DTE acts quickly and reasonably to settle Milford bypass case.
Since I previously wondered whether DTE was engaging in chicanery by providing a construction document that identified the proposed location of the easement while not explicitly indicating that the easement area was limited to what was shown on the construction drawing, I think it is more than appropriate to compliment DTE on how it handled the negotations.
I represented a property owner in Milford confronted with an extremely broad easement. After having the easement boundaries staked, I was able to negotiate a deal with DTE that minimized the tree clearing required to construct the pipeline, required DTE to transplant some trees within the easement and plant additional shallow-rooted trees also within the easement to provide a screen from a major road, prevents constructing above-ground improvements, and limits access rights to the easement. Once we reached reasonable compromises on the extent of the easement that mitigated some of its impacts, we were able to agree upon a financial settlement that included reimbursement of the owners’ attorney fee.
While the owners would obviously prefer not to have an easement on their property, they are happy to have this process resolved in a way that minimizes the impacts on their property while paying fair just compensation. I am sure that DTE recognized the value of avoiding the cost of litigation and wisely took into account feedback about the impacts of the easement when minimizing the rights that they obtained.
And as an added bonus, when meeting with DTE I mentioned that my own house had suffered a blackout as a result of a dead tree falling on the lines. DTE’s engineer passed my information along and the dead tree was removed from my yard within three days.
If you have been approached by a pipeline company, I suggest that you read this post and contact me to discuss your rights.