The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutDRB100607 withdrawn ��i�r� I��i�� r��l ��TI��I F�F�1�1 � - � � � ��rtrr7�r�t �f ��r�r��r�i�� :��I��r��r�� # �.� �� Fr�r�t�� F�� i I� ��I�r�� 1�.�� I: ��.��.�1�� f��; ��,��.�� 1�1.��1'-'i C�wEL��i_�- �� .��I��f�l Project Name: SCOTT RESIDENCE DRB Number: DR6100607 Project Description: REMOVAL OF 1/2 SIDE OF DILAPIDATED STRUCTURE & REBUILD TO MATCH CLOSELY Participants: OWNER SCOTT, MARK&JACQUELINE 11/22/2010 3980 NASSAU CIRCLE, WEST CHERRY HILLS VILLAGE CO 80113 APPLICANT SCOTT, MARK&JACQUELINE 11/22/2010 Phone: 720-494-6600 3980 NASSAU CIRCLE, WEST CHERRY HILLS VILLAGE CO 80113 Project Address: 4898 MEADOW DR VAIL Location: UNIT A Legal Description: Lot: 15 Block: 7 Subdivision: BIGHORN 5TH ADDITION Parcel Number: 2101-131-0402-2 Comments: BOARD/STAFF ACTION Action: WITHDRWN Conditions: Planner: Bill Gibson . --- -..-� _ .�.�, .,-.m�_T_ � �_�_ _�„�.-.-_ r,_�_ _ _._..._........�-�„�..R�.�_��_ ___T_ _ _ . _ _� ��,� �� ;�� , , �fr ��.. ' F ;' Department;of Community bevelopmen�-� �; �' �`� '��T�.t.- �� ` ,,�� x .75 South Frontage Rv�d�; - � � ��` : _-� �*�i `.� y � s - •- � ��:� . � `�� - a � � ; �x< > .� , �s Va�ts-Ccil.orac�o. 8�� ;� ` -:, 4 3� ��..� ��-y �- -� � =�'�, ; -�Te3: 97-0-479 ��'Z$�� 1 �rt��,,��' �,<��#:� - f�� - ��3.-.Fa�c'�;9'76��'��'4°52,, �:" <�, � �. . �.ti ''�.� -.�� ,��. �.�� r� •� .�r Web_• wwu�i'��"a�lgov�o�° -f �� ` ��^ .. @ .t �" � -- - D�ve7opmen��ew�:�oordt t,�*,' �#��¢��}�` `' -+.`�� `� � �rt $ �, � � . � : .. . ._ � _.,F<.__. �'`�_.,. ,_._�_ . . �. ., _..,��:�. . '�� . �.�.,��a�-.�'��__ °'�' Application for Design Review Conceptual Review General Information: A conceptual review may be requested by an applicant where new construction or major changes are to occur on a property. A conceptual review does not serve as a final approval and an addfional applica- tion is required for final review. The conceptual review is intended to allow the applicant to introduce the project to the Design Review Board and receive comments. The DRB does not vote on conceptual reviews. Fee: $0 Single Family � Duplex Multi-Family Commercial Description ofthe Request: __�.e� .a��rr«r�. �ira6riel � � cS.�c` cP� �,L�,o c�.o�e�/ a�-��e,�-" �d �f�-.C3v•L�/ �o �r.aTCl e�� (�c,q. .tr� jJ�Ty�, r+'!A�'t�2�e�r' , F7� . Physical Address: �B�2g /�r;�D o�,) �4�/F f7Ni r /Q /4 '/s i..,r ,.� �jT!'�� Parcel Number: Rd 33 ?,�3 [.�T�j' 13�f-(Contact Eagle Co. Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.) a��i i 3�u�oa� ��_ Property Owner: /I�IA+�� t: �J'l1C9d�'+�� cSca'T' Mailing Address: �4'�O /✓.�tss•acc_ G',.�1. Gvc.tT ; ��t��f/fd�l/S 1/l/.aYE� (°O �`r7V/� Phone: 303— �'��63� Owner's Signature: Primary Contact/ Owner Repr ive: ��X �� ✓� �t/il� /.Pc�l�,J Mailing Address: ��lsy� Phone• E-Mail: /yJ,4�K$G07Jr,?8 � ,�15�✓ �'O�l Fax: 7i�0 - �9'�— G G o�v For Office Use Only: Cash_ CC: Visa/ MC Last 4 CC# Auth # Check# Fee Paid: Waived Received From: Meeting Date: DRB No.: 1717 Planner: Project No: � Zoning: Land Use: Location of the Proposal: Lot:�Block:�Subdivision: 'Gh.�Y ;Sil h �'h �t�+ 01-Jan-la ��, ��.•,� Department of Community Dewelopment �'�` �.'� , ., 75 South Frontage Road ` t.�; ��, . - Vail,.Color�.�o :8165�"' � � ; �� . Tel:, 9?� -�79 ��1'M1. � ' . � , . Fa�c:*97�:�7 4�. .� � � � - _ � . � 1�Veb: wwKV:w�.�i�go�o�ii , � ,�� , .-��`D�i�elo�pinent�i.�riev�,��,�.,'�tri�tpt;,; �� ._.,,�.� .,�., Y �.: ,�;� _ _ .� �a�'_ Appiication for Design Review Additions - Residential or Commercial General Information: This application is required for all proposals involving the addition of any floor area, induding net floor area and/or gross residential floor area (GRFA). This also indudes proposals for`residential 250 adtlitions'and 'interior rnnversions'. Applicable Vail Town Code sections can be found at vuwvu.vail4ov.com under Vail Infflrmation— Town Code Online. All projects requiring design review must receive approval prior to sub�itting a building permit ap- plication. An application for Design Review cannot be accepted urrtil all required informati�n is received by d�e Commu- nity Development Department, as ouiiined in the submittal requirements. The project may also need to be neviewed by the Town Council and/or the Planning and Environmental Commission. Design review appr�oval expires or�e year from the date of approval, unless a building permit is issued and oonstruction commences. Fee: $300 Single Family V Duplex Multi-Family Commercial Description of the Request: S�E /l�.s.E+.LeTiut Addition of !,�GY� sq ft of GRFA(Residential)or sq ft of net floor ar�a(Commercial j Office) Physical Address: '��l� /��C�dia✓ �.�i✓t , Paroel Number: A . �� (.J7'' r.J[o?' /� (Contact Eagle Co.Assessor at 970-328-8640 for parcel no.) �+e 1 Property Owner: A7i�� t ,Ti�P�C t�uE�•c/E Sca�i Mailing Address: 3�tSo /l�.a.ys,�r.L L`r'.�_ v�:: C��.��/ 16l/� �l��E � c�'eJ�j . Phone: 3d'3� �'��"�6 J,� Owner's Signature: Primary Contact/ Owner Rep n e: I��- c�[?8?T t ��v f,ew�� Mailing Address: �Jc Pnone• 30� — �-��--�,�'6�C E-Mail: /�i¢k��Z13G�'/'�'..v�l t�� Fax: �ir0� �44j—�+C�� For OfFoe Use Only: Cash_ CC: Vsa/ MC Last 4 CC# Auth # Check# Fee Paid: Received From: Meeting Date: DRB No.: Planner: Project No: Zoning: Land Use: Location of the Proposal: Lot: Blodc: Subdivision: 01-Jan-10 Narrative of 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A Redevelopment Page 2 December 2007—April 2008 Scott retains survey firm to plot out the lot for development design and Nova Group to begin prelimina�°y planning. Scott begins repairs on common areas including, but not limited to,dilapidated share�d Hot Tub. Scott incurs expense caused by contractors hired by Davis while shoveling snow off Davis raaf and onto the shared deck,subsequently collapsing it(Davis family paid$500 towards deck damage,Scott covering the balance). Other direct Scott on-going maintenance expenses include, but are not limited to, pa}�ments for probVei•�ns associated with Davis' improperly installed and out of code sewer clean-out from freezing, etc. (shared}, replacement of gravel in driveway(shared); lawn care(exclusively Scott) May 2008—June 2009 Scott continues weekly maintenance to improve exterior grounds including, but not limited to, lawn fertilization, insect control (including spraying for Lodge Pole Pine Beetle),weed control and general exterior clean up. Davis acknowledges Scotts efforts to maintain property as seen in attached email. Scott pays painting contractor of Davis choosing to improve portions of common space even though Scr�tt explains this area is not part of Scott's redevelopment plan but does so for appearance consistency until redevelopment efforts begin. Scott hires and pays for exterminator to control rodent infestation including mice, rats, bats,and vole�s around parameter of property. Scott shows Davis where infestation is occurring and 5uggests Unit B retain interior exterminator. July 2009 Scott family seeks Davis' input on redevelopment plans induding one option offerin�,to replace Davis' dilapidated 1 car garage(e.g.garage floor drains back into the house, lacking insulation, ramshackle overhead door,etc.)with new heated, insulated two car garage including replacing gravel driveway with new concrete heated driveway at no cost to Davis. Included in proposal to Davis is to clean out and replace overgrown Unit B landscapimg at no cost to D��is. Davis' reject this suggestion demanding to retain gravel driveway for"nostalgic reascrns".Scott continu�s effort to try to maintain decaying property exterior(Units A&B)for another 18 months. August 2009 Shared sewer line fails due to age,improper depth, nearby construction,ground movement in addition to being out of code. Scott agrees to either repair existing sewer line or install entirely r�ew sewer if two lines are installed so second line can be used for redeveloped property. Narrative of 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A Redevelopment Page 1 The planned redevelopment of 4898 Meadow Lane, Unit A has been underway since the Scott's purchased the property intended as their permanent residence in November, 2006. Property owner Scc�tt (Unit A)has attempted to collaborate with owner Davis(Unit B)and seeks DRB apprn�val of the propose�d improvement of this dilapidated property as outlined herein. The subject property is essentially constructed as two separate boxes with living spaces connected by a limited common wall (see satellite image). The two garage units are separate substructures attached ta the living spaces and the deck and gravel driveway are shared. Scott's property(A)faces onto Meadow: Drive whereas Davis property(B)faces to Meadow Lane.There are completely separated entrances to each property albeit, Davis unit B entry is not marked, hence visitors to the Scott horme and seeking a Meadow Lane address frequently attempt to enter via the hazardous Davis unit B walkway. The structure is dilapidated,dated and no longer fitting with the neighborhood which has enjoyed 5 newly constructed homes within a few hundred feet of 4898 Meadow Lane. Further,4898 Meadow Ls�ne has been,and still may be,infested with rodents, has hazardous aluminum wiring, is poorty insulated arid considered the neighborhood eyesore. Accordingly, neighbors immediately adjacer�t QWarren Davis)4418 Meadow Drive facing Scott's unit A strongly endorse the proposed Unit A redevelopment(letter attached). In addition, neighbors next to Unit B on the Meadow Lane side, including the John Waring Family,also strongly endorse the redevelopment. Below is a chronological summary of events leading to today's DRB meeting: April,2006 Scott retains Diana Meehan, broker/principle with Timberline Real Estate to locate redevelopment property in East Vail. August,2006 Broker Meehan presents subject property with the advertised "More Gross Residential Floor Area" ("GRFA")available(attached)as the most viable available redevelopment choice. Accordingly,Scott conditions an offer predicated agreement with common wall neighbor to allow redevelopment. Broker Meehan meets with Ruth Davis,4898 Meadow Unit B present common wall m,eighbor,to discuss Scott redevelopment plans. Meehan shares preliminary ideas and renderings developed by David Irwin af VaiPs Nova Group. Meehan confirms Davis will agree to allow Side A redevelopment and has no intereat in redeveloping Unit B. Letter affidavit from Broker Meehan attached. November 2007 Relying on the promise to allow redevelopment made by Ruth Davis,Scott closes on Unit A. Narrative of 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A Redevelopment Page 3 October 2009 Davis agrees to two new sewer lines,one for Unit A redevelopment use and one for VJnit B sole use once Unit A redevelopment effort is complete. Parties agree including hold harmless for any potential expense or obligation associated with connecting second sewer line to newly developed Unit A. November 2009—April 2010 Scott begins redevelopment design work with Nova Group consulting with neighbors oo�plausible and desirable design schemes fitting with character of transitioning neighborhood consisting of 5 newly constructed homes either adjacent to or within several hundred feet of subject prop�rty. Letter from immediate next door neighbor(Warren Davis)endorsing proposed project attached. Scott retains architect David Irwin to meet with Davis to review preliminary renderin�s and ideas. Dau�;� agrees to Scotts offer to pay Irwin's hourly fee to take Davis to other Nova properties so that she could get a feel for the craftsmanship and design of other Nova developments. Other than iinitial meeting at subject property address, Davis never returns Irwin's calls. Davis continues to reject several initial design suggestions. Davis then demands to maintain gravel driveway. With these further demands in hand,Scott then instructs Irwin to redesign according to Dawis latest requirements. Irwin then submits another rendering idea which is also rejected as Davis feels plan wc>uld create a"bcr.xed in feeling"on the shared deck. Once again Scott instructs Irwin to redesign according to Davis'demand�. For this rendering,the rendering which is proposed, Irwin removes one story of the �redeveloped property, lowering the roof line around the shared deck(below even the existing roaf line)to allow more natural sunlight not only onto the deck but also Unit B's kitchen and dining area. Davis response to this most recent set of renderings is that she will not consent to AhJY redevelopment c�f Unit A. Hence,we are seeking DRB approval to proceed with renderings that have tc�ken into account significant input from Davis. 4898 Meadow Lane, Vail, CO - Google Maps �iC.�� l�'` �l"18 �J S � Get Directions MY Maps . k re�. h � / , * , � .f . .. G"_..� �, + ,�E� ;.. ' '.. .. ��` � �... .. . .. �' � � � - �. � �' � . .. . � �� .� �� V �•�"'' ��,%�" � ��r �4 � .� � r� .. '.. �. � �t'�r I ��``�. . � _ + A � x� �{�� {� i � � �; � . .. . �6' k,e. °:1� http://maps.google.com/ � y.., � 1��. � �� ; �: �� . � �� . i � /\ . R % `�•/�� iv" U � -� r Print Page 1 of 2 Send Link �� ♦ ... . � � a��^� �„�..�`° ��-� � ��. ° , _ � �" +� f � � �,., .�. . '�;?� � ..� ,�.y�.�. �� ' (Jr � � �� i� � � y f � � � � � � �n � : � � �. ,i.�:� . �i� � �� _ �a � �� a�,,�� l l/21/2010 ! R d� !�� Q LOT f4 E � � B.L.M. �� ..% c�ut a�naN• hr�wt h�a d to ar o�i�`L�oe°td Bloa�'� a��6L , fllYh Add/tAov, �xcpf Parr.W 0 1 �� r na.ay owfHy Mof ana i,rpowm.va roeaela,owrMeof�. wn,p�pa�sd 16r Nbnda yYavns A'oy�n; 7YvafN o/fM Ntrnob Jwrn�P/�p�r� R�s/darf/d(�'t NwnMr 7Mn u�dwr GYonfw IP�fah�d brcar►r� 1Jv�f Ap�an art Rumb�r JMo alof�al Nowmbr!$ 1DAE� Mpayni Rk�A�ad Sanft and Sf�rart Ath o/Lb/arndp fhof/(h no!a/and th�swplabJlfahm�n�o/hneet OwahµaC oNHr ILfuro Inpro`wnrt Aira� � kr /ArMrr cwNly fhof fh� �wninb ar M�a0ow d�sa�l�d parieN on �fwrMr 1�i �i �x� �M! covuuefkru�, orr rrfhNy iMM�h Nti Aamobrlis �111 p� NC�t CI A�IO�MA� ��N!N!pl�IIO MCfDOCf�MqMh H�OR MI daanE.d pnma.a ay Nnprowminfa on onr�.�+�a a+wn/�µ w�+cwt o.,harof.d ard Mof fhw�r h no qopavwif�Mdnce a Npn o/any�va�m�nt avuh�p ar Awd�vMrp anr pwf or saM paroN, �xvpe aa nof�d fi,Br�xtlAcots doss nof cauNtuh o t!!N�sarch by Artr-Alowrfah fo aYrhvmhs oMnrNhjo or�aarnnfa o/ncad Far aM pribrmotlan nr�rar�i� 16 w,o�r,e �y cav�/bn.n�a,d�r�ewea�1~i,�ra,�an.�wren:°O��eoh ow/at T!!h Srptwmbar d ?OOi6: Ron A. Alahab P.LS J70t�S 'o CWanob bw�ou muif commancv d�+an any d�hcf Ar thb wn�y 'x�ou Jkst ol4rcowr aadi d�Rret. /n ef/an bossd upov�any dshat h tAAr d man fhar rw��e�rs,►om tn. acn o�cwrmcor�wr daMn haran. � ��'�� ;la�i � � i � , , ��1 � i�� 1. � ��d:' � � n � � � � � � a � � . � � �1 1 > � � � P.a A E �5�,� � � �EPpO L=41.94' R=125.Oi0' d�f97326' G�=N7476'43"E _ G�l=41.74' LOT 14 i � B V ml � �. � . � I PAA�Z B � PARCEL A 1 �i � J0.4� i �OEOr ��,,,.amod"' LOT 15 B.L.M. ��o o� �� > L=92.f0' �,J R=125�00' de42y2'S6' � �sS"�%6ZB�£ ��,y A51=9Q03��,� i � � r.�c,ec n£scmPncw.• Porcd A, ond wr und/�dss wnrhd/ � A�t�roat h and to w7 0/Lot IS� BloaF BlpAan ,Ai6dlNe/ai. f!/Hr Add/Na, sxcqof Pares/ o and Par.W� �► �� / �nersay awr/ry Mct ub r.rp.oremene aaoHa, e..rmeoa woaprqvorsd lar Ma,av �b�ann�P/opa�; TruaNs o/ths N6ndo Jwrns P/ayena R�ddsnbd pif Alimbsr liro undwr GYmtor RrtoMisd/ncan� hust Ayr�smant Numbx 7Mo dvtsd Nown6r l� 189Q Na*Rkfiad Scott and Steumrt 711/s o/Cdandq fhat/t!s not o/md sunry p/of arb»pro wvnent sunay plo� and thot!t/a not to bs rodsd ywn Ror ths sstaBJMmen1 0/hsnea buidhR or othx lbtws inpm�anart lhst /hathw'cwt/ry Mot th�Anpro�an�nts an th�abow esser�fbsd pacN an Srptambr PD, � �xcYP1 ut9/fy conn.axa,a a^.wnthry win,Nr rh.aow,ac.�ia of tAs pmce( sxcqot w ehown, Mot thwro as no sncrooaAmenfs upan tM d.+an�.d p..�„rrs,ey anprowm.nr.on a,r�i�'+�+c a+«n/asa� srcopr c,d,elcorsc( and thot thwv/a no appaMrrf e�dinn or ilpn oI any�oaement aivaNip ar GwdsnArp any port o�so/d pacv�; �xe�of oe not�d 17ib carNHcnts doao not con�t/tuts a tlHs asw+eh Ay/ntsr—AlounfaM�Enyhhssrhg to �1avm�hs oMnsrslr(u w�oawmsnta o/rocord. For oll bi�brmatkn d LOT f6 a'�w',yt�y�C�ar»�m�n,n.ne�av�Nr'a 6aiar4°�i,M�t an s�n+r��e�i re»/,xe ne�s Septsmber '.; 20016. Ron A. Alehwn, P.LS 37015 NOAGL�? Aecadhg to Cdando/ow�ou muat cammsnes any lpd xHon bassd upai any d�het Ar thta avrwy wJthJn thros�sara oRr you AFst dJacooar wch dslsct /n � no sronf, moy ony xfkrr boasd upon any dsJbct h !h/a wrYey 6s canmsnrod maro thaen ten�eas/rom th� obh o/cwf/Ncotkrr shoxn hsr�ar. e ti J 2 � 3 W � � � g ..� . x �xx 1 i r.. a �.. � � . =r -', �� '�"�„ ": � �' �d<e.,r' /T:M �' e.�., r ,� � '�� `° - �r . , , ,�''� .., . ��j,.� �lt� �!l� � i � ''+� �r� �r+ �i�i � e>�' ,.. . 6. ' " r P � : a � ; -'�n,. . 1.- .. ..�-"4 y� i W '�MMM,'�`� ." � �� ,,�r � .� ,d , .,. �. , -..� . .. ' .. J #.... „� ��]s �' � -. �'+}y� 4.. ' �� : � `.ry ` � . , x • � .. a � ,�.�k.�•. �� ^ ��y�� w� �� t A �=f ..._,r '^� �. � �_ � \ ��3%r • �� I �� . . �� . ,. �� •� . �, �' � . , `e �,� . v.. .�- ..,... . - � � - •. i I� <: ` :� ...4 '` I`I,'� �� r, `�+�.. 3, . �� e "�. � •,. �;.' ' _, I , � '�li �� . y"v�'.� 1: .� . a"`.�r**�, .:'��'. '° " �'�. .�. �"` RI ' S�,t - ^ � : � , ..'. � .,a� a ... . . , � ,�� „ �� _ a „ . .:` �'* ,"'Vi►k. , �� ;t . .. . . : a.* , � ;' � ,� t °Y: II � , +� �, f,.�. _� � ,,� � ,�r � � �'� �` .. � . - ,� � ��'� ,� 4 �:. � ` �;��y, � .r.-,� �j .y a�F,�'�r %� � �� i` �`�(� / '�� r v�".� , �' ry';-� �.:~ � � .�* F;.I�,a,�,e".`1� � ,.y .r�` ��}� �. �� I ry„�4Y ��,�i�,. {� � � . �. .�xii ~ .,� � � +��-- ��' �' .. t .. �p.,' �� . � . ., �' . t� - y `; n � .� e. `,.�* . { � _ ., � � r �' •� � � ,-.�.. � . AireV`;�`v ro�T.. y �,f.,,. a� �w�N'�.,Y4�t`a ,A" �;��' 3x; . rr -�� „�' �;; --,�'�`r.� �.>s.. „d� ��.u"� < �� ;,..,'�`d�.�� i a�y ` .�. -: es�..- �s ,c N� „L�L��'�'.'+, . � r �,,�ef � '� �` �� 4.4' ar �.. . -} � �'.' } .' �";i►1 �" �''\ ,`��' �" �Y� i. , �� . F', � .1'� r �ro« .♦ k 5t 1 'r"� � .�{: '� �,_�t,�, r"� � { � r ,�y �" N '�t y � � '.:aNX r.,:� �` <, �, � G'�ff m' y. -fr:/ ��: :..: � .s a + � r�t" ;� d• �'��,, u` / �w ;�. � r � � � �'r< ' +� "`t � �i "= i� �, �ti1�.. , . , . �. . � � � . -,�� pA "'�p,"` � ' ' P�r ,.'�" 4 /� a �r'» � � t ' .,� � ' -�. � �� ,�� ` � �, � � � � ��: _ .�„ � R �.�'t ,�,„ yu.,a' � 1r t � T: }+ ,r K ��, �p;?'-!@� �r 1�.� �¢�. 4�,� {,� �F �• �'�r . . ��-�^±+� ,�. �+`�.K''4 ��. 'i�BjP�y� r: �� +x�a.�a.iR� y.�� ^� '}"+ . .�'P";f V�`y� �� s:: �� a � . �.�W,�.. � � �' F;��RR :, At . bl .�TJI � � .n � �, �l � �T tC.'� ' I� �.1#� � . f �ti��F� ,,''%7�f .� � ` A ,� 1 �� ,,yy��'� � ae E a� +f` 7 ... L �� :p �y, r ��L� �.�x!°„� � � �R � ' �,�" �° '•l,�i f ''4a . . .. . . �`� x . .` ' � ° " � ` "�� 5 �� y � �. M § � �� ' � .F . l'. $� �Z�,� � ' • f' � �ryi / � �4 � �`�� . � � � ,.: _ p"` , .•A �'�, a �,..a � � o- .� ��. �.:,x :: �;n 9 •- ,,. . - a`R�"�"'Y� � ��- q .:...- ��4., �' y�� ' # � ; � ..1�ti " _ f '. -;,�(,'. 5 ' S° ' , .� . w ��a .� i �.4� \ � • ' � ' •� ''"y�'3 , �7y��'�+.4'i}4�� y�.,. u.�� Vt�t � i3z�. . �� .`� ` " . .. �. .� . � � .a'� - , � ��i�•� i.4 � �,. i .�' .SX M��.. �' .+� ; � "".�f�y� � .{ ; .% � .�_ .. ��i. r _ � a�si+� 'i'f1 Il•��'4 '.-' . . � � � x� : � ��'^� �� _ � � }' #�� '4 �� #� ^ ��ryi ��! �r } . I � .' � , .'�� i�,i'i"�, a�` `�'M%p-. C• . , �.F�� a .;� � Y. t .x.: � t ii. � 4 h1+{ :. � �� 1. � a X''y 1n. �4, .._�_. . :..�tl � ' ; r r,�,J ,�w, a.� �r'`' aa�.� ��"' yv y �. a� . Jt{ c.�.� ��' , �- ",,aR*� 1 � �5.: � ' fi; ,� '�'y , �� "`w a � �� ' a � - '�""��`�� ,.^�. �` �,�. s�. ,°�w�y , , �� r . .: � . :, . qq -.w, ` �1C` ' � �w-�.� �1�,,�� '�_ t .� _ ..,Q � ,. , _• s ..�.. .`,y�� , .. .• � r�. :;�'e� .�, ��. w+.'""` . . �� . , y •,,. ,.� � Y��y*� y #i - ."6 '�II. '�.,.�� ` ' +., �. � � ... � . .,,. �. . �f . .. .. mu �. �. �.;:- � . ,� ..', .. _ . n �� , �,Pl�-y�r � � .�. z' ', r �, �� .� �� i� .+�� t �a-=w, r��, �14 r! ��/''i` � xl R i j� I t' N .'( �:. ' Y"-R i �. t rS �Y '�K�. �� .C�,p ^ �A�, ��' y� _ .., \ 4j { �y �.�t �I�� 't_'. �� `' �' r� q��? � A j, �,t � . � .. y� . �_ �-� �e�� r .. . �� . ' "'� .� �-;.'_ �y � ._ �T � ; yy*�,J � d�rv'/ i4 . y1 �-a ,k �.1�3._ \ . .�� .i�`d ° �` ' f� ��.1� . r. _`'p 7 • �? ,g�r ... . �. ..r • `�� '. �� .� � �'` �-�... 4�`� �'�a.,��,q�.. ._. � rf , �,. � �"., l' '��r �,!�� 'i +� �•-w � ��:�^ �j� .r, ,.� ,3 }jA . . ;� .. ? , �NY�S (A ��,..'� tr�. �� 'k�'� �. ♦�F ��1 �� . ' w . . ;.1 ' . J .. �� ,. , . �'.t �, ,. ' ry N %�P�.�v�. .j + � ,. .�� ' u ; �. e � . � . , . ;,�" �' `` �� , . � � _ , - s � s , . . � _. .. '��`:. � ` , r� �4,a '+� , e , � „ ,< � • � .c- �, x? _ fi �o� '� � 4 � i >; . � 4 ' ..; . y , '� " , p:�' x � ,_ �� , . � 1`k i. �q ,. ., -tt � � � � . ,�, �� ,�,� �y� � ,, y°�,p � e � � ' .-si �YI A.. ..k.. ♦``y� � +� f y' h� I... .,.. , .J.1'7 � a+me � ._.y�i a �` ,'l• ..•rq�: .�""+s- Overgrown &Out-Of-Control "��` `��,6 `�� _'� �� ,'� �" . , ; ,\1 .„� ��;,t .�" `;� ,"' ` � `� Landscaping(Facing Meadow Lane as - r � �° , ,� , � n .L�� = . . � ,°� , ,, ,.�; , . _:� , �. , � r .. � " .�,�� - .�� looking from the street) � , �� ,�� ''� �,1 �� . ;�' + s F � i�� ♦1 9 � # #�, ,j: Y ' Taken September 2010 y'; � t '�y , � �' .. "' " ` �k;v *�`�;�� w�`,�:: f ,.,.