Plaistow planning board conditionally approves lot-line adjustment amid deed dispute

The Plaistow Planning Board voted 4-0 to conditionally approve a lot-line adjustment that exchanges roughly 27,560 square feet between 238 Main Street (Tax Map 18 Lot 11) and 244 Main Street (Tax Map 18 Lot 10), while preserving a path for the deed discrepancy to be resolved before final recording.

The board's action followed a contested public comment from James Mosher, who said the plans submitted by the applicant show the applicant claiming “4 plus minus acres” of land on Mosher’s side of the boundary and asked that the application not be recorded until the deed and plans are reconciled. Mosher said in a prepared statement, “To move forward, the current application and recording of these erroneous plans without correction will will cause irreparable harm to me and my family.”

Why it matters: the town's review used a stamped, engineer-prepared survey to evaluate the lot-line adjustment; planning staff and board members emphasized the board’s role is to accept or reject plans that carry a licensed surveyor’s stamp, not to adjudicate private boundary disputes. Board members conditioned approval on final recording materials and a corrected deed to reduce the risk of conflicting public records.

Board discussion and evidence: board members and the applicant’s representative told the board the recorded deed for the applicant’s parcel describes about 14.6 acres while the stamped survey used in the plan shows about 18 acres. The applicant’s representative said the deed appears to be based on a boundary survey that only described frontage and left the backland “plus or minus” with no monuments or bearings; the consultant reported additional historical surveys and a 1978 court case that, in the consultant’s view, support the boundary shown on the current survey. The applicant said he had invited Mosher to review the survey package in the applicant’s office but that Mosher declined to meet.

The objecting neighbor, James Mosher, submitted a written objection to the record and read it at the hearing, citing recorded plans (plan d 7674 and plan b 38359) and contending the applicant’s plan “incorporates the area outlined in pink as part of your client's property” contrary to the deeds he cited. Mosher told the board he would not withdraw his objection until the recorded documents matched the statutory deed descriptions.

Outcome and conditions: the board’s conditional approval motion described the land exchange and set these conditions: final recording plans must bear all professional stamps; monumentation certification by a New Hampshire licensed land surveyor must be submitted to the planning department; all recording materials must be submitted to the planning department within 90 days of conditional approval; and the approval is additional conditioned on an updated, recorded deed that reconciles the deed with the survey prior to recording the lot-line adjustment plan. The motion passed 4-0.

Process and limits of town authority: multiple board members and a staff member reminded the public that boundary line disputes are civil matters between property owners and that the planning board typically bases its decision on a stamped survey plan. Several members said approving a stamped plan does not legally bind the board to settle private ownership disputes and that a future court action could address ownership if a conflict remains.

Next steps: the applicant may record the lot line adjustment after meeting the conditions; the objector may pursue his own survey and, if necessary, civil remedies. The board recorded the conditional approval and required the corrected deed be recorded before final stamp and plan recording.

Ending: The board closed the public hearing on the lot-line adjustment and moved to the next agenda item after the vote.