Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council refers long‑running Coffin Street dispute to Public Works and Committee of the Whole
Summary
After residents raised concerns about an unfinished segment of Coffin Street, the council voted to send Order 850 (Coffin Street status) to Public Works & Safety and the Committee of the Whole for further review, amid disagreement about whether the council should make a formal finding on road ownership.
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Councilor Tract introduced Order 850, addressing a long-standing dispute over whether an unfinished portion of Coffin Street is a public way. The order, drafted after communications with the planning office and the city solicitor, would declare the disputed portion private; the council referred it to the Public Works & Safety Committee and to the Committee of the Whole for deeper review.
Resident Jane Snow spoke during public comment with a detailed review of deed and plan-book references, contending that record evidence shows a smaller unfinished portion and expressing concern about public-safety implications for emergency turnaround areas and safe routes to school. In committee discussion, one councilor opposed the council making a finding about street ownership, saying that such determinations are a judicial function better suited for land court and warning the council is not a fact-finding court.
The motion to refer Order 850 to both Public Works & Safety and Committee of the Whole carried; several councilors said the referral would allow Public Works staff, planning, and the city solicitor to provide more information and advise whether administrative or legal remedies are appropriate.
Next steps: Order 850 will be considered in committee, where staff and the city solicitor are expected to present background materials, deed references, and recommended next steps; if the parties wish to pursue a legal determination, land court may still be necessary.

