01/04/1988 Park Board Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

"Notice that this takings doctrine is tied to an assumption that the right to compensation, and the amount to be paid, can be determined by examining the economic effects that occur solely within the physical boundaries of one's property. Sure- ly it is naive, however, to suppose that one who profits from a piece of property necessarily uses only those resources with- in his boundaries, and equally naive to think the consequences of one property user' s activities are confined to his property. Property does not exist in isolation. Particular parcels are tied to one another in complex ways, and property is more accut-. rately described as being inextricably part of a network of relationships that is neither limited. to, nor usefully defined by, the property boundaries with which the legal system is ac- customed to dealing. Frequently, use of any given parcel of n property is at the same time effectively a use of, or a demand upon, property beyond the border of the user. "*8 The court in Jordan V. Village of Menomonee Falls also noted. the benefits of platting accruing to the land owner as a basis for dedica- tions . r "The test of reasonableness is always applicable to any attempt to exercise the police power. The basis for upholding a compulsory land.-dedication requirement in a platting ordin- anoe is this: The municipality by approval of a proposed sub- division plat enables the subdivider to profit financially by selling the subdivision lots as home-building sites and thus realizing a greater price than could have been obtained if he had sold his property as unplatted. lands. In return -for this benefit the municipality may. require him to dedicate part of his platted land to meet a demand to which the municipality (S)