Laserfiche WebLink
I <br />MEMORANDOM <br />TO:Mark Bernhardson, City Administrator <br />City of Orono <br />FROM: <br />RE: <br />Thomas J. Barrett, City Attorney <br />City of Orono - LF 3643-091 <br />Regulation of the Ose of Private Property <br />DATS:July 21, 1989 <br />ISSUE <br />If a private road is made public, does the City of Orono <br />have the obligation to pay for the road as improved? <br />CONCLUSION <br />There are no Minnesota cases which specifically address <br />this issue. The City of Orono probably will not be <br />required to compensate the private owners if the_road is <br />opened to the general public because no taking or property <br />has occurred. <br />DISCUSSION AN! ANALYSIS <br />If a private road is made public, does the City of Orono <br />have the obligation to pay for the road as improved? <br />No Minnesota cases specifically address the issue of <br />whether or not the city must compensate the owner of a private <br />road if the city opens the road to use by the general public. <br />It may be argued that no compensation is due to the owner of a <br />private road since no taking has occurred. The City of Orono, <br />by opening the private road to the general public, . <br />exercising its power to regulate all roads in its jurisdiction, <br />and acting pursuant to the easement it has been granted. <br />The courts in the State of Minnesota have not addressed <br />this specific issue. There are two cases in Minnesota which <br />provide a clue as to how the courts in the State of Minnesota <br />would lik.ely rule upon this issue. The first case is Borcher_t <br />V. Villaqe of North Oaks, 264 Minn. 32, 117 N.VP.2d 396 <br />in Borchert, the village of North Oaks prescribed maximum speeds <br />a