Consider Petition for a Cartway to Access Thorn Lake Property (PID #04-32-25-31-0001); Case of Thomas and Pattiann Kurak

On August 18, 2021 the City received an official petition from Thomas and Pattiann Kurak seeking a cartway access to a landlocked, forty (40) acre parcel they own.  The property is located north of 175th Avenue, east of Chameleon Street, and south of 178th Lane (the "Subject Property").  The purpose of this case is to present the official petition for cartway access to the Subject Property, outline the options, and attempt to address any questions the City Council may have.  Within 30 days of this meeting date, the City Council will need to issue an order describing the designated location of said cartway and call for a public hearing to be scheduled. 

Under Minnesota statute, if a property owner has no legal access to a public road leading to their property, cartway statute states the municipality’s governing body must grant access from a public road. That access — which is called a cartway — must be at least 33 feet wide and no more than half-mile long. (Language from brainerddispatch.com)

Notification is not required to receive the petition for cartway.  However, notice to potentially impacted property owners, as well as the Department of Natural Resources (the Subject Property contains a public water), will be required in advance of the next meeting that this topic will be discussed. 

Minnesota State Statute 435.37 (Easement for Cartway) outlines the process for processing a petition for a cartway.  Should the City grant the cartway, it shall be not less than thirty-three (33) feet in width.  The steps are as follows:

1. The petitioner shall file a petition for a cartway with the City Clerk (completed).
2. The petition is presented to the City Council (current step) 'accept' the petition (the purpose of this case). 
3. The Council shall, within 30 days of receiving the petition, issue an order describing where the cartway will go and set a hearing date. 
4. The City Council conducts a public hearing and determines whether to grant the petition. 

There are several factors that are important to note regarding a cartway petition.  First, the petitioner, not the City, is responsible for providing the notice to affected landowners and said notice must be personally served by the petitioner.  Secondly, since the Subject Property contains a public water, the petitioner shall also serve said notice, by certified mail, to the Minnesota Department of Natural Resources (due to the public water, the notice shall be served to the DNR at least 60 days in advance of the public hearing).  The petitioner is responsible for all damages, which includes compensation to the owner of the land upon which the cartway is established together with the cost of professional services, such as delineating wetlands, surveying, appraisals, hearing costs, recording costs, etc., before the cartway can be 'opened'.  Finally, the City must use the route requested by the petitioner unless the City determines both that an alternative route will be less disruptive and damaging to neighbors and that an alternative route is in the public's best interest.

Potential Cartway Routes

In general, there are challenges to accessing the Subject Property, regardless of what route is ultimately chosen.  The entirety of the Subject Property is wetland and there is wetland on all abutting lands as well.  Furthermore, the entirety of the Subject Property is within the General Floodplain District, which also extends beyond the boundaries into abutting lands.  Construction of any sort of cartway, which again, would be the petitioner's responsibility, would be expensive due to construction within wetland and wetland mitigation.

The petitioner has requested a route from the proposed new public street in the plat known as Williams Woods (the "Plat") to access the northeast quadrant of the Subject Property.  Since approval of the Williams Woods Preliminary Plat was not contingent upon inclusion of an access to the Subject Property, this cannot be made a condition of approval of that Final Plat.  Thus, the petitioner's requested route, which would be through upland and wetland area, would appear to have greater negative impacts than two other alternative routes.

There are two public parks that could also be considered as alternative routes to the Subject Property.  One is Caroline Acres Park, off of 178th Lane.  This option likely presents the greatest amount of impact to wetland area (the majority of the park is wetland, plus the privately owned parcel south of the park is all wetland) and also represents a longer route than the other options.  While it is an undeveloped park, there is only forty (40) feet of frontage along 178th Lane.  If a thirty-three (33) foot cartway was opened, it would greatly impact future access and/or options for this parkland. 

Shawn Acres Park is to the southwest of the Subject Property.  This is also an undeveloped park with wetland (approximately the eastern 50% of it is wetland).  However, this route appears to present the least impact to private property (only about 100-150 feet of private property, all of which is wetland, would be impacted, compared to about 500 feet coming from Caroline Acres Park or about 1,000 feet if through the Plat).  While through public parkland, it also appears that this route may result in the least amount of impact to natural resources, which would be in the public's best interests.

Th petitioner confirmed they fully understand state statutes concerning cartways, including their financial obligations and other responsibilities.  The petitioner also informed Staff that they requested access to the northeast corner of their property because this area has the greatest elevation differential between the ground and groundwater making it the most likely location for improvements. The petitioner also informed Staff that they do not have a strong preference for a cartway route and acknowledged that a cartway through Shawn Acres Park to the southwest corner of their property would serve their needs.

The petitioner has been requested to attend the Council meeting to respond to questions as needed.

Costs
As previously noted, any and all costs for the cartway would be the responsibility of the petitioner.  Damages the petitioner would be responsible for may include compensation to the impacted property owner, appraisal(s), surveying, wetland delineation, wetland mitigation, cartway construction, hearing costs, and recording costs. 

At this stage, this is being handled as part of Staff's regular duties.

Staff has no formal recommendation.  However, it appears that an alternative route, that being through Shawn Acres Park, may be less disruptive/impactful to privately owned lands and result in less impact to natural resources.

No formal action is required at this time.  This is an opportunity for the City Council to consider the petition, ask questions, and/or request additional information.