Alfano Law Office, PLLC

Alfano Law Office, PLLC
Phone: (603) 856-8411 • Fax (603) 290-5521
4 Park Street, Concord, NH 03301
  • Home
  • Real Estate Law
    • Road Law
    • Commercial Real Estate Law
    • Tax Abatements
    • Business Law
  • Estate Planning
  • About Us
    • Paul J. Alfano, Real Estate Attorney
    • John F. Hayes, Attorney
    • Terrie Harman, Attorney
    • Jim Soucy, Attorney
    • Marissa Schuetz, Attorney
    • Michael D. Cameron, Attorney
    • Privacy Policy
  • Articles
  • Contact Us
    • Directions
  • Road Law Guide
  • NH Tax Abatement
    • Tax Abatement Team
    • Grounds for Abatement
    • Municipal Application
    • Owners of Properties Outside New Hampshire
    • Transfer Tax Allocation
    • Recent Laws and Rulings
  • Resources and Links
    • Allobar Strategies
    • Calendar and Key Dates
    • Equalization Ratio
    • NAPTA
  • Covid-19 Updates
You are here: Home / Road Law / Road Acceptance – A Proposal

Road Acceptance – A Proposal

Road “acceptance” is a common enough term, but what exactly does it mean?  Does it meanimagesCADOYNQF a municipality has the obligation to maintain the road in question, or does it simply mean the public has the right to use the road?  And what is required for an acceptance to occur?  This distinction can be confusing.

Fortunately, the Supreme Court tackled the issue in the seminal case of Harrington v. Manchester.[1]  In that case the court noted “…a failure to distinguish between what is necessary to vest the right of passage in the public and what is necessary to constitute an acceptance such as will render the city or municipality responsible for the construction and maintenance of the streets.”[2]

This distinction can be quite important in a number of contexts, one being so-called paper streets.  Although a municipality may not have the obligation to maintain a paper street, certain persons, or even the public at large, may have the right of passage.[3]  In this article I describe the two types of acceptance and propose the adoption of two terms, acceptance-for-use and acceptance-for-maintenance.

 Acceptance-for-Use

Recording a plan and conveying lots in accordance with the plan constitutes an unequivocal intention to dedicate the streets shown on the plan to public use.  This act also creates certain rights in abutters, which is beyond the scope of this article.[4]  Once so dedicated, and assuming no other facts exist indicating the owner does not unequivocally manifest an intention “to abandon his property and dedicate it to public use,” the public has the immediate right to take the street for public use.  At this stage, the public would have no right to use the dedicated street for public use; the public still needs to accept the street.

If the public right of passage over the street would be beneficial to the public, public acceptance will be presumed in the absence of some burdensome condition imposed by the donor.  In the Harrington case, the public right of passage was beneficial because it relieved the municipality of the obligation to pay damages to the abutters should the municipality formally create a highway at a later date through the lay out process, which is what happened in that case.  In most cases, therefore, dedication of a street immediately gives the public the right of passage over the street.

Acceptance-for-Maintenance

Imposing the obligation to maintain a street on a municipality is another matter.  The need for a separate, distinct act of acceptance by municipalities for purposes of maintaining a street is clear:  “…it would be a great hardship upon towns if an individual could lay out a way upon his own land, throw it open to the public, and then oblige the town to charge themselves with the maintenance and repairs of it.”[5]

A municipality ordinarily accepts a dedicated road today by town meeting vote or by affirmative action of the board of mayor and aldermen or city council; however, other methods exist by which a municipality may be deemed to have accepted a road for maintenance purposes.  Some of these theories are old, yet none have been eliminated by the General Court or the Supreme Court.  In fact, the ability of a municipality to accept a road via town meeting vote simply is the newest method, having been created by the General Court in 1945.   A court may deem a road accepted if the municipality repairs the road or if the public uses the road for twenty years, coupled with municipal maintenance.

i)  By Local Legislative Action

A municipality may accept a dedicated road by town meeting vote or its equivalent.  The legislature created this power in 1945 when it re-introduced dedication and acceptance as a mode of creating a highway.  Although the Supreme Court stated the purpose of the 1945 amendment was “to enable municipalities to accept dedicated streets with only a formal vote,” the Court did not say this was the exclusive manner in which municipalities could accept dedicated streets.[6]  In fact, at least one case after 1945 acknowledged twenty years public use could constitute acceptance[7] and another acknowledged some threshold of public use, without reference to the need for it to continue for twenty years, could constitute acceptance.[8]

Planning boards do not have the power to accept roads.  Planning Board approval of a subdivision plot does not constitute acceptance by the municipality of any street shown on the plot.

