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 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Konick, citing points made to him by Dick McNear, said theClub is not— attracting the public anci is not open to the public, therefore the use of the land is not commercial. '
Both Miller and Konick held that hunting was not a use of land regulated by the zoning ordinance. Konick supported this by pointing out that hunting did not change the use of the land. He compared the renting of a singlefamily dwelling to the leasing of land for hunting, saying that, for zoning purposes, the point is not whether one owns or rents but what is done with the property. “The fact that (a landowner) leases those hunting rights out to a group doesn’t change the actual use of the property,” said Konick. Therefore he claimed that the land use was “essentially noncommercial.”
Konick, considering other ways to regulate hunting, referred the Commissioners to a passage in the Virginia Code, which states that the Board of Supervisors of a county has the authority to ban the shooting of weapons or hunting in any area deemed too dangerous to allow it.
The commissioners passed a motion stating that the Hunt club issue was not a zoning matter.
In other business during the January 16 meeting, the Commissioners:
• Forwarded to the Board of Zoning Appeals an application filed by
92.6%