- 16 - healthy annual appreciation rate, and an aggressive sellout or absorption of the project. Number of Lots The first value difference that must be reconciled is the determination of the number of lots into which the Property could have been developed. While both Mr. Flint and Mr. Sullivan were qualified as expert witnesses, we find that Mr. Sullivan's local experience and hands-on knowledge with respect to the development of property more persuasive. Therefore, we give greater weight to Mr. Sullivan's subdivision plan, which obtains the maximum benefit of the available land. However, Mr. Sullivan's plan employs an access road over a portion of land retained by petitioner. Without an easement for this road, several of the lots would be inaccessible. The record indicates that petitioner did not deed such access in his conveyance of the Property to the Commonwealth.10 Petitioner testified that he would have transferred such an easement if he had been requested to do so. Nevertheless, respondent argues that if the Property is appraised assuming access could be acquired, then there should be a 10Although petitioner did not grant the Commonwealth an easement for automobile traffic as required in Mr. Sullivan's plan, he did grant an easement over a different portion of his remaining property to access the Property for pedestrian and bicycle traffic.Page: Previous 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011