Denver developer says Eagle County is telling private builders to ‘pound sand’ in housing crisis

A Denver developer claiming to own a half-acre parcel in Edwards and now facing an eminent domain seizure of that property by Eagle County on Thursday questioned the competency of local government officials in the wake of Tuesday’s resolution and vowed not to sell and to keep fighting for more affordable housing for local residents.

“Watching Eagle County’s elected commissioners vote to condemn land intended for much-needed housing was like seeing three people dying of thirst intentionally kick over a bucket of water being offered to them,” Larson wrote in an email statement after press time on Wednesday.

“Even if the county had a genuine willingness and institutional competency to address the county’s massive shortage of affordable housing, the resources required are far too significant for government to solve alone,” Larson added. “Yet, (Tuesday’s) message to every private developer willing to undergo the regulatory gauntlet to be part of the solution was loud and clear: ‘pound sand.'”

The commissioners on Tuesday unanimously approved a resolution authorizing negotiations with Larson and last-resort eminent domain seizure of the property, which, along with its own land, it wants to preserve as parkland, open space and access to the Eagle River for nearby residents who — through surveys, site visits and other public input opportunities — overwhelmingly expressed an interest in keeping the combined parcels free of more housing development.

But the county on Thursday, in a press release touting its “Strategic Plan Goal to Create Housing Solutions for Locals,” acknowledged the oft-cited 2025 Housing Needs Assessment showing a current shortage of 2,638 workforce housing units, with an additional 3,736 units needed by 2035. Larson said there is very little buildable private land in the county to meet those goals.

Support Local Journalism

Donate

Larson, who has built high-end homes in Eagle County but says he’s been stymied in his efforts to build more affordable projects, said he appreciated the county’s outside legal counsel pushing for good-faith negotiations in the ownership dispute. But Larson adds he’s not interested in selling the property and last month filed a federal civil rights complaint against the commissioners and the assessor, making a settlement unlikely at this point.

Larson cites thousands of pages of internal records and two years of trying to clear up his ownership of the half-acre Peterson property, which he paid $20,000 for several months after the county paid $3.8 million for the adjacent River House parcel, which was originally described as the one-word Riverhouse and has since been changed to two words.

Larson said the county outbid him for the River House parcel, but that purchase did not include the Peterson parcel, despite a county assertion claiming nearly four total acres. The county now claims an historical right-of-way easement on the Peterson parcel providing access to the River House property.

“For this plan to work best, the county wishes to utilize a small strip of land adjacent to the parcel to ensure the park extends to the boundary of the Eagle River Mobile Home Park and can be accessed easily and safely by the mobile home park’s residents,” Eagle County Commissioner Tom Boyd wrote in an email statement. “We have offered fair market value to parties, even those with a legally unverified claim to that strip, in the spirit of good faith, including developer Matt Larson. Unfortunately, that offer was refused.”

Larson cites another infamous property dispute in recent Eagle County history — the Booth Heights parcel in East Vail that wound up in years of costly litigation between the town of Vail and Vail Resorts. That fight over private property also involved an affordable housing project.

“(Eagle County) had no trouble recognizing Vail Resorts as the record-title owner of its East Vail property — but in our case, Eagle County wants the land for itself,” Larson said. “It is like a vital records clerk refusing to issue a birth certificate because the clerk’s employer is trying to take the child. For two years, we have asked the county to identify a single recorded interest that conflicts with our chain of title. Not one has been provided. Not one.”

While Larson contends that both the River House property and his Peterson parcel should be used for housing, Commissioner Boyd explained why he thinks housing won’t work there.

“Developer Matt Larson claims that he intends to build affordable housing on a 40-foot strip of land adjacent to the River House parcel that historically served as a driveway and has been reflected as a right-of-way in county records,” Boyd said. “While we support affordable housing in general, Eagle County staff do not believe that his project could ever be feasible at this location, noting that the eastern 20 feet of the parcel is encumbered by another easement, and the western 20 feet has historically served as the only access to the River House parcel.”

County officials on Tuesday went to great lengths to explain why the River House property should remain open space. Larson disagrees and originally wanted to work with the county to access federal funds to build rental housing at 60% AMI (area median income).

“We’ve invested far too much time and money to walk away, and selling would condone the County’s shenanigans that drove up those costs — all of which are detailed at http://www.EdwardsAffordable.com,” Larson wrote. “Unnecessary delays and expenses are a luxury that our plan for six price-capped rental units at $1,500 a month simply cannot afford.”

Boyd countered that the six-unit plan simply isn’t feasible.

“Any development of the 40-foot strip (Peterson parcel), for affordable housing or otherwise, would require a multitude of extensive variations to the county’s land use and engineering standards,” Boyd said. “We hope interested parties would reach the same conclusion and accept a fair market offer for any claims they may have to this land.”

That is clearly not going to be the case at this point.

“Accountability here matters; other efforts are also underway,” Larson said. “As for the condemnation, a potential recall election is being explored. If feasible, we will outline our thoughts about the leadership changes needed to really move the affordable housing needle for the entire valley — not just our project — and we look forward to hearing from voters if it is time for a new direction.”

County officials declined to comment either on Larson’s lawsuit in U.S. District Court or his threats of a potential recall. Larson is a Denver resident and did not attend Tuesday’s hearing in Eagle.