Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Easement Encroachment topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
ZBA flags title and easement questions in Valaquat shed encroachment hearing
Summary
At a continued hearing the ZBA reviewed century-old subdivision maps and heard opposing letters about a 12x20 shed that appears to encroach on a neighboring parcel; board counsel said the triangular parcel has long been tied to the applicant's tax lot and that an easement by necessity could apply, but the town cannot resolve title — the hearing remains open while easement language is edited.
The Zoning Board reviewed survey maps and deed history in a prolonged public hearing over accessory structures and alleged encroachments on a triangular parcel owned by Jason and Gina Valaquat.
Board counsel told the meeting that the small triangular parcel (identified on filed maps from 1930 and 1933) appears in successive deeds tied to the larger applicant parcel, and that, as a legal matter, an easement by necessity could arise if part of the applicant's land would otherwise be landlocked.
"An easement by necessity would necessarily have to exist under these circumstances because there's no other way to access or use that portion of your parcel," the board attorney said while cautioning that the ZBA has no authority to grant private easements and that a court would be the proper forum to adjudicate competing title claims.
The ZBA received a late objection letter from the owner of the adjacent Johnson property asserting the shed encroaches on her land; the board also received a letter of no objection from another neighbor (Offenback). Draft easement agreements were submitted but remained unsigned and inconsistent in language; the town attorney flagged mismatched owner names and contradictory clauses and asked the applicant to rectify the drafts before any recording.
Neighbors and trustees said the 12x20 shed and gravel areas have been used historically and questioned whether the accessory structure should be allowed where it currently sits. Arty Bowman, a trustee and neighbor, asked, "can you stop calling that a garage if you can't even get a car through that little piece there?" The applicant said one smaller shed has already been removed and that plans to relocate or remove the larger shed were being priced so work could be coordinated.
The board asked for clarified easement drafts, corrected owner names on proposed instruments, and additional measurements. Members voted to keep the public hearing open and to continue the matter next month to allow the applicant to resolve easement language and coordinate any shed moves.
The ZBA emphasized that final determinations about private easements, the precise location of rights-of-way, and claims of adverse possession are matters for the courts and that the board's role on the application is limited to weighing area-variance criteria and local zoning conditions.
