Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
43 <br /> 1849 Patrick Mallett: The zoning is the only one. <br /> 1850 <br /> 1851 Perdita Holtz: Well, the LIDO text amendment also. <br /> 1852 <br /> 1853 Patrick Mallett: Yep, sorry. <br /> 1854 <br /> 1855 Adam Beeman: 7, we don't need a statement of consistency. <br /> 1856 <br /> 1857 Lamar Proctor: 8, do we need a statement? <br /> 1858 <br /> 1859 Perdita Holtz: You need to give your rationale on why you're denying a text amendment. <br /> 1860 <br /> 1861 Lamar Proctor: Okay. And then 9, obviously we do. Got it. I make a motion to deny the application as to <br /> 1862 Agenda Item 7. <br /> 1863 <br /> 1864 Chris Johnston: I second that motion. <br /> 1865 <br /> 1866 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to Deny Agenda Item 7. Seconded by Chris Johnston <br /> 1867 <br /> 1868 IN FAVOR: Adam Beeman, Lamar Proctor, Charity Kirk, Chris Johnston, Whitney Watson, Liz Kalies, Steve <br /> 1869 Kaufmann, Statler Gilfillen <br /> 1870 <br /> 1871 OPPOSED: Beth Bronson <br /> 1872 <br /> 1873 MOTION PASSES 8 TO <br /> 1874 <br /> 1875 Lamar Proctor: All right. I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 8, that it is <br /> 1876 inconsistent with the comprehensive land use plan and adopt the statement of <br /> 1877 inconsistency as presented by the Planning Department. <br /> 1878 <br /> 1879 Perdita Holtz: There isn't a statement of inconsistency for 8. Just give a rationale on why. <br /> 1880 <br /> 1881 Lamar Proctor: So, I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 8. Part of that is to <br /> 1882 codify on which future land use classifications MPD-CD may be applied. So, the rationale <br /> 1883 would be that extending MPD-CD zoning to rural activity nodes is inconsistent with the <br /> 1884 comprehensive land use plan. <br /> 1885 <br /> 1886 Adam Beeman: Do I have a second? <br /> 1887 <br /> 1888 Chris Johnston: Seconded. <br /> 1889 <br /> 1890 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to Deny Agenda Item 8. Seconded by Chris Johnston <br /> 1891 <br /> 1892 MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY <br /> 1893 Lamar Proctor: I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 9 with the statement that it <br /> 1894 is inconsistent with the comprehensive land use plan and adopt the statement of <br /> 1895 inconsistency as presented by the Planning Department and its attachment. <br /> 1896 <br /> 1897 Adam Beeman: Do we have a second? <br /> 1898 <br />