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 5 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
To the editor:
For many long months the residents of this county were set upon each other in bitter controversy by the Planning Commissioners when .they tried quietly to slip down our throats the lengthy, restrictive, and incredibly complex zoning ordinance , of Fauquier County. But a local form . of “people’s power” prevented it: the largest number of petitioners ever to band together here in protest of an ‘ act of high-handed bureaucracy demanded that hearings be held and the people heard. The Supervisors did put on the brakes and let us have peace and quiet for several months.
Now come the real estate peddlers (on the editorial page) to break the peace. They demand enactment of the Fauquier zoning ordinance in the county so that they can get on With “growth” (i.e., real estate sales) under the Comprehensive Plan. They say that they are unable to explain the provisions of the present short zoning ordinance to their potential customers, so they urge enactment of an ordinance so complex and restrictive that only with a .battery of lawyers at his elbow could t a buyer know what he’s getting into 'or stay out of trouble alter he has ^bought his property. * We never hear the Comprehensive Plan even mentioned until anil other zoning scheme occurs to the * real estate developers. The Comprel hensive Plan is a “glittering generality” used, and meant to be used, as a ;peg upon which to hang the latest ^self-serving zoning scheme pushed •by the retd estate developers and I traders. * (In this connection, no person in *the real estate BUSINESS should 'sit on any board or commission havling to do with zoning regulations. 'The conflict of interest potential is ^inescapable. Every county resident -with whom I’ve ever discussed this •subject sees the conflict and most tare intensely upset by it. Consult the developers if we wish, but keep them away from the decision making.)
Let us be clear about the obvious: people involved in the exploitation of real property in this county are not going to beat the drums for a ■zoning ordinance contrary to their fi' nancial interests.
Most of our citizens, involved in useful and productive employment, are pleased that the supervisors have given this zoning issue long and careful thought. Residents of the county will be better “protected” if the supervisors continue to give this messy business a very low priority,
88.4%