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 9 · column 1 of 6 · from the scan, no model involved
Paving
From Page A1
their replacements, to understand that the rural, scenic character of the road is important,” said resident John Hanback.
The road’s residents have also been circulating a petition to “Stop the Paving of Grimsley Road.”
Grimsley resident Sharon Payne said she thought there were nearly 300 signatures so far, from people across Rappahannock County.
“More people who don’t know the road will come down it and drive fast,” Payne said. “People are worried. They’re afraid it’ll happen to their roads, too.”
Susie MacNelly, who boards her horses off Grimsley, said paving the whole road would be an unsound decision.
“Somebody is going to get killed,” MacNelly said. “This is a motorcycle train wreck waiting to happen. Somebody is going to kiss a tree.”
In November 2003, in a controversial and much-debated 3-2 vote, the Rappahannock Board of Supervisors authorized a tar-andchip surface to be put down on three-tenths of a mile on the roughly 2.5-mile road. Supervisors Charles K. “Pete” Estes, Ron Frazier and Bryant Lee voted to pave. Roger Welch and Robert Anderson voted against.
Lee, whose Hampton District is separated from Roger Welch’s Wakefield District by a long stretch of Grimsley, said paving the threetenths was a compromise measure.
The compromise was between Harry and Nancy Newlin, who want all of the road paved, and the rest of the road’s residents, who want it untouched.
“There’s been confusion on this whole thing,” Lee said. “We voted on the three-tenths last November, not the whole road.”
Supervisor Lee listens
Lee said the issue of paving the rest of the road will come up during the supervisors’ October meeting.
96.4%