HomeMy WebLinkAboutPEC020073 �����;,.
Application for Review by the
Planning and Environmental Commission
TU YY1V Q�VAIL Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road,Vail, Colorado 81657
te1: 970.479.2139 fax: 970.479.2452
web: www.ci.vail.co.us
General Information:
All projects requiring Planning and Environmental Commission review must receive approval prior to submitting a
building permit application. Please refer to the submittal requirements for the particular approval that is requested. ,
An application for Planning and Environmental Commission review cannot be accepted until all required information
is received by the Community Development Department. The project may also need to be reviewed by the Town
Council and/or the Design Review Board.
Type of Application and Fee:
X Rezoning $1300 ❑ Conditional Use Permit $650
❑ Major Subdivision $1500 ❑ Floodplain Modification $400
❑ Minor Subdivision $650 ❑ Minor Exterior Alteration $650
❑ Exemption Plat $650 ❑ Major Exterior Alteration $800
❑ Minor Amendment to an SDD $1000 ❑ Development Plan $1500
❑ New Special Development District $6000 ❑ Amendment to a Development Plan $250
� Major Amendment to an SDD $6000 ❑ Zoning Code Amendment $1300
O Major Amendment to an SDD $1250 ❑ Variance $500
(no exterior modifications) ❑ Sign Variance $200
Description of the Request: To Rezone the property described below from Heavy Service Zoning
District to Public Accommodation Zoninq.
Location of the Proposal: Lot: A Block: �Subdivision: Vail Village Fiting 2
Physical Address: 28 South Frontage Road
Parcel No.: 210107101019
Zoning: Heavy Service
Name(s)of Owner(s): Mollentine Land Compan�r LLC
Mailing Address: c/o Lantis Eyewear, 461 Fifth Avenue, New York, NY 10017
Phone: 212-561-7510 Fax: 212-561-7509
Owner(s) Signature(s): See attached Letter of Consent
Name of Applicant: John Kohler, Nicollet Island Development Company, Inc.
Mailing Address: 600 Foshay Tower, 821 Marquette Avenue, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Phone: (612) 332-1500 ,�
� ��� ..
,
; .
E-mail Address: JKohler@semperdev.com Fax: (612) 332-2428
���.� ����
For Office Use�y� ,�}� ,- � r �' �'���'
Fee Paid: ��_ Check No.:� � By: J7, - �� �� �
Application Date: PEC No.: "�
Planner. Project No.: � ' — `
*�*****�**�*****�*****+*****�**�***********************************�********************�***
TOWN OF VAIL, COLORADO Statement
*******:�**�x*********************�********�x**�x******:x*****************************�**********
Statement Number: R000003551 Amount: $1,300.00 12/16/200203:28 PM
Payment Method: Check Init: JAR
Notation: 5151 H.B.
Development CO
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Permit No: PECO20073 Type: PEC - Rezoning
Parcel No: 210107101016
Site Address: 13 VAIL RD VAIL
Location: Chateau Vail
Total Fees: $1,300.00
This Payment: $1,300.00 Total ALL Pmts: $1,300.00
Balance: $0.00
*******************************************************�************************************
ACCOUNT ITEM LIST:
Account Code Description Current Pmts
-------------------- ------------------------------ ------------
PV 00100003112500 PEC APPLICATION FEES 1,300.00
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
, � '
� Land Title Guarantee Company
CUSTOMER DISTRIBUTION
Date: 10-09-2002 Our Order Number: VC268855-9
Property Address:
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST
D��RAMAR HOTELS,INC. WALDIR R. PRADO
4849 BANNOCK STREET VAIL VILLAGE INN
DENVER,CO 80216 100 E.MEADOW DRIVE
Attn: JIM WILDMAN VAIL,CO 81657
Phone: 303-298-1496 Attn: CONNIE DORSEY
Fax: 303-295-0360 CALL 1ST Phone: 970-476-5622
Seat Via US Postal Service Fax: 970-476-4661
Sent Via US Postal Service
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY JAY K.PETERSON
108 S.FRONTAGE RD.W.#2A3 108 S.FRONTAGE RD.#305
P.O.BOX 357 VAIL,CO 81657
VAIL,CO 81657 Phone: 970-476-0092
Attn: Danielle Stoltz Sent Via Couriec***
Phone: 970-476-2251
Fax: 970-476-4534
EMail:dstoltzQltgc.com
HB DEVELOPMENT C0.
ONE TABOR CENTER
1200 17TH ST.,SUITE 570
DENVER,CO 80202
Attn: THOMAS J. BRINK
Phone: 303-825-8500
Fax: 303-825-7200
Sent Via US Posta►Service
Form DELIVERY
Land Title Guarantee Company
YOURCONTACTS
Date: 10-09-2002
� Our Order Number: VC268855-9
Property Address:
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST
Buyer/Borrower:
NICOLLET ISLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION
�eller/Owner:
DORAMAR HOTELS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION
ss***s*s**s**s*x*x*s*s****sss**mx*s***s:ss:*x�*x**x:sz*ss**s**xxs*
Note: Once an original commitment has been issued, any subsequent
modifications will be emphasized by underlining or comments.
s***ss*s*sss:xsx********asss*sxsms*s*ss*s**s**sss�**x*s***szs**sss
If you have any inquiries or require further assistance,please contad one of the numbers below:
For Closing Assistance: For Title Assistance:
Danielle Stoltz Vail Tide Dept./SD
108 S. FRONTAGE RD. W. �203 Roger Avila
P.O. BOX 357 108 S. FRONTAGE RD. W. #203
VAIL, CO 81657 P.O. BOX 357
Phone: 970-476-2251 VAII,, CO 81657
Faz: 970-476-4534 Phone: 970-476-2251
EMail: dstoltz@ltgc.com Fax: 970-476-4534
EMail: ravila�ltgc.com
Need a map or directions for�your upcoming closing? Check out Land Title's web site at www.ltgc.com
for directions to an of oor 40 office locations.
ESTIMATE OF TITLE FEES
Alta Owners Policy 10-17-92 $9,333.00
Ta�c Report SCH#R010540 $15. 0 D
Tax Report SCH#P002215 $15.00
TOTAL $9,363. 00
Form coN�:;�' THANK Y()li f�()R YOUR ORDER!
Chicago Title Insurance Company
° ALTA COMMITMENT
Our Order No. VC268855-9
Schedule A Cust. Ref.:
Property Address:
SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80 WEST
1. Effective Date: Sentember 23. 2002 at 5:00 P.M.
�. Policy to be Issued, and Proposed Insured:
"ALTA" Owner's Policy 10-17-92 $11,700,000.00
Proposed Insured:
NICOLLET ISLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
SEE ATTACHED
4. Titie to the estate or interest covered herein is at the effective date hereof vested in:
DORAMAR HOTELS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION
5. The land referred to in this Commitment is described as follows:
SEE ATTACHED PAGE(S) FOR LEGAL DESCRIPTION
Our Order No. VC268855-9
3. The estate or interest in the land described or referred to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
PARCEL 1: A FEE SIMPLE
PARCEL 2: AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS TO AND FROM SUBJECT
PROPERTY DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1, AS RESERVED IN DEED RECORED NOVEMBER
28, 1967 IN BOOK 211 AT PAGE 666, AMENDMENT TO EASEMENT RECORDED
SEPTEMBER 23, 1969 IN BOOK 216 AT PAGE 48 AND AS CONVEYED IN DEED
RECORDED MAY 2, 1985 IN BOOK 412 AT PAGE 967
Our Order No. VC268855-9
• LEGAL DESCRIPTION
PARCEL 1:
A PART OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80
WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN AND BEING A PART OF LOTS A, B, AND C OF
AMENDED MAP OF SHEET 1 OF 2 OF VAIL VILLAGE SECOND FILING, COUNTY OF EAGLE,
STATE OF COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 7; THENCE SOUTHERLY AND
ALONG THE EAST LINE OF THE NORTHEAST ONE-QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 7; 39.20 FEET
TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 6; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE
RIGHT OF 100 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 47 SECONDS AND ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY
LINE, 25.44 FEET TO A POINT ON THE WEST LINE OF VAIL ROAD, SAID POINT BEING THE
NORTHEASTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT A; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE AFOREMENTIONED
LINE AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A, 152.65 FEET TO A POINT ON THE
NORTHWESTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT A, SAID POINT BEING THE TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFf OF 100 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 47 SECONDS
AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A, 110.0 FEET; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE
LEFT OF 73 DEGREES 53 MINUTES 12 SECONDS, 156.13 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF VAIL
ROAD; TI�NCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT OF 73 DEGREES 53 MINUTES 12 SECONDS AND
ALONG SAID WEST LINE 29.15 FEET; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT OF 106 DEGREES
06 MINUTES 48 SECONDS, 156.13 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A;THENCE ON AN
ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 134 DEGREES 17 MINUTES 11 SECONDS, 67.00 FEET; THENCE ON
AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT OF 90 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS, 18.27 FEET; THENCE
ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 90 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS, 86.00 FEET;THENCE
ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT OF 102 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 17 SECONDS, 101.50 FEET,
MORE OR LESS TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF WEST MEADOW DRIVE; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO
THE RIGHT OF 38 DEGREES 13 MINUTES 30 SECONDS AND ALONG THE SAID NORTHERLY LINE
264.42 FEET TO A POINT OF CURVE; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE
AND ALONG A CURVE TO THE LEFT HAVING A RADIUS OF 525.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 06 DEGREES 23 MINUTES 12 SECONDS, AN ARC DISTANCE OF 58.52 FEET TO TI-�
WESTERLY LINE OF LOT C; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT OF 84 DEGREES 48
MINUTES 35 SECONDS AND ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF LOT C, 251.25 FEET TO THE
SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO. 6; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT
OF 90 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS AND ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE
300.00 FEET; MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING.
PARCEL 2:
TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS TO AND FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
A TRIANGULAR EASEMENT AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF A PART OF LOT A OF AMENDED MAP
OF SHEET 1 AND 2 OF VAIL VILLAGE FILING NO. 2, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF
COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 7, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80
WEST OF THE SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE SOUTHERLY AND ALONG TNE EAST L1NE
OF SAID SECTION 7, 39.20 FEET TO THE SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY
NO. 6; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RtGHT OF 100 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 47 SECONDS AND
ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE, 178.09 FEET TO THE NORTHtiVEST CORNER OF SAID
Our Order No. VC268855-9
• LEGAL DESCRIPTION
LOT A AND TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING, THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF A
100 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 47 SECONDS AND ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A, 65.44
FEET; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 90 DEGREES 00 MINUTES 00 SECONDS, 5.00
FEET; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFI' OF 63 DEGREES 29 MINUTES 51 SECONDS, 65.86
FEET TO THE NORTH LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 105
DEGREES 48 MINUTES 22 SECONDS AND ALONG SAID NORTH LINE OF 35.00 FEET TO THE
TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
ALS 0,
TOGETHER WITH AN EASEMENT FOR INGRESS AND EGRESS TO AND FROM SUBJECT PROPERTY
DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
A TRIANGULAR EASEMENT AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF A PART OF LOT A OF AMENDED MAP
OF SHEET 1 OF 2 OF VAIL VII.LAGE FILING NO. 2, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF
COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
COMMENCING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SECTION 7,TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 80
WEST OF SIXTH PRINCIPAL MERIDIAN; THENCE SOUTHERLY AND ALONG THE EAST LINE OF
SAID SECTION 7, 39.20 FEET TO THE SOUTI3 RIGHT OF WAY LINE OF U.S. HIGHWAY NO.
6; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT OF 100 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 47 SECONDS AND
ALONG SAID SOUTH RIGHT OF WAY LINE 178.09 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID
LOT A;THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE LEFT OF 100 DEGREES 41 MINUTES 47 SECOND3 AND
ALONG THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT A, 95.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;
THENCE ON A CURVE TO THE LEFT, HAVING A RADIUS OF 15.00 FEET, A CENTRAL ANGLE
OF 70 DEGREES 18 MINUTES 45 SECONDS, AN ARC LENGTH OF 18.08 FEET TO A POINT OF
TANGENT; THENCE ALONG SAID TANGENT, 58.05 FEET; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT
OF 176 DEGREES 25 MINUTES 33 SECONDS, 67.00 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID LOT
A; THENCE ON AN ANGLE TO THE RIGHT OF 73 DEGREES 53 MINUTES 12 SECONDS AND
ALONG SAID WEST LINE 15.00 FEET; MORE OR LESS, TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING,
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO.
NOTE: THE FINAL POLICY DOES NOT IN ANY WAY GUAR.ANTEE OR TNSURE THE DIMENSIONS
OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED LAND, THE LEGAL DESCRIPTTON IS DERTVED FROM THE CHAIN OF
TITLE AND ONLY AN ACCURATE SURVEY CAN DETERMINE THE DIMENSIONS.
ALTA COMMITMENT
• Schedule B -Section 1
(Requirements) Our Order No. VC268855-9
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
Item (a) Payment to or for the account of the grantors or mortgagors of the full consideration for the estate or
interest to be insured.
Item (b) Proper instrument(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for record,
to-wit:
Item(c) Payment of all taxes, charges or assessments levied and assessecl against the subject premises which are due
and payable.
Item(d) Additional requirements,if any disclosed below:
1. EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS,CONDITIONS AND
PROVISIONS OF EASEMENT RECORDED AUGUST 28, 1991 IN BOOK 561 AT PAGE 54
HAVE NOT BEEN RENEWED.
2. RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED JANUARY 24, 2001 FROM DORAMAR HOTELS, INC.,
A DELAWARE CORPORATION TO THE PUBLIC TRUSTEE OF EAGLE COUNTY FOR THE USE
OF PEAK NATIONAL BANK TO SECURE THE SUM OF$2,225,748.07 RECORDED JANUARY
26, 2001, UNDER RECEPTION NO. 748967.
MODIFICATION AGREEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH SAID DEED OF TRUST WAS RECORDBD
NOVEMBER 30, 2001 UNDER RECEPTION NO. 777034.
3. EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT THE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND
PROVISIONS OF THE TOWN OF VAIL TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SATISFIED.
4. WARRANTY DEED FROM DORAMAR HOTELS, INC., A DELAWARE CORPORATION TO NICOLLET
ISLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A MINNESOTA CORPORATION CONVEYING SUBJECT
PROPERTY.
NOTE: SAID DOCUMENT MUST BE EXECUTED BY THE PRESIDENT, V10E-PRESIDENT OR
SECRETARY OF THE CORPORATION. IF AN ASSISTANT VICE-PRESIDENT OR ASSISTANT
SECRETARY EXECUTES SAID DOCUMENT, A CORPORATE RESOLUTION MUST BE PROVIDED
TO LAND T1TLE GIVING SAID ASSISTANT AUTHORIZATION.
NOTE: ANY BUYER DOCUMENTS MUST BE EXECUTED BY THE PRESIDENT, VICE-PRESIDENT
OR SECRETARY OF THE CORPORATION. IF AN ASSISTANT VICE-PRESIDENT OR
ASSISTANT SECRETARY EXECUTES SA1D DOCUMENT, A CORPORATE RESOLUTION MUST BE
ALTA COMMITMENT
� Schedule B - Section 1
(Requirements) Our Order No. VC268855-9
Continued:
PROVIDED TO LAND TITLE GNING SAID ASSISTANT AUTHORIZATION.
********** NOTICE OF FEE CHANGE, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 2002 **********
Pursuant to Colorado Revised Statute 30-10-421, "The county clerk and recorder shall collect a surcharge of$1.00 for
each document received for recording or filing in lus or her office. The surcharge shall be in addition to any other
fees permitted by statute."
ALTA COMMITMENT
• Schedule B - Section 2
(Exceptions) Our Order No. VC268855-9
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed
of to the satisfaction of the Company:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easements, or claims of easements, not shown by the public records.
3. Discrepancies, conflicts in boundary lines, shortage in area, encroachments, and any facts which a correct survey and
inspection of the premises would clisclose and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or material theretofore or hereafrer furnished, unposed by law and
not shown by the public records.
5. Defects, liens, encumbrances, adverse claims or other matters, if any, created, first appearing in the public records or
attaching subsequent to the effective date hereof but prior to the date the proposed insured acquires of record for
value the estate or interest or mortgage thereon covered by this Commitment.
6. Taxes or special assessments which are not shown as existing liens by the public records.
7. Liens for unpaid water and sewer charges, if any.
8. In addidon, the owner's policy will be subject to the mortgage, if any, noted in Section 1 of Schedule B hereof.
9. RIGHT OF PROPRIETOR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRACT AND REMOVE HIS ORE
THEREFROM SHOULD THE SAME BE FOUND TO PENETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES
AS RESERVED IN U1vITED STATES PATENT RECORDED SBPTEMBER 04, 1923, IN BOOK
93 AT PAGE 98.
10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DITCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY THE AUTHORITY OF THE
UNITED STATES AS RESERVED IN UNITED STATES PATENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 04,
1923, IN BOOK 93 AT PAGE 98.
11. RESTRICTIVE COVENANTS WHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER CLAUSE,
BUT OMITTING ANY COVENANT OR RESTRICTION BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RELIGION,
SEX, HANDICAP, FAMILIAL STATUS OR NATIONAL ORIGIN UNLESS AND ONLY TO THE
EXTENT THAT SAID COVENANT(A) IS EXEMPT UNDER CHAPTER 42, SECTION 3607 OF
THE UNITED STATES CODE�R(B)RELATES TO HANDICAP BUT DOES NOT
DISCRIMINATE AGAINST HANDICAP PERSONS, AS CONTAINED IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED
JANUARY 09, 1963, IN BOOK 174 AT PAGE 431.
12. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT AS GRANTED TO THE MOUNTAIN STATES TELEPHONE AND
TELEGRAPH COMPANY, A COLORADO CORPORATION IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER
20, 1969 IN BOOK 216 AT PAGE 211.
ALTA COMMITMENT
• Schedule B - Section 2
(Exceptions) Our Order No. VC268855-9
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed
of to the satisfaction of the Company:
13. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT AS GRANTED TO THE MOUNTAIN STATES TELEPHONE AND
TELEGRAPH COMPANY, A COLORADO CORPORATION IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER
20, 1969 IN BOOK 216 AT PAGE 212.
14. EASEMENT AS GRANTED TO TO GULF OIL CORPORATION IN DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER
28, 1967 IN BOOK 211 AT PAGE 666.
15. EXISTING LEASES AND TENANCIE3.
16. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF CABLE TELEVISION EASEMENT AND
MAINTENANCE AGREEMENT RECORDED NOVEMBER O5, 1993 IN BOOK 624 AT PAGE 152.
17. TERMS, CONDITIONS AND PROVISIONS OF COMMERCIAL CONTRACT TO BUY AND SELL
REAL ESTATE RECORDED JUNE 04, 2002 AT RECEPTION NO. 797610.
.
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY
� DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-122, notice is hereby given that:
A) The subject real property may be located in a special taxing district.
B) A Certificate of Taxes Due listing each taxing jurisdiction may be obtained from the County
Treasurer's authoriaed agent.
C) The information regarding special districts and the boundaries of such districts may be obtained from
the Board of County Commissioners, the County Clerk and Recorder, or the County Assessor.
Note: Effective September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 requires that all documents received for recording or filing
in the clerk and recorder's office shall contain a top margin of at least one inch and a left, right and bottom
margin of at least one half of an inch. The clerk and recorder may refuse to record or file any document that
does not conform, except that, the requirement for the top margin shall not apply to documents using forms
on which space is provided for recording or filing information at the top margin of the document.
Note: Colorado Division of Insurance Regulations 3-5-1, Paragraph C of Article VII requires that "Every
title entity shall be responsible for all matters which appear of record prior to the time of recording
whenever the tide entity conducts the closing and is responsible for recording or filing of legal
documents resulting from the transaction which was closed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee
Company conducts the closing of the insured transaction and is responsible for recording the
legal documents from the transaction, exception number 5 will not appear on the Owner's Tifle
Policy and the Lenders Policy when issued.
