Laserfiche WebLink
Louisville City Council Meeting <br />December 4, 2001 <br />Page 15 <br /> <br />explained that the comparables used in Louisville by the appraiser were CTC properties <br />at $3.65 per SF. The appraisal was made on January 7, 2001, and on March 1, 2001, the <br />valuation was $3.45 per SF. <br /> <br />Pedersen stated that, when he discovered he needed an appraisal, he found an appraiser <br />out of the telephone book. He noted that the further you move away from the <br />Interchange, the property values decrease. <br /> <br />Sisk voiced his disagreement with the appraisal. He stated that the appraisal did not have <br />any valuation of Koebel and Company or any place on the McCaslin corridor. The only <br />comparables used were CTC. Pedersen stressed the importance of using comparables of <br />value during the same calendar year for purposes of appraisals. <br /> <br />Sisk asked why a valuation was used in Superior of 1999. Pedersen stated that he was <br />not familiar along any properties along McCaslin Blvd. after 1999. He speculated that <br />the appraiser had to go back to 1999 to find his comparables. <br /> <br />Sisk stated that in all due respect, he disregarded to the appraiser and appraisal. He <br />suggested that if Council accepts the appraiser, the citizens would be misled. <br /> <br />Levihn stated that he shared the same concerns as Councilman Sisk and Keany. He asked <br />if the Walgreen's on South Boulder Road will close. Pedersen responded no, and that it <br />was Walgreen's intent to keep the South Boulder Road location open. He explained that <br />Walgreen's believes that they are serving two distinct and separate areas of the City. <br /> <br />Levihn stated that he had problems with the Grease Monkey automotive use; otherwise, <br />he was pleased with the development. He noted that the screening was done well. He <br />stated that the only issues now are the appraisal and the cash in-lieu of land dedication. <br /> <br />Davidson stated that the purpose of the trees in the commercial guidelines is to soften the <br />building and not to provide view corridors. He concurred with Councilman Mayer and <br />the recommendations of the Planning Commission with respect to the trees. He addressed <br />the letter from Leon Wurl relative to the annexation agreement of cash in-lieu of land <br />dedication, and stated his belief that it must have been done by a case-by-case basis. He <br />stated that records indicate that it was not in the annexation agreement for CTC or <br />Centennial Valley. He felt that the ordinance on open space land dedication is clear in its <br />intent. Davidson stated his belief that the Council is bound to follow the ordinance in <br />fairness to all the other landowners with respect to cash in-lieu of public dedication. <br />Davidson voiced concerns about the automotive uses, but stated his support of the <br />proposal with the conditions recommended by the Planning Commission. <br /> <br />Mayer stated that the appraisal of real estate at CTC and Centennial Valley are two <br />different properties. The industrial land, which is far away from the Interchange <br />properties, has a completely different value. He suggested a condition of approval that <br />the Mayor and City Manager negotiate a fair appraisal price for the property. <br /> <br />15 <br /> <br /> <br />