Government is not, in this case, destroying the investment of the developers. The developers are perfectly free to sell the property they bought. They can either build houses on it at the existing zoning or sell it as they bought it, as farmland. They aren't entitled to make unbelievable amounts of money on their real estate purchase any more than I am guaranteed by law to make money on my more modest one. No one is even saying they can't build on the land they bought. They just can't build endless thousands of houses whose occupants will swamp local infrastructure.
Did you read the bit in the article about how the new immigrants to the county will require 125 new schools? At millions of dollars per school? The developers sure-God aren't going to pay for that. The taxpayers have to shell out for it. Do the developers have the right to demand the rest of us do that? I dispute that. Taxes are already bad enough, thanks. There's no reason the taxpayers of Virginia should fork over money to further enrich a development corporation.
You're not from around here, are you? Come visit us sometime. Spend a few hours parked in motionless traffic on Route 7 or I-66 every morning and afternoon for a week. You may come to feel differently.
Good night.
"Government is not, in this case, destroying the investment of the developers. The developers are perfectly free to sell the property they bought. They can either build houses on it at the existing zoning or sell it as they bought it, as farmland. They aren't entitled to make unbelievable amounts of money on their real estate purchase any more than I am guaranteed by law to make money on my more modest one. No one is even saying they can't build on the land they bought. They just can't build endless thousands of houses whose occupants will swamp local infrastructure."
You are clearly of the socialist mindset. You actually stated that they are not "entitled" to make "unbelievable" profits. Do you understand that farmland is no longer a wise investment in the year 2006 (we are not an agrarian culture as the Soviets were in the early 1900's) and that if it must be sold as such, then the property has been devalued by the community, yet they happily enact zoning laws to esure that their own property values remain intact.
Also, infrastructure should not be burdened by development since there are such enormous increases in tax revenues, unless the funds are not appropriated toward updating said infrastructure. Unfortunately, what often happens is that the local governments squander the money on various school "programs" and other unnecessary projects and then cry about the burdened infrastructure and propose tax increases. That is not the fault of developers, but of the voters.
Understand that the tax base increases proportionally to the services that are required. If there is not enough money coming in from the tax payers for additional services, then they do not "require" such services.
And here is a newsflash for you - developers pay taxes for as long as they own the property. Please get it through your head that you aren't forking over anything that pays for development property. In fact, if your home is modest - the developer's property taxes, which are probably much higher than those on your property, are likely contributing more to your community than you are.
So you should say thank you if you choose to stay.
"You're not from around here, are you? Come visit us sometime. Spend a few hours parked in motionless traffic on Route 7 or I-66 every morning and afternoon for a week. You may come to feel differently."
No thanks, I like it rural. That is why I choose to live in a rural community. When it no longer is one, I'll choose another. :)