Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Property Law topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
City solicitor: 'Paper streets' generally not city-owned; owners likely abutters
Summary
Associate City Solicitor Tim Reilly told the Public Works Committee that 'paper streets' shown on subdivision plans typically remain unaccepted ways and are often owned by abutters; residents should consult private counsel to resolve ownership and maintenance questions.
Councilor Mary Beth Pniak-Costello asked the Public Works Committee on Jan. 30 to clarify whether the city is responsible for maintenance of so-called 'paper streets' that create overgrowth or public-health issues adjacent to private homes.
Tim Reilly, the associate city solicitor, told the committee that a paper street is typically an unbuilt street shown on a subdivision plan and ownership is usually held by abutters up to the centerline; the city generally has not accepted such ways for maintenance. "The city does not own a paper street," Reilly said, explaining that the designation exists on recorded plans but the physical way often never was constructed or accepted.
Reilly said the ownership situation can be complicated and recommended that residents consult private counsel and review title or subdivision records if clarity is required. Councilor Gary Labrie and others said the city sometimes performs cleanups when overgrowth affects trash pickup or emergency access, but Reilly emphasized there is no general city maintenance obligation for paper streets without acceptance by the municipality.
The committee voted to close public input and to place the topic on file. No change to city policy or new maintenance program was proposed at the meeting.
