07/09/2012 Council Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Search

In re Cartway Petition |u\y9,2[O2 Page 8 of 9 of-way, private improvements and the full before and after anaLysis for each parcel. Minn. StaL'5ll7.O36. Nevertheless, based on the appraisal of the affected property owners. it appears that the total value of the taking will be between approximately $747,987.25 (65'652 + 519,080.25 + 163,255) and 5911,242.25(65.652 + 519,080.25 + ]26'510). depending on the issue of public hunting'. Based upon statute, Mr. Johnson must pay the minimum of $747,987.25 in estimated damages before the cartway is opened. Minn. StaL§43537'subd.l(c). As detaiLed above, the present measure of damages is likely to be ioxve, than the actual damages. An appraisal for each of the parcels will need to be completed to fully address the full amount of severance damages in this case. The City also has discretionary authority to require Mr. !ohnson to post a bond or other security for the total estimated damages before the City takes action on the petition. Given the amount of damages, if the City chooses to proceed with the taking for a public cartway, the Association requests that the City Council require that a bond be posted for the current total estimated damages and act upon the petition once a more thorough appraisal is completed by the City pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 117.036. If Mr. Johnson is unable to post the bond, the Association requests that the City Councit deny the petition. VI. Maintenance ofthe Cartway Once a cartway is established it becomes a public road open to any member of the public to use it. Rask u Town Bd. Ofh/endn/nl 173 Minn. 575 (Minn. 1978). However, construction and maintenance of the cartway is the responsibility of the petitioner. Minn.Stat. §435.37` subd. 1 (d). In this case, the road has already been constructed and is a 3 This taking is analogous to a property with a tennis court or house on it. If the City were to take the tennis court or house for public use by eminent domain, it is reasonable that the city would not only pay for the value of the land beneath the tennis court or house and for the reduction in value of the property losing the tennis court or house, but that the City would also be required to pay the property owner for the value of the private improvement that is the tennis court or house. Sinniiar|y, here in addition to the reduction in the home values that is attributable to being on a public road instead of a private road, the City must also reimburse the property owners for the current value of the privately built roadway, curbs and gutters and other improvements.