My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2012-05-23 CC Packet
Centerville
>
City Council
>
Agenda Packets
>
1996-2022
>
2012
>
2012-05-23 CC Packet
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/27/2012 8:59:43 AM
Creation date
5/18/2012 1:23:29 PM
Metadata
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
33
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
on a previous assessment, and a $51,000 credit based on the estimate of costs that would <br /> be contributed to Shopek's proposed infrastructure by the City of Lino Lakes. The <br /> factfinder may accept or reject all or part of an expert's opinion. Kundiger v. Prudential <br /> Ins. Co. of Am., 219 Minn. 25, 29, 17 N.W.2d 49, 52 (1944). The district court found <br /> that, although the city did provide such a previous- assessment credit to Sheehy, there was <br /> no evidence that the city had an obligation to do so. The district court also found that <br /> there was insufficient evidence to support Herman's conclusion that the City of Lino <br /> Lakes would contribute one -half the costs of constructing improvements on the east side <br /> of Sheehy's property. The record supports the district court's findings that these two <br /> credits were not properly included in the pre- improvement market value of the property. <br /> The city also argues that the district court improperly failed to consider the cost of <br /> acquiring land from the city or from Lino Lakes, which would be required to construct <br /> the improvements specified in Shopek's testimony. But Shopek's testimony was <br /> admitted only as foundation for Herman's appraisal, neither party presented evidence on <br /> this issue, and the district court appropriately did not speculate by making findings on the <br /> possible cost of such an acquisition. <br /> The city additionally contends that the district court made mathematical errors in <br /> adjusting Herman's pre- improvement appraisal to arrive at the benefit conferred by the <br /> special assessment. The district court adjusted Herman's pre- improvement appraisal <br /> downward by $77,000 to reflect its disallowance of $51,000 Lino Lakes credit and the <br /> $26,000 previous- assessment credit. We agree with the city that the district court clearly <br /> erred by subtracting only $51,000 for the Lino Lakes credit. Shopek testified that the <br /> 16 <br /> 29 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.