(Recreated with permission from jhunderground.com)

Dick Edgcomb, developer of two failed golf and resort projects in the Snake River Canyon, is seeking approval from the Forest Service that could lead to construction of up to 77 homes on another piece of his riverfront property.

Edgcomb has applied for a road and utilities easement for the 144-acre parcel, which straddles the Teton-Lincoln county line about six miles south of Hoback Junction. The land is surrounded by national forest on a stretch of the Snake newly designated as Wild and Scenic.

“There is no development proposal at all,” Edgcomb said in an interview Monday. “We’re just asking for a road easement down to our property.”

The land in question was supposed to have been the subject of a swap with the Forest Service, to be preserved following approval of the highly controversial Canyon Club golf development, later renamed Snake River Sporting Club.

Edgcomb has been requesting access to the property since mid-2008, according to documents filed with the Bridger-Teton National Forest and obtained by JH Underground under the Freedom of Information Act.

He is calling the new project “River Bend Preserve.”

The developer seeks access across public land in four places, mainly a mile-long stretch of national forest where an old dirt road exists. Edgcomb has requested a 60-foot easement to bury utility lines and rebuild and pave the road, which runs from the south boundary of the Sporting Club to the 144-acre parcel. The road is projected to cost nearly $1 million. He also seeks formalized access to two corners of national forest crossed by the Sporting Club road — an easement that has been in dispute since 2002.

In Monday’s interview, Edgcomb repeatedly denied that he is pursuing further development in the canyon. But when pressed, he later said, “We may put a house down there, or two houses. It doesn’t matter.”

[Listen to interview with Dick Edgcomb]

Correspondence with the Forest Service paints a different picture, outlining the potential for anywhere from 35 to 77 residential lots.

Edgcomb’s attorney, Scott Garland, wrote in a letter dated Dec. 2, 2009, “My client has not determined how many residential lots might be developed on the property in the future.” Garland laid out the development rights permitted by each county. Half the land, or 72 acres, sits in Lincoln County, where zoning allows one residential lot per acre. “Therefore, it is probably feasible that up to 72 lots could be created on the Lincoln County portion of my client’s property,” Garland wrote. “However, my client has no intention of ever developing more than 30 lots on the Lincoln County portion.”

On the 72 acres in Teton County, zoned rural, only five lots could be built. “Therefore,” Garland wrote, “the total number of residential lots that could potentially be served by the proposed road is thirty-five.”

That’s assuming the land stays in Edgcomb’s hands, which if the two failed projects upstream are any guide, is far from a sure bet.

Canyon Club and its sister resort, Snake River Canyon Ranch, located at Astoria Hot Springs, are one of the worst development fiascoes in Teton County history. The golf club has been the subject of numerous lawsuits and twice been mired in bankruptcy. Both properties, totaling some 550 acres, were sold to the New York development company Dolan Pollak and Schram in 2005 and renamed Snake River Sporting Club.

In October 2008, the Sporting Club filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy, more than $91 million in debt. The company owed money to 456 creditors. In February, Teton County foreclosed on $6 million in bonds to finish infrastructure at the club, but that work is said to have cost substantially more, leaving the county enmeshed in the legal woes.

Edgcomb sought and received approval for the golf and resort projects separately. On the northern parcel at Astoria Hot Springs, which used to be a campground and swimming pool, the county in 1999 approved 181,700 square feet of resort buildings, including a lodge, helicopter landing pad and elk viewing tower. In 2003, after a public process marred by allegations of impropriety, commissioners approved an 18-hole golf course and 68 homesites in the river bottom at Canyon Club, situated among three bald eagle nests.

The Greater Yellowstone Coalition and Jackson Hole Conservation Alliance sued to stop the project. The Snake River Fund joined the lawsuit, fearing that levees could be built along the river and public access could be restricted if eagles were displaced. A federal judge ruled in Edgcomb’s favor, but no sooner had work began than contractors walked off the job, complaining of not being paid.

Dolan Pollak and Schram bought the land, wrested control from Edgcomb and secured financing to emerge from the first bankruptcy. The company also finished the golf course and clubhouse and began selling memberships and lots.

And made this marketing video:

In recent years the Sporting Club sought to reconfigure the Astoria project into more of a residential development than a resort — contrary to the regulations under which it was approved. Aside from the golf course, very little has been built on either parcel. Lot sales were weak, and the club spiraled deeper into debt. As the second bankruptcy loomed, developers and investors deeded pieces of the property to themselves, while contractors still wait to be paid.

The development eyed for River Bend Preserve is the latest, tragic twist in a saga that represents a colossal failure by federal agencies to coordinate oversight of the river corridor. During the Canyon Club process, the prospect of conserving the 144-acre inholding was dangled like a carrot before the public. It was widely understood that Edgcomb would work with the Forest Service and conservation groups on a land swap that would protect the isolated parcel while giving the golf club ownership of the two corners of public land crossed by the road.

In approving the final development plan for Canyon Club, Teton County commissioners attached a list of 76 conditions, one of which put five lots off-limits until the “boundary adjustment” was accomplished or a period of three years elapsed. “If the boundary adjustment negotiation appears to show promise, this term may be extended on a year-to-year basis …” the condition stated. (Eventually, the Sporting Club satisfied the county and gained permission for the lots by showing there had been no adverse impact to eagles, even though no houses had been constructed yet.)

