Benefits and Damages Statement

Transcription

1 Sibley County Drainage Authority: RE: Sibley County Minnesota County Ditch No. 46 Redetermination of Benefits October 11, 2017 In accordance with the Minnesota Statute 103E.351 law, we herewith submit the following Viewers' Report: Benefits and Damages Statement This report covers the redetermination of benefits for a previously constructed drainage system. The basis for determining benefits and damages is, therefore, based upon a comparison of the conditions that would have existed prior to the ditch system s construction with those that do exist with the drainage system in a reasonable state of repair. Sibley County Ditch No. 46 was originally established around The drainage system consisted of a shallow open ditch drainage system with a main tile and one tile branches. The system serves as an outlet to properties in sections 16, 20, 21, 22, and 28 of Kelso Township, in Sibley County. The outlet of County Ditch No. 46 was into Rush River. Other repair and maintenance has been done to the system. Supporting documentation for the analysis and conclusions of the report are contained in our files. The figures stated herein are based on a full and fair consideration of all pertinent facts and information that we were aware of at the time of this appraisal. The following aids were used during the viewing process. 1. Soil Survey Manuals and Maps of Sibley County. 2. GIS Aerial Photos and Data 3. USGS Topographical Maps 4. Yield averages and production costs taken from Minnesota State College and University Farm Management Records 5. Sales data from the Sibley County Assessor's office 6. Visual inspection of each 40-acre tract Land classification benefit values are based upon an increase in the potential for agricultural production as a result of constructing the drainage project and reconciled with sales value increases. Existing individual land management practices were not considered. All present land use was evaluated under estimated best land management practice. Special consideration was given to areas, which were considered to be in a native/non-converted condition or identified as wetlands under wetlands inventory and restricted from drainage by state or federal regulations. Benefits for lands used for industrial agricultural purposes, such as large bin sites or hog production facilities, have been determined with consideration of the drainage system providing an outlet for the accelerated runoff and for a different land use.

2 Valuation Prior To Drainage Beginning land use, property value, and economic productivity have been determined with the consideration that the benefited properties within the watershed currently do not have an adequate outlet for artificial drainage. "A" -- Standing water or cattails, wetland classification with a market value for agricultural purposes of $0.00 per acre, economic productivity of $0.00. "B" -- Seasonally flooded/pasture ground. Pasture classification with a market value of $ to $ per acre, economic productivity of $ based on grazing days and/or hay values. "C" -- Wet subsoil -- Marginal crop land, low to medium crop land classification with a market value of $ to $ per acre, annual economic productivity of $ based upon average annual yield of 80 % of optimum with $ production costs. "D" --Upland areas not needing artificial drainage but irregular in shape and intermixed with wetter soils. Medium to high cropland classification with a market value of $ to $ per acre, annual economic productivity of $ based upon average annual yield of 95% of optimum with $ production costs. Valuation with NRCS Guideline Drainage Potential land use, property value, and economic productivity, after public and private drainage have been installed and with the restrictive existing tile drainage system in a reasonable state of repair, using current crop rotation, income, and expense: "A" -- Seasonally ponded agricultural ground. Low cropland classification with a market value range of $ to $ per acre, annual economic productivity of $ based upon average annual yield of 92 % of optimum with $ production costs. "B" -- Occasionally flooded agricultural ground. Medium cropland classification with a market value range of $ to $ per acre, economic productivity of $ based upon average annual yield of 96 % of optimum with $ production costs. "C" -- Wet subsoil. Medium high cropland classification with a market value range of $ to $ per acre, annual economic productivity of $ based upon average annual yield of 100 % of optimum with $ production costs. "D" --Upland areas not needing artificial drainage, but irregular in shape and intermixed with wetter soils. Medium to high cropland classification with a market value range of $ to $ per acre, annual economic productivity of $ based upon average annual yield of 99 % of optimum with $347.11production costs. Special consideration is given to areas where the ditch only provides an outlet adequate to convert the lands to pasture or hay land and are restricted from further individual improvements by regulatory restrictions. Consideration of benefits for commercial development, whether utilized for commercial agriculture, livestock confinement, or other commercial use, has been developed based upon the property s individual use. Road benefits were determined with consideration of the reduced construction and maintenance costs that would be realized after construction of the drainage system improvement. Based upon recent land sales and utilizing these productive values, potential benefit values were

3 determined for the system based upon a 25-year effective life with proper maintenance, private improvement cost depreciated over the same 25-year period, and an allowance of 0.5% return on the system investment. Adjustment was made to each land class based upon consideration of the change in hydraulic capacity and the subsequent increased market value and productivity that the construction of the drainage system improvement provides. Benefit values were rounded off to an even percentage benefit increase for ease of computation. Example: "B" Benefits per Acre Potential productivity Value $ Adjustment for 96% economic efficiency $ Production Cost Beginning Productivity Value Change in Productivity Value Private Improvement ($850/25) (Waterway or tile) Annual Benefit Value $ $ x 25 years, 0.5% = $ Rounded to $ The drainage system, as currently exists, does not have adequate size and capacity to meet the NRCS recommended tile drainage capacities for agricultural drainage. Adjustment to the potential benefit value is made by the application a hydraulic consideration and parcel s proximity to the public ditch system. The net benefit provided by the ditch system is determined by the potential benefit value being applied to the number of acres determined to be in each class per tract, accumulating the sum of these benefit values, and then applying the proximity rate adjustment. As the drainage system is all tile no buffer strip is required by Minnesota Statute No. 103E.021. Respectfully submitted, Ron Ringquist Allen Kerber John Dotolo

