Zoning and Property Rights

The implicit statement in your comment is that people have the right to manage their own property any way they want. I think this is short sighted when the city, i.e. your neighbours, pay so much taxes to take care of the area around your property. They should have some say on what goes on in the property. For example, maybe people don't want to live next to a hotel when they didn't move in next to one?

There’s plenty of places share there’s no restrictions like this. But people that live in communities have the right to regulate how community members use their property. It’s for the greater good.

Nothing about this would let a developer cut down your tree, build on your yard, etc. You just wouldn't be able to stop your neighbor from selling their property to a developer who might cut down trees and build things there. It's not unreasonable for you to have preferences about what your neighbors do with their property, just like it's not unreasonable for you to have preferences about which kinds of restaurants are close to your home. But should you be able to prevent your fav

Because it's their home, and they literally own the land.Irrespective of the legalities, you do realize zoning is an almost universal concept?You do realize that you can't just waltz into some neighbourhood, and screw everyone over by building a giant skyscraper in the middle of their land? (Even if this law were supposedly upheld)Probably over 90% of communities in the US, even those with more open zoning, wouldn't allow any arbitrary thing to be built.Finally, it

Ha! I'm an anarchist.But yes neighborhoods do get to control things like that and they should. Ever wonder why there are no skyscrapers in DC? Ever wonder why there are home owners associations that can dictate what colors and upkeep you do on your property? My example was extreme, but rules and controls exist for a reason. If you don't like it, then don't live there.

When you bought a residential property, you agreed to operate it within certain levels of upkeep, within residential zoning ordinances, adhering to a list of rules the city imposes on you. You didn't settle a piece of land on some unclaimed frontier, and you don't get to change the rules your building, neighborhood, community, city, state, or country imposes on your property just because you don't like them. If you wanted to operate a hotel, buy property zoned for that purpose.

And you’re (Not you personally) free to do what like on your property barring negative outcomes for the entire community. Imposing restrictions on land you don’t own certainly falls in that category.Hence the stalemate I guess.

You have never had carte blanche to do whatever you want with your property in the US. You cannot run a nail salon out of your residentially zoned house, either. Many actions come with negative externalities. The whole purpose of regulation like this is to protect the interests of the community and the permanent residents.

Why shouldn't land owners be able to build whatever they want on their own property? It's not your backyard, it's your neighbors property

The idea that you should have a right to dictate what your neighbors can and cannot not do in their own homes is not uncontroversial, and a slippery slope.