Revised Blight Study - City of Shawnee

BLIGHT STUDY 

HODGDON, JONES, DEFFENBAUGH, AND BOUSMAN TRACTS 

STUDY AREA 

NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF SHAWNEE MISSION 

PARKWAY AND INTERSTATE 435 

SHAWNEE, JOHNSON COUNTY, KANSAS 66217 

PREPARED FOR: 

MR. KORB MAXWELL 

POLSINELLI SHALTON FLANIGAN SUELTHAUS, PC 

6201 COLLEGE BOULEVARD, SUITE 500 

OVERLAND PARK, KANSAS 66210 

EFFECTIVE DATE OF THE APPRAISAL: 

MARCH 8, 2007 

INTEGRA REALTY RESOURCES – KANSAS CITY 

FILE NUMBER: 119-2007-0436A 

© 2007 BY INTEGRA REALTY RESOURCES

NORTHWEST QUADRANT OF SHAWNEE MISSION PARKWAY AND INTERSTATE 435 

SHAWNEE, KANSAS

April 2, 2008 

Mr. Korb Maxwell 

Polsinelli Shalton Flanigan Suelthaus PC 

6201 College Boulevard, Suite 500 

Overland Park, Kansas 66210 

SUBJECT: Blight Study 

Northwest Quadrant of Shawnee Mission Parkway and Interstate 435 

Shawnee, Johnson County, Kansas 66217 

Integra Realty Resources – Kansas City File No. 119-2007-0095 

Dear Mr. Maxwell: 

Integra Realty Resources – Kansas City is pleased to transmit the blight study of the area 

comprised of the Northwest Quadrant of Shawnee Mission Parkway and Interstate 435, 

Shawnee, Johnson County, Kansas. The purpose of this report is to make an evaluation and 

determination as to whether or not the area is blighted as defined in KSA Chapter 12, Article 

17, 12-1770a, Definitions. The facts and conclusions contained herein are presented as of the 

effective date of the report, March 8, 2007. 

This report has been performed in accordance with the Code of Professional Ethics and 

Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the Appraisal Institute and Uniform 

Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP). Supporting documentation 

concerning the data, reasoning, and analyses is retained in our file. The depth of discussion 

contained in this report is specific to the needs of the client and the intended use of the report 

as noted herein. 

The study area is comprised of 18 separate tax parcels located north of Shawnee Mission 

Parkway from Interstate 435 on the east to Ogg Road on the west and Johnson Drive on the 

north. The study area totals 310.79 acres more or less, according to public record. The area is 

being analyzed to determine whether or not blighting factors exist at the study area. Please 

note that for the purposes of this report, the term “blight” is defined by the Terms of Kansas 

law. The statutory definition, cited in the body of this report, does not necessarily coincide 

with the common definition of blight as defined in Webster’s Dictionary as: “something that 

frustrates plans or hopes, something that impairs or destroys a deteriorated condition .” 

1901 West 47 th Place, Suite 300 • Westwood, Kansas 66205-1834 • 913-236-4700 • Fax 913-236-4307 • www.irr.com

Mr. Korb Maxwell 

Polsinelli, Shalton, Flanigan, Suelthaus, PC 

April 2, 2008 

Page 2 

As explained in detail in the study that follows, it is our conclusion that the site is blighted 

under the criteria listed below. 

Factor Present 

A majority of the following factors: 

A substantial number of deteriorated or deteriorating 

structures. 

A predominance of defective or inadequate street layout. X 

Unsanitary or unsafe conditions. X 

Deterioration of site improvements. X 

Tax or special assessment delinquency exceeding the fair 

market value of the real property. 

Defective or unusual conditions of title including but not 

limited to cloudy or defective titles, multiple or unknown 

ownership interests in the property. 

Improper or obsolete platting. X 

The existence of conditions which endanger life or property X 

by fire and other causes. 

Conditions which create economic obsolescence. X 

Cause the following: 

Retarding the provision of housing accommodations. X 

Conditions which constitute an economic or social liability X 

Conditions which constitute a menace to the public health, safety, 

morals or welfare in its present condition and use 

Not 

Present 

If you have any questions or comments, please contact the undersigned. Thank you for the 

opportunity to be of service. 

Respectfully submitted, 

INTEGRA REALTY RESOURCES – KANSAS CITY 

Kenneth Jaggers, MAI, MRICS 

Managing Director 

Certified Real Property Appraiser 

Kansas Certificate No. G-969 

(913) 748-4704 

kjagger@irr.com 

X 

X 

X 

X

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA TABLE OF CONTENTS 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

PAGE NO. 

SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS............................................................. 1 

BLIGHTING FACTORS............................................................................................................ 2 

GENERAL INFORMATION ...................................................................................................... 3 

Identification of Study area......................................................................................... 3 

Purpose and Effective Date......................................................................................... 3 

Scope of Report........................................................................................................... 3 

METHOD OF ANALYSIS.......................................................................................................... 4 

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS ........................................................................................................... 6 

Johnson County, Kansas Area Analysis ..................................................................... 6 

Market Area Analysis ............................................................................................... 15 

PROPERTY ANALYSIS .......................................................................................................... 20 

Description and Analysis of the Land....................................................................... 20 

Description and Analysis of the Improvements........................................................ 24 

Real Estate Tax Analysis .......................................................................................... 25 

BLIGHT ANALYSIS ............................................................................................................... 26 

Blighting Factors....................................................................................................... 26 

Conclusion ................................................................................................................ 39 

CERTIFICATION ................................................................................................................... 42 

ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS....................................................................... 44 

ADDENDA 

Qualifications of Analysts ....................................................................................Addendum A 

Definitions.............................................................................................................Addendum B 

Letter of Authorization .........................................................................................Addendum C 

7 © 2007 BY INTEGRA REALTY RESOURCES

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS 

SUMMARY OF SALIENT FACTS AND CONCLUSIONS 

Property 18 Land Parcels. Identified by the last four digits of the 

Johnson County Parcel ID Number. N/w Shawnee 

Mission Parkway from Interstate 435 east to Ogg Road 

and north to Johnson Drive. 

Date of the Report April 2, 2008. 

Effective Date of the Assignment March 8, 2007. 

Land Area 310.79 acres, more or less. 

Zoning Designation Agricultural District. 

Description of the improvements. The only commercial use in the study area is an 

approximately 0.25 acre plot in the central portion of the 

study area near Ogg Road, where a cell phone tower is 

constructed. Various storage and distribution buildings 

previously used by Hodgdon Powder, Inc. are scattered 

among several Hodgdon tracts. Five tracts are vacant, 

eight have residential improvements, and five tracts 

have farm outbuildings. 

Study # Parcel ID Address Owner of Record Acres 

2001 QF 241207-2001 5973 Ogg Road Jones, Wilbur L. & Susan M. 34.86 

2002 QF 241207-2002 6336 Lind Road Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 56.75 

2003 QF 241207-2003 N/A Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 15.00 


4005 QF 241207-4005 6235 Lind Road Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 18.01 


1002 QF 241218-1002 N/A Hodgdon, J.B. et al 26.83 

1003 QF 241218-1003 N/A Hodgdon, Sally J. et al 18.12 

1004 QF 241218-1004 Public R.O.W. Hodgdon, John 0.41 


1014 QF 241218-1014 Public R.O.W. Bousman, Dorothea 1.22 

1019 QF 241218-1019 N/A Hodgdon, J.B. et al 0.36 

1020 QF 241218-1020 6336 Lind Road Hodgdon, J.B. et al 2.90 

3008 QF 241218-3008 Public R.O.W. Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 23.59 

3013 QF 241218-3013 Public R.O.W. Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 7.87 

2005 QF 241207-2005 18101 Johnson DrivDeffenbaugh 1.83 

2004 QF 241207-2004 18100 Johnson DrivDeffenbaugh 33.67 

4008 QF 241207-4008 N/A Deffenbaugh 35.52 

Total 310.79 

PAGE 1

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA BLIGHTING FACTORS 

BLIGHTING FACTORS 

As shown in the exhibit below and our analysis summarized herein, we find several 

blighting factors present at the study area. 




structures. 


















Not 

Present 

X 

X 

X 

X 

PAGE 2

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA GENERAL INFORMATION 

GENERAL INFORMATION 

IDENTIFICATION OF STUDY AREA 

The study area is comprised of 18 tax parcels with seven different private owners. Parcel 

ID, size, and owner are cited in summary of salient facts and the property description. The 

total land area is 310.79 acres more or less. 

PURPOSE AND EFFECTIVE DATE 

The purpose of this report is to recognize, analyze, and report any blighting factors that 

may be present at the study area, pursuant to the definition of blight set forth in the KSA 

Chapter 12, Article 17, 12-1770a. This study has been prepared for use in conjunction 

with establishing the study area as a redevelopment district. The effective date of this 

report is March 8, 2007. 

INTENDED USE AND INTENDED USER 

This Consulting report is prepared for Mr. Korb Maxwell, Polsinelli, Shalton, Flanigan, 

Suelthaus, PC, 6201 College Boulevard, Suite 500, Overland Park, Kansas, to assist the 

client in evaluating the application for tax increment financing. It is not intended for any 

other use or user. 

SCOPE OF REPORT 

To perform this assignment, we took the following steps to gather, confirm, and analyze 

relevant data. 

An inspection of the study area was conducted by Kenneth Jaggers, MAI, 

and Matthew J. Antongiovanni on March 8, 2007. 

Collected factual information about the study area and the surrounding 

market, and confirmed that information with various sources. 

Reviewed and analyzed the governing statutes that apply to the site. 

Reviewed various site maps, zoning map, plat maps, and aerial 

photographs. 

Prepared a consulting report summarizing our analyses, opinions and 

conclusions. 

This is a consulting report that has been prepared to determine whether or not the study 

area is blighted as defined in KSA 12-1770a. This is not an appraisal report, and there is no 

opinion given to the feasibility of a proposed project or to the value of the underlying real 

estate. This is a summary report. The depth of discussion contained in this report is specific 

to the needs of the client and the intended use of the report as noted herein. 

PAGE 3


METHOD OF ANALYSIS 

In determining whether the defined area is a blighted area, the initial responsibility is to 

define the term, “blighted area.” This study utilizes the definitions found in KSA Chapter 

12, Article 17, 12-1770a: 

(1) “Blighted area”, means an area which, 1) because of the presence of a 

majority of the following factors, substantially impairs or arrests the 

development and growth of the municipality or constitutes and economic 

or social liability or is a menace to public health, safety, morals or welfare 

in its present condition and use: A) a substantial number of deteriorated or 

deteriorating structures; B) predominance of defective or inadequate street 

layout; C) unsanitary or unsafe conditions; D) deterioration of site 

improvements; E) tax or special assessment delinquency exceeding the 

fair market value of the real property; F) defective or unusual conditions 

of title including but not limited to cloudy or defective titles, multiple or 

unknown ownership interests to the property; G) improper subdivision or 

obsolete platting or land uses; H) the existence of conditions which 

endanger life or property by fire or other causes; or I) conditions which 

create economic obsolescence; or 2) have been identified by any state or 

federal environmental agency as being environmentally contaminated to 

an extent that requires a remedial investigation; feasibility study and 

remediation or other similar state or federal action; or 3) previously was 

found by resolution of the governing body to be a slum or a blighted area 

under KSA 17-472 et. Seq., and amendments thereto. 

Shawnee, Kansas has no additional or differing conditions to be examined to determine 

whether blight exists in an area. 

In determining whether the area under review is blighted pursuant to the definition above, 

the consultants have first reviewed the surrounding area and neighborhood as a whole, 

then the study area. In reviewing the statute we note that the governing body may 

determine that an area is blighted, although the blight may not necessarily affect the total 

area, or any particular portion of the site. It is not necessary that the property be located in 

what is generally known as a “slum.” 

PAGE 4


The term “blighted” for purposes of this analysis requires a finding that the presence of 

certain factors in an area “impairs or arrests the development and growth of the 

municipality or constitutes an economic or social liability or is a menace to the public 

health, safety, morals, or welfare in its present condition or use”. The statute requires that 

the preceding factors be caused by the predominance of one or more of the following 

factors: 

(A) A substantial number of deteriorated or deteriorating structures; 

(B) Predominance of defective or inadequate street layout; 

(C) Unsanitary or unsafe conditions; 

(D) Deterioration of site improvements; 

(E) Tax or special assessment delinquency exceeding the fair market value of 

the real property; 

(F) Defective or unusual conditions of title including but not limited to cloudy 

or defective titles, multiple or unknown ownership interests in the 

property; 

(G) Improper subdivision or platting or land uses; 

(H) The existence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire or 

other causes; or 

(I) Conditions which create economic obsolescence. 

