My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
7/1/1981
CBCC
>
Meetings
>
1980's
>
1981
>
7/1/1981
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2015 11:49:17 AM
Creation date
6/11/2015 1:12:18 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Meetings
Meeting Type
Regular Meeting
Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
07/01/1981
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
56
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
_I <br />BOOK <br />JUL 1 1981 <br />6 PAGE 746 <br />THEY ARE EAR -MARKED FOR SOMETHING SPECIFIC. HE WONDERED IF THOSE <br />FUNDS COULD BE USED TO DEMOLISH THE STRUCTURE, IF THEIR REQUEST WAS <br />FOR FUNDS TO REPAIR THE HURRICANE DAMAGE, <br />ATTORNEY GRAHAM RESPONDED AFFIRMATIVELY AND ADDED THAT THE <br />REQUEST WAS NOT ONLY FOR HURRICANE DAMAGE, BUT WOULD BE USED FOR <br />SOME COMMERCIAL PROCESS, AND FUNDS WOULD BE FUNNELED THROUGH THIS <br />DISASTER LOAN. HE THEN REITERATED THAT SBA WANTS DR. FENNER TO <br />SETTLE HIS DISPUTE WITH THE COUNTY BEFORE THEY CAN SEE IF HE CAN <br />STILL QUALIFY�FOR THE LOAN. <br />DISCUSSION FOLLOWED ABOUT PRESENTING ALL THE FACTS TO THE <br />SBA. <br />ATTORNEY GRAHAM SUMMARIZED THAT IF THEY COULD RESOLVE THEIR <br />DIFFERENCES WITH THE COUNTY, AGREE ON THE SERIES OF FACTS - AND THOSE <br />FACTS PROVE THAT THE HURRICANE CAUSED THE DAMAGE - SBA WILL APPROVE <br />THE LOAN. <br />COMMISSIONER SCURLOCK STATED THAT HE WANTED A COMMITMENT <br />SAYING THAT IF THE LOAN IS NOT RECEIVED, DR. FENNER WOULD TAKE THE <br />BUILDING DOWN. <br />ATTORNEY GRAHAM STATED THAT HE WOULD NOT AGREE TO THAT. <br />JOHN CALMES, ARCHITECT, APPROACHED THE BOARD AND ADVISED <br />THAT HE HAD PERFORMED THE INSPECTION OF THE HIGHLAND MOTEL ON DECEMBER <br />3, 1980 AND SUBMITTED A REPORT DATED DECEMBER 22, 1980 ALONG WITH A <br />SERIES OF PHOTOGRAPHS TAKEN DURING THE ON-SITE INSPECTION. IN HIS <br />OPINION, THERE WAS NOT VERY MUCH THAT WAS SALVAGEABLE IN THE BUILDING. <br />HE CITED AS EXAMPLES: MOST OF THE WIRING THAT WAS EXPOSED TO THEIR <br />VIEW WAS NOT IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE CODE; PANEL BOXES WERE OF THE OLD <br />TYPE; AND THE CEILING AREAS HAD NOT BEEN INSULATED. ALSO, VANDALISM <br />WAS DISPLAYED, THERE HAD BEEN A FIRE IN ONE ROOM, AND TWO CEILING <br />JOISTS WERE SEVERED. MR. CALMES WENT ON THAT SINCE THEIR INSPECTION, <br />SEVERAL WALLS HAVE COLLAPSED AND THE BUILDING HAS RECEIVED FURTHER <br />DETERIORATION. HE COMMENTED THAT IF THE ROOMS OF THE MOTEL WOULD <br />MEET THE SIZE REQUIREMENTS, MAYBE SOME OF THE WALLS WOULD BE SALVAGEABLE. <br />MR. CALMES AFFIRMED THAT MOST OF THE DAMAGE HAD OCCURRED DUE TO <br />DETERIORATION, VANDALISM; ALSO DUE TO THE FACT THAT THE BUILDING WAS <br />OUT -DATED AND NOT UNDER CODE. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.