AG 2007 10 15 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Qank, an arguably objective third party in determining appraised value solely because Wachovia is not a party to the sale transaction. A careful examination of the Integra appraisal reveals outer considerations when comparing the values derived from the three separate appraisals. In the Integra appraisal, the only conclusion for highest and best use of the 22.163 acres is office commercial (see p. 26). The Integra appraisal denies the sustainability of retail commercial, and completely omits the potential for multi-family housing such as town homes or apartments, both of which are allowed in the Commercial Neighba•hood pursuant to the PUD zoning for the site (see p. 25). The Integra appraisal also expresses a concern that even office commercial space would be aslow-growth use (see p. 25). In addition, the appraisal does not take into account the infrashucture already built and appurtenant to the school tract, as well as firture plauned improvements to the infrastructure, stating that there are as yet no improvements to the land (see p. 26). Much of integra's appraisal is phrased in terms of the "opinion" of the individual appraiser, whereas in the Wachovia appraisals, that phrase is rarely, if ever, used. Fm• the foregoing reasons, the following considerations should be taken into account in order to more realistically state the vahie of the 22.163 aae school site tract. First, the tract could clearly sustain commercial use. Whether retai(or office, the 22. l63 acres could be used to fw•ther extend the planned commercial uses highlighting the entrance to the development. However, the tract could also be utilized in moving some of the planned multi-family residential development away from the main commercial-retail setting (fronting Rocky River Road) to the more residentially-focused area planned for the school, thereby allowing for higher commercial uses in the heart of the commercial area on Rocky River Road. Neglecting this potential use for the site also neglects the relative value this site has in the market associated with increasing the overall value of the entire Commercial Neighborhood with its particular opportunity costs, namely those associated with giving up the additional retail uses in favor of locating multi-family units ou the commercial-retail site nearest Rocky River Road. This particulat• loss of economic opportunity should be reflected in the value of the tract, and is certainly a more substantial loss than reflected in [ntegra's consideration of only office use. For example, the property innnediately adjacent to and around the Rocky River G-~