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 6 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
in conflict with the predominant character of the neighborhood, considering the sire and location of the use, the nature and intensity of the operation involved...its site layout and its relation to roads giving access to it; (2) will not adversely affect the health and safety of persons residing and working in the neighborhood of the proposed use; and (3) will not be detrimental to the public welfare...” (Section 10-13 of the 1973 Zoning Ordinance). The Board of Zoning Appeals found that the proposed activities for the Ski Area would be in conflict with these standards and therefore unanimously denied the Special Use Permit request.
Now, however, the latest turn of events reveals that the County Board of Supervisors, based on the advice of the Commonwealth Attorney, Mr. George Davis, may be attempting to illegally strip the Board of Zoning appeals of its vested authority and to have its legally adopted decision reversed without any court proceedings through the acceptance of a consent order, prepared by the Ski Corporation attorney with the
74.8%