There is an interesting "by-product" of the way these roads appear on the GIS lots, and that may even contribute to the confusion. As Tummyman points out, in the beginning all the lots are divided-up into sellable lots, and the road itself is documented with its total area is listed on the map, just like all of the lots around it. In this way, every foot of land area was then (and is now) accounted for. I suspect as every lot gets sold and deeded that - by default only - it remains looking like a lot without an owner of record. I think we now know that any claims of road "ownership" by any single person is more than likely not true. And the fact that the road is listed on the Tax maps without having an owner of record is proof of that. It may-well be a misconception from people who track-back to the original subdivision of everything that since it was never sold, it must still somehow be "theirs". People are funny, aren't they?
Thanks to all for your very thoughtful input and references! A lot to think about...
Cal
|