Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Rights Of Way topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Westerly council denies petition to abandon terminus of James Street after contested hearing
Summary
After multi-year disputes and a full public hearing with survey and title testimony, the council voted to deny a petition to abandon a small triangular terminus of James Street; petitioners sought consolidation with abutting private parcels and presented photos, surveys and a title review, while neighbors opposed the request.
The Westerly Town Council on Sept. 22 denied a petition to abandon the triangular terminus of James Street after a contested, multi-hour public hearing that included photographs, a boundary survey and a title examination.
The petitioners, represented by attorney Stephen Serdu, said private improvements and long-term maintenance had effectively taken place on the small grassy terminus and that an administrative abandonment and consolidation would regularize ownership and allow property owners to clear the dispute. Margaret Caster, a petitioner and property owner, presented photos from the 1990s through 2024 showing lawn maintenance, a “no parking” sign, later a vinyl fence and, eventually, a gravel parking surface and a short retaining wall placed where she says the town right-of-way had been.
A title examiner who testified for the petitioners said the land records and the 1911 plat left ambiguity as to whether the terminus was specifically dedicated as part of the road or remained part of underlying platters' holdings. The examiner said two plausible legal constructions existed: either the town holds title to the strip as part of the platted road, or title remains with descendants of the original platters; he urged that surveys and clear administrative steps be used to resolve the dispute.
Neighbors opposing the petition, including Megan Nelson, said family ownership and earlier legal work had established rights and that private improvements had been made for safety and ingress. Nelson said her family has occupied the neighboring property since 1917 and that historical documentation and local practice supported her position. Many residents and councilors noted a long history of disagreement about access and a related footpath to South Joseph Street.
After hearing testimony and discussing whether the council had sufficient evidence and whether the town had previously asserted or waived rights, the council voted to deny the abandonment petition. Council members repeatedly asked for clear survey evidence and legal records and observed the town staff and planning recommendations favored preserving public rights; some councilors said town staff should remove unauthorized work on public property and restore the area if it is town-owned.
What happens next: The petitioners may pursue administrative or court remedies. The council's denial leaves the disputed terminus in place under existing rights until ownership or legal status is clarified; councilors asked town staff to compile and share relevant historical records and permitted work documents.
