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 4 · column 7 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
All this was done with a unanimous vote. Their treatment of the sincere and obliging applicant was as fair and just as a lynch mob. Different members of the “mob” have differing opinions, too, as to whether it was a “lynching” br just a “tar-and-feathering. ’ ’
They can’t seem to agree on the interpretation of the decision. Did any of them understand what they were voting on? No discussion and apparently no understanding. They must have been in too big a hurry to get the dirty deed over with.
In its memorandum to the planning commission, the BZA makes several allegations:
(A) “Incidental to approving the 'Rappahannock County Zoning Ordinance, 1973', the entire property was inadvertently zoned 'commercial' without benefit of the full knowledge and specific consideration of the Board of Supervisors. ”
Is this not true also of most other parcels of property in the county, or did the Board of Supervisors “specifically consider” each other parcel in the county overlooking this one? Really, now!
(B) ''Commercial'' taxes have been levied on only 20 of the more than 300 acres in this parcel.
The parties that assessed this property were present at the Jan. 12 hearing and addressed this point. They informed the board that this parcel was assessed in the same manner as all other commercial parcels in the county: that is, acreage with improvements thereon was assessed at commercial rates while unimproved acreage was not. Was the BZA asleep at this point?
(C) Commercial development is not feasible due to lack of essentials such as road access, sewage disposal, water, fire protection, rescue services, and law enforcement.
First of all, there is a road access! (Rte. 622, unless it’s been moved!)
Secondly, is the BZA implying that the county provides sewage disposal and water services to parcels of property that it considers suitable for commercial development? If so, there are many businesses in the county whose owners would like to know. Or maybe there simply is NO parcel in the county that is suitable for commercial development.
If not, then these services will continue to be the responsibility of the developer to provide as
81.2%