My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
09/12/2012 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
>
09/12/2012 ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS Minutes
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/24/2022 5:12:10 PM
Creation date
1/24/2022 3:47:33 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
Mashpee_Meeting Documents
Board
ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS
Meeting Document Type
Minutes
Meeting Date
09/12/2012
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
36
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
COMMONWEALTH OF MASSACHUSETTS <br /> TRIAL COURT <br /> BARNSTABLE, SS. LAND COURT <br /> 09 MISC 395229 (KCL) <br /> JANET E. KROCK and KATHRYN } <br /> KROCK, Trustees of The HUBERT ) <br /> TRUST ) <br /> Plaintiffs ) <br /> V. ) <br /> ROBERT NELSON, JONATHAN ) <br /> FURBUSH,JAMES REIFFARTH, ) <br /> WILLIAM BLAISDELL and JACK ) <br /> DORSEY as they are members of the ) <br /> ZONING BOARD OF APPEALS OF ) <br /> THE TOWN OF MASHPEE ) <br /> Remand Order <br /> In this action, plaintiffs Janet E. Krock and Kathryn Krock, Trustees of the Hubert <br /> Trust ("Krock"), pursue a G.L. c. 40A, § 17 appeal from the defendant Mashpee Zoning <br /> Board of Appeals' denial of an application for special permit and denial of an application <br /> for variance. In this appeal, Krock contends that: <br /> (1) the special permit decision contains no findings to support the conclusion <br /> that the proposed project would be more detrimental to the area as proposed; <br /> (2) the variance decision contains no findings with respect to the criteria for a. <br /> variance; and <br /> (3) the Board's decisions are arbitrary and capricious, in excess of its <br /> authority, and based upon errors of law and fact. <br /> The Defendants have denied the Plaintiffs' contentions. <br /> At a case Management Conference convened.on June:6 2012,. the parties agreed <br /> that the case should be remanded to the Board for farther review and consideration. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.