Subdivision

Subdivision

provisions

'critical'

By DAPHNE HUTCHINSON

Rappahannock Newt Staff Writer

Monday night the supervisors unanimously approved a zoning ordinance amendment which ups to six the number of family subdivision exemptions from the county’s density regulations. This latest change comes on the heels of amendments which limit a landowner to one such division in a calendar year and require that notice of any family division be given to owners of parcels deriving from the same “parent” lot.

“A step in the right direction,” according to Supervisor Ellis Bingham. But still a step that doesn’t go far enough, the Jackson District representative maintained at Monday’s public hearing.

“I’m looking into the whole issue of family subdivisions very carefully with the intent of rewriting (that provision in the county zoning ordinance),” Col. Bingham said. “I think it can be done so it’s fair to all the people of this county. I think if it’s rewritten properly it will close the gate to what I see as an abuse of the system.” Liberalization is imperative, he said, particularly in light of rapidly rising land costs here.

His proposal will “hinge on the word bona fide," Col. Bingham explained, adding that he hopes to “phrase it in such a manner that it will get the attention” of his follow supervisors. “If someone has a real need and the land is there, if they have a child of legal age or a child that’s married, and that child needs a piece of land for a start, that’s bona fide ... If the child is out of its mother’s womb for three days, and we divide the land (for a family subdivision exception), that’s not bona fide."

Seemingly willing to overturn the county’s current two-acre minimum lot size for family subdivisions, Col. Bingham maintained: “The only thing we can’t bypass are the health restrictions” which require approved sites for a well and septic field and separation distance between those facilities.

“Land is important. But far more important are the people on the land . . . We must find a way to nurture this independent spirit we have so families can keep their children here. Parents should be able to have their children around them because that’s every parent's dream.”'

According to Col. Bingham, the allowance of family subdivisions “on an equitable and fair basis will do a lot to preclude outside developers from coming in and buying up large tracts of land.” In theory, there’s nothing wrong with Rappahannock’s policy of trying to hold small lots and higher density development to in and around the villages where services can be most economically divided, Col. Bingham said. But in practice, he added, land in and around the villages is too expensive for most Rappahannock residents to afford.

“We have to solve this problem. It is one of the most critical issues facing this county ... I think everyone on this board is becoming attuned to this,” he concluded.

Shirley Berry maintained that since the superSee

TRANSFERS, p. A-10