�a �� , �` r .�� , �� ,,� �� `� � , �,., ,� � �j� �� / � �L s . f �s!�� r �,: "� � ��, �.�� . � �` � . r �w�..J• .?.�t�%a.E �r�✓W,�yO '2�t, . �;� .�.1� ,��,�.. • q � A r;I'�i1`�.L� , �� A , ._,�- �� .��-.�.�.�.��--� -�� , -�� f ' . ,._. ..�� ., �. .. .., -<..,. .,., ,.�..,..�,. _ c�-v- . _ . -:.:... _�.x...�m.,..'.,� . . � . . . . .. `�'��:-. . �.. . ._ . i b � �'. "f'`t , „ , ° t�� r �. � '�''91 ' jE`'�.. : �' 4 : � : �"� , � # .�" � - ��:- �`�, ,�,,- kt�. � � � . ,� �'��,. . � } �"` � A _ L .�:�~;� --- '.. '..� : e�� ', — � , ,.. �.�,_ ° ' . , - �,r.. +'�x �x • �_'�` �� ,, � �� y,,,�.." �� °� : � �,.�b�. '�,' �. ii�,� . �"��'... . + �° y. en .,. � �f a� �� .. , ,�'• : � � '` ,�n°"�.- -�' .-.' ��'��p�� "• //� ' r_- �,- � A� •-�f" 'I� . . . ._ . � - ' y�_� !� , '�M `R f.�• /��".. �� I/�' .,r '�P�'� r +nia'' .�. ��1�� `�'� l �� ""!�'-.� ,,�:. ;'�� .M.�.� '�� ",�i ` ;r � �"k'.��°".'� � :`�'�r +�� ` ;y :n`� �, ` „ � � �"`�""""' , . � 1��x i�M�1�:- +i►�1r.�� ,�. ,„"��.•. ,.��, � {1 � '� �Y _ , .,, ��. + � r� ., - - :� T� . ' s . - - - �{ —. . . e . . � y . . ..; • _ , .r . ,3 ♦ J+ ��, ' '�j _..' .#� '" �J . �� r ' " ' . ..:. . . �,.r� , , ` a ' i v�: .._x,:! ,�..� g � � „x . o� � ; `�� / �� . �` � o-��: . l ?� . � � ,�. �y � .t a .'�e4 .'t F4' �:r. r� .: � i t p ,t �.�... ' w fi . ; . ��.�`�t , 1��! a 5 7 ' � �..��4,�} �?�F.:_ .. t .. ._ 3 �� ' -~se' • . ` �� Y . ' ,�+� . . .'�.` '• Sr :.� , �q� .� r� ��,., ,��!' , .. . �"u- ,S� " �. �� ` `� �` ' .�, _$�.Y _ ��'¢~ ��, �P. Y� '� � " _ . � . 2' � +§ . — . `�,�.y , �� ,�1 ' • A�'�°. �_ � � j � , � . � . . y � • / � Not maintained & Unmarked Front Door ��'«: '' � '� .�..- �"�� L V � � %# °`,�`i .. � �'�°�� ,,� �;q ; ,�.�� Entry to Unit B showing extensive � � � �� debri5 deca m �"�° ':= �` �� °``�`� E� ; •',�, , • Y b siding and overgrown 'i -,-.-, ' � ...!�"""!,� '"" -° -�"''-�t;,. , ` landscaping '�`, '� . �:__` .�� _ __- � �--°..:��-- '- :• _. � �,,. ., , Taken Sept 2pyp "' '_ �---'_�"'� � ember '� > "�'r_�.:.� '"�� ! f -:��fx#�k '`:r:�'. �g `F . �.`�`�. � ' , , i�;�n W..-I i��'�• - �r +� #F� ,� �"k��, ,..' �� , ;'T'+ � �r��.r� ��F� � � � � ,��; �. .� .. !' �� i.i�"`��"+ �- ` ✓ '�w.. �_i �� +x. +ms"'�� . h .. ��. � a �i " '�°ls--i�— �:'� c . - . , -' � �}b �'�"�',� „�} � �.x� d'�,,'¢, �.4. �' �" ..�:y! ,� '�i�,'i'° �/.�. -�,s' `t , . � . �*'�+` �,�.�c f` '°�" �`��" '� � � ` " ,ae�'�.' '`'� • .�' ;s • =j. . . . „ _" , ,�, �� ': � � � n � � _ � f� ;a. . "f� � � � ,. ��w�`n, aE' r �.r ��:� �� j `'�.'�� }d .r' � �t a � ��. i��i.�. �. ..; �; � �`' �': . , � � 1 j` _ _.. a '4�j� ,�'"4 �' � . �,��' .� �� .�* T,��hi�� \�... ��Ia'l��'',`�� ♦. pa.�� kw . � `�� °� „�"..`.. �/. � ,� � � �,`��. i�� F 'x`�'r 4�'S �.�j �� ' , �.� � � � ��..� �� 4� � � ..� .,�� i, � � � - #�... ��, .� ` . � ^� � a ,<:� _�...��. ,s � . . � �.! � �, �'=� _ "r�..,' " . � �;` :� � � . �.... � . -'��'. V a��x ~��4„ ;i `�� s� � r �- .� . �� .,,,...: �- . �,�� j�f,, , � . , � .� s '.�t'�", � .. ' t �' ..�.,•�r��... _ . �� . . F P'i° ! � « ;� s �� ..f s .��j'-,-+��` ��. � 1! . � z ' -�' ` �- .�:.. ..� r� �'�' ��, � �'�.�y j �'• f �' ��' i � "'\ +-��t i�' �t � , , ' P�a . . f . :' • . �..��e '3 - °'� ' �:{ - , ' .' . '4 . - �� . _ . � . � � yi �,� y �,�„ . �' c✓ . ��. �y �,3 53 f f�! ,�µ f �� $..y• ,. . f q # . � � f�` y�.. '� .�� ,�^. ��k. � .. � � arc�;i: j � s .. + �� 4 T�pFbBk^3`'t�. :.�� Y� i � �.',� � ��t�. � `! „d.. � y� � l s'� +� I. ` • ��•. ��r J�. a! ,r �y..' � y: '-�� w..��b.. ri e3�,v fi � � �� Y� � � �,� �I�� X� �t~a��' �� /;� -�' �� -�i��..4/j� ,`;r'S,$` M �� .'�� 1�*» �i} ��.-� .r r s� ,f,;.�'�� .i�. � �� . •r .� � ��.: � �� i ` x �� Y � ��. �f�.� .�� .� ��,��s�� "� - � '. � `� R,. , � � . , s . �{ ,t r.�. � �u -,� � C- � +� _ � � � �-�Y� A�, r�� ' +. �;,'' ,� �`x �±�,'��'3+ �k , h I",� � ��, �� . .�,. . ��- �/ ,� � y[� 3� . i . h � '`�s ,Y v. ,�- ��,. :�i �v+� s:�, ��- t; +� .� �. 4 ' y� `�...;:i' ,.�;'�� '� ��' .:, ' � '°$g ' ( ° � , xa-f .`t. . .� '�i�'�7�{ J 'M� �� p � � � i � K# �� .� � �,.G « s • - � � yt #'�' � ,r ,� �,� : � � �r� yy� Y;,� ,,��. � �". " .�,�Y'i� �' . �, 4 �} � , * s �'�y` F.•�„F�• �f, �A., �a� 1 ''�' Y- t` � '� n't �5u�r i`_.� -- -- $� � . . � /4',��„ � y �...� 4 "�+� b � � /�`.!' _ � ..<l � ��+' , �` At".��Y° � ; t -� � ; �( �� ,�' �} r � " " �'� '� ..o.�- ;- r,K •. : ' ' `�� . : �c . _,f .. . , K- „ � f f � ; SF. '7t�� -�.? ��N .�' . . � 3 , � 3�, �„� �.+ .'� ��' ,i ., �� ' � . . � . - .4 '� l♦ •4a- , + / , ��S ��y g1`f��.j _.ry� ��!'. � � ' %g'� ��u .'fi s � ' �� r .. ZO._ '-��'�.%�'x� r'�t - ... ' : . � , '� #rt ti`.�" , " '4� . ..r �°' �'' °'� �(M.� '3� ��4 � � �7 �� - ,I�„_, �5 ' �sky �..`.� � t:. ,'d Y� .E.� �� - ` Y i� y � t '� � �� ' ;?'�� . � Ls' �'r .,`1s� F " -`3 �� ' "'�'"+., ,� � �r � � �� r�, ; ai M � ' �`e 4 � ' ti� . l • �. � ' �� ,�� , � �- � ;r : �, _ ; n . �-�9. r�=° '� :� '4� ` �+�"� � -� f»..��* k � ° � . : a � ��E�. k��. � 'a� �� f�� q ... ..., �,- i§"' . �; , : ;rn . 1,:. � - ! � .�ti; 1. �•T„__� r _+�° �, .r' .�' � Y ` � , f � , � r , < �� ,, �: ,.� F '�'�a 4a � ' ��'.'�,�'`p,. � '`��r� �� ,�,�� L4 �� x� d_ ,� �,; �a s r��fg, +" � v # ~�. �f ��, � x�� S�f � �r 'f; ` � t ,p� 't��'� �., ��; �^.. _ !� '.�l. a �"t}y: �q,+ r�•�... -Se» M'� ea.,�s �� '�� ,� �''��_ �'sa`�r� '��" fd� :. .r. _ # aar 4�'�`"'s_ � ..r" �v' wj._. - a� �. �. ��•�. q� �. F:� ��,4, . :: " 4 - �� G� ' � � '4�`' � � ._, . � �`� .�� . �`�' ' � '..�� ^� ° Y, r •.'�-*i�i`� �� .i1��"� ��.i�:}� �"� #� ��'^.._�r . . . ��:��'°''Tr. d,� i�,. '�--�a�i,�r��. � '.!�� . , ��.."� '`.`�r� � " �` ..��c + ��'_ � .. ��t . � � � � �'�`�- '-�� _�R .. ';�y�, � ., � �::. . ` �� ' - � j � _� ��k �¢~�� .�, ♦. �.t F. t�� 7� ��'.F ��, . �j,� �,.,� : '..� -��^ -�J!,t , , ; a,'`: . �,�` ': a y��'�C� �;,,, ;�`j`, -�-_` �.°i�'�� ., . �, , ' �. �. , _ � - - .`a> " . : " p v�. �' � � .- - `� `" �" �� 3� � � �," 4 �.� v ` � ;a R� �ar"_.. �-o.� .� - ,f r-� .�,,r�s .:.� �, �_ , f { -�� , e`- �+';4 t .��r' A' .rf„ ��,�7 'a6^ �r.'�.'s�y�� -�� r•F � ��'� ,�e � 'iJ�'� dV*��`i�, K.� ? �.-�1..34 ! :: I i� i ��-'�i- _a-._ yR�'��s e ,.i '� � � -,�+ �;yy� �� f • '�..��`,1� y � �i '��-�,. y .'+�` Y�.-:� e".r < _ . . . , .�..� '� a %.t 4 . . �:�. � f^..::.. ` �«... .;. r � ' � � y��d �I�� :�� ,:� �� _�� ,a ��^•.�� _ � `v .��A'.� a . r?�-� �- . _ _ �- �+ - .4 •� . � I. ; -x „u .-< K'"..� "}�% c�.:,,` �� - ' ,,.w+' �� 4 k[�� K at i � ..,f' . ., ,{' �a , 1 5 _ " ",� . `� ,,11 �� i ��` ^�i b� ��.. °� ;�, I '�.Y� t � q.I r �� :,,,f�� . _.'a, } r"�'�,^� I �^ a '�..'� ._ .�>4 �,'��t x _ ?1"''�'�i �4�' �' � 4.e�;,.;kr i �.,�A.f`> 4: �F`- , �� m� � � �"��F' A J'.'.( �4. _y t'��'r}��' 4 .y, �s4g�'�F �y„t�4 i�J' � � ��,.. � 'i" � 4r�' i ` .`£ . .�# '�•: � ,l� :� ' �., :, - ?� � � •-� d ' � �� .. Photo of entry to Unit B depicting " :� �� . � `� ..�t► � � `� ``` " • overgrown landscaping and �� i ` � F�'�s . - .._ '�.�, narraw/hazardous unmarked walkway �" ; � s„ ` :�` �� ' � Taken September 2010 � - � � �. �^�� °� � �' � , $a x �,��; m. � �' ,> s � �� . . r r J I� .. !s � En-+t4 �'!4.'�-_:.. .Kii-_�1_ ��xY1Z'... ! ` � � f,Z. ��`' t �� . �. �� ' . ,;� 1 ' ' ., �_ �� f. � � � " ' ; t i �. k .;3�'�i ��. I I '� ' ' i '' ' 1 � h � ;. .`�� r � r.t' � _ �.. '' .� £ '`1) ' ' � {i 5 1' l c i � " i � :�'.� '� ; s�', � � ; � � � � r r � � � f ��` i , ' ,�� i � � � � � 1 , � � `'� ��.� �:� ��. I � � . � �i1 �. - ' r�"� � 1 ( � . � � r�'� � K � � �'.I� . {� R:. k � F r , '.Y �� . p�� ' ;; '=1. ' � ` � � � /� � i � , , � � � '� I � �r ,; ,� �'I � i � . <�._. _ � � � I , . , � � �_ '. , . . � � � , � `�� . � �. .� , l , � , �� ` y �.�i.� ' �_� ( � � 6 I I a II 1 I..� .�y �. j �i�, � , � � 4'. . � �.,_ t'�:. � ! � f ..-'_ . � �! j + C l L f � ' € i ! 3r � i. � 6 i' I . . . � 4- -. � I3G ' � k � ,,�� = Photo of siding depicting rotting, ; �� : decaying, cracking, dilapidated and �. '- ; �.. � ,. ;, ` deteriorating exterior , " � - Taken September 2010 � " ' '"� i'. � � �, •R� � . 3�i�� J ,.. �, .. ' } � � . ��T ��,y ' �F'l ! '' �,-�,"... � � � ' �,%�' _ -`'t ��"�,�, , �t � � �� : j � „ "` �; • � � , � ' ", ti _ k'R � "w!`��'ti"{:1 � �� Y`. ��.`Yr� '� (,�n�.� . Aa t ...'K l��. .,�x .f. iVy�' _ � .�ii�f � p+�F� � . �� . '�{ �..�� . .. ��#�,� ' ��' l� .�je'. ��3 . 'y�� ` {.. y.. �j �..$ ��o.,��a f •.s -�. ..,� � �° � ��} � =t � i �,�'`. � . �: �� ,. , � �� . � � � .� r.�� 1 � �� .� J � . � ` '� • . _ .� , .:�,� ��*E _�' .� . .L,.„,`- . . , , - , � z,- � � ' �� - � . �-. ," - s ��s -+� '} ;°� �, � � �,� � , Y, a ` .. fl k � ��; � .. ,�� s. �w ��" ,a�R � . .. . . . �::' � a�: ' ' ' . . ....� .. ..... ,..;: �_�.. � s � .� �� 'F'-,: ^� :� "� � ,� `.p;ii. s � ;;'-�1� _',j� � : ` � � i � �. �4. ,,-�� ,+�''�� _ ,'�',` .,�,y�,� � �`°i r ✓. r � , a , - V�� k'' � „� �' .�� . : *a � `�:�C.��'� ..��,�';�' �,�:�rs�'�`"�'"-�r s',�'°'�s t'- *�' '� '�'��..~ ,r.�`' .r�, �:'�'�`��-�,�''a`- ,7�.. 9 �� ; ��' �.�'t �.i° �t ,w ,�, ��;'' t ;.'.5 ... _ �,'�..,i �� >: ,._:r ' . ' ��`.� r ;�� .,��. .. .-M „� _ "�?: s�'-aw_ y ',� � � ' �,.,,#,� ''°�'��"� .4 j ��r � �' �:.A1^ .`s`` � f �E'i, 4. �.� �y � �9'•'- sl-��° y"` ��-. "'�� . , � ��.�^ . . ��r , F a �'„ r�¢.�,�"3:a�R;, t'�q 'i, �` ' I '_o... . "� ' a .�'n"'''�c'�n�" �,�,n.� .,t�1 .,� � � _ �L �m:.F_, '�ij�?. ��' .. '� � *''�z1��y t�. _� .. � '�� ' ��*'"�� r.�:% i �� 'v � �'� ��` `'` ��'�."°S'�%4."`� ,-m°�`- 'Y.�-F'�„"�� ..�� <s'�•, � ��• -,.. § £ -„_ P 1 yar w3 l 'T"� "�ys.��;�s � 'vf � '� -. �.�. � t ��'!-� .;`�+�.,��/.r^s*^a w w,y�,�,�„e� �� '��I'� �'� � '--°-r ..-,i� �� i...+j�-„�^� '�:-•- I . r � , . yut"}''a�' k ,�R 4�4`"w_``ti^7 r� .Yr 2i"�'� � `�-S + ��'° ,, ti _ , . ;.<,� , ,� m• w � , :'4 l+".�:�} +. ,'�4. �`:�� ,. ' �r-"� '��.c�",�.��•.. ,�r ry .1+,- `� � i.z n s�is i• k�S.a�+ '�'R.�r5 ^�t� y�.,_ � -r. '�`,��'-" 's"�i 4�5..s. 'I'� >.� 'S �.�°�B �",,,.r ��.� ! 1...m1 �`'at°r�" �" �'` �°�r,.;A�r'.�4'�+�w. ,�k j��-a�� ,��:�'° '.`��,a � ; ��ac #.,.��, �r�.,,,$ s< ^+ ��.'�`tX.'�" �4��`'t� `. ��;?� \ .kt�`"��*.�� _ �:.. `�,'�"� � `�`�"�L+''^ '' t.+� r�`y ��" x�`3' �° ° � ' , "'�.G� �r�`�-� P'�"' �`�,•-�''.->„�'.. , �+�v,a��'f1� - �� `S:s� • � •-s.��' � 1"c^� .. V � .�(' ' "-..s'�.�,�--"iar ';{7�,�"'i�, 1:.-��rj,�ya'��`3tr"' ��J' . a '�l� � . :�t+.� ra {�i ��:��s�i�r�+.��r'I�T`kh�„��,�� 6'"l2''�'"�'`\� .' +�. � t� x <}� g ..�-. -�� a : I .�. k ... •• ��11>4-�Y� t' _1r Y +�'h�' "; �1n.�'� `4. '�*._�6 v�`. � ':.. �6 � , � . a�'.� �"````� '��"� ..'°`Z ' �_ : ��s �' u. ... _�:.. , . ,, r`��r r � �rit'R�' �li.-t+""t' SV�'}._��j�,�'�'�"'�� iC�� "„�.�a ,p�i'_� � ��y"'��x , �.r'.' "t f� . �c+.r '- `�. rr� rt, ,� � `'4�i�`° +tr�a.•... `�-a r.,-� i1r.:3"� .. ... :j� �. -a6�?,��.��`°.;9t".�,"aC�'jv ^� �'s�`:_-�� y4+,c��`�'��-.. �"`�:� �,,�`�"}�p�� Y - .,- .�o-t�-.P ��,.-..,..,.� ... ':, f. J�.' �.f f"`,t � ��( �^� ) ♦r � a�'R'I'��MC ��y'Y. 3'�� "�� i:�'�i, �� `��y 4.`,�� ,'�ir .,�,��,'�-tir� �� r 'J ��'4• '�"� '#�..t ��,. ��4�r }' .�. 4�„�� ) �W'!'�t.7�^1�'lrJ'` ��, �...7� � � +�, �v. .• 'y'''qy�-s�• ,y �� ,�+,�,.� y f.E y� h1 •.�� t v �L r� �t T , ��Y��J .� A "i�:r` ;�'�..�� y'+y[�u'"r%�' <•t yp„ SS1'°" ��v'�.- °"� .'iq ',�i`' ]�„,�� \'I .'P' . � � ``��, t�j C� `` '`.�\'fM°'y:i -A�,� ,a�, : .' ,**�!s�: A.'� +�. � �. .;;� �� : �- .��--.,.� :� *� ' '4 . �. �. � � � tG'=�r,a'�I[�� y_a'�S• ' �j "��`_�1�� Y . � p � �:._r ..' � `{ �4 r . :' �''.. '"`,+r� '� , i +� ��' ,� * d-.�r'�`'��y.p��i , , �, � �.� ,X�t � �t`� �� "''>�.. ��.i: q n .:M � �. �tX}_ ��„'$' . ' t . , , . � � � �� ' . # �fyS t'°� '�t::^�' � 4`^ ^3`� .�� `"� '� 1'��r�-��1 t ��'� -'" � 'd. �ie�',hr..'t _ -i `�:` +l'�±4,� ��y` .� . .�l t. • ... � � ' � . =�.. .,... _. , . � _ ,��'�. ��.' ?� '��.-,F.. :,�_ ��¢�� :. � � `�.'ys(�� ♦�-� \1�F ♦ �� \�s �, ' +•�� ,�� \ % �.f'[ r''��!' �P�.:_ �ia ,a� �` � �R.�r � ��' `^.,.�1 , }.t'x' ,ta . i � '� .,3- r �� ' ��'A ..s�.. 4.1... � �;,�� , �� '4 --r- ti �(. �i �+��.��.,� °�F , I"" '�., `�a �r.� .��w��`,t��1`�.~ - k- �.' � � N � ��fi i t"� y v `'s �y� �� c-"� }t :F ,. _"!C '{r � j • � .1.. � °�a. . .A-,1; �"a-,-�`�� "T r� . `*_ . ,e'r' t�.. ,�t y� 6 .+�`' °`4 * ` .�` #��`. �:, . ` . � �i r�� ... .� .�� i },�4 .� � ��r��_''�1°'�!'!�'1`+'�,�.,.w�� `�'"'� �� € . . � . ` -� �'�• v�'�k.,. , . ;: � ,, � , ;;;.d. �� s � .� � . . ,� � . : a r''�'^ ,€• . � / � • �w � '-�,. _ ,.f .�''��:� ,t�i. �r�� 7i�.. ��—�. / ��` � �� ~�� `'�, �- / '�l�'� . a .�..�s.r+,�r�±l�� r'�� o _ - � . / ` Not maintained & Unmarked walkwa � _ ` � y � � > `,� �:� to Unit B Front Entry Door depicting `�� •`� � �� , -��. °� �_ ,�.."��° � hazardous loose plastic,overgrown �`,� ��`+� ` �' " � : � weeds and debris � � Taken September 2010 —______��`.::;�. _.__ ..---------------— _ __ -- _.�_----._...__-------_ - �°'� CI�t I�t�N R6�Pf N1Mx ------ _ .� ,��..______._ _ _ _ --- -------- --____.. _--------._ __ _ -- �_ _ _- - -. _---_� '- _ - ------ -- ___ e�Pre�ty_lafr�eti�a -:� -� MLS#: V309976 Status: Active �ub-Type: Dupie� ; , _ __ ___----_.___. _- - - -.__._. __-- ��, _- ', List Price: $895,000 low Price: � Sold Price: Sold Price/SqFt: Soid I�ate: � �' Address: 4698 MEADOW LANE :�. . � ,-�� VAIL,CO81657 � --� � ' � Wiil Consider Trade: NO Shared IM.For Sale: , � �� : #Levels: 3 Unit Entry Level: County: Eag1e Year Built: 1 ifia „'� �� ° Bedrooms: 3 Fuli Baths: 3 3/4 Baths: 0 i/=eatns: 1 Totai Bidg L�e^ais: � �_� �� loft Incl Bdrm Count: Ye; LoR: Yes Furnished: Unfumished Subj to Rent�l,�antr: N �� - ,, ` '-� ` Lockoff: No Add'1 Rooms: Dining Room � � '�"`� m MH Manufacturer: Width: Sia�. #Axie�; Ownersh�p �ype: Week: Waek Remarks: Remarks:EkCELLEN7 VIEWS...private,beautlfully lanscaped yard. No highway impacG BUS StOP...flght out your front d�e�ar.L+Janderfui deck v�iif,:•?'st tub. New apshaR roaf.More GRFA(grass residentlal floor area available.Woodburing Plre�lace.One tar garage. - . __ ___._ __---. _____ __--_ --_ __.._ ____ . , =Bb91Y�en/699t�tINl11 M�'99Uee : --- _ -- _--- — ._� __ __ _ --- ___ --_.—.: Subd/Complex Name: BIGHORN FIFfH Bldg#/ltr. Unit#: Uaits in Cotrip�brtx: RigM of RefusaL• No Right of Ref#Days: p Assoc Fee: 50.00 Resort/NeighbGrod feet Sfl Assoc Pee Includes: Lowtion: #of Units: Common Pacilities: Commun.Ameniiales: Goif-Public Hikln /Pedestrian trails On Bus Line --- -------------�--�--------- _ --- — - ----_ __ _ --- --- — '; L�l!&�tD h(�78I� f --- --__ -- -----_ - --- ------__.__�r.___ _ ...,_ .__.;_� _ ��.___� Schedufe#: R033723 Zoning: Dupiex Area: East Vail Parcei#: Lot#:i5A Bixk#:7 Filing#: 5th Apx Lot Sq Ft: 12,197 Apx Lut Acreay�; d.Z9 B�.!�ned: Lot Sq Ft Source: CountyjGovt Ground Lease: No Access#of Months: Water Src: Mun,iz§�?�C t Pu�ic 5'e�aked: Legal Parcel: Yes lot Ownership: View: GSA: Not In Gsa Accessibility: Available Utilities: Distric[Sewer,DisCriCt Water,EIeQHclty,Phone,Ttash Pickup Documents on File: Party Wall Agreeme�t SewerJSeptic: Connected to Sewer ------- —..__�._._,___._��__ ._�.__ .__ d_ _�__..._.,_ � -----...__ _.... .---.___._-i � �______—_...._�____.._._—______ _ .__ . __ __._.._.__.__. .__..._ ..._.___.______—___' _.._. .._ _____� __......._.. . ...__ I Apx SP LinEnq Area. 1,9Z9 Sq.Ft.Source: Appraiser Living Rm Size. KI}6Rt2A Sli�: Dining Rm Size: Great Rm Size: Master Bedrm Size: 2ncp�ledrm Size: 3rd Bedrm 5ize: 4th Bedrm 5ize: Den Size: Fam11y Rm Size: Loft Size: Water Heater Gati.: Avg Gas Monthly: $0 Av�Elec Manthiy: $0 Water Montfiiy: $0 Sewer Mo�hly: $0 Totai Avg.Mo.tltil.: $0 App{iances: Dishwasher,Disposai,Mlcrowave,Range,Cookkop,Refrigerator,Washer/Dryer Plaor Coverings: Tile,Wall/Wali Carpet Laundry: Dryer-Electric,Washer Interior Features: Flreplace-Wood,Hot Tub/Spa,Deck,Cabie Ava+labie,Multl-Level,Sauna,Skyilght Heating: Electric Water Heating: Eleetric ——-_—_.—__ ---��— ---- _ _ __ �.__ _—__- —__ _ _._-----.�_ _ _ . _ _ — --- ---- --- _ __._ ,�_ Construct�on lWoodfrome __ Roof: Asphalt GarJPrking: 1 Ciir 2`�rage r- --- ___._— _ — ._.,... ,.... � IMart�.��Ta�[�f�er�atl�x '------- _ ---------- ---__ ___-- -- ----------_ _— --_ _-- _--- -- _-____. . _ Taxes: g2,225 7ax Year. 2005 Transfer Tax: 1.00 Ext,GN:in�7 Mortgage: YA i FNA: Assumable Mort: Mortgage Remarks: Terms: Assessment�: None Known __ _. _._._ . _ _ _._ _. _ Copyright(c;IG02.Mountaln Region MLS.The Informadon�n this pubticaN�was derived from sourcts bdieved M be accu2te,buk has r�bed�e:9�,�.`�By Mamtain R!��ca,��•ILS.Buyers are cauteaiecf tv vzrify a0 i�formation ta tfieir own saGsPadion. E� `�TY. C0 200632278 TEAK J SIn�NTON . � REC� 536.90 �OC� $BB 964P(1 � � l�p le�� r �r c � � l I 1 I -�� - i � � . i � , WARRANTY DEED , . , TffiS DEED,made this 22nd day of Novemher,2O06,between � � �' VVANDA JEANNE PLA�rNti,�rItUSTEE OF THE WANDl1,TE11NN1: PLAGENS RESIDENTIAL rRiT NuM13Lit TWp UN�ER GRnNTOR RETAINED INCOME TRUST AGREEMENT NUMBER TWO DATED NOVEMBER 12, 1998 �b�• '�P-e- � ��' -UO of the said County of and State of Colorado,Grantor,and WS ABSOCIATES, LLG,A COLORADO LIMITED LIABLITY COMPANY whose legal address is:3980 NASSAU CIRCLE WEST,CHERRY HILLS VILLAGE CO 80113-5123 of the said County of Douglas and State of Colorado,grantee: WITNESS,that the grantor,for and in consideration of the sum of ( $880,000.00 ) Eight Hundred Eighty Thousand doliars and Zero cents, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, has granted, bargained, sold and conveyed, and by these presents dces grant, bargain, sell, convey and confirm, unto the grantees, their heirs and assigns forever, not in tenancy in common but in joint tenancy, all the real property, together with improvements,if any,situate,lying and being in the County of Eagle and State of Colorado described as follows: See��E1cltibit A"attached hereto also known by strcct and number as: 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A, Vail,CO 81657 TOGETHER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonging, or in anywise appertaining, and the reversion and reversions, remainder and remainders, rents, issues and profits thereof, and all the estate, right,title, interest, claim and demand whatsoever of the grantor, either in law or equity, of, in and to the above bargained premises, with the hereditaments and appurtenances. TO HAVE AND TO HOLD the said premises above bargained and described,with the appurtenances,unto the grantee,his heirs and assigns forever. And the grantor, for himself, his heirs, and personal representatives, does covenant, grant,bargain, and agree to and with the grantee,his heirs and assigns,that at the time of the ensealing and delivery of these presents,he is well seized of the premises above conveyed,has good, sure, perfect, absolute and indefeasible estate of inheritance, in law, in fee simple, and has good right, full poe�er and la�vful authority to a ant,bargain, se112nd convey the same in mannPr and form as aforesaid,and that the same are free and clear from all former and other grants, bargains, sales, liens, taxes, assessments, encumbrances and reshictions of whatever kind or nature soever,except those matters set forth in Eachibit"A"attached hereto and made a part hereof. The grantor shall and will WARRANT AND FOREVER DEFEND the above-bargained premises in the quiet and peaceable possession of the grantee,his heirs and assigns,against all and every person or persons lawfully claiming the whole or any part thereof. The singular number shall include the piural,the plural the singular,and the use of any gender shall be applicable to all genders. IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the grantor has executed this deed on the date set forth above. <-<_/c�'�-�?��oGz�—ya-s7.� � �?-l''yo WANDA JEANNE PLAGENS,TRUSTEE�-=' STATE OF ARIZONA ) )ss. COUNTY OF �', h��., � The foregoing instiument was aclrnowiedged before me this j``"t day of �OV�+"��,� , �.�4 �,by WANDA JEANNE PLAGENS,TRUSTEE OF THE WANDA JEANNE PLAGENS RESIDENTIAL GRTT NUMBER TW�UNDER GRANTOR RETAINED INCOME TRUST AGREEMENT NUMBER TWO DATED NOVEMBER 12, 1998 My comrrussion expires: � r` �9 i o Witness my hand and official seal. 'iciai eal ;��LP,t.G� ll�� /_��1.+�'.��- NOTARY PUBLIC NO1ryP��` STATE OF ARIZONA , , County of Pima KEITH A.STUCK �. M Commission Expir2s April 26,2010 \\ \ 0 1 � - _ . -=. � Stcwart Titic of Cobrado-Vail Division Flle 1Vumber. 6038141 �� '1�L No.921 A-Warranty Dxd— To Joint Tenants Page 1 of 2 EXAIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION Order No.: 6038141 PARCEL A: A tract of land being a portion of Lot 15, Block 7, BIGHORN SUBDIVLSION FIFTH ADDI1'ION, Town of Vail, Eagle County,Colorado; said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northern-most comer of said Lot 15, being the intersecrion of the South right-of-way line of Meadow Lane and the Westerly right-of-way line of Meadow Drive,both being platted rights-of-way in said Bighorn Subdivision Fifth Addition; thence S OS°O1'46"E a distance of 52.12 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence S 13°10'00"E a distance of 47.00 feet; thence S 76°50'00"W a distance of 30.30 feet; thence N 13°10'00"W a distance of 36.10 feet; thence S 76°50'00"W a distance of 0.20 feet; thence N 13°10'00"W a distance of 8.20 feet; thence N 76°50'00"E a distance of 3.50 feet; thence N 13°10'00"W a distance of 2.70 feet; thence N 76°50'00"E a distance of 27.