the main issue is what you are establishing for

the main issue is what you are establishing for the future.

“It isn’t fair to say that because these are large lots, they will have nice houses,” she continued. “The price of a house isn’t the only consideration in aesthetics. I think it is better to have the concept of a village surrounded by open space. This is tearing into the fabric of the plan.”

Andy Lane said, “I agree you are setting a precedent for the future. Since you don’t have the lines drawn for the villages, aren’t you putting the cart before the horse? One worries about the rest of Rappahannock and its villages,” she added.

Planning Commission member Sharon Pierce said she wanted to speak as a private citizen. “I agree you are setting a precedent,” she said. “It is tempting to think that Amissville is far away, but we’ve been through the divisive process of Adopting a comprehensive plan. We hswe R-2 and R-5. Just rezone it R-5 and leave the 10 acres out of it. I don’t think the county should jeopardize its planning process for this.”

Robert Dennis said, “I have a problem with what you end up doing to the landscape with 10-acre parcels —even 5-acre parcels use up a lot of land for not many residences.” He told of two developments in Fauquier County that are being developed in five to 15-acre parcels. “What you get is not anything that looks like country and not anything that looks like a town. To me it looks like a mess. It’s nice to know what the edges of the villages are, but it can’t be done rezoning by rezoning.”

Mrs. Bird said she and others in the Amissville area who had supported Mr. Smet’s application at earlier hearings were afraid that if Mr. Smet’s plan were turned down the property would be developed much more densely. Because of the closeness of the Culpeper line, development pressures are very great, she said. “You don’t understand what we’re afraid of.”

Ron Frazier told the supervisors, “I’m divided. I would like to remind the board that there are still a great number of people who feel two-acre zoning is necessary to keep young people in the county. I see the two sides of this, but these lots won’t serve the needs of the people in the community.”

Eileen Day added, “The county has to decide, ‘Is that area within the village?’ If it is, then 10 acres is too large. It’s important to plan for small lots iri the village for young people and old people.”

When Supervisor Chairman Hubert Gilkey asked for comments from the board, County Administrator John McCarthy requested the floor. “Those who are fearing what will happen in the village areas in terms of development are right to be afraid,” he said. “In the Comprehensive Plan the villages are the safety valve. The villages are where we want development to happen. The board reached the conclusion most of this is in the village of Amissville. This plan does set the southern limit to the village, at least temporarily.”

However, Mr. McCarthy added, “The proffers do sort of make this a bastard child. My personal feeling is it should be R-5 and the proffers left up to the owners. It’s not a matter of holding the line. We will push the