My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
11/18/1999 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
>
11/18/1999 CONSERVATION COMMISSION Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/26/2018 5:09:46 PM
Creation date
2/26/2018 3:03:01 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
CONSERVATION COMMISSION
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
11/18/1999
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
32
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
18 November 1933 <br /> Page 5. <br /> Mr.-Costa stated the jurisdictional line cuts through the lawn. The issue of <br /> the rest of the lawn is between Mr. Newman and Mr. Carter. Mr. Costa's <br /> firm was hired to bring the project into compliance with the regulations. <br /> 5 <br /> Mr.. Newman stated when he read the application when it was filed, it was <br /> clear to him it was to remove that portion of the lawn that the Commission <br /> has Jurisdiction over, It will leave him with two-tone lawn. He contacted <br /> an expert and he distributed his findings on the three random samplings of <br /> the lawn to the C mmission. <br /> Mr. Rosenberg asked who brought suit against whom Mr. Sherman advised <br /> the Commission brought suit against Mr. Kinder and had to mention Mr. <br /> Newman as owner. Mr. Rosenberg suggested that this matter be continued <br /> until Mr.. Ne m n gets into court and gets an answer that satisfies him as <br /> far as the lawn is concerned. He should work it work it out with Mr. Kinder <br /> and then come back to the Commission. <br /> Mr. Sherman stated the lawn cannot be more than 10%. They are not going <br /> to make lawn renovations this time of year. He asked if there was any <br /> objection to continuing this hearing until Mr. Newman returns? <br /> Mr. Newman stated it is a complex issue. The record is clear, in terms offir. <br /> Ki.n. er's track record. This has been going on since dune 1998 to the <br /> direction of the court to get him to fele a Notice of latent. He still dict net act <br /> in a timely fashion. Mr. Newman had t bring on a contempt proceeding. He <br /> would prefer not to have any future dealings with Mr. Kinder and is tired of <br /> spending money unnecessarily. <br /> Mr. Sherman would like to explore the letter from' Mr. N wman#s expert. <br /> The.Chair suggested continuing to mid-April. <br /> VOTE: Motion made and seconded to continue the hearing to 11 April. Zoo <br /> t the request of the applicant. Unanimous vote. <br /> HEARING CONTINUED. <br /> 7:30 MICHAEL T. C WHI x, 23-25 Ocean Bluff Dr., continued from 2 <br /> July 1999. Michael Grotke was present. <br /> Mr. Sherman advised this will have to be continued as the same four <br /> Commissioners are not sitting. <br /> i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.