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 2 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
ment. It is a recipe for deep mistrust and dissatisfaction. And it invites hiding, lying and every kind of creative circumvention of “The Law.”
When the BZA on July 23 approved the Charles Hawkins permit for a mobile home as a family apartment, it laid a new rule on the Hawkins family: the apartment must be used only by family members forever. Current zoning rules permit conversion to a rental property after two years. The BZA decided to deny this option to the Hawkins family. When the grandmother is gone, their family apartment will have to stand empty unless there is another relative to occupy it. God forbid that a non-relative might occupy it and pay some much needed rent! The BZA also denied this option to the Letsen family at its June 25 meeting.
In short, the BZA has written new regulations of a very personal nature for two Rappahannock families without benefit of public hearings or formal amendment of the county code. If this is not illegal, arbitrary and selective regulation, I don’t know what is. It certainly is unfair and rough treatment of two applicants.
Having attended the BZA meeting (four were in attendance, including Mrs. Hawkins, but no News reporter), I read with great surprise the Rappahannock News account of this July 23 meeting.
After recommending approval of the Hawkins application, the BZA “. . . stip
96.4%