Note: Affirmative mechanic's lien protection for the Owner may be available(typically by deletion
of Exception no. 4 of Schedule B, Section 2 of the Commitment from the Owner's Policy to be
issued)upon compliance with the following conditions:
A)The land described in Schedule A of this commitment must be a single family residence which
includes a condominium or townhouse unit.
B)No labor or materials have been fiunished by mechanics or material-men for purposes of
construction on the land described in Schedule A of this Commitment within the past 6 months.
C)The Company must receive an appropriate afficlavit indemnifying the Company against un-filed
mechanic's and material-men's liens.
D)The Company must receive payment of the appropriate premium.
E) If there has been construction, improvements or major repairs undertaken on the property to be purchased
within six months prior to the Date of the Commitment, the requirements to obtain coverage
for unrecorded liens will include: disclosure af certain construction information; financial information
as to the seller, the builder and or the contractor; payment of the appropriate premium fuliy
executed Indemnity Agreements satisfactory to the company, and, any additional requirements
as may be necessary after an examination of the aforesaid information by the Company.
No coverage will be given under any circumstances for labor or material for which the insured
has contracted for or agreed to pay.
Note: Pursuant to CRS 10-11-123, notice is hereby given:
A)That there is recorded evidence that a minerxl estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise
conveyed from the snrface estate and that there is a substantial likelihood that a third party
holds so�ue or all interest in oil, �as, ott�er a�inerals, or geothermal energy in the property; and
B)That such niineral estate may include the ri��ht to enter and use the property without the
surface owner's perniission.
This notice applies to owner's policy commitments ce3ntaining a mineral severance instrument
exception, or exceptions, in Schedule B, Secti�in 2.
Notfiin�� herein contxined will be deemed n� uhli��ate the cumpany to provide any uf the coverabes
referred tu hrrein unless the above conditic�n� ar� fiilly satistied.
Form DISCLOSURE a/02/ ver 4_0 ,
From Land Title Guarantee Mon 14 Oct 2002 09:37:30 AM MUI rage 1 or lu
, � .
LandTitie(�awar�tee Gbrr�any
CLST�NIB3 aSTFi Bllil
Date: 10-142002 Our Order Ninnber: VC277788
Property Address:
AMOCO-ALPINE STANDARD
LAND T1T[E GUARANTEE COMPANY HB DEVELOPMENT CO.
108 S.FRONTAGE RD.W.�i203 O�TE TABOR CENTER
P.Q BO%357 120019TEi ST.N570
VAII.,CO 81657 DENVER,CO 8020Z
Atfi: Dazdelle Soola Ath�: THOMAS,L BRINR
Phone: 470-496-2251 P}wne: 303-825-7800
Fax: 970-476-4534 Fax: 303-825-7801
EMail:dcooltzCa�ltgc.com Sent Via Fax
MOELLENTINE LAND CO�ANY,LLC JACOBS CHAS6 FRICK KLEIIdKOPF&I�LLEY LLC
GO LANTlS EYEVVF.AR 105017TH 5T.#1500
4615TEi AVENUE DENVER,CO 80265
NEW YORK,NY 10017 Atnn: ROBERT P.DETRICK
Attn: MR LON MOEI.I.ENTINE Phom: 303-685-4800
Phone: 112-561-7501 Fax: 303-685-4869
Fax: 212-561-7590 Sent Via Fax
Sent Via Fax
Fortn�1V�Y
t
r',
From Land (it le c,uarantee rvion 14 uc.� �u�� u�.�� .�� .v., ,.,�� , �y� � .., _..
� .
LandTitle C�,arantee Oorrpar�y
�taavracrs
Date: 10-142002
Our Order Number: VC277788
Property Address:
AMOCO-ALPINE STANDARD
BuyerBorrower:
NICOLLET ISLA.ND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A MINNF�OTA CORPORATION
Seller/Owner:
MOELLENTINE LAND COIVIPANY, LI,� A CONNECI'ICUT LIlVIITED LIABILTTY COIVIPANY
If you have any inquiries or require further assistance, please contact one of the nwnbers below:
For Closing Assistance: For Title Assistance:
Danielle Stollz Vail Tttle Dept
108 S. FRONTAGE RD. W. #203 Itoger Avila
P.O. BOX 357 108 S. FRONTAGE RD. W. #203
VAIL, CO 81657 P.Q BOX 357
Phone: 970-476-2251 VAII,, CO 81657
Fax: 970-476-4534 Pho�: 970-476-2251
EMail: dstoltz@itgc.com Faxc 970-4?6-4534
EMaih ravila@Itgc.com
l�eed a map or directions for your upcoming closing? Check out Land Tide's web site at www.ltgc.com
for directions to an of our 40 off'ice locations.
��������
Alta Ownets Policy 10-17-92(Reissue Rate) TBD
Deletion of Genetal Exceptio� 1-3(Ow�r) TBD
Deletion of Genecal Exception 4(Owner) TBD
'I�x Repoit SCH#R008355 has been ordered�m Eagle Cty $15_00
T�7i'AL Si5_o0
Fon� ooNTac2 TEiANK YOU FOR YOUR ORDERt
Frc� Land Title Guarantee Mon 14 uct [uu� uy:si:su �viinui ��y� � �� y�
� .
Chicago'Iltle Instiu�ance Comgany
ALTA COMMITMENT
Our Order No. VC277788
Schedule A Cust Ref.:
Property Address:
AMOCO-ALP�TE STANDARD
1. Effective Date: Septetnber 26, 2002 at 5:00 P.M.
2. Policy to be Issued, and Proposed Insured:
"ALTA"Owner's Policy 10-17-92
Proposed Incured:
NICOLLEI'LSLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, A NIINNESOTA CORPORATION
3. The estate or interest in the land described or refened to in this Commitment and covered herein is:
A Fee 5impte
4. Ti[le to[he estate or interest covered herein Ls at the effective date hereof vested in:
bIOELLENTINE LAND COMPANY, LLC, A CONNECTICUT LINIITED LIABIIdTY COMPANY
5. The land referred to in this Comtnitment is described as fotlows:
SEE ATTACHED PAGE(S) FOR LEGAL DESCRIPITON
F.rom Land Title Guarantee Mon 14 Oct 20Q2 09:37:30 AM MDi rage 4 oi i�
Our Order No. VCZ7778S
(R'.,al ��Q�
A PAAT OF LOT A OF AIVIENDED MAP OF SHEET 1 OF 2 OF VAIL VII.,LAGE, SECOND FII,ING,
COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT THE NORTHWFSTERLY CORNER OF SAID LOT A; THFNCE SOUTH'79 DEGREES 41
MINUTES 13 SECONDS EAST AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A, A DISTANCE
OF 152.65 FEET TO THE I�ORTHF.�\ST CORNER OF SAID LOT A; 'I�iENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREE'.S 23
NIINUTES 00 SECONDS EAST ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A, A DISTANCE OF
125.00 FEET;TFiENCE 1\ORTH?4 DEGRg'S 16 MINU'I'� 12 SECONDS WFST A DbSTAl\CE OF
156.13 FEET TO A PO�iT OF IlVTERSECTION WTTH Tf�WFSTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A;
T�NCE NORTH 0 DEGREES 23 1VID�TUTES 00 SECONDS WEST AND ALONG SAID WESTERLY LINE
OF SAID LOT A, A DISTANCE OF 110.00 FEET TO TKE TRUE POINT OF BEGIIVNI�i iG, COUNTY
OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, TOGEI'FiER W1TH AN FASEIV�NT FOR INGRF.SS AND EGRFSS
BEING A PART OF LOT A OF AIVIFNDED MAP OF SHEET 1 OF 2 VAIL VII�LAGE, SECOND
FILING, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS
FOLLOWS: COMN�TCING AT Tf�NORT'f�ASTERLY CORNER OF LOT A;'I'�I�1TCE SOUTH 0
DEGRFE�S 23 MIIVUTES 00 SECONDS EAST AND ALONG THE EASTERLY LL�JE OF SAID LOT A, A
DISTANCE OF 125.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING;THIIVCE NORTH 73 DEGREES
30 MIlVUTES 12 SECONDS WEST A DLSTANCE OF 156.L3 FEET'I'O A FOINT OF IlVTERSECITON
WTI'H THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID LOT A; THENCE SOUTH 0 DEGREES 23 MQVUTES 00
SECONDS ESAT AND ALONG WFST'ERI.Y LINE A DISTANCE OF 29.15 FF.�T;THENCE SOUTH 73
DEGREES 30 MINUTES 12 SECONDS EAST A DISTANCE OF 156.13 FEET TO A POINT OF
INT�RSECTTON WTI�I TI�EASTERZ.Y LINE OF SAID LOT A; TFffiVCE NORTH 0 DEGREF.S 23
MWUTES 00 SECONDS WEST AND ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE A DISTANCE OF 29.15 FEET
TO TI�TRUE POINT OF BEGIIVIVING, COUNTY OF EAGLE, STATE OF COLORADO.
Frem Land �lt�2 �uaraniee IYIOII 19 UCl LUVL U7.�i .�u r�in iri�i � ..y.. .. .., ,.,
�' .
ALTA COMMITMEN T
Schedule B - Secbon 1
(Requirements) Our Order No. VC277785
The following are the requirements to be complied with:
Item(a)Payment to or for the accoimt of the grantors or mortgagors of the full conside�ation for the estate or
interest to be insured.
Item(b)Proper instnanent(s) creating the estate or interest to be insured must be executed and duly filed for recorci,
b-wi�
Item(c)Payment of all taxes, chat�ges or assessmenfs levied and assessed against the subject premi5es which are due
a�p�yable.
Ibem(d)AddiHotml req�rirements, if any disclosed below:
1. CERTIFTCATE FROM THE SECRETARY OE ST'ATE OR OTHER APPROPRIATE OFFTCER OF
NQNNFSOTA, SHOWIlVG THAT NICOLLET ISIAND DEVELOPIVIENT COMPANY, A 14IINNESOTA
CORPORATTON L'S A DULY ORGANIZED AND EXLSTPi TG CORPORATION UNDER T'HE LAWS
OF Mni TNESOTA.
2. ARTICLFS OF ORGANIZATION FOR MOELLENTIl�TE LAND COMPANY, LLC,A CONNECTICUT
LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY MUST BE FILED WITH THE SECRETARY OF STATE. A
COPY STAMPED '�'Q,ED"BY THE SECREI'ARY OF STATE MUST BE FURNLSHED TO LAND
TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY.
