ACRES v. STATE, 769 P.2d 990 (Alaska 1989)
769 P.2d 990
No. S-2339.Supreme Court of Alaska.
January 24, 1989.
Before MATTHEWS, C.J., and RABINOWITZ, BURKE, COMPTON and MOORE, JJ.
On consideration of the petition for rehearing, filed on October 10, 1988, and the opposition to the petition, filed on November 16, 1988,
IT IS ORDERED:
1. The petition for rehearing is granted in part. The first paragraph at lines 1 through 5 on page 19 of Opinion No. 3387, issued on September 30, 1988, 762 P.2d 96, (first column, third full paragraph lines 1-4 and second column lines 1-3 of 762 P.2d page 103), is deleted.
2. The following paragraph and footnote are added in its place:
First, it is too speculative to have experts testify as to possible subdivision plans to determine how much more land the owner would have to dedicate after the condemnation than before, when the planning authority has not considered or approved any of those plans, or when the valuation experts are unable to state with reasonable probability when and how the land would be subdivided.
 See Martens v. State, 554 P.2d 407, 409
(Alaska 1976); cf. Dash v. State, 491 P.2d 1069, 1073
(Alaska 1971) (court should not consider a “truly speculative or imagined use.”).