Link

Social

Embed

Disable autoplay on embedded content?

Download

Download
Download Transcript


[00:00:01]

AND SO AT THAT TIME, THEY HAVE A VERY FAST LIBRARY, THE LIBRARY STANDARDS KNOWLES.

AND I TOLD THE LADY OF INFORMATION IN THE UNITED STATES AND THEY DIDN'T HAVE ANY.

AND THEY SAY AND , AND , AND EVERYWHERE.

THERE WERE TWO OR THREE HOMELESS SHELTERS ASSOCIATED WITH TWO TO THREE BLOCKS AWAY.

AND EVERYTHING HAD BEEN SAYING, WE GOT THIS REPORT THEN DIFFERENT MUNICIPALITIES.

AND I TALKED TO THE STACK, BRANDON AND I STARTED IN GREENVILLE COMPARED WITH WHAT POSSIBILITIES .

BUT TO WHICH THIS WILL SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCE BY THE NIGHT THAT CAN TRULY SAY, HEY, POTENTIAL BUYERS OUT THERE.

AND THEN THERE'S, YOU'RE TIRED AND IT'S NOT SECURE.

AND SO , NOW WE'VE HEARD SOME TERMS ABOUT PERCEPTION.

I APPRECIATE THAT.

THEN THAT'S BEEN EXPLAINED TO US WHAT MAKES, WHAT MAKES ART EXCEPT, UH, MS. MS. Q.

SOMETIMES THEY DO A LOT OF PEOPLE IN, AT 12 O'CLOCK TO GET THEM OFF THE STREET.

WE CALL SPEAK ABOUT THAT AND YOU CAN CROSS EXAMINE HIM.

AND THE WAREHOUSES, THEIR CONCERNS ABOUT WHETHER OR NOT THEY'RE THERE TO SERVE RIGHT DOWN HERE.

AND THIS THING IS BEING .

THIS IS THE NEIGHBOR HOMELESS PEOPLE, WHICH I DID.

I HEARD EARLIER FROM JACKSONVILLE WHO WAS HAVING MASSIVE PROBLEMS. AND HE WAS, AND I'M REALLY.

AND THEN I TALKED TO, I SAID, WHERE ARE YOU FROM? THEY SAID,

[00:05:02]

WE'LL WORK FROM OTHER CITY.

SHOULD NOT BE A CONCERN WHEN HE'S TRYING TO THEY DID NOT KNOW OF ANY SALES.

NOW I COULD NOT SUBSTANTIATE.

I FOUND SO SAY PROPERTIES IN THE AREA PROBLEMS WITH ALCOHOL DRUGS.

AND THEN PEOPLE SAID IT WAS A SCENARIO.

I HAVE SOME CELL ACROSS THE STREET, MICHELLE AND ANOTHER ONE WAS AND HE SAID UH, THE 30 MINUTES LATE AND THEN THERE WAS ANOTHER PROPOSED, COMPLETED, WHICH REPORT, WHICH IS BASED ON MY .

I

[00:10:02]

HAVE THIS SILLY COMPLETED THE NOW I'M NOT HERE TO ANSWER.

IT HAS SUBSTANTIALLY INCREASED.

THE WORST SUBSTANTIAL EARLY UM, I SPOKE WITH AND THERE IS ONE BUT IT WAS DIFFERENT ZONE.

THIS WAS CORRECT.

MR. CHAIRMAN MEMBERS BOARD.

I WANT YOU TO DO THAT.

I AM ABSOLUTELY, UH, 20 OR MEMBERS, ALL CATHOLIC CHURCH AND SIR, THREE YEARS NORTH CAROLINA I HAVE TO SHARE WITH MY CIRCLE.

LIVING GROWING HAS BEEN RECENTLY, ARE THERE IN

[00:15:01]

A MEETING WITH AND IMPROVE THE FACADE BREATH AND THEN SAID, WE DON'T HAVE ANYBODY ELSE.

THIS IS GREAT.

THIS IS THE PLANNING THAT GOES ON HERE SHOULD BE THINGS THAT YOU HAVE REFILL.