Identification as an environmentally contaminated site that requires state or federal 

remediating action is also a blighting conditions as is a property’s previous finding of 

blight under KSA 17-4742. 

The consultants have inspected the site and its surrounding area, considering the elements 

that constitute blight by statutory definition, as well as the improvements and associated 

site improvements for the study area. The following sections of the study include the 

neighborhood description, site description, an analysis of the factors that indicate blight, 

and a final conclusion regarding whether the area is a “blighted area.” 

PAGE 5

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA JOHNSON COUNTY, KANSAS AREA ANALYSIS 

ECONOMIC ANALYSIS 

JOHNSON COUNTY, KANSAS AREA ANALYSIS 

An analysis of population, employment, and income trends for Johnson County and the 

Kansas City MSA is performed using data provided by NPA Data Services, a recognized 

source. 

POPULATION 

Historical and projected population trends for Johnson County are charted below: 

Population (1,000's) 

700 

600 

500 

400 

300 

200 

100 

0 

1997 

1998 

POPULATION TRENDS 

Johnson County 

1999 

2000 

2001 

2002 

2003 

2004 

2005 

2006 

2007 

2008 

Year 

2009 

2010 

2011 

2012 

2013 

2014 

2015 

2016 

2017 

The population of Johnson County increased at a compounded annual rate of 2.07% 

from 2002 to 2007. For the same time period, the Kansas City MSA grew at a 

compounded annual rate of approximately 1.05%. Over the last ten years Johnson 

County’s average annual compound change was 2.26%, compared to 1.12% for the 

Kansas City MSA. 

Looking ahead, both Johnson County and the Kansas City MSA are anticipated to 

experience continued growth, with future population estimates reflecting growth rates 

less than those experienced in the past. For the period 2007 to 2017, the populations of 

Johnson County and the Kansas City MSA are expected to increase by an average 

annual compound rate of 1.91% and 1.05%, respectively. For the next five years, the 

population of Johnson County should grow faster than the ten year average. 

PAGE 6


Kansas City MSA 


% % 

Year Population (000's) Change Population (000's) Change 

1997 1,780.7 421.5 

2002 1,888.5 6.1% 475.9 12.9% 

Historical 

2003 

2004 

1,908.3 

1,927.2 

1.0% 

1.0% 

486.9 

496.9 

2.3% 

2.1% 

2005 1,947.7 1.1% 506.6 1.9% 

2006 1,969.5 1.1% 516.4 1.9% 

Current 2007 1,989.6 1.0% 527.2 2.1% 

2008 2,010.1 1.0% 538.0 2.1% 

2009 2,031.2 1.0% 549.0 2.0% 

2010 2,052.9 1.1% 560.3 2.1% 

Projected 2011 2,074.8 1.1% 571.5 2.0% 

2012 2,097.0 1.1% 582.6 2.0% 

2017 2,209.8 5.4% 637.0 9.3% 

Average Annual 

Compound Change 

Source: NPA Data Services, Inc.; compiled by IRR 

EMPLOYMENT 

POPULATION TRENDS COMPARISON 

Historical 

Past 5 years 1.05% 2.07% 

Past 10 years 1.12% 2.26% 

Projected 

Next 5 years 1.06% 2.02% 

Next 10 years 1.05% 1.91% 

Employment trends for both Johnson County and the Kansas City MSA should follow 

a pattern similar to the population trends for these areas, although at higher rates of 

increase. From 2002 to 2007, Johnson County’s employment grew at an average 

annual compound rate of 3.25% compared to 1.58% for the Kansas City MSA. These 

figures indicate that Johnson County surpassed the Kansas City MSA in employment 

growth over the last five years. Looking back ten years, Johnson County’s 

employment grew at an average annual compound rate of 3.22%, compared to the 

Kansas City MSA’s growth rate of 1.38%. 

Over the next five and ten years Johnson County employment growth should exceed 

the Kansas City MSA growth rate. From 2007 to 2012, Johnson County should grow 

by a 3.77% average annual growth rate, while the long term projection, 2007 to 2017, 

is for a 3.25% increase. For the same periods, employment in the Kansas City MSA is 

expected to grow at average annual compound rates of 2.08% and 1.79%, respectively. 

Employment gains are a strong indicator of economic health and generally correlate 

with real estate demand. Historically, Johnson County has exceeded the Kansas City 

MSA’s growth rate, suggesting that Johnson County’s relative position is 

strengthening. 

PAGE 7


Employment trends for Johnson County and the Kansas City MSA are presented 

below. 

NON-FARM EMPLOYMENT TRENDS COMPARISON 

Kansas City MSA Johnson County 

% % 

Year Employment (000's) Change Employment (000's) Change 

1997 1,140.4 319.4 

2002 1,209.2 6.0% 373.8 17.0% 

Historical 2003 1,208.3 -0.1% 375.8 0.5% 

2004 1,224.6 1.3% 384.6 2.3% 

2005 1,250.0 2.1% 402.1 4.5% 

2006 1,280.9 2.5% 421.7 4.9% 

Current 2007 1,307.9 2.1% 438.5 4.0% 

2008 1,334.2 2.0% 455.3 3.8% 

2009 1,362.6 2.1% 472.9 3.9% 

Projected 

2010 

2011 

1,392.1 

1,421.3 

2.2% 

2.1% 

491.4 

509.6 

3.9% 

3.7% 

2012 1,449.7 2.0% 527.5 3.5% 

2017 1,561.0 7.7% 604.1 14.5% 


Compound Change 


Historical 

Past 5 years 1.58% 3.25% 

Past 10 years 1.38% 3.22% 

Projected 

Next 5 years 2.08% 3.77% 

Next 10 years 1.79% 3.25% 

The following chart depicts the current distribution of employment by industry. In 

2007, the largest employment sectors in Johnson County are: 

• Services (42.2%) 

• Retail Trade (12.2%) 

• FIRE (11.9%) 

• Transport, Info, Util (9.8%) 

PAGE 8


Percentage 

45.0% 

40.0% 

35.0% 

30.0% 

25.0% 

20.0% 

15.0% 

10.0% 

5.0% 

0.0% 

42.2% 

Services 

Retail Trade 

EMPLOYMENT SECTORS 2007 


12.2% 11.9% 9.8% 7.9% 5.5% 5.3% 4.8% 0.4% 

FIRE 

Transport, Info, Util 

Government 

Manufacturing 

Sector 

Wholesale Trade 

Construction 

Mining & Other 

By comparison, the Kansas City MSA's largest employment sectors are Services 

(39.9%), Government (13.0%), Retail Trade (11.4%), and FIRE (10.0%). 

Over the past five years, the largest meaningful percentage gains in employment within 

Johnson County occurred within the FIRE and Services sectors with annual average 

compound growth rates of 3.61% and 4.22%, respectively. 

For the Kansas City MSA, the largest meaningful gains in employment over the past 

five years occurred within the FIRE and Services sectors with annual average 

compound growth rates of 2.21% and 2.36%, respectively. 

Ten year projections for Johnson County show Mining & Other related employment 

leading all other sectors with Transport, Info, Util second. The forecast for the Kansas 

City MSA has Mining & Other related employment leading all other sectors with 

Services second. 

EMPLOYMENT SECTOR TRENDS 


% 

Change Rate 

2002 2007 of Total 2012 2017 '02-'07 '07-'12 '07-'17 

Total Employment 373.8 438.5 100% 527.5 604.1 3.25% 3.77% 3.25% 

Services 150.6 185.2 42.2% 226.3 263.0 4.22% 4.10% 3.57% 

Retail Trade 47.9 53.7 12.2% 63.5 71.5 2.31% 3.41% 2.92% 

FIRE 43.7 52.2 11.9% 61.8 69.9 3.61% 3.44% 2.96% 

Transport, Info, Util 39.3 42.9 9.8% 55.3 66.6 1.74% 5.21% 4.50% 

Government 31.1 34.7 7.9% 39.9 44.4 2.17% 2.86% 2.51% 

Manufacturing 20.5 24.0 5.5% 26.5 27.8 3.19% 2.04% 1.47% 

Wholesale Trade 20.1 23.0 5.3% 28.4 33.1 2.78% 4.27% 3.69% 

Construction 19.1 21.1 4.8% 23.4 24.9 2.03% 2.09% 1.65% 

Mining & Other 1.5 1.9 0.4% 2.5 3.0 4.45% 5.41% 4.76% 

Ttl Non-Mfg. 353.3 414.5 94.5% 501.0 576.3 3.25% 3.86% 3.35% 

Ttl Office-Related* 225.4 272.0 62.0% 328.0 377.2 3.83% 3.82% 3.32% 

*Includes FIRE, Services and Government (Numbers in thousands (000's)) 

PAGE 9



Kansas City MSA 

% 

Change Rate 

2002 2007 of Total 2012 2017 '02-'07 '07-'12 '07-'17 

Total Employment 1,209.2 1,307.9 100% 1,449.7 1,561.0 1.58% 2.08% 1.79% 

Construction 71.5 75.4 5.8% 79.4 80.9 1.07% 1.02% 0.71% 

FIRE 117.5 130.5 10.0% 145.5 157.2 2.12% 2.19% 1.88% 

Government 159.6 170.1 13.0% 186.7 200.0 1.28% 1.88% 1.63% 

Manufacturing 87.2 88.4 6.8% 89.6 88.0 0.28% 0.27% -0.05% 

Mining & Other 5.0 6.2 0.5% 7.3 8.3 4.25% 3.42% 3.01% 

Retail Trade 137.4 148.7 11.4% 163.6 174.7 1.60% 1.92% 1.62% 

Services 464.4 521.9 39.9% 590.4 647.5 2.36% 2.50% 2.18% 

Transport, Info, Util 110.6 110.7 8.5% 124.2 135.3 0.02% 2.32% 2.02% 

Wholesale Trade 56.0 56.0 4.3% 63.1 69.2 -0.01% 2.44% 2.15% 

Ttl Non-Mfg. 1,122.0 1,219.5 93.2% 1,360.1 1,473.1 1.68% 2.21% 1.91% 

Ttl Office-Related* 741.5 822.5 62.9% 922.6 1,004.7 2.09% 2.32% 2.02% 

*Includes FIRE, Services and Government (Numbers in thousands (000's)) 

In the following chart, we focus on trends in two broad employment sectors: officerelated 

and manufacturing employment. For purposes of this analysis, we define officerelated 

employment as the total number of jobs in the FIRE, Services and Government 

sectors. While not all employment in these sectors is office-related, office employment 

trends tend to mirror the trends in these three categories combined. In Johnson County, 

office-related employment is growing at a much faster rate than manufacturing 

employment. This indicates a shift toward a more service-based economy, which is 

consistent with the national trend. 

Office Related 

Employment (000's) 

400 

350 

300 

250 

200 

150 

100 

50 

0 



2002 2007 2012 2017 

Office RelatedYear Manufacturing 

Johnson County accounted for approximately 28.01% of the Kansas City MSA's 

employment in 1997. In 2007, the ratio is 33.53% and it is projected at 38.70% 

through 2017. This is an indication that Johnson County is growing at a rate above that 

of the Kansas City MSA. 

Johnson County’s economy is not dependent on a particular sector. The employment 

base is varied, as are the major employers. Therefore, Johnson County should be less 

susceptible to cyclical fluctuations that have occurred in other areas dominated by a 

single industry. The area’s major employers are listed below. 

30 

25 

20 

15 

10 

5 

0 

Manufacturing Employment 

(000's) 

PAGE 10

2005 

Rank 


Company 

TOP 50 AREA EMPLOYERS 

Current No. 

