Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Zoning topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Pegram board tables rezoning ordinance after residents say advertisement omitted parcel details
Summary
The Town of Pegram Board of Mayor and Aldermen tabled Ordinance 2024‑163, a proposed rezoning from R‑1 to R‑2, after residents said the advertisement did not identify the property by owner, address or map and parcel. The board postponed action to the August meeting at the attorney's suggestion.
The Town of Pegram Board of Mayor and Aldermen on July 29 tabled Ordinance 2024‑163, which would reclassify a parcel from R‑1 (low density residential) to R‑2 (medium density residential), after members of the public said the ordinance notice lacked location details.
Mayor John Louallen opened a public hearing on the ordinance at 7:02 p.m. Resident Gary Woodard said the ordinance "doesn’t let the public know where the property is located" and requested the map and parcel be included in the ordinance heading and an emailed response. Alania Sheeley told the board the advertisement "didn’t give information as to where the zoning was located," and Susie Coleman asked that future ordinance ads list the owner, address or map and parcel information.
Per the town attorney, the timing issue for the measure relates to the planning commission. Mayor John Louallen moved to table the ordinance until the August meeting; Vice Mayor Bob Sanders seconded. The motion carried on a 4‑0 vote (Bob Sanders, Louallen, Bo Sanders and Michael Paszek voting yes; Randy Howington absent).
The ordinance title on the agenda reads: "An Ordinance Amending the Town of Pegram Municipal Code, Municipal Zoning Ordinance and Zoning Map, Providing for Reclassification of a Certain Property Zoning From R‑1, Low Density Residential District to R‑2 Medium Density Residential District" (Ordinance 2024‑163). The board did not adopt the rezoning; instead it postponed consideration to allow additional planning commission timing and to address public concerns about how the change was advertised.
The board is scheduled to revisit the matter at its August meeting.
