Laserfiche WebLink
• • / 0 , <br /> have any authority to on the basis of that access. Unless I 'm. that doesn ' t <br /> deny the fact that there might by sympathy and desire that would, I 'm jsut curious <br /> Mr. Nottingha, . what you deem to be your right to use that particular . . . <br /> BN: Becuase- 1 bought the property, I have a right to cross the railroad tracks by <br /> the right of way of my purchasing the property. <br /> K: I can ' t speak from a legal standpoint but there are a lot of people in particular <br /> are but still do not have the right to cross our property. <br /> say in private crossing. <br /> MC: Excuse me, my name is Mike McCarthy representing Nottingham S b G, I think <br /> that this calumny right here demonstrates that this is a question that has <br /> probably not been presented in the correct from becuase people are arguing back <br /> and forth over who' s got what kind of property rights to do what and when you <br /> place that kind of question in contact with this kind of situation where this <br /> access is not on affected land and at that point I 'd also point out that it is not <br /> a private access that 's exclusive to Nottingham S b G it also serves adjoingin <br /> landowners so what we really have is a threshold question on jurisidictions <br /> bu but the Board is very well aware that I don ' t want to belabor the point but I <br /> just wanted to point out this dialogue demonstrates that it is a problem that <br /> needs-to be resolved in another form not here. <br /> RW: That that would be our final conclusion here that we don ' t have the. . . . <br /> K: I just wanted to have it in the records thank you very much <br /> RW: Let' s deal with the other, what 's the other objection from Stimwiddel Law Firm <br /> and <br /> G: I 'm Mr. Goldstine representing the Eagle River Trust , Stimwiddel is no longer <br /> representing the Eagle River County may leave your office but uh <br /> now we only have, the Eagle River Trust is a separate entity i don' twant <br /> q you to be confused , the Eagle River Compny, the Brush Creek Company,are <br /> different as of Nottingham. and there' s a very important which we have <br /> which is complete failure to notice , we were not notified of the application <br /> we are record owners of the property on the nw a ast and we as a result of this <br /> RW:Just stay with these one by one here , so we know what you' re saying <br /> cause we do have questions , if you' re just in the vicinity that doesn ' t necessarily <br /> count , if youre' adjacent owner to the affected land, affected land or <br /> just <br /> G: We; re touching the affected land, continusous adjacent or touching whatever the <br /> word is <br /> RW: You alight Mark. <br /> MH: There's 2 adjacent landowners, immediately adjacent landowners, RR and Brush <br /> Creek and Eagle River Com. Well , <br /> G: Well , that may not be updated as of OCt of 1978 ther , the land was deeded as <br /> of record Oct. 2, to Eagle River Trust , Brush Creek is no longer an adjacent <br /> or continuosu landowner. in my understanding. the land belongs to Eagle River Trust <br /> a this time. , has for the last 4 montsh or so. <br /> k�t ' sWRtaXt�ithtee5of'tk� 'application? <br /> I 'd like to respond to the notice question <br /> I don' t really want to challenge Mr. Goldste.i.e 's good faith, in making that <br /> assertion but 1 am very troubled by that assertion because the Brush Creek Co. <br />