Commuter rights
Printer-Friendly
Email this Letter
Post a Comment (0)
I received a notice regarding downzoning due to steep slopes on part of my land, so I presume that I am on the losing end of the latest debate regarding downzoning. I do not, however, consider this a total loss.
In the debate on the downzoning of property for unbuildable slope and flood plains, those with the loudest voices against it are the local farmers and some modest landowners.
The presumption in most of their arguments seems to be that by helping them, we are doing the right thing for the local economy — not to mention treating them as they should be treated. After all, improving business is good for everyone and no one should have their properties "taken" without compensation.
This is where I believe their thinking is a bit off.
I believe that the primary business of Fauquier County is providing a nice place to live for those that work and bring home money (to spend in Fauquier) from the D.C. area.
I know that this is heresy and does not go with the county's stated goals, but without this money from commuters, Fauquier would be destitute.
I hate to paint it with a broad brush (since there are still some working farms in Fauquier) but agriculture/horse farms/open space is mostly a prop to this business of providing a nice place to live.
My recommendation to the supervisors and planning commission? Do everything possible to help this commuter group.
If, by extinguishing a few marginal lots, we improve the scenery and make Fauquier a more pleasant place to live for the commuter, I am OK with it.
By the way, I think that the farmers and landowners who lose lots will reap financial benefits from having their remaining lots in nicer neighborhoods.
It would be great to have a bidding war for the "rare but nice place to live in Fauquier" vs "the plentiful and ugly subdivision in Prince William."
Antony Takahashi
Marshall
You must be logged in to post a comment.