Local 

Employees 

Year 

Founded 

Nature of Operations 

1. Federal Government 29,724 1837 Federal operations 

2. Sprint Corporation 16,300 1960 State-of-the-art network technologies; all-digital, fiber-optic network and 

TI internet backbone 

3. HCA-Midwest Division 7,326 1968 Health care 

4. State of Missouri 6,723 1821 State government 

5. Ford Motor Company 5,874 1906 Car and truck manufacturing; Escape, Tribute, Hybrid Escape, F-150 

trucks 

6. Kansas City, Missouri School District 5,685 1867 Public school district 

7. DST Systems Inc. 5,100 1969 Information processing and computer software services 

8. Saint Luke’s Health System 4,633 1994 Health care 

9. Hallmark Cards Inc. 4,500 1910 Greeting cards, personal expression products, television programming 

10. City of Kansas City, Missouri 4,400 1853 City government 

11. State of Kansas 4,184 1861 State government 

12. Shawnee Mission School District #512 3,851 1969 Public school district 

13. Johnson County, Kansas Government 3,774 1855 County government 

14. Olathe District Schools USD #223 3,620 1965 Public school district 

15. Kansas City, Kansas, Public Schools 3,500 1886 Public school district 

16. Children’s Mercy Hospitals and Clinics 3,417 1897 Pediatric specialty health care 

17. Cerner Corporation 3,165 1979 Health care IT solutions 

18. General Motors Fairfax Plant 3,000 1944 Automobile assembly 

19. University of Kansas Hospital 2,922 1998 Health care delivery 

20. Truman Medical Centers 2,909 1962 Health care 

21. University of Missouri-Kansas City 2,799 1963 Education, research and public service 

22. Honeywell Federal Manufacturing & 

Technologies 

2,718 1949 High-tech electronic, mechanical and engineered material components 

23. Blue Valley Unified School District #229 2,717 1965 Public school district 

24. North Kansas City School District 2,667 1913 Public school district 

25. Black & Veatch 2,500+ 1915 Engineering, consulting and construction in energy, water, information and 

government markets 

26. UMB Financial Corporation 2,433 1913 Commercial and retail financial services 

27. Commerce Bank 2,400 1865 Banking and financial services 

28. UPS 2,385 1971 Package delivery, specialized transportation and logistics services 

29. Lee’s Summit R-7 School District 2,334 1949 Public school district 

30. North Kansas City Hospital 2,307 1958 Acute-care facility with 351 beds; offsite imaging center; open MRI 

services; open heart surgery 

31. University of Kansas Medical Center 2,291 1905 Schools of medicine, nursing, allied health and graduate studies 

32. ATK Lake City Ammunition 2,250 1941 Small-caliber ammunition production 

33. Yellow Roadway Corporation 2,214 1924 Freight transportation services 

34. Citi Cards 2,200 1986 Customer service, collections, marketing, legal, account recovery 

35. Carondelet Health 2,098 1997 Health care 

36. Unified Government of Wyandotte 

County/Kansas City, Kansas 

2,000 1861 City and county government 

37. Lab One Inc. 1,970 1972 Risk-assessment information services for insurance industry; diagnostic 

testing 

38. Shawnee Mission Medical Center 1,950 1962 Community hospital, specializing in cardiac/vascular services, women’s 

services, behavioral health 

39. Kansas City, Missouri, Police Department 1,938 1874 Municipal law enforcement 

40. Applebee’s International Inc. 1,931 1988 Casual-dining restaurants 

41. Blue Springs School District 1,890 1949 Public school district 

42. BG Service Solutions 1,750 1972 Building services contractor 

43. Great Plains Energy Inc. 1,710 1882 Electric utility 

44. Independence School District 1,700 1866 Public school district 

45. Deffenbaugh Industries Inc. & Affiliates 1,640 1954 Residential and commercial refuse and recycling; mining, medical waste 

disposal 

46. The Metropolitan Community Colleges 1,605 1915 Higher education 

47. SBC Communications Inc. 1,600 1878 Voice, data; networking and e-business services 

48. American Century Investments 1,540 1958 Investment manager for investment professionals, institutions, corporations 

and individual investors 

49. Burns & McDonnell 1,465 1898 Engineering, construction, environmental and consulting 

50. J.E. Dunn Construction 1,300 1924 General construction, construction management and design/build services 

PAGE 11


INCOME 

Personal income is a significant factor in determining the real estate demand in a given 

market. From 2002 to 2007, Johnson County’s income grew at an average annual 

compound rate of 1.42%, compared to the Kansas City MSA’s average annual 

compound growth rate of 1.29%. The two market areas displayed a similar pattern in 

per capita income growth over the last ten years. Johnson County's average annual 

compound growth rate was 1.88% as compared to 1.89% for the Kansas City MSA. 

Projections for the next five and ten year periods reflect growth rates for Johnson 

County that are [parallel to//greater than/less than] the anticipated gains for the Kansas 

City MSA. For the two time frames, 2007 to 2012 and 2007 to 2017, Johnson County 

is anticipated to experience 2.22% and 1.83% average annual growth rates, 

respectively, compared to the projected growth rates for the Kansas City MSA of 

2.18% and 1.80%. 

An examination of income per household reveals that, historically, Johnson County has 

experienced a growth rate slightly above that of the Kansas City MSA. Future 

projections predict slightly faster growth for Johnson County compared to the Kansas 

City MSA. In absolute dollars, Johnson County’s personal income historically has been 

above that of the Kansas City MSA, both on per capita and per household bases. 

% % 

Year Income/Capita 1 

Change Income/Capita 1 

Kansas City MSA Johnson County 

Change 

1997 $28,079 $38,177 

2002 $31,745 13.1% $42,843 12.2% 

Historical 

2003 

2004 

$31,797 

$31,978 

0.2% 

0.6% 

$42,642 

$42,999 

-0.5% 

0.8% 

2005 $32,399 1.3% $43,715 1.7% 

2006 $32,971 1.8% $44,769 2.4% 

Current 2007 $33,849 2.7% $45,971 2.7% 

2008 $34,621 2.3% $47,046 2.3% 

2009 $35,473 2.5% $48,228 2.5% 

Projected 

2010 

2011 

$36,235 

$37,032 

2.1% 

2.2% 

$49,267 

$50,370 

2.2% 

2.2% 

2012 $37,698 1.8% $51,295 1.8% 

2017 $40,465 7.3% $55,101 7.4% 


Historical 

Compound Change Past 5 years 1.29% 1.42% 

Past 10 years 

Projected 

1.89% 1.88% 

Next 5 years 2.18% 2.22% 

Next 10 years 1.80% 1.83% 

1 Income figures are stated in year 2000 constant dollars. 


INCOME PER CAPITA COMPARISON 

PAGE 12


% % 

Year Income/Household 1 Change Income/Household 1 Kansas City MSA Johnson County 

Change 

1997 $72,086 $98,911 

2002 $80,516 11.7% $109,482 10.7% 

2003 $80,471 -0.1% $108,722 -0.7% 

2004 $80,788 0.4% $109,424 0.6% 

2005 $81,706 1.1% $111,036 1.5% 

2006 $82,999 1.6% $113,496 2.2% 

Current 2007 $85,053 2.5% $116,323 2.5% 

2008 $86,833 2.1% $118,817 2.1% 

2009 $88,808 2.3% $121,569 2.3% 

2010 $90,549 2.0% $123,950 2.0% 

Projected 2011 $92,373 2.0% $126,484 2.0% 

2012 $93,860 1.6% $128,558 1.6% 

2017 $99,814 6.3% $136,771 6.4% 


Compound Growth 

INCOME PER HOUSEHOLD COMPARISON 

1 Income figures are stated in year 2000 constant dollars. 


CONCLUSION 

Historical 

Past 5 years 1.10% 1.22% 

Past 10 years 1.67% 1.63% 

Projected 

Next 5 years 1.99% 2.02% 

Next 10 years 1.61% 1.63% 

Overall, the economic outlook for Johnson County is positive. Total population is 

projected to increase slightly. More importantly, the area is projected to experience 

increasing employment growth. Based on this analysis, it is anticipated that Johnson 

County will continue to grow and prosper. The expected growth should provide an 

economic base that supports demand for real estate in the subject neighborhood and for 

the subject property. These conditions should stimulate increases in general property 

values within the foreseeable future. 

PAGE 13


AREA MAP 

PAGE 14

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA MARKET AREA ANALYSIS 

MARKET AREA ANALYSIS 

BOUNDARIES 

The property is located in the central portion of Shawnee, Kansas. This market area is 

generally delineated as follows: 

North Johnson Drive 

South Shawnee Mission Parkway 

East I-435 

West K-7 

A map highlighting these boundaries and identifying the location of the property 

follows this section. 

ACCESS AND LINKAGES 

Primary access to the market area is provided by I-435 Kansas City’s circumferential 

interstate highway. Three of the tracts front on Shawnee Mission Parkway which is a 

primary trafficway from the Kansas City Country Club Plaza, west to K-7. Johnson 

Drive is located just north of the study area and is a primary trafficway from Mission, 

KS to K-7, spanning almost the entire width of Johnson County east to west. North and 

south access in the neighborhood is by I-435, Ogg Road, Barker Road, Woodland 

Road, Monticello Road, and finally K-7. Transportation in the area is predominantly 

the private automobile. 

The Kansas City Airport is located about 25 miles from the market area; travel time is 

about 30 to 45 minutes, depending on traffic conditions. The Kansas City, Missouri 

CBD and Country Club Plaza, the economic and cultural center of the region, is 

approximately 10 miles from the market area. 

DEMAND GENERATORS 

College Boulevard, the core of Kansas City’s 13,000,000 SF South Johnson County 

office submarket is located approximately seven miles southeast. Nearby residential 

communities provide a reliable source of skilled workers and demand for retail goods 

and services. The population within a one mile radius of the study area has increased 

from 1,973 in 1990 to 2,738 estimated in 2006 according to Claritas, an industry 

recognized source. Within a five mile radius, the population has increased by 24,837 

persons from 1990 to the present estimate. Anticipated population growth for the one 

mile radius is 14.9% from 2006 to 2011 and 7.58% for the five mile radius. This 

demonstrates that the population growth near the study area has been slower and that 

within the five mile radius (with primarily west and south). The growth is projected to 

be concentrated within the one mile radius of the study area as evident by the growth 

rate that is double that for the five mile radius. However, as suitable development sites 

become scarce growth will occur to the west and south. 

PAGE 15


The average household income for the one mile radius is $92,931 and is $79,748 for 

the five mile radius. This compares favorably to the Kansas City MSA, but the five 

mile radius, which is comprised partly of Wyandotte County, is approximately $30,000 

below the average for Johnson County. The average household is 2.45 persons in the 

one mile radius and 2.42 in the five mile radius. The housing within one mile of the 

study area is 57% owner occupied while it is 67% owner occupied within the five mile 

radius, in both instances below that for all Johnson County. 

MARKET AREA SERVICES AND AMENITIES 

Most necessary consumer goods and services are located within two miles of the study 

area. Major community retail attractions are west, east and south of the study area 

along K-7, Shawnee Mission Parkway and Midland Drive. Shawnee Mission Medical 

Center is located approximately five miles to the southeast. The medical center is 

expanding to the west of the study area with medical office and outpatient services at 

K-7 and Shawnee Mission Parkway. Schools, police and fire are all nearby. The 

Johnson County Government Center is located approximately 10 miles southwest of 

the study area. 

LAND USE 

In the immediate vicinity of the study area, land uses include a mix of retail, 

commercial and residential. Other land use characteristics are summarized on the 

following page. 

Predominant Age of Improvements New to 20 years. 

Predominant Quality and Condition Average 

Approximate Percent Developed 25% 

Life Cycle Stage Growth 

Infrastructure/Planning Average 

Predominant Location of Undeveloped Land Throughout 

New growth is west of the 

Prevailing Direction of Growth 

neighborhood and south of the 

neighborhood. 

Study Area’s Immediate Surrounding Land Uses 

North The Deffenbaugh land fill site. 

South 

East 

West 

Small acreages and single family residential south of the 

study area. 

I-435, Lowes Home Improvement Center, Wal-Mart and 

vacant land. 

Small acreages and single family residential south of the 

study area. 

PAGE 16


DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITY AND TRENDS 

During the last five years, the area has had little in the way of development. New 

residential subdivisions are being developed to the west and south. Retail development 

has occurred along Shawnee Mission Parkway. 

OUTLOOK AND CONCLUSIONS 

The market area is in the growth stage of its life cycle. Recent development activity has 

been limited to residential uses. Given the history of the area and the growth trends, it 

is our opinion that property values will experience nominal appreciation over the 

foreseeable future. 

MARKET AREA MAP AND TRAFFIC MAP 

PAGE 17


SOURCE: KDOT 2004 

Subject 

PAGE 18


AERIAL 

PAGE 19

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE LAND 

PROPERTY ANALYSIS 

DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE LAND 

The following description is based on our inspection of the study area as well as 

information provided by the Johnson County Appraiser's Office. Aerial photographs and 

plat maps are included later in this report. 

PHYSICAL FEATURES 

Hodgdon, Jones, Deffenbaugh, and Bousman 

Tracts Study Area 

Land Area 310.79 acres more or less. 

Configuration Generally rectangular. Individual parcels within the 

study area are rectangular or irregular in shape. 

Topography The topography of the study area varies 

Drainage 

Floodplain 

significantly. The highest part of the area is along 

Johnson Drive. A large retention pond exists in 

north central parcel. Also, there are other small 

ponds on the sites (aerial photograph indicates three 

other ponds). Without a survey or elevation map to 

review it is difficult to say with certainty, however 

the elevation change from the northeast corner of 

the study area appears to be 100 feet or more. 

