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 3 · column 3 of 9 · from the scan, no model involved
specifications to be in compliance with State Board regulations and approved by the State Superintendent and (2) fulfilling criteria in the Uniform Statewide Building Code. "Beyond this there is no power which can dictate to the Rappahannock County School Board where it may or may not place a school building.” Eastham maintains.
In conclusion, Eastham recommends that the board consult its special counsel. Harrisonburg attorney Phillip Stone, and follow his guidance on what action to take in response to Konick’s letter. “For the future, the School Board should persuade the Zoning authorities to incorporate a change during the current revision of the Zoning Ordinance which effectively recognizes that this School Board, as all others in the Stale, has total responsibility for all school property...including the location and construction of future buildings on that property,” Eastham adds.
Supervisors’ Intent In a response to Eastham’s contention. Konick wrote the commonwealth's attorney on September 7, reaffirming his position that a special use permit is required before a building permit can be issued to the school board and asking for Douglas Baumgardner's opinion on the matter.
In his letter. Konick acknowledges that his research indicates that "such questions have often been resolved in favor of an exemption from local /oning ordinances for political subdivisions of the slate." But through legal citations, Konick notes that public subdivisions are bound by the requirements of a zoning ordinance "unless a different intent is clearly manifested." By including "public buildings of all kinds" and "schools, public and private" among the uses allowed by special permit in an agricultural district, the supervisors "clearly and consistently" expressed an intent "to bind local government, and particularly the school board, to the requirements of the /oning Ordinance." he maintains.
Konick describes as “unw arranled" Eastham's suggestion that requiring the School Board to obtain a special use permit constitutes “administralive harassment." He notes that the zoning ordinance confers the right to be heard upon all adjoining properly ow ners and the general public before a special use permit may be granted for those uses which the Supervisors considered might adversely affect adjacent properties or the character of the neighborhood. "This is especially the easy where the proposed ‘public use' is. in fact, not a 'little red school house' but a maintenance and repair facility tor buses and other vehicles owned by the school board. It might verv well be that adjoining properly owners have a valid objection to such a use or may wish the Board of Zoning Appeals to impose reasonable conditions on the operation." Konick notes. He adds that it the neighbors don't object, there's no reason whv the
61.2%