- 23 -
Petitioner primarily relies on Mr. Baker's statements to
determine its intent at the time of the exchange. In support of
its intent not to subdivide the Exchange Property, petitioner
lists several factors: (1) Cost of off-site improvements,
(2) lack of housing market, (3) other obstacles, and (4) health
concerns. According to petitioner, the primary reasons for not
subdividing the Exchange Property were the cost of the off-site
improvements and its unsuccessful sales record in selling the 14
lots in Tract No. 10018-1.
(1) Feasibility of Development (Off-Site Costs)
Petitioner claims that the cost of off-site improvements
prohibited development of the 48 lots in the Exchange Property.
As a result, petitioner argues that it held the Exchange Property
for investment. In regard to the Exchange Property, petitioner
received an estimate of off-site costs in 1987 in the amount of
$389,435.81, and received another estimate in 1988 in the amount
9(...continued)
On behalf of our client Neal T. Baker Enterprises Inc. owner
of approved Tentative Tract No. 10018 we hereby request
permission to phase Tract 10018. Our client wishes to
initially improve and build on lots adjacent to Pennsylvania
Avenue (Lots 1-14 as shown on the attached print of a copy
of the approved Tentative map from Tract 10018).
Although it is the owner's intent to phase this Tract
into two phases, defining the initial Tract by number 10018-
1; subsequent phases, if any, would be defined as Tract No.
10018-2, Tract No. 10018-3 etc., with the number 10018
defining the last phase. Improvement plans, street, sewer,
water grading etc. shall be modified to correspond and made
compatible for any and all phases to the satisfaction of the
city of Beaumont.
Page: Previous 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011