The site naturally drains to the south and there are 

several small ponds that collect surface drainage. 

Community Panel # Map number 20091C0070F. Dated 6/17/2002. 

Flood Zone Zone X. Not in the 100 year flood plain. 

Flood Insurance None required. 

Environmental Hazards 

An environmental assessment report was not provided for review and 

environmental issues are beyond our scope of expertise. Our inspection of the site 

did not reveal any obvious signs that there are contaminants on or near the 

property. Therefore, we assume the study area is not adversely affected by 

environmental hazards. 

Ground Stability 

A soil report was not provided for review; however, based on our inspection of the 

property and observation of development on nearby sites, we assume that the study 

area is not affected by any adverse soil conditions that would restrict it from being 

developed to its highest and best use. 

PAGE 20


ZONING 

The zoning in the study area is shown in the following exhibit. From our observation of 

the study area, none of the tracts are presently in agricultural use. Yet, all 18 tracts 

comprising the study area are zoned Agricultural District. 

Study # Parcel ID Address Owner of Record Acres Zoning District 

Zoning 

Code Residential 

2001 QF 241207-2001 5973 Ogg Road Jones, Wilbur L. & Susan M. 34.86 Agriculture District AG Y 

2002 QF 241207-2002 6336 Lind Road Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 56.75 Agriculture District AG N 

2003 QF 241207-2003 N/A Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 15.00 Agriculture District AG Y 

4004 QF 241207-4004 N/A Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 14.58 Agriculture District AG Y 

4005 QF 241207-4005 6235 Lind Road Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 18.01 Agriculture District AG Y 

1001 QF 241218-1001 N/A Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 4.57 Agriculture District AG N 

1002 QF 241218-1002 N/A Hodgdon, J.B. et al 26.83 Agriculture District AG N 

1003 QF 241218-1003 N/A Hodgdon, Sally J. et al 18.12 Agriculture District AG N 

1004 QF 241218-1004 N/A Hodgdon, John 0.41 Agriculture District AG N 


1014 QF 241218-1014 N/A Bousman, Dorothea 1.22 Agriculture District AG N 

1019 QF 241218-1019 N/A Hodgdon, J.B. et al 0.36 Agriculture District AG Y 

1020 QF 241218-1020 6336 Lind Road Hodgdon, J.B. et al 2.90 Agriculture District AG Y 



2005 QF 241207-2005 18101 Johnson DrivDeffenbaugh 1.83 Agriculture District AG Y 

2004 QF 241207-2004 18100 Johnson DrivDeffenbaugh 33.67 Agriculture District AG Y 

4008 QF 241207-4008 N/A Deffenbaugh 35.52Agriculture 

District AG N 

Totals 310.79 

OTHER LEGAL AND REGULATORY CONSTRAINTS 

UTILITIES 

Easements, Encumbrances, and Restrictions 

A title report was not provided for review and we are not aware of any 

easements, encumbrances, or restrictions that would adversely affect the 

use of the site. A title search is recommended to determine whether any 

adverse conditions exist. There is a high tension electric line easement that 

bisects the study area, in addition to various other smaller easements. This 

is demonstrated in exhibits in the following pages. 

Encroachments 

We were not provided a survey; however, an inspection of the site revealed 

no apparent encroachments. It is assumed that the property is free and clear 

of encroachments. 

Other Land Use Regulations; Development Moratoriums 

We are not aware of any land use regulations other than zoning that would 

affect the property, nor are we aware of any moratoriums on development. 

All public utilities are available near or at the study area tracts. 

PAGE 21


SUMMARY OF LAND DESCRIPTION 

The study area is in a suburban area that has seen development occur in all directions. 

The sizes of the parcels in the study area range from 0.36 acres to 56.75 acres. In the 

southwest portion of the study area one city-maintained street as well as a right-of-way 

that serves six tracts runs generally north/south. The study area’s topography is 

sloping, in some instances steeply. 

PLAT MAP 

PAGE 22


FLOOD PLAIN MAP 

PAGE 23

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS 

DESCRIPTION AND ANALYSIS OF THE IMPROVEMENTS 

The following description is based on our inspection of the study area and research of 

county records. Field measurements of the improvements were not taken due to their size 

and complexity. We were not provided access to the interior of the building improvements 

and did not have access to the all the owners of these properties for the purposes of this 

assignment. 

SITE IMPROVEMENTS 

The site improvements in the study area can be segregated into public and private 

improvements. The private improvements are typically driveways, retaining walls, 

fences, and ponds. The public improvements include the streets, overhead power lines. 

The parcel labeled study #2002 also has a cell phone tower. Private and public site 

improvements are in average to good condition. 

IMPROVEMENTS ANALYSIS 

Condition The single family residences and out buildings 

appear to be functional, adequately to well 

maintained and generally appear to serve their 

intended use. We were not provided access to 

any of the improvements on the site. 

Deferred Maintenance No deferred maintenance is visible from the 

street. 

History of Maintenance The single family residences have received 

adequate maintenance based on their exterior 

appearance. From what was apparent insofar as 

the commercial buildings, the maintenance was 

fair. 

Environmental No hazardous substances were observed during 

our inspection of the improvements; however, 

we are not qualified to detect such substances. 

We anticipate that given the prior use of some 

of the parcels, some hazardous substances may 

be present. However, the client is advised to 

engage an appropriately qualified engineer for a 

definitive determination. 

PAGE 24

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA REAL ESTATE TAX ANALYSIS 

REAL ESTATE TAX ANALYSIS 

An analysis of the study area’s valuation by Johnson County, and the assessed value and 

the taxes are shown below. 

Study # Parcel ID Owner of Record Acres 

2001 QF 241207-2001 Jones, Wilbur L. & Susan M. 34.86 

2002 QF 241207-2002 Hodgdon, Robert E. et al 56.75 





1002 QF 241218-1002 Hodgdon, J.B. et al 26.83 

1003 QF 241218-1003 Hodgdon, Sally J. et al 18.12 

1004 QF 241218-1004 Hodgdon, John 0.41 


1014 QF 241218-1014 Bousman, Dorothea 1.22 





2005 QF 241207-2005 Deffenbaugh 1.83 



Totals 310.79 

Assessed Total 

Appraised Assessed Improvement Assessed 

Total 

Value Land Value Value Value Taxes Specials Taxes 

$247,690 $8,023 $28,050 $36,073 $4,571 $36 $4,607 

$167,160 $6,780 $43,446 $50,226 $6,423 $720 $7,143 

$6,210 $1,869 - $1,869 $243 $576 $819 

$1,060 $339 - $339 $37 - $37 

$64,050 $4,386 $300 $4,686 $516 $504 $1,020 

$300 $96 - 

$96 $10 - $10 

$6,580 $1,998 $30 $2,028 $223 $324 $547 

$1,200 $387 - $387 $43 - $43 

- 

- 

- - - - - 

$1,280 $417 - $417 $46 - $46 

- 

- 

- - - - - 

$12,570 $1,508 - $1,508 $166 - $166 

$258,800 $14,177 $15,585 $29,762 $3,233 $36 $3,269 

- 

- 

- - - - - 

- 

- 

- - - - - 

$156,900 $5,887 $12,157 $18,044 $1,942 $36 $1,978 

$406,710 $20,753 $27,994 $48,747 $5,324 $72 $5,396 

- 

$923,800 

- 

$45,867 

- 

$87,411 

- 

$133,278 

- 

$17,454 

- 

$2,232 

- 

$19,686 

The county’s market value of the study area properties, for the entire 310.79 acres is 

$923800, or just $0.07 per square foot. The study area has an overall assessment rate of 

14.4% and generates real estate taxes of just $25,082 total including special assessments. 

This equals just $0.0019 per square foot. 

PAGE 25

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA BLIGHT ANALYSIS 

BLIGHT ANALYSIS 

BLIGHTING FACTORS 

Our analysis will begin with looking at the first set of factors that are a cause of blight as 

defined in KSA 12-1770a, which is the following: 

A substantial number of deteriorated or deteriorating structures; 

Predominance of defective or inadequate street layout; 

Unsanitary or unsafe conditions; 

Deterioration of site improvements; 

Tax or special assessment delinquency exceeding the fair market value of 

the real property; 

Defective or unusual conditions of title including but not limited to cloudy 

or defective titles, multiple or unknown ownership interests in the 

property; 

Improper subdivision or platting or land uses; 

The existence of conditions which endanger life or property by fire or 

other causes; or 

Conditions which create economic obsolescence. 

We then consider if a predominance of these factors “impairs or arrests the 

development and growth of the municipality or constitutes an economic or social 

liability or is a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare in its present 

condition or use”. 

Each category is discussed in the following pages with demonstrative exhibits where 

appropriate. 

PAGE 26


A SUBSTANTIAL NUMBER OF DETERIORATED OR DETERIORATING STRUCTURES 

There are deteriorating improvements at various locations within the study area. 

However, there is not a preponderance of the improvements (from what could be 

observed from public rights of way). Thus, it is our opinion that the site does not 

suffer from a deterioration of the existing structures. 

PAGE 27


PREDOMINANCE OF DEFECTIVE OR INADEQUATE STREET LAYOUT 

PAGE 28


The photographs above show the limited sight distance on Lind Road facing west. The 

photograph on the following page shows limited sight distance at the curve on Lind 

Road, located where the entrance to the former distribution and storage facility is 

located. 

These interior roads of the study area, in addition to having limited sight distances, are 

narrow. As such, the roads are inadequate for carrying the traffic generated by a typical 

residential subdivision. 

PAGE 29


Shown below is a photograph indicating a bus stop on Ogg Road. With a sharp curve 

in the road to the south, hill to the north, and the narrow streets, this area is ill suited to 

a school bus stop. 

PAGE 30


The aerial photograph above shows that much of the study area is not served by public 

road or right of way. This is uncharacteristic of large tracts near the city center. The 

tracts identified above all rely to varying degrees to one of two means of ingress and 

egress shown in green. It is our opinion that the site does suffer from a 

predominance of defective or inadequate street layout and that this has retarded 

development. 

PAGE 31


UNSANITARY OR UNSAFE CONDITIONS 

Shown above is a photograph indicating a bus stop on Ogg Road. With a sharp curve 

in the road to the south, hill to the north, and the narrow streets, this area is ill suited to 

a school bus stop. Also, no street lights were observed, another safety issue. 

PAGE 32


Shown above is close up of trash and debris found in numerous locations in study area 

#1003. Such conditions suggest instances of past nuisance and trespass which may 

invite future nuisance and trespass. 

As a result of each of these examples, we determine that the study area is 

characterized by unsafe conditions. 

PAGE 33


DETERIORATION OF SITE IMPROVEMENTS 

Private site improvements viewed from the street and public site improvements do not 

exhibit deterioration. Thus, it is our opinion that the site is not characterized by a 

predominance of deteriorated site improvements. 

TAX OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DELINQUENCY EXCEEDING THE FAIR MARKET VALUE OF 

THE REAL PROPERTY 

The site is not characterized by taxes or assessments exceeding the fair market 

value of the real property. 

DEFECTIVE TITLE 

The site is not characterized by defective or unusual conditions of the title. 

IMPROPER SUBDIVISION OR OBSOLETE PLATTING 

A power line easement runs through tracts 2002 and 1002. It bisects the entire width of 

the study area and compromises a significant portion of some the most developable 

parts of the study area. 

PAGE 34


The aerial above shows study parcel numbers 2003, 4004, and 4005 which are land 

locked and cannot be accessed by a public street. 

In our opinion there is evidence of obsolete subdivision and platting. 

Furthermore, the undeveloped parts of the study area are not platted to 

accommodate reasonably dense suburban development. 

PAGE 35


CONDITIONS THAT ENDANGER LIFE AND PROPERTY BY FIRE OR OTHER HAZARDS 

PAGE 36


The preceding photographs demonstrate 1) the lack of curbs on Ogg Road (especially at a 

curve in the road) and 2) the lack of proper signage and traffic control at the intersection of 

Ogg Road and Johnson Drive. The lack of proper curbs and the possibility of eroding 

shoulders on Ogg Road present a potential hazard. Furthermore, it seems ill advised to have 

a bus stop. Shown below is Ogg Road which is too narrow to accommodate modern 

firefighting equipment and certainly provides no room for firefighters to turn around. 

We note the presence of conditions that endanger life and property by fire and other 

hazards. 

PAGE 37


CONDITIONS WHICH CREATE ECONOMIC OBSOLESCENCE 

We find that there are several conditions which contribute significantly to economic 

obsolescence in the study area. 

Portions of only three parcels are currently used for agriculture. All 18 of 

the parcels are zoned Agricultural District, yet just three are used for 

agriculture. Per the City of Shawnee, the minimum lot area in an 

agricultural zoned area, with proper streets and planning, is five acres for 

single family residences. Accordingly, the study area could accommodate 

62 single family residences. 