AND THERE ISN'T ANYONE HERE IN THIS GROUP, WE DO CARE ABOUT IN DECEMBER, 1999, AND HER LAWYER REPRESENTING 90% OF OUR REMAINING 10% THAT WILL MAKE GEORGE STREET, SENIOR CENTER THEATER CENTER BETWEEN MAJOR AND NOW YOU DISCLOSE THE TRAILER

[00:20:08]

AND AND AFTER EXPLAINING, WHAT DID SHE NEED? SHE SENT ME, SHE SAID NONE OF THESE STEPS ARE NOT ALL.

THINK YOU HAVE ANY CHOICE.

YOU WILL.

NOW I UNDERSTAND THAT THIS IS SOMETHING, UH, HOMELESS SHELTER.

UH, NOT NECESSARILY, BUT, OR .

UM, YEAH.

YOU SAID PEOPLE DOWN THE STREET IS PROCESSING AS HE'S DOING THAT.

THE SHELTER

[00:25:20]

[00:30:09]

IN 19 AND ONE MORE THING.

THE INDIVIDUAL CHILDREN UNTIL 2000

[00:35:36]

UH IS THAT THE HAS ACTUALLY GONE DOWN IS 34,000 SQUARE FEET.

DO YOU ANTICIPATE AN ADDITIONAL SERVICES IN THE STRUCTURE THAT YOU ARE NOT ABLE TO

[00:40:19]

[00:46:06]

THE HAS DONE A NUMBER OF PROPERTIES.

TAX BASE THAT LINKS TO THE REST OF THE BUILDING.

TO THE IMPROVEMENTS TO THAT OUTSIDE INVESTORS OR OTHER BOOKS.

THIS IS THE STATUS BUSINESS DEVELOP PROPERTY.

WHEN THEY HAVE AN UNCERTAINTY WE'RE APPLYING UM, OKAY, WELL, THE

[00:50:08]

ARE THREE RETAIL ON THE LINE, OR ANDREW'S LATE ON MONDAY, SEPTEMBER 17TH, 2001, REPRESENTING DEFENDANTS CONSIDER COMMUNITY HOMELESS SHELTER.

UM, THAT'S THE LAST, UM, THIS WHOLE SHOW THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO GO INTO SEPTEMBER, 2000 THOUSAND PEOPLE IN THE NEIGHBORHOOD GOT THE CONCEPT OF WHAT SHOULD BE DONE IN THE AREA.

THE REAL ESTATE PLAN PLAN WITH THE NORTHERN BOUNDARY BEING DONE.

SHE CAME IN AND SAID THEY DON'T WANT BUSINESS TO BE IN THIS VICINITY.

THEY WANTED PRESIDENT THE STATE.

THEY WANT TO PROVIDE THE AREA, BUT THEY HAD TO NOW THE TRUCK BACK THERE'S PROBLEMS, ONE OF THEM WAS TO PUT A NEW ROAD, UH, THAT CAME BACK THE FIRST 80.

SHE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING OTHER THAN THEY JUST HAD WHO OWNED PROPERTY.

THE SECOND PLAN THAT SHE CAME IN IN MAY, JUST A SCHEMATIC THING THAT SHOWED WHAT HOUSES WERE IN THE AREA, AND ALSO TO GO TO THE PROPERTY BUILDING.

ALSO THE, UH, GREG AND ELECTRIC BILL THAT INDICATED IT WAS THE PUBLIC BUILDING PUTS UP.

THEY APPLY NOT THE MAN IN SEPTEMBER, WHERE IT IS THE WESTERN BOUNDARY.

THE IT'S NOT RIVER SECTION COUNTY IS WEST OF GEORGE STREET.

BUT HOW,

[00:55:04]

HOW DOES THAT VERY SMALL BLOCK ON THE EAST SIDE OF , BUT ON THE WEST THAT YOU CAN GO THE CEMETERY AND ON THE EAST WITH A FEW, UM, SMALL RESIDENTIAL STRUGGLE WITH THIS NEW ROAD THAT WAS SUPPOSED TO BRING TRAFFIC TO GEORGE STREET, UH, PUT IT UP INTO HOW WOULD THAT PROVE THE TRANSPORTATION OF THE BUSINESSES AND THE PEOPLE TRYING TO GET OUT OF THIS NEW, BY THE WAY, YOU KNOW, THE NAME OF THE STUPID DOG HOUSE, NEW RIVER VILLAGE IS GOING TO HAVE MAYBE ALSO, YOU WOULD HAVE A CONCEPT RESIDENTIAL AREA UM, , WOULDN'T WANT TO PUT IT UP, BRING IT DOWN.

