2012-05-23 CC Packet - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

district court's credibility determinations, Alstores, 286 Minn. at 353, 176 N.W.2d at 118, and we conclude that the evidence sustains the district court's findings rejecting Schwab's appraisal and crediting Almer's testimony on the release of the flooding easement. Herman's appraisal The city also argues that the district court erred by crediting Herman's appraisal, maintaining that it is unreliable because she used valuation comparables of property already improved with infrastructure, rather than completely unimproved property. The supreme court has observed that "the priority and quantum of reliance [on a valuation approach] depends on the facts of each case." Lewis & Harris v. Cnty. of Hennepin, 516 N.W.2d 177, 180 (Minn. 1994). The district court found that although "generally speaking, a market analysis of sales of similar unimproved properties would be more useful.... Given that the court has determined that it cannot rely on those sales selected by Schwab, the court has no such market analysis before it." In this context, based on the district court's findings and the record evidence, we conclude that the district court did not err in determining that Herman's approach generally "result[ed] in a fair approximation of the increase in market value" due to the assessment. Eagle Creek Townhomes, LLP v. City of Shakopee, 614 N.W.2d 246, 251 (Minn. App. 2000) (quotation omitted), review denied (Minn. Sept. 13, 2000). The city also argues that Herman's appraisal did not provide the court sufficient evidence on which to base the two adjustments it made in the pre- improvement value of the property; specifically, the removal of a $26,000 credit to Sheehy from the city based 15 28