If some billionaire wanted to build a new dense, walkable city (even if it's a ghost city to start with) could they legally do it? Most zoning and setback laws are city ordinances, not state laws, right?
-
Show this thread
-
Like if you bought 30 square miles of land on a river and/or highway somewhere and were the sole owner instead of having to deal with mayors, city alders, homeowners, etc. what might stop you?
6 replies 0 retweets 15 likesShow this thread -
Take the concept of landlord to a whole new level! How many billions could it take?
1 reply 0 retweets 8 likesShow this thread -
Replying to @drethelin
I think the problem is that once you have 5,000 tenants they have political clout and all of the existing state apparatus sees all of this wealth and lack of regulation as both a tasty snack and a new empire to conquer
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @MorlockP
One way to avoid this problem is to build the whole thing before allowing any tenants. Obviously this would make the capital costs even higher but hopefully after people move in and like it, they'll then be incentivized ot let it stay nice?
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @drethelin
Not sure I understand. OK, built the whole thing. Then let it out. Then after two years you hike rates by 12% (as allowed by contract) and 5,000 tenants go screaming to their state legislators "it's not faaaaair"
1 reply 0 retweets 1 like -
Replying to @MorlockP
That’s not gonna change the shape of the city though. Buildings and streets have a LOT of intertidal
2 replies 0 retweets 1 like
ah, ok scrolling back up, re-reading go it
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.