2. County Road 17/Horace - Laserfiche WebLink

"(r)ecent events which have presented an opportunity to examine the county's practices and policies regarding highways through cities." However, the statutes cited above would clearly contradict any conclusion that "North Dakota law gives the authority over city streets to the city regardless of a county highway designation. " When County Engineer Berndt appeared before the Horace City Council, statements were made that were not accurate representations of North Dakota law with respect to right of access to county highways. The Horace City Council made decisions entirely consistent with (a) the property rights of the adjacent owners, (b) Cass County's legal rights with respect to Cass County Highway 17, and ( c) the future needs of this community - which covers an area larger than just Horace, North Dakota. Under N.D.C.C. S 24-05-16, any changes in Cass County, North Dakota's designated county road system has to be justified and based on new developments, with notice to the director of transportation. It is difficult to see how new appreciation for laws or legal concepts that have been in existence since before statehood [1889] could be considered "new developments" justifying removal of either highway from the county's road system. If limiting access to a Cass County highway is necessary, North Dakota law allows for the proper exercise of eminent domain so as to achieve a "controlled-access facility." This has not been done, nor even suggested by any representative ofCass County, North Dakota. Our City Attorney has brought to our attention the decision of the North Dakota Supreme Court in Boehm v. Backes, 493 N.W.2d 671, 673-674 (N.D. 1992) which recognizes, among other things: "[A] property owner has a right of access to abutting highways and streets." Cady at 469; Yegen v. City of Bismarck, 291 N.W.2d 422 (N.D.1980). Cady ruled that the right of access is "a private right which entitles the abutting land owner [to] just compensation ifthatrightis impaired or destroyed." 472 N.W.2d at 469. Under NDCC 24-01-32, the Department may acquire rights of access. This same decision recognizes that abutting landowners are entitled to "free and convenient access to his property," and identified three other earlier Supreme Court decisions that recognized that "substantial interference with direct access to the nearby thoroughfare (will) result in a compensable taking as a matter oflaw .." 3