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 4 · column 6 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
L.O.M.P. lot 7, .4181 acre and parcel A . 1422 acre were subdivided adding parcel A to an adjoining property. This violates the 1/2 acre minimum lot size required by the Zoning Ordinance. Paragraph 2-32 (page 4) of the Subdivision Ordinance does not allow a boundary line adjustment where the parcels created do not conform to the Zoning Ordinance. The last sentence states, “Provided, however, that if all the land divided and all the parcels created shall conform to the Zoning Ordinance of the Town of Washington, the following shall not be defined as a subdivision.” Since one of the parcels created L.O.M.P. lot 7, the residue of .4181 acre does not conform to the mimimum lot size in the -Zoning Ordinance (Par. 5-1 page 13) can the division be made as a boundary line adjustment?
J) The Zoning Ordinance, Par. 56-5 (page 15), requires a variance to the Zoning Ordinance for the L.O.M.P. lots that cannot be approved for on-lot septic field reqirements before a building permit can be issued.
Most if not all of the points raised . in this letter are valid considerations. I feel that many of these points were not considered. Land use decisions are complex and require detailed study to insure the correct decisions are made. Each individual public official is responsible for'his decision. These important decisions should not be delegated to others.
The public hearing held Jan. 22 should leave no doubt in the Council’s mind that the people of Washington, Virginia do not want The Inn’s project approved. I trust, the Council will respect their wishes.
NEWBILL MILLER
Washington
95.0%