This is a classic case of the intersect between private property rights and the "public good."  It's easy to make an argument on either side.  However, if the City or County or State or the Federal Government decides "my" private land is better used as a publicly owned natural resource reserve, great, pay me the real value of the land (in the Dryer's case...as low density development land), buy it and keep it as that natural reserve.  However, don't restrict my zoning compliant use when it's MY land.  It's not a private landowner's responsibility to own and maintain his/her land for the "public good."  Certainly a "good neighbor" would work with his/her neighbors to minimize the impact of the development, but simply having you nighbors "forbid" your (again compliant) use of your land is not reasonable.  Gary Crum