Editorials

Editorials

A sound decision

The Planning Commission was correct last month when it recommended denial of a request for an off-site sign advertising a local restaurant.

The question is not the specific request for a sign, but the principle of off-site advertising. Allowing the sign would be,' in the words of the commission, “an awful precedent.”

We’re sure that the owners of the restaurant would, as Mrs. O’Brien told the planners, erect a small and tasteful sign which no one would find objectionable.

The problem with granting her request would come later, when someone else asks for an off-site sign, one w hich is perhaps not quite as small or quite as “tasteful.” Now, wre would be the first to agree that “taste,” like beauty, is in the eye and mind of the beholder.

However, we also feel that there is small room for argument that the highways of Rappahannock County are much better off without the clutter of billboards and other signs which spring like gigantic, man-made weeds along the roadsides of adjacent counties.

And, we think that the natural vistas which are much of the attraction that brings visitors to our county would be diminished if they had to compete with advertisements for the “Golden Arches” and other businesses, local and otherwise.

It’s true that billboards and roadside signs for businesses in Rappahannock do appear along the roads in other counties. They do so in keeping with the ordinances of those counties. But frankly, we’d prefer that those vistas were unblemished by roadside advertising as well.

However, the Rappahannock County Planning Commission can only regulate our county. Last month, the planners made the right decision in denying that off-site sign request.

In Mr. Massie’s w ords, “Who would want to drive to Rappahannock County if they couldn’t see the mountains for the signs?” We agree.