Putting Limits on Growth
Letters to the Editor
The Washington Post
Monday, January 18, 1999
In "Virginians Want Limits on Growth"
[Metro, Jan. 7], which reported that most Virginians
(like most Americans) favor limits on sprawl,
developer-lobbyist Mike Toalson argues that controls on
development would "trample individual property
rights." He perpetuates the myth that developers
have the absolute right to maximize profits through
uncontrolled growth, free of restrictions designed to
promote community welfare and protect property values.
In fact, U.S. property owners always have been subject
to reasonable limits on development. When the founders
wrote the Constitution, Virginia and the other colonies
imposed restrictions to control population densities,
ensure orderly development and otherwise protect the
community from uncontrolled growth. The U.S. Supreme
Court long has recognized that "all property in this
country is held under an implied obligation that the
owner's use of it shall not be injurious to the
community" and that the Constitution allows
communities to impose reasonable land-use controls to
promote the public good. It is ironic that developers use
"property rights" to counter efforts to combat
sprawl. Most property owners in this country are
homeowners, and many are watching their property values
and property rights decline as uncontrolled growth clogs
highways, damages the environment and undermines quality
of life. Limits on sprawl promote the property rights of
most property owners. Community rights should not be
sacrificed to the profit margins of a few.
TIMOTHY DOWLING
Chief Counsel
DOUGLAS KENDALL
Executive Director
Community Rights Counsel
|
