Ada County Highway District v. Sharon L. Sharp

Sharon L. Sharp appeals from the district court’s judgment deciding that an order of
condemnation from the Ada County Highway District (ACHD) does not define the nature and
scope of a take and that her property suffered no severance damages. Sharp also appeals from
the district court’s denial of her claim for attorney fees and costs. We affirm.

I.

FACTS AND PROCEDURE

The ACHD decided to widen a portion of Eagle Road between the Eagle Bypass and
State Street in Eagle, Idaho. Sharp owns three contiguous lots on the corner of Eagle Road and
Aikens Street. There are three homes on these lots. Two of the three lots border Eagle Road and
have access driveways to Eagle Road. The third lot has an access driveway to Aikens Street.

It is undisputed that the highest and best use of these three lots is commercial and not
residential. It is further undisputed that the then-existing residential access driveways could not
be implemented for commercial purposes. The ACHD prepared plans for the widening project
that provided Sharp with her current residential access driveways onto Eagle Road. During
subsequent negotiations, Sharp expressed her concern that ACHD was taking all her rights to
future commercial access to Eagle Road, thus greatly devaluing her property. Dick Brown of the
ACHD memorialized Sharp’s concerns in a memorandum stating:

She wants some access to Eagle, other than the one presently in existence on the
corner of Aikens and Eagle Road.

Answer – She may have the access to Eagle Road as it now exists. Once the
property sells, this access will be taken away. Franz Witte said that her loss of
access to Eagle Road would devalue her property. The property was valued at its
present condition. I said I would ask if she could have another access to Eagle
Road, other than the access now on the corner.

Thereafter, Sharp asserts she was told that she could only have the existing residential access to
and from Eagle Road after the widening.

The ACHD offered Sharp $16,258 for a small slice of land they sought to take, but Sharp
declined that offer. On February 19, 1997, ACHD entered an Order of Condemnation regarding
a portion of Sharp’s property bordering Eagle Road. The order included this statement:

[A]ll rights of access to, from, and between the right-of-way of the public way
and all of the contiguous remaining real property of the named owners, or reputed
owners, shall be extinguished and prohibited except for access, if any, in the
project hereinabove described.

On March 6, 1997, ACHD filed its complaint for condemnation, with the order of
condemnation attached. The complaint stated:

ACHD, by this action, seeks to (i) take and condemn a portion of the
Property right-of-way, and (ii) obtain a permanent easement on an additional
portion of the Property, for a public purpose, namely, alignment, reconstruction,
and widening of the North Eagle Road from the Eagle By-Pass to State Street.

The complaint made no mention of condemning access rights to Eagle Road.

Sharp thereafter hired experts to determine the value of her property both before and after
the taking and to estimate just compensation. Mark Richey was hired in July and determined
that the loss of commercial access rights to Eagle Road substantially impacted the value of her
property and determined that just compensation due was $440,000. Roger Wood was also hired
around this time and arrived at a similar conclusion; he estimated just compensation at $390,000. consideration the eventual installation of a traffic light at the intersection of Plaza Street and
Eagle Road, which would prohibit Sharp from accessing Eagle Road for commercial purposes.

ACHD took the position that the Plaza Street signal was not a part of the Eagle Road
widening project and therefore could not be considered in determining the effects on Sharp’s
property. A bench trial was held to decide the classification of Eagle Road and whether the
Plaza Street signal was a part of the project. At trial, ACHD maintained that no part of Sharp’s
right of access was being condemned. As to the effect of the order of condemnation, ACHD’s
counsel argued:

All that order of condemnation says is that all rights of access to and from the
property are taken except for access if any in the project here and above
described. And the project here and above described gave them the same access
they already have. Doesn’t say residential access.

Also defense [overlooks] the fact that the complaint which sought to
condemn property doesn’t take any access. . . . The plans gave them the same
access they have had before the plans were drawn. And as to any future access it
would depend on whatever the rules and regulations are.

The district court thereafter issued its findings of fact and conclusions of law, ruling that
the order of condemnation was not determinative in deciding whether access had been taken and
that no right of access had been condemned under the complaint. The court further concluded
that the potential signal light at the intersection of Plaza Street and South Eagle Road was not
part of the Project or the construction contract, and did not have any bearing on this case.1 The
court also found that the Sharp property had incurred no severance damages as a result of the
take. Sharp contested this finding, claiming that the question of severance damages was not an
issue at this stage of the condemnation proceedings.

Sharp thereafter filed various motions, asserting that the ACHD’s order of condemnation
controlled the definition of the take. The district court summarized this argument by saying:

So you are arguing that the ACHD order of take that predates the filing of the
complaint in this action, trumps my conclusions and findings of fact. That’s your
argument? . . . I do not accept that argument. My findings of fact trump the order.
It is the findings of fact of this court and not the order that defines the take.

Sharp’s motions were denied.

* * *

Click the case caption above for the full text
of the Court's opinion.

Affirmed.

Unknown

Unknown

Reported by Kent Morlan