The drastic change in elevation, an estimated 100’ or more, from north to 

south and the general variation and difficulty in the terrain makes the 

study area unlikely to be the tract chosen to meet the growing demand for 

commercial property in the area. 

Study Nos. 2003, 4004, and 4005 and are land locked parcels inaccessible 

from a public road. 

Development near the study area has slowed significantly whereas 

redevelopment is occurring to the west of the study area in the K-7 

corridor of Shawnee, to the south, and now to the north in Wyandotte 

County. 

PAGE 38

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA CONCLUSION 

CONCLUSION 

In the preceding pages we analyzed the factors that can cause blight in an area in 

accordance to KSA 12-1770a. The following table summarizes our findings. 




structures. 










The existence of conditions which endanger life or X 

property by fire and other causes. 


Not 

Present 

From our analysis it becomes apparent that the study area is blighted under a 

preponderance of the criteria employed, and there are sometimes several instances of 

blight for each of those criteria. 

The next step in our blight analysis is to determine whether the aforementioned factors 

present at the site contribute to “blight” by the following means: 

• Impairs or arrests the development and growth of the municipality; 

• Constituting an economic or social liability; 

• Being a menace to the public health, safety, morals, or welfare in its 

present condition and use. 

RETARDING THE PROVISION OF HOUSING ACCOMMODATIONS 

This intersection serves as the gateway to Shawnee from I-435 with some 55,200 cars 

per day traveling north and south. With residential and commercial development 

ongoing nearby and established residential and retail development south and east the 

study area’s immediate vicinity, it is apparent the study area has been bypassed for 

development in favor of other areas. 

Thus, we conclude that the blighting factors present impair or arrest the 

development and growth of the municipality. 

X 

X 

X 

PAGE 39


CONDITIONS WHICH CONSTITUTE AN ECONOMIC OR SOCIAL LIABILITY 

Total Study Area - 277.7 

Acres Land and 

Improvements Total $ 185,790 

Per Acre $ 669 

Per SF $ 0.015 

Q P66700000 0003 - Shawne 

Station Target 16.05 acres 

land only Total $ 5,594,470 

Per Acre $ 348,565 

Per SF $ 8.00 

Q P66450000 0001 - Home 

Depot 12.86 acres land only Total $ 3,923,900 

Per Acre $ 305,124 

Per SF $ 7.00 

Q P55240000 0007 Prairie 

Lakes Apartments 22.21 acres 

land only Total $ 2,040,000 

Per Acre $ 91,851 

Per SF $ 2.11 

The study area has frontage on Shawnee Mission Parkway, Interstate 435, and Johnson 

Drive and is compared with two nearby commercial tracts (land only) and a nearby 

multifamily tract (land only). Irrespective of any variation in the tax rate or assessment 

ratio, the study area produces just a fraction of the tax revenue that is produced by the 

multi-family or commercial sites based on the county’s valuation. With this disparity in 

the appraised value for real estate tax purposes, we determine that the blighting 

factors constitute an economic and social liability to the community. 

CONDITIONS THAT CONSTITUTE A MENACE TO THE PUBLIC HEALTH, SAFETY, MORALS, 

OR WELFARE IN ITS PRESENT CONDITION AND USE 

Considering the density at which the study area is used, and the poor access to the 

interior portions of the study area, we conclude that this site does not constitute a 

menace to public health or safety. 

Our conclusions are displayed on the following page. 

PAGE 40





structures. 


















Not 

Present 

X 

X 

X 

X 

PAGE 41

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA CERTIFICATION 

CERTIFICATION 

We certify that, to the best of our knowledge and belief: 

1. The statements of fact contained in this report are true and correct. 

2. The reported analyses, opinions, and conclusions are limited only by the 

reported assumptions and limiting conditions, and are our personal, impartial, 

and unbiased professional analyses, opinions, and conclusions. 

3. We have no present or prospective interest in the property that is the subject of 

this report and no personal interest with respect to the parties involved. 

4. We have no bias with respect to the property that is the subject of this report 

or the parties involved with this assignment. 

5. Our engagement in this assignment was not contingent upon developing or 

reporting predetermined results. 

6. Our compensation for completing this assignment is not contingent upon the 

development or reporting of a predetermined value or direction in value that 

favors the cause of the client, the amount of the value opinion, the attainment 

of a stipulated result, or the occurrence of a subsequent event directly related 

to the intended use of this Appraisal. 

7. Our analyses, opinions, and conclusions were developed, and this report has 

been prepared, in conformity with the requirements of the Code of 

Professional Ethics and Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice of the 

Appraisal Institute, which includes the Uniform Standards of Professional 

Appraisal Practice (USPAP). 

8. Kenneth Jaggers, MAI, MRICS inspected the study area March 8, 2007. 

9. No one provided significant real property assistance to the person(s) signing 

this certification. 

10. We have not relied on unsupported conclusions relating to characteristics such 

as race, color, religion, national origin, gender, marital status, familial status, 

age, receipt of public assistance income, handicap, or an unsupported 

conclusion that homogeneity of such characteristics is necessary to maximize 

value. 

11. We have experience in analyzing properties similar to the subject and are in 

compliance with the Competency Rule of USPAP. 

12. The use of this report is subject to the requirements of the Appraisal Institute 

relating to review by its duly authorized representatives. 

PAGE 42

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA CERTIFICATION 

13. As of the date of this report Kenneth Jaggers, MAI, MRICS, has completed 

the continuing education program of the Appraisal Institute. 

Kenneth Jaggers, MAI, MRICS 

Managing Director 

Certified Real Property Appraiser 

Kansas Certificate No. G-969 

(913) 748-4704 

kjagger@irr.com 

PAGE 43

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 

ASSUMPTIONS AND LIMITING CONDITIONS 

In conducting this Appraisal, we have assumed, except as otherwise noted in our report, as 

follows: 

1. The title is marketable and free and clear of all liens, encumbrances, 

encroachments, easements and restrictions. The property is under responsible 

ownership and competent management and is available for its highest and best 

use. 

2. There are no existing judgments or pending or threatened litigation that could 

affect the value of the property. 

3. There are no hidden or undisclosed conditions of the land or of the 

improvements that would render the property more or less valuable. 

Furthermore, there is no asbestos in the property. 

4. The revenue stamps placed on any deed referenced herein to indicate the sale 

price are in correct relation to the actual dollar amount of the transaction. 

5. The property is in compliance with all applicable building, environmental, 

zoning, and other federal, state and local laws, regulations and codes. 

6. The information furnished by others is believed to be reliable, but no warranty 

is given for its accuracy. 

Our Appraisal is subject to the following limiting conditions, except as otherwise noted in 

our report. 

1. An Appraisal is inherently subjective and represents our opinion as to the 

value of the property appraised. 

2. The conclusions stated in our report apply only as of the effective date of the 

report, and no representation is made as to the effect of subsequent events. 

3. No changes in any federal, state or local laws, regulations or codes (including, 

without limitation, the Internal Revenue Code) are anticipated. 

4. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in 

conjunction with this Appraisal, and we reserve the right to revise or rescind 

any of the value opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact 

studies. If any environmental impact statement is required by law, the 

Appraisal assumes that such statement will be favorable and will be approved 

by the appropriate regulatory bodies. 

5. We are not required to give testimony or to be in attendance in court or any 

government or other hearing with reference to the property without written 

contractual arrangements having been made relative to such additional 

employment. 

PAGE 44


6. We have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility in 

connection with such matters. Any sketch or survey of the property included 

in this report is for illustrative purposes only and should not be considered to 

be scaled accurately for size. The Appraisal covers the property as described 

in this report, and the areas and dimensions set forth are assumed to be 

correct. 

7. No opinion is expressed as to the value of subsurface oil, gas or mineral 

rights, if any, and we have assumed that the property is not subject to surface 

entry for the exploration or removal of such materials, unless otherwise noted 

in our Appraisal. 

8. We accept no responsibility for considerations requiring expertise in other 

fields. Such considerations include, but are not limited to, legal descriptions 

and other legal matters, geologic considerations, such as soils and seismic 

stability, and civil, mechanical, electrical, structural and other engineering and 

environmental matters. 

9. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report (especially any 

conclusions as to value, the identity of the appraisers, or any reference to the 

Appraisal Institute) shall be disseminated through advertising media, public 

relations media, news media or any other means of communication (including 

without limitation prospectuses, private offering memoranda and other 

offering material provided to prospective investors) without prior written 

consent from Integra Realty Resources. 

10. Information, estimates and opinions contained in this report, obtained from 

sources outside of the office of the undersigned, are assumed to be reliable 

and have not been independently verified. 

11. Any income and expense estimates contained in this Appraisal are used only 

for the purpose of estimating value and do not constitute predictions of future 

operating results. 

12. If the property is subject to one or more leases, any estimate of residual value 

contained in the Appraisal may be particularly affected by significant changes 

in the condition of the economy, of the real estate industry, or of the appraised 

property at the time these leases expire or otherwise terminate. 

13. No consideration has been given to personal property located on the premises 

or to the cost of moving or relocating such personal property; only the real 

property has been considered. 

14. The current purchasing power of the dollar is the basis for the value stated in 

our analysis; we have assumed that no extreme fluctuations in economic 

cycles will occur. 

15. The value found herein is subject to these and to any other assumptions or 

conditions set forth in the body of this report but which may have been 

omitted from this list of Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. 

PAGE 45


16. The analyses contained in this report necessarily incorporate numerous 

estimates and assumptions regarding property performance, general and local 

business and economic conditions, the absence of material changes in the 

competitive environment and other matters. Some estimates or assumptions, 

however, inevitably will not materialize, and unanticipated events and 

circumstances may occur; therefore, actual results achieved during the period 

covered by our analysis will vary from our estimates, and the variations may 

be material. 

17. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective 

18. 

January 26, 1992. We have not made a specific survey or analysis of this 

property to determine whether the physical aspects of the improvements meet 

the ADA accessibility guidelines. In as much as compliance matches each 

owner’s financial ability with the cost to cure the non-conforming physical 

characteristics of a property, we cannot comment on compliance to ADA. 

Given that compliance can change with each owner’s financial ability to cure 

non-accessibility, the value of the subject does not consider possible noncompliance. 

Specific study of both the owner’s financial ability and the cost to 

cure any deficiencies would be needed for the Department of Justice to 

determine compliance. 

This consulting report has been prepared for the exclusive benefit of Mr. Korb 

Maxwell, Polsinelli, Shalton, Flanigan, Suelthaus, PC, 6201 College 

Boulevard, Suite 500, Overland Park, Kansas 66217. It may not be used or 

relied upon by any other party. All parties who use or rely upon any 

information in this report without our written consent do so at their own risk. 

19. No studies have been provided to us indicating the presence or absence of 

hazardous materials on the site or in the improvements, and our valuation is 

predicated upon the property being free and clear of any environment hazards. 

20. We have not been provided with any evidence or documentation as to the 

presence or location of any flood plain areas and/or wetlands. Wetlands 

generally include swamps, marshes, bogs, and similar areas. We are not 

qualified to detect such areas. The presence of flood plain areas and/or 

wetlands may affect the value of the property, and the value conclusion is 

predicated on the assumption that wetlands are non-existent or minimal. 

PAGE 46

HODGDON, JONES, AND DEFFENBAUGH TRACTS STUDY AREA 

ADDENDUM A 

QUALIFICATIONS OF ANALYSTS

PROFESSIONAL QUALIFICATIONS 

KENNETH JAGGERS, MAI, MRICS 

EXPERIENCE: Mr. Jaggers, Managing Director, has been with Integra Realty Resources – Kansas City, since May 1993. He 

started his career in commercial real estate in 1987 as an investment officer with a subsidiary of Metropolitan 

Life in Overland Park, Kansas then in the Washington D.C., and Boston, Massachusetts’s offices. In 1991, Mr. 

Jaggers joined BankBoston and served as a review and field appraiser for two years. Duties included quality 

control over two acquired banks in Maine and Vermont. 

Since that time he has completed appraisals on commercial properties of all types, primarily for institutional 

investors and for litigation. Unique properties include the 1,140,000 SF IRS Processing facilities and the 

600,000 SF Overland Park Trade Center and exhibition hall. Mr. Jaggers appraised Corporate Woods in 

Overland Park Kansas. The largest single investor owned real estate asset in the Kansas City area, it has 21 

buildings totaling 2.2 million SF of Class A and B office space. He has also appraised the former headquarters 

of H&R Block, the Sanofi Aventis (>500,000 SF), and Town Pavilion (>900,000 SF) offices in Kansas City 

and finally, Branson Landing a destination mixed use project with over 400,000 SF of lifestyle retail, marina, 

boutique hotel, and 170 condominium units. Mr. Jaggers is a Director of IRR’s Hospitality Specialty Practice 

Group. A recent assignment in this capacity was the Lodge of Four Seasons at Lake Ozark, MO with over 300 

rooms, 146 proposed Condotel units, marina, and two golf courses. 

