City attorney says ‘paper streets’ are not city property; councilors urged to advise residents to seek title research

Councilor Pena Castello asked the subcommittee to discuss the city's obligation for so-called "paper streets," which residents say abut private homes and present overgrowth and safety concerns. "Paper streets, according to attorney Riley, are owned by the city," she said, but the issue prompted legal clarification.

The nut graf: City Attorney Tim Riley told the committee that a paper street is typically a street shown on a developer's recorded plan that may never have been built or accepted by the city; ownership and maintenance responsibilities are complex and usually require title research. The subcommittee placed the matter on file.

Tim Riley, city attorney, told the committee, "No, they're not owned by the city," and described paper streets as features that appear on subdivision plans even when the streets were never constructed or taken by the municipality. Riley said the residents who raised concerns should consult an attorney to determine ownership and rights because the city does not have a blanket responsibility to maintain those parcels. "My job is not to give legal advice to residents in a private capacity," Riley said. "If the resident has a question, they should consult an attorney to determine because you may have to do title searches."

Councilors and staff noted the practical effects on neighbors: some parcels look like vacant lots and may have overgrowth, debris or parked vehicles; staff said the city will continue to monitor problem areas and that resolution often requires interested parties to research deeds at the Registry of Deeds or, in complicated cases, Land Court. The committee voted to place the discussion on file; staff recommended residents seeking clarity commission title searches or legal counsel.