Rist Canyon development plan pulled

By Cherry Sokoloski
North Forty News

A contentious development proposal for a ranch in Rist Canyon was heard by the Larimer County commissioners on Nov. 21, but the matter never came to a vote. Landowner Bruce Maloof, who wanted to further divide his 440-acre ranch to make it more saleable, withdrew his application after more than an hour of testimony, just as the commissioners were ready to vote on the matter. The inclination of the board at that time, according to all three commissioners, was to deny Maloof's request.

Maloof had two matters on the table: an appeal that would have allowed him to do an additional minor land division; and, if that appeal were approved, a request for an MLD that would split 440 acres into three large parcels.

The county planning staff recommended denying both requests. County planner Matt Lafferty provided a history of the property in question, noting that Maloof was granted two minor land divisions in 1998 and 1999. A note on the plat of the second MLD stated that any further land division would have to go through a standard subdivision process. Maloof has already used the MLD right as much as the county allows, Lafferty contended.

Neighbors concerned

About 25 Rist Canyon neighbors showed up to argue against both of Maloof's proposals. Several cited the scarcity of water in the area as a major concern if the property were eventually divided into small parcels.

Rist Canyon resident Kathy Lake produced a real estate flyer advertising several parcels for sale on the Maloof ranch, although those parcels do not yet legally exist. "Why should we allow a large landowner to use and abuse the land use process?" she asked. "He has displayed a complete lack of respect for county government and the processes of land division for his own selfish purposes."

Holding up the flyer, commissioner Karen Wagner said the county does not condone "the perpetration of unscrupulous business practices" in land division. She also said that granting the appeal to create another MLD would be an "abuse of the land use process."

Options still open

According to the 1999 MLD agreement, if Maloof wants to further divide his property, he must use either the rural land use process or the conservation development process. Both of these subdivision processes are more stringent than an MLD, requiring the applicant to consider impacts on resources such as water, wildlife and roads. MLDs, according to Lafferty, were designed to give property owners with large parcels an opportunity to create some value on their property without abandoning their agricultural pursuits, but they are very limited in scope.

With the 1998 and 1999 MLDs, Maloof created four parcels, including three 10-acre parcels and the remainder of 440 acres. Four parcels are the maximum possible using the MLD process. At the November hearing, however, Maloof stated he had had difficulty selling the large parcel and thought he would have more success by dividing it into three pieces.

Part of the reason for choosing the MLD process, Maloof said, was to leave the land in larger parcels and retain the beauty of the area. He said he purchased the Rist Canyon property in 1997 for his horse breeding operation, but the economy has "gone downhill" for that business.

Commissioner Glenn Gibson said he was concerned about setting a precedent if the county allowed Maloof to create a third MLD. None of the planners at the hearing could recall another case of three MLDs being approved.

"You can't have your cake and eat it, too," when it comes to land division, stated senior planner Rob Helmick. He noted that Maloof could have divided his land into 35-acre parcels, without county review, if he hadn't chosen the MLD route in the 1990s.

Commissioner Kathay Rennels pointed out that even if Maloof is not allowed to use the MLD process again, he could still develop his property through one of the standard subdivision processes. In fact, early this past summer he did submit an application to the Rural Land Use Center for developing five five-acre parcels on 123 acres, with the balance left as open space. However, since the 123 acres were part of the 440-acre parcel previously created, he was told he would first have to split off the smaller piece. At that point he began looking into the third MLD, according to Jim Reidhead, director of the RLUC.

In mid-November, Reidhead said, Maloof withdrew his RLUC application.

After the hearing, Maloof declined to comment on alternative plans he may have for dividing his property.