LITIGATION 

EXPERIENCE: 

QUALIFIED BEFORE 

COURTS AND 

ADMINISTRATIVE 

BODIES 

EXPERIENCE WITH 

MUNICIPALITIES/ 

ADMINISTRATIVE 

BODIES: 

PROFESSIONAL 

ACTIVITIES: 

Mr. Jaggers has performed appraisal services and/or provided expert trial or deposition testimony in many legal 

proceedings, including the following: State of Kansas vs. Westgate, LC 04 C 214, State of Kansas v. Domino 

LC, and Northland LC, WD1 of Johnson County v. Highlands Group, Debra L. Miller v. Aida Oil Company 

etal, Moore v. United States No. 93-134 L, Illig v. United States 98-934L, City of Lenexa v. RREEF American 

REIT II Corp., VVV etal, Colliers v. City of Oak Grove, MO 03CV223403, Gailloyd Enterprises v 

Centertainment 98-CV-5115. 

Circuit Court of Jackson County, Missouri 

Kansas District Court, 7 th Judicial District 

Mr. Jaggers has provided expert testimony to a number of taxing authorities, city councils, boards of planning 

and zoning, commissioners’ hearings, and bodies providing public finance (TIF and Tax Abatement). His 

expertise is sought by the administrative bodies and by the private developers. 

Member of the Appraisal Institute, Secretary of the Kansas City Chapter 

Member of The Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors 

Westwood City Planning Commission 

Lecturer – UMKC Bloch School Lewis White Real Estate Center – Hospitality Feasibility 

Lecturer – REATIC Forecast 2003-2008 

Lecturer – Blue Springs EDC – Market Trends 2006-2008 

Lecturer – Employee Relocation Council 2005 – The Housing Bubble 

STATE LICENSES: State of Iowa Certified General Real Property Appraiser (CG02446) 

State of Kansas Certified General Real Property Appraiser (G-969) 

State of Missouri Certified General Real Estate Appraiser (RA 003190) 

State of Nebraska Certified General Real Estate Appraiser (CG970204) 

State of Wyoming Certified Real Estate Appraiser (863) 

EDUCATION: Bachelor of Arts (1983) Chadron State College, Chadron, Nebraska 

Economics and Marketing, Minor in Business Administration 

APPRAISAL 

TRAINING: 

Mr. Jaggers has successfully completed numerous Appraisal Institute courses and attended seminars in keeping 

current, the educational and professional work product requirements of the Appraisal Institute and states in 

which he is licensed. 

Completed 3 rd Party Multifamily Accelerated Processing (MAP), September 18, 2002. 

February 27, 2008 

1901 West 47 th Place, Suite 300 • Westwood, Kansas 66205-1834 • 913-236-4700 • Fax 913-236-4307 • www.irr.com

INVESTMENT BANKS, BANKS, S & L 

& MORTGAGE COMPANIES 

AIMCO 

Allen Bank & Trust 

Allied Irish Bank 

American Real Estate Group 

Arbor National 

Athena Corporation 

Bank of America 

Bank of Belton 

Bank of Blue Valley 

Bank of Boston 

Bank of Jacomo 

Bank Midwest 

Bank of Odessa 

Bank of Prairie Village 

Bannister Bank 

Bayview Financial 

Beneficial Finance Co. 

Brotherhood Bank & Trust 

Capitol Federal 

Capital City Bank 

Central Bank of Kansas City 

Chase Manhattan Bank 

CIT Financial Savings 

Citigroup 

Citizens Bank & Trust 

Clay County Savings & Loan 

Collateral Mortgage 

Commerce Bancshares 

Commerce Bank & Trust 

Country Club Bank 

Credit Union of America 

CS First Boston 

Douglas Bank 

Enterprise Banking 

Exchange National Bank 

Farmers Exchange Bank 

Federal Employee Credit Union 

First Bank of Missouri 

First National Bank 

First National Bank of Chicago 

First National Bank of Olathe 

First Nationwide Bank 

First State Bank 

GMAC Commercial Mortgage 

Gold Bank 

Hillcrest Bank 

Household Finance Corporation 

Industrial State Bank 

Interbay Funding 

Intrust Bank 

James B. Nutter Company 

Johnson County Credit Union 

KeyBank 

Landmark Bank 

LaSalle Bank 

Mission Bank 

Missouri Bank & Trust 

North American Savings 

Old Second National Bank 

Peoples Bank 

PNC Bank 

Security Bank 

Security Financial 

UMB 

US Bank 

Valley View State Bank 

Wachovia 

Wells Fargo 

DEVELOPERS – 

RESIDENTIAL REALTORS 

Century 21 

Coldwell Banker Real Estate 

Crown Realty, Inc. 

Eugene D. Brown Realtors 

Reece & Nichols 

Prudential 

RE/MAX Realtors 

CLIENTS SERVED BY INTEGRA REALTY RESOURCES – KANSAS/MISSOURI/ILLINOIS, INC. 

DEVELOPERS – 

COMMERCIAL REALTORS 

Amresco Advisors 

AT&T Investment Management Co. 

B.A. Karbank & Company 

Block & Company 

Boylan Commercial Realty 

Briarcliff Development 

CB Commercial 

Cerner Redevelopment 

CIII Holdings 

Colliers, Turley, Martin 

Cohen-Esrey Real Estate 

Copaken, White & Blitt 

Coulson & Company 

Dean Realty 

Fishman & Company 

Grubb & Ellis 

Fremont Investments 

Highwoods Realty L.P. 

Koll 

La Salle Advisors 

Lioness Realty 

Management Associates 

Maxicare 

MC Real Estate 

Simon & Co. 

NOMURA 

North Star Development 

Price Brothers 

Property Company of America 

R.H. Sailors & Co. 

Realvest, Inc. 

RED Development 

Retirement Management Co. 

RH Johnson Company 

RHW Development Company 

Stephens & Company 

Sulgrave Development 

Summit 

Superior Bowen 

Tower Properties 

Trammell Crow 

Varnum/Armstrong/Deeter 

Zimmer Companies 

CORPORATIONS 

AMC 

Anheuser Busch Co., Inc. 

Ashgrove Cement 

Athena Corporation 

Aventis 

B.C. Christopher Securities 

Baird, Kuntz & Dobson 

Barclays Capital 

Bear Stearns & Co., Inc. 

Black & Veatch 

BP Products 

Burns & McDonnell 

Butler Manufacturing Co. 

Cerner Corporation 

Custom Color 

De loitte & Touche LLP 

Dodson Group 

DST Systems, Inc. 

Employee Relocation Council 

Equiva Services 

Farmland Industries, Inc. 

Ford Motor Company 

GE Capital 

General Motors Corporation 

George K. Baum & Company 

Greystone Graphics 

Hall Foundation 

Hallmark Cards, Inc. 

Health Midwest 

Hoescht Marion Roussel 

Hunt-Midwest 

J.C. Penney Company 

J.E. Dunn Construction Co. 

John Deere & Company 

Meara & Company 

KPMG, LLP 

Kansas City Power & Light 

Kansas City Southern Industries 

Kraft Foods 

Lab One 

The Marley Company 

Menorah Medical Center 

Merrill, Lynch, Pierce, 

Fenner & Smith, Inc. 

Merrill Lynch Relocation 

Michelin 

North KC Memorial Hospital 

Olathe Medical Center 

Olathe School District 

Price Waterhouse Coopers 

Property Tax Representatives 

Puritan Bennett Corporation 

Research Medical Center 

Saint Joseph Health Center 

St. Luke's Hospital of KC 

Shawnee Mission USD 512 

Shearson, Lehman Brothers/ 

E.F. Hutton 

Shell OPUS 

Southwestern Bell Telephone 

Sprint 

Standard Havens, Inc. 

Stern Brothers & Company 

American Airlines 

Trinity Lutheran Hospital 

United Telecommunications, Inc. 

Utilicorp 

KU Medical Center 

Yellow Freight Systems, Inc. 

INSURANCE COMPANIES 

Aetna Insurance 

Allstate Insurance Co. 

American Family Insurance 

American Fidelity Assurance 

Central Life Insurance 

Commercial Union Insurance Co. 

Equitable 

KC Life Insurance Company 

Metropolitan Life 

Mutual of New York 

New York Life 

Northwestern Mutual Life 

Prudential Financial 

State Farm 

STRS of Ohio 

TIAA-CREF 

Transamerica Life Insurance 

Annuity Company 

Travelers Insurance 

Travelers Pension Fund 

Union Labor Life Insurance 

USF&G 

Zurich of America Insurance Co. 

STATE & FEDERAL 

GOVERNMENT 

City of Blue Springs, Missouri 

City of Branson, Missouri 

City of DeSoto, Kansas 

City of Fulton, Missouri 

City of Gardner, Kansas 

City of Gladstone, Missouri 

City of Grandview, Missouri 

City of Independence, Missouri 

City of Kansas City, Kansas 

City of Kansas City, Missouri 

City of Leawood, Kansas 

City of Lenexa, Kansas 

City of Liberty, Missouri 

City of Manhattan, Kansas 

City of Merriam, Kansas 

City of Olathe, Kansas 

City of Overland Park, Kansas 

City of Prairie Village, Kansas 

City of Raytown, Missouri 

City of Shawnee, Kansas 

City of Springfield, Missouri 

City of Topeka, Kansas 

City of Westwood, Kansas 

County Commissioners - 

Johnson County, Kansas 

CRIIMI MAE 

Department of HUD 

Department of the Navy 

Economic Development Corp. 

Farm Credit Services 

FDIC 

FHLMC 

FNMA 

Franklin County Commissioners 

GSA 

Internal Revenue Service - 

Johnson County, Kansas 

Johnson County District Court 

Johnson County Parks & 

Recreation 

Johnson County Substance 

Abuse Services 

KCCID 

KC Port Authority 

K.C. Redevelopment Authority 

KCMO School District 

Kansas Dept. of Transportation 

Kansas Public Employees 

LCRA 

MHDC/State of Missouri 

Mosers 

PIEA 

RTC 

University of Missouri 

United States Postal Service 

USDOJ 

LAW FIRMS 

Armstrong, Teasdale, LLP 

Blackwell Sanders, et al. 

Bryan Cave, LLP 

Buchalter, Nemeretol 

Ensz & Jester, PC 

Foth & Orrick, LLP 

Humphrey, Farrington & McClain 

Husch &, Eppenberger, LLC 

King Hershey, PC 

Kirkland & Woods, PC 

Lathrop & Gage, LC 

Lewis, Rice & Fingersh LC 

Lowe, Farmer, Bacon & Roe 

McAnany, Van Cleave & Phillips, PA 

McCormick, Adam & Long 

McDowell, Rice, Smith & 

Buchanan, PC 

Niewald, Waldeck & Brown, PC 

Norton, Hubbard, Ruzicka & 

Kreamer, PC 

Krigel & Krigel, PC 

Payne & Jones, Chtd. 

Polsinelli Shalton Welte Suelthaus 

Sanders Conkright & Warren, LLP 

Schlagel Damore & Gordon, LLC 

Sherman, Taff & Bangert, PC 

Shook, Hardy & Bacon, LLP 

Shughart, Thomson & Kilroy, PC 

Seigfreid, Bingham, Levy, Selzer & 

Gee, PC 

Sonnenschein, Nath & Rosenthal, LLP 

Spencer Fane, Britt & Browne, LLP 

Stinson, Morrison, Hecker, LLP 

Wallace, Saunders, et al. 

White Goss Bowers et al 

Wyrsch, Hobbs & Mirakian, PC 

2-27-08

CORPORATE PROFILE 

_______________________________________________________________________________________________________ 

Integra Realty Resources, Inc. (IRR) with corporate offices in New York, NY offers the broadest and most 

comprehensive valuation and counseling services in North America through 56 independently owned and 

operated offices located across the United States and Mexico. Each local office is operated by its principal 

who, on average, has 30 years of local service and is led by a Managing Director holding the MAI 

designation and having an average of 25 years of experience in commercial and investment property. 

Benefited by IRR’s intellectual property, standardized reports, delivery systems and certain intellectual 

property, each office operates under the philosophy “Local Expertise…Nationally.” 

