CCP 04-14-2003 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

() --, \ ) . . To determine whether the assessment exceeds any special benefits. one needs to look at what, if any, special benefits the proposed Ingerson Court improvement affords the Association members and/or whether the improvement increases the market value of the Association's property. . A functional roadway already exists and building a new roadway in itself does not necessarily convey a special benefit The Association members that typically use the property travel to the property by foot, not by vehicles. A new roadway will not provide any new benefit to these members or if it does provide a benefit, its value is negligible. The current configuration and structure of Ingerson Court provides the necessary means for members to access the Association's property. Returning to what the Minnesota Cowts have held that the market value should be determined by what a willing buyer would pay a willing seller for the property before and then after the construction of the improvement, one first has to determine: (I) how much a willing buyer would pay for the vacant property if it already has a roadway that provides access to the property and to the lake; (2) if the property is subject to an easement for use held by others that cannot be removed by the Association and (3) the property cannot be developed due to the requirements of the City's Shoreland Ordinance. The critical determination is then how much a willing buyer would pay for the same property with some roadway improvements that would (1) not provide better land or lake access; (2) would not cure the easement the property is subject to, and (3) due to the requirements of the City's Shoreland Ordinance, would not make the property developable. We do not believe a buyer would be willing to pay more for the Association property due to the proposed improvements to Ingerson Court. . Because the proposed improvements do not increase the market value of the Association's property and the proposed assessment for improvement to Ingerson Court exceeds any special benefit to the property, thus, failing to meet the applicable legal standards, the City should delete the Association's property from its Assessment Roll. ~ As to the City's third criteria that the proposed assessment produces unfair and undesirable results and thus, should be removed from the City's Assessment Roll; from a review of the assessments assessed against homeowners in the roadway project at issue, it appears that the assessments proposed to be levied against homeowners amount to less than 3% of the market value of the assessed properties. However, in the case of the property owned by the Association, even assuming the Council agrees that the assessment should only be for ownership of96 feet of property along the City's right-of- way on Ingerson Court as opposed to 1565 feet, the proposed assessment is 41 % of the property valne based upon the 2003 assessed valuation of the Association's property_ If the City maintains the $7,355.50 assessment that would be 66.9% of the property value based upon the 2003 assessed valuation of the Association's property. Clearly, assessing a small undeveloped, and undevelopable, piece of property 41 % of its property value, . 3