My perspective is that it's not about the investment. It's about wanting to keep the quality of life you bought into. The investment side only comes in when the

My perspective is that it's not about the investment. It's about wanting to keep the quality of life you bought into. The investment side only comes in when the large building next to you decreases your quality of life, so you want to sell, which you otherwise wouldn't have wanted to do. I'd totally buy into a system that incentivizes the positives too. If I'm paying for the amount it affects me by, sure. That's why I pay my taxes. On the other hand, ratchet-like systems by which things can't get worse than they started seem fair too. It's okay to be asymmetric. Specifically, the example that comes to mind as a fair reason to be pissed (or vote against development/rezoning) is changing something like this: https://ssl.cdn-redfin.com/photo/9/bigphoto/398/486398_44_2.jpg https://ssl.cdn-redfin.com/photo/9/bigphoto/398/486398_44_2.... to something like this: https://ssl.cdn-redfin.com/photo/9/bigphoto/440/486440_28_0.jpg https://ssl.cdn-redfin.com/photo/9/bigphoto/440/486440_28_0....