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 1 · column 5 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
and then the BZA proceeded to discuss certain condtions, “some, but not all. of which were voted upon at the hearing.” The BZA order granting the variance was subsequently drafted and later endorsed by the members of the board, “one of whom, George M. Muth. was not even present at either of the said meetings,” according to the suit.
On the basis of procedural irregularities alone, Konick contends, the BZA’s order granting the variance is null and void since the question of granting the variance was never voted on in public.
No Hardship Proved
In addition, Konick maintains, neither of the conditions set forth in the Rappahannock zoning ordinance for granting a variance were met. NPEA representatives did not demonstrate a hardship and failed to show that granting the variance wouldn’t be detrimental to adjacent property owners or that the character of the neighborhood wouldn’t be changed, the suit contends.
(Continued on Page 2)
89.1%