Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Easements Legal Conditions topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Applicant seeks amendment to perpetual no-structure easement at Crossland Road; commission divided and no hearing scheduled
Summary
An applicant asked the Conservation Commission Sept. 25 to amend an in-perpetuity condition banning structures inside a drainage easement on Crossland Road; commissioners expressed mixed views and asked the applicant to file a formal amendment request if the matter is to be considered.
A property owner’s representative asked the Conservation Commission Sept. 25 to amend a longstanding order condition that currently forbids “any structures” within a drainage easement on a Crossland Road property (DP Number 348-0886). The applicant proposed allowing a movable shed raised on blocks and a short run of stairs to reach the lower yard, contending the work would permit access without harming drainage function.
Applicant representative Mark Lager (Allen Engineering) said the current proposal would involve less disturbance than a prior plan and that the easement language, in the applicant’s reading, does not explicitly prohibit movable or nonpermanent structures. He asked the commission to consider a reconsideration of the in-perpetuity prohibition and said he believed the homeowners association (the easement grantee) and the property owner would maintain stewardship of the easement.
Commission members reviewed the history: staff noted the condition originated in prior orders and was explicitly carried into a certificate of compliance that remains in effect. Commissioners debated the scope of the word “structure” and whether a narrow amendment for nonpermanent features could be entertained. Several commissioners said they were not prepared to change a condition described as perpetual; some said they would consider an amendment only after a formal, advertised public hearing; others said they would not support any amendment. No binding vote to open or schedule a public hearing was recorded.
Conservation staff advised the applicant that if the commission wishes to consider an amendment, the matter must proceed through the formal public-hearing process with notice to abutters; staff also advised that the commission could decline to change a perpetual condition. The applicant indicated he will file a formal request for amendment and that staff should advise whether legal notice and abutter notification are required; staff said they would follow up.