IRR offers a single point of contact to coordinate your assignments and communicate the unique nature of 

the real estate and/or your special requirements. Each local office is licensed to use IRR’s MarketPoint and 

DataPoint products which provide the client with consistent applications of the most sophisticated valuation 

tools, access to a national database and delivery of a standardized report for ease of review and presentation. 

A listing of IRR’s local offices and their Managing Directors follows: 

ATLANTA, GA - J. Carl Schultz, Jr., MAI, SRA, CRE MINNEAPOLIS, MN – Michael F. Amundson, MAI, CCIM 

ATLANTIC COAST, NJ - Anthony S. Graziano, MAI, CRE MORGANTOWN, WV – Thomas A. Motta, MAI 

AUSTIN, TX - Randy A. Williams, MAI, SR/WA NAPLES, FL – Thomas Tippett, MAI, 

BALTIMORE, MD - G. Edward Kerr, MAI NASHVILLE, TN – R. Paul Perutelli, MAI, SRA 

BOISE, ID - Bradford T. Knipe, MAI, ARA, CCIM NEW YORK, NY – Raymond T. Cirz, MAI, CRE 

BOSTON, MA - David L. Cary, MAI, SRA, CRE NORTHERN NJ – Barry J. Krauser, MAI, CRE 

CHARLOTTE, NC - Fitzhugh L. Stout, MAI, CRE ORANGE COUNTY, CA – Larry D. Webb, MAI 

CHICAGO, IL - Gary K. DeClark, MAI, CRE ORLANDO, FL – Charles J. Lentz, MAI 

CHICAGO, IL - Jeffrey G. Pelegrin, MAI, MRICS PHILADELPHIA, PA – Joseph D. Pasquarella, MAI, CRE 

CINCINNATI, OH - Gary S. Wright, MAI, SRA PHOENIX, AZ – Walter Winius, Jr., MAI, CRE 

COLUMBIA, SC - Michael B. Dodds, MAI, CCIM PITTSBURGH, PA – Paul D. Griffith, MAI 

COLUMBUS, OH – Bruce A Daubner, MAI PORTLAND, OR – Brian A. Glanville, MAI, CRE 

DALLAS, TX - Mark R. Lamb, MAI, CPA PROVIDENCE, RI – Gerard H. McDonough, MAI 

DAYTON, OH - Gary S. Wright, MAI, SRA RICHMOND, VA – Robert E. Coles, MAI, CRE 

DENVER, CO - Brad A. Weiman, MAI SACRAMENTO, CA – Scott Beebe, MAI 

DETROIT, MI - Anthony Sanna, MAI, CRE SALT LAKE CITY, UT – Darrin Liddell, MAI, CCIM 

FORT WORTH, TX - Donald J. Sherwood, MAI SAN ANTONIO, TX – Martyn C. Glen, MAI, CRE, FRICS 

GREENVILLE, SC – A. Keith Batson, MAI SAN DIEGO, CA – Jeffrey Greenwald, MAI 

HARTFORD, CT - Mark F. Bates, MAI, CRE SAN FRANCISCO, CA – Jan Kleczewski, MAI 

HOUSTON, TX - David R. Dominy, MAI SARASOTA, FL – Julian Stokes, MAI, CRE, CCIM 

INDIANAPOLIS, IN - Michael C. Lady, MAI, SRA, CCIM SAVANNAH, GA – J. Carl Schultz, Jr., MAI, SRA, CRE 

KANSAS CITY, MO/KS - Kenneth Jaggers, MAI, MRICS SEATTLE, WA – Allen N. Safer, MAI 

LAS VEGAS, NV - Shelli L. Lowe, MAI ST. LOUIS, MO – Roland G. Hoffman, MAI, SRA 

LOS ANGELES, CA - John G. Ellis, MAI, CRE SYRACUSE, NY – William J. Kimball, MAI 

LOUISVILLE, KY - George M. Chapman, MAI, SRA, CRE TAMPA, FL – Bradford L. Johnson, MAI 

MEMPHIS, TN - J. Walter Allen, MAI TULSA, OK – Robert E. Gray, MAI 

MIAMI, FL - Michael Y. Cannon, MAI, SRA, CRE WASHINGTON, DC – Patrick C. Kerr, MAI, SRA 

MILWAUKEE, WI – Sean Reilly, MAI WILMINGTON, DE – Douglas Nickel, MAI 

IRR de Mexico – Oscar J. Franck 

Updated 2-27-08 

1133 Avenue of the Americas ▪ 27 th Floor ▪ New York, NY 10036 ▪ Phone: 212.255.7858 ▪ Fax: 646.424.1869 ▪ www.irr.com


ADDENDUM B 

DEFINITIONS


DEFINITIONS 

These definitions have been extracted, solely or in combination, from definitions and 

descriptions printed in: 

Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice, 2005 Edition 

(USPAP) 

The Dictionary of Real Estate Appraisal, Fourth Edition, Appraisal 

Institute, Chicago, Illinois, 2002 (Dictionary) 

The Appraisal of Real Estate, Twelfth Edition, Appraisal Institute, 

Chicago, Illinois, 2001 (Twelfth Edition) 

Effective Date 

The date at which the analyses, opinions, and advice in an Appraisal, review, or 

consulting service apply. (Dictionary) 

Highest and Best Use 

The reasonably probable and legal use of vacant land or an improved property, which is 

physically possible, appropriately supported, financially feasible, and that results in the 

highest value. The four criteria the highest and best use must meet are legal permissibility, 

physical possibility, financial feasibility, and maximum profitability. (Dictionary)


ADDENDUM C 

LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION


Korb Maxwell Via Email: kmaxwell@polsinelli.com 


6201 College Blvd., Suite 500 

Overland Park, KS 66210 

SUBJECT: Proposal/Authorization for Consulting Services 

Hodgdon/Jones Tract – 200 acres + Deffenbaugh – 60 acres (the “Subject Property”) 

Shawnee, Johnson County, KS 66217 

Dear Mr. Maxwell: 

Integra Realty Resources – Kansas City (“Integra – Kansas City”), appreciates the opportunity to 

provide this proposal for consulting services to Polsinelli Shalton Flanigan Suelthaus PC (the 

“Client”) for the above-captioned property. 

It is our mutual understanding that the purpose of this report is to provide a blight study for the 

above referenced property. The intended use of the report is for private acquisition purposes. The 

report will be prepared in conformance with and subject to, the Standards of Professional Practice 

and Code of Ethics of the Appraisal Institute and the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal 

Practice (USPAP) developed by the Appraisal Standards Board of the Appraisal Foundation. 

Our fee for this assignment will be hourly not to exceed $7,500. We will provide three (3) copies of 

the report; however, additional copies of the report are available at an additional cost. The current 

minimum cost for each additional copy is $100 per copy. The report will be completed and delivered 

to you within four weeks from our receipt of this fully executed engagement letter and the 

information requested in ATTACHMENT II. 

Additional fees will be charged on an hourly basis for any work which exceeds the scope of this 

proposal, including performing additional scenarios, additional research and conference calls or 

meetings with any party which exceed the time allotted for an assignment of this nature. 

The terms of ATTACHMENT I which apply to this engagement are hereby incorporated by 

reference.

Korb Maxwell 



Page 2 of 9 

In order to complete this assignment in the designated time, we will require as much of the available 

information as possible, as identified in ATTACHMENT II, within five business days after the 

execution of this engagement letter. Any delays in the receipt of this information or in the access to 

the property will automatically extend the final delivery date of the report as proposed. Furthermore, 

the report and conclusions therein will be predicated upon the accuracy and completeness of the 

information provided by the Client and set forth in Attachment II. In the absence of some of this 

information, the consultants will attempt to obtain this information from other sources and/or may 

require the use of Extraordinary Limiting Conditions and Assumptions within the report. 

The report will be limited by our standard Assumptions and Limiting Conditions and any 

Extraordinary Assumptions and Limiting Conditions, which become apparent or necessary during 

the course of the assignment. A copy of the standard Assumptions and Limiting Conditions is set 

forth in ATTACHMENT III. 

The purpose of the report is to provide a blight study for the City of Shawnee, Kansas, on behalf of 

the Client as the intended users of the report. Without first obtaining our prior written consent, the 

use of the report by anyone other than the Client is prohibited. Accordingly, the report will be 

addressed to and shall be solely for the Client’s use and benefit unless we provide our prior written 

consent. We expressly reserve the unrestricted right to withhold our consent to your disclosure of the 

report (or any part thereof including, without limitation, conclusions of value and our identity), to 

any third parties. Stated again for clarification, unless our prior written consent is obtained, no third 

party may rely on the report (even if their reliance was foreseeable). 

In the event the Client provides a copy of this report to, or permits reliance thereon by, any person or 

entity not authorized by Integra – Kansas City, the Client agrees to indemnify and hold harmless 

Integra – Kansas City, its affiliates and its shareholders, directors, officers and employees, from and 

against all damages, expenses, claims and costs, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in investigating 

and defending any claim arising from or in any way connected to the use of, or reliance upon, the 

review by any such unauthorized person or entity. 

If the report is referred to or included in any offering material or prospectus, it shall be deemed 

referred to or included for informational purposes only and Integra – Kansas City, its employees and 

the consultants have no liability to such recipients. Integra – Kansas City disclaims any and all 

liability to any party other than the Client which retained Integra – Kansas City to prepare the report.

Korb Maxwell 




ATTACHMENT I 

ADDITIONAL TERMS 

This assignment is subject to the following terms: 

1. Completion Date Estimate: Integra – Kansas City agrees to use reasonable commercial efforts to complete this report as 

per the attached letter agreement. Said completion date is an estimate and does not take into consideration pre-trial or court 

time as well as delays beyond the control of Integra – Kansas City such as illness, lack of specific necessary data and/or 

Acts of God. 

2. Database/Marketing: Both parties acknowledge that real estate consulting requires current and historical market data to 

competently analyze the Subject Property. Accordingly, the Client agrees that: (i) the data collected by Integra – Kansas 

City in this assignment will remain the property of Integra – Kansas City; and (ii) with respect to any data provided by the 

Client, Integra – Kansas City and its partner companies may utilize, sell and include such data (either in the aggregate or 

individually), in their marketing materials, the Integra database and derivative products, including the identity of the Client 

and the Subject Property. The Client agrees that all data already in the public domain may be utilized on an unrestricted 

basis. 

3. Litigation: In the event Integra – Kansas City is called upon to provide testimony or receives a subpoena concerning any 

suit or proceeding or otherwise become involved in any litigation relating to this engagement or assignment, in which 

Integra – Kansas City is not a party, Integra – Kansas City will make every reasonable effort to assist the Client and give 

such testimony. The Client agrees to compensate Integra – Kansas City at its then current rates, on an hourly basis, plus 

reimbursement for all expenses incurred as a result of said litigation. In addition to the foregoing, the following terms are 

applicable: 

(a) Review and trial preparation (if applicable) in-office, will be billed at standard hourly rates; outside office rates 

may apply to conferences, depositions and testimony. Our current in-office rates are as follows: 

Kevin K. Nunnink, MAI 

$395 per hour 

Kenneth Jaggers, MAI; Rollie Hoffman, MAI; Jeff Pelegrin, MAI 

$250 per hour 

Directors or Principals 

(Other MAIs, CPAs, CREs, and Real Estate Brokers) 

$125–$250 per hour 

Senior Analyst $150-$250 per hour 

Analyst $100–$175 per hour 

(b) All reports for which testimony is required must be disclosed prior to report authorization. 

(c) All fees for reports, conferences and depositions must be paid prior to hearings and trial. 

(d) Scheduling of casework and appearances will be made with due consideration for the time of all persons 

involved. Every effort to comply with reasonable requests for appearances will be made. Once an appointment, 

deposition or appearance is scheduled, that time is set aside. Therefore, if the appearance is canceled, or the 

reserved time is abandoned for whatever reason, the following cancellation charges will apply: 

1. More than one week No Charge 

2. 48 Hours prior $250.00 

3. Less than 48 Hours prior $600.00 

4. A Stand-by Charge of $250.00 per day 

(e) Due to the difficulty associated with accurately forecasting the number of hours which may be required with the 

research, hearing and/or trial preparation, deposition time, client/expert conferences, etc., we will maintain 

contemporaneous time and expense records and will provide you invoices on a 30 day billing cycle. The Client 

agrees to pay Integra – Kansas City at the time the invoice is submitted and acknowledges payment to Integra – 

Kansas City is not contingent upon any set outcome, result or award to the Client.

