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 4 of 7 · from the scan, no model involved
provide for family transfers. Family transfers constitute a privilege — one traditionally used to allow a county’s “old family” larger landowners to create a few new lots without going through the regular zoning/subdivision ordinance hassle.
When Rappahannock first began to discuss the current revision, it was to apply only to properties held in continuing ownership since 1973. We thought that an imaginative way to accomplish two things: continue the “old family” tradition, while virtually preventing any chance of abuse.
But, as is true also in neighboring counties, “something funny” seems to have happened along the way. Now the ordinance applies to newcomers buying property in Rappahannock next week or next year.
The two year “waiting period,” one-division-per-year, and five-parcels-only provisions do, to be sure, provide some protection from abuse. But the new ordinance contains at least two protentially troublesome flaws.
First, it allows creation of lots that are inconsistent with the basic zoning. Second, it allows subdivision on the basis of who owns the land rather than on the basis of the comprehensive plan and zoning ordinance.
It seems highly probable that not far in the future Landowner A (unmarried, no children) will get a court ruling that he can create just as many new parcels as his neighbor Landowner B (married with five children), for to do otherwise would be discriminatory. That means that over time Rappahannock will acquire a great many more lots, houses on hilltops, and taxpayer costs for the schools and the landfill, than anticipated by the comprehensive plan and the zoning ordinance.
ROBERT T. DENNIS,
President, PEC
Flint Hill
94.0%