Definitely not. Land is a common asset of all of society: taking away building sites while basically all urban areas (ie: with jobs) suffer housing shortages is exploiting the commons.
Probably not, but I'd have their site planned at the regional/state/province level rather than allowing each individual municipality to say "NIMBY!" to everything. Because most NIMBY measures aren't about chemical refineries, they're about the working class, about sites of housing and employment for ordinary people.
The whole view that dense housing somehow equals violent crime is decades out of date and largely only ever applied to deliberately-created black ghettoes in the first place.