- 17 -
Respondent argues that, despite the fact that the parcel of
30.3 acres was zoned M-1, there was not a reasonable probability
in 1992 that it would be used as an industrial park in the
reasonably near future. Furthermore, respondent contends that
petitioners' retention of the 8.56 acres effectively eliminated
the possibility of the parcel of 30.3 acres' becoming an
industrial park because of the lack of reasonable access to a
main commercial thoroughfare.
3. Additional Information
The Litton property was located in the northeast part of
Lubbock. Respondent contends that, during the last 20 years,
most of the real estate development has taken place in the
southeast and southwest parts of Lubbock. Mr. Cantrell indicated
in his report that the bulk of industrial development had been in
southeast Lubbock.
Mr. Cantrell's report further stated that Lubbock had
virtually no growth since 1984 and that general business activity
was still somewhat depressed in Lubbock, but had improved over
the recent past. Additionally, Mr. Cantrell's report states that
there was a relatively slow market for land in the neighborhood
in which the Litton property was located.
4. Conclusion
We have reviewed the maps submitted with the expert reports.
The maps clearly identify two properties as lots that were part
Page: Previous 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 NextLast modified: May 25, 2011