The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1.0 Extension Request 04.26.2011MEMORANDUM BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERSTO: FROM: RE: DATE: FRED A. JARMAN, AICP, DIRECTOR, BUILDING & PLANNING O"'.(1 REQUEST FOR AN ADDITIONAL I-YEAR EXTENSION FOR ,,HIGH MESA RV PARK" MAY 16, 2011 iN I \ \. /t' H I. BACKGROUND The Board of County Commissioners (BOCC) approved a Land Use Change Permit for the High Mesa RV Park via a Major lmpact Review process in 2009 (memorialized in Resolution 2OO9-72). The Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended provides that an Applicant has 1 year to complete / satisfy conditions of approval; otherwise, the approval expires. On August !6,2O1O, the Applicants (collectively: High lVljsa leIDers, LLC, Drybrerk RealW, LLC and James and Monique Speakman) were granted a 1 year extension to meet these conditions of ,ppror.l. This approval granted them an extension to September 21, 2OI7. (This is memorialized in Resolution 2010-56 attached to this memo.) i'i':?t'' , z't/ II. REQUEST L*) 4, '' , Lot?z The Applicants have submitted a letter asking the BOCC grant an additional 1 year extension to September 27,2012. This letter is attached to this memo.) The ULUR provides that only one 1- year extension may be granted by the BOCC. Specifically, Section 4-103(G)(8XbX3) of the ULUR states the following: Maior lmpact Review. The Boord's decision to approve or conditionally approve o land use chonge opplicotion by Major lmpoct Review shall be effective for a period of one yeor. Prior to expiration of the original Major lmpoct Review approvol, the opplicont moy request an extension of one year to complete conditions of approval. III. STAFF COMMENTS While the ULUR is clear that only one l-year extension may be granted, Staff believes that the BOCC has provided recent policy direction in this area specifically related to the looming expirations of preliminary plans. ln that instance, the ULUR also allowed only 1 year extensions; however, because there were significant challenges for Applicants in acquiring their financing and dealing with the general down turn in the economic climate, the BOCC granted extensions (despite the code) but directed Staff to process text amendments to the ULUR that included language to provide additional flexibility in certain circumstances. Staff did that which resulted t) H'':l^\ A.- ;t t!" \ ^/,,,u""J, in the following newly adopted code language for preliminary plans which are memorialized in Resolution 2O7O-77: Section 4-103(G)(8)(a) 8. Expiration of Approval. unless otherwise provided by these Regulations or stated in oction approving a land use change application, the decision to opprove or conditionally approve the land use chonge sholl be valid for o period of one yeor, to complete all conditions of opprovol. a. Division of Land. (7) Conditional Approval. The Board's decision to approve or conditionally approve the preliminary plan, minor exemption, moior exemption or rurol londs development exemption shall be effective for a period of up to one year or until the finat or exemption plot has received o Determination of Completeness pursuant to Section 4-103(C), Determinotion of Completeness, whichever occurs first. lf approvol lapses, the Plonning Director shall record a lopse of approvol affidavit with the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder (Resolution 2010-77). Prior to expirotion of any approvol, the applicont may make a request for an extension to the Board of County Commissioners. The Boord moy grant an extension ol up to two years bosed on a request contoining the following su b m itto I re q u i re m e nts : t.Fee A narrative stoting the reasons for the applicont's inobility to comply with the specified deadlines of this section such as unforeseen circumstances ond a demonstration of how the applicont is reosonably pursuing submission of o Final Plot, listing any changes in the chorocter of the neighborhood, any changes in the County's Comprehensive Plon, and the Unified Land tJse Resolution of 2008, os omended. Criteria: the Board of County Commissioners may opprove an extension if it finds that the extension does not result in any inconsistency between conditions of opproval, the Comprehensive Plan, the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as omended or thot ony inconsistency con be mitigated by specific conditions. should o change be required to ony conditions of approval, they shall occur in o noticed public hearing pursuant to Section 4-103(F) of the unified Land lJse Resolution of 2008, os omended (Resolution 2010-77). il. staff is presenting this request to be consistent with the spirit of where the Bocc policy direction was set last year' staff believes that to be consistent, the Bocc may wish to initiate atext amendment for expiration of Land Use Change Permits in a similar fashion to what the BOCC did for preliminary plans. As a practical matter, this request does not result in an inconsistency between conditions ofapproval of Resolution 2009-72, the comprehensive Plan zo3o, and the Unified Land Use Resolution of 2008, as amended which are the current criteria for requests for preliminary plan extension approvals' Additionally, if this were consistent with how the Bocc treats preliminary plans, the Bocc could have granted the Applicant a 2 year extension rather than a l-year extension in August, 2o7o.ln other words, the net effect would be that the Applicant would not have needed to come back to ask for another 1-year extension. IV. BOCC DIRECTION The Applicant is requesting an additional 1-year extension to septemb er 21., 201,2 to complete conditions of approval for the RV Park. staff suggests if the Bocc grants this request, they alsodirect staff to process an amendment to the ULUR to codify a process including criteria for doing so. ^ ,l ' 0 "*1'Pry' tLl ,4 t, - fl'l O fuY+ rtn^t* r lf'lrn " nt2 ',-u./-,1,* , I ROCKY MOUNTAI|Y STEEL STRUCTURE S, I]YC. 353 EAST VISTA DR. SILT. co 81652 / pHor.\E 970-876-5878 pax szo-si648z / Fss@tsap.isae! "LEARN MORE ABOUT US AT WWW. RMSTEELSTRUCTURES.COM Fred Garmin Garfield County Building Dept. RE: High Mesa RV Park Resolution No. 2009-72 4l26t1t Fred, We appreciate all that you and the board have done in the past to assist us with our High Mesa RV park project in Battlement Mesa. We are still very eager to get started but due to the continued poor economy and the tight bank and lending requirements we have found ourselves unable to do so this year as planned. We hope things turn around to allow us to get started :rr,2}l2 but at this time fmd owselves unable to satisfz all the conditions of Approval in the Resolution by our September 2r,20fi deadline. Therefore I am requesting an additional one year extension to satisfu all the requirements. I ulderstand that current policy allows only one extension but hope that the board will grant us one more year to ensure a strong and successful project. Your and the Boards help in this matter is greatly appreciated. Thanks you, Jerry Rusch Representative for the High Mesa RV Park