Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jasonmarks_ 310 days ago
> So this is all about getting the town to assess lots at higher valuations and this way raise tax revenue which in turn will raise town’s ability to spend for itself.

That is one angle of view. Alternatively, you could be encouraging vacant lot (or equivalent structure) owners to sell if neighbors are improving properties while they are not.
1 comments
sroussey 310 days ago
That’s an interesting condition—that the market indicates the land can be improved profitably.

However, it depends. An area might have enough demand for a single improvement, like a 7-11 or something, but no prospects for any more.

Punishing neighbor properties for not getting that one deal is an interesting but not ideal solution.

link
jasonmarks_ 310 days ago
> Punishing neighbor properties for not getting that one deal is an interesting but not ideal solution.

It could very well be that it is less than optimal to compare lots intended for residential with lots you would develop a convenience store on.

link
alistairSH 310 days ago
Which gets us into a whole other debate about zoning in (most of) the US.

Why shouldn't a land owner be able to use that land in the most profitable way possible (within reason)?

Example: In my area, there's an intersection about 1/4 mile away. I think it would be a great place to have a corner shop/cafe/bodega. It's close to the schools, the other shopping options are another mile away. It's walking distance to several thousand housing units.

But, I can't build such a shop because the entire area is zoned residential (and also covered by HOAs, which are yet another debate).

Quite a few blogs and articles out there comparing US zoning to typical Japanese zoning, if you're interested. Cliffs: Japan often has mixed-use zoning by default (ie, anything from detached homes to small apartments to small office/shops is ok in the same zone)

link