Board of Aldermen 10-09-2018 Page 4
possession does not reset itself based on new owners but the continued usage of land. If adverse
possession is successfully established, which we believe we have a compelling case, it would move the
boundary line where we believe it should lawfully be.
The pictures handed out show a few things; page one shows how the land in question, the yellow box
and our land 123 Conant Road, fits with one another given the configuration and maintenance use
history. We also believe it shows the maintenance of land by the variance and lawn color. Page two
shows the agreed upon boundary lines, the telephone pole and sign but also where the proposed
property line would be moved, the red dash line. As you can see, it is no more than arm’s length away
from our main entrance.
The trees 121 Conant Road planted, and grass maintenance all stop at the telephone as well: also the
prior owners of 121 Conant Road recognized these boundaries as well when they installed the sprinkler
system, or the sprinkler placement would be very different, and more sprinkler heads would have been
added to cover the 24 x 65-foot area. There is not one sprinkler head on that land in question. Page
three is the Conant Road before it was moved. You can see our driveway and where our mailbox was
prior to the move. Also more importantly, you can see the shrubbery that exists close to our driveway
and the dent that is cleared due to my husband’s upkeep. Page four, the house and property in 1991
that existed before the development; page five shows clearly the land gained and the forsythia and trim
bushes that entire area maintained by my husband.
Based on the testimony and clarification from the City Attorney Steve Bolton, we would be basing our
suit for adverse possession against the owners of 121 Conant Road. All we are respectfully asking is
that we table this final decision to the next meeting, not to complicate the issue, allowing us time to
obtain legal representation. We appreciate your time, thank you.
COMMUNICATIONS REQUIRING FINAL APPROVAL — None
PETITIONS
Petition for Street Discontinuance — Portion of Conant Road
e Committee on Infrastructure Recommends: Granting Petition with Proposed Amended Plan
e Also assigned to NCPB; Favorable Recommendation of Amended Plan - 9/13/2018
MOTION BY ALDERMAN O’BRIEN TO AMEND THE PETITION FOR STREET DISCONTINUANCE
BY REPLACING THE PROPOSED DISCONTINUANCE PLAN WITH THE AMENDED PLAN
SUBMITTED BY THE PETITIONERS
ON THE QUESTION
Alderman Gidge
Yes, | think we have been talking about this, as you can see there are two people over here who would
like the land. One couple has cared for it for 27 years, the other couple also says they have cared for it.
There are flower beds over there, it is part of a garden. They just can’t seem to come together and
divide it and | understand there is a precedent to do that, you can’t do that literally. Legally if the land is
given up by the City, the petitioners | believe because of where they live, and the land did come from
that house or that property before, they can get it.
Having said that, having watched this mess, the City doesn’t have to sell it. We don’t have to sell it, and
the fact of the matter is, or give it until some sort of an agreement is made. If you take a look at the
pictures you can see that | believe put a fence up, it’s four feet from their driveway.