A municipality may accept a street corresponding to one shown on the municipality’s official map or on a subdivision street plat approved by a planning board with platting jurisdiction.  A municipality also may accept a street that received the legal status of a public street prior to the planning board obtaining platting jurisdiction.

Municipalities may accept streets not shown on the official map or on approved plans as long as the ability to do so appears in an “ordinance or other measure.”[9]  The “ordinance or other measure” must be submitted to the planning board for its approval.  If the planning board approves the ordinance, then the ordinance becomes effective upon an affirmative vote of a majority “of the entire membership of the local legislative body.”  If the planning board disapproves the ordinance, then the ordinance requires a two-thirds vote.

A municipality with the town meeting form of government may delegate to the board of selectmen (or other governing body) the authority to accept dedicated streets.  Only municipalities which have conferred upon a planning board platting jurisdiction in accordance with RSA 674:35 may delegate this power.  If such a delegation of authority is made, a board of selectmen may vote to accept any dedicated street only if the street corresponds in its location and lines with a street shown on a subdivision plat or site plan approved by the planning board, or on the municipality’s official map, or on a street plat made and adopted by the planning board. The board of selectmen must hold a public hearing on the proposed acceptance prior to taking action.

One old case holds that Selectmen also may accept a road by laying it out.[10]  Because the layout process is a separate method by which a municipality may assume the responsibility to maintain a road, this form of acceptance probably holds little meaning.

For cities, the city council or board of mayor and aldermen must accept the dedicated road.  Practitioners should obtain copies of minutes to establish acceptance.  Do not rely on the word of a clerk.

RSA 231:51 gives the governing body of municipalities (versus the legislative body) the power to release a street from all public servitude unless the street is opened, built, or used for public travel within twenty years from dedication.  Being “opened, built or used for public travel” means either the street is formally accepted by vote of the legislative body or a use commences which may ripen into acceptance.  Failure to accept such streets, lanes or alleys “deprives the public of any independent right it has in the road,” provided the local governing body so votes.[11]   Private rights, such as implied easements, remain unaffected.

ii)  By Municipal Repair of Road

Under common law, the selectmen could accept a road by authorizing its repair, erecting signs or by “any other official act of recognition.”[12]  In addition, towns could accept a road by voting to raise money for its repair or by performing “any other act recognizing an obligation to repair.”[13]  Road repair as evidence of acceptance fell victim to the imposition of the twenty year rule in 1842; however, evidence of road repair may be relevant again today following the re-codification of dedication and acceptance in 1945.

iii)  By Twenty Years Use

While public use of a dedicated road for less than twenty years may establish acceptance, twenty years public use “may furnish conclusive evidence of acceptance.”[14]  Before 1913, “an offer of dedication created a permanently vested right in the town to accept [a dedicated] street.”[15]  Between 1913 and July 16, 1989, a road could be accepted only if it was opened, built or used for public travel within twenty years of dedication.  Beginning July 16, 1989, the power to accept a road may be terminated after twenty years by vote of the governing body of the municipality.

Use of a road that ultimately may ripen into acceptance may commence, therefore, in the nineteenth year following dedication and arguably need not continue for twenty years.  One reason this is possible is the Supreme Court’s ruling that the “20 years prior to January 1, 1968” language in RSA 229:1 applies to prescription only.  If the language applied to all types of uses, whether prescriptive or the type that historically ripened into acceptance, then acceptance by use would not be valid today, unless the use began twenty years before January 1, 1968.  Under the current version of RSA 231:51, if a use commences, say, in the twenty-first year following dedication, that use still may ripen into acceptance, but the governing body of a municipality may terminate the power of acceptance prior to that point.

Occasional use is insufficient to constitute public acceptance of a dedicated way.  For example, occasional, seasonal use of a paved path to the ocean is insufficient for public acceptance, especially where abutters, tenants, friends and neighbors make up most of the use.  Limited use of land by neighboring owners without express permission does not constitute public acceptance.

Public use of a road for twenty years also may create a presumption that the municipality laid out the road and is obligated to maintain it.  This theory is distinct from the twenty years that may furnish conclusive evidence of acceptance or the twenty years required for prescription or even the twenty years required for custom.  No recent cases have re-stated this theory.

As you can see, the methods by which a municipality can accept a road for purposes of assuming the obligation for its maintenance are more extensive than the type of acceptance that merely bestows upon the public the right of passage.


 

[1] 76 N.H. 347 (1912).

[2] Id. At 349.

[3] Passage rights may be private or public.  In other words, a person may have private rights to use a road as well as rights derived as a member of the public.  This article addresses public rights only.

