Questão jurídica principal
Whether the cantonal decision was sufficiently reasoned under Art. 29(2) BV regarding transfer of road parcel ownership versus easement rights.
Decisão extraída
No. The lower court failed to address the decisive argument whether easements would suffice instead of transferring ownership, and did not weigh the owners' interests against the municipality's interest.
Fundamentação extraída
The court had to engage with the specific submissions made in the cantonal appeal, especially after the owners offered easements and relied on the principle that expropriation should not go beyond what is necessary. General references to prior case law and the public interest in unified ownership were insufficient.