--- In AsburyPark@yahoogroups.com, "bluebishop82" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > True. Those were the only aboptable matters as they were the only > matters reviewed by the Planning Board. The June draft wasn't. > Clarification. Only the March 15 version was actually marked DRAFT. The later June 5 version was not.
> Perhaps the recordings of the meetings will tell if you are right or > wrong about that. Jim Bruno said he heard Aaron say something to that effect on A tape. I also heard that Shields went and listened to the June 5 tape and also heard Aaron say that. So for the moment, assume Aaron said that they could not adopt the June 5 version. 1) Was he correct? and 2) Why was the June plan submitted to the state and touted as the PLAN for 3 years? To the first, it remains to be seen if Aaron is correct. For the second, I know, -- clerical error. Is that the pat excuse in this town? How about you as a defense attorney make such an error in filing the wrong brief for my stay of execution? > Until proven otherwise, I don't have a reason to doubt what > Mr. Aaron said. In my opinion the latest amendment to the plan is > the March draft with the changes as outlined in the ordinance on > June 5. > Where is that version Tom? Do you have a copy? Your answer sounds like it came from official lips. > Why do you exclude that the planning board changes, some of which > were abopted in the ordinance, are the clarifications you speak of? Because what I am saying is that simple clarifications that are not substantive changes do not need go through further review. The acceptions/rejections of the planning board recommendations of course don't have to go back for review. It is also my belief that the June version (a Draft can't by definition be adopted) doesn't contain all of the changes accepted/rejected from the planning board review.> > None of it is the "plan." Respectfully you are mixing up important > words and that makes it confusing to talk about. There is only > one "plan" and that is the 1984 plan. We are still using it. It > was amended in 1989 and again in 1991. The latest amendment > consists of the March draft and the June 5 ordinance, both of which > now are properly referred to as the June 5 2005 amendment. For > clarity we should call that other, unadopted document the June 5 > draft. Tom, it is not me that is mixing up words. They are all called plans. I didn't start this and I think I have been extremely clear. And in fact, I have been using VERSION to identify which PLAN is supposed to be the official one. > Yours is one interpretation. Another is that if the origninal plan > says 10 and 16 stories and I later build 10 and 16 stories, I've > finished it no matter if I had to take a step back first or not. Tom, the original plan, if you mean 1984, was amended, then most recently by the new controls put into the March or June plan, which ever you prefer.The controls for the waterfront blocks including C-8 are 3 stories on Ocean, 4 stories mid-block and 8 stories on Kingsley. That can only be overridden on C-8 if they are able to FINISH the project. Clearly, the clarification in the June version makes explicit what was implicit in March. Don't emulate Clinton. Youa re going argue what is means? > It certainly could be your third yet unenumerated choice of a > clerical error. The sanction you suggest may be excessive > considering there seems to be no harm done as far as I can tell. > Crooks? Idiots? I say they are neither. I hope you never prove me > wrong. Tom, believe me, I have only begun to scratch the surface. Aaron is in deep. The city has been getting advice in the best interests of Azbury Partners. > It was???? I'm not saying that you are wrong, I just didn't know > that was the case. Seems odd that we only have NJ subdevelopers if > it was truly shopped across the fruited plain. You may > inadvertantly be giving credit to them that may not be due. You don't know people from around the country have either bought or considered buying condos here based upon the plan that was disavowed? > I object to the limiting choices in the question, Your Honor! ;-) Your objection is overruled counselor. ------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor --------------------~--> Get fast access to your favorite Yahoo! Groups. Make Yahoo! your home page http://us.click.yahoo.com/dpRU5A/wUILAA/yQLSAA/Y2tolB/TM --------------------------------------------------------------------~-> Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/AsburyPark/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
