A developer and friend of WEAR member Chris Swan had the following comments regarding the EMC appraisal and funding.
• It seems that there is more opposition to using TIF for development every day. Note the article in Crane’s about the TIF request for the Willis Tower. So this needs to be factored into the equation because with TIF assistance and public opposition to neighborhood retail, the site has no economic value and may be cheap to acquire for park land.
• The unimproved cleared land value (of the EMC property) given the RS-3 and proposed B1-3 zoning for the east tract at $5.3 million is ostensibly less than the cost for demolition and there fore would not result in any liquidation value to the creditors in bankruptcy unless demo is say subsidized by TIF. Demolition is a TIF eligible cost
Without a subsidy for demolition, the creditors will not have any value and bankruptcy court should be indifferent to disposition. The site is already fully zoned RS-3 which also allows parks.
• It is interesting that in the report that in the definition of highest and best use, financial feasibility of the mixed-use proposal was considered beyond scope of report, but in the discussion of maximum productivity (also required to determine highest and best use), the definition is the financial feasible project that produces the highest returns.
How can an appraisal claim mixed-use project is maximum productive use if determining financial feasibility was beyond scope of report? It almost seemed that appraiser has already predetermined that the mixed-use project was highest and best use without having the ability or scope to prove it.