| ▲ | vel0city 2 hours ago | |||||||
> This is a circular statement. Its not if you get the context. > The regulatory hurdles are a large part of what drive cost I agree, they are a large part. The things they have to do to meet the standards are expensive. The claim was "impossible to get permission to build now". As in, the government won't let them build it. That the standards are just technically impossible to meet. They can get the permission to build it any day. Its possible to meet these standards. They just don't think it'll be worth it when they have to do it right. | ||||||||
| ▲ | cucumber3732842 an hour ago | parent [-] | |||||||
"It's impossible to get permission to build something with specifications that is financially viable." There, better? These agencies have all sorts of discretion to waive this or enforce that or interpret some third thing and yet they leverage all of it in a manner that stalls progress. I know a guy who has a textbook perfect situation for a septic in MN. MN won't permit it not because of some law or rule or code, but because the agency has decided that they just don't do septics anymore, mounds only and are exercising their discretion to only permit those. The cost difference is a lot, but less than suing them so guess what got installed? Commercial permitting of every kind is like that but worse because the public will tolerate way more abuse of business than abuse of homeowners. | ||||||||
| ||||||||