At the Greensboro City Council meeting on 11-17-2009 items #11 and #12 came in front of council here is the items below
11. Ordinance amending Chapter 30, Section 30-1-10, Relation to the Comprehensive Plan, to consider an amendment to the Connections 2025 Comprehensive Plan Generalized Future Land Use Map (Figure 4-2) from the Low Residential and Mixed Use Commercial land use classifications to the Moderate Residential land use classification for property located in the northwest quadrant of the intersection of W. Cornwallis Road and N. Elm Street. (Attachment #11 (CP-09-02) to Councilmembers) (roll call vote) (THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE NOVEMBER 10TH MEETING OF COUNCIL WITHOUT FURTHER ADVERTISING)
12. Ordinance rezoning classification from RS-12 (Residential-Single Family) to CD-RM-12 (Conditional District-Residential Multi-Family property located at 2207-2209 North Elm Street and 106-108 West Cornwallis Drive, generally described as north of West Cornwallis Drive and west of North Elm Street. (Attachment #12 (PL(Z)09-14) to Councilmembers) (roll call vote) (THIS ITEM WAS CONTINUED FROM THE NOVEMBER 10TH MEETING OF COUNCIL WITHOUT FURTHER ADVERTISING) (A VALID PROTEST PETITION WAS RECEIVED BY THE CLERK AND DELIVERED TO PLANNING ON 11.11.09 AT 11:48 A.M.)
As you can see from above there was a valid protest petition received by the city clerk. This is the first time since the bill was passed earlier this year for this to happen. Here is the article by Amanda Lehmert on this rezonong case with a title " Council fails to pass controversial rezoning" CLICKHERE
In the article this is what was said"The motion to approve the rezoning failed 4 to 3, with Mayor Yvonne Johnson, Councilwoman Wells, and Councilwoman T. Dianne Bellamy-Small voting no.
Councilman Robbie Perkins abstained and Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw was absent. Councilman Matheny later changed his vote to no – meaning he will be able to ask that the council reconsider the decision at a future council meeting.
Councilman Robbie Perkins abstained and Councilwoman Mary Rakestraw was absent. Councilman Matheny later changed his vote to no – meaning he will be able to ask that the council reconsider the decision at a future council meeting.
The protest petition is now a part of the landscape of future zoning cases in Greensboro.This state law should have never been taken away from the citizens of Greensboro in the first place, hopefully in future will see more zoning cases with a valid protest petition attached to the case. But in the future there might be a case with a valid protest petition and still pass muster with the council and pass but at least they had the right to use a protest petition in the zoning process.
No comments:
Post a Comment