3. RELEASE OF DEED OF TRUST DATED DECF.MBER 21, 1998 FROM MOELLIIVTINE LAND
COMPANY, LLC, A CONNECTICUT LIlVIITED LIABILITY COMPANY TO THE PUBLIC
TAUSTEE OF EAGLE COUNTY FOR THE USE OF DOUGLAS J. STERKEL AND KA.TRINA A.
STERKEL TO SECURE THE SUM OF$3,500,000.00 RECORDED�iNUARY 21, 1999,
UNDER RECEPTION NO. 684236.
4. EVIDENCE SATISFACTORY TO THE COMPANY THAT TfIE TERMS, CONDITIONS AND
PROYISIONS OF Tf�TOWN OF VAIL TRANSFER TAX HAVE BEEN SAT6FIED.
5. WARRANTY DEED FROM MOELLIIVTIlVE LAND COMPANY, LLC,A CONNECTTCUT LIMITED
LIABILTI'Y COMPANY TO NICOLLET LSI.,AND DEVELOPMENT CONIPANY, A D'IINNESOTA
CORPORA.T'ION CONVEYIlVG SUBjECT PROPERTY.
THE FOLLOWIlVG DELETIONS/MODIFICATIONS ARE FOR TFIE OWNER'S POLICY.
NOTE:ITEMS 1-3 OF THE GINERAL EXCEPTIONS WB,L BE DELETED UPON RECEIPT OF
AN APPROVED SURVEY. MATTERS DLSCLOBED BY SAID SURVEY MAY BE ADDED TO
Fr4m Land Title Guarantee �on 14 uc� c�uc �7.�� .�� w�� �.,�� , �y� � -• --
V �
ALTA COMMITMENT
5chedule B- Section 1
(Requirements) Our Order No. VC277788
Continued:
SCfiEDULE B-2 HERFAF.
UPON TI-iE APPROVAL OF Tf�COMPANY AND TF�RECEIPI'OF A NOTARI7.ED FINAL LIEN
AN'FIDAVIT, ITEM NO. 4 OF THE GENERAL EXCEPTIONS WII�L BE AMENDED AS
FOLLOWS:
TTF.M NO. 4 OF TE�GENERAL EXCEPTIONS�S DELETED AS TO ANY LIENS OR FUTURE
I.IIIVS R�SULTIlVG FROM�VORK OR MATERIAL FURNLSHED AT Tf-iE REQIJFST OF
MOII,LENTINE LAND COMPANY, LLC,A CONNECTICUT LIlVIITED LIABILTTY COMPANY.
CHICAGO TTIT.E INSURANCE COMPANY SHALL HAVE NO LIABILITY FOR ANY LIIIVS
AR6IlVG FROM WORK OR MATER�AL FURl�ISHED AT THE REQUEST OF NICOLLET 15LAND
DEVII.OPIVIENT COMPANY, A MINi\'ESOTA CORPORATION.
NOTE:ITEM 5 OF THE GENERAL EXCEP'IZONS WII.L BE DII ETED IF LAND TITi.E
RECORDS T'EIE DOC[JMENTS RF�QUIRED iJNDER SCHEDULE B-1.
NOTE: UPON PROOF OF PAYNIFIVT OF ALL TAXFS, ITEM 6 WII,�.BE AMENDED TO READ:
TAXES AND ASSESSMENTS FOR T'f�YEAR 2002 AND SUBSEQUENT YEARS.
TI�1YI 7 UNDER SCHEDULE B-2 WII,L BE DELETED UPON PROOF T'HAT THE WATER AND
SEWER CHARGES ARE PAID UP TO DATE
**********NO'I'ICE OF FEE CHANGE, EFFECTIVE SEPTEMBER 1, 2002 '�*"'��'�****
Putsuant to Colorado Revised Sfahibe 30-10-421, "The coimty clerk and recot�der shall collect a swzhatge of$1.00 for
each docwnent received for recording or fiting in his or her o$ice. The su�chatge shalt be in addition to any other
fees pernutted by statute.•,
Fr�m Land Title Guarantee Mon 14 Oct 200z 09:37:jU AM MUI raye � u� ��
ALTA COMMITMENT
Schedule B-Section 2
(E�tceptions) Our Order No. VCZ?7788
The policy or poticies to be issued will contain exceptions to the fo(lowing unless the same are disposed
of to the satisfaction of the Company:
1. Rights or claims of parties in possession not shown by the public records.
2. Easement�, or claims of easements, not shown by the public mcords.
3. Discmp�ncies, conflicts in bo�lary lin�s, shortage in area, encroactunents, and miy facts which a correct survey and
impecaon of the premases woutd disclose and which are not shown by the public records.
4. Any lien, or right to a lien, for services, labor or roaterial theretofom or hereafter furn�shed, imposed by law and
not shown by the public records.
5. Defects, tieiu, encianbrat►ces, advetse claitns or other matUeis, if any, created, fitst a�earing in the public recot+cls or
at�ching subsequent to the effective date heceof but prior to the date the proposed insured acqirires of record for
vatue the cctate or interest or�rigage thereon covered by this Comcnihnent
6. 'Ihxes or special aSSessments which are not shown as exisbtig l3ens by tlie public records.
7. Iiens for unpaid wa6er and sewer charges, if siry.
S. In additlon, the ownet's policy wIll be subject to tl�e mortgage, if atry, no�d in Sectlon 1 of Schedule B hereoL
9. RIGHT OF PROPR[E'I'OR OF A VEIN OR LODE TO EXTRAGT AND REMOVE FiTS ORE
THEREFROM SHOULD THE SANIE BE FOUND TO PE1�-ETRATE OR INTERSECT THE PREMISES
AS RESERVED IN UNTTED STATFS PATENT RECORDED SEPTF.MBER 04, 1933, IN BOOK
93 AT PAGE 98.
10. RIGHT OF WAY FOR DTTCHES OR CANALS CONSTRUCTED BY TEIE AUTHORITY OF TI�
UNITED STATES,�S RESERVED IlV L'NITED STATES PATENT RECORDED SEPTEMBER 04,
1923, IN BOOK 93 AT PAGE 98.
11. RESTRICTIYE COVENANTS VVHICH DO NOT CONTAIN A FORFEITURE OR REVERTER CLAUS'E,
BUT OMITTING RESTRICI'IONS, IF ANY, BASED ON RACE, COLOR, RII,IGION, OR
NATIONAL ORIGIN, A5 CONTAINID IN II�STRUMENT RECORDID JANUARY 09, 1963, IN
BOOK 174 AT PAGE 431.
12. TERMS, CONDITIONS A1��D PROVISIONS OF RESERVATION OF EASEMIIVT IN WARRANTY
DEED RECORDED SEPTEMBER 23, 1969 Il\BOOK 216 AT PAGE 48.
13. RIGHT OF WAY EASIIVIENT AS GRANTED TO TF�NiOUNTAIl�i STATES TELEPHONE AND
TELEGRAPH COMPANY, A COLORADO COR.PORATION IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER
20, 1969 IN BOOK 216 AT PAGE 211_
Fram Land Title Guarantee Mon 14 uct LUUL Uy:1/:SU Am mui raye o u� l�
r
ALTA COMMITMENT
5chedule B - Secaon 2
(Exceptions) Our Order No. VC277788
The policy or policies to be issued will contain exceptions to the following unless the same are disposed
of to the satisfaction of the Company:
14. RIGHT OF WAY EASEMENT AS GRANTED TO T[�MOUNTAIN STAT'ES TELEPHONE AND
TELEGRAPH COMPANY, A COLORADO CORPORATION IN INSTRUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER
20, 1969 IN BOOK Z16 AT PAGE 212.
15. TERMS, CONDITIONS Ar� PROVISIONS OF RELEASE AND RIGHT OF ENTR.Y AGREE.�IENT
RECORDID DECIIVIBER 17, 1993 IN BOOK 627 AT PAGE 865.
16. TERMS, CONDTCIONS AND PROVLSIONS OF MEMORANDUM OF OPTION TO LEASE RECORDED
DECEMBER 17, 1993 IN BOOK 627 AT PAGE 866.
17. EX�STING LEASFS AND TIIVANCIES.
Fr�m Land Title Guarantee Mon 14 ucL LUUL u7:si:su H�a �nu� �ay� � �, ��
LAND TITLE GUARANTEE COMPANY
DISCLOSURE STATEMENTS
Note: Pursuat►t to CRS 10-11-122, nobce is hereby given thaC
A) The subject rea!pmpeN.y may be loca�ed in a special taxing district
B) A Certi�cate of'Paxes Due listing each�ng jurisdicdon may be obtained from the Cowity
'I�easurer's sutlwdzed agent
C) The inforn�adon reganiing special districts arni the bo�mdaries of such districts may be obtained from
the Board oi Coimty Commissionecs, the Coimty Clerk and Recorder, or the Coimty Assessor.
Note:Effecave September 1, 1997, CRS 30-10-406 req�rires that all docwnentc received for recording or�iling
in the clerk and recorder's office shall conbain a top tnargin of at least one inch and a lef� right and battom
tna�gin of at leasf one half of an inch The cleiit and recorder may refuse to record or file any docwnent tI�at
does not confonn, except that, the req�rement for the top ma�gin shall not apply to doc�nts using fornis
on which space is provided for recording or filing inforn�atlon at tl�e top maigin of the docimnent
Note:Colotado Division of Insurance Regulatiot�s 3-5-1, Paragraph C of Acticle VII reqirires that"E�ery
title entlty shall be responsible for all�tbets which appear oi record prlor to the time of recording
wt�enever the dtle et�ily conducts the closing and is responsible for�ecording or fiimg of legal
docwt�ents resultlng from the hat�sac6on which was ctosed". Provided that Land Title Guarantee
Company conducts the closing of the insiu�ed transaction and is responciMe tor recorciing the
legal docianentg from the h�a�actlon, eaecep6on raunber 5 wiil not appear on the Owner's TSfle
Poticy and the Lenders Policy when issued.
