Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR06-006 denying moratorium exception for Hardy Management - 84 Lumber Commissioner ~ O'-....A ~ moved adoption of the following Resolution: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 2006 - 60~ RESOLUTION DENYING MORATORIUM EXCEPTION REQUEST FOR HARDY MANAGEMENT COMPANY, LLC / 84 LUMBER COMPANY EAGLE COUNTY FILE NUMBER: MO-00001 WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2005-121, the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado (hereinafter the "Board"), is authorized to grant exceptions to the moratorium on zone changes; and WHEREAS, on or about October 25,2005, the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, accepted for filing an application submitted by 84 Lumber Company, (hereinafter "Applicants") seeking an exception to the moratorium language; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, on December 13,2005 to consider this application; and WHEREAS, based on the evidence, testimony, exhibits, and the moratorium exception hardship criteria delineated in Resolution No. 2005-121, comments of the Eagle County Department of Community Development, comments of public officials and agencies, and comments from all interested parties, the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, finds as follows: a) The extent to which the applicant has, prior to October 4, 2005, received Eagle County permits or approvals for the proposed development; To date, the applicant has not received any permits or approvals from Eagle County. No permits or approvals have been granted by Eagle County. b) The extent to which the applicant has, prior to October 4, 2005, made a substantial expenditure of money or resources in advance on permits or other approvals of the county directly associated with physical improvements on the land such as grading, installation of utilities infrastructure or any other public improvements; To date, the applicant has made investment in its due diligence. The expenditures by the applicant, however, were not for permits or any other county approval. No expenditure of money or resources in advance on county permits or other approvals directly associated with physical improvements on the land have occurred to date. c) Whether the applicant, prior to October 4, 2005, has contractual commitments and reliance upon permits or other approvals to complete the project; Based upon representations made by the applicant, the applicant has lost non refundable earnest money through its contractual relationship with the landowner based upon the prospects of being able to proceed to seek a PUD Application / Zoning on the site. HMC has incurred other contractual obligations for certain engineering, surveying, land planning and other services on the site which will have to be paid. At this point in time, the applicant does not have reliance upon permits or other approvals from Eagle County to complete the project. The applicant has entered into contractual commitments prior to October 4, 2005. No permits or other County approvals have been ~ranted for the applicant to rely upon. d) Whether the applicant, prior to October 4, 2005, has in reliance upon permits or approvals of the county incurred financial obligations to a lending institution which despite a thorough review of the alternative solutions, the applicant cannot meet unless development proceeds; Based upon representations made by the applicant, the applicant, as part of a master line of credit, has identified the subject property as a potential for funding through the line of credit. Under such line of credit certain items are required for such financing, including a title commitment, AL T A survey and Phase I environmental report. Again, reliance upon county approvals is not the basis for these financial obligations incurred by the applicant. Rather, the applicant's expenditures to date are for its own due diligence. The applicant has incurred financial obligations though no permits or other County approvals have been granted for the applicant to rely upon. e) Whether the moratorium would expose the applicant to substantial monetary liability to third persons; or would leave the applicant completely unable after a thorough review of alternative solutions to earn a reasonable investment-backed expectation on the property. Based upon representations made by the applicant, the applicant has incurred monetary liability to third persons and would incur a financial loss if the PUD Sketch Plan, PUD Preliminary Plan, Zone Change, and PUD Final Plat are ultimately not approved. The applicant can proceed at this time with the PUD Sketch Plan application absent approval of a moratorium exception. This is not dissimilar to any other PUD Sketch Plan application processed by Eagle County - the applicant will not be able to proceed to the Zone Change phase of approval until a Sketch Plan application has been approved by the Board of County Commissioners. The applicant is exposed to substantial monetary liability to third persons. Given the absence of PUD Sketch Plan approval by Eagle County, it is uncertain whether or not the applicant will be completely unable, after a thorough review of alternative solutions, to earn a reasonable investment-backed expectation on the property. The Board of County Commissioners also considered the following non-exclusive factors under the criteria set forth above: 1) The history of the property; Based upon representations made by the applicant, the proposed portion of the Property to be acquired by the applicant has materially been unused. The history of the site and the surrounding property is described in Exhibit C of the applicants' moratorium exception request. The site is comprised of sagebrush and rock outcroppings. The applicant understands that the remaining portion of the Property had been used for growing alfalfa and cattle. The entire property was sold to Chemical Lime Company in the 1980's with the intention to mine a 2200 acre tract of land. However, this use never occurred and the entire Property was sold to Coyote River Ranch, LLC in December, 2004. 2) The history of any development on the property; There has been no history of development on the subject property. 3) The history of property's future land use map classification; The Future Land Use Map of the Master Plan classifies the subject property as 'Rural Center' and 'Rural'. Rural Center is intended to provide limited commercial services to serve the needs ofthe immediate neighborhood. The 'Rural' classification recommends residential densities of one unit per thirty-five or more acres. 4) The history of the property's zoning; The subject property has been zoned 'Resource' since October 19, 1974 when Eagle County first adopted and implemented zoning. 5) Any change in development when property ownership is changed; Once the applicant purchases the property and receives the necessary County approvals, the future use of the property may be for a lumber yard. 6) The present nature, size and use of the property; Based upon representations made by the applicant, the 10 acre property is a portion of a ranch that is characterized by sagebrush, rabbit brush and field rock and,/as such, has never been utilized agriculturally even though that is the purpose for which it is zoned. There are no structures on the property and due to the topography it has not been uses as irrigated pasture or for hay production. 7) Any other factors deemed relevant by the Board in making a hardship determination. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado: THAT, the application of Hardy Management Company, LLC / 84 Lumber Company, File No. MO-00001, for a moratorium exception be and is hereby DENIED. THAT, the Board of County Commissioners directs the Department of Community Development to provide a copy of this Resolution to the Applicant. THAT, the Board hereby finds, determines and declares that this Resolution is necessary for the health, safety and welfare of the citizens of Eagle County. MOVED, READ AND ADOPTED by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, at its regular meeting held this 24th day of January, 2006, nunc pro tunc to the 13th day of December, 2005. ATTEST: ~":i. By: I '.__-4'J. Teak J. Simonton Vi2tJJk Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners By: Tom C. Stone, Commissioner By: Am M. Menconi, Commissioner Commissioner ~L..A '-t OL.J. seconded adoption of the foregoing Resolution. The roll having been called, the vote was as follows: Commissioner Peter F. Runyon ~ tc Commissioner Tom C. Stone A Commissioner Am M. Menconi This Resolution passed by 7-/ 0 vote of the Board of County Commissioners of the County . of Eagle, State of Colorado.