My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
1998 Planning Commission Packets
MoundsView
>
Commissions
>
Planning & Zoning Commission
>
Agenda Packets
>
1990-1999
>
1998
>
1998 Planning Commission Packets
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
3/21/2018 10:25:19 AM
Creation date
2/22/2012 8:14:59 AM
Metadata
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
882
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
Show annotations
View images
View plain text
Mounds View Planning Commission February 18, 1998 <br />Special Meeting Page 9 <br />Commissioner Obert re-emphasized the need for an independent unbiased real estate � <br />appraiser. <br />Gayla Keyes, 7730 Greenwood Drive, told the Commission that she has hired an <br />independent real estate agent to assess her property. This person told her that her <br />property would decrease in value. <br />Cecelia Brownell, 7730 Greenwood Drive, told the Commission that the real estate agent <br />had indicated the property would drop in value between $4,000-$14,000 dollars. She <br />added she does not want the development in the neighborhood. <br />'�erry Moses asked if the appraisal was done by a certified appraiser, and continued by <br />telling the Commission that there is a difference be�veen a real estate agent and an MAI <br />appraiser. He said real estate agents are held to lower standards that an MAI appraiser. <br />He suggested hiring an MAI appraiser to do the work instead of a real estate agent. <br />Director Jopke reminded the Commission and the meeting attendees that it is very <br />important to keep in mind what the "big picture" is. He asked, "How can the staff provide <br />the Commission, Developer and citizens with the type of information that is being <br />requested?" He agreed with Mr. Cunningham's statement that it is very hard to quantify <br />the effect that a development of the type will have on the surrounding neighborhood. <br />Jopke stated the staffwould make every attempt to locate information that is relevant to <br />the situation and in turn forward that information to the appropriate people. <br />Chairperson Peterson asked Benshoof and Associate's representative, Michael Chen to <br />comment on the report that SEH had made regarding the traffic study. <br />Michael Chen stated if you asked five different engineers the same question, most likely <br />you'd get five different answers because of the way the information is collected. Benshoof <br />and Associates gathered their information from different sources than SEH. He added <br />that the differences in the two firm's figures were very minute. <br />Mr. Cunningham added, Walgreen's is a neighborhood retailer, and draws its clientele <br />from the immediate surrounding areas. The majority of the customers are live within 1. <br />mile radius of the store. <br />Chairperson Peterson asked Chen to summarize what the traffic study was indicating. <br />Mr. Chen told the Commission the tra�c study indicated the overall impact of the <br />Walgreen's Development is not expected to have a significant negative impact on traffic to <br />the a$'ected neighborhood with the closing of Eastwood Drive. <br />Mr. Johnson stated he has lived in the neighborhood for 29 years, before the shopping <br />center was developed, before any of the commercial developments on this section of <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.