[4] For a detailed description of these rights, see the author’s article in the New Hampshire Bar Journal entitled “Roads Revisited: The Creation and Termination of Highways in New Hampshire – An Update.”

[5] Atherton, 16 N.H. at 210-11.

[6] See Polizzo, 126 N.H. 398.

[7] McInnis v. Hampton, 112 N.H. 57 (1972).

[8] Young v. Prendiville, 112 N.H. 190 (1972).

[9] RSA 674:40, III.

[10] Hopkins v. Crombie, 4 N.H. 520 (1829).

[11] Duchesnaye, 118 N.H. at 733.

[12] Atherton, 16 N.H. at 210.

[13] Id.

[14] Atherton, 16 N.H. at 209-10; see also Stevens, 46 N.H. at 199.  This twenty-year rule is referenced in McInnis v. Hampton, 112 N.H. 57 at 60 (1972), a case where the plaintiff failed to prove dedication or acceptance (“[s]imilarly, the record does not compel a finding that the town dedicated the lot to public use which the public accepted by use for more than twenty years.”).

[15] Polizzo, 126 N.H. at 402, citing Harrington, 76 N.H. 347.

Filed Under: Road Law

The above information is for informational purposes only and does not constitute legal advice.

Important Registry Updates
Important Court Updates

Subscribe to the Alfano Law Property Rights Alert

Sign Up Now

For Email Newsletters you can trust.
Allobar Strategies

NH Tax Abatement

  • Road Law Guide
  • NH Tax Abatement
    • Tax Abatement Team
    • Grounds for Abatement
    • Municipal Application
    • Owners of Properties Outside New Hampshire
    • Transfer Tax Allocation
    • Recent Laws and Rulings
  • Resources and Links
    • Allobar Strategies
    • Calendar and Key Dates
    • Equalization Ratio
    • NAPTA
  • Covid-19 Updates

NH Real Estate Law Articles

  • Court Updates
  • Covid-19
  • Estate Planning
  • General
  • Legislation
  • New Hampshire Property Tax Alerts
  • Property Investments
  • Property Tax Law
  • Real Estate Law
  • Road Law
  • Taxes

Recent News Letters

March 2020

December 2019

November 2019

October 2019

August 2019

July 2019

May 2019

Recent Articles

NH Supreme Court Holds that Tenants’ Right of First Offer to Purchase Rented Property can be Triggered by the Owners’ Intent to Sell.

It is common for residential leases to include options … [Read More...]

March 1 is the Deadline to Request a Refund of New Hampshire Property Taxes

March 1, 2021 is the deadline to challenge your 2020 real … [Read More...]

NHPVRTA SUBMITS DRAFT OF NEW BILL ON PRIVATE ROADS TO THE NH SENATE

New Hampshire Private Road Taxpayers Alliance (NHPVRTA) is a … [Read More...]

Understanding Commercial Site Planning in New Hampshire

Obtaining a rezoning of property to a commercial zoning … [Read More...]

Article Archives

  • February 2021
  • January 2021
  • December 2020
  • November 2020
  • October 2020
  • September 2020
  • August 2020
  • July 2020
  • June 2020
  • May 2020
  • April 2020
  • March 2020
  • February 2020
  • January 2020
  • December 2019
  • November 2019
  • October 2019
  • September 2019
  • August 2019
  • July 2019
  • June 2019
  • May 2019
  • April 2019
  • March 2019
  • February 2019
  • January 2019
  • December 2018
  • November 2018
  • October 2018
  • September 2018
  • August 2018
  • July 2018
  • June 2018
  • May 2018
  • April 2018
  • March 2018
  • October 2017
  • May 2017
  • April 2017
  • March 2017
  • February 2017
  • January 2017
  • November 2016
  • October 2016
  • September 2016
  • August 2016
  • June 2016
  • April 2016
  • March 2016
  • January 2016
  • December 2015
  • October 2015
  • September 2015
  • August 2015
  • July 2015
  • June 2015
  • May 2015
  • April 2015
  • March 2015
  • February 2015
  • January 2015
  • December 2014
  • November 2014
  • September 2014
  • August 2014
  • June 2013
  • February 2012
  • December 2011
  • May 2011
  • July 2010
  • December 2005
  • Facebook
  • LinkedIn
  • Twitter

Alfano Law Office, PLLC, 4 Park Street, Concord, NH 03301 USA | Phone: (603) 856-8411
Copyright © 2021 · Alfano Law Office, PLLC. All Rights Reserved · Website design by InterActive Synergy, LLC

Sign up to receive our FREE Road Law Guide

Everything you need to know about navigating public and private road laws in New Hampshire.

    This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.