We affirm. As the Court of Appeals wrote in Schillawski v State of New York ( 9 NY2d 235) with respect to determining the width of a highway, "[w]here a road has obtained its character as a public highway by user, its width is determined by the width of the improvement . . . But where the road has been laid out under a statute, it is the statute and not the user that determines the width" ( id. at 238; see Matter of Hill v Town of Horicon, 176 AD2d 1169, 1170, lv denied 80 NY2d 752; Snow v State of New York, 48 AD2d 582, 584-585). The Town failed to identify a statute "laying out" Eddy Road ( see Snow, 48 AD2d at 585; Kenyon v State of New York, 28 AD2d 1182, 1182-1183), and thus was required in support of its motion for summary judgment to establish the width of the highway by use ( see Schillawski, 9 NY2d at 238; Snow, 48 AD2d at 585).
Therefore, the metes and bounds descriptions as well as the acreage estimates must yield to the natural boundary of the lake. Furthermore, the descriptions contained in the letters patent, by running to the lakeshore, carried the boundaries to the low-water mark of Cayuga Lake (see Stewart v Turney, 237 N.Y. 117, 130-131; Snow v State of New York, 48 A.D.2d 582). Absent proof that "Canoga Island" has not always been a peninsula (at least since 1813), plaintiff's title runs to the low-water level on the eastern shore of the peninsula. Thus, plaintiff owns the peninsula and the marshland to the west of it, subject only to rights gained therein through adverse possession.