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. TOGETHER WITH an undivided one-half(1/2) interest in and to all of Lot 15, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision, Fifth Addition, EXCEPT PARCEL A,described above and PARCEL B described as follows: A tract of land being a portion of Lot 15, Block 7, BIGHORN SUBDNISION FIFT'H ADDITION, Town of Vail, Eagle County,Colorado; said parcel being more particularly described as follows: Beginning at the Northern-most corner of said Lot 15, being the intersection of the South right-of-way line of Meadow Lane and the Westerly right-of-way line of Meadow Drive, both being platted rights-of-way in said Bighorn Subdivision Fifth Addition; thence S OS°O1'46"E a distance of 52.12 feet to the True Point of Beginning; thence N 13°10'00 W a distance of 11.40 feet; thence S 76°50'00"W a distance of 66.30 feet; thence S 13°10'00"E a distance of 30.20 feet; thence N 76°50'00"E a distance of 36.00 feet to a point on the West line of said Parcel A; thence along the common boundary of said Parcels A and B for the following six courses: 1)N 13°1Q'00"W a distance of 7.90 feet; 2) S 76°50'00"W a distance of 0.20 feet; 3)N 13°10'00"W a distance of 8.20 feet; � 4)N 76°50'00"E a distance of 3.50 feet; � 5)N 13°10'00"W a distance of 2.70 feet; 6)N 76°50'00"E a distance of 27.00 feet to the True Point of Beginning. COUNTY OF EAGLE STATE OF COLORA.DO Stewart Title of Colorado-Vail Division File Number: 60381A1 No.921 A-Wartanty Deed— To Joint Tenants Page 2 of 2 ,t"R � ".,�ry,�,. l ir28r20@6 Pgs� 1 03�43=03PM REC- $6.00 DOG S STATEMENT OF AUTI30RITY , (38-30-172,C.RS.) � 1. This Statement of Authority relates to an entity named WS ASSOCIATES,LLC,A COLOR.ADO LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY And is executed on behalf vf the entity pursuant to the provisions of Section 38-30-172 C.R.S. 2. The type of entity is a: LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY 3. The mailing address for the entity is: 3980 NAS�AU CIRCLE WEST CHERRY HILLS VII.LAGE, Colorado 8Q113-5123 4. The entity is formed under the laws of C4LORADO 5. The name of the person(s) authorized to execute instruments conveying, encumbering,or otherwise affecting title to real property on behalf of the entity is: MARK R. SCOTT,MEMBER 6. The authority of the foregoing person(s)to bind the entity is a Not limited OR � Limited as follows: 7. Other matters concerning the manner in which the entity deals with interest in real property: Dated this • day of I1�D1�, ,�• � . SC T, ME ER STATE OF ORADO ) ) ss. COUNTY OF EG�� ) The foregoing instrumeni was acknowledged before me 1�a�� Z�i ZC� bY MARK R. SCOTT,MEMBER ,.;V;_.�.,;, .`P4� �UB�� WITNESS MY HAND AND OFFICIAL SEAL. �� C �� Notary Public �_ aQ�� My commissian e ires: 5/ 007 �OF CQ'' � �� - �� . �� , �� ,'�'`�'� ' �//.� ,�� %� ?,�� ' `��%�ir.1� (��2 v—' � i_ :�., � , J2�� _ � Fik Number: 6038141 St�TiQe of Cvlundo-Vail Division ` � - Smtement of Authority �� EXHIBIT A EXCEPTIONS 1. General taxes for the year 2006 subsequent years; and those specific exceptions described by reference to recorded documents as reflected in the Title Documents accepted by Grantee(s) in accordance with Section 8a (Title Review) of the Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate relating to the above described property; distribution utility easements (including cable T�; those specifically described rights of third parties not shown by the public records of which of which Grantee has actual knowledge and which were accepted by Grantee(s) in accordance with Section 8b (Matters not shown by the Public Records) and Section 8c (Survey Review) of the Contract to Buy and Sell Real Estate relating to the above described real property; inclusion of the property within any special taac district; and, the benefit and burdens of any declaration and party wall agreements, if any. �le Numbcr: 6038141 Stewart Title of Colorado-Vail Division Wamanty Deed—Exhibit A Exceptions) Page 1 of I , 11�1(1FYA�� 70YNT PROPERTY OWNER WRITTEN APPROVAL LETTER This form is applicable to all Design Review applicants that share ownership of the subjec�property. Foc exam- ple, the subject property where construcdon is occurring is a duplex, condominium or multi-tenant buildin�. This form shall be completed by the applicanYs neighbor/joint property owner. In the case of a multiple-family dwell- ing or multi-tenant building, the authority of the association shall complete this form and mail to: Community Development Departrnent, 75 South Frontage Road,Vail, CO 81657 or fax to 970.479.24�. I, (print name) . a joint owner, or authority of the association, of pa�operty located at provide this lel.ter as written approval of the plans dated which have been submitte� to the Town of Vail Community Development Departmerrt for the proposed improvements to be oompleted at the ad- dress noted above. I understand that the proposed improvemerrts include: (Signature) (Uate) Additionally, please chedc the statement below which is most applicable to you; o I unders[and that minor modificalions may be made to Ifie p/ans ove�the course of tf�e review proc�s d7v en- sure comp/ianc�e wibh ifie Town's app/icable codes and regulations (Initia/here) o I�equest that a//ma�dificalions, minor o�othe�wrse, whicfi ar�made to the p/ans ovre�Ifie cnurse of�he re- �iew process, be brought to my attention by the app/icant for addi[iona/approva/Laefore undergang further re- view by bhe Town. � (Initia/here) � � f:lc�evlforrrulpertnitslPlanning�DRBWR6 Addition_010110 Leruth G. Davis g60p E, Exposition Ave. Denver, CO 80224 Mark and Jacqueline Scott 3980 Nassau Circle West Cherry Hiils Village, CO 80113 Re: 4898 Meadow Lane, Vail, Colorado Dear Mark and Jackie: I have carefully considered your proposal to expand Unit A and discussed it with my sons and advisors over the past couple of weeks. Regretfully, I dedine to give my consent to any such work for the following reasons. First, we have used Unit B as a family residence for some 31 years now. It is a place where my children grew up, a place which my husband and I decorated and a place where I have many fond memories. Simply, Unit B in its present cor�figuration has and is a big part of our family and, at this stage in my life, I do not wish to change it. Second, I was advised by legal counsel of several problems that would be created by the expansion as follows:. (i)The zoning of the entire property has a limitation on the maximum buitding size. Any expansion of Unit A correspondingly reduces the poterrtial building size of Unit B. Consequently, the expansion of Unit A financially harms the ovmer of Unit B. (ii} Any construction defects or delays or mechanics liens that might arise with an expansion of Unit A will be suffered by the owner of Unit B because of the legal and physical integration of the finro units. (iii) The existing Townhouse Declaration which is applicable to the property and perhaps other documents would also have to be revised to reflect the expansion. In short, there is no way to insulate the Unit B owner from the headac��es and risks associated with the e�ansion of Unit A. I hope you und�stand my position and concems regarding your proposal. Very truly yours, G�LG�Q� g�G�la Leruth G. Davis 90203\I\1438339.1 In early September,Scott receives letter from Davis dated 08/26/2010 yet again rejecting one more set c�' renderings. Davis cites the following: • "..�expansion of Unit A wou/d corresponding/y reduce tfie potentia,�bui/ding size a� UnitB...." This is factually incorrect and disingenuous: 1.) This assumption is factually incorrect. The Gross Residential Floor Area for 4895 Meadow is approximately 1,950 square feet. Unit A redevelopment would comprise approximately 3,400 square feet leaving ample square footage on the lot remaining for Unit B rede�elopment. 2.) This assumption is disingenuous. On at least 5 occasions, Scott and others hau� been instructe�d by Davis that while she had no interest now or in the future to redevelop or iimprove Unit B, D��;^is would allow redevelopment on Unit A. Scott not only relied on this promise v�rh�en purchasing th� properly, but also when investing in infrastructure improvements. • "..Constrvction defects or de%ys or mechanics/iens thot might orise....due to the /eg,nd' ond physica/integrotion of the two units..." Once again,this is factually incorrect and circuitous: 1.) Scott has signed prior hold harmless agreements with Davis in the past. 2.) Common construction practice will provide adequate protection with this undertaking. 3.) Essentially the living spaces of Unit A and Unit B are two separate boxes attached by a few fee#Qf common wall.The living area"box"comprising Unit A faces east out onto Mea�dow Drive whereas the living area"box"comprising Unit B faces 45 degrees to the north towards Meadow Lane. Sa, other than a wall separating the garage spaces,the common walls are minimaf. 4,) During the prior 4 years, Scott has proven to be nothing short of a steadfast, trustworthy and responsible neighbor as cited in testimonials from neighbors and Davis hersel�. There is no basi:� to believe Scott's practices would suddenly change. • "...the existing Townhouse Dec/arotion wou/d hove to be revised..." 1.) The Townhouse Declaration has already been revised and amended by Davis attorney at least ance when s/he drafted the hold harmless agreement in October 2009. 2.) The Townhouse Declaration is outdated and has not been adhered to by Davi� i�r the past(no reimbursement for maintenance done on property; no recent appraisal by Da�vis as required in tl�e Townhouse Declaration,etc.) 3.) Scott is willing to accept responsibility of revising and updating Townhouse D!ec!laration. The basis of the Davis letter of 08/26/2010 is disingenuous on numerous fronts: Ruth Davis statement in paragraph #2 that 4898 Meadow Lane has been used as a fami�ly residence for�1 years is fraudulent. The Davis residence is at 6600 E. Exposition Ave. in Denver, CO. Her letter of 08/26/2010 cites that address and her place of residence. Ms. Davis children did not grow up in Vail nor have they lived there permanently.The Q�avis adult childrer� grew up in Denver and attended K-12 Schools in Denver. One Davis adult child,who i�s a permanent Dei°�ver resident, is the only adult child that spends noteworthy time in Vail whereas Ruth Davi�has been and continues to be an occasional weekend and vacation visitor. The Scott Family intends to become permanent Vail residents upon the completion of the redevelopment. From: Ieruth5280@comcast.net[mailto:leruth5280@comcas�t.net] Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 7:15 PM To: Scott, Mark Subject: Re: Misc. Stuff about Vail.. Thanks Mark...l plan to be up this weekend and will look our yards over. I did no# plan to hav� the lawn power raked and glad to hear you don't think it will be necessary. I do appreciate what you are doir�g. Ruth ----- Original Message ----- From: "Mark Scott" <Mark.Scott�intrado.com> To: MarkGDavis�aol.com, Ieruth5280�comcast.net Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2010 10:02:27 AM GMT -07:00 US/Canada Mountain Subject: Misc. Stuff about Vail.. Hi... Hope all is well on your end. Wanted to let you know I went up last weekend and did some misc. work around the yard including mowing. Our side got hit very hard with winter Voles who did a number on our side of the yard. I inspected your side and it appears you were completely spared from the Voles. I contacted an exterminator and the problem should be solved. I did notice that both sides had quite a bit of lawn winter kill...at least more than the last couple of years. While mowing, I kicked in the recycler and that appeared to do a pretty good job of churning up the winter kill and getting it ready for spring. I plan to fertitize on my neut trip up so if you plan to power rake your side before I fertilize, please let me know....l believe the lawn will be okay without power raking. In addition,the deck appears to have accumulated a bunch on dirt on the new paint job so I will also bring up a power washer and power wash the deck for summer. On another note, our friend and architect, Dave Irwin (Ruth, I believe you met Dave) has completed an elevation rendering that we'd like to show you when you have some time. The next couple of weeks are a bit crazy for us with graduation and then a college orientation trip, but perhaps we can get together in mid-June to show it to you? Have a great rest of spring and we look forward to seeing you this summer. 11/21/2010 Ms. Diana Meehan Owner/Broker Coidwell Banker Timberline 286 Bridge St. Vail, CO 81657 November 22, 2010 Mr. Pete Dunninq Chair Design Review Board Town of Vail 75 S. Frontage Road, Vail,CO 81657 To the Design Review Board; In TJovember, ZOOC�I represented Maric a jar.�ueiine St�tt wher they�urchased 4898 Meadcw Lar��, Uni�A in the East Vail area. Mr. &Mrs. Scott have been long term East Vail Homeowners having previously owned another East Vail home when they searched for a redevelopment properly in 2006. Although the property located at 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A was dated and somewhat dilapidated,the primary selling feature,and reason for the premium asking price,was the redevelopment opportunity it represented. This selling feature was promoted evidenced by the attached qient Detail Report cfing°More Gross Residential Floor Area Available". As a result, Mr.&Mrs. Scott purchased and paid a premium for this redevelopment property. When Mr. &Mrs. Scott were evaluating the purchase of 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A,and prior to closing, they requested that I meet with the owner of 4898 Meadow lane Unit B, Ms. Ruth Davis, with the express purpose to share Mr. &Mrs. Scott plans to purchase and redevelop Unit A. At this meeting Ms. Davis indicated that was aware that 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A was being promoted as a redevelopment opportunity. I explained that redevelopment was Mr. &Mrs. Scott primary intention should they purchase the unit and I showed Ms. Davis preliminary architectural rendenngs. During this meeting in October 2006, Ms. Davis told me".... while she was not interested in redeve%ping he�side(Unit B), the buyer((Mr. &Mrs Scott)cou/d do what bhey wanted to thei�side...". Based on this reliance Mr. &Mrs. Scott decided to proceed with the purchase of 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A. Unquestionably, lacking this reliance from Ms. Davis, Mark&]acqueline Scott would not have purchased 4898 Meadow Lane Unit A. In addition,within the past year or so, based on the reliance given by Ms. Davis, Mr. Scott began several infrastructure improvements with Ms. Davis complete concuRence and participation. Of note,two new sewer lines installed, one that Ms. Davis adcnowledged was specifically earmarked for the Unit A redevelopment initiative and.extensive surveying._E�r_ther, I understand_thatMr.&Mrs�Scott have prQVided Ms. Davis with numerous redevelopment options that would make the current dilapidated properly more fitting with the character of this East Vail neighbofiood. I believe that several of these options even included Mr. Scott funding cosmetic updates to the exterior facade and landscaping for Ms. Davis'Unit B. Mr. &Mrs. ScotCs redevelopment intentions have been clear from the beginning and it would be unfortunate if this dilapidated property remained as is because it does not fit with the character of this appealing East Vail neighborhood and it greatiy detracts from the value of the surrounding properties. Thank you. Sincerely, � , _-Gt� �"�-�.�' Diana Meehan �`�7�' 1�U� YY:�rre� �#, U��r� 49�8 M�ead�vvrc�! C�r�� Yail, �CC� �cs�.�mt�r ��w ��iE} t��, P�� t�g �h��r ��i�n F�evi� �€c� �� sf V�iF �5 �. FT€�n�,�t� ��Cls �l�i1r C:�!C) �t�a�� e ��u�t �c� �i�r��e � ��r�l�r�c �f��9� M��w t.��, ��i�t:t� 4et�� ,��'^.7 rr� �Q� �� VSf �t"�r � �`��3�Iy �il,l��t�� k" R�.''1�4'�y ��}Q� �I`�� 1� I`+°��;;��fi�i '�`�c'!!�!� ��ve �wned �SR��y' in Ea��i� t�t��rn�r f�r c�vv�.�a° I4 ��rr,. ��i�+� r*�f�rer��, �rty t"�ty'm� �5 �€� �f��ti �i�a�rtt t�a tt�� tt ��p�e�F, v►+�iCh i��.� 5��3�� +�0��` �3f1��r�t��t. �Ci'�f�O !11'� �iEJf€�k7��1t� 7'}'i'� �''�KJt'3� �i'1t� t�G'1 �!k �,3�'bC��tl�j �3�1�� '"�i'�'� `�-j'��fl YYSt��i"'y t�r. �ar�e �� bo€�t his �ns [� �errpr�+�� hi� �r�pe�� and th� �t3,�:�:�r�t ur�it. I �*�V�'' 21� f�"°I�� lc��.''`.�"� ��K�fl� �'Vc�l��f 01�t'��"4&3�� c��'1C� ��; NJ'��3f�'9��'��`.:�" �� f�1 �''.�� 1�'`?t` �t�` � � �� .'t�rt�'�(�'T� iit �i��17�5 '�s�' d�zs�'��f�l. 71��,-'��d�� f9tj }�'€''��. ��'1�G �t��E.' �?��t�`'{ �'lc�� S+[!I"€'��`�11�7Et'at� ff��'��I�U`�"i� �`�3��'ltk��l'�s'��"1�t5�'"�, ,�3�t� �1c3`� ,[�rt� t� �h� i� �c��. An+�, fifi�c��h I h�+�� k�t� �� .t�l� mi�'��;x= I�t�i�ti �xtP�rr i�n�ra�+��t#� to t� �ntir� pr�aF�ec�.�r, 1 �uppc�rt i�ir e�€�s�li.�� t�a c�n;�n�;b ��a�t�� C� ft�l� ��l+��m�r��, �I� ��n�d r� kf�� h�� ny �t��r�. ��f9��1�4'°r � _� °�� E�'�`# �, ��iF1 , .�....., ��%�� JOINT PROPERTY OWNER � , _�� 7Y.i�';��'�;�� WRITfEN APPROVAL LETTER The applicant must submit written joint property owner approval for applications afFecting shared ownership properties such as duplex, condominium, and multi-tenant buildings. This form, or similar written correspondence, must be com- pleted by the adjoining duplex unit owner or the authorized agent of the home owner's association in the case of a con- dominium or multi-tenant building. All completed forms must be submitted with the applicants completed applicatian. I, (print name) Leruth G. Davis , a joint owner, cr �uther;ty-�f the-a�sc�i�tien, of propert located at 4898 Meadow Lane , provide this letter as written approval of the plans �+�te� See Exhibit A which have been submitted t�� the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the proposed improvements to be completed at the address not- ed above. I understand that the proposed improvements include: Demolition of most of Unit A's structure and replacement with a new structure in accordance with approved plans. I object to the stucco and wainscoting as depicted on the plans. Attached is a letter from my architect Pam Hopkins and request that her comments be addressed before final approval. � f � �� '9 ��, / ; ruth G. Davis (Signature) (Date) Additionally, please check the statement below which is most applicable to you: I understand that minor modifications may be made to the plans over the course of the review process to ensure com- pliance with the Town's applicable codes and regulations. (Initial here) I understand that a//modifications, minor or otherwise, whrch are made to the plans over the course of the review pro- cess, be ught to my attention by the applicant for additional approua/before undergoing further review by the T"own. x � (Initial here) EXHIBIT A Peak Land Consultant—Improvement Location Certificate dated 8/27/08 PLC Job 1646 Undated NOVA Group Scott Residence Plan 16-1, 16-2 and 16-3 14456\1\1555237.1 � �� g �� .�"'"z,,'"' �xc� � � > . _ � „;'-u � �'� �e o � ��— � e e ��'��s`xcl � �f � � ° �` �.�,�� _�.._,: ��:,zw__.i � � ` . June 28, 2011 Mr. Mark G. Davis 943 Emerson St. #4 Denver, CO 80218 VIA email: markqdavis�a7qrnail.co�� Mark, The following is a list of drawings I recommend that your family request from the owners of Unit A for your review prior to the signing of the FINAL Joint Property Owner Agreement: 1. A stamped Improvement Location Certificate (ILC}. 2. Architectural Plans of the existing units, as they are today with existing GRFA calculations for both units. 3. Proposed Architectural Plans with dimensions and proposed GRFA calculations. 4. Proposed Site Coverage calculations. 5. Proposed Landscaping Plan and calculations. 6. Proposed Site Plan showing the proposed and existing driveway and the required parking for both units. 7. Proposed Roof Plan. 8. Proposed Elevations showing materials and colors selected. ��f� Pamela Hopkins, AIA, LEED AP PO f3ox 3340 m Vail , Colorado 81658 � Phone: 970-476-2201 � Fax: 970-476-7491 Bill Gibson From: Sommers, Steven M. <SSommers@BHFS.com> Sent: Thursday, June 30, 2011 10:53 AM To: Bill Gibson Cc: Paul Franke Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane Attachments: consent to concept review 062911.pdf Bill - attached is the consent of the Unit B owner to the concept plans for the redevelopment of Unit A at 4898 Meadow Lane. Please review and contact me with any questions or comments. Steven M.Sommers,Esq. Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck LLP 410 Seventeenth Street,Suite 2200 Denver,Colorado 80202-4432 ssommers(a�bhfs.com T 303.223.1121 F 303.223.0921 To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that any federal tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) is not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for purposes of(i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or(ii) promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein. STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY& DISCLAIMER: The information contained in this email message is attorney privileged and confidential, intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this email is strictly prohibited. If you have received this email in error, please notify us immediately by replying and delete the message. Thank you. 1 Bill Gibson From: Bill Gibson Sent: Monday, [�ecember 46, 2410 2:21 PM To: 'markscotC28C�msn.com" Cc. 'snapoutofit2�msn.tc�m' Subject: 4898 Meadow I.aneJLflt 15, Block 7, Bighc�rn Subdivision Additic�n S Hey Mark and David, 1'he Town of Vail Community Develapment Department has received a design review application for the renovation of 4898 Meadow tand, Unit A. The subject prc�perty is lacated within the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Zone District. Bath halves c�f the existing duplex can Lot�.5 are treated as one entity for zoning purposes and share developments rights such as density,gross resEdential floar area,site coverage, landscape area,etc. Since the two halves of the existing duplex share development rights,the Town of Vail Community Development Department requires all development applications to include the written approval of both unit owners. The Town of Vail does not interpret, administer or enforce private covenants,deed restrictians,contracts,ar any ather form af civil agreement. Therefore, the Town of Vail can not arbitrate or render any form of judgment about any disagreement between yourself and Ms, [7avis abaut how,or haw nat to, redevelop your properties. The Town af Vail Community t�evelopment Department can not pracess the submitted design review applicatian ta remodel Unit A without first receiving the written apprc�val c�f the joint property owner{Unit B}or an equivalent court order. Please submit written joint property owner to the Community Development Department by no later than Manday, lanuary 3,2011. If joint propecry owner approval is not submitted by that date, the submitted design review applicatian will be cansidered null and void and the application will be returned to your mailing address. Sincerely, Bill Bill Gibson,AICP Ti�wtz Plattr�er Communit; Development I?epartm�nt t . !t1�tll 1��,' • Direct 47(�-479-2173 Fax 970-�79-2452 http:II w ww.vai�go v.c o m � � � � � � 1 � Bill Cibson Frarn: Mark Scc�tt <markscott28@msn.com> Sent: Monday, December 06, 201�4:40 PM To: 8ill Gibson Cc: snapoutofit2 a�msn.com Subject: RE:4898 Meadow Lanel�c�t 15, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Addition 5 Hella Bill... Thank you for your response. I have tried to cal!today, but with our two hectic schedules, it appears we're missing ane another. At this point, we're just seeking a Conceptual Review vs. full design review application. The reason being is that we're trying to assess whether the anticipated idea is in the realm of possibilities from your end before we proceed down an Arbitrations path with Side B ouvner. Thak said, are we procee�ing down the correct pakh? I would hate to reach an agreement with Side B only to discover at a later date that the TOV DRB doesn't see this idea in the realm af possibilities. thanks again Bill. !�'f��►''�'✓�. .sL't 9�Z`' 3980 Nassau Circle West Cherry Hills Village, Colorado 80113 303.888.4636 FAX.759.170{} From; BGibson�a vailgov.com To: markscc�tt28@msn.�om CC: snapoutofit2@msn.cam Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane/�at 15, Block 3, Bighorn Subdivision Additian 5 [3ate: Mon, 6 De� 2010 21:20:47 +0�00 Hey Mark and David, The Town of Vai) Community Development Department has received a design revieuv application for the renovation of 4$98 Meadaw Land, Unit A. The subject properky is located within the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Zone C7istrict. Both halves of the existing duplex on Lot 15 are treated as one entity for zoning purposes and share develapments rights such as density, grass residentia! floor area, site coverage, landscape area, etc. Since the two halves of the exist�ng duplex share development rights, the Town of Vail Communitjr Development Department requires all development applications to include the written apprcrval of both unit owners. The Town of Vail does not interpret, administer or enforce private cavenants, deed restrictior�s, contracts, c�r any other form of civil agreement. Therefore, the Town of Vail can nt�t arbitrate or render any form of judgment about any /� disagreement between yourself and Ms. Davis about how, or how not to, redevelop your properties. The Town af Vail V� �ommunity pevelopment Department can not process the submitted design review application to remodel Unit A witho t � first r�iving the written approval af the joint praperty awner(Unit B) or an equivalent court order. � Please submit writken joint property owner to the Community Development aepartment by no later than Manday,�anu ry � 3, 2011. If joint property owner apprflval is nat submitted by that date, the submitt�d design review application will � mnsidered null and vaid and the application will be returned to your mailing address. �� 1 � Sincerely, Bill T3it1 Gibson,A1CP Tcru}rr Plrrt7ner Cc�n�n�unity Development Department Y x �� Uirect 970-479-2173 Fax 970-479-2452 http:llwww�vail�av.carn 2 � Fron:JA�S 3�3-534-1�54 To:3�3623fl960 05l2fi/�031 15:02 �420 P.001/008 `�f2�(Dt�b�7 Facsinr�lle �over �heet Phc�ne. 303-534-1254 JAMS Fax: 303-53�-1255 � ,�AlIAS � �10 17th �#reei Suite 1f(}(} C3enue�, CQ 802fl2 TML'RBSOLU11C7N BXP�R75 C�SP.. �C}. 1�G.r'?S7i Thu, May 26, 2C?11 NmE�r. c�f Pages in�. Cc►v�r� To: Paul R Fnnke fiF �`irmlCampany: Franke Gr�enhouse Lis#8� G.ippitk, LLP � � [� � �I [� D Firm �ax Number. 3{}3-623-0960 �� Firm Phvne hJumb�r: 3(?3.623.3208 T{�WN C�� VAII. From: Gharm�ine K. Ogren Subjecf; Scott, Mark and Jaqueline us. L�ruth �. Dauis Message: ARBITRATIC)N AWARD. Thank you. Gl�ar if you do nat receive t1�e number of page� indicated abc�ve or yau have received this transmission in error, please�all 303-v34-12�4. The information containsd in this taesimile contains prlrtlls�ed�ad cart�ItNntlsl Irri+arrn�tlon in#ended far#he use of individuaE or entity named above. !f you are not tt�t�s intended recipient of this iacsimile or the employee �� or agent responsibie to deiiver it tc� th�e int+�nded recipient, you are hereby nat�Fred that any dissemination, � distributian ar copying of this f�csimile is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile in error, plesse immecii�tery notify JAMS by telephone at�{?3-534-1254 and retum the original message tc� me at the abc�ve � addre>s via the U.3. Postal Service. � � � � : Fr��.JA�S 3�3-53A-1254 Ta:3�362��960 �5/26/��11 �5:02 #4�0 P.�021008 �..�.._�_.�.... �__ ---- -- ..� .__�_. � IN R,E:ARHI'�RATION PR(�EEI?tIyJGS t � Claim�stta. i�+iark Scott and Jacqueline Sctytt F{espondent: �.eruth Gt� Davis Case Number: �2�52{J1�M5) � � _.__.._.....�._ ARBITRATt{?N AWARtJ ..~. ___�_M~ ___..._.__.__� The arbitration af this mattcr was hetd on May 1�-I3,2011.Paui Frsnl�e,Esc�.and Ktely I?o�s,Fsc}•aPPra�r�ct for Clai�►ants{t�ih of whom were present).Jonatl��tn Pray,Esq.and Stevcn Sommexs,Es9•app��for Resp�t�ent(who vvas gresent}.Although i�ert+itrators w�rc appoiat�tl by the parties,as pr�viously riot�l{C}rder of Apnl 21 t 2{711),the ar�sitrators are neutral and are not`�f`or"either party. '�'he Pancl has consicFerex3 tha ustimony e�sd credibility of all wit�ses{sc�me ofwhom tcesstified by tet�hone3,the e�chibi#s a�3mitted into evidence,the partics'prc-arbitrr�ttian and post- acbitration submissions and the applicable Iaw. BAC.K.t3RUUNI} The disgtt�centers a+raund ccrtain prcrvisions in the Towr�ho�use I?eclaration fcsr�i 15, Block 7,Bighorn Subdivi�iori,Fifth Additit�n,Faglc County,Colorado("the T}e�lstration"j. Para�raph 5�ftht Declaration grc�vides in part t3�at"No pwn�r sh�11 make or suf�er�ny structural or design ch�nge{incItading a�lar scheme�hangc)either permaneat or impeim�nt and of any type or r►atc�re whatever to 8ae�rct�or t�f any imp�rovement on t}xe groperiy wit}�out abtaining the pr��r writier►�onscnt there#a from th�other vwner." Clainnants{herein sometim�s n��rrred to as"the Scotts"}own Uttit A oFtbe Townhou�+� and Respondent(herein sornetimes re�erred to as"Mns.Davis"}avvns Unit 8. The Scc,tts have � � � � � � � . �Froa:JA�S 303-534-1�54 To:303623096Q 05/2612011 15:02 #420 P.003/008 proposeci certain subst�tial rcmodaIing chang�s which will atter thc exterior of Uni�A.� Sotne of their proposals a�sv wouid aLter the�appear�nce of sou�e of the exterior of Un.it B,such as putting stone wainscaating arc�t�nci the exterior of bath units and stucco covering the chimneys. However,the Sct»tts testi#ied at th�hearing'Chst they wc�uId be willing t+�e]im��innate�all af thc�se prapt�sed changes so tbat the exteric�r of Uni#8 would nat be alt+ered. Ii is undisputeci that M,rs. I�avis�as n.ot given writte»conseat to the Scotts' �+roPosals. The issuc in this arbitratian is whether Mrs.Davi�,ttuough her st�tements and actions,has a;�re.ed t��at the Scotts oan remodel the exteriar of Unit A and sh�uld�e z�equir�d tc�give her consen#in writir�g. The cvidence estahlished that the parties mentianed ar discussed tbe Scotks° desirc to rernodel their unit un s�vsral a+�cesions,ir�cludi�g the following: 1. In the Fa]I vf2�tK'i,the Scotts'real estate broker,i)iane Meehan,spoke to Mrs.Uavis. 2. In esrly October,2(�06,Mrs. Scott and Mrs,Davis had a ct�nversatior�in the drirreway afthe townhome. 3. In ihe swmmer of 20{}9,th��c•�tts met Mrs. Uavis at th�Buckhorn Exalyang�in I?enver. �. Also in the summer af2tI09,the Scc�tts m�t Mrs,I�avis at her}�nae in Denver. S. In August,20t19,the Scotts' �u-chit�ct,D�avac!Irwin,rnct Mrs. Davis on the deck of LTnat B. 6. I�September,20U�,Mrs. Dawis' son,Marlc,s�oke to c�ntrsctt�r David Bronn, 7. In Octo�,20Q4,Mr.Uwin again snet with Mrs,Davis. 8, In Ju1y,2010,I�fr. Scott�auud�.I�avis met in the Scatt's tJnit. 9. Dun�ng Christm�s hv]iday,�4I0�Mr.Scott and h�rs.Davis had a brief cccanversatian. Theze also were a-mail rness�ge�is�which tho remodeling wes me�ti€�ned. Tl�re is cc�nflieting testimony�s m what�xactty was said dur'sng the abav�meetings and 3 cc�nversat�ans,but the Panel canctudes tha#Mrs, T)�vvis led th�Scot#s to believe tklat,while sMe 1 was hagpy with t�er av►�e u�tut ihe way it vv�s�nd did not want it cl�anged,she"di�i not c«�re"what , the Scc��hs did to th�eir uuc�u� A+�xs.Davis waited.almttst 4 ye�s af'tter thc first eonversation with Ms.Mee�Zan,and nntaz�#,hau vne yesr a�diseussions of rhe�co�#s'remocielinP,I�l�sats began 4�� 'So�of tho testisnony dis�ssed potea#ial chsnges to the intariar of#hc Scotts'unit.Mrs.Usrris has acknowledged � that st►e does aot ab.�ect ta any s�h chsnga�and that interior chauges are not the subjxt of�'sragraph 5. � -z- � � � � From:JA�S 303-534-1254 To:303623�96� �5/2612�11 15:Q2 #A2� P.��4/Q08 in earnest in the summer af20(l9,before she told the Scotts,through a letter draftcd by her lawyer,t�at she�id noi consent to any change tQ the exteriar ofthe townhouse. DISCUSSrt7N AND A�+IALYSIS Based t�n these fs�cts,Claimants present three clairns for re�ief breach af the�ovenen#of good faith and fair dc�ling,promiss�ry estoppel,and p�rtia] perfors�suce. In ct�nsidering the�e�etaims,the Panel is nundfvl of its gz�vit�us detcamis�ation that Co�ar�do's version of the Uniforrn Arbitration Act,as it eacisted when the Ueclaration bac�ne effec#ive in 1978,is the control�ing statute. IJnder that statute,the aarbitrators have"gr�at flexibitity'"in fasbion�ing appzopriate remedies.R.P.T, v. Inr�ava#ve CQmmurticativrrs, Tnc,,�17 P.�d 340,3+�3(�olo.App. 1996); Byerty v. l�irkpatrick Pettis Smeth Polinn, ln�, 996 P.2d 77t, 774{Cala.Ap�.2{}Ufl). The Panet finds that Mr.and Mrs.Scott and Mrs. I}avis,as co-own�rs of ihe subject �iuplex,axc"co�tracting psrties"tu the Declaration{'�13) and therefcue are subject to basYc contcact principles,�nctuding the implieci coven�nt af good faith and fair deaEing. The parties have debated th�effect of the covenan.t,The]aw as clearty set fo�th ir�New I�csign Can.str. �o,, Ir�c. v Hamon Caratractors, Irrc., �1�P.3d I 172 (Co�a.App.Z.Op8) Every�ntract i,n Calor�do cont�ins�n implied duty of goc�faith and.�`air de�Iing.A vio�a.tion af the duty af good faith and f�ir dealing gives rise�a a atai�n for bncach ofcon�ract. Whether a p�arry acte�i in good faith is a qucstion offact which must be deterznined on a case by csse basis. 1"�e duty ofgoad f�i#h atxd f�ir dea�ing may be relied upan when the��ner ofgerformatxce under a�speci�ic contraet tcrm al.lows for di�retion an the gart of either party.l�iscretion in performance o+cc�rs whcn the p�r�ies,at frnmatian,defer e decision regarciin,g perfornjan�ce tenms of the cantra.c#lea�ring one party with the gower to sct or control the terrns Qf performance afteT formertiion.�15 P.3d 1I72, 12 81 {int�rnal citatians and quotations omitted). The q�estian of�uvhetbar a garty has acted in gov�i f�ith is a qu�estic�n of fact which is determined on a case by esss basis."The doctrine exists to effectuate tht garties' intentions and hanar their reasonable expectatians." �Vetvflower Market, ltt�. v. Covk,229 P.3d 1fl5$, 1�64 {Colo.Agp.�Ol UJ�, The P�e] do�s not believe thai the Declaration wes ira�tended to pern�it either c►wwr�..er arbitrarily to withhold its consent to eacter�or siterations ofthe building for any reason or tzo reason at all. �r�rm v�priI Ccrrpvration,62 P.3d 1039, 1t}41 {{;ol.App.20�2}{"Whcre the language used in the cc�r�traxct does rtoi uaatce it clear t��at a subjective s�tandard applies,au � obje�tive test c�freasonabte satisfacteon will be epplied#o#he extant it is practicable."} � _g_ � � � � i � . Fron:JA�S 3��-534•1�54 To:3D3623��6� 05/2�/20ii 1�:03 �42Q P.�05/008 When the Scvtts purch;�sed Unit A mnd becarnc pazties ta the Declaratian.thay were �ntitled to believ�that.Mrs. Uavis wc�uld act fn�reason�ble manner in its perfarrt�ance.Plutr v. As�eem{�ood C'Qndcaminium.4ssociativn, �Cttc.,214 P.3d l(�6t}, l 456(�olo.App.2{�t19). Even if a "subjc�tivc"�tandard apgtied,I��.Davis was vblzgated tt�exercise that stan�dard in�c�od f$ith and fairly and cxpeclitiously.,�ee,� Crum v,�pra��arpctratiar� supra. A�statcd abov�,the Panel co�c]ud�s ittat,aver a long period,Mrs.T�avis ted the Set�tts ta beiieve that stxe wc�uld nt�t object an+d wt�ul�conseut ta their remadetin�plans so lang as her unit was nc�t chang�d, The Panel atsc�concludes that tbe ScoCts reascrnably relicd an Mrs.Davis' statements to puxchase Unit A,ta pay for a second sewer linc in co�iemplation of e}ccganciing Unit A,to hire�v1.i.Irwin tc�draw up varit�us rernadcling prop�sals,�ncl io ims�vct Mr. lrwin to revi�tbe pz�posats to accomtnc�dste ctsnc�rns xaised by Mrs.Davis. Tl�Panel conclud�s thal lvirs.]��vis'a�tions were not consistent v��ith hcr oblig,ations under the implied duty af�aod faith and fair ciea�ling. Far welt over a yesr befare Mrs.Davis' August 26,2aI0,letter denying cos3serit,Mrs.Uavis did no#say she objected tc�any ee�ct�rior zemodeling whatsoever;inste�,sh�raised various can�ems which the Scotts accom�nodated by tiir�ctin�;I4ir.Irwin tt�make changes to the des�igns,such as rcmoving Ieve!tbres#t�izngrave sttr�light to het unit,movin�thc direction af a new addidon in ord�r to keep op�n Mzs.Davis' vie�v cQrrldor,and abaruion�ng groposals to build T�xrs.I)avis a new garage,'Fhe Panel canctudes that Mr�.t3avis'current;reasons frnr withholding her ccrnsent st�ted in her A�gu$t�6,2014, December 20,2t}10,and Jauuary 15�,201 l,Ietters either have bee.n ar can be accorzvmadaied by the Sco�ts ar are not reasc�riabie reasons for withh�lding ccrn�nt. The Panel also�onaludes that th�drawings in Exhibit �6 show a,proposed reinodei af Unit 1�thar dces not materially c�t�at�e the e�ctez�ior af Unit B earcept for the wainscaating ar�d stueco chzmneys. If Mrs. I?avis coxrtinues to obje�t tc>th��w�znscosting and sRtuc�a,th��cott$ have agreed tv remove those design featur�s and must do so.�urther,ths Scottts may talte na actic�n which,in any w�y,cha�g�s the e�cteriaz af Mrs.I3avis'uns't, In view of vur decision bas�c�n the impiied cc�venant of g�ad faitb anc�fair dealing,the ; Pan�l ecyncaudes that it need not c,c�nsider Claimants'pramiss+�ry ost�ppel c3a,im vr partxa] � p�rfarmance claim. '', S . �.�� ..�,. , ��b.� ��..�,,,',. 3..� .��,,.. �' -4- `� � � , � I �a1 i � h � , �Fron:JA�S 3�3-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/2612011 15:03 �420 F.OQ6/008 AR$TT�2ATIC}N AVt�AR.D Based on tl�e Fore�oing,the Fanel finds that Mrs, I)avis has breached the implied covenant of g�od faith and fair dealing.The Panel f�rtla�r finds tizact Nlrs.Davis has c�nsented to alic�w the Scc�f�s to remodel Unit A in a u�anner that does uot change the e�tterior of Unit B as set forth herecin_ As between thc Scotts at�d Mrs.�?avis,this Avvard s,hali be deemcd fult complienae with the A�eclaratit��'s requirement#t�at cansent be,�ivea in wridng. Thc Pane�,of caurse,has nfl autharity tu deterrnine whcther c�r no�the fiown taf Vail wi1�require fi�rther consent of Mrs.DSVI$8S p$Tt Of Y�S CiCSl�,tl S11+C�TC'4+IE�W�tY}�CSS. If Mrs.l7avis continues to ob�ect ia the wains�oting and s#aucco shown on the drawiugs in �xhihit l6,the S�otts are ordered to rem�ve those design f�atures. Tn orcter to acct�mmodate Mrs.I3avis'conc�ems exgressed in har letter of August 2b, �014,if the Scotts go fon�arcl with thcir proposad remod�ling,t�ey are ordered to defer►d, indemnify,and hold Mrr�. Davis harcx�less from any mechanics' lie�as ar oth�r damages or claims arisin�from the c+�nstruction af#he pmpc�se�i renovatiflns. Ai th$ir sc��e expen�e,the Sc�tts sha�i undertalce the drefting€�f arny a�xd all amendments tc�the T3eclaration and related dacumcntat�on, necessary as a xesult af the progosed renovations. The Se�tts also shell t�tilize n�greater than fifty percent(5U°fo}of thc allowabEe building sqraare fc�oatage fox the Pmperty f�r their z�rYt�vated Unit A. All co�struction work shall be pEerform�d during re�sc�nable hours„which may inclutt�e evenings and w�ekends,k�u#ncrt ai3�er?:{}Q p.m.or befarc 7.OU a.m.,and t�nce work com�nences. the Scoits shalt proccecl in a diligent mazxner to compl�te the work ss soon as pra�ticable to minimiz,�any in�nvenience ta Ivlrs.Uavis. Finatly,tt�Pa�el has considared th�question of attomey t`ees amd costs,Fee shifting provisions arc in derogaizon af the Americaa Rule conr.c�ning attorn�y fees aind cc�s#�.In Iitigation,the question of which pariy is the"pr�vailing garty"is left ta the disc�retion ofthe iria] cc�urt. �heeler v. T.L. Rvrafrng, Inr.,74 P.3d 499,503 (Colo.App.2Q03�, "A`prevailing party' is ons who prcvails on a si�nzficartt iss�.e in#Ite litigation and dcr�ves sc�me of the bcnefits sought b�the liti�tion.The number of claims upan wh3ch a Farty prevai�s ar the amouat awarded for those c2aims is s�sat determinative." �rcher v.Farmer Bros. Cv.,9U P,3d 2�8,230-231 {Calo.20047. � The PaneI cancludes��t the S�o�ts have"pXCVai�ed"in tktat this award is deemed to b� �� Mrs.Davis'written consent fc7z changea to tbe e7cteriar of the ScQtts" u�it Hawever,the Scotts � _�_ � '.�� n � � Fron.JA�S 303-534-1254 T�:30�623�960 05126/2�11 15:03 #42� P.�07l008 cannot,in any way,change the exterior of Mrs.Davis' unit.Accordingl�,and in the Panel's discreti�n,na aitorney f�cs or costs are aw�rded tv either party. Each party shat�pay�he compensa#ion of the arbitratc�r appointed by thai p�rty. ".t'his Awazd repr�sents a co�piete determination of alI disputes presented to the Pauel in t�is pmcccding. Except as p�videt3 abc�ve,all claiu�s by sit�aer party r�t spe�ifically dealt with in the Aw�cd are$ereby denied. ated:May 26,2t�1]. / .. I?�le R Hacris,Arbitrator Jahn P.Leopo2d,Arbitrstor I � � � -f�- � � � � . . � t Fro�s:JA�IS 3a3-534-1254 1'0:303823�960 fl512Ei2fl11 15:03 #+�2�1 P.0081008 Ger�fl+d�te v#3srv�e Sct�tt�Mark and.faqueline rs.Letuth G. Davis�{:sse ID#12552) I,C)sarmaine K.Ugren,h�reby declare that on May 26,2tiI 1,I served the follr�win�dacutnent: ARB�17.7:�tATiUN AW�1RD�n�he pariies li�led below r�gardin�;the within actia.�by Facsin�ilc falit�wed by MaiI from the a#�ice ofJAMS,41{� 17th Street,D�enver,�oloradt�84202, 3fl3-534-��54. Service List: Scott,Mark and Jaqueline Arbiter-claimant appaznted Pau3 R Fran�ce III Dale Hanis Franlce Graen�use List cXc lippitt�LLP �avis, +Gn�han�&SEubbs,LLP 1228 35th Strect, Suite2�t ISSt} 17th St�et,#54t} Denver,Color�da ��1202 Uenv�r,�Ct 80242 Leruth .�.�.Davis Jonat,han G.1'ray B��wnstein Hyatt�"arber 8c Schrcck, LL� �#]0 17tt1a Street,�uite 22�� Denver 8�202-0916 I declar�under p+��a�ty nf perjury the fare�oing to be true and correct. Executed on I�iay 26,Zt}1 l. . � Charmaine K, Clgren Staff' JAMS.�t 1 t} 17th Street,Denver,Coloradc�8U2t}2 Casc il�#i255� Pa�c l of l � � � � � � . � Bill Gibson From: Benn�tt,Amy L. <ABennett@BHF5,com> t�n behalf of Sommers, Steven M. <SSomrners@BHFS.cam> Sent. Tuesday,June 07, 20119;Q1 AM To: Bill Gibson Cc: Pray,Jonathan G.; pfranke@fgll-law.corn Subject: 4898 Meadow �ane, Vail, CC} Attachments: Scan001.PQF Nlr. Gibsc�n, please see the attached carrespc�ndence. 