Laserfiche WebLink
AUG 13 1986 <br />RECOMMENDATION:�P <br />BOOK 65 F,�GE406 <br />Staff recommends that the Board of County Commissioners deny the <br />request to accept a letter of guaranty in lieu of posted security <br />in conjunction with the Hawk's Nest golf course Stormgrove Road <br />developer's agreement. <br />Staff Planner Stan Boling explained that there have been <br />some changes since the above memo was written, and Assistant <br />County Attorney Bruce Barkett advised that he is basically asking <br />the Board to approve just the concept today of allowing a <br />mortgage to be used as a security backup for the construction <br />agreement rather than an irrevocable letter of credit. He <br />believed that we will find that that it will be a second mortgage <br />for $81,000, with the first mortgage of $800,000 on property <br />appraised iti excess of $1.5 million. <br />Chairman Scurlock noted that in this particular case we are <br />not sure whether or not the improvement will be made, and he is <br />looking for something unique because he did not want to get into <br />accepting mortgages as security on projects. <br />Attorney Barkett stressed that the developer does not want <br />to tie up $81,000 for an indefinite length of time and this may <br />exceed 10 years. That is why he is requesting to give a second <br />mortgage for our security, which is enforceable, and then within <br />60 days of the date that the County tells them that they need to <br />make the improvements on Storm Grove Road, they will substitute <br />an irrevocable Fetter of credit for that amount and make the <br />improvements. <br />Chairman Scurlock felt we should allow staff to go ahead and <br />negotiate these conditions and come back to the Board, or the <br />Board could approve it today as long as the numbers come in .right <br />and the value of the property exceeds $1.4 million, that there is <br />only one mortgage to the tune of $800,000, and that our mortgage <br />is indeed a second mortgage. If that is the case, staff would <br />not have to bring it back to the Board. <br />44 <br />' M W <br />