My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
12/28/1995 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
12/28/1995 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/23/2018 5:11:54 PM
Creation date
2/23/2018 1:58:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
12/28/1995
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
17
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).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
December 2 , 1995 <br /> Page 10. <br /> subject to the governments set up by the condominiums. The grant easement is part of the <br /> title and exists so that the five condominiums could share the use of the beach and cross <br /> across it. The fact remains that the beach up to the high water nark is shown on the land <br /> court ptatrs as being included widtin each of the four condonveniums. <br /> 1r. Sherman stated the letter was passed on to Elliot Rosenberg who has reviewed it and <br /> agreed it constitutes prom'and recommends the question of the legal issue be closed; it i <br /> nothing the Commission should get involved with. <br /> Louis Jankauskas stated the village Mees do have the right to maintain at the Alage level. <br /> Walter Dardano asked if trustees are owners, wM they be responsible financially? fir, <br /> Sherman stated the previous pem-dt held them responsible finaneiahy. <br /> Scott Wentzel asked who filed the application. Nomian Mayes stated he filed on behalf o <br /> Maushop Condominium Trust. <br /> Atty Pier stated this is a unique condo arrangement, them are five condos, with four <br /> having waterfront. <br /> Sherman stated the point is, is the paperwork in the proper fonn and sloes the <br /> Commission need a revised cover sheet`Imo. Hayes stated he will provide a new page one <br /> and a cover letter exphdning why. <br /> Eileen Curtin objected to that kind of change and does not agree. She Mated they are the <br /> owners of the beach, not New Seabury. <br /> Sherm Palan expressed concern that the Order of Conditions imposed lacks in sufficient <br /> bead noufishment. <br /> John Bacon stated there is an easement granted from New Seabury to Aaushop Vfte <br /> 'frust. It appears to hirer Now seabury has ownership interest and should be the proper <br /> party to apply for any modification to the beach. He objected to any decmon of ownership <br /> being made at this point. <br /> Ofi1ia Ferreira stated the Commission's attorney recommended to go along with what was <br /> reconmmmded but he is not here and perhaps should be. <br /> fir. Sherman stated the Commission should make a decision and if the owners are <br /> u r happy they should seep legal appeal. <br /> Mr. Hayes advised there is a dent Order of Conditions on the table for the construction <br /> of the revetment. They have created an envir mnentaUy better structure from the 16 to 12 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.