'fhank you, Steven M. Sornmers, Esq. Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP �1Q Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 �enver, Colorado 80202-4432 ssorrtmers(c�bhfs.com P 303.223.1121 C 720.987.3121 F 303.223.0921 To ensure compiiance with requirements impased by the IRS,w+e infarm you that any federal tax advice contained in th{s communication(inc{uding any attachment�}is not intended or written fo he used,and cannot be used,for purpases of{i)avoiding penait�es under the Intemai Revenue Code,or{ii}promoting, marketing ar recammending ta another pariy any transactian or tax-related matter addressed herein. STATEMENT C}F GC}NFIDENTfALI'FY 8�diSGLAIfiV►ER:The information contained in this email message is attamey privileged and canfidentiai,intended aniy for the use of the individ�ral or entity named aboue.If the reader of this message is nat the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distrit�ution or copy af this emaii is strictiy prohibited.If you have r�eived this emaii in error,please notiTy us immediately 6y replying and deiete the message. Thank yau. I i i � I 1 �i i � �� d,�.� �,: �� 1 � Browns�ein �Hy��t Farber�Scl�reck �teven M.Sammers June 7,2011 Attorney at Law 3fl3.2�3.112t tel 303.223,�92� fax ssomm�rs(a�tshfis.cam VIA E-MAIL BGIB50N�VAILGC?V.CC?M wlliam Gibson Town of Vail Community Develaprnent Departrnent 75 South Frontage Fioad Vail,CO 81657 RE: 4898 Meadow�ane;Arbitratian Betweec� Mark and Jacqueline Scott and l.eruth G. [}avis C}ear Mr.Gibsona This follows yaur conversation yesterday r+vith Jonatt►an Pray fram my office. As Jonathan exp{ained, this firm represents�eruth C}avi�with respe�ct to[he property located at 4898 Meadow Lane in Vail (the "Prope�ky"}. We under�tand th�t yau are in receipk of a copy of the arbikration award da#ed May 26, 2011 (the"Awartl"}that was issued by the arbitrators who heard the dispu#e between Mrs. Davis and Maric and Ja�queline Scott(the"Scotts°}. As you requested, this letter summarizes Mrs, Davis'position on the Design Review�oard Applic,�tion submikted by the Scotts. First, under th�statute governing khe arbitration between the Scatts and Mrs Davis,the Award is not yet final. The Award has nat been canfirmed by a court,and it is stiA subject ta(1�rn�ificat�on or correction by the arbitrators, or(2}vacation by a court. lndeed, Mrs. Davis has until June 15,2011 to request that the arbitratars make modifications or carrec6ons ta khe Award,and Mrs. Dauis t�as until August 24, 2011 to petition a�alarada[7istrict Court to vacate the Award. Second, the Award did rrok impair Mrs. Davis' rights under Vail Municipal�cule§ 12-11-4 B.i.d,which requires consent by co-awner�of prope�ty tc�a praposed remodelin�a�l'rcatic�n. tn ths Award,the arbitratars found that Mrs. Dauis has consented ta the Scotts' propasal fc�r purposes of the Townhause [}eclaration that governs the Praperiy. Nawever,the arbitratars made it cCear that the Award did not address Code t� 12-11-4 B.1.d. The arbitratars instead held t�at,"[k[he Panel,of course,has no authority to determine wh�ther or nat the Town of Vail wi11 require further cansent af Mrs. [3avis as part of its design and review prt>cess." (Award at page 5.j -rhe arbitratars afsa gave Mrs. [}avis the right to disapprove certain aspects of the Scotts'plan, including the Scatts' proposed use af stucco and rock wainscoting on the exteriar of the Property. Mrs. Davis requires additional time ta review the plans submitted by the Scotts. Prior to the commencement of arbitration prt�ceedings, Mrs. Davis had not even received copies of the Scatts' conceptual plans. Naw that the a�tiitrators have ruled, Mrs. Davis�s in the process of reviewing the Scatts' plans and is considering engaging an architect ko help advise her abc>ut potential impacts to her side of khe Property,i.e., Unit B. Mrs. Davis does not believe tha#this process will kae complete by June 15`",and requests that the Design Review Board cantinue any hearing on the concep#ual review of the Scotts'prc�posal until July 6"'at the earliest. �tfU,r+s��enteti-»th Strc�re,Suzte 2�1t}� Dcnce,Ct7 tlt)�}2•4412 it13.22.i,11t1�1 Jel lbnm��tei�I lt'att f�ri�cr$chrx.2k,1.1.P�1thFxcom � :5t}3.?�3.1111 frta 1Nilliarr�f"aibson June 7, 2fli 1 Par�e 2 Finally, as a co-owner of the Property, Mrs_ [}avis requesks that the Town keep her apprised of the status of the�cotks'application and provide her with notice of any submissions to the Town, hearings, or decisians related to the Property. Mrs. Davis intends to prc�ceed cooperatively and does not anficipate further litigation related to the Scotts'proposal—but Mrs. E}�vis d4es interxi to insist on her right to review,comment and consent to the Scatts pro�rasal. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if you would like to discuss this matter further, Si �=�� uen M. �ommers cc: Jc�n�#han G. Pray, Esq. Pau1 R, F'ranke. Esq. (Counsel for the Scotts) i44561111546�88.1 Bill Gibson From: Bennett, Amy L. <ABennett@BHFS.com> on behalf of Sommers, Steven M. <SSommers@BHFS.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 07, 2011 1:31 PM To: Lorelei Donaldson Cc: George Ruther; Matt Mire; Bill Gibson; Sommers, Steven M.; Pray,Jonathan G. Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane, Vail, CO Attachments: Scan001.PDF Please see the attached correspondence. Please let me know if you have any quesi�ions or comments. Thar�k you, Steven M. Sommers, Esq. Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP 410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 Denver, Colorado 80202-4432 ssommersCc�bhfs.com P 303.223.1121 C 720.987.3121 F 303.223.0921 To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS,we infortn you that any federal tax advice contained in this communication(including any attachments)is not intended or written to be used,and cannot be used,for purposes of(i)avoiding penalties under the Intemal Revenue Code,or(ii)promoting, mariceting or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein. STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY&DISCLAIMER:The infortnation contained in this email message is attorney privileged and confidential,intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.If the reader oi this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this email is strictly prohibited.If you have received this email in error,please notity us immediately by replying and delete the message. Thank you. � � � � � 1 � � Brownstein f Hyatt Farber�Schreck Steven M.Sommers June 7, 2011 Attorney at Law 303.223.1121 tel 303.223.0921 fax ssommers@bhfs.com VIA EMAIL: LDONALDSON@VAILGOV.COM Town of Vail Attn: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Open Records Request—4898 Meadow E.ane Unit#A Dear Ms. Donaldson: This letter is a request for public records pursuant to the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. § 24-72-200.1 et seq. ("CORA"), to inspect and obtain copies of any and all public records received or created relating to requests for the remodeling/redevelopment of, and/or addition to, that certain property located at 4898 Meadow Lane Unit#A, Vail, Colorado (also described as Parcel Number 2'101-131-04-022), including without limitation applications for administrative or design review board review and any permit applications (collectively, the "Subiects of Interest"). This request spec�cally includes, but is not limited to, any notes, memos, analyses, emails,or correspondence about the Subjects of Interest befinreen and among Town staff, Town staff and members of the public, Town staff and members of the Design Review Board, Town staff and members of the Town Council, and Town staff and outside referral agencies and consultants, whether handwritten, typed, or computer-generated. Public records means and includes all 'writings made, maintained, or kept by the state, any agency, institution...or political subdivision of the state." C.R.S. § 24-72-202{6){a)(I). "Writings"means and includes all books, papers, maps, photographs, cards, tapes, recordings, or other documentary materials, regardtess of physical fonn or characteristics. "fhe tenn °writings" includes "digitally stored data, including wi�hout limi�ation electronic mail messages, but does not include computer software." !d. § 24-72-202(7). This request also specrfrcally rncludes any public records received or created relating to the Subjects of lnterest after the date of this letfer. Pursuant to C_R.S. § 24-72-204{4), if access is denied to any public record, we hereby request a wri�ten statement of the grounds for the denial of each public record, including a citation of law or regulation under which access is denied for each public record. If any public record requested is not in the Town's custody or control, you must notify us of this fact in 410 Sc�•entcenth Stmet,tiwtc Z'�(Nl� Drnver,CO 80�2.4433 303.�?3.11(Xl�e! Rrrnva<tcin l lyatt Farbcr Schn:ck,IJ.P�bhf�com 303.223.1111 J�a• 4pen Records Request June 7, 2011 Page 2 writing and provide the reas�an for the absence af such records, ti�e location o#the records, and wh2�t pe�son fhen has�t�stody or contro!of tF�e records. !d. §24-72-203�2�(a�, C�C}RA requires that ali public records sl�ail be apen for inspectian within three (3� business days of receipt of the request. 1d. �24-72-203(3}{b}. Please contact my assistan#, Amy E3ennett, at 303-223-13Q9, when the records are available for inspection. Lastly, please advise if records haue not yet been reeeiue� regarding the Subjects of Interest. �ir�c ly �+�� Steven M. Somrners cc: Gec�rge Ruther, Gommunity Develapment Director{via ernail at: grutherr�r. vailgov.cam) Nlatt Mire, Town Attomey (v�� email at: mmire�r,�,vaElc�ov.com) William Gibson, Tawn Planner(via email at: b�ibson@vailgou,comj 1445fi1111547020.1 i � 4 � Bill Gibson f From: Kristine Lundstrc�m <klundstrom�a fgll-law.com> � Sent: Wednesday,June 08, 201111:58 AM ` To. Bill Gibson; Matt Mire Cc: JPray@bh#s,com; ssommers c�i bhfs.com; Scott, Mark Subject: Mark &Jacqueline Scott v. Leruth C3avis Arbitratic�n Attachments: imageOUl jpg; �tr to W Gibson and M Mire_6.08.2011.pd# f Dear Mr. Gibson and Mr. Mire: i Attached please find cc�rrespondence from Paui Franl€e regarding the referenced matter. � �lease f�el free to contact me shctuld yau have trouble viewing the attachment, or any part thereof. I � Thank you. Kristine Lundstrom Legal Assistan�tc� Paul R. Franke, III Charles Greenhous� 5tephanie D. �oughner klundstram@fgll-law.cam * FRANKE ��vus� ' I.I�T � �� ' E.IPPITT� . ��:�� F.t-�S9�[ °r;tt,llt�}l��,SR:�:�rdt� �'LC��C� �?_�� '��l�I�tEE�, C3��'�i1+'�6?,C.:C",��it}x{;� � r��?; C�23�;�5�1F��irr�r��rT��a��} � t.�Mi:�} l'�Z�-{}��{�4�<#),� i WWW.FGL�.•IAW.CI�M 4 CONFIDENTIALITY:This message is intended far the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed and may cantain inforrnatian that is privileged,confidential, f and exempt fram disclosure under applicable Iawt If the reader of this message is not the intended retipient,or the employee or agent responsible for delivering the ; message solely to the intended recipient,you are hereby natified that any dissemination,distributian or copying of this cc�mmunication is strictly prahibited. ff you have received this communicatian in error,please notify us immediately by telepht�ne and return tne t�riginal message to us at the address above. IRS CIRCULAR 230 REQUtRED NOTICE: IRS regulations require that we infarm ypu as fallows:Any U.S.federal tax advice contained in this communication(including any attachment�} is nat intended ta be used and cannat be used, far the purpase of{i) avoiding penalties under the Internal Revenue Code or {ii} pramating, marketing or recammending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter[s]. ' �"'� Please consider the enviranment before printing this email.Thank you. i � � 2 � � � t �,� �` � FRAN KE ��; � CREEl�Ht�US� �� %, = L1ST ��, � � �,.1 RPITT c,�.� �,�,��` , ,, < . , Paul R.Franke,III pfranke@fgli-law.com (303)623-4500 - .�1211� �. �{}�� VIA FACSIMILE VIA EII�AIL t�Villialn Gibson To�vu af Vail Cc�mmunity�eve�opnle�l C)epartn�ent 75 Sau#h�`ro�ltage R.oad Vail, CQ S l 657 �il�sc�rr��cril,�ov�c�ortr Matt Vlire, Es�. fiOt�4'll 1�tt01'll�V Tc��i�oi�Vail � 75 Sauth Fronta�e Raad Vail, CO $1657 � r1�lr,rire�vuir�.r��t�.c��nz IZ�: .�r�bitration of`Mrn�k trr��t.Iacqueline Scratt (<,�"lrrit�a�ats")��. Let�ttt�t G. Dai�is ("lies��carxe�err!")-1�'�9�3?1�1ead�►v LldY1G' � i T�ear iv�r. Gibson and Mr. Mir�: k � This letter is ��Tritten in respc�nse to Mr. Soinmers' letter to Mr. Gibsoi� of Jui�e 7, 201 l. First, I assume yop ha�e receic=ed the Arbitratian llecisir�na whicl� I a.tu att�cl�in� should yc�u wish t� ha�,�e it tc�re�=iew with this letter anc� Mr. Sc�r�n3ers' ccrrrespc�ndelice.. Clnfartunately, UIs. I�avis contii�ues to act, as th� 2�rbiters found, in bad f"ait11 in ct�nnection t��ith the issues surroundi�i�t13� ct�nstructic�n at 4�9� Mead�3ut Lane. Iler�ctions appear to be not�lirtg more than an effort to delay aixd caus� ful�Ther damage to thc; Scotts. Let tn� et�rrect some inaccuracies associated�vitl� Mr. Sainmers' ctarrespc�ndeiice; tiild ac�c�ress 1��. Davisx position. T'irsk, tl-�ere is i�c� requia•emcnt that tile Arl�ilratiori I��cision be 1c�c��ed v4ith the Cot�rt ur�less VI►-, Sc�miners is indicating tl1�t i�1s. Davis ��i(1 r��-i��e to �bid� �y the L�ecision ��ithout a �c�i�rt order co�npellin; 11er to tio so. T�ypically arbitration decisic�ns aren't lodged tmless there is a neeci tc� enfvrce thc tiecisic�n. `I`his is c:s��ecially true where t�t�th p�►-ties �et ta cl�c�c�se an arbiter �{nd in this ca�e i�°l�ere il�e tu�� l:�u�id i��r Nlr. and i�9rs. Iv13rk Scait. There is no basis tc� moc�ifv or vacatc tlie a��uard �nd ��etitio��in� t� Cc�lor{�c�o cc�urt ta �•acatc tl�e dccision t�fould reqtiire f'acts Gi3ANITE BUttDtNG � � � P: , ' -. ,. ;2 � src.. F WW W.FGLL-LAW.COFt Willia�n Gibson Matt Mire, Esq. Tc�r�rn c�E`V ail 1ui�e f�,2011 Pa�e 2 of 2 that, if known, ��ro�ild he required tta bc discic�sec� to me as c�unse� for Mr. and ��rs. Scott. Nc�ne have t�een tiisclosed. Mz•. Sc��nmez�s then sug�ests that tl�e Arbitration Decision did ��c�t iznpair Ms. Davis ri�hts under Vail Municipal C:ode §12-11-4 B,�,d.,l�<hicll req�lires con�ent by co-��nez-s of prapert5t to a �ropflsed ren�odelin� applicatic�n. TIZis is funda�nentally� nc�t true, �.1so the statemexlt by Mr. Sommers that "However, the arbitr�lors ir��de it clear that the Award did not address Code � 12- 11-� 13.1.ci." is s.imply false. There is no statement to that cffect in the decision; il� fact there is na referenee to that Vail Cc�de section. 'I`he decision absc�lutely bourxd the parties to the determir�atian t11�t Ms. I�avis l�as �i�en her conse�t to the plans as ider�tified, subject tc� tl�e liinitatic�ns of t�le Decisioil. Th� �anguagc quated by Mr. San�ners, ��vhich is the c�nly language relating tQ the Tc��vn of Vai1, was t�erely a recognitian that the �rbiters did nat have the Tow=n of Vail befc�re then� in the arbitratiQn and their decisic�n ��as not goi��g to usurp the To�vn's authc�rit}= to handle the matter should the To�4n require samethin� further. The basic cc�nsent to #he plai�s as presenied has been deemed to be �iven, suhject to the limitatians in the Decision. Tl�e very �ur�ose: �flr lhe consent requirezne�lt by Vail was to avoid the incflnsistencies t��at come a�out fram an adjoining landa��vner consenting to pal-ty t�ra(1 a�reenlent anc� then not consentin� to tl�e ��ery same construction pu1•suant to the proceeciings by the Town c�['Vail. I dou�t tl�at Vail ��=ants to becaine tli� a��biter of party��Tall cansents. Additionally, Mr. Somrners seems to suggest that Ms. Davis has ncrt had an t�pport�.�lzity tt� revie«r dae plans. This again is a mis��epresentatic�n. The plans ��ere cex�tral to the Arbitrati�n aald indeed were exliibits that Ms. Davis el�dorsed and used in her presei�ta�ion, The Arbitration, ��lli�e desi�ned to be expeciited, 4v�s camn�enced on Mar�h l0, 2011,jiast short af three �nonths ago. Tl�e arbitratia�z proceeding required the }�arties tc� present any and all evideizce, claiins, ar�ulnents re�arding ihe issu�s sui�rounding tlie ��roposed construction at 48�8 Meac�vw Lane. Tliis included ar�urnents b� Ms. Davis about the `impact' t�f the construction t�i� her u�1it, To the extent an architect ��as important tc� that cansiderati�n, Ms. Davis, c�r iler attorneys, uJere bound tt� have en�;a�ed ttn �rcliite�.t anci l�resented e�id�nce about an}� conccrns about the `i1�7pact', Indeed, the Scatts' architect testified at the proeeediizg and presc��ted evidence re�;a��din� the design, eonstructial� and gradin� af the site a� ea�ltenaplated by the plans. h�s. Davis and her attarlae}•s produced no rebuttal evidence �nd callcd no architects or en�ineers in the t��rc� c�ay ��rc�ceec�ing. Il'I�•irs. �avis believed that it �-as or is important to have az� a�•chitect retia�ict� s��cll �lails, she anti c�r her attorneys llat�e 4vai��eci ih�t issuc,. fls such tlley are bu�•ed fironl noc�;�trying to re-liti€�z�te this�iiatter in th�;Tawn�>:t.'��i1 proceedi�z�;s. Tn Ct�lar�cio, the daetrines of ecrllcrtea•rrl estr��pel al�ci 1•�.�jtacl�c•ulcr ll�l�re been a��licci tc� arbitr�tiot7 prc�ceedin�s. ,See l�uc�ri�rrc�.� ��. f3ur�-S lrr�r�cl Ct�., SC�7 �'.Sup�. 1241, �245 (I).C'olc�.19f�3} (hc�lc�i��; that und��• �c�loradcs la�u, ��n arbitration n�ay bc �iven ��ecl��si�7e ef'fect a�aiust a su�s�c�uent prc�ceetii��); sc�� ul4r� ��1ust v. �1elnu C�'�rs. c� Irrs, C'v„ 78(i 1'.3ci 45C}, ��1 r / William Gibsc�n Matt Mire, Esc�. Ta�v�i of Vail Jui�e 8, 2011 Page 2 c�f'2 (Co1o.�.pp.19�9) {st�ting arbitr�lic�n aw��ci is bindin� a�xl arbitr�tor is Fiilal.jtidge of questic�ns of la�v and f�ct). In tlie Ju1�e 7, ZOl 1 letter St�mrnel�s, states tl�at"[t]l�e arbitr�tors alsa �;ave Mrs. Davis t1�e right tc� clisapproue certain aspects oI` tlze Scatts' plan, ir1c1«din� the Scc�tts' proposed use of stucco �l�d rock �vainscoting c�z� the ex#eri�r af the Praperty." Mr. Son�n�ers' statement is a misclzaracterization of the Arbitration Aurard_ The A��vard iz� fact only ailows Mrs. Davis to oE�ject tc� the stucco and wair�scotii��. `I�he Award does i1Qt allow Mrs. Da��is to object to any other aspects c�f the plan�t tllis�t�int. Mr. C�ibson and 1VIr. Mire, the Scotts, as t�ie Arbiters fo�uid, have r�one everything reasonable in pursuing this constructian. We undcrstt�t�d at the beginnin� of the Arbitration that the decisior� of the Arbite�•s would be valid to comply witl� the Vail c�rdil�ance if su�h decision was tlaat cor�sent had been granted. ] believe this was confirrned by conversatic�ns with Mr. Scott and cc�nversations by and between Mr. Mii•e and my pa��tr�er Tom List. Tliere is strong logic far adbering tc��zis�c�licy. Ms, Davis seeks c4ntinue her�ractice of acting it�bad faith, delaying the Scott's efforts and fundamenta�ly ini�representing �acts �I�zd circumstances in order to try and stop any construc#ion on thc �raperty. The as�biters l�ave fo�a�id t�is to be in�ad faith; the City af Vai1 shc�uld not give credeiice to this type c�f ac#ion. As a result, we would respectfully request tl�at yotz den� Mrs. D�vis requ��# for further delay ou tl�e Scatts' applicatioii,�naintaan tl�e Junc 15, 2011 revietiu date and prec]ude Mi�s. Davis fi�c�n� no��rec�pening her consent ta the Scotts' proposecl const�ucti�n. Should eithei�€�f you have �zy� c��es�ions c�r cc�ncerns, please dc�n'#hesitate to c�iztact me, ��r t��ul youxs, �._... a�.� R. Fran.ke III. Fr�nke Gr�enhouse List &Li�apitt LLP CC: Jc�natlzan G.I'ray, Fsq. ' rtz�i�bllf,, s.cc�m St�ven Soinrners,Esq. ssc�nlnters(cr?bhfs.ct�n� 'I`ha�nas M. List, Esc�. Ma�•k & Jacquelitie Scott FI�c;losur�s 1 _ ,av , ., ,�, ,� ` s:%�^� ;n�� s �,._ .. , . , � �, , .�;. � „_� . � im�m'i�.�,,..�.s..��a„�.�'�5�� ,ow..a . _ . . . . ��'{3Wt`��£lt1 ��lc�t�.