Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Easement Boundary Issue topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission probes deed and survey errors after boundary dispute could reduce easement by 9.4 acres
Summary
The commission identified a boundary dispute on a conserved parcel and flagged a potential problem: an original easement survey may have been done by someone other than a licensed surveyor, which could create a legal vulnerability and reduce the easement area by about 9.4 acres; members will check registry of deeds and consult the appropriate regulatory office.
At the meeting Nancy Martin raised a boundary dispute involving a property now owned by Hannah McBride and asked whether the conservation commission has an obligation to correct the recorded boundary if the easement was conveyed to the town. Members reviewed paperwork in the monitoring file and discussed that deeds or easement language may show the town as the easement holder.
Committee members said the original survey that defined the easement may have been performed by an engineer who was not a licensed surveyor, and that mismatch could create a legal vulnerability if someone challenged the easement. One member estimated the difference affects about 9.4 acres of the easemented area. Hans Carlson said the attorney general's office has an office that oversees conservation easements and offered to follow up by email; Nancy Martin agreed to check the registry of deeds to locate the controlling deed and easement instrument.
Members expressed confidence in current easement holders but agreed that clarifying deed language and the survey's validity is important because an incorrect survey could reduce the size of the protected area. The commission decided to follow up: check the registry of deeds, determine the named easement holder, and, if necessary, consult the regulatory office in the attorney general's office about remedies or corrections.