YOU'D HAVE TO PUT IT AT THE, UH, , UH, JEWISH.

IF THIS ROAD WAS A BOWLING ALLEY, THIS WOULD BE, IT'D BE THE HOME SHOW FROM, FROM, UH, YOU WERE BUYING A HOUSE THAT YOUR AGENT HAD TO TELL YOU, UH, BY THE WAY, THREE BLOCKS, YOU'RE GOING DOWN TO GET MORE PROPERTY TO TRY TO WHILE YOU'RE IN THE BACK, IT'S NOT GOING TO WORK.

I'M NOT AGAINST THAT, BUT THE COMMISSION HAS SOME STATISTICS THAT SHOW THAT YOU CAN SAY THE HOMELESS.

UM, A CONSIDERATION HERE, THE VISION THAT CITY HAS SET FOR, UH, ORIGINALLY, BUT MORE SPECIFICALLY SPACE TWO.

I DIDN'T WANT HIM TO SAY, UH, I HAD ALREADY STARTED

[01:00:03]

UM, UM, SO, UM, UM, THEY WILL NOT UM, AND THIS IS A NEW ISSUE, THE NEW ISSUE DOOR, THE FIRST TIME IN A LAWSUIT, AND SOMEBODY WILL SAY, THIS IS WHAT WE MUST DO, REGARDLESS WHERE THERE HAS TO BE CERTAIN JUST CURIOUS IF IT WAS THREE OR FOUR BLOCKS AWAY THAT CONCERNED ABOUT IT'S NOT MANDATORY.

[01:05:16]

GOOD.

NECESSARY, BUT

[01:10:10]

.

AND SO ON THE SPECIFIC ELEMENTS THAT POINTED OUT CERTAIN ITEMS, THOSE ARE DOCUMENTED, UM, THE BURDEN OF PROOF HAS ALREADY BEEN EXPLAINED TO YOU UNDERSTAND THE MATERIAL AND SUBSTANTIAL IN ALL THOSE WORDS HAVE MADE AND MADE SPECIFIC THINGS LOCAL.

BUT IF THE AVERAGE SHOWS EACH ELEMENT, IT IS ESTABLISHED WHAT IS CALLED .

IN ORDER FOR ME TO REFLECT THAT I HAD TO DO SITE THAT I HAVE MATERIAL AND SUBSTANTIAL EVIDENCE TO SAY THAT THAT PARTICULAR ELEMENT HAS NOT BEEN MET.

AND IF I DO THAT GOES TO ME COMPLETELY, JUST LIKE IN THE SYLLABLE, WITHIN THE APP, AND HAS THE BURDEN OF PROOF.

NOW THAT BURDEN OF PROOF IS MORE THAN JUST A LITTLE BIT ABOUT WHAT THAT MEANS.

OTHER THAN THAT, THAT'S WHAT THE LAW IS, WHAT WE DO TO MAKE SURE THAT NEIGHBORHOODS ARE ONE IS THAT THEY'RE SAFE, THAT THEY'RE PROTECTED AND BRING THEM IN THAT TIME DURING TECH.

AND THAT'S WHY WE ANSWERED, WELL, WE HAVE DONE CLUBS.

THAT'S THE PURPOSE OF THE POLICY.

SO WHEN YOU THINK THAT YOU HAVE TO READ THOSE IN THE FALL, UM, I KNOW THAT THE DEFINITION OF A SHELTER IS NOT GOOD.

THE DEFINITION OF IS NOT FEASIBLE WITHIN THE APP.

HE SAID, EVEN HE COULD GROUP, EVEN IF YOU, YOU BRING THOSE TOGETHER, THEY DON'T SUITCASE AND EMERGENCY SERVICES.

THEY DON'T FIT.

