Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Boundary topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Planning Board denies endorsement of ANR for Highland Road, citing unresolved town boundary and title inconsistencies
Summary
The board voted to deny endorsement of an ANR plan submitted by C.R. Henson Construction for Highland Road after town counsel advised the applicant had not sufficiently demonstrated ownership of portions of the new lots; the board recommended the applicant pursue land-court resolution of the municipal-boundary discrepancy.
The Planning Board on Feb. 19 denied endorsement of an Approval Not Required (ANR) plan submitted by C.R. Henson Construction for a Highland Road property after town counsel identified inconsistencies between the plan, title records and municipal-boundary depictions.
Town special counsel Jonathan Silverstein, in written advice to the town administrator, concluded that the deed language and the plan were inconsistent because the deed references the municipal boundary but also relies on a 1996 plan depiction; Silverstein advised the board that the applicant had not provided sufficient evidence of ownership for the portions of land at issue and recommended denial. Staff read Mr. Silverstein’s analysis into the record and noted MassGIS boundary layers were informative but cautionary, as MassGIS carries a disclaimer that its municipal-boundary layer is not sufficient to determine definitive boundary locations.
The applicant (owner) and his surveyor told the board they had used GPS survey methods and monuments and believed their survey to be accurate. The applicant asked the board to wait or accept the ANR; town counsel’s written analysis, however, supported denial or conditional action because of the conflicting evidence. The board elected to deny the ANR endorsement on the basis that the applicant failed to demonstrate clear ownership of the portion of the parcels in question and that the submitted plans were inconsistent with the recorded title descriptions.
Board members discussed options for third-party confirmation but noted the town’s legal counsel recommended denial and indicated the appropriate forum for resolving competing survey claims would be Land Court. The board’s motion to deny specified failure to demonstrate ownership of the portions of new lots based on plans inconsistent with title records.
Votes at a glance: - Motion: Deny endorsement of the ANR submitted by C.R. Henson Construction for the Highland Road parcels due to failure to demonstrate ownership for portions of the new lots and inconsistency with title records. Outcome: Denial (unanimous).
The board will send the applicant a written denial citing the legal-analysis basis; staff told the owner that he could seek Land Court adjudication of the boundary and return with clarified title evidence. Staff and counsel recommended direct communication between the applicant’s attorney and the town’s attorney to explore whether the parties can resolve discrepancies without litigation; otherwise the property-owner may pursue Land Court.
