HomeMy WebLinkAboutC.054.93008_13458919
somebody else to do it, I can almost assure that the State of North Carolina recognizes the power of
the county commissioners, and their wishes, and if you don't approve this, the State won't make you
approve it. The State will not make you do it. If you do it, then the State is free to go either
way, but they want to recognize your wishes because they realize that you people know what's best
for Iredell County. The State's some nebulous thing down there in Raleigh. We're the ones that
will have to live with Lake Norman. Statesville will be the one that will be drawing the water out
of Lake Norman in a few years. Everybody is going to be utilizing Lake Norman. And I don't believe
that there is anyone that can prove, and I think that's what you've got to do, is prove it, not say
we'll depend on someone else to take care of us. I think what you've got to say is prove to us that
what you want to do will not damage the lake, and I think the power or the onus is on anyone who
wants to do something to prove it, not say, We think this and We think that, and the State says
this, because I'm telling you, no one at this point knows, and so I ask you again, if you approve
it, approve it with the condition that they have to dispose of the effluent on land and not allow
the dumping into the lake. And I think if you don't do that, hold up any approval until they do
design a package plant, until we do get the questions answered, until you do see where the State
tells them they are going to have to run the line, if they run it at all. I think you should wait
on that before you approve unless they want to dispose of it on land. And I will be glad to leave
with you if you will give them back to me, these letters. And I have one other letter that I would
like to sum up with that was written by Congressman McMillan directed to the Secretary of Natural
Resources in Raleigh, and I will leave you the letter.
MASSEY: Objection, Mr. Pope.
BRYAN: It doesn't have anything to do, it has to do with a comprehensive plan for the lake.
It doesn't have to do with individuals dumping into the lake.
MASSEY: We would object to introduction of any more evidence at this time.
POPE: I'm not going to receive it as evidence. If you want to read from it, I don't have any
objection to that.
BRYAN: Well, I'll just read one paragraph. It says, "Public hearings are suitable for each
case, but I think a coordinated effort by local officials on a commission or a panel would serve a
greater purpose of targeting the long-range needs of the Catawba River Basin due to the projected
population growth in the area, and in-depth study plan may be appropriate. He is referring not only
to Iredell County, he is referring to all the counties around the lake and also to the State
officials to try to get everyone together to get some comprehensive plan put together for the
Catawba Drainage Basin into Lake Norman, because piecemeal approach is very difficult. No one
really knows what the rules are. Each time a package treatment plant is approved, that strengthens
the case for the package treatment plant. And if we allow this thing to go on piecemeal, by the
time we do discover what is happening, it will be very difficult then to go back and undo what is
already done. I just ask you not to approve it on the basis as it is presented. To day anything on
it until the questions are answered, and I don't believe the third question that you asked has been
answered.
POPE: Mr. Massey.
MASSEY: We'll let Mr. Bryant do our summation.
BRYANT: For the record, my name is Fred Bryant. I have been sworn and previously testified.
Let me very briefly summarize what I think, what I see as being the desired result of this type of
discussion. And to do that, I really would like to begin by trying to refocus your objection on
what is good land use planning. That is what this is really all about. That is what any zoning
matter, any issue related to the use of land should be about, what is good land use. We would
submit to you that we have presented to you in previous meeting ample physical evidence so as to the
prepared plans, and as to the verbal testimony to indicate to you that this is a superior plan of
development for this property. I would submit to you that it is a superior plan to the development
that could o on the property right today. And I remind-`
9 P P Y 9 Y• you that this property is now zoned so that
it could be developed with only a somewhat smaller amount of lots than is proposed for this land.
It is not as if the land, by your decision today, is going to remain unused, uncommitted to any
purpose. That is not what you are saying by your decision today if it were to be an adverse
decision.
What you're saying is that the plan which we have presented to you today, in your opinion, is
not the appropriate use of this property. It does not mean that tomorrow or next week or next
month, someone could not come back, come back, not to you necessarily, but come back with a subdivi-
sion plan for the development of this property, into I think we have already determined to our
satisfaction that we could get 138 individual lots on this property. And that could be done any-
time, because it meets your basic requirements of your ordinance. And I would submit to you further
that what we have presented to you is a strong indication of what we consider to be good land use
layout, good land use planning for this property. We will pledge to you, if we have to, that all
technical requirements will be met to develop this property, and this technical requirements of the
state, of the county, of Duke Power, anyone else, because there is a whole host of agencies and
regulatory devices that come into play here. We have to meet those technical requirements.
Again, let me refer to the fact that in the main, this property can be used in a very urban
fashion under present zoning. The same basic sewer system, in my estimation, and I think this could
be bourne out with people who are more technically qualified than I am in that respect, that if this
property were developed to its maximum under existing zoning, it probably would come back to be
developed under the same type of basic system that we are proposing to you, as far as sewer is
concerned. And so I say that to you to indicate to you that your decision should be whether or not
what we have presented to you is a good land use plan for this property. The technical aspect of ,