AND IF THEY DON'T GET THAT, THEN THEY DON'T WALK BY AS PRINCIPAL USES, WHICH ARE ALSO PERMISSIBLE USE ALL 40 THAT WE'LL USE IN ORDER TO RUN THOSE TOGETHER.

AND THEY'RE ALL NOT.

AND I'M GOING TO ASK EXAMPLE EFFECTS SAID BEFORE ABOUT WHERE'S THE , UH, FAMILY CAMPER.

IT DOES GET DONE.

MAYBE IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN CHANGED.

UM, IN TERMS OF OUR SECOND ARGUMENT ON COMPLETION, UM, THERE IS, UM, OUR POSITION IS THE MANAGEMENT PLAN IS NOT THE ORDINANCE.

I THINK I WOULD REALLY, I'M STRUGGLING IT REALLY DOES SAY FACE ON THE SIDE AND THAT WASN'T DONE

[01:15:10]

PUBLIC SITE.

NOW, IF YOU LOOK AT THESE THINGS LIKE LAWYERS AND THEIR FEARS ARE, UM, ADVICE ON CIRCUMSTANCES OR WHERE THEY ARE NOW, THEY HAD PEOPLE COME UP WITH , BUT THERE ARE FIVE TOGETHER THAT, THAT FEAR.

AND I, I CAN APPRECIATE THAT, UM, THIS OR THAT, UM, ALCOHOL OR DRUG PROBLEMS, EVEN IF IT'S DEPRESSION AND YOU'RE NOT ON MEDICATION, THAT CAN BE A BROAD RIGHT NOW THAT IF SOMEBODY AND THEN WHOEVER THE NEXT GROUP OF AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT, UM, I HAD 41 PEOPLE SUBMIT THINGS OF THAT AND BOLTED DOWN TO WHAT I THINK IS FIVE, A FIVE.

AND THEN IF YOU LOOK AT IT, YOU HAVE TO SAY, I GOT TO QUALIFY AND I GOT TO HAVE ENOUGH JUST LIKE A MEDICAL MALPRACTICE.

YOU HAVE TO BASE THAT ON WHAT THE SPECIFIC QUESTION IS, WHETHER OR NOT IT SUBSTANTIALLY REDUCES THE VALUE OF THE JOINT OR THE KEY ISSUE OUT THERE IS NUMBER ONE ANSWER IS THE VIRUS.

NUMBER TWO, WHAT IS THE VALUE OF THEIR PROPERTY? OKAY.

IF THEY KNOW THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OR SANDY FROM DOWN NOW UP HE SAID, WHAT IS THE VALUE? IT IS $73,950,000 IS 14,000.

NOT UNDER DOC DECREASE, WHICH HE SAID WAS HE'S IN ONE WORD.

BUT THEN THE SAME THING IS SUBSTANDARD.

COMPARE THAT TO SOME MOOSE.

AND I MOVED US TO SYDNEY.

MRS. MOODY'S OPINION IS BASICALLY THAT I WENT TO OTHER TOWNS AND I CALLED SOME PEOPLE.

AND THAT WHAT WOULD HAPPEN TO YOU WILL NOT DECREASE THE VALUE OF THE PRODUCT, BUT WHAT HE DID IS THAT HE DOESN'T KNOW WHAT THE VALUE OF THE PROPERTY OF .

HE COULDN'T TELL YOU THE DIFFERENCE IN THE VALUE.

AND THAT'S WHAT, SO EVEN , YOU'RE SAYING, HEY, WE'RE STILL, THE JUSTICE ARE EQUALLY COMPETENT.

YOU GOT TO SAY YOURSELF THAT MR. MOODY WAS IN HIS

[01:20:01]

ANSWER THAT YOU HAD THE APP.

THEN YOU GO TO NUMBER THE WHERE'S THAT IT DOES SUBSTANTIALLY EASILY.

YOU GOT ALL THE EVIDENCE THAT RCS HAS DONE SUCH A GOOD JOB THEY DON'T NEED TO GO.

THAT IS SUCH A GOOD JOB.

ALL CHARTS AND IMPROVISE.

