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 4 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
Priorties
In addition to a list of uses and zoning districts, McNear asked the planning commissioners to establish priorities on land preservation. “If you have to put 100 houses somewhere, where would you put them?”
“Around the residential business districts,” answered Fannon.
“But those are some of the most fragile areas in the county,” Miller countered, noting Washington’s water' problems and Sperryville’s flood plain. He maintained that large lot development was the county’s best hope for preserving its rural character.
“Twenty-five acre lots are probably your least tax deficient,” McNear noted.
Twenty-five acre development is not tax deficient at all, countered Miller. On the contrary, he said, large lot subdivisions are ‘‘just subsidizing the devil” out of the rest of the county.
Because farming is the base of Fauquier’s economy, McNear said, the priority in that county is farmland protection. But the way Rappahannock's ordinances are worded, the professional planner maintained, they “provide an incentive for developing farm land.”
Miller and Fannon disagreed. Miller claimed that requirements for roads whtch meet state specifications, curbs and gutters provided economic deterents to subdividing farmland under 14 percent slope into five acre lots. Fannon added that the incentive in Rappahannock’s land use controls lies in development of 50 acre lots in conservation zones which do not have to meet any of the subdivision requirements for rezoning or state roads.
In answer to a final question. McNear said there's probably no difficulty in retaining the ordinance's prohibition against resubdivision of property that's already been subdivided. He agreed. however, that procedures for administration of the ordinance have to be set out clearly. “If you aren't going to enforce the laws, there’s no sense having them,” he stated.
To a last comment from the audience, McNear agreed that the county’s sign regulations, both off and onsite, need tightening.
The planning commissioners set their next session on the continuing ordinance review for February 18 following their already scheduled rezoning hearing.
90.6%