The following summary is based on a “3JX” order of the New Hampshire Supreme Court rather than an ordinary opinion. A 3JX order is a decision entered by three justices of the Supreme Court, rather than of the entire five-member court. The decision is not entitled to be cited as precedent of the Court in future cases. However, these opinions are often instructive as statements of the existing law on issues, and guides to how the full court might rule in similar cases.
In this case, a property owner invested substantial sums in the renovation of a property, and sought permission to move the driveway access from one point on the lot to a different point. The application for a driveway permit was denied by the City on the grounds of safety. The owner appealed to the Superior Court, which reversed the denial. The City appealed.
The property owner argued that it had a constitutionally-based property right to place the driveway in the location he/she desired. The Court made clear that while a property owner does have a vested and protected right to access the system of public highways from land, there is no right or guarantee to have that access in a particular location.
The decision is important to planning boards, public works departments, road agents and governing bodies who implement highway access permits in accordance with RSA 236:13. Under New Hampshire law, access points are not vested property rights incident to the ownership of the land, or under the control of the property owner. Instead, access points are subject to movement or alteration by action of municipal officials in the interest of safety and the efficient operation of highways.