AND ALL OF THE BUILDING THAT DECREASES IN THE SHELTER VERSUS SERVICES FROM 10% TO 2%, BUT THEY ALL GO, THE PROBLEM IS NOT THE ADMINISTRATIVE OFFICES EASIER WOULD NOT BE AN ADVANTAGE TO SAY, IS THERE A PROBLEM? BUT IT'S NOT, NOT SUBSTANTIATED BY .

AND THAT GOES TO CITIES.

IF YOU LOOK, IT SAYS, UH, WHICH IS, UM, EXHIBIT .

THERE IS A THIS AREA HAS THE POTENTIAL PUBLIC INVEST, UH, UM, LIKE TREES WILL UTILITY WOULD THIS, THIS IS THE THAT THIS IS A BIT OF CONNECTION.

AND THAT EVERY ONE OF THESE IS JUST FOR THE PROSECUTION.

DOES EACH AND EVERY NOTE THEY CAN SHOW THAT THERE WERE A HUNDRED SHOULD THE BOARD ULTIMATELY GRANT THE BOARD ATTACH CONDITIONS AS PART OF WHAT THE USE WILL BE.

I DON'T NEED TO BELABOR THAT POINT.

WHEN YOU LOOK ON THE , UH, BASED ON MR. CLEMENS COMMENTS, THE HOMELESS SHELTER IS, UH, UM, UH, AS I SAID EARLIER,

[01:25:12]

REQUEST IS WITHIN HIS JURISDICTION, ACCORDING TO THE TABLE.

YOU SAID THAT, DID YOU SAY AT LEAST

[01:30:04]

YES.

NO, NO.

YES.

UH, REACTIVE UM, UM, UM,

[01:39:04]

THE HOMELESS SHELTER, THE SOUP KITCHEN AND THE WAREHOUSE, UH, OR ANY FUNCTIONS FACILITY, AS WELL AS COUNSELING, EMERGENCY SERVICES.

[01:40:18]

SERVICES, WAREHOUSES ADMINISTRATION SERVICES.

ALL HERE.

HAVE NO .

I SAID, UH, THOSE, UH, UH UH UH

[01:45:16]

UH AND, UH, UH, UH, WHEN, UH, , UH, UM, , UH, LEGAL REQUIREMENTS.

DOES THAT MEAN WE HAVE TO APPROVE, IN OTHER WORDS, ORDINANCE ALLOWS FOR AMENDMENTS TWO STEP PROCESS, STEP ONE, GENERAL PLAN.

WE ALSO HAVE AN INTEREST WITHIN THE AMENDMENTS.

THERE ARE TWO FLAVORS, THERE ARE MINOR AMENDMENTS, AND THOSE THAT ARE NOT FINE, THE LADIES ORDINANCE ALLOWS TO STAY AT THE DISCRETION TO DETERMINE WHEN IS MINE, COMPLIANCE WITH THE WAYNE'S ORDINANCES INDIVIDUAL.

AND THEN THAT AMENDED GENERAL PLAN IS BROUGHT TO YOU WITH THE RECOMMENDATION.

AND ONCE WE ARE AT THAT STAGE, YOUR JOB IS TO APPROVE THE PLAN.

THE ISSUE HERE IS, IS ON THE ISSUE OF WHETHER OR NOT TERMINATION THAT KNOCKING AMENDMENT WAS MINE.

WASN'T BROKE.

WE'RE NOT THE ISSUE WITH GONE, WANTS TO SAY IT WAS 85.

IS THAT LAST 20? I MEAN, FROM 17 TO 20 BUCKS GENERAL IN GENERAL,

[01:50:10]

LET ME JUST ASK, DID YOU HAVE A PROBLEM WITH , UH, AFTER TERMINATION AT THE END, WHAT WE WANT TO DO WITH THAT PIECE OF LAND, IT IS MORE APPROPRIATE.

THAT EQUALS 20.

IT IS CERTAINLY WITHIN THE PURVIEW, ALL THE BOX SIZES AND WE COME BACK AND CONSIDER HERE.

ONE IS THE PROCESS AND THE OTHER IS WHAT THE PRODUCT IS, WHICH IS LOCKED AWAY.

THAT'S PERFECTLY .

UH, THE BOARD HERE IS THE PLAN.

