Undersized waterfront lots that provide access to the water for larger residential lots across the street are not uncommon. These undersized waterfront lots were often created long before zoning and subdivision regulations were adopted. In this property tax appeal case, a .02 acre waterfront lot, including two docks and a deck, in common ownership with the 6.01 acre residential parcel across the street, was assessed as one lot. The residential parcel had no road frontage; instead, it had access to the road via a right-of-way through another owner's parcel. The property owner appealed, arguing that the two lots should be assessed separately.
The town defended its assessments on the ground that the highest and best use of the petitioner's two properties is as an assemblage. The "doctrine of assemblage" applies when the highest and best use of separate parcels involves their integrated use with lands of another; in this case, the undersized waterfront parcel with docks and access to the water used together with the larger residential parcel located away from the water.
Resolution of this case depended on the meaning of RSA 75:9, which provides that "whenever two or more tracts of land which do not adjoin or are situated so as to become separate estates have the same owners," they must be assessed separately. The town argued that two lots separated by a road could "adjoin" for purposes of RSA 75:9 and, thus, assessing the lots as one was appropriate. The Court observed that, in this case, the two lots were not in physical contact with each other, given that they were connected by a private right-of-way over intervening land of a third party as well as a public road. The Court rejected the contention that contact with or connection by a right-of-way renders two lots "adjoining" for purposes of RSA 75:9, and held that RSA 75:9 prohibits the assemblage of non-adjoining parcels for appraisal.