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 15 · column 6 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
an amendment to redress this problem or face a lawsuit. ”
But he emphasized that racial issues do not enter into the problem. “It’s the property that's getting looked at. I don’t care if the property owner is black or white or sky blue or pea green. It's the land that counts.” As to the “five cut” ceiling on parcels of record as of 1962, “the first plat that hits my desk is the one that gets the decision,” the zoning administrator explained.
“But is that fair?” asked Commissioner Bob Anderson.
Time restraints often play a role in land use issues, Mr. McCarthy countered. He pointed out that the state code requires allowance for just a single division under its family transfer mandate while Rappahannock permits five. (Under Rappahannock’s limitations, however, the “five cut” rule includes all divisions from parcels of record as of 1962, and so that ceiling could be reached before a single family transfer is made.)
“But is that fair?” repeated Mr. Anderson.
“We’d be better off if we allowed only one,” Commissioner Fannon maintained.
But citizens would oppose that restriction, Mr. McCarthy responded. Returning to Mrs. Doares’ case, he said, “The question of due process is the main issue raised tonight.” However, he challenged the contention that due process is a right as it relates to Rappahannock’s family transfer provision. “The only right in an agricultural zone is one dwelling unit per 25 acres . . . How they do that is up to the property owner.”
88.3%