Orange County NC Website
Browse       Search
41 <br /> 1916 Chris Johnston: Okay. I'm going to butcher it. I make a motion that the application as stated follows the statement <br /> 1917 of consistency, the Planning Board finds that it is within the statement of consistency and should <br /> 1918 be moved forward with the conditions as proposed with no additional conditions or changes. <br /> 1919 <br /> 1920 Lamar Proctor: Okay. So that's a motion to adopt the statement of consistency in Attachment 6 and recommend <br /> 1921 approval to the Board of County Commissioners. <br /> 1922 <br /> 1923 Chris Johnston: With the conditions as stated,yes. <br /> 1924 <br /> 1925 Lamar Proctor: With the conditions as stated in the application. Do I have a second? <br /> 1926 <br /> 1927 Whitney Watson: Second. <br /> 1928 <br /> 1929 Lamar Proctor: Second. All in favor of approval? <br /> 1930 <br /> 1931 MOTION BY Chris Johnston to approve the statement of consistency. Seconded by Whitney Watson. <br /> 1932 <br /> 1933 MOTION FAILS 4-4:Venkat Yendapalli, Statler Gilfillen, Beth Bronson, and Delores Bailey opposed. <br /> 1934 <br /> 1935 Lamar Proctor: I'm sorry, how many approval? So, one, two,three,four.And then for those who say nay, I think <br /> 1936 you're required to state your reasons as to why is that right, Cy? <br /> 1937 <br /> 1938 Cy Stober: That's requested,yes. <br /> 1939 <br /> 1940 Lamar Proctor: All right,so all those against? All right. So, Delores, you want to state your reasons as to why it's <br /> 1941 not consistent. <br /> 1942 <br /> 1943 Delores Bailey: I do not feel like this is consistent with rural character of this area. <br /> 1944 <br /> 1945 Lamar Proctor: Okay. Thank you. Beth? <br /> 1946 <br /> 1947 Beth Bronson: I just,yeah,the density does not fit the rural character. I don't find that the complete testing for <br /> 1948 the rezoning application as it stands is sufficient enough to move forward with a recommendation. <br /> 1949 <br /> 1950 Lamar Proctor: All right. Who else was a no? Statler. <br /> 1951 <br /> 1952 Statler Gilfillen: Professional architect who's dealt with these types of issues at the university level and as a <br /> 1953 licensed architect who has taught for years at universities, planning and development and design, <br /> 1954 1 do not believe that this layout is in the best interest consistent with what the Planning Board <br /> 1955 should be approving. <br /> 1956 <br /> 1957 Lamar Proctor: Okay. And Venkat? <br /> 1958 <br /> 1959 Venkat Yendapalli: Yeah, my reason is same with Beth. The density, the 40,000 square foot requirement, and there's <br /> 1960 not enough usable land that we can accommodate 40,000 square foot here and with what they're <br /> 1961 saying is leftover space which is not usable. So, my concern is the density. <br /> 1962 <br /> 1963 Lamar Proctor: Okay. I thank you. <br /> 1964 <br /> 1965 Chris Johnston: Now we need another motion. I mean,we need another motion one way or another if we're going <br /> 1966 to table or if we are going to disapprove? <br /> 1967 <br /> 1968 Lamar Proctor: I think Cy is probably looking what happens with a four-four. <br /> 1969 <br /> 1970 Cy Stober: All actions have to be determined by a majority vote. <br />