Note:AtTinnative mechanic's Iten protection for the OVVner may be available(typically by delebon
of�cception no.4 of Schediile B, Sectlon 2 oi the Co�hnent from the OwneYs Policy to be
issued)upon compliance with the followi�conditions:
A)The land desciibed in Schedule A of this com�:ntment must be a single family residence which
includes a condominiwn or bownhouse iuu�
B)No tabor or maberlals have been fiunished by mechanic4 or matedal-men for purposes of
cot�ttvcfion on the land described in Schedule A of this Commihnent wittrin the pest 6 months.
C)The Cot�any m�t receive an appropriate affidavit indemnifying the Company sgainst wrfiled
mechanic's and material-tnen's lienc.
D) The Compeny m�t ceceive p�yment of the appropriate premiim�.
E) If there tias been conshvction, im�rovements or major regairs imdertaken on the property to be put�hased
within six monttB prior to the Da6e of the Com�aihnent, the req�rirementc to obtain coverage
for tmrecoriled tiet�wzli inchxle: disclosure of certain conShuc6on informaaon,financial infocmation
as to the seller, the buiider and or the contractor,p�yment of the appropriate prexnium futly
executed Indettn►ity Agreements satlsfactory to the company, and, �y addidonal req�irements
as may be necessary after an exatni�tion of the aforesaid inforn�ation by the Compeny.
No coverage will be given iu�der atry circ�m�stances for tabor or materiat for which tl�e ituured
has conhacted for or agreed to p�y.
Note:Rusuant to CRS 10-11-1?3, noace is hereby given:
A)That there is recotded evidence that a minernl estate has been severed, leased, or otherwise
conveyed from the siaface estate and that there is a subst�ntla!►ikelihood thet a third pa�ty
holds some or all interest in oil, gas, othcr minerals, or geothcrnmt ener�y in the propecty; and
B) 'Itiat such minerat esmte may include the right to enter and use the propecty without the
surface owne►'s pernussion
This nolice applies to owner's policy comtrritinents containing a ririneral severance ins�mient
excepflon, or exceptlons, in Schedule B, Sectlon 2.
Nothing herein contained wilt be deemed to obligate the comp�ny to provide any of the coverages
reierred to hecein imless the above conditions are fiilly satis�ied.
Eo�DLS�lA6�tE 9/02/ ver 4.0
From Land Title Guarantee Mon 14 Oct 2002 09:37:30 AM MUI rage tu or lu
JOINT NOTICE OF PRIVACY POLICY
Fidelity Nationat�nancial Group of Companies/Chicago Title Insurance Company and
Land Titte Guatantee Company
July l, 2001
We recogniu and respect the pdvacy expectatiot�s of today's consmneis and the requ�remenCs of applicable fedetal and
state privacy laws. We believe that�nald you aware oi how we u5e youc�wn-public persona(infonnatlon('Personal
Inionnaflon'�, and to whom it is disclose� will form the b�sis for a relabonship ot huct between us and the public
that we serve. Tl�is Pcivacy Statement provides that explenation, We reserve the right to change this Privacy
Statement irom time to tIme consistent mth applicabie privacy laws.
In the course of our business, we may collect Personal Information about you from the following sources:
* From applicatio� or other forins we receive from you or your authorized mpresentative;
* From your hamacaons with, or from the services being perfor�ned by, us, onr a$iliates, or otheis;
* Frnm o�internet web sites;
* FYom the public recoMs mait�ined by govenunental entities that we either obtain directly from those
enHtles, or irom o�a$iflatcs or otl�ers; and
'� FYom consimtier or other repo�ing agencies.
Oar Policies Regatding the Protection of the Confidentiality and Security of Your Personal Information
We maintainphysical electrotric and proceduial safeguards to protect your Personal Infortnation irom imautlmrized
�cess or intti�on. V�e flmit access bu the Pexsonal Infom�tion only to those employees who need such access in
connecHon with providing products or services to you or for o t}�er legiamate business purposes.
Our Poltcies and Pcactices Regarding the Sharing of Your Personal Information
We may share youu�Personai Information with our aHiliates, such as i�uurance compaTUes, agent�, and oEher real
estate settlement secvice providets. We also may disclose your Pecsonai Information
* to agents, brokets or representatives to provide pou with services you have reqaested;
* to third-party contractors or service providers vrho provide secvices or perform marketing or other
ftmctioiu on our behali; and
* to others with whom we enter into joint marketing agreements for productc or services that we believe you
may 6nd of inOeresL
In addition, �re vv�tl disclose your Personal Infonnadon when you direct or give us pennission, when we are required
by law to do so, or when we suspect fraudulent or criminal activities. We also may disclose your Petsonal
Information when otherwise pernutied by applicable prtvac�taws such as, for example, when disclosure is needed
to enforce our righfs arising out of atry agreement, transachon or relaaonship with you.
One of the irnpotfant cesponsi�lities of some oi our affiliated companies is to record docwnents in the public
domain. Such doc�nents may contain your Persoml Infom�on
Right to Access Your Personal Information and Abitity to Correct Errors Or Request Changes Or Deletion
Cettain slabes afCord you the right to access your Personal Infonnabon aitd, w�der cet�in circ.�hances, to 6nd out
to whom your Peisonal Infomiatlon has been disclosed. Also, certain states afford you the right to rern,PCt
correctlon, axnet�nent or deletfon of your Petsonal Infortnation. We t�esecve the rlgh� where pennitted by law, to
charge a reasonaWe fee to cover the costs trnurred in responding to such requests.
All requesls subtnitbed to the�delity Nationsl�x�ancial Group of Companies/Chicago'I�tle InSUrance Cotnpany
shall be in writing, atxl delivered to tlie follow�ng adciress:
Privacy Compliance Of6cer
�detity National FSnancial, Inc.
4050 Calle Res1, Suite 220
Santa Barb�ra, CA 93110
Multiple Products or Services
ff we provide you with more that�one 6nancial�roduct or secvice, you may receive more t}►an one grivacy notice
from us. We apotogiu for any inconvenience ttus may cause you.
Farm PRIV.P(]L.C�iZ
T���� ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPEh°�Y
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Vail Town Code on
March 10, 2003, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of: .
An request for a final review of a Conditional Use Permit pursuant to Section 12-7B-5, Permitted
and Conditional Uses; Above Second Floor, Vail Town Code, to allow for the elimination of an �
existing dwelling unit in the Gore Creek Plaza Building, located at 193 Gore Creek Dr./Gore Creek
Plaza Condominiums, Block 5B, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Rod and Beth Slifer
Planner: Warren Campbell
A request for a final review of a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed
amendment to the Vail Land Use Plan; a request for a final review of a recommendation to the Vail
Town Council of a proposed amendment to the Vail Village Master Plan; a request for a final review
of a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a text amendment to the Vail Town Code, Title
12,Zoning Regulations,to allow for the creation of a new zone district, Ski Base Recreation 2; and
a request for a worksession to discuss the following applications: a recommendation to the Vail
Town Council of a text amendment to Section 12-7B-13, Density Control, Zoning Regulations; a
request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed rezoning of Lots P3 & J,
Block 5A, Vail Village 5th Filing from Public Accommodation zone district (PA) to Parking zone
district(P); a request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the proposed zoning of an
unplatted parcel of land commonly referred to as the "trade parcel" and Lots 1 & 2, Mill Creek
Subdivision to Ski Base Recreation II zone district; a request for a minor subdivision, pursuant to
Title 13, Subdivision Regulations, Vail Town Code, to allow for the relocation of the common
property line between Lots P3&J, Block 5A,Vail Village 5th Filing; a request for a recommendation
to the Vail Town Code of a proposed major subdivision, pursuant to Section 13-3, Major
Subdivision, Vail Town Code, to allow for the platting of the "trade parcel"; a request for a
conditional use permit, pursuant to Chapter 16, Title 12, of the Vail Town Code, to allow for a
"private off-street vehicle parking facility and public park"to be constructed and operated on Lots
P3&J, Block 5A,Vail Village 5th Filing; a request for an exterior alteration or modification, pursuant
to Section 12-76-7, Exterior Alterations or Modifications,Vail Town Code,to allow for an addition to
the Lodge at Vail; a request for a variance from Section 12-21-10, Development Restricted, Vail
Town Code, pursuant to Chapter 17,Variances,Zoning Regulations,to allow for the construction of
multiple-family dwelling units on slopes in excess of 40%; and a request for the establishment of an
approved development plan to facilitate the construction of Vail's Front Door, and setting forth
details in regard thereto. (A more complete metes and bounds legal description is available at the
Town of Vail Community Development Department)
Applicant: Vail Resorts, represented by Jay Peterson
Planner: George Ruther
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for the establishment of Special
Development District No. 37, pursuant to Section 12-9A-6, Development Plan,Vail Town Code,to
allow for the redevelopment of the Tivoli Lodge, located at 386 Hanson Ranch Road/Lot E, Block 2,
Vail Village 5'h Filing.
Applicant: Robert & Diane Lazier
Planner: George Ruther
„
" ° TOWN OF VAIL �
,
1
, � ,
A request for a recommer,��ation to the Vail Town Council for a rrr�or amendment to Special
Development District No. 36, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10,Vail Town Code,to allow for a mixed-
use hotel; a request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7A-3,Vail
Town Code, to allow for Type III Employee Housing Units and a fractional fee club; and a request
for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a proposed rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2�d
Filing from Heavy Service (HS) District to Public Accommodation (PA) District, located at 28 S.
Frontage Rd. and 13 Vail Road/Lots 9A& 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing.
Applicant: Nicollet Island Development Company Inc.
Planner: Allison Ochs
The applications and information about these proposals are available for public inspection during
regular business hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department office, 75 South
Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation held in the Town of Vail
Community Development Department office and the site visits that precede the public hearing.
Please call (970) 479-2138 for additional information.
Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call
(970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for additional information.
Community Development Department
Published February 21, 2003 in the Vail Daily.