After U.S. District Court Judge William Downes ruled in favor of Canyon Club in April 2003, the Casper Star-Tribune reported, “Left up in the air is the fate of five additional lots, while a land swap of 144 acres is pursued with the Forest Service. If the land exchange succeeds, the lots will be moved away from eagle nest sites.”

But there was never any sort of binding agreement about the swap, and no substantive discussions ever took place.

Commissioner Andy Schwartz recalls that the county struggled with the language, barred from putting a condition on property that was not part of the application at hand. An earlier planning commission draft spelled out, “In the event that a land exchange is successful with the USFS for the southern portion of the River Bend Ranch, these lots may be relocated to the corners that abut Canyon Club currently managed by the USFS, with issuance of applicable permits.” That condition was changed to the more nebulous “boundary adjustment” reference in the final version adopted by the county.

Reynolds Pomeroy, a former fishing outfitter who as a member of the Snake River Fund board was involved in the Canyon Club litigation, wistfully recalls that the prospect of a land swap faded as the club collapsed in bankruptcy. “This was a matter left unresolved with potentially the best intentions and perhaps some naive assumptions about what might transpire,” Pomeroy says. “Here we are, it’s back again.”

Franz Camenzind, former director of the Alliance, says the latest twist leaves him “very disappointed but not surprised, because we knew that was hanging there all along. … I don’t think we did a good enough job back then. That’s what scares me.”

Edgcomb’s move to develop the 144-acre inholding is sure to spark anger in the community, and the Forest Service is likely to get an earful before making a decision.

To its credit, the agency has responded to Edgcomb’s request with tough questions. In a letter dated Aug. 24, District Ranger Dale Deiter wrote, “From our past meetings, we were aware that the applicant desired a 60 ft. wide easement; however we were not aware that this would involve a 1.5 million dollar road improvement as well. Increasing the footprint of the existing road would have to be evaluated for environmental impacts including those that are relative to the Scenic designation of the Snake River under the Wild and Scenic Rivers Act.”

Furthermore, Deiter wrote, “We are concerned with a large scar that was inadequately rehabbed on a slope to the north of this area when a power line was buried for the Snake River Sporting Club’s access. Our understanding is that this cut was different and larger than what was approved by the Forest Service. Before authorizing the burial of any additional utility lines along that road, we will need to insure that the scar is completely rehabbed. In addition, we will need to insure that any damage to the resource that may be created by approving the new use and burial of utility lines will be fully reclaimed immediately after any improvements are completed.”

Deiter also asked that Edgcomb “better specify the scope of the development” so that the Forest Service would be “better able to analyze the potential impacts of the additional access and road improvement.”

Garland’s letter of Dec. 2, outlining the potential for 77 lots, was in response to Deiter’s questions. As for the road scar, that is the problem of Snake River Sporting Club, Garland asserts. “It is our understanding that Teton County has been using funds from a Snake River Sporting Club performance bond to complete infrastructure for that project. Perhaps the Forest Service should ask the County to use some of those funds to fulfill the Sporting Club’s obligation to re-vegetate the disturbed area,” he wrote.

Camenzind says the inholding still could be the target of a swap — just not the type the community envisioned. “What I fear he’s doing is setting this up for a higher value, getting all these permits, and then selling to someone.”

As he has pursued the various developments in the canyon, Edgcomb’s credibility has been called into question. He first sought to build a golf hole on an island in the Snake River, which he maintained was a peninsula. The county rejected that idea.

Then, to avoid a 150-foot setback along the river, Edgcomb renamed channels of the Snake as “Trout Creek.” The county planning department accepted this assertion, and even after the Jackson Hole News produced historical photos showing the river flowing through the channels, Edgcomb was permitted to build several golf holes in the flood plain.

During the litigation in federal court, Edgcomb portrayed himself as a rancher pursuing the golf development to sustain the viability of his ranch. Judge Downes bought that argument, even though it was plainly obvious to the community that the developer was raising only trophy homes.

During Monday’s interview, Edgcomb was asked if any private parties had inquired about buying the 144-acre parcel. “No,” he said flatly.

Several days earlier, a person who spoke on condition of anonymity had told JH Underground that they tried to buy the land three years ago with an eye on preserving it, but were rebuffed by Edgcomb. The Forest Service was open to the idea of a swap, but Edgcomb was “totally uninterested,” the person said. “Now we know why.”

District Ranger Deiter (ddeiter@fs.fed.us) has formed a proposal review team headed by Dale Dawson (ddawson@fs.fed.us / 739-5426) and administered by Dee Dee Witsen (dwitsen@fs.fed.us). The team was slated to inform utility companies Lower Valley Energy and Qwest of a decision by Dec. 21, but Witsen said that notification likely won’t be sent until after the holidays.

——————————————————–

• Water hazard: Will Canyon Club golf development harm the Snake? (June 12, 2002)
• Does the river run through it? (July 24, 2002)
• River users criticize Army Corps oversight (Sept. 4, 2002)
• Edgcomb digs as critics cry foul (June 17, 2002)

——————————————————–

>>  More Info:  December 30th article by Jackson Hole News and Guide

Filed under: Watershed News, Wild & Scenic News on December 30th, 2009