Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Easement Townhall topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Select Board hears split testimony on equestrian easement across town‑hall parking lot; town counsel: easement grants private rights, not automatic public right
Summary
The Essex County Trail Association asked the board to confirm historic equestrian use across the town‑hall lot. Adjacent property owners opposed opening the lot, citing safety, trespass and loss of tenant parking. Town counsel said the 15‑foot right‑of‑way grants rights to the grantee (and heirs/assigns), not blanket public access; the board took no action.
Members of the Essex County Trail Association (ECTA) petitioned the Select Board to confirm that an historic right‑of‑way intended to provide equestrian passage was meant to reach and traverse the town‑hall lot to reach trails on the other side of Route 113.
Martha Sanders of ECTA summarized the association’s view of the easement’s historical purpose and urged that access be restored so horses can reach nearby trail networks safely. ECTA provided a map and an affidavit from prior owners asserting that the intended route continued to the town‑hall property line.
Nearby landowners strongly objected. Donna Dario — whose home abuts the town‑hall lot — told the board she “does not support the opening of the right away on town land for public access,” citing public‑safety concerns for horses crossing near a busy daycare traffic flow, prior incidents of trespass and animal feeding, and the practical reality that fence lines and property boundaries presently block a direct connection from the town lot to the mapped trail.
Town counsel summarized chain‑of‑title research and advised the board that the recorded 15‑foot private right‑of‑way was ‘‘reserved to the grantor and heirs and assigns’’ and does not, on its face, create public rights. Counsel told the meeting: "the existing 15t rightway does not grant public rights. It grants rights to Dario and her heirs and signs." Counsel further advised that any durable conveyance of public access or creation of new public rights would require town‑meeting action and careful balancing of the private easement holder’s interests with town uses.
Board members discussed practical constraints: the fence and lack of a direct physical connection between the town‑hall lot and the recorded easement, parking and traffic patterns tied to existing tenants, and potential liability and safety risks from mixing preschool drop‑off, contractor activity, public events and occasional equestrian passage in the same narrow parcel. Several board members said they were reluctant to authorize regular equestrian traffic through the lot without clearer legal authority and stronger assurances on safety and connectivity.
The board did not take action and directed staff to continue researching property records and legal options. Select Board members said a durable change in access that created public rights would likely require a town‑meeting vote and coordination with the easement owner and abutters before any change in the lot’s use.