2
�� �
TN�S ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Vail Town Code on
� March 24, 2003, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In consideration of:
A request for a final review of a proposed major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12,
Vail Town Code, to allow for a hotel redevelopment and addition; a request for a final review of a
conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail Town Code, to allow for a fractional fee
club; a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a text amendment Section 12-7A-3
(Conditional Uses), Vail Town Code, to allow for retail uses in a lodge in excess of 10% of the total
gross residential floor area of the structure as a conditional use; a request for a final review of a
variance from Section 12-7A-10 (Landscaping & Site Development), Vail Town Code, to allow for
a deviation from the total landscape area requirement, located at 20 Vail Road, 62 E. Meadow
Drive, and 82 E. Meadow Drive/Lots K & L, Block 5E, Vail Village 1St Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: George Ruther/Warren Campbell
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text amendments to Title
12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, for proposed "house keeping" amendments and/or
corrections, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council, to allow for text amendments to Title
11, Sign Regulations, Vail Town Code, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Matt Gennett
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a major amendment to Special
Development District No. 36, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Vail Town Code, to allow for a mixed-
use hotel; a request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail
Town Code, to allow for Type III Employee Housing Units and a fractional fee club; and a request
for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a proposed rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2"d
Filing from Heavy Service (HS) District to Public Accommodation (PA) District, located at 28 S.
Frontage Rd. and 13 Vail Road/Lots 9A& 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing.
Applicant: Nicollet Island Development Company Inc.
Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of proposed text amendments to Title
12, Zoning Regulations, Vail Town Code, to amend the Gross Residential Floor Area (GRFA)
regulations in the Hillside Residential (HR), Single-Family Residential (SFR), Two-Family
Residential (R), Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential (PS), Residential Cluster (RC), Low
Density Multiple-Family (LDMF), Medium Density Multiple-Family (MDMF), High Density Multiple-
Family (HDMF), and Housing (H) districts, and setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Vicki Pearson, et.al.
Planner: Bill Gibson
�,
1 TOWN OF YAIL �Y
d .h �
A request for a recommenc �n to the Vail Town Council of propos�:�;.�.ext amendments to
Sections 12-6B-2, 12-6B-3, 12-6C-2, 12-6C-3, 12-6D-2, 12-6D-3, Vail Town Code, to allow a
Type II employee housing unit as a permitted use and to eliminate a Type II employee housing
unit as a conditional use in the Single-Family Residential (SFR), Two-Family Residential (R), and
Two-Family Primary/Secondary Residential (PS) districts, and setting forth details in regard
thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail Community Development Department
Planner: Bill Gibson
The applications and information about these proposals are available for public inspection during
regular business hours at the Town of Vail Community Development Department office, 75 South
Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend the project orientation held in the Town of Vail
Community Development Department office and the site visits that precede the public hearing. Please
call (970) 479-2138 for additional information.
Sign language interpretation is available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call
(970) 479-2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for additional information.
This notice published in the Vail Daily on March 7, 2003.
2
' �- I � ' THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPER�i Y
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Municipal Code of the
Town of Vail on January 13, 2003, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed text amendment to
Section 12-10-9: Loading Standards, Vail Town Code, to amend tFie size requirement for
loading berths & setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
Planner: Allison Ochs
A request for a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-6C-3, Vail Town Code, to allow
for a Type II Employee Housing Unit and a request for a variance from Section 12-6C-6
(Setbacks), Vail Town Code, to allow for additions in the side setbacks, located at 1193 Cabin
Circle/Lot 4, Block 2, Vail Valley 8th Filing.
Applicant: David & Renie Gorsuch, represented by Resort Design Associates, Inc.
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-3B, Vail Town Code, to allow
for a tourist/guest service related facility accessory to a parking structure, and a request for a
variance from Title 11, Vail Town Code, to allow for proposed signage and setting forth details
in regard thereto, located at 181 W. Meadow Drive/Lots E&F, Vail Village 2"d filing.
Applicant: Stan Anderson
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a major amendment to Special
Development District No. 36, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
mixed-use hotel; a request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-
7A-3, Vail Town Code, to allow for Type III Employee Housing Units and a fractional fee club;
and a request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a proposed rezoning of Lot
9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing from Heavy Service (HS) District to Public Accommodation (PA)
District, located at 28 S. Frontage Rd. and 13 Vail Road/Lots 9A& 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing.
Applicant: Nicollet Island Development Company Inc.
Planner: George Ruther/Allison Ochs
A request for a variance from Section 12-7A-9, (Site Coverage) and a request for a proposed
minor exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
residential addition, located at 292 East Meadow Drive/A part of Tract B, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Mountain Haus Homeowner's Association, represented by K.H. Webb Architects
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a final review of a proposed major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-
12, Vail Town Code, to allow for a hotel redevelopment and addition; a request for a final review
of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
fractional fee club; a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a text amendment Section
1
�
1'�
�� �.
� I�TOWN OF VAIL �
1 �� .J '
� .l
.
-,w� �' �
� , ,�� � 1
12-7A-3 (Conditional Uses), ���il Town Code, to allcw for retail uses iri 4 �odge in excess of 10°r�o - , ,' .
of the total gross residential floor area of the structure as a conditional use; a request for a final
review of a variance from Section 12-7A-10 (Landscaping & Site Development), Vail Town
Code, to allow for a deviation from the total landscape area requirement, located at 20 Vail
Road, 62 E. Meadow Drive, and 82 E. Meadow Drive/Lots K & L, Block 5E, Vail Village 1St
Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, Inc., represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: George Ruther/Warren Campbell
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation
and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development
Department. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published December 27, 2002 in the Vail Daily.
2
Cliff Eldredg,�
Vail Clinic Inc Town of Vail c/o Finance Dept Vail Colorado Municipal Bldg
181 W Meadow Dr 75 S Frontage Rd Authority
Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657 75 S Frontage Rd
Vail, CO 81657
DAB Investment Inc
d/b/a Holiday Inn Chateau Vail Moellentine Land Co LLC Vail Fire Protection District
P O Box 11939 461 Fifth Street Vail, CO 81657
Denver, CO 802ll-0939 New York, NY 10017
Zyman, Sylvia Rebeca c/o Johnson,
Brown & Speigel Gary A. Syman -Azita Raji Family Otto Wiest c/o Brandess-Cadmus
Attn: Brenda Brown Trust 281 Bridge St
500 Bishop St AS 27 Windward Rd Vail, CO 81657
Atlanta, GA 30318 Belvedere, CA 94920
Morgan D. & Catherine E. Douglas D.C. Kistler, P.H. Stark, M.S. Richard A. Eddy
142 W Meadow Dr Garbe, L. &E. Griffiths 1881 Lionsridge LP 28
Vail, CO 81657 1510 S Clayton St Vail, CO 81657
Denver, CO 80210
Maud B. Duke Qualified Personal Irving J. Shwayder Mervin Lapin
Residence Trust 1900 E Girard Pl 1501 232 W Meadow Dr
5550 S Steele St Englewood, CO 80110 Vail, CO 81657
Littleton, CO 80121
Theodore S. Halaby James U. King, Jr.
Paul R. & Merrole Steinway and 11931 Wickchester Ln
12 Vista Rd Theodore S. & C nthia Halab
Englewood, CO 80110 y Y Suite 401
12 Vista Rd Houston, TX 77043
Englewood, CO 80110
Caleb B. & Maryan F. Hurtt Sonnenalp Properties Inc Vail Corp
272 W Meadow Dr 20 Vail Rd P O Box 7
Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81658
Talisman Condominium Assoc Daymer Corp NV Vail 108 Ltd c/o Westar Bank
62 E Meadow Dr 100 E Meadow Dr Admin Center
Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657 P O Box 1210
Gypsum, CO 81637
Scorpio Condominium Assoc. Alphorn Condominium Assoc. Skaal Haus Condominium Assn
P O Box 1767 121 W Meadow Dr#304 141 W Meadow Dr#2
Avon, CO 81620 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657
Holiday House Condominium Assn Villa Cortina Condominium Assn Meadow Vail Place Condominium
P O Box 3842 P O Box 1012 Assn
Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658 44 W Meadow Dr
Vail, CO 81657
Vail Gateway Plaza Condominium Village Inn Place - Phase III Village Inn Place - Phase IV
Assn Condominium Assn Condominium Assn
P O Box 19157 100 E Meadow Dr 100 E Meadow Dr
Avon, CO 81620 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657
Village Inn Place - Phase V Talisman Condominium Assn Vail Village Inn Plaza
Condominium Assn P O Box 832 Condominium Assn
100 E Meadow Dr Vail, CO 81658 143 E Meadows Dr
Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657
BS Condominium Assn Allan Steiger
Alejandra Lerdo de Tejada de Creel 2g2 Concord Rd
10403 W Colfax Ave Bosques de Chihuahua 144 Lon meadow MA 01106-2225
Lakewood, CO 80215 Mexico DF 11700 g �
Thomas H. Atkins &Sharon N. Jones Jud L. Feinber
Dephine M. Delsemme Amended & Successor Trustees c/o Amer Star Fncl y g
Restated Trust 7101 Wisconsin Ave Ste 1201 9241 Cambridge Manor Ct
2509 Meadowwood Dr Bethesda,MD 20814 Potomac, NID 20854
Toledo, OH 43606
James J. Ariola 1997 Declaration of AJ, M, AI & AJ Hauser, AH Garza, Mary Clare &Ronald J. Snow
Trust MMH Martinez 2159 S Parfet Ct
243 Lorraine Cir 2100 Gulf Blvd Unit 11 Denver, CO 80227-1913
Bloomingdale, IL 60108 S Padre Island, TX 78597
Albert J. & Yvonne M. Martens Bruce T. &Elizabeth H. Bowling Jack Kent Cadillac Inc
1503 Valle Vista 30 Eastwood Cir c/o Jack C. Kent
Pekin, IL 61554 Johnson City, NY 13790 4790 S Ogden St
Englewood, CO 80ll0
Michelle Ellen Warshofsky William B. &Deborah A. Hardin Henry &Helga Beck
9445 SW 90th St 601 Wellesley 3037 E Lake Rd
Miami, FL 33176 Houston, TX 77024 Skaneateles, NY 13152
S. Joseph Prapuolenis, Debora Hals Und Bein Bruck Brian F. &Helen M. Stoick
Morris 7075 Campus Dr Ste 200 6145 Upper Straits Blvd
731 Laurel Ave Colorado Springs, CO 80920-3164 Orchard Lake, MI 48324
Wilmette, II. 60091
Howard J. & Linda M. Awand Isidro &Anna Maria Jauregui Caryn J. Clayman Trust
Famil Trust 472 Warren Ln
y Ke Bisca ne, FL 33149 Caryn J. Clayman Trustee
4955 S Durango 126 y y P O Box 810186
Las Vegas, NV 89ll3 Boca Raton, FL 33481
Inversiones Don Rau17540 C.A. Helen E. & Gary W. Dahlen, Basil Morgan
c/o Vail Management Company Samuel H. Wood 4324 York Rd 100
143 E Meadow Dr 395 4 Escondido Valle Baltimore, MD 21212
Vail, CO 81657 Manitou Springs, CO 80829-2417
Two�Ttes LLC Laura S. 3 Maurer Adolo Holdings Ltd
c/o Vail Realt &Rental M mt 1705 Warpath Rd
y g West Chester, PA 19382 Vln 1041 Box 025685
302 Hanson Ranch Rd Miami, FL 33102
Vail, CO 81657
Emilio F. Espinola James L. &Paula Gould Luanne M. &Ronald L. Smith
Elefante 101-302 715 Boylston 121 W Meadow Dr 306
Colidel Valle, 03100 Mexico DF Boston, MA 02116 Vail, CO 81657-5078
William E. &Matthew G. Fuller Tom K. &June P. Brown Banjamin R. Boutell, Jr.
