You are here

Adverse possession of land declared Urban Wild

I have 2 issues:
30(+) years ago my parents built a wooden deck at the end of their property. The deck is NOT attached to the house.
At the time they built the deck - the support posts were on land that was wild & undeveloped. The land was combination of private and city of Boston land.
There were "paper plans" for building new street & homes on the land. This never happened because land was too swampy. Sometime between 2003 and 2008 - the City of Boston declared the property as an "Urban Wild".

Now for the first time ever -- after 30(+)years -- the City of Boston Environmental Department claims the deck is an illegal encroachment on city property --

Do I have a right to claim Adverse possession since my parents have had this deck up for 30(+) years. At least 25 years before the land was declared an protected "Urban Wild".
It has shown up on the city maps of our street for MANY years.
Also the deck has shown up on their property assessment and taxes for many years.

#2 The City of Boston has also filed a violation for not having a permit to build the deck. They can not find the permits for the pool either -- I feel they have lost permits from the 1970's.

#1 Can they really force us to remove the deck?
#2 Can they fine us for not having the 1970's permit to show hem
#3 Can I file for adverse possession of the land?

thank you

Share this with your friends

You cannot acquire rights by adverse possession to land owned by the government. See Massachusetts General Laws Chapter 7C, Section 32. Yes, they can force you to removed the deck. You didn't mention where the pool is located so I don't know about fines in that case, which you may be able to challenge.

I had read in this article that Massachusetts is an exception. Under the provisions of Massachusetts General Laws chapter 260 section 31, the 20-year statute of limitations for recovery of land applies to the commonwealth and its political subdivisions except in connection with land "held for conservation, open space, parks, recreation, water protection, wildlife protection or other public purpose."
Since more than 20 yrs had passed before the land was transferred to the urban wild.. I thought that it could come under Adverse possession.
The article:
Lawrence v. Concord: The doctrine of adverse possession restored and acquistion of title to government property

is this true
thank you

The statute that you refer to is for claims by the commonwealth or political subdivisions not against them. The exception about adverse possession that you refer to is that adverse possession is generally favored but not against governmental units that can't be expected to patrol all land under its control as private owners can. You may consider negotiating with the municipality to purchase it though with a covenant that it will be kept conservation land.

Talk to a Real Estate Lawyer Today
Most offer FREE Consultations
Connect with The Forum
facebook google twitter linkedin