Agenda - Planning Commission - 05/07/1996

Home

Z.B. April 15, 1996 -- Page 3 would be hazardous to the residential tract if the two retained direct access because of heavy petrochemical traffic on the highway that bordered the in- dustrial tract. The court upheld the city's actions. It awarded Taub damages for the land the city took, but found there was no damage to the remainder. Taub appealed. The appeals court affirmed the trial court's decision, saying the evidence supported the finding of no remainder damages. According tO the court, the evidence showed the ditch would upgrade the property from a 100-year flood plain to a 500-year flood plain; the resulting enhanced development opportu- nities offset any damage to the remainder. However, the case was sent back to the trial court to correct unrelated errors in the judgment. · Taub appealed to the state Supreme Court, which affirmed the appeals court's decision regarding the zoning issues. However, it sent the case back to the appeals court to reconsider the remainder damages. The Supreme Court said the drainage ditch benefited the whole community, and did not give Taub any special benefits to offset any remainder damages. It also said Taub's remain- der damages were not the cost of building a bridge. Instead, they should have been measured as any decrease in the remainder's market value after the' taking: DECISION: Sent back to trial court for entry of corrected judgment. The trial court's judgment Was affirmed again, but it still had to correct some errors that were irrelevant to this appeal. The city appraiser's testimony supported the finding of no remainder dam- ages, and Taub's evidende was not strong enough to overcome it. Taub did not claim any decrease in fair market value, which would have been the correct way to measure damages. Even if direct access were hindered, the two tracts still had reasonable alternative access to each other. Because access was not "materially and substantially impaired," Taub was not entitled to remainder damages. Taub v. City of Deer Park' 882 S. W. 2d 824 (1994). Taking -- New Median Strip Restricts property's Highway Access County of Anoka v. Mhego Inc., 541 N.W. 2d 375 (Minnesota) 1996 Blaine State Bank leased property next to the northbound lane of University Avenue in Anoka County, Minn. The property was accessible from both traf- fic lanes. -The county wanted to widen the road and build a concrete median strip down the center. It filed eminent domain proceedings to acquire property for the project. The county took some of the bank's property, and court-appointed commissioners awarded the bank damages. In addition to direct damages for the taking, the bank got severance damages (the difference between the property's fair market value before and after the taking). After the county built the median strip, southbound travelers could not directly turn into the bank's property. The bank and the county both appealed to court. The bank said it should have been compensated for the restriction of highway access to only one lane.