Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutR06-012 - Rec #200619808 - approving moratorium exception for Penelope Salcido r . <;:t / Commissioner /" /VfJ1Lf' moved adoption of the following Resolution: BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO RESOLUTION NO. 2006 _ RESOLUTION APPROVING THE MORATORIUM EXCEPTION REQUEST FOR PENELOPE SALCIDO EAGLE COUNTY FILE NUMBER: MO-00002 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 December 12,2005, the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, accepted for filing an application submitted by Penelope Salcido, (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 January 3, 2006 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 ofConnty Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado, finds as follows: a) The extent to which thc 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 pennits or approvals from Eagle County; however, the applicant has applied for a Snbdivision Exemption application, which is in its final stages of the on-going process. The application was filed in September of2004. No permits or approvals have been granted by Eagle Connty; however, the applicant has applied and is in the rmal stages of a Subdivision Exemption. b) The exteut to which the applicant has, prior to October 4,2005, made a substantial expenditure of money or resources in advance on permits or otber approvals of the county directly associated with pbysical improvements on tbe land such as grading, installation of utilities infrastructure or any other public improvements; 1 To date, the applicant has made substantial investment in its due diligence. The expenditures by the applicant were for surveying, legal fees and related fees for the on- going Subdivision Exemption application. 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; The applicant hopes to achieve approval for permits or other approvals from Eagle County to complete the goals of the applicant. The applicant has been in negotiations and/or commitments with neighbors prior to October 4, 2005; however, no permits or other County approvals have been granted for the applicant to rely upon thus far. 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; Although most costs that have occurred with the Subdivision Exemption application are "out of pocket" and not directly with a lending institution; there is reliance in the approval for the lot line adjustment (by virtue of the Subdivision Exemption, or Minor Type A Subdivision, if granted the moratorium exception) outcome to rectify the parking situation of the subject property. In proceeding with a change of zoning, the applicant also hopes to rectify the current zoning situation which has developed as part of the history of the property. 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 may incur a financial loss if the land use applications are ultimately not approved. The approval of the moratorium would allow for the applicant 2 to move forward in applying for a more applicable zoning for this property; thus allowing the applicant to potentially achieve a greater value for the property and a reasonable expectation for the property. The applicant is exposed to substantial monetary liability to third persons. It is certain at this time that 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 will consider the following non-exclusive factors under the criteria set forth above: 1) The history of the property; Lots 1,2 & 3 of the Argo Lode mining claim were once part of the Town of Red Cliff and de-annexed in 1984. In 1981, a single-family home and a 2-bedroom rental dwelling was built on Lot 1 (subject property). A few years later a 600 sq. ft garage with an office unit that is plumbed for a bathroom above the garage was also built. Lot 1 and the garage on Lot 1 are accessible only via an historic access road named the "Albert Access Road". This road is the sole point of access for the existing home and garage on Lot 1; the "Albert Access Road" bisects Lot 3 and terminates in front of the garage located on Lot 1. While under contract to buy 228 High Street, Ms. Salcido rented out the residence for approximately 2 years. Lot 3 was sold to Brian Blackstock in 1994. Ms. Salcido went on to purchase Lot 1 in 2002. 2) The history of any development on the property; During the construction of the Blackstock residence (Lot 3), portions of the existing access easement servicing the Salcido residence (Lot 1) was altered and excavated without approval. This excavation has significantly affected the legal access easement to Ms. Salcido's property. As a result, Ms. Salcido has been in negotiations for a lot line adjustment since prior to April 3, 2003, to adjust the line common to Lots 1 and 3 so that the parking and access for Lot 1 would actually become part of Lot 1. In September of2004, Ms. Salcido submitted a lot line adjustment (via the Subdivision Exemption process) to the County. 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' (there are three classifications for Future Land Use in Red Cliff: Town; Forest Service; and Rural. If you are not in the Town, all properties are designated as either Forest Service or Rural). The 'Rural' classification recommends residential densities of one unit per thirty-five or more acres. 3 4) The history of the property's zoning; The 228 High Street property was originally in the town of Red Cliff boundary and was zoned Mixed Use/Multi-Family. All existing improvements on the subject property were constructed while the property was still part of Red Cliff. The property was de-annexed from the Town and into Eagle County around 1984. At the time that the property was de- annexed, Eagle County assigned a zone district designation of 'Resource' to Lot 1. The Resource zone district requires a minimum of35 acres, whereas, Lot 1 currently consists of only 5227 square feet or 0.12 acres. As such, the Resource zone was not a realistic zone district for this property and created a non-conforming property in 1984. The 228 High Street property is and has always been utilized as a mixed use/multi-family property - neither of which is allowed by the Resource zone district. Ms. Salcido recently spoke to the town of Red Cliff board members as to whether annexing back into the town is possible, however, after preliminary discussions with the Town, it appears as though there will be a significant cost and ordeal to annex (at Ms. Salcido's expense) and that the Town may not want to annex this property. 5) Any change in development when property ownership is changed; The most current owners of Lot 3 have encroached upon the sole access road across to Lot 1, the subject property. Ms. Salcido can no longer parks unhindered or access her garage pursuant to my access easement across Lot 3 until a court ruling has been granted or until such a time as the Subdivision Exemption has been approved. 6) The present nature, size and use of the property; Lot 1 consists of 5227 sq. feet per the County Assessor's records, and its present use has always been and remains to be mixed use and multi-family dwelling in a residential area. 7) Any other factors deemed relevant by the Board in making a hardship determination. 8) The main reason for the request of the moratorium, and ultimately a change in zoning is to remedy the current zoning situation, while in the process of creating the Exemption plat. With the potential change in zoning, the multi-family use of the 228 High Street property would remain the same; however, the ownership arrangement would change. In essence, the applicant would like to eliminate the accessory dwelling unit/landlord arrangement, and in lieu of the ADU, allow for a second, independently owned dwelling unit. The applicant also hopes to sell the second dwelling in order to find a more reasonable solution to the parking, snow removal and safe turn-around situation, during the development of the second unit. According to the applicant, the adjacent property owner of Lot 3 have encroached onto the subject property's access easement/road and as such, prevents parking, proper snow storage, safe turn-around, and a much narrower access to the subject property. 4 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Board of County Commissioners of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado: THAT, the application of Penelope Salcido, File No. MO-00002, for a moratorium exception be and is hereby APPROVED. 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 7th day of February, 2006, nunc pro tunc to the 3rd day of January, 2006. COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, By and BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS ATTEST: B0~~ BY: Peter F. unyon, Chair Clerk to the Board of County Commissioners Commissioner seconded adoption of the foregoing resolution. The roll having been called, the vote was as follows: Commissioner Peter F. Runyon Commissioner Tom C. Stone Commissioner Am M. Menconi /:;J.) J I ,.-, This Resolution passed by / l/ vote of the Board of County Commissioner of the County of Eagle, State of Colorado. 5