Read the following excerpt from a US court opinion:
```
acres of residential property contained “in a sea of hundreds and hundreds of acres of industrially zoned land” had no viable value because a single family home had already been constructed, the fifteen acres were abutted on at least two sides by residentially-zoned property, and three units per acre could be developed under its present classification); Montgomery County v. Woodward & Lothrop, Inc., 280 Md. 686, 724, 376 A.2d 483 (1977), cert. denied, 434 U.S. 1067, 98 S.Ct. 1245, 55 L.Ed.2d 769 (1978) (“[Ojnly that permissible densities ... have been significantly decreased; that showing is ... insufficient to demonstrate a confiscatory exercise____”); Governor of Maryland v. Exxon Corp., 279 Md. 410, 437, 370 A.2d 1102 (1977), aff'd, 437 U.S. 117, 98 S.Ct. 2207, 57 L.Ed.2d 91 (1978) ; Stratakis v. Beauchamp, 268 Md. 643, 654, 304
```
What is the most suitable continuation to the opinion? Your options are:
A. holding that a statute that prohibited producers and refiners from directly operating retail service stations did not constitute a taking because they were not deprived of all beneficial uses of their property
B. holding that airport noise regulations and county zoning ordinances which restricted certain development and adversely affected the value of property did not constitute a taking because the owner was not deprived of all beneficial use of the property considering the fact that there were a number of permitted uses consistent with the noise zone regulations and county zoning ordinances
C. holding that a statute requiring a natural gas producer to make gas available to pump water for agriculture irrigation at a price fixed by the corporation commission is not a regulation under the police power but a taking of the producers property without due process of law and an appropriation of the producers property without just compensation
D. holding that a zoning regulation which deprives property of all economically beneficial or productive use is a categorical regulatory taking
E. holding that plaintiffs had standing because they were directly affected by the laws and practices against which their complaints were directed
Reply with [A, B, C, D, E] only.