.
It’s also a way to concentrate traffic where there’s infrastructure to support it, and limit it where there isn’t.
Proponents would say that that a good central plan adds value more value to the city as a whole than it costs in local inefficiencies.
“ Proponents would say that that a good central plan adds value more value to the city as a whole than it costs in local inefficiencies.”
This seems...unlikely.
It is about unaccountable government servants having power over serfs. People have to justify their existence and hence every day they go to their work thinking "what new rules can I enforce today". This was inevitable.