P O Box 25 121 W Meadow Dr 305 121 W Meadow Dr 304
Troy, MI 48099 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657
Joan E. Payne Trust
Laura P. Wright, Mary Payne Mary Payne Galloway Trust No 1 - Kenneth Gordon Revocable Trust
Galloway et al 4800 Biltmore Dr
220 Vine Street 2045 Tabor Dr Caral Gables, FL 33146
Denver, CO 80206 Lakewood, CO 80215 -
Celeste M. Reisinger Lesley S. Craig
253 Kenforest Dr 215 S Clermont St Alice Fegelman Trustee
Pittsburgh, PA 15216 Denver, CO 80246 251 Poage Farm Rd
Cincinnati, OH 45215
Dr. Lynne C. Wright Trust Herbert E. &Jane B. Wollowick Michael V. &Margaret W. Kell
1847 Rhode Island Ave 104 Driftwood Ln 1851 Raynele
McLean, VA 22101 Largo, FL 33770 Birmingham, MI 48009
Margot W. McLish William &W. Judson Fuller
6500 W Mansfield Ave 57 1100 Westwood Michelle Dupre, Mininder Kocher
Denver, CO 80235 Birmingham, MI 48009 52 Grey Cliff Rd
Brighton, MA 02135
Michael J. & Suzette B. Newman Frank J. Haberl Family Trust Alti Corp
700 Cascade Ave
Boulder, CO 80302 14700 Crabapple Rd 3862 La Jolla Village Dr
Golden, CO 80401 La Jolla, CA 92037
Lawrence J. Flynn, Jr.
c/o Flinn Asset Mgmt Marjorie J. Takton Trust Charles & Karola Arizmendi
2 Greenwich Plaza 1505 Greenway Terrace CCS 6284, 4400 NW 73rd Ave
Greenwich, CT 06830 Elm Grove, WI 53122-1612 Miami, FL 33166
Peter&Judith McEnnally Katherine W. Dudzinski
143 Oaks Ave 3309 Canadian Pkwy Sears, Francine Farkas & Benjamin
Dee Why NSW 2099 Ft Collins, CO 80524 Lewis, Farkas, Alexander Moss
Australia 47 Flying Point Rd
Stoney Creek, CT 06405
Joan M. Nortis Susan H. Schultz Revocable Trust Annette L. Mackie
141 W Meadow Dr 2 Susan H. Schultz Trustee 100 Larned Rd
Vail, CO 81657 6495 Ideal Ave N Summit, NJ 07901
Mahtomedi, MN 55115
Jim Lamont
Vail Village HOA Dorothy H., Gordon &Pat Parrish Allison F. Butts
P O Box 73 8642 Gregory Wy 4523 Dorset Ave
Recliff, CO 81649 Los Angeles, CA 90035 Chevy Chase, MD 20815
Vail Associates Ltd Dean Gosper Family Trust Jacqueline R. Knepshield
6711 Monroe St Ste A 106 St Georges Rd 6201 Elmwood Rd
Sylvania, OH 43560 Toorak Vic, Australia 3142 Chevy Chase, NID 20815
William W. McCuthen, Jr. Richard A. & Gwendolyn G.
12 Sandpiper Rd Vinterra Exempt Corp Scalpello
Westport, CT 06880 c/o Frederick S. Otto P O Box 160
P O Box 3149 Vail, CO 81658
Vail, CO 81658
Thomas P. Walsh, Sr.
VPP No. 15 Corp c/o Dakota King Inc James T. &Jane R. Watson
c/o Daniel Abounrad 3800 W 53rd St 6999 S Bemis St
5100 San-Felipe 193 Sioux Falls, SD 57106-4223 Littleton, CO 80120
Houston, TX 77056
Scott D. Bradshaw
22E6 Inc 4130 La Jolla Village Dr porothy B. McKnight
c/o Esther Geifman de Mizrahi Suite 107-125 203 Country Club Dr.
302 Hanson Ranch Rd La Jolla, CA 92037-1599 Sterling, CO 80751
Vail, CO 81657
Douglas &Joanna Polzin
3654 E Ellsworth Ave Golden Horizons Inc Vinterra Exempt Corp-
Denver, CO 80209 2340 Oak Hills Dr Richard A. Scalpello
Colorado Springs, CO 80919 P O Box 160
Vail, CO 81658
Steven G. & Susan J. Marton Peter M., Kimberly A. &Paul
Paul Weiner Revocable Trust 6711 W 128th Pl 204 Mourani
150 Quebec Street 107 Overland Park, KS 66209 6091 S Happy Canyon Rd
Denver, CO 80230 Englewood, CO 80111
R.G. Jacobs
Mountain Caretaker, Inc. Jacqueline R. Knepshield Guillermo &Tamara Oynick, Velia
2000 S rin Creek Road 4915 Auburn Ave 200
p g Betheda, MD 20814 & Carlos Oynick
Gypsum, CO 81637 449 S Creek Dr
Osprey, FL 34229
Andres Banos Gail M. & Stephen R. Rineberg
Ahuehuetes Norte No 909 '7475 Gainey Ranch Rd 9E Beaver Road Inc
Bosques de las Lomas Scottsdale, AZ 85258 c/o Vail Realty &Rental Mgmt
Mexico DF Mexico 302 E Gore Creek Dr
Vail, CO 81657
� Luis P. &Huguette D. Bustamante
Robe'rt M. Euwer & Barbara D. Obering Irrevocable Trust c/o Vail Realty &Rental Mgmt
Euwer Revocable Trust 5251 DTC Parkway 425 302 Hanson Ranch Rd
7528 E Gallup St Greenwood Village, CO 80ll 1 Vail, CO 81657
Littleton, CO 80120
Maureen T. O Dea William A. &Ronnie N. Potter Margaret T. Fuller
16450 W Sunset Blvd 302 1130 Park Ave 5123 S Perry Cir
Pacific Palisades, CA 90272 New York, NY 10128 Littleton, CO 80123
Linda C. Dickinson Qualified William W. Graham RL Exempt Corp
Personal Residence Trust 11661 San Vincente Blvd 401 c/o Frederick S. Otto
9200 Hollyoak Dr Los Angeles, CA 90049 p O Box 3149
Bethesda, NID 20814 Vail, CO 81658
David G. & Cathy L. Crane
c/o D.G. Crane Charlene Caruso Revocable Living JAF Industrial Dev
2485 Broadway Trust P O Box 6688
San Francisco, CA 94115 2428 N 12th Ct Somerset, NJ 08875-6688
Ft Lauderdale, FL 33304
Thomas F. Sheridan, Vincent D. Judith & Joel Baker Seviher Corp
Walsh 20 Dolma Rd c/o Burke Mgmt
1808 Swann St NW Scarsdale, NY 10583 p O Box 2631
Washington, DC 20009 Vail, CO 81658
Ponch Inc -Trio Inc James W. &Ellen V. Pinkard William &Ann F. Loper
c/o Jefferson P Knoght PA 3440 Youngfield St Ste 351 22 W Meadow Dr 360
777 Bricknell Ave#1070 Wheat Ridge, CO 80033 Vail, CO 81657
Miami, FL 33131
Eugene, Jr& Sue B. Mercy Pericles Realty Inc Michael S. & Iris Smith
1 ll 1 Park Ave c/o Otto Peterson & Post 2 Sedwick Dr
New York, NY 10128 p O Box 3149 Englewood, CO 80110
Vail, CO 81658
Richard T Liebhaber and
Vail 44 Corp Spraddle Creek Properties Inc. Kirsten E Liebhaber Personal Res.
