Block · one region of the page, as the scanner read it. It may hold a whole story, part of one, several, or an advertisement; stitching blocks into articles is the next step. Text is supplied OCR.
Page 10 · column 3 of 5 · from the scan, no model involved
would work to protect agriculture.
E. A. MANWARING suggested that Rappahannock would be “planning backwards.” Noting that the county already had the ordinances, he said that what Rappahannock needs to do is develop the goals that those ordinances are implementing. Pete Luke and McNear agreed.
“But to move back, we’re going to need information and data,” Luke said, bringing up the maps, on an “environmental inventory,” for which the planners had requested additional funds from the Supervisors and had been turned down. Luke said he didn’t think that Rappahannock might need as many of the maps as they had first thought.
“I’ve sat through many hours of planning since 1962 and I think that once we go back and look we’ll find a whole lot of planning’s been done and recorded,” said Planning Commission Chairman Herbert Barksdale.
Eileen Day asked McNear what Fauquier had done to prevent further development in agricultural areas.
“Our agricultural zone is a misnomer,” McNear said. “They are the zones where agriculture exists, but which allow for a minimum lot size of two acres. There have been several two-acre subdivisions and the county didn’t have the legal wherewithall to say no. We are now doing a technical study, getting information so we will be able to define prime agricultural areas.”
96.2%