The Minnesota Supreme Court recently ruled on a significant case involving the establishment of cartways, which are public roads that provide access to landlocked properties. The case, Bryce Holstad et al. v. Town of May (Docket A24-1113), centers on the rights of landowners seeking access to their property and the authority of local towns to determine the routes of these cartways. The decision impacts landowners in similar situations across Minnesota, clarifying how towns can manage cartway requests.

In this case, Bryce and Jody Holstad, who own a 2.5-acre landlocked property in the Town of May, petitioned the town to establish a cartway that would provide them access to their land. After their request was denied, they appealed the town's decision, which had chosen an alternative route deemed more suitable. The court's ruling underscores the balance between property rights and local government authority in managing public access.

Background

The Holstads have owned their landlocked property along the St. Croix River for years, but it has never had roadway access. After unsuccessful negotiations with neighboring property owners for a private easement, they petitioned the Town of May to establish a cartway under Minnesota Statutes section 164.08. This statute allows landowners without access to public roads to request a cartway, which is a type of public road.

The Town of May conducted public hearings and evaluated the Holstads' proposed cartway route, which involved using an existing private driveway. However, the Town's engineer proposed an alternative route that was shorter and avoided steep slopes and drop-offs, which raised safety concerns. The Town ultimately approved the engineer's route, requiring the Holstads to construct the cartway to specific standards and pay for all associated costs, including attorney fees.

The Ruling

The Minnesota Supreme Court upheld the Town of May's decision, affirming that the Town did not act arbitrarily or capriciously in selecting the alternative cartway route. The court ruled, "A cartway established under Minnesota Statutes section 164.08, subdivision 2(a), must be at least two rods wide, regardless of the size of the parcel it connects." The court also noted that the Town acted within its statutory authority by requiring the Holstads to meet specific construction standards and obtain necessary regulatory approvals.

The justices emphasized that the Town's decision was based on thorough investigations and public hearings, where all parties had the opportunity to present their views. The court found that the alternative route was less disruptive and damaging to the affected landowners, thereby serving the public interest. The ruling also confirmed that the Town could require the Holstads to pay for the cartway's construction and the Town's attorney fees, which totaled approximately $95,500.

Impact

This ruling has significant implications for landowners in Minnesota seeking access to landlocked properties. It clarifies that towns have the discretion to choose cartway routes based on public safety and welfare considerations. The decision reinforces the authority of local governments to manage cartway requests, ensuring that the routes selected are safe and less intrusive to neighboring properties.

Additionally, the ruling sets a precedent regarding the financial responsibilities of landowners who seek cartways. The court's decision indicates that landowners may be held accountable for the costs associated with establishing cartways, including construction and legal fees, which could deter some from pursuing such requests in the future.

What's Next

Following this ruling, the Holstads may face challenges in constructing the approved cartway due to the significant financial burden imposed by the Town. While the decision can be appealed, the court's affirmation of the Town's authority suggests that further legal challenges may be difficult. Details were not available in the court filing regarding any related cases pending.