44 Meadow Dr 44 c/o James B. Newman Trust
Vail, CO 81657 150 Government St Ste 2000 P O Box 8210
Mobile, AL 36602 McLean, VA 22106-8210
Hilda O. Farrill Avila Meek Family Trust
Meadow Place Inc Attn: B. Brandon John F. &Jerris P. Ferguson,
c/o Invicta America Attn: Suzette Ansbacher House Jennet St Terry O. Meek
P O Box 551600 George Town Grand Cayman 5326 Clayhill Dr
Ft Lauderdale, FL 33355 Cayman Islands BWI Springfield, MO 65804
Pericles Realty Inc David William Hanna Trustee 575M LLC
44 W Meadow Dr c/o Hanna Capital Management, Inc 18 Springfield Ln
Vail, CO 81657 620 Newport Center Dr Ste 500 Sarasota Springs, NY 12866
Newport Beach, CA 92660
White River Acquisition Corp
Vail Sundial LP c/o Manuel Martinez WW Leo Palmas
c/o Russell Standard Consulting Group 2775 Iris Ave
P O Box 479 905 Bricknell Bay Dr Ste 230 Boulder, CO 80304
Bridgeville, PA 15017 Miami, FL 33131
Whitebay Marketing Ltd
Vail Gateway LLC c/o George D. Perlman Holland& Timberline Commercial Holdings
3 World Financial Center Knight LLC
12th FL 701 Bricknell Ave Ste 3000 12 Vail Rd 600
New Yark, NY 10285-1200 Miami, F133131 Vail, CO 81657
Vail PBK LLC GGG LLC Kilmur LLC
392 Mill Creek Cir P O Box 5963 P O Box 5963
Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81658 Vail, CO 81658
James R. & Karen W. Johnson Vail Gateway Plaza Vail Village Inn Inc
19 Churchill Rd 12 Vail Rd Ste 600 100 E Meadow Dr 33
Pittsburgh, PA 15235 Vail, CO 81657 Vail, CO 81657
Diane Gamel Lighthall Meadow Drive Ventures Inc Patricia Ann Gabriel
5293 W Oberlin Dr p O Box 2767 P O Box 268
Denver, CO 80235 Mobile, A136652 Paramus, NJ 07653-0268
Karin Wagner Revocable Inter
Claus W. Fricke Revocable Trust Vivos Trust Staufer Commercial LLC
Edna N. Fricke Revocable Trust Karin Wagner Trustee 100 E Meadow Dr 31
P O Box 1557 405 Bontona Ave Vail, CO 81657
Eagle, CO 81631-1557 Ft Lauderdale, FL 33301
Sylvan M. &Frances Tobin Daymer Corp NV Marvin J. & Karole A. Frank
101 Cheswold Ln 5-D 2430 N Orchard
Haverford, PA 19041 950 Red Sandstone Rd 26 Chicago, IL 60614
Vail, CO 81657
Ernest III & Lisa Jane Scheller Carol G. Jones trustee Guiseppe & Mercedes Cecchi
751 Benner Rd 1700 Moore St Ste 2020
Allentown, PA 18104 268 Litchford CT Arlington, VA 22209
St Louis, MO 63141
William P. & Lynda B. Johnson Michael P. &Patricia J. Glinsky Vail Village Inn Associates
375 Inca Parkway 3200 Cherry Creek S Dr Ste 230 c/o Copperthwaite & Co
Boulder, CO 80303 Denver, CO 80209 P O Box 61349
Denver, CO 80206
Silvia lto de Zaragoza Gary J. &Dorothy Farrell Cordes 302 VVI Inc
P O Box 220349 2B Trentino Rd, Turranurra 2074 c/o Fred Otto - Otto Peterson & Post
EI Paso, TX 79913 NSW Australia P O Box 3149
Vail, CO 81658
Barbara Weinstein A.J. Property Trust Michael J. Zaremba
78 Joyce Rd c/o Dreyer Edmonds & Assoc. 6200 Plymouth Ct
Plainview, NY 11803 355 S Grand Ave Ste 4150 Downers Grove, IL 60516
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3103
Richard T. Liebhaber 4725 Ltd Oliver M. &Diana L. Kearney
P O Box 8210 g0 W 78th St Ste 133 7565 Spanish Bay Dr
McLean, VA 22106-8210 Chanhassen, MN 55317 Las Vegas, NV 89113
Kirk D. Huffard Daymer Corp NV Chris J. &Jennifer A. Anderson
8 Maher Ave 100 E Meadow Dr 103 Anemone Dr
Greenwich, CT 06830-5617 Vai, CO 81657 Boulder, CO 80302
Patricia Ann Gabriel Paul A. &Penelope N. Leseur John &Rebecca Moore
1 E Ridgewood Ave' Somerset Bridge, Sandys SBBX p O Box 728
Paramus, NJ 07653 P O Box SB90 Del Mar, CA 92024-0728
Bermuda
Staufer Commercial LLC Town of Vail James E. &Jeanne Gustafson
100 E Meadow Dr c/o Finance Dept P O Box 5010
Vail, CO 81657 75 S Frontage Rd Norwalk, CT 06856
Vail, CO 81657
Colando CO Alexander Family Trust Floyd L. &Elaine E. English
Priv Antonio Chedraui S/N Judy Lynne Alexander Trustee 571 Millbrook Dr
Col Encinal 91180 Xalapa Veracruz 2121 N Frontage Rd W Ste 254 Downers Grove, IL 60516
Mexico Vail, CO 81657
Barbara & Charles Dillman S.C. Geroca Lario Inc
18316 Mainsail Pointe 100 E Meadow Dr 101 c/o Vail Village Inn
Cornelius, NC 28031 Vail, CO 81657 100 E Meadow Dr
Vail, CO 81657
Red Sands Corp Village Inn Condominium Assoc Lublan S.A.
c/o Vail Home Rentals Inc 100 E Meadow Dr c/o Banco International SA
143 E Meadow Dr Ste 397 Vail, CO 81657 437 Madison Ave 17th Fl
Vail, CO 81657 New Yark, NY 10022
Raymond J & Mealnie Rutter
Charles M. Harmon, Jr. - Traditions Family UDT Enchanted Mesa Exempt Corp
LP Raymond J Rutter Trustee c/o Frederick S. Otto
11380 Long Meadow Dr 760 Via Lido Nord P O Box 3149
W Palm Beach, FL 33414 Newport Beach, CA 92663 Vail, CO 81658
Bede Ltd c/o Bustamante, Luis Pedro A. & Adelaida Petunia Douglas Deane Hall, Jr.
Pablo Ramirez 2000 E 12th Avenue
Priv. San Isadro 44 Cond. Caparra Classic Ph-2 Box 4
Col. Reform Social, Del Miguel 105 Ortegon Ave Denver, CO 80206
11650 Mexico DF Guaynabo PR 00966
VVIP 502 Kinney L. Johnson Glaser Living Trust
4603 Annaway Dr 1100 Hornsilver Cir Herbert & Sharon Glaser Trustees
Edina, MN 55436 Vail, CO 81657 719 N Linden Dr
Beverly Hills, CA 90210
Marilyn M Fleischer Living Trust Robert D. Hodes Lawrence & Suzanne Weiss
Marilyn M Fleischer Trustee 650 Park Ave SC 11 Pierson Dr
62 E Meadow Dr 205 New York, NY 10021 Greenwich, CT 06831-2523
Vail, CO 81657
Amos &Floy Kaminski Betty Lou B. & James Lawrence
S.F.P. LP 315 E 68th St Sheerin
80W 78th St Ste 133 New York, NY 10021 7801 Broadway Ste 200
Chanhassen, MN 55317 San Antonio, TX 78209
Margaret Eastwood Trust RCGGIII LP Patricia M. Dolan 1992 Trust
c/o Kaufman Bernstein Oberman c/o Ronald F. Nobis Patricia M. Dolan Trustee
2049 Century Park E 2500 P O Box 3ll 1 280 Meadowbrook Dr
Los Angeles, CA 90067 Bloomington, IN 47402 Northfield, IL 60093-1049
H&W Properties Inc Loring H. &William Amass Richard J. Genova
5654 Greenwood Plaza Blvd 16 Polo Field Ln P O Box 17
Englewood, CO 801ll-2385 Denver, CO 80209 Skytop, PA 18357
Vail LP Staufer Commercial LLC Edna N. & Claus W. Fricke
43 Rockledge Dr 100 E Meadow Dr P O Box 1557
Pelham, NY 10803 Vail, CO 81657 Eagle, CO 81631-1557
Nico Vail Inc Claggett/Rey Gallery LLC Masters Gallery At Vail LLC
c/o Slifer Mgmt 100 E Meadow Dr 70 S Potomac St
143 E Meadow Dr Ste 360 Vail, CO 81657 Aurara, CO 80012
Vail, CO 81657
Osakis LLC Hanlon Family Partnership Red Sands Corp
c/o Watson & Co Inc 385 Gore Creek Dr c/o Vail Home Rentals Inc
10670 E Bethany Dr Bldg 4 Vail, CO 81657 143 E Meadow Dr Ste 397
Aurora, CO 80014 Vail, CO 81657
Gerardo Schroeder Gonzalez -DE
Patricia lnzunza Schroeder A.J. Property Trust Firstbank of Vail
91 Tunapuna Ln c/o Dreyer Edmonds & Assoc 17 Vail Rd
Coronado, CA 92118 355 S Grand Ave Ste 4150 Vail, CO 81657
Los Angeles, CA 90071-3103
Roger L. Reisher Richard Kent Charles Lipcon
2400 Cherry Creek S Dr#405 1873 S Bellairee St Ste 1120 430 N Marshra Dr
Denver, CO 80209-3258 Denver, CO 80222 Key Biscayne, FI. 33149
Jim I.�mont" Chuck Lipcon Jeff Moellentine
P O Box 73 One Biscayne Tower Alpine Standard
Recliff, CO 81649 Suite 2480 28 S Frontage Rd
Miami, FL 33131 Vail, CO 81657
� ' THIS ITEM MAY AFFECT YOUR PROPERTY
PUBLIC NOTICE
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Planning and Environmental Commission of the Town of
Vail will hold a public hearing in accordance with Section 12-3-6 of the Municipai Code of the
Town of Vail on January 13, 2003, at 2:00 P.M. in the Town of Vail Municipal Building. In
consideration of:
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a proposed text amendment to
Section 12-10-9: Loading Standards, Vail Town Code, to amend ttie size requirement for
loading berths & setting forth details in regard thereto.
Applicant: Town of Vail
� Planner: Allison Ochs
� A request for a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-6C-3, Vail Town Code, to allow
for a Type II Employee Housing Unit and a request for a variance from Section 12-6C-6
(Setbacks), Vail Town Code, to allow for additions in the side setbacks, located at 1193 Cabin
Circle/Lot 4, Block 2, Vail Valley 8th Filing.
Applicant: David & Renie Gorsuch, represented by Resort Design Associates, Inc.
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-9C-36, Vail Town Code, to allow
for a tourisUguest service related facility accessory to a parking structure, and a request for a
variance from Title 11, Vail Town Code, to allow for proposed signage and setting forth details
in regard thereto, located at 181 W. Meadow Drive/Lots E&F, Vail Village 2"d filing.
Applicant: Stan Anderson
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a major amendment to Special
Development District No. 36, pursuant to Section 12-9A-10, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
mixed-use hotel; a request for a final review of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-
7A-3, Vail Town Code, to allow for Type III Employee Housing Units and a fractional fee club;
and a request for a recommendation to the Vail Town Council for a