4 SIBLEY COUNTY MINNESOTA COUNTY DITCH NO. 46 INCOME APPROACH TO VALUE WORKSHEET PRODUCTION INCOME CROP AVERAGE SALES GROSS ROTATION ADJUSTED PLANTED YIELD VALUE INCOME PERCENTAGE INCOME CORN 180 BU SOYBEANS 50 BU $ DIRECT PRODUCTION EXPENSE CROP PRODUCTION ROTATION ADJUSTED PLANTED COST PERCENTAGE EXPENSE CORN SOYBEANS $ BENEFIT VALUE CALCULATION PRODUCTION CAPABILITY BASED UPON CONSTRUCTED DRAINAGE SYSTEM MEETING N.R.C.S. RECOMMENDED DESIGN STANDARDS LAND CLASS "A" "B" "C" "D" % PRODUCTION 92.0% 96.0% 100.0% 99.0% GROSS INCOME PRODUCTION COST NET INCOME PREVIOUS INCOME INCREASED INCOME PVT TILE COST NET ANNUAL INCREASE CAPITALIZED FOR % BENEFIT VALUE $ $ $ $570.00

5 SIBLEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA October 11, 2017 COUNTY DITCH NO. 46 "A-" "A" "B" "C" "D-" "D" $100, $4, $4, $2, $2, $2, $ % 60% 75% 85% 90% 90% $1, $2, $2, $1, $2, $ $2.25 NONCOVERTED PARCEL IN POTENTIAL GROSS PROXIMITY NET MAINT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT TILE TILE OR RESTRICTED NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION SEC T-N R-W TRACT BENEFITS BENEFITS RATE BENEFITS COST ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE FOOTAGE BENEFIT WETLAND ACRES FREDERIC & MARLYES LATZKE SESE SWSE FREDERIC & MARLYES LATZKE SESE RONALD REGENSCHEID NENW SENW AVE FREDERIC W & MARLYS K LATZKE NWNE GLEN REGENSCHEID REVOCABLE TRT NENE SENE ST DELANO QUAST SWNE " " ST NWSE SWSE DONALD L & JUDITH PFARR SENE NESE AVE SESE AVIS M JACOBUS E2SE AVE FREDERIC W LATZKE_SR NESW NWSW Sibley CD# 46 Sheet 1

6 SIBLEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA October 11, 2017 COUNTY DITCH NO. 46 "A-" "A" "B" "C" "D-" "D" $100, $4, $4, $2, $2, $2, $ % 60% 75% 85% 90% 90% $1, $2, $2, $1, $2, $ $2.25 NONCOVERTED PARCEL IN POTENTIAL GROSS PROXIMITY NET MAINT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT TILE TILE OR RESTRICTED NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION SEC T-N R-W TRACT BENEFITS BENEFITS RATE BENEFITS COST ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE FOOTAGE BENEFIT WETLAND ACRES BEATRICE A MEYER SWSW SESW CLAIRMONT N NE ATLANTA GA HEIDI & NICHOLAS PILACINSKI NWNW SWNW AVE RONALD REGENSCHEID NWNW SWNW AVE GLEN REGENSCHEID REVOCABLE TRT NWNW SWNW ST RONALD REGENSCHEID NWSW AVE GLEN REGENSCHEID REVOCABLE TRT NWSW ST LAURA L RENNEKE NESW ST KENNETH A & CAROL D RENNEKE NWSW ST ORVILLE L PIOSKE TRUST NWNW AVE Sibley CD# 46 Sheet 2

7 SIBLEY COUNTY, MINNESOTA October 11, 2017 COUNTY DITCH NO. 46 "A-" "A" "B" "C" "D-" "D" $100, $4, $4, $2, $2, $2, $ % 60% 75% 85% 90% 90% $1, $2, $2, $1, $2, $ $2.25 NONCOVERTED PARCEL IN POTENTIAL GROSS PROXIMITY NET MAINT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT TILE TILE OR RESTRICTED NUMBER NAME DESCRIPTION SEC T-N R-W TRACT BENEFITS BENEFITS RATE BENEFITS COST ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE ACRES VALUE FOOTAGE BENEFIT WETLAND ACRES EDWARD K PIOSKE & NWNW JAMES L PIOSKE ST GAYLORD MN TODD & KRISTIN D NEPPER SENW ST LORRAINE AALAND & NENW EVELYN DAHLKE 314 PARKVIEW CURVE ZUMBROTA MN MELVIN W & BEULAH M SULLIVAN NENE NWNE ENCHANTED ROCK TRL MCKINNEY TX SIBLEY COUNTY COUNTY DITCH NO. 46 "A" "B" SOILS "C" SOILS "D" SOILS OTHER ROAD AUTHORITY LENGTH BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT BENEFIT LOCATION SEC T-N R-W (FEET) % % VALUE % VALUE % VALUE VALUE R SIBLEY COUNTY CSAH # 9 per foot COURT AVE East of Sec GAYLORD MN East of Sec per foot R KELSO TOWNSHIP 310th Street MARLYS LATZKE DEPUTY CLERK North of Sec LESUEUR MN th Street North of Sec North of Sec st Ave East of Sec LAND BENEFITS ROAD BENEFITS TOTAL BENEFITS Sibley CD# 46 Sheet 3