Korb Maxwell 




4. Limitations of Liability: It is expressly agreed that in any action which may be brought against Integra – Kansas City, 

Integra Realty Resources, Inc. or their respective officers, owners, managers, directors, agents, subcontractors or 

employees (the “Integra Parties”), arising out of, relating to, or in any way pertaining to this engagement, the report, or 

any estimates or information contained therein, the Integra Parties shall not be responsible or liable for an incidental or 

consequential damages or losses, unless the report was fraudulent or prepared with gross negligence. It is further agreed 

that the collective liability of the Integra Parties in any such action shall not exceed the fees paid for the preparation of the 

report unless the report was fraudulent or prepared with gross negligence. Finally, it is agreed that the fees charged herein 

are in reliance upon the foregoing limitations of liability. 

In the event the Client provides our work or permits reliance thereon by, any person or entity not authorized by Integra – 

Kansas City in writing to use or rely thereon, Client hereby agrees to indemnify and hold Integra – Kansas City, its 

affiliates and the respective shareholders, directors, officers and employees, harmless from and against all damages, 

expenses, claims and costs, including attorneys’ fees, incurred in investigating and defending any claim arising from or in 

any way connected to the use of, or reliance upon our work by any such unauthorized person or entity. 

You acknowledge that any opinions and conclusions expressed by professionals employed by Integra – Kansas City 

during this assignment are representations made as them as employees and not as individuals. Our responsibility is limited 

to you as Client, and use of our product by third parties shall be solely at the risk of you and/or third parties. 

5. Late Fees; Etc.: Unless arrangements are made otherwise, a late charge of 15% per annum, commencing thirty (30) days 

after the receipt of invoice will be charged on any balance not paid; however, in no event shall this delinquency rate of 

interest exceed the maximum rate permitted by law. We shall also be entitled to recover our costs (including attorneys’ 

fees), associated with collecting any amounts owed or otherwise incurred in connection with this engagement. Upon 

default, we shall be permitted to file a lien against the Subject Property for any amounts owed pursuant to this 

engagement. 

6. Cancellation: In the event the assignment is canceled prior to completion, an invoice will be prepared reflecting the 

percentage of work completed as of that date. Any credits to the Client will be promptly refunded or any remaining 

balances to Integra – Kansas City will be indicated on the invoice. 

7. Responding to Review: We agree to respond to your review of our report within five (5) business days of your 

communication to us. Correspondingly, you will have twenty-one (21) days from receipt of our report to communicate 

your review. We reserve the right to bill you for responding to your review beyond this time period. 

8. Special Experts: Any out-of-pocket expenses incurred during this assignment will be billed at cost and included on the 

invoice. Should the Client request the assistance of Integra – Kansas City in hiring a special expert to contribute to this 

assignment (including but not limited to, a surveyor, environmental consultant, land planner, architect, engineer, business, 

personal property, machinery and equipment appraiser, among others), the Client agrees to perform their own due 

diligence to qualify said special expert. The Client agrees and acknowledges it is solely responsible in paying for the 

services of said special expert. Furthermore, the Client acknowledges that Integra – Kansas City is not responsible for the 

actions and findings of the special expert and agrees to hold Integra – Kansas City harmless from any and all damages that 

may arise out of the Client’s reliance on the special expert. 

9. Duration of Quote: This proposal and fees quoted are valid for a period of fourteen (14) calendar days from the date 

hereof. If not retained by the Client, the fact that we made the foregoing proposal of professional services will not 

preclude us from performing professional services for another client on the property. 

10. Marketpoint/Template: The Client acknowledges that IRR-Marketpoint, our templates and DataPoint software is 

proprietary and confidential. Accordingly, the Client agrees not to use such software or make such software available for 

the use of any third party. 

11. Arbitration: The parties agree that any dispute relating to this letter agreement or the report shall be submitted to, and 

resolved exclusively pursuant to arbitration in accordance with the commercial arbitration rules of the American 

Arbitration Association. Such arbitration shall take place in Johnson County and shall be subject to the substantive laws of 

the state of Kansas. Decisions pursuant to such arbitration shall be final, conclusive and binding on the parties. Upon the 

conclusion of the arbitration, the parties may apply to any appropriate court to enforce the decision of such arbitration.

Korb Maxwell 




ATTACHMENT II 

PROPERTY INFORMATION REQUEST 

Hodgdon/Jones Tract – 200 acres + Deffenbaugh – 60 acres 

Following is a list of items needed to complete our appraisal on the above referenced property. 

While some of the items may not be available, your assistance in gathering as much of the 

information as possible will be greatly appreciated. Additionally, the analyst may request 

additional information as needed to complete the valuation of the property. We need to receive 

this information no later than five (5) business days from authorization to proceed with 

assignment. 

Please contact Shannon McCollam at 913-748-4730 or smccollam@irr.com with any questions. 

• Copy of the last Deed of Acquisition. 

• Contact name & phone number for property inspection. 

• Current owner. 

• Information on any sales or transfers of title in the subject property over the past three years. 

At a minimum, this should include sale date, sale price, and number of lots at the time of 

sale. 

• Title report or policy. 

• Survey or plat map. 

• Legal description. 

• Tax ID #. 

• Most recent tax billing and paid receipt.

Korb Maxwell 




ATTACHMENT III 

ASSUMPTIONS & LIMITING CONDITIONS 

This report is subject to the following limiting conditions, except as otherwise noted in the report. 

1. A consulting assignment is inherently subjective and represents our opinion as to the value of the property analyzed. 

2. The conclusions stated in our report apply only as of the effective date of the report, and no representation is made 

as to the effect of subsequent events. 

3. No changes in any federal, state or local laws, regulations or codes (including, without limitation, the Internal 

Revenue Code) are anticipated. 

4. No environmental impact studies were either requested or made in conjunction with this assignment, and we reserve 

the right to revise or rescind any of the opinions based upon any subsequent environmental impact studies. If any 

environmental impact statement is required by law, the report assumes that such statement will be favorable and will 

be approved by the appropriate regulatory bodies. 

5. Unless otherwise agreed to in writing, we are not required to give testimony, respond to any subpoena or attend any 

court, governmental or other hearing with reference to the property without compensation relative to such additional 

employment. 

6. We have made no survey of the property and assume no responsibility in connection with such matters. Any sketch 

or survey of the property included in this report is for illustrative purposes only and should not be considered to be 

scaled accurately for size. The appraisal covers the property as described in this report, and the areas and dimensions 

set forth are assumed to be correct. 

7. No opinion is expressed as to the analysis of subsurface oil, gas or mineral rights, if any, and we have assumed that 

the property is not subject to surface entry for the exploration or removal of such materials, unless otherwise noted 

in our report. 

8. We accept no responsibility for considerations requiring expertise in other fields. Such considerations include, but 

are not limited to, legal descriptions and other legal matters such as legal title, geologic considerations, such as soils 

and seismic stability, and civil, mechanical, electrical, structural and other engineering and environmental matters. 

9. Neither all nor any part of the contents of this report shall be disseminated through advertising media, public 

relations media, news media or any other means of communication (including without limitation prospectuses, 

private offering memoranda and other offering material provided to prospective investors) without the prior written 

consent of the person signing the report. 

10. Information, estimates and opinions contained in the report, obtained from third-party sources are assumed to be 

reliable and have not been independently verified. 

11. Any income and expense estimates contained in the report do not constitute predictions of future operating results. 

12. No consideration has been given to personal property located on the premises or to the cost of moving or relocating 

such personal property; only the real property has been considered. 

13. The opinions found herein is subject to these and to any other assumptions or conditions set forth in the body of this 

report but which may have been omitted from this list of Assumptions and Limiting Conditions. 

14. The analyses contained in the report necessarily incorporate numerous estimates and assumptions regarding property 

performance, general and local business and economic conditions, the absence of material changes in the 

competitive environment and other matters. Some estimates or assumptions, however, inevitably will not 

materialize, and unanticipated events and circumstances may occur; therefore, actual results achieved during the 

period covered by our analysis will vary from our estimates, and the variations may be material.

Korb Maxwell 




15. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) became effective January 26, 1992. We have not made a specific survey 

or analysis of any property to determine whether the physical aspects of the improvements meet the ADA 

accessibility guidelines. In as much as compliance matches each owner’s financial ability with the cost to cure the 

non-conforming physical characteristics of a property, we cannot comment on compliance to ADA. Given that 

compliance can change with each owner’s financial ability to cure non-accessibility, the value of the subject does 

not consider possible non-compliance. A specific study of both the owner’s financial ability and the cost to cure any 

deficiencies would be needed for the Department of Justice to determine compliance. 

16. The report is prepared for the exclusive benefit of the Client, its subsidiaries and/or affiliates. It may not be used or 

relied upon by any other party. All parties who use or rely upon any information in the report without our written 

consent do so at their own risk. 

17. No studies have been provided to us indicating the presence or absence of hazardous materials on the Subject 

Property or in the improvements, and our valuation is predicated upon the assumption that the Subject Property is 

free and clear of any environment hazards including, without limitation, hazardous wastes, toxic substances and 

mold. No representations or warranties are made regarding the environmental condition of the Subject Property and 

the person signing the report shall not be responsible for any such environmental conditions that do exist or for any 

engineering or testing that might be required to discover whether such conditions exist. Because we are not experts 

in the field of environmental conditions, the appraisal report cannot be considered as an environmental assessment 

of the Subject Property. 

18. The person signing the report may have reviewed available flood maps and may have noted in the appraisal report 

whether the Subject Property is located in an identified Special Flood Hazard Area. We are not qualified to detect 

such areas and therefore do not guarantee such determinations. The presence of flood plain areas and/or wetlands 

may affect the value of the property, and our conclusion is predicated on the assumption that wetlands are nonexistent 

or minimal. 

19. Integra is not a building or environmental inspector. Integra does not guarantee that the Subject Property is free of 

defects or environmental problems. Mold may be present in the Subject Property and a professional inspection is 

recommended. 

20. It is expressly acknowledged that in any action which may be brought against Integra – Kansas City, Integra Realty 

Resources, Inc., or their respective officers, owners, managers, directors, agents, subcontractors or employees (the 

“Integra Parties”), arising out of, relating to, or in any way pertaining to this engagement, the appraisal report, or 

any estimates or information contained therein, the Integra Parties shall not be responsible or liable for an incidental 

or consequential damages or losses, unless the report was fraudulent or prepared with gross negligence. It is further 

acknowledged that the collective liability of the Integra Parties in any such action shall not exceed the fees paid for 

the preparation of the report unless the analysis was fraudulent or prepared with gross negligence. Finally, it is 

acknowledged that the fees charged herein are in reliance upon the foregoing limitations of liability. 

21. Integra – Kansas City, an independently owned and operated company shall prepare the consulting report for the 

specific purpose so stated elsewhere in this proposal. The intended use of the report is stated in the General 

Information section of the report. The use of the report by anyone other than the Client is prohibited except as 

otherwise provided. Accordingly, the report will be addressed to and shall be solely for the Client’s use and benefit 

unless we provide our prior written consent. We expressly reserve the unrestricted right to withhold our consent to 

your disclosure of the report (or any part thereof including, without limitation, conclusions of value and our 

identity), to any third parties. Stated again for clarification, unless our prior written consent is obtained, no third 

party may rely on the report (even if their reliance was foreseeable). 

22. The conclusions of this report are estimates based on known current trends and reasonably foreseeable future 

occurrences. These estimates are based partly on property information, data obtained in public record, interviews, 

existing trends, buyer-seller decision criteria in the current market, and research conducted by third parties, and such 

data are not always completely reliable. The Integra Parties and the undersigned are not responsible for these and 

other future occurrences that could not have reasonably been foreseen on the effective date of this assignment. 

Furthermore, it is inevitable that some assumptions will not materialize and that unanticipated events may occur that 

will likely affect actual performance. While we are of the opinion that our findings are reasonable based on current 

market conditions, we do not represent that these estimates will actually be achieved, as they are subject to 

considerable risk and uncertainty. Moreover, we assume competent and effective management and marketing for the 

duration of the projected holding period of this property.

Korb Maxwell 




23. All conclusions prospective to the current date and presented in this report are estimates and forecasts which are 

prospective in nature and are subject to considerable risk and uncertainty. In addition to the contingencies noted in 

the preceding paragraph, several events may occur that could substantially alter the outcome of our estimates such 

as, but not limited to changes in the economy, interest rates, and capitalization rates, behavior of consumers, 

investors and lenders, fire and other physical destruction, changes in title or conveyances of easements and deed 

restrictions, etc. It is assumed that conditions reasonably foreseeable at the present time are consistent or similar 

with the future. 

As will be determined during the course of the assignment, additional extraordinary or hypothetical conditions may be 

required in order to complete the assignment. The report shall also be subject to those assumptions. 

K:\07 Engagement Letters\Hodgkin Tract Engagement Letter.Doc

Revised Blight Study - City of Shawnee

Create successful ePaper yourself

Delete template?

Save as template?