Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
286 <br /> Approved 8.7.24 <br /> 1850 Patrick Mallett: The zoning is the only one. <br /> 1851 <br /> 1852 Perdita Holtz: Well, the UDO text amendment also. <br /> 1853 <br /> 1854 Patrick Mallett: Yep, sorry. <br /> 1855 <br /> 1856 Adam Beeman: 7, we don't need a statement of consistency. <br /> 1857 <br /> 1858 Lamar Proctor: 8, do we need a statement? <br /> 1859 <br /> 1860 Perdita Holtz: You need to give your rationale on why you're denying a text amendment. <br /> 1861 <br /> 1862 Lamar Proctor: Okay. And then 9, obviously we do. Got it. I make a motion to deny the application as to <br /> 1863 Agenda Item 7. <br /> 1864 <br /> 1865 Chris Johnston: I second that motion. <br /> 1866 <br /> 1867 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to Deny Agenda Item 7. Seconded by Chris Johnston <br /> 1868 <br /> 1869 IN FAVOR: Adam Beeman, Lamar Proctor, Charity Kirk, Chris Johnston, Whitney Watson, Liz Kalies, Steve <br /> 1870 Kaufmann, Statler Gilfillen <br /> 1871 <br /> 1872 OPPOSED: Beth Bronson <br /> 1873 <br /> 1874 MOTION PASSES 8 TO <br /> 1875 <br /> 1876 Lamar Proctor: All right. I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 8, that it is <br /> 1877 inconsistent with the comprehensive land use plan and adopt the statement of <br /> 1878 inconsistency as presented by the Planning Department. <br /> 1879 <br /> 1880 Perdita Holtz: There isn't a statement of inconsistency for 8. Just give a rationale on why. <br /> 1881 <br /> 1882 Lamar Proctor: So, I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 8. Part of that is to <br /> 1883 codify on which future land use classifications MPD-CD may be applied. So, the rationale <br /> 1884 would be that extending MPD-CD zoning to rural activity nodes is inconsistent with the <br /> 1885 comprehensive land use plan. <br /> 1886 <br /> 1887 Adam Beeman: Do I have a second? <br /> 1888 <br /> 1889 Chris Johnston: Seconded. <br /> 1890 <br /> 1891 MOTION BY Lamar Proctor to Deny Agenda Item 8. Seconded by Chris Johnston <br /> 1892 <br /> 1893 MOTION PASSES UNANIMOUSLY <br /> 1894 Lamar Proctor: I make a motion to deny the application as to Agenda Item No. 9 with the statement that it <br /> 1895 is inconsistent with the comprehensive land use plan and adopt the statement of <br /> 1896 inconsistency as presented by the Planning Department and its attachment. <br /> 1897 <br /> 1898 Adam Beeman: Do we have a second? <br /> 1899 <br />