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 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
“The County of Rappahannock shall be exempted from the terms hereby with respect to any activity, structure or project undertaken by it which is required by law. ”
That addition to Rappahannock’s zoning ordinance, tacked on to a list of proposed technical corrections to local land use regulations, drew no reaction at the public hearing last month by the planning commissioners, who unanimously recommended its adoption. But at the Board of Supervisors’ hearing this Monday, opposition from the Jackson District Citizens Committee led the supervisors to table the measure, pending a written opinion from Commonwealth’s Attorney Peter Luke.
The amendment “makes plain a presumption of validity to actions undertaken by the governing body when such actions are required by law,” wrote zoning administrator John McCarthy in a memo to the Planning Commission.
What was not so plain - and not discussed publicly until Monday’s hearing - is the impact of the proposed amendment. Mr. McCarthy’s memo set out its effect in general terms: “For instance, if state statute or a court order mandated an addition or expansion of a public facility, then such addition or expansion (or new construction) would be exempt
90.2%