� Fa rber�Sch r�ck steven M. 5ori,mecs Jurte 7, 2011 Aitorney at L�w 303.223.i12t te1 �L�3,223.4921 fax ssvmrners�bh{s.com VIA E-MAtL BGIBSON a�VAILG�V.Ct7M William Gibson 7own of Vaii Cammunity Develapment Departrnent 75 Sauth Fronkage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE. �4898 t�leadow�ane;Arbitration Between Marlc and Jacq�eline Scott and�eruth G. Davis Dear Mr.Gibson: This follows yovr conversation yesterday with,lnnath�n Pra}r from my oFfice. As Jonathan explained, this firm represents �eruth Qavis with respect ko the praperty located at 489$ Meadow tane in Vail (the "Prope�y"}. Vtte understand that you are in receipt c�f a capy pfi the arbitration award dated May 26, 20�9 {the"Award")#hat was issued by the arbitrators who heard the dispute between Mrs. Dav`ss and Ntark and Jacqueline Scott(the"Scc�tts"j. As you requested, this letter summarizes Mrs. Davis' positir�n on the C}esign Review Board Application submi#ted by the Scotts� First, under khe statute governing tl�e arbitration belween the Scak#s and Mrs Davis,khe Award is nt�t yet final. The Award has not been confirmed by a court, and it is still subject ta{1}modifrcatior�or eorrection by the arbitrators, or(2)vaeation by �eou�t. Indeed, Mrs. davis has until June 15,2011 to reques#that the arbitrators malce madifications or correctians to the Award,and Mrs. t�auis h�s until August 24, 2011 to petition a Golor�do aistrict Caur�to uacate the Award. Second, the Award did nat'smpair tvlrs. C}avis' rights under Vail Muni�i�al Code§12-11-4 B.1.d,which requires consenk by co-owners of property to a proposed remodeling applicak�on. In the Award,the arbitrators fou�d that Mrs. Davis has cc�nsented to the S�c�tts' proposal ft�r purposes of the 7ownhouse Declaration khak governs the Property. However,the arbitratc�rs made it c(ear that the Award did not address Code§ 12-11-4 8.1.d. The arbitrators instead heid that,"(#[he PBnel, of course, has no authority ko d�termine whether ar not the'Cc�wn t�f Vai�will r�quir�further con5ent of Mrs. Davis�s patt of its desic�n and review proceSS." �Award�t page 5,� The arbitr�tors also gave Mrs. davis the right ta disapprove ce�tain aspects af the Scotts' plan, includin� khe Scotts' proposed use of stucco and rock wainscotint�on t�se exteriar of the Property, Mrs. C}avis requires addikional tirne to review the plans s�bmitted by the Scotts. Prior to the cc��nmencement of arbitratiQn proceedings, M�s. Davis had n�rt even received copies afi the Scotts' cor►cepkual plans. tVow that the arbitr�kors have ruled, Mrs. Davis fs in the process of revi�wing ths �cotts' plans and is considering engaging an architect ka help aciuise her about patential impacts to her side of the Prop��#y, i.e., Unit B. Mrs. Davis does nqt believe khat this prncess will be cnmplete by June 15"', and requests that the Qesign (�eview E3aard continue any hearing on the conceptual review of the Scotts' propasal untii July 6�"at the earliest, �f�t;�cx�cn�c,�t:�t titrcrt�;^aas�s:�?E7c!] t1t;rcr.C:C?n�IMQ`>..a4�? 3s)t_��3.}Itkt trt :ir<za�iastci��1��ats]';.rl.x:r Sc�sttrk,t.l.='�E>hf.•.w+mi �l33.233.I 1 i�,;i:� *e' �� ,m ,� a�� yii �z s� �� s � > � � �` � r�� = �-'� � �`% � � �� ,�` � '� ° �.< �ss�'''�,,t` „� .ri'� � r��*# � ,5` - �. . „�ss H��.v s _ ,`A ` °� �' �'� .�.,,.,._., , __ ... � -� . ". ',. . >�, � �� . _�, .. , ._�..u. .� �, . . . . �,�„��..W_a� �� e; �n.r. _ _,e,d . ._...�....��.... ,� �'��,� m .��.. _ � .�.� ! 1 William Gibs+�n June 7, 2011 Page 2 Finally, as a ca-owner of khe Property, Mrs. Dauis requests#hat the Town k�ep her apprised c�f th� status of the Scc+tts' app]ication and provide her with notice af any�ubmission&t�the Town, hearing�, flr decisions related to th�Prc�perty. Mrs. Ct�vis intends ta pra�eed coap�r�kively and does not anticipate further iikig�kion re(ated to the Scatts'prapQSal—but Mrs. �}aVis dc�es intend to insist on h�r right to review,comrnenf and ccrnsent to the Scotts prt�posai. Please dc�not hesitate tc�get in touch if you woulci like to discuss this matter further. Sir,�r � ��t�Z � .�..�-- 5 even M. Spmmets cc: ,�ort�#han G, Pray,E�q. Paui R. F�anke, Esq,{Cae�nsel for the�cotts) 1 d46&1i lt 54�988.i � �i,/III.JI�I`!J tlVJ �1�J'T ILJ�f IV.VUUVL+JVt�VV V*.7f4.V� t..IJI � fiJ•iJt., 7*`T�-.V { .VItLtVVV � �_.__.__ .v__n_.-�-.� ...-.__ __ . _"__� ... �___ �___�....��..�.��...�._..... .. _ ...�.__ _i i 3�Ihf RF: AR13IT�2AT3�N PROCE�DINGS a I � � � s ! � I l � � Claim�an#s; Mark Scs�f�and 3acqueline�cott Ftespc�ndent: L.eruth G. Davis C�se Number: �2552 {JAMSj ` _..._.__�.� __ . ,__.,..___�_._..__._.. ._. ._.. __. _.__.�__ ARBITRATIG1tV_AWARD . _...�.._...�...__ .__.._..._.._.__�.. The�rbitration af this malter was held on ivlay 12-�3, �Q 1 l.Yaul�`rar�lce,Esq,and�e�l}r Downs,Esq, appeared for Clairx�ants(both af whom wexe present}. Janafban�*ray,Esq, a�d Steven Sominers,Esq. appeared for Respandent(whca wt�.s present}, A1#.�t�ugh the�rbitr�ttt�rs ��ere appointed by the parEies, as previousty noted(Oxd�t�f April�l,201 l�,the arbitrators are neutral and are not"for"either party, The Panel has considered the testimoriy assd credibility of�il witnesses{some c�f�vht�m testified by telephon�e),the exhi�its admifted ir�tt�evid�n{ce,the parties'pre-arbitr�teo��a7�d post- arbitratian submissions and the applicable l�r�v, �3ACKGRt�UAF� The disputc centers around certain grovisions in the Tc�u�nhouse�}eclaratioc�f�r Lc�i 1 a, �314ck'�,Bighorr�Subdivisi�an,Fifth Add�tion,Es�;�e C�u�ty#C�it�r�do{"the D�c]arati�n"}. �'aragraph 5 of t�ZC Declaratio��provides in part fhat`�Na own�r shall mak.e ar suff�r any struetur�l or design change(including a calc�r scheme c�an�e)either perm�z�ent ar impez7rnrn�ne�t and c�f any type c�r nature what�ver to th�exterior of any impxovement c��th�prcap�rty withcrut e�btaaning the przor written consent thereto from the otl��r ownar." Cla�mants{herein sometirnes referred ic�as"the Scotis"}awn Unit A of the Townh�use and Respc�nt3ent{hereiz�someti.mes referzed#c� as"?virs.L�avis")awn�Unit �. T7ae Scoris httve t ! IVISl+Jfil'I..! �JV*J�J�J'7'- iLJ'T ItJ.JV�,JVLJV.JVV VJ+ L4(LUiI IJ.VL 7fTL4i 1 .V41J/ VVV propaszd certain subst�nfza�rez�adelin�cE�,x�ges which wil.l aCter the exteri�r c�f Unit A,� Sr�me c�f iheir prnposais alsc�would a1�ex th��t�pearance c�£scrzne af��e sxteric�r�f CJnit B, such as putting stc�ne wainscc�ating aronnd t�e exterior af�c�t�t units and siucco c�averiz�g th�chimneys, H�vwever, tbe�eotts�testified at th�hearing tY►ai they��ouid be willing Ea e2iminate afl vf those proposed changes so tk�ai Lh�exterior of�Jnit B wou�d not be aitered. xt is undis�uted that Mrs. Uavas has not given�vi�itten�:ons�nt io the Scotts' p�mposals. 't"he issue in this ar�itra#�on is whether Mrs��avis,tl�xvug�h�r s�aterr��nts a�rd acti�ns,has agreeci that the�c�tts can remodel tk�e exierit�r of Unit A and shauEd be required to giue her cor�sent in wzitin�. The evidenee es#ablished that#he�arti�s ment�oned or dis�ussed the S�otts� d�sir�#o rem�del their c�nit on several occasians, including Lh�follrawing: 1. Tn fhe Fall of 2Q06,the Sco�ts° re�T estate brokex,Diane I��ehan,spoke to Mrs.�avis. 2, 'i.n e,�arXy fJetob�r,2�06,Mrs. ��ott and Mrs.l�avis h�ci a coztversat�on in the driveway c�fthe townhome. 3. In 1he surnr�er of 2C149,the�ccstts met Mrs. Davis at the Buck.�aorn�x�hat�ge in C�enver. 4. Alsc�in the summe�r c�f 20�}9,t�s 5catts met Nirs�T)avis at her honie in F�euver. 5. In Au$ust,2U{�9,the Scotts' arc'hite�t, Davzd Tt�vvin,met Mrs, I3avis an the deck of Unit B. fi. In September, 20(�J,Mrs.Davis' sar�,Ntark,spoke to contra�tor�avid T3mnra, 7. �ri Qctober,2409,Mr. Irwin a�air►met witk� Mrs.]�avis. �. In July,2�10, Mr. Scot#and�VSrs. l�avi�znet i�tl�e�c.�#.t'�Unit. 9. �}uring Christmas hoIiday, 2�i U,Mr, Scott az�d Mrs.Davis had a brief conversation. Tli��e t��c�WeTe�-zrit��ll'i�SS�ge�i�]W�51c�t13+�rextl0{�e�iTt�W&S 1n�n'lib�et�. Th�re is cc�nfticting testimony as to what ex�c#ly was said dur%ng#he above meetings arsd canvers�ti�ns,but the�'anel co��lnd�s that h�irs.L?avis l�d the Sci�tts t�beiiev�tk��t,while she was ha�PY vrith her c�wn unit tfi�way it was and did not want it changed,sh�"did not�are"v�thai thc�cc�tts did to th��r uni� Mr�. t�avis waited alznost 4 y�rs after th��irst cc�nve�sati�n wifh Ms. Meehan,and mr�re th�n�ts�e year a��r discussit�ns of the Scotts' r�modelin�prc�pvsais began � Som�of t3ze tcstirnc�ny discussed poteniial changes io the interior of tlte Scatts'uni�Mrs.L'Javis�as acknc�wiedged � thai she docs nn#object to any auch ch�rsges and th�t interiar changes�re not�he subject of Par�gxaph 5, _�_ � ! IVIII.VfIt'IsJ 1JVJ J1J"f (�—J't �4.JLl4lAJ!_JV�.14V VJttVfLVI ! IJaVC. 7:'1`G.tt i ,tJ�.?'!`iUVV in earnest in the summer of 20�}�, beft�re she told the 5cvtts, thrau�a Ietter drafted t�y her lav�yer,tl�at s�e t�ict not eonsent to any c}�ange tn i�e exterior of the townhouse_ DISCCJSS�ON Al�i�At�IALYSI5 Based c�n#h�se facts, Claimant,s present thr�e+claims for relief_ breach afthe covenaz�t af goad faith and fair dealin�,promissary estoppel,and partial performance. In cansidering these cIaims,tfie P�el is mandful a�'its previt�us det�rmivation th�t Colaradt�'s version of'the Unif�rm Art�itr�atic�n Act,as i��xisted when the Declaration becam� effecii ve in 1�78, is the contr�lting s#atute. Under that s#atuis,tbe arbitrat�rs have"gre�t fl�xibiiit�"ix� fashioning approprixte remed�es.R.P.T: v. l�rr�rc�vative �vrnn�unica�inns, lnc.,91'7 �'.2d 3�4t}, 343 {Cola.Agp. I99��; �3yerly u. l�irkpatrz�k Pettr`s.Smrth P�Itura. Inc., 996 P.2d�7 t, �'74 {C�lc�.App.20{}0}. '�'�e Par��I finr3s that Mr. en�i Mrs. �cc�tt and Mrs. �avis,as�a-owners of t�Ye subject dup�ex,ar�"�o�tr�.ctin�parties"to fhe D�cl�ration{'�13} �.nd therefore are subject to basic cc�ntr�ctprinciplcs, sncluding the implied covenant of�,�d faith and fair dealing. The parties have debated the effect c�f the covenant. The law is clearly set fc�rth in Nc�w Uesrgn�c�rrstr. G'�.. Tr�c. v. ��amon Contractors. Inc., 21� P.3d 1172 (Calo. App. �.(�48} �very contraet in Colorado contains an irnpliec3 ducy of g�cxd fnith and f�ir dealing.A violation of the du#y of good faith and fair d�ai.ing gi�r�s ris�to a cl�im fvr br�ach ofct�ntr�et. Whether e party acted in gaod faith ys a c�uestitan�f�'act w�ich�ust be determined an a�se by cas�basis, T'h�dt�ty t�f g�od fazth and fair dealing may b�re�ieci u��n when the mann�r ofp�rf�rmance under a specifie contract term a�lc�ws for dis�r�.�tic��on the part of eith�r party, l�iscretican in p�rforma�ce occurs when the parties,at for�ziatic�n�defer a deciszar�re�arding performar�ce #errns c�f#he coutract leavin�t�ne party with the pc�wer tc�set�r ct�ntrvl the ternis of perf�rmar�ce t�ez formation.�15�.3d 1 I72, 11 B t (internal citativns and yuota.tions omitteci}. The qz��stic�n�f whether a garty has acted in�or�d.#`aikh zs a ques3ian of fact which is detcrmir�ed on a cuse by case basis. "T'he doctrine exists to effectuate the p�rties' intentivns and honox their rcas€�nable expectations." Newflawer Mark.�t, Irrc, v. Cook,229 P_3d 1D5$, 1064 (Cc�la. App.��10). T�]G PaT1C� CI005I10t be11CY8 tI73��l�D�CJc�I'&xSOt1 WBS.LIa.t�,�d�{�f0�}�ZTTII�£l��.1CT owner art�ita�arily to withho3d its consen#to extec�or alterations ofthe bui�ding fQr any reast�n or na re�son at all. C"r•um v,Aprit Cvr,�oratiata,62 �'.3d 1 i139, t t�41 (Col.Apg.2002}("Wh�re t�e l�ngua�e used in the contract dQes nc�t make it clearthat a subj�ctive st�ndard applies,an �bjective fest c�freasonab�e satisfaction will be�pplied te�ihe extent it i�pz�cticable."} ..�. ' 1 IV!lf.Vlll•14 4ViJ��VtiJ`[�� tL�/'F �V•uuVUi-ttuNl/u �✓uf�-4� LUII !�.).VJ RTtU ! ,VV�J1t1V4 When the Seatts purchased Unit A and became�arties ta the Dectaratioa,th�y werc en�itieci t4 believe that�Irs. Davis wo��d act in a re�son�tbl�manner in its�erforrz�ance. Pt�rtt v. r�s��n�+�nr�d Condamirerurr3,4ssaciativn, Inc.,214 P.3d ��60, l£��i6(�olp.App.2�09}. Even if� "subjective"sr�ndard apglied,Mrs, i�avis�vas obligated t�exercise that standarcl in gc�c�d faith and fairly and expeditiously.�`ee; Grum v�4pri1 Gvr�r�ratir�n, supra. As st�ted ab��ve,ttt�1'an�i��ncludes that,av�a a lan�pe�iad,Mrs. Davis led th�Scatts tfl believe that she v,rvulc3 not object�nd wo�zl�consez��o their remode�in�pla�s sc� long as her unit was not c1�a�,ged. The Pan�l also�onclud�s that t�se Scoils reason�bly relied on Iulrs.JJavis' statements tv purcl�ase�.It�it A,io p�y for a second sewer line in contemp�ation of expanriit�g I1nit A,to hire Mr,Irwin tc�draw up variaus r�modelin�proposals, an�i to ins#ruet Mx.Irxin t+� revis�the propasais ta accommodate can�erns z�aised by Mrs.Davis, 'T'he Panel+cc�ncfudes that Mrs.T3avis' �ctictns were nat consistent with her c�bligati4ns under the implied duty crf�,c�t�d faith and feir deaiing. For w�l�t�vez a y�ar bef�re M.rs. Davis' Au�ust 26,2C1�0,�etter denying ct�ns�nt, Mr�. Davis�d�d 1�of say she rsbject�d tc►�ziy exterior rem�deliug wh�tsaever;instead,she raise;ci various co�.cerns w�ich the Sc�tts accommod�ted t�y directzn�;hrlF.Irwin t�make cha�ges tt�the designs, such as remt�ving level three#t�imprt�ve sunli,ght to taer unit,mo�vittg the directio�c�f a new additia� ik oxder t�k�ep op�n.Mzs. Davis' view cc�rridar,and�bandvnin�proposals to build Mrs. I�avis a nc,�v gara�e, The I'ane� co�s�lu�des ihat Mzs. Davis' curr�nt z�easc�ns f�x withh�idin;�;her cansen#sta#ed in h�x Attgust�6,20]tl, D�cember 20,Z{}10,and.�annuary 3 9,20l l,lettezs�ither Iaav�be�n c�x can be at;cc�mmodaied by tl��c�tt�or ar�t1c�t reasonable r�asons�r withhold�ng consent. The Par�el a�sc�cvnciud�s i�aat the dra�,+in�,s in E�hibit �G s�tow�prt�posed remod�l t�f tlr3it A th�.t does not znateriall�ch�nge the�tt��ior c�f Unit B ex��pt ft��the wainscoa#ing�.r�d stuceo c�imneys. If hrlrs.�avis�ontiz�u�s to obj ect tc�the waznscaat�ng and stucco,tt�e Scflits have a�reed to remove those design feattares and must�a so�Further,the Set�tts nzay take nc� a.�tit�n whicb,irt any wa}�,changes the exteriar of iv�rs. Davis' �nit, In view of c�uz decisic�n�Sased on#�e im�Iied ccsven�t of good faith ar�d fair dealirtg,the Pa»el cc�ncludes ihat ii necd nc�t cansider Claimanis'prc�rriissc�ry est�ppe] claixn or partial performance cl�im. ��_ � IUiU.�ltll'I�J +JV�J-fiJW�- �I-�✓'f IU.VV�.IVt_JVJVV VJlLVtLV1 { IJ�UJ 'i!'7tV 1 .VVVtU(}t�1 ARBITRATIOi� l��VA.�tI7 13ased on the fc�re�;c�3ng, the Pancl fi�ds ttiat Mrs.Davis has breached the irn�licd co�venani t�f gcrod�'aith and fair deaLin�. The Panei further finds t.�at Mrs. I}av�s has consented to allaw the Scotts ta remade] Uni�A in a znanner that ci�es not+c�ange fhe extezi+ar of llni�B as 3et fi�rth�iercin. As b�twee�z th� Sct�tts and Mrs. Davis,t]�tis Award shal� be deerned futi complianoe with the Declazatio�'s requiz-ement that cansent be give�in writxng. Thc Panei,of cc�urs�,has no authoricy to d�eterrnine whet3ier esr not the Tt�wn of Vail will require further c�nsent of Mrs.I�avis a.s part of its design and r�vi�w process. If i��trs.Davis continues to o�ject to ihe wainscc�ting anr�stucco st�own �n the drawings in Ex}�ilait I�,thc�ccrtts are ordered to rernor�e thase desigrs featur�s, In order tt�accomrnodate��.�av�s' concems expr�ssed in her i�tter ofAugzxst 26, 2010, ifth�Scotts go fc�rw�rd with th�ir prc3gosed rem��ie]ing,they are c�rdared to defend, indemnify,and hold Mrs, T�avis harmless fr€�tn any mechanics' liens t�r other dama,�es or claims arisin�from the canstructic�n of fhe pioposcd reuQVatiQns, At their sole expense,t��Scotcs s}ralI iu;dertake the draftir�g of any anc�all amendments t4 th�Decl:�ation and relaied documentatian, nec�ssary�s a resu�t of�he propt�sed X�ova#ions, Th��cotts aiso shalt utilize no greaier thar� fifty percent(50%) of the allt�wable building squaxe foo#age for the Property for their rez�ovated Unit A. AIl canstxuctic�n vs�c�rk shatl be perf�rmed dwring zeasonable hc�urs,which may�include evenings and we�kends, but n�t after'7:00 p.m, or befc}re�i:(}t�a.m.,anti trnce w�rk ct�mmences, the Scc��ts shall praeeed in a dili�ent rnanner ta c�mpl�te the work as sQ�n as practica�le to zni.�imize any zncc�n�r��ience ta Mrs. Dav�s. Fina�ly,the P�nel has consider�d�e questi�n 4f attc�rney 1'ees end costs. Fee shi�ting pravisiar�s are in dezogafzo�of#�he Arnericazz i�ule conc�zni��;attorriey fees�nd costs. In 1i�i�atiar�,th�question c�S'whict�party is tt�e"preva�ling,PartY"is t�ft to th�discrc#ic�n of the trial caurt_ G�eeler v. T.L. Raofrrt�� .Int., 74 P.3d 45�9,SQ3 (Colo. App.2Q03�. •`A `prevailing party' is one who prevails on a signific�nt issue in The litigatic�n�td derives some of th�beanefits sought by the iitigatian.The nurr�ber of eiaims�pon whicf� a�arty pr�vails or the amount�war�icd for those clainns is not deterrc�inative." .4rc�er u..�'armer,8r�ts. �'n.,90 P.�d 225,23Q-231 (�c�]c�. 20�4). The�'anel conctudes that the Scc�tts have"pr�vailed"'in ��t tt�is�ward is de�zneci t� be A�Irs.Davis' v��ritten cc�nsent fc�r chang�s to the exteri�r c��tb.e Scotts' ruyit.I-�owever,the Scatts _�.. � i iV111.4fii4rJ +JUa!-�J�J"'T` IG�,t'T �V.x153�.1Vt_VIJJVV VJ(LVtLUt1 I�1.41�7 ilTLV 1 .UV1lVU4+ cannot, �n any way,change the extenor of Mrs.£?avis' �nit.Accordingly, and i�the Pane�'s discretir�n,no attarney fees�r costs are av+rarc�eci ta eixher party. Each party sha�l pa� ��ie campensation�r#'the arbitr�rtor appointed�y that party. `I'his A�v�rd represents a compiete de#ermination of al_I disgutes pr�sented ta ihe I��x�el in this�roceeding. Ex�ept as provided above,a1l claims by either party n�t specifically c��alt with in th�A��ard ar�hereby c�eflied. Dated:May 2�,201]. � �` - a L3ate �t.. �-Iarz�is,Ar�iitratar lohn P.Le�pold,Arbitratar _g_ I 14`IIIs�1t11`fV V41V��ItJ'f�� FLttY 1 V.V4ilVl�VValVV aJ+.�� tV� �V � � fv+asu i� ��v � .v.+ui vvi.. ��rtiflca#e of S�rvice Scott,Mark a�id Jttqueline�rs� �.etuth G. I�avis(C�se If.3#l125S2} I,C��armaine F�.fl�ren, hereby declar� Ehat on May 2G,241 1, I serv�d the f'oll€�win�dacurnel�t. A�tB�'RA,TIflIY A'P4'�tJ"J on th�}�ariaes listed below regardin�th�u�ithin actian�y Facsan�ile �t�llawed by Mail froin the r�ffice c�f J�MS,410 77th�treet,Den�uet•. Ct�Ic�radU 802t12, 3{13-534-125�. � Ser�ice List: Sc�tt, Artark and Jaqueline Arbitcr-claimaxit app�inted Paul R gxanke IiI Dale 1-�arris Franke Greenhouse�.ist&Lippitt, LLP Davis, Grahan� 8c Stubbs,LLP 1228 �St�Street, Suite 2U1 155�} 17th Sueet,#�(30 Denver, Colorado 8�2Q2 l�enver� �C3 80�(}� Leruth G,D�vis Jon�than G. P��y Browz�stein i�yatt Far6er& Schreck= LLC �110 17th St�•eet} Suite 22(}a 3�enver 802Q2-��i 6 1 declar�rtnder penaliy t�f perjury the foregt�in�,to be t.�.+e and correct. �xecuted t�n May 26.�{}11. �� Char�naine�,_ �}�xen ss�r'�' JAN1S.�3{} 17th Street,I�enver,Calor�do 8�202 C�se EI};;�2552 Pagc E of 1 Bill Gibson Fram: Bill Gibson Sent: Friday, lune 17, 20119:13 AM To: 'Pamela Hc�pkins' 5ubject: RE:4898 Meadow �ane/lot 15, Blotk 7, Bighorn 5th Attachments» image001.pnc�; image002.png Hey Pam, For zaning purpt�ses, both halves of the duplex are collectively ane entity. The setbacks, GRFA, site cc�verage, {andscaping area,etc,are applied to the site as a whr�le, and are nat applied to each half individually. Construction across an A, B, or C duplex awnership line rnay have buildingjfire ct�de implicatians, but does not affect zr�ning. There may party wail agreements that control who gets to build where on the lot, but this is civil matter between the c�wners and does not involve the Town of Vai{. Sincerely, Bill Bill Gibson, AICP Town Planner Community Development �� 970.479.2173 97fl.479-2452 fax vailgov.com twi#ter.com/vailgc�v �� . � r �* '�� 4� . , 's�,��:��., From: Pamela Hopkins [mailto:phopkinsl7@gmaiLcom] Sent: Friday, June 17, 2(l11 9:03 AM To: Bill Gibson Subject: Re: 4898 Meadow t�ne/ lot 15, Block 7, Bighorn 5th Thank you Bill. 1 was out of the office most of Wedne�day and yesterday. 1 have another question ft�r you. t�n the proposed conceptual plan from Irwin and Scott(Lot A}, they da not shgw the Lot A property line as shown on the ILC submitted, The proposed plan goes way into the �ot C (Common Area}. Does that require a variance or legal action? Thanks, Pam Pamela W. Hopkins,AIA, LEED AP Snowdon and Hopkins Architects, PC 1 Pa Box 3340 Vail, Ct�8165$ 970.476.2201 970.378.6469 cell Pam c(r�.SnawdonHopkins.com Fram: Bill Gibson <baibsc�nCc�vailqov.com> Date:Wed, 15 Jun 2011 15:47:54 +OOOQ To: "Mark G. [}avis° <marlcqdavis5280(c�qmail.com>, Pamela Hopkins �phopkinsl7{t�gmail.com> Subject: RE: FW: 4898 Meadow Lane/ lot 15, Block 7, Bighorn 5th You are correct, the DRB will nat be visiting site today. Bill From: Mark G, Davis �mailto:markqdavis5280 r�r.�qrr�ail.cam] Sent:Wednesday, June 15, �U11 9:45 AM To. Pamela Hopkins; Bill Gibson Sub�ect: Re: FW: 4898 Meadow Lane!lot 15, Black 7, Bighorn 5th Hi Bill: dc�es this mean that the site inspectionitaur that DRB does at 1 is aiso tabled? Just want ta make sure. Thanks a million. Sorry this is such a mess. Mark G. Davis On Wed,Jun 15, 2011 at B:SS AM, Pamela Hopkins <phopkinsl7�,g�nail.com>wrote: This just came from Bill Gibson. He copied Mark Mueller who is a structural engineer in town. Ne meant to senti it ta yau. Pam Pamela W. Hopkins,AIA, LEED AP Snowdon and Hopkins Architects, PC Pt7 Box 3340 Vail, CQ 81658 970.476.22Q1 {te1:970.4762201> 970.376.6469 {te1:970.376.6469> Cell Pam aC'�.SnawdonHopkins.com {http:llPamCcz75nowdonHopkins.cam> ------ Farwarded Message From: Bill Gibsan <bqibsan(c'�vailqov.com <http:llbgibsantc"�vail�ov.com> > Date:Wed, 15 Jun 2411 14:47:14 +p{�p0 To. Pamela Noplcins<phapkinsl7�gmaiLcom �http:llphopkins17Cc�,�qmail.com> > Cc: "Mark,1. Mueller' �muefler(a�mauntairrmax.net<http:llmuellerCa�mountainmax.net> > Subject: RE:4898 Meadow Lane/ lot 15, Black 7, Bighorn 5th Hey Pam, Tr�day the DRB will be asked to table this item to its July 6th hearing withaut discussion. The July 6th hearing of this item is contirtgen# upan jaint property avtrner approval fram Ms. Davis. 