Gay sauna in Luton, UK not extended a license: too close to a mosque

[Gups]

You can't really live in close proximity with people and not expect to be inconvenienced by the things they do. That's the price you pay for the benefits of a community.

I totally get why you should expect to have some say over whether or not your neighbor can burn the forest next to your house. But I don't get why you should expect to be able to prevent him from painting his house pink or flying a gay pride flag. Even if it does harm your property value. Lots of things affect your home value, like the Fed or Freddie Mac or Countrywide. It's a fluctuating asset.

As far as I'm concerned, if you own your property, you are the only person who gets a say in what you do there. Nobody else has any right. Even if it has side effects that inconvenience them. As long as you don't physically damage other peoples' stuff.

Seriously? You should be able to turn your house in a residential street into a 24 hour nightclub with no noise insulation? If I can no longer live next doo to you and my property's market value is destroyed, you are damaging my "stuff" way more than if you threw a stone at my window.

[Richard Hakluyt]

These are the sort of houses that people are not allowed to paint pink :

http://www.aboutbritain.com/images/towns/big/brighton-regency-terraced-houses-138810260.jpg

I could probably get away with painting my house pink (largeish, Northern, Edwardian Terrace of no particular distinction), meanwhile in parts of rural Suffolk it is more or less compulsory to have a pink house 

[Sheilbh]

Also this:
http://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2015/apr/14/candy-stripe-house-redesign-makes-kensington-neighbours-see-red
http://www.standard.co.uk/news/london/striped-house-owner-reveals-sevenfigure-sum-spent-on-planning-and-legal-fees-a3238211.html

[Capetan Mihali]

Again, while our attitudes might differ, the US is very far from being a country of unrestrained land-use, and is probably much more similar to the UK, if not more restrictive (again, especially with regulating sex-oriented businesses), in how things actually play out on a daily basis.  As against any grandiose mythologies about our respective "national characters" and the way they impact our land-use laws.

[celedhring]

You can't really live in close proximity with people and not expect to be inconvenienced by the things they do. That's the price you pay for the benefits of a community.

I totally get why you should expect to have some say over whether or not your neighbor can burn the forest next to your house. But I don't get why you should expect to be able to prevent him from painting his house pink or flying a gay pride flag. Even if it does harm your property value. Lots of things affect your home value, like the Fed or Freddie Mac or Countrywide. It's a fluctuating asset.

As far as I'm concerned, if you own your property, you are the only person who gets a say in what you do there. Nobody else has any right. Even if it has side effects that inconvenience them. As long as you don't physically damage other peoples' stuff.

Seriously? You should be able to turn your house in a residential street into a 24 hour nightclub with no noise insulation? If I can no longer live next doo to you and my property's market value is destroyed, you are damaging my "stuff" way more than if you threw a stone at my window.

I remember back in the 90s, before Barcelona had comprehensive noise control requirements fot businesses, neighbors were reduced to downright heckling noisy nightclubs. Stuff got pretty hostile, quite often.

[The Minsky Moment]

Economists to the rescue: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2809807

The 'secondary effects' legal doctrine allows municipalities to zone, or otherwise regulate, sexually oriented businesses. Negative 'secondary effects' (economic externalities) justify limiting First Amendment protection of speech conducted inside strip clubs. One example of a secondary effect, cited in no fewer than four United States Supreme Court rulings, is the negative effect of strip clubs on the quality of the surrounding neighborhood. Little empirical evidence that strip clubs do, in fact, have a negative effect on the surrounding neighborhood exists. To the extent that changes in neighborhood quality are reflected by changes in property prices, property prices should decrease when a strip club opens up nearby. We estimate an augmented repeat sales regression model of housing prices to estimate the effect of strip clubs on nearby residential property prices. Using real estate transactions from King County, Washington, we test the hypothesis that strip clubs have a negative effect on surrounding residential property prices. We exploit the unique and unexpected termination of a 17 year moratorium on new strip club openings in order to generate exogenous variation in the operation of strip clubs. We find no statistical evidence that strip clubs have 'secondary effects' on nearby residential property prices.

[Hamilcar]

In other news: http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/ztvdg82

England, the nation of kind and sensitive persons. 

Deus Vult! Let's sack Istanbul.

[Malthus]

Economists to the rescue: http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=2809807

The 'secondary effects' legal doctrine allows municipalities to zone, or otherwise regulate, sexually oriented businesses. Negative 'secondary effects' (economic externalities) justify limiting First Amendment protection of speech conducted inside strip clubs. One example of a secondary effect, cited in no fewer than four United States Supreme Court rulings, is the negative effect of strip clubs on the quality of the surrounding neighborhood. Little empirical evidence that strip clubs do, in fact, have a negative effect on the surrounding neighborhood exists. To the extent that changes in neighborhood quality are reflected by changes in property prices, property prices should decrease when a strip club opens up nearby. We estimate an augmented repeat sales regression model of housing prices to estimate the effect of strip clubs on nearby residential property prices. Using real estate transactions from King County, Washington, we test the hypothesis that strip clubs have a negative effect on surrounding residential property prices. We exploit the unique and unexpected termination of a 17 year moratorium on new strip club openings in order to generate exogenous variation in the operation of strip clubs. We find no statistical evidence that strip clubs have 'secondary effects' on nearby residential property prices.

My gut feelings based NIMBYism trumps your economic augmented repeat sales thingummy whatchamacallit. 

[Hamilcar]

trumps

This term might be permanently sullied.

[Malthus]

trumps

This term might be permanently sullied.

[Richard Hakluyt]

This seems to be a convenient time to point out that "trump" means fart (both as a noun and verb) in certain parts of England. It is a bit old-fashioned now, but I certainly wouldn't use the word in Yorkshire without bearing that meaning in mind.

[Malthus]

This seems to be a convenient time to point out that "trump" means fart (both as a noun and verb) in certain parts of England. It is a bit old-fashioned now, but I certainly wouldn't use the word in Yorkshire without bearing that meaning in mind.

That meaning may be making something of a comeback, in essence if not literally. 

[Eddie Teach]

trumps

This term might be permanently sullied.

Undeserved wins? Seems apt.