Smart growth means different things to different people
by James Simpson

Potomac News
Friday, June 20, 2003

Everyone is talking about Smart Growth, but no two people have the same definition. Similar to the term "success" it greatly depends on ones point of view or perspective.

There are several facets to growth within Prince William County that need to be addressed: the burden of new growth on current taxpayers, appropriate ratio of homes to retail, industrial, and office space, and real property taxation.

One of the more complicated of these subjects is the burden of growth on existing taxpayers. In a previous column I described the advantages of establishing an Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance. In addition to an APFO there is another way to ensure that the 34,000+ housing units that are on the books (some since the 1950s) do not place an undue burden on taxpayers - Downzoning.

I should state right now that I take a lot of heat over some of my suggestions related to land and government control. While I am a Libertarian, my opinions on certain issues clash not only with mainstream Republicans and Democrats but sometimes also with other libertarians. (The difference between a Libertarian and a libertarian, sometimes referred to as a big "L" and small "l" libertarian is that the former is a member of the party and the latter is usually a Republican or Democrat who believes in a more limited government.

My opinions are a mixture of Libertarian, Geo-Libertarian, and Free-Market Anarchist philosophies. Usually I lean more toward Geo-Libertarian beliefs when it comes to land. Unlike the definition of "property" as all objects possessed or owned title to, I believe property is the result of ones labor. While the fruits of ones labor, even on a parcel of land, belong to an individual … the land itself was not derived from the expenditure of ones time and energy. But I digress, and that is a discussion for another time.

In a near perfect world even land issues would be resolved without the necessity of government, but we must deal with the world as it exists right now. And unlike many other issues that government is involved in, how one uses the land that is titled to him impacts others through taxation for services and environmental factors such as pollution and a standard of living.

Downzoning would provide for the reduction of density or a change in the intensity of development on land. After the government has approved zoning, such as with lots approved in the 50s, 60s and 70s, it can not change the zoning on individual lots to account for the impact that they would have on the county when built upon. Laws are rightly set up to protect against efforts that may be targeted at individuals rather then applied universally. However, a county wide downzoning would allow for such a change. While previous attempts at this have been rejected in Virginia, the commonly believed reason is due to targeted or piecemeal attempts rather then a countywide change.

While my preference would be to reduce the scope of government, resulting in fewer services that needed to be paid for through taxes, this is one of the only ways that will protect taxpayers as developers add more homes to Prince William. A protection clause would need to be built in the downzoning to protect those land owners who have already made investments or improvements on their property.

The second issue that must be addressed is providing the right climate in the county to attract a good mix of residential and office space. There is no question in anyones' mind that a greater number of high paying jobs located in small, architecturally attractive local business parks would reduce the number of commuters - improving traffic and pollution and reducing the demand for additional roads.

The problem we face in Prince William County is one of investment protection. Due to the way our zoning laws are written, and frequently ignored, no one in their right mind would invest in building offices around here. Once built they would need to be sold in order for the builder to make money, and if a bunch of retail stores or auto dealerships pop up in the mean time then they would be harder to move then offices located in Reston, Dulles or even parts of Loudoun.

A prime example is the stretch of land on the Prince William Parkway between Old Bridge Road and Smoketown Road. This would be a prime stretch for a nice set of low-rise office complexes. However, a car dealership is about to be approved for replacement of the old Hechingers store. And who knows when the next strip mall will pop up in that area. We already have a corridor of auto dealership on the northern stretch of Route 1. This is where future dealerships should be located, not throughout the county. Who wants to drive all over Prince William when they are shopping for a car anyway?

Well, I've run out of space. I will have to go into Real Property Taxation in a future column.

James Simpson is a resident of the very well designed community of Lake Ridge. He welcomes reader feedback and can be reached at JamesSimpson@aol.com.