Marisa: Conclusion Existing zoning regulations must be loosened; Support in some places the restrictions on development are now so prohibitive as to reduce the property values of undeveloped areas significantly.
█████ █ █████████ ██████ ██ ██ ████ ████ ███ ██████ ████████ ██ ███ ██████████ ██ ██████ ███████████ █████ ██ ████ ██ ██████████ ██ ██████ ██ ██████████ ████ ██ ████████ ███████████ ████████ ███ █████ ██ ████████ ███████████ █████ ███ ████ ██ ██████ █████████ ██ ████ ██████████ ███████████
Marisa concludes that zoning regulations must be loosened because they’re reducing property values in undeveloped areas. Her choice of language—“property values” and “undeveloped”—suggests that her concern is monetary value.
Tyne’s conclusion is that zoning regulations don’t need to be loosened, because such regulations are needed in order to better preserve the value of natural areas. He also refers to value, but his language—”natural” and “undisturbed”—suggests that he’s referring to non-monetary value (spiritual, ecological, psychological, et al.), unlike Marisa.
Tyne's response to Marisa suggests ████ ████ ███ ██████████████ █████ ███ ██ ███ █████████ █████ ██ ████████ ████████
regulations
development
prohibitive
values
significantly