AND THE PLAN WE'VE SAID THAT YOUR STAFF WAS VERY AND WE WERE NOT IN THAT PROCESS AND THAT THERE, WHICH CONSTITUTE OUR ABILITY TO BUILD AN INFRASTRUCTURE, WHICH IS AND THEY HAD NO PROBLEM WITH WHATSOEVER.

THEY INCUR APPROVAL PROCESS ORDINANCES, UH, BUT A LOT OF YOUR CITY DEPARTMENTS DID ALSO, WE'VE ALREADY HAD THE THAT WAS ASSAULT ON THIS PLAN.

AND IF YOU TAKE STREETLIGHTS, PEOPLE HAVE RELIED ON THE PROCESS AND THE APPROVALS THAT FOLLOW THROUGH IN THIS, UH, THE AND THE, THAT YOU HAVE BEFORE YOU CAN LOOK AT THIS AS AN AVERAGE BLOCK SIZE OF 14,169 SQUARE FEET.

I WENT BACK TO THE PREVIOUS PLASTIC REPORTING BASED ON THIS GENERAL, THIS AREA, AND FOUND THAT, UH, THE VERY FIRST VILLAGE 807 PEOPLE BRINGING THE NUMBERS DOWN TO SEE HOW SUBSTANTIAL THESE LAWS CHANGED.

THE SECOND EDITION TO THE SECOND PHASE THAT WE DID THIS GENERAL PLAN HAD A SQUARE FOOTAGE, AVERAGE SQUARE FOOTAGE OF 14,782 SQUARE FEET.

AND WHAT WE'RE REQUESTING NOW 14,169 SQUARE FEET.

AND THIS IS THE VERY ORIGINAL PLAT, WHICH IS DIFFERENT FROM THE GENERAL PLAN THAT WE INCLUDED A BUMPER STRIPS, NOT IN GENERAL, BUT ALSO HAVE ADDED AN ADDITIONAL 270 SQUARE FEET.

EACH ONE OF THESE 20 WAS NOT.

SO

[01:55:02]

YOU TALKED ABOUT 1500 SQUARE FEET.

AT ITS OWN LITTLE ERROR.

IN FACT, INDICATED A COMMITTEE AND OPPOSITION TO THIS PARTICULAR .

NOW WE KNEW THAT WE WERE GOING TO HAVE A LARGE CROWD HERE, SO THAT THE REST OF THE BAR WHO WAS BROUGHT HERE TO THE STATE HOUSE STAIRS AND 16 BUSES, AND THEY WILL BE AND THEY ARE HEARING AND RESOLVE THING TO KIND OF MAYBE WE HAVE ASSOCIATION ABOUT THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE.

IT WAS DIVIDED IN TWO PARTS TONIGHT.

AND WE PRESENTED TO THE HOMEOWNERS AND THE MAYOR TIME DURING THE CAMPAIGN.

SO THEY KNOW THE SIZE OF THE ROOM.

PEOPLE WERE LYING AROUND TO BE, I WAS STANDING SHOULDER TO SHOULDER, AND AS I HEARD THE PLAN ABOUT THAT NIGHT, IT SEEMED TO BE, AND THEN THE HOPES AND THE DREAMS AND AMBITIONS THAT MANY OF US HAD WERE CHANGING.

WE CAME TO THE COMMUNITY, WE COULDN'T WALK IN THE COUNTY AND WE COULD'VE MADE THIRD, THIRD FLOOR, BUT WE WANT IT TO BE PROTECTED BY THE OLDER SIDE OF THE PLANNING AND ZONING.

AND NOW WE HAVE A PLAN BEFORE YOU IS TO PAY WHAT WAS ORIGINALLY 64 MILLION.

AND TO MORPH THAT INTO THIS EVENING, THE PART THAT IS BEFORE YOU IS TO TAKE AND MORE THAN SEVEN TO 20 BUILDING SITES, I TALKED ABOUT TALKING ABOUT GREASING THE DENSITY THAT IS 6% DIFFERENCE IN DENSITY.

I SUBMIT TO YOU THAT THAT IS A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER.

IF I WERE TO RECEIVE A BILL NEWBURN DEPARTMENT OF TAXATION, AND AT THE END OF THE YEAR, I'M GOING TO OPEN THAT 17.6%.

THAT IT REALLY IS A SIGNIFICANT ARGUMENT.

THAT DECISION THAT WAS MADE, THAT THIS WAS NOT A CHANGE WAS A DECISION.

THAT WAS A IRRELEVANT DECISION BASED UPON JUDGE.

I THINK ANYTIME 17 ONE 6% IS A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER, 21 OR 25.

YOU HAVE TO USE YOUR COMMON SENSE THERE, 17.6% DIFFERENCE.

IF ANYTHING IS ANY MAJOR DIFFERENCE, THIS POINTS TO YOU TONIGHT, YOU EXPANDED YOU.

AS I COULD HAVE INDICATED, THE DEVELOPER CAME WITH A PETITION TO GET THIS LAND CHANGE MADE A DECISION.

IT WASN'T A MAJOR CHANGE.

WE THINK IT'S A MAJOR CHANGE WITHOUT THE QUESTION, THE ISSUE THAT WAS BROUGHT TO THE ZONING WAR BERNARD PRESENTED, AND THEY GO, THEY CAN MONITOR ISSUE DURING THIS ENTIRE

[02:00:01]

PROCESS.

THERE WAS A PUBLIC HERE ON THIS ISSUE.

SO ALL THE RESIDENTS THAT ARE CHARGED TONIGHT IS REALLY TO ASK YOU TO SET THIS ISSUE BACK AND NOT TO DENY US THE DUE PROCESS, BECAUSE THEY NEVER HAD AN OPPORTUNITY TO HEAR WHAT SHE HAD TO SAY, BECAUSE IT WAS A JUDGMENT MADE THAT 17 ONE 6% WAS NOT SIGNIFICANT.

I MEAN, ANYTIME YOU GO TO A STORE AND SOMEONE SHORTCHANGED YOU 17.6%, YOU SAY THAT IS A SIGNIFICANT NUMBER.

THAT'S WHAT I WANT TO SHARE WITH YOU TONIGHT.

I ALSO WANT YOU TO HEAR MY COLLEAGUE, JOHN THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME DECISION.

AND I ALSO APPRECIATE THE FACT THAT DECISIONS THAT YOU MAKE LASTING DECISIONS AND THE DECISIONS THAT YOU MAKE, AND IT'S GOING TO IMPACT OUR COMMUNITY IN THE LONG RUN.

YOU DON'T GET THAT RESPONSIBILITY LIGHTLY.

AND I APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION.

I APPRECIATE YOUR ATTENTION AND OCCURRENCES OF , UH, IN THE BURN VILLAGE.

AND I'M HERE TONIGHT TO ANSWER IN THE BEST WAY I CAN QUESTION EARLIER, NAMELY, DO WE HAVE TO APPROVE THIS CHANGE? AND THE NORTH CAROLINA PRETTY IMPORTANT 1990 SAID, NO, YOU DON'T HAVE TO APPROVE THIS CHANGE.

UH, THE PROBLEM HERE IS THAT WE WERE NOT FAMILIAR WITH THIS PROCESS INITIALLY, AND WE HIRED AN ATTORNEY REAL ESTATE LAWYER, AND THE LAWYER FOR ATTENTION TO A CASE THE SUPREME COURT DECIDED IN 1990, UH, CITY ATTORNEY IS THIS FACE.

THE FACTS ARE NOT EASILY DISTINGUISHABLE FROM THE PRESENT SITUATION.

IT INVOLVED A CASE WHERE A DEVELOPER IN RALEIGH HARRIET HAD PROMISED THAT CERTAIN PROPERTY DEVELOPMENT WOULD BE USED FOR THE BENEFIT OF HOMEOWNERS IN A CERTAIN WAY.

AND AFTER EVERYBODY HAD BOUGHT THEIR PROPERTY AND BUILT THEIR HOMES THERE, THE DEVELOPER PAVEMENT AND SAID, WELL, WE'RE GOING TO USE THIS LAND IN A DIFFERENT, BUT WHICH DOES NOT BENEFIT YOU IN THE SAME WAY.

AND THERE WAS A LAWSUIT THAT WAS INVOLVED, UH, SYDNEY, BENIGN DEVELOPER, UH, THE, UH, THE RIGHT TO, UH, MAKE THE CHANGE THAT THEY WANTED TO MAKE.

AND THE DEVELOPER SUED AND CAROLINE, AND FOUND IN FAVOR OF THE CITY OF RALEIGH.

AND, UH, I WOULD LIKE TO QUOTE YOU, UH, BRIEFLY SOME OF THE FINDINGS FROM THIS SPACE, I WOULD ALSO POINT OUT ONE THING, I UNDERSTAND THAT A PRELIMINARY PLAN OR A GENERAL PLAN FOR A COMMUNITY IS NOT GETTING SOME.

I ALSO UNDERSTAND THAT LAST, THAT PLAN IS USED TO ENTICE BUYERS, PURCHASE PROPERTY AND INVEST THEIR MONEY AND DEVELOP BASED ON WHAT THAT PLAN WAS SAYS.

AND ON TOP OF THAT, BASED ON WHAT THE SALES REPRESENTATIVES AND PROMOTIONAL MATERIAL, AND THE DOCTORS SAY THAT THE STATE IS FARMING ON SOMETHING THAT IS MERELY A GENERAL DESIGN OR MERELY SOMETHING FOR THEM TO TAKE A LOOK AT AND FEEL COMFORTABLE.

AND THAT'S EXACTLY WHAT HAPPENED IN THIS CASE.

I ONLY WANT A NUMBER OF PEOPLE THAT CAME TO THE TO PURCHASE PROPERTY.

AND IN THE PROCESS OF THAT PURCHASE, THE CITY WAS SHOWN LITERATURE BY THE SALES REPRESENTATIVE FOR THIS PARTICULAR PROPERTY THAT YOU'RE CONSIDERING THE OTHER BLACK GREEN SPACE.

THERE WAS NO INDICATION THAT ANY TIME

[02:05:01]

I ASKED MY SALES REPRESENTATIVE AT THE TIME I SAID, WHAT'S GOING TO HAPPEN.

AND THAT PERSON SAID TO ME, THAT'S GOING TO BE TYPICALLY DEVELOPED, AS I SAID, AM PROPERTY SAY, THAT'S TRUE.

AND THEN THE PERSON WENT ON TO SAY, IF YOU DON'T TRUST ME, GO DOWN TO THE PLANNING OFFICE.

AND I DID THAT, AND IT'S DATED DECEMBER 4TH, 1997.

TONIGHT AS CONTAINS 64 SINGLE FAMILY, RESIDENTIAL WISE, THE DAMPER.

I SAW THAT I SIGNED THE CONTRACT, AND NOW I'M GOING TO ASK ME, WHAT IS THERE HE WANTS TO NEXT TO WHERE YOU HAVE INVESTED YOUR PARTNER MONEY AND YOUR RETIREMENT SAVINGS.

IS THERE NO PROTECTION? IS IT SIMPLY, IS THERE NOTHING, NO RESPONSIBILITY ON PART OF ANYBODY TO MAKE SURE THAT WHAT SOMEONE SAYS THEY'RE GOING TO AT ONE POINT AND USES IT TO BUY PROPERTY? IS THERE NOTHING THAT SAYS THAT THAT'S WHAT THAT PERSON HAS TO DO? I THINK THERE IS NORTH CAROLINA SAID ASSURANCES, WHICH ARE SALES TO PROSPECTIVE BUYERS REGARDING THE GENERAL SCHEME OR PLANS OF DEVELOPMENT THAT PURSUED ARE ADMISSIBLE TO ESTABLISH THE EXISTENCE OF SUCH A SCHEME.

THAT IS TO SAY, TO ERASE THIS BLUEBERRY PLAN TO SOMETHING THAT IS TWO WEEKS, MAYBE IN THE FORM OF FIELD MAP MAPS OR ORAL STATEMENTS ON WHICH COURT ALSO THE PROPERTY.

ACCORDING TO THE GROUP .

I HAD 3, 8 30 100%, ALMOST 40% OF THE MAKER MAKE THEIR SACRIFICE.