The concept of prescriptive right-of-way depends on whether access was "taken" vs "licensed". It's like squatters rights, but for a public right-of-way. You c

The concept of prescriptive right-of-way depends on whether access was "taken" vs "licensed". It's like squatters rights, but for a public right-of-way. You can't claim squatters rights if you've been paying rent to the property owner the whole time. In the same way, if the previous owner "licensed" access across his property, by charging fees for parking and/or entry, then no prescriptive right-of-way is/was ever established. It would be permissive right-of-way. Since aquisition by prescription typically requires some element of abandonment, charging fees serves a double purpose: 1) proving the property is "in-use" / not abandoned, and 2) that the paying public recognized the private property rights of the owner. (Ie, that there was no public understanding or "expectation" that access across the private property should be free and/or unrestricted.) Since legal consideration is required for a lawfully recognized contract, charging a fee makes this implied recognition of the property rights legally valid.