In a significant ruling, the Supreme Judicial Court (SJC) has determined that landowners in Concord cannot prevent public access to certain “discontinued” sections of Estabrook Road, a former public roadway adjacent to their properties. This decision reinforces earlier findings from both the Land Court and the Appeals Court, highlighting ongoing ambiguities in Massachusetts laws regarding public ways.
Background of the Case
The legal dispute revolves around two segments of the old Carlisle Road, now referred to as Estabrook Road, which were designated as public ways until 1932. At that time, county commissioners declared these sections discontinued under G.L.c. 82, §32A, a statute that outlines the process for removing a public way from active use. Following this discontinuation, the areas transformed into the wooded Estabrook Trail, which the public has utilized for recreational purposes.
In 2017, the town of Concord initiated legal action against a group of property owners who attempted to restrict access to these sections of the road. Both the Land Court and the Appeals Court ruled that the discontinuation under §32A only relieved the town of its maintenance responsibilities and did not eliminate the public’s right to use the road.
Key Findings of the SJC
The SJC upheld these lower court decisions, emphasizing that another statute, G.L.c. 82, §21, outlines a more comprehensive process for extinguishing public access rights, which includes a town vote and public notice. Justice Scott L. Kafker articulated that the public’s interest in access is significant, as demonstrated by the community’s desire to preserve historic public paths.
The court also supported the Land Court’s use of circumstantial evidence to establish that the southern section of the road had been recognized as a public way since the 1700s, despite the absence of formal layout documents.
Reactions to the Ruling
Austin P. Anderson, the town’s attorney, expressed satisfaction with the SJC’s ruling, affirming the public’s right to access the road. He noted that the town has consistently acted in the community’s best interest throughout the legal proceedings.
Conversely, Gwen Nolan King, representing the abutters, highlighted the broader implications of the case for landowners and municipalities across Massachusetts. She pointed out that various stakeholders, including regional planning commissions and the Real Estate Bar Association, submitted amicus briefs advocating for clearer regulations regarding public rights and their extinguishment.
Nicholas P. Shapiro, who co-authored an amicus brief, raised concerns about the ruling’s impact on the stability of land records, suggesting that title examiners may struggle to ascertain the status of public ways based on existing records.
Historical Context of Estabrook Road
The disputed section of Estabrook Road is an unpaved path, approximately 30 feet wide, stretching about 1.8 kilometers through Concord. It is bordered by historic stone walls and passes by remnants of colonial homesteads and other significant landmarks. The northern section was established as a public way in 1763, while the southern section, known as the “Town Way,” was purportedly laid out before that date, although exact records have been lost.
Despite the town road commissioners’ recommendation in 1890 to discontinue maintenance due to insufficient public use, the road remained accessible to the public for many years. However, in 2016, concerns arose among abutters regarding trail users, leading to attempts to restrict access, including the installation of a gate in 2017.
Conclusion
The SJC’s ruling in Town of Concord v. Rasmussen clarifies that landowners cannot block public access to discontinued roadways, reinforcing the public’s rights while also highlighting the need for legislative clarity in Massachusetts regarding public ways. The decision serves as a reminder of the complexities surrounding land use and public access rights in the state.
Attorney Blair E. Weigand — Helping those with legal questions for 35 years and counting.