2 The subject property is zaned Two-Family Primaryl�econdary, s�o ane unit can not exceed 40°l0 of the allowable GRFA. The attached original building perrr�it plans show Unit B (western unit) as the secondary. Nawever, the seeandary designation is not binding. As long as one of the twa units does not exceed 40°fo of the alfowable GRFA the property complies with the requirements of the Town Code. If bc�th units are under the current al(owable 40°fa, it is up to the two owners to decide who will be the prinnary and who will be the seeondary moving forward. If bath units construet no mc�re than 40°l� of the allowable GRFA, they will be"equal" and comply with the standards of the Vail Tawn Code. The rezoning t�f this one lot to the Two-Family District would be a "spot z�ning" which is not supported by the Town's subdivision r�gulatians. A rezoning may be feasible if the entire neighborhood requested tc� be rezoned. I hope that helps answer your questians; if not, please feel free ta contact me via email ar at 479-2173. Sincerely> Bill BHI Gibson, AICP Tawn Planner Community [�evelapment T�WN QF t�Al�, ` 970,479.2173 <te1:97(?.479.2173> 970.479-2452 <te1:970.479-245�> fax vailgov.com <http:/Ivailqov.com/> twitter.camlvailgov{http://twitter.com/vailgov> r� �R r � I� �� .., . . �, From: Pamela Flopkins [mailto:�hopkins17�a gmail.coml Sent:Tuesday, June 14, 2011 4:54 PM To: 8i11 Gibsan Cc: Mark J. Mueller Subject: 4898 Meadow Lanel lot 15, Block 7, Bighorn 5th Ne(lo Bill, Am i correct that you will table the DRB Canceptual Review for the above redevelapment project at tomarraw's DRB meeting? Also, �ot 15 is zoned PrimarytSecandary Residential, but 1 cannat find which unit is desi�nated as the primary. Is that legally defir�ed or a first come first served situatian?The duplex was built in 1979. Can the owners change the zaning ta Two Family Residential? Thanks, Pam 3 Pamela W. Hopkins, AIA, LEED AP Snowdon and Hopkins Architects, PC PO Box 3340 Vail, CO 81658 970.476.2201 <te1:970.476.2201> 970.376.6469 <te1:970.376.6469> cell Pam(a�SnowdonHopkins.com <http://PamCcr�.SnowdonHopkins.com> ------ End of Forwarded Message Thanks, Mark G. Davis 4 Bill Gibson From: Bill Gibson Sen#: Monday,June 13, 20119:3(}AM To: 'Kristine Lur�dstrom'; Matt Mire Cc: JPrayC�bhfs.com; ssommers@bhfs.corn; Scott, Mark Subjec#: RE: Mark&Jacqueline Scott v. Leruth Davis Arb+tration Attachmen#s: Joint Property Qwner Written Approvai �etter.pdf; image(}Q2.png; image0{}3.png Ai i, The Town of Vail dc�es not enforce ar interpret private party wall �greements, declarations, contracts, arbitrations,or any other similar civi) matter. 4nce Ms. Davis has cansented to the Scott's application for Town of Vail design review, please complete and submit the attached itrrm to the Town of Vail Community Development Department. Design review applications for construction at 4898 Meadaw Lane will no move forward until joint property owner approval has been submitted ta the Town. Sincerely, Bill Bill Gibson, AICP Town Planner Community C�evelopment row� oF r�� 970.A79.2173 97Q.479-2452 f�x uailgov.com twitte�.com/vailgov .� ee . � � � rr �� 1 Bill Gibson Fram: Mark G, davis <markgdavis5280@gmail.ct�m> Sent: Thursday,June 16, 2011 1:13 PM To: Bill Gibsan Subject: 4898 Meadow Cane Hi Bill: We were just made aware of the Scotts' applicatic�n to DRB a few days agQ. As I think yQU know, we have engaged an architect, Pam I-�opkins, ta review plans. We anticipate hearing back frarn Pam shortly and will respc�nd at that time. Thanks, Mark On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 11:39 AM, Bi11 Gibson�BGibson(a�?vail a�v.c�m> wrate: �-�ey Mar'k, St� t�3at I caii k�e cle�r in l��y understandir�g flf the�urret�t situ�tic�n, Ms. Davis rs n�t ct>nsentin�(as the joir�t E�ropei�ty otivner)to Mr. Scott's s�ib��ittal of a design review applicatic�� to lhe Tc�GUi7 c�F Vail for a remc�del or demalrebuild at this tin�e. Is this cc�r�rect? ��,�lilil�f S, �1�� 1 Bill Gibson From: Bill Gibson Sent: Wednesday,July 06, 2011 9:44 AM To: 'DAV:[D lRW:[N' Subject: RE:4898 Meadow Lane, Unit A - DR6100607 Thanks for the update Dave. We will withdraw the current conceptual review application, and will keep an eye out for the new applications. Sincerely, Bill Bill Gibson, AICP Town Planner Community Development TOWN OF �fAl� ' 970.479.2173 970.479-2452 fax vailgov.com twitter.com/vailgov �s� 1� �. , + .. B e �a► �. ..,, , , rF From: DAVID IRWIN [mailto:snapoutofit2@msn.com] Sent: Wednesday, July 06, 2011 9:13 AM To: Bill Gibson Subject: RE: 4898 Meadow Lane, Unit A - DRB100607 Hi Bill, We will not need a meeting today. Mark Scott is in the process of buying Ms. Davis out, then we would start over with a new design. If not we will continue on with current design. I will stay in touch and let you know what is happening. Thanks for your help, Dave From: BGibson@vailgov.com To: snapoutofit2@msn.com; markscott28@msn.com Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane, Unit A - DRB100607 Date: Tue, 5 Jul 2011 21:06:41 +0000 Hey Mark and Dave, i The Town of Vail has received the joint properly owner approval from Ms. Davis (4898 Meadow Lane, Unit B)for your submittal of a conceptual review design review application. So, this conceptual review application will proceed to the Design Review Board tomorrow, July 6th. Please be present at 3:OOpm in the Town Council Chambers for this hearing. As you are aware, if Ms. Davis is unwilling to change the exterior of her side of the duplex; the compatibility of the proposed renovation with the existing half will be your challenge moving forward. "14-10-6: RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT: A. The purpose of this section is to ensure that residential development be designed in a manner that creates an architecturally integrated structure with unified site development. Dwelling units and garages shall be designed within a single structure, except as set forth in subsection 8 of this section, with the use of unified architectural and landscape design. A single structure shall have common roofs and building walls that create enclosed space substantially above grade. Unified architectural and landscape design shall include, but not be limited to, the use of compatible building materials, architectural style, scale, roof forms, massing, architectural details, site grading and landscape materials and features." Sincerely, Bill Bill Gibson,AICP Town Planner Community Development rowN oF wart � 970.479.2173 970.479-2452 fax vailgov.com twitter.com/vailgov w'� �m � � . ` r� ,* ..... _. �,��..�� z �� . . � �� ; �x�; -� �* y `y : � ._� ,�. l�i:�,:, . i�v O � � C � r T � a � A ! z y � �� y � ;, 'x;� -� � ' z I" ,�; ,` � <�� :��" � �•_ . ,. � .-��i'a y � �a �+ �' '� x � - .�'1�; - � � � , *;, Z _4. 1 �=, > z � f � .. � r 7_ � � J i I� I � r� /'1 n � � � ' Z C�i ?7 � a T � z ^ o - � /�J p �T �/ '�l y l:l; /� � � O ' J � r 3 :- � y � � z � � � Z L � �, � � � � Z C N � c z v � :r r, r, � � � : .: ? -� y � rn `"' , '� z .� '� � -, r-� c = z T � < � � � � � o � r f � f Z p z (� .,, � "3 p � Zn � �7 ;�,,. 3 O � ? � Z � T � � 3 � z 0 � x n �' � ^ ;i7 't !o .j � _ .r�v � � O � � ,.,3 N w ..+ � / / � � � �IZy � J �.w� � L L i �+ _ Y' .' . . _ . _ . �';f- , .. . - . � � ., Bill Gibson From: Bennett, Amy L. <ABennett@BHFS.com> on behalf of Sommers, Steven M. <SSommers@BHFS.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 07, 2011 1:31 PM To: Lorelei Donaldson Cc: George Ruther; Matt Mire; Bill Gibson; Sommers, Steven M.; Pray,Jonathan G. Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane,Vail, CO Attachments: Scan001.PDF Please see the attached correspondence. Please let me know if you have any questions or comments. Thank you, Steven M. Sommers, Esq. Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP 410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 Denver, Colorado 80202-4432 ssommersCa�bhfs.com P 303.223.1121 C 720.987.3121 F 303.223.0921 To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS,we infoRn you that any federal taz advice contained in this communication(including any attachments)is not intended or written to be used,and cannot be used,for purposes of(i)avoiding penalties under the Intemal Revenue Code,or(ii)promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein. STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY&DISCLAIMER:The information contained in this email message is attomey privileged and confidential,intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this email is strictly prohibited.If you have received this email in error,please notify us immediately by replying and delete the message. Thank you. 1 Brownstein I Hyatt Farber i Schreck Steven M.Sommers June 7, 2011 Attomey at l.aw 303.223.1121 tel 303.223.092i fax ssommersQbhfs.com VIA EMAIL: LDONALDSON@VAILGOV.COM Town of Vail Attn: Lorelei Donaldson, Town Clerk 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: Open Records Request—4898 Meadow Lane Unit#A Dear Ms. Donaldson: This letter is a request far public records pursuant to the Colorado Open Records Act, C.R.S. § 24-72-200.1 et seq. ("CORA"), to inspect and obtain copies of any and all public records received or created relating to requests for the remodeling/redevelopment of, and/or addition to, that certain property located at 4898 Meadow Lane Unit#A, Vail, Colorado (also described as Parcel Number 2101-131-04-022}, including without limitation applications for administrative or design review board review and any permit applications (collectively, the "5ubjects of InteresY'). This request spec�cally includes, but is not limited to, any notes, memos, analyses, emails, or correspondence about the Subjects of Interest between and among Town staff, Town staff and members of the public, Town staff and members of the Design Review Board, Town staff and members of the Town Council, and 7own staff and outside referral agencies and consultants,whether handwritten, typed, or computer-generated. Public records means and includes all "writings made, maintained, or kept by the state, any agency, institution...or political subdivision of the state." C.R.S. § 24-72-202(6)(a)(I). "Writings"means and includes all books, papers, maps, photographs, cards, tapes, recordings, or other documentary materials, regardless of physical form or characteristics. The term "writings" includes "digitally stored data, including without limitation electronic mail messages, but does not include computer software." !d. § 24-72-202(7). This request a/so specifically includes any public records received or created relafing to the Subjects of lnterest affer fhe date of fhis leffer. Pursuant to C.R.S. § 24-72-204(4), if access is denied to any public record, we hereby request a written statement of the grounds for the denial of each public record, including a citation of law or regulation under which access is denied for each public tecord. If any public record requested is not in the Town's custody or control, you must notify us of this fact in �` 410 Sc�•cnrccnth Sacct,Smtc L.'�(1� Dcm�cr,CO 80202 4432 3(?3.�?3.i 100 u! Rro�vmtcm 1 Iqatt Farb�:r Schrcck,�.l.i��bhf�.com 303.LS.1111 fw• Open Records Request June 7, 2011 Page 2 writing and provide the reason for the absence of such records, the location of the records, and what person then has custody or cantrol of the records. Id. § 24-72-203(2)(a). CORA requires that aN public records shali be open for inspection within three (3) business days of receipt of the request. Id. §24-72-203(3)(b}. Please contact my assistant, Amy Bennett, at 303-223-1309, when the records are available for inspection. Lastly, please advise if records have not yet been received regarding the Subjects of Interest. Sinc ly • �;�.�,yl'. Steven M. Sommers cc: George Ruther, Community Development Director(via email at: gruther@vailgov.com) Matt Mire, Town Attorney (via email at: mmire@vailgov.com) wlliam Gibson, Town Planner(via email at: bgibsonQvailgov.com) 144561111547020.1 Bill Gibson From: Bennett, Amy L. <ABennett@BHFS.com> on behalf of Sommers, Steven M. <SSommers@BHFS.com> Sent: Tuesday,June 07, 2011 9:01 AM To: Bill Gibson Cc: Pray,Jonathan G.; pfranke@fgll-law.com Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane,Vail, CO Attachments: Scan001.PDF Mr. Gibson, please see the attached correspondence. Thank you, Steven M. Sommers, Esq. Brownstein Hyatt Farber Schreck, LLP 410 Seventeenth Street, Suite 2200 Denver, Colorado 80202-4432 ssommersCa�bhfs.com P 303.223.1121 C 720.987.3121 F 303.223.0921 To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS,we inform you that any federal tax advice contained in this communication(including any attachments)is not intended or written to be used,and cannot be used,for purposes of(i)avoiding penalties under the Intemal Revenue Code,or(ii)promoting, marketing or recommending to another party any transaction or tax-related matter addressed herein. STATEMENT OF CONFIDENTIALITY&DISCLAIMER:The information contained in this email message is attomey privileged and confidential,intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above.If the reader of this message is not the intended recipient,you are hereby notified that any dissemination, distribution or copy of this email is strictly prohibited.If you have received this email in error,please notify us immediately by replying and delete the message. Thank you. s � � 1 �: Brownstein I Hyatt Fa rber i Sch re�k Steven M.Sommers June 7, 2011 Attorney at Law 303.223.1121 tel 303.223.0921 fax ssommers aQbhfs.com VIA E-MAIL BGIBSON�VAILGOV.COM '�' William Gibson Town of Vail Community Development Departrnent 75 South Frontage Road Vail, CO 81657 RE: 4898 Meadow Lane;Arbitration Between Mark and Jacqueline Scott and Leruth G. Davis Dear Mr. Gibson: This follows your conversation yesterday with Jonathan Pray from my office. As Jonathan explained, this firm represents Leruth Davis with respect to the property located at 4898 Meadow Lane in Vail (the "Property"). We understand that you are in receipt of a copy of the arbitration award dated May 26, 2011 (the"Award")that was issued by the arbitrators who heard the dispute between Mrs. Davis and Mark and Jacqueline Scott(the"Scotts"}. As you requested, this letter summarizes Mrs. Davis'position on the Design Review Board Application submitted by the Scotts. First, under the statute governing the arbitration between the Scotts and Mrs. Davis, the Award is not yet final. The Award has not been confirmed by a court,and it is still subject to(1) modification or correction by the arbitrators, or(2}vacation by a court. Indeed, Mrs. Davis has until June 15, 2011 to request that the arbitrators make modifications or corrections to the Award, and Mrs. Davis has until August 24, 2011 to petition a Colorado District Court to vacate the Award. Second, the Award did not impair Mrs. Davis' rights under Vail Municipal Code§ 12-11-4 6.1.d,which requires consent by co-owners of property to a proposed remodeling application. In the Award, the arbitrators found that Mrs. Davis has consented to the Scotts' propasal for purposes of the 7ownhouse Declaration that governs the Property. However, the arbitrators made it clear that the Award did not address Code§ 12-11-4 6.1.d. The arbitrators instead hefd that, "(t[he Panel, of course, has no ` authority to determine whether or not the Town of Vail will require further consent of Mrs. Davis as part of its design and review process." (Award at page 5.) The arbitrators also gave Mrs. Davis the right to disapprove certain aspects of the Scotts'plan, including the Scotts' proposed use of stucco and rock wainscoting on the exterior of the Property. Mrs. Davis requires additional time to review the plans submitted by the Scotts. Prior to the commencement of arbitration proceedings, Mrs. Davis had not even received copies of the Scotts' conceptual plans. Now that the arbitrators have ruled, Mrs. Davis rs in the process of reviewing the Scotts'plans and is considering engaging an architect to help advise her about potential impacts to her side of the Property, i.e., Unit B. Mrs. Davis dces not believe that this process will be complete by June �; 15�', and requests that the Design Review Board continue any hearing on the conceptual review of the � Scotts'proposal until July 6'"at the earliest. � � 410 Sc�•cntcrnth�trcct,Sw�c 22011� bcnrcr,CO 802D?-�Iqt? }(13.??31 IIKIle/ t,� Rrol��nzicin I lya�t I��arbcr$chrcck,i.I.P�bhG.com �. 3t)Z.233.11 I t jux �_� William Gibson June 7, 2011 Page 2 Finally,as a co-owner of the Property, Mrs. Davis requests that the Town keep her apprised of the status of the Scotts'application and provide her with notice of any submissions to the Town, hearings, or decisions related to the Property. Mrs. Davis intends to proceed cooperatively and dces not anticipate further litigation related to the Scotts'proposal—but Mrs. Davis does intend to insist on her right to review, comment and consent to the Scotts proposal. Please do not hesitate to get in touch if you would like to discuss this matter further. Si r � ._...� S even M. Sommers cc: Jonathan G. Pray, Esq. Paul R. Franke, Esq. (Counsel for the Scotts) 1 44 561111 54 6 98 8.1 . froa:JANS 303-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/26/2011 15:02 #420 P.001/008 `�2a�oo667 Facsimile Cover Sheet Phone: 303-534-1254 �p��g Fau: 303-534-1255 � �AMS � 410 17th Street Suite 1600 Denver, C4 80202 THE RESOLUT�ON BXPERTS Case ID: 12552 Thu, May 26, 2011 Nmbr. of Pages inc. Cover: To: Paul R Frankv fll Firm/Company: Franke Greenhouse List 8� Lippitt, LLP � � (� Q � [ D Firm Fax Number. 303-623-0960 JUN 0 2 2011 Firm Phone Number: 303.623.3208 From: Charmaine K. Ogren TOWN OF VAIL Subject: Scott, Mark and Jaqueline vs. Leruth G. Davis Message: ARBITRATION AWARD. Thank you. Char 1f you do not receive the number of pages indicated above or you have received this transmission in error, please call 303-5341254. 7he information contained in this facsimile contains pMvilsged ane!q�nfld�ntlal IMotrnlatbn intended far the use of individual or entity named above. tf you are not the intended recipient of this facsimile or the employee or agent responsible to deliver it to the intencled recipient, you are hereby notifled that any dissemination, distribution or copying of this facsimile is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimiie in error, please immediately notity JAMS by telephone at 303-534-1254 and return the original message to me at the above adcfress via the U.S. Postal Service. Froro:JAMS 303-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/26l2011 15:02 �420 P.002/008 �___._�__...._ _.___ �__ �_�_.._ . __ -- � IN RE:AR.BTTRATION PROCEEDINGS � � � Claimants: Mark Scott and laequeline Scott ( Respondent: Leruth G. Davis i Case Number: 12552(JAMS) I __.._._._---- ARBITRA7'tON AWARD .._. . . .___ --- -- The arbitrgtion of this matier was held on May 12-I3,201 l.Pau!Franke,Esq.and Kcely Downs,Esq.appeared for Cleimants(both of whom were present).Jonathan Pray,Esq.and Stcven Sommers,Esq.appeared for Respondent{who was prese.nt).Although the arbitrators were appointed by the parties�as prcviously noted(Order of Apri121,2011),thc arbitrators are neutral and sre not"for"either party. The Panel has considered the iestimony and credibility of alI witn�esses{sorne of whom testified by telephone),the exhibits admitted into evidence,the parti�s'pre-arbitration and post- arbitration submissions and the applicable law. BACKGROUND The dispuic centers around certain provisions in the Townhouse Declaration for Lot 15, Block 7,Bighorn Subdivision,Fifth Addition,Eagte County,Colorado("the Declaration"). Paragraph 5 of tho Declaration provides in}�rt that"No owner shali meke or suf�er any structtuaI or design change{including a color scheme chaage)either permanent or impermanent and of any type or nature whatever to t�e exterior of any improvement on the property without obtaining the prior written consent thereto&om the other owner." Claimants(herein sametimes refemed to as"the Scotts")own Unit A of the Townhouse and Respondent(herein sometimes referred io as"Mrs. Davis")ovms Unit B. The Scotts have Froro:JAMS 303-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/26/2011 15:02 #420 P.0031008 proposed certain substantia]remadeIing changes which will alter the exterior of Unit A,t Some of their proposals atso would alter the appearance of some of the exterior of Unit B,such as putting stone wainscoating around the exterior af both units and stucco covering the ahimneys. However,the Scotts testified at the hearing that they wouId be willing to eliminate all of those proposed changes so that the exterior of Unit B would not be altered. Ii is undisputed that Mrs. Davis has not given written consent to the Scotts'proposals, The issue in this azbitration is whether Mrs.Davis,thrvugh her statements and aetions.has agreed that the Scotts can remodel the exteriar of Unit A and should be required to give her consent in writing. The evidence established that the parties mentioned or discussed the Scotts' desirc to rernodel their unit on severai occasions, including the following: 1. In the Fall of 2006,thc Scotts'real estste brokez,Diane Meehan,spoke to Mrs.Davis. 2. Tn early October,2006,Mrs. Scott and Mrs.Davis had a conversation in the driveway af the towr�ome. 3. In the suxnmer of 2009,the Scotts met Mrs.Davis at the Buckbom Exchange in Denver. 4. Also in the summer of 2009,the Scotts met Mrs.Davis at her honie in Denvor. 5. In August,2009,the Scotts' arehiteci,David Irwin,met Mrs. Davis on the deck of Unit B, 6. In Sepiember,2�9,Mrs.Davis'son,Mark,spoke to contracior David Bronn. 7. In October,2009,Mr.Irwin agair►met with Mrs. Davis. 8. In July,2010,Mr. Scott and Mrs. Davis met in the Scott's Unit. 9. During Christmss holiday,20i0,Mr.Scott and Mrs.Davis had a hrief conversation. There also were e-mait messages in which ths remodeling was mentioned. There is conflieting testimony es to what exact�y was said during the above meetings and convcrsations,but the Panel concludes that Mrs.Davis led the Scatts to believe that,while she was happy with her own unit t�►e way it was and did not want it ehanged,sbe"did nat care"what the Scotts did to their uni� Mrs.Davis waited almost 4 years aftcr the first conversaiion with Ms. Meehan,and more ihan one year ai3er discussions of the Scotts'remodeling proposafs begen 'Some of the testimony discussed potentiat changes to tho interior of the Scotts'unit,Mrs.Devis has acknowledged that sbe does not object to any 6uch changes and that interior changes are not the subject ofParagxaph 5. -z- � Froro:JANS 303-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/26/2011 15:02 #420 P.004/008 in eamest in ihe summer of 2009,before she told the Scotts,through a letter drafted by her lawyer,that she did not consent ta any change to the exterior of the townhouse. DISCUSSION AND ANALYSIS Based on these facts, Claimauts present three claims for relief_breach of the covenant of good faith and fa'v dealing,promissory estoppel,and partial pert'ormance. In considering these ctaims,the Panel is rnindful of its previous detcrmination that Colorado's version of the Uniform Arbitration Act,as it cxisted when the Declaration became effective in 1978,ia the controlling statute. Under that statute,the a�rbitrators ha.ve"great flexibility"in fashioning appropriate remedies.R.P.T. v. Innovanve Communicatlorts, Inc.,91? P.2d 340,343 (Colo.App. 1996); ByerJy v. Kirkpatrick Peitis Smith Polian, Inc., 996 P.2d'77I, 774(Colo.App.2000). The Panei finds that Mr.and Mrs. Scott and Mrs. Davis,as caowners of the subject duplex,are"conUracting parties"to fhe Dectaration(¶13)and therefore are subject to basic contract principles,including the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing. The parties have debated the effect of the covenant.The law is cIearly set forth in New IJiesign Constr. Co., Inc. x Hamon Conlractors, Inc., 215 P.3d 1172 (Colo.App.2008) Every contract in Colorado contains an implied duty of good faith and fair dcaling. A violation of the duty of good faith and fair dealing gives rise to a claim for bn;ach of contract. Whether a party acted in good faith is a questioa of fact which must be detemuned on a case by case basis. The duty of good faith and fair dealing may be relied upon when tlu manner of perfoxmance undcr a specific contra�ct term allows for discretion on the psrt of either party,Discretion in performance occvrs when the parties,at formahon,defer a decision regarding perfotmance terms of the conttact leaving one party witf�the power to set or control the tecros of performance a$er formation.2l S P.3d 1172, 1 l 81 (internal citations and quotations omitted). The question of whether a party has acted in good faith is a qu�estion of fact which is determined on a cass by case basis. "The doctrine exists to effectuate the parties' intentions and honor tEieir reasonable expectations." Newflower Market, Inc, v Coo�229 P.3d 1058, ]064 (Colo.App.2010). The Pa�nel dces not believe that ihe Declaration was intended to permit either owner arbitrarily to withhoid its consent to exterior alterations of the building for any reason or no reason at all. Crum v.April Curporation,62 P.3d 1039, 1041 (Cal.App.2002)("Where the language used in the contract does nat m$ke it ciear that a subjective standard applies,an objeetive test of reasonable satisfactian witl be applied to the extent it is precKicable.") _3_ . From:JANS 303-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/26/2011 15:03 #420 P.005/�08 When the Scotts purchased Unit A and became parties to the Declaration,they were entitled ta believe thaf Mrs. Davis would aet in a ressonable menner in its performance.Platt v. flsperrx�ood Condominium.4ssociation, Inc.,Z 14 P,3d l fl60, I 06f>(Colo.App. 2009). Even if a "subjecrive"standard applied,Mrs.Devis was obligated to exercise that sta.ndazd in good f$ith and fairly and expeditiously.See: Crum v April Corporation, supra. As stated above,the Panel concludes that,over a long period,Mrs. Davis ted the Scotts to believe that she would not object and would consent to their remodeling plans so long as her unit was not changed. The Pane!also concludes that t�e Scotts reasonably relied on Mrs.Davis' statements to purchase Unit A,io pay for a second sewer line in contemplatian of expaading Unit A,to hire Mr.Irwin to draw vp various remodeling proposals,and to instruct Mr.lrwin to revise the proposals to accommodate concerns raised by Mrs.Davis. The Panel concludes that Mrs.Davis'actions were noi eonsistent with her obligations under the implied duty of goad faith and fair dealing. For well over a year before Mrs.Davis' Avgust 26,202 0,letter denying consent,Mrs. Davis did not say she objected to any exterior remodeIing whatsoever;instead,she raised various concerns which the Scotts accommodated by directing Mr.Irwin to make changes to the designs,such as removing level three to impmve suniight to her unit,moving the dircction of a new addition in order to keep open Mrs. Dsvis' view coxridor,and abandoning proposals to build Mrs.Davis a new garage.The Panel concludes that Mrs.Davis'current r�asons for withholding her eonsent stated in her Angust 26,20l 0, December 20,2410,and January 19,201 l,letters either have been ar can be accommodated by the Scatts or are not reasonable reasons for wit.bhalding consent. The Panel also concludes that the drawings in Exhibit l 6 show a proposed remodel of Unit A that does not materially change the exterior of Unit B except for the wainscoating and stucco chimneys. If Mrs. Davis continues to object to ihe wainscaating and�tuccco,the Scatts have agreed to remove those design features and must do so.Further,the Scotts may tske no action which,in any way,changes the exterior of Mrs. Davis' unit. In view of our decision based on the implied covenant of good faith and fair dealing,the Panel cancludes that it need not cansider Claimants'promissory estoppel claim or partial perforrnance claim. -4- . Fro�:JAMS 303-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/26I2011 15:03 #420 P.0061008 ARBITRATtON AWARD Based on the foreboittg,the Panel finds that Mrs.Davis has breached the emplied covenanf of good faith and fair dealing.The Pane1 further finds that Mrs. Davis has consented to allow the Scotss to remodel Unit A in a manner that does not change the exterior of Uuit B as set forth herein. As between thc Scotts and Mrs. Davis,this Award shalJ be deemed fu11 compliance with the Declaration's requirement that conscnt be given in writing. The Panel,of course,has no authority to deterniine whether or not the Town of Vail wi11 roquire further cansent of Mrs.Davis as part of its desigtt and review process. If Mrs.Davis continues to objeet to the wainscoting and stucco shown on the drawings in Exbibit 16,the Scotts are ordered to remove those design features. In order to accammodate Mrs.Davis' concems expressed in her letter af August 2b, 2010,ifthe Scotts go forward with th�ir proposed remodoling,they are ordered to defend, indemnify,and hold Mrs. Davis harmiess from any mechanics' liens or other damages or claims arising from the construction of the proposed renovations. At their sole expense,the Scotts shatl undertake the drafting of any and ell eme�ndments to the Declaration and related documentation, necessary as a result of the proposed renovations. The Scotts also shall utilize no greater than fi8y percent(SO%)of thc allawable building sq�are footage far the Property for their renovated Unit A. A!1 construetion work shail be performed during reasonable hours,which may inciude evenings and weeicends,but not after 7:00 p.m. or before 7:00 a.m.,and once work commences, the Scotts shall proceed in a diligent manner to complete the work as soon as praeticable to minimize any incanvenience to Mrs. Davis. Finatly,the Panel has considered the quesdon of attorney fees and cosis. Fee shifting provisions are in demgation of the American Rule conceming attorney fees and costs.In litiga#ian,the question of which party is#he"prevailing party"is left to the discretion of the trial eourt. Wheeler v. T.L. Rdofir�g, Inr.,74 P.3d 499,503 (Colo.App.20a3). "A `prevailing party' is ane who prevails on a significant issne in the litigation and derives some of the benefits sought by the litigatian.lfie number of claims upon which a parry prevails or the amount awarded for those claitns is not determinative." Archer v.Farmer Bros. Co.,90 P.3d 228,230-231 (CoIo.2004). The PaneI concludes that the Scotts have"pravailed"in that this award is decmed to be Mrs.Davis' written consent for changes to tlie extenior of the Scotts' unit However,the Scotts -5- , Fro�:JANS 303-534-1254 To;3036230960 05/26/2011 15:03 #420 P.007/008 cannot, in any way,change the exterior of Mrs.Davis' uni�Accordingly,and in the Panel's discretion,no attorney fees or costs are awarded to either party. Each party sha]1 pay the coinpensation of the azbitrator appointed by that party. This Award represents a complete determination of alI disputes presented to the Panel in this proceeding. Except as provided above,sil claims by either party not specifically desit with in the Award are hereby denied. ated;May 26,20I]. / ''��`/� � Dale R. Hanris,Arbitcator J�hn P.Leopold,Arbitrator -6- � From:JANS 303-534-1254 To:3036230960 05/2fi/2011 15:03 #420 P.008/008 Certlflcate of$ervke Scott,Mark and Jaqueline vs. Leruth G.Davis(Case ID#12552) I,Cl3armaine K. Ogren,hereby declare that on May 26,20I 1,I served the foliowing document: ARBTI'RATTON AWARD an the parties listed below regardinb the within action by Facsimile faltowed by Mail from the oflice of.1AMS,410 l 7th Street,Denver,Colorado 80202, 303-534-1254. Service List: Scott, Mark and Jaqueline Arbiter-claimant appointed Paul R Franl:e Ill Dale Harris Franke Crreenhouse List&Lippitt,LLP Davis, Graham&SEubbs,LLP ]228 15th Street, Suite 201 t550 17th Street,#500 Denver,Colorado 80202 Denver,CO 80202 Leruth G.Davis Jonathan G. Pray Brownstein Hyatt Farber&Schreck, LI.0 4l0 17th Street,5uite 2200 Denver 802p2-0916 1 declare under genalty of perjury the foregoing tc�be true and correct. Executed oa May 26,2011. . /` /`C Charmaine K. Ogren Staff JAMS.410 17th Street,Denver,C�lorado 8Q202 Cast ID#1Z552 Pege t of 1 t PROPOSED MATERIALS B �ig Maberials Tvoe of Material Color Roof �s L1AI� �u oc�cc a�12��`p- siding �x 6 ��G C�A,2 GirvqeQ ��Pu�u�v ot�er wau Mater�a�s S�'vc co /�us�'Y �/�� Fasda C eclr�i2 ��,uFo�lt �s�' Sof�ts ix 6 A�.,ie clei9�. windows c�i,�i;I �,�o�vzG Window Trim �eclAk. �'t�uq�iC�AfaeUN Doors G�A� �,Qou z e. �oor Trim Cecli� G'�,v�ei¢ �,�a�u,v Hand or�edc Rails C ecl�� G„uQe/� ,�✓,�au�ev Rues S�iBeF i1�1e T'�� l�/la�uz� Fiashing S�tee��te �� /1o�✓ze. Chimneys S'y'u c c0 �v��' �iPr9i� Trash Endosures ��'� Greentwuses '��9 RetaiMng Walls �'�� g�;r,g �y Ow�ue,Q. Otl'�er Notes: Please specify the manufacturer's name, the color name and number and attach a color chip. f:\cdevlfortns�pertnits\Planning�DRB\DRB_Addition_010111 c � `L.. N �Q 1� <<R.��'co t� . � �aroev�, . ]OINT PROPERTY OWNER WRITTEN APPROVAL LETTER � The applicant must submit written joint property owner approval for applications affecting shared ownership properties such as duplex, condominium, and multi-tenant buildings. This form, or similar written correspondence, must be com- pleted by the adjoining duplex unit owner or the authorized agent of the home owner's association in the case of a con- dominium or multi-tenant building. All completed forms must be submitted with the applicants completed application. I, (print name) , a joint owner, or authority of the association, of property located at , provide this letter as written approval of the plans dated which have been submitted to the Town of Vail Community Development Department for the proposed improvements to be completed at the address noted above. I understand that the proposed improvements include: �� (Signature) (Date) � �' Additionally,please check the statement below which is most applicaWe to you: � I understand itiat minor modifications may be made to the plans ove�the course of the re�iew process to ensure com- pliance with ttre Town s app/icable rndes and regulations (Initia/here) I unde�and that al/modifications, minor or otherwise, which ar�made to the p/ans over the cnurse of the review proc- ess, be brought to my attention by the applicant for additiona/approva/before undergoing furtfier review by the Town. ` ��' (Inilral here) � � � � �', � PROPOSED LANDSCAPING Safaicai IY�e Common Name uan ' Size P1�71i�.5 /17L�P. cS/d�dC�. 2. -4 �`�i9 • /�us��t�e5 ,�o re,v ri�u� 6 S��vl• ��ui D e,G 8 �G - � � D�SIIN�:IAlH'S TO E R@�Y� �: �" Minimum Requirements for Landscaping: Deciduous Trees—2"Caliper Coniferous Trees—6'in height Shrubs—5 Gal. Tvae Sauare Footas�e GROUND COVER SOD SEED N�r��e �'Qi�ss o s IRRIGATION �' TYPE OF EROSION CONTROL �: Please specify other landscape features(i.e. retaining walls,fences, swimming pools, etc.) f:\cdev�fortns�permits\Planning�DRB\DRB_Addition_010111 . . UTILITI(APPROVAL&VERIFICATION This form serves to verify that the proposed improvements will not impact any existing or proposed utility services,and aiso to verify service availability and location for new construction and should be used in conjunction with preparing your utility plan and schedul- ing installa�ons. A site plan, induding grdding plan, floor plan, and etevations, shall be submitted to the following utilities for ap- proval and ve�cation. PLEASE ALLOW UP TO 2 WEEKS FOR APPROVAL OR COMMENTS FROM THE UTILITY COMPA- NIES. If you are unabie to obtain comments within that timeframe please contact The Town of Vaii. Subject Property Address: Lot Blodc Subdivision: � � Primary Contact/Owner RepreseMative: Phone: �` Plans Dated: Primary Contact/Owner Representative Signature Autho�Slanature Comments Date QWEST 970.468.6860(tel) 970,468.0672(fax) Contacts: Samuel Tooley samuel.toole west.com XCEL HIGH PRESSURE GAS 970.262.4076(tel) 970.468.1401(fax) Contact: Rkfi Sisneros HOLY CROS.S ENERGY 970.947.5471(tel) � 970.945.4081(fax) . Contact: Diana Golis � oli ho a�ss.com XCEL Ener+py 970.262.4038(fax) 970.262.4024(tel) \ � Conbcts: Kit Bogert ` / r EAGLE RNER WATER�SANITA- TION DISTRICT 970.476.7480(tei) � 970.476.4089(fax) Contact: Fred Haslee \ fhaslee@erwsd.ora COMCAST CABLE 970.619.0752(tel) 970.468-2672(fax) Contact: Tony Hfldreth tony_hildr�th�cable.comcast.com CDOT(Ony in CDOT Right-of-waY) 970.683.6284(tel) Contact: Dan Roussin Da n lel.roussi n@dot.state.co.us NOTES: 1. Utility locations must be obtained before digging. 2. A Revocable Right-of-Way Permit may be required for any improvements within a street right-of-way. Contact the Pubiic Works Department for verification 970.479.2198. 3. It is the responsibility of the utility company and the applicant to resolve problems identified above. 4. The Primary Contact/Owner Representative is required to submit any revised drawings to the above agenaes for re-approval &re-verification if the submitted pians are altered in any way after the authorized signature date. 03-Mar-10 Bill Gibson From: Mark Scott <markscott28@msn.com> Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 4:40 PM To: Bill Gibson �c: snapoutofit2@msn.com Subject: RE:4898 Meadow Lane/Lot 15, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Addition 5 Hello Bill... Thank you for your response. I have tried to call today, but with our two hectic schedules, it appears we're missing one another. At this point, we're just seeking a Conceptual Review vs. full design review application. The reason being is that we're trying to assess whether the anticipated idea is in the realm of possibilities from your end before we proceed down an Arbitrations path with Side B owner. That said, are we proceeding down the correct path? I would hate to reach an agreement with Side B only to discover at a later date that the TOV DRB doesn't see this idea in the realm of possibilities. thanks again Bill. /�G�''ki� sCd��" 3980 Nassau Circle West Cherry Hills Village, Colorado 80113 303.888.4636 FAX.759.1700 From: BGibson@vailgov.com �� `. ��'�rv ry�µ��wwx�� To: markscott28@msn.com CC: snapoutofit2@msn.com Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane/Lot 15, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Addition 5 Date: Mon, 6 Dec 2010 21:20:47 +0000 Hey Mark and David, The Town of Vail Community Development Department has received a design review application for the renovation of 4898 Meadow Land, Unit A. The subject properly is located within the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Zone District. Both halves of the existing duplex on Lot 15 are treated as one entity for zoning purposes and share developments rights such as density, gross residential floor area, site coverage, landscape area, etc. Since the two halves of the existing duplex share development rights, the Town of Vail Community Development Department requires all development applications to include the written approval of both unit owners. The Town of Vail does not interpret, administer or enforce private covenants, deed restrictions, contracts, or any other form of civil agreement. Therefore, the Town of Vail can not arbitrate or render any form of judgment about any disagreement between yourself and Ms. Davis about how, or how not to, redevelop your properties. The Town of Vail � Community Development Department can not process the submitted design review application to remodel Unit A without � first receiving the written approval of the joint property owner(Unit B) or an equivalent court order. � Please submit written joint property owner to the Community Development Department by no later than Monday, January � 3, 2011. If joint property owner approval is not submitted by that date, the submitted design review application will be considered null and void and the application will be returned to your mailing address. � � � Sincerely, Bili �'; � Bill Gibson,A[CP � Town Planner Community Development Department i . ��Vl�� . Direct 970-479-2173 Fax 970-479-2452 http://www.vail�ov.com � � 2 � � Bill Gibson � � � From: Bill Gibson � Sent: Monday, December 06, 2010 2:21 PM To: 'markscott28@msn.com' �' Cc: 'snapoutofit2@msn.com' � Subject: 4898 Meadow Lane/Lot 15, Block 7, Bighorn Subdivision Addition 5 � Hey Mark and David, � The Town of Vail Community Development Department has received a design review application for the renovation of � 4898 Meadow Land, Unit A. The subject property is located within the Two-Family Primary/Secondary Zone �' District. Both halves of the existing duplex on Lot 15 are treated as one entity for zoning purposes and share �, developments rights such as density,gross residential floor area,site coverage, landscape area,etc. Since the two halves of the existing duplex share development rights,the Town of Vail Community Development Department requires all development applications to inc�ude the written approval of both unit owners. � The Town of Vail does not interpret, administer or enforce private covenants,deed restrictions,contracts,or any other � form of civil agreement. Therefore, the Town of Vail can not arbitrate or render any form of judgment about any �' disa reement between ourself and Ms. Davis about how,or how not to, redevelo � g y p your properties. The Town of Vail � Community Development Department can not process the submitted design review application to remodel Unit A � �: without first receiving the written approval of the joint property owner(Unit B)or an equivalent court order. � � Please submit written joint property owner to the Community Development Department by no later than Monday, � January 3, 2011. If joint property owner approval is not submitted by that date, the submitted design review � application will be considered null and void and the application will be returned to your mailing address. �' Sincerely, � Bill �; � � � Bill Gibson,AICP �. Tow�i Planner �; Community Development Department �: � � _ �� , � Direct 970-479-2173 �' Fax 970-479-2452 � http://www.vailgov.com � # � � � �. �t �- 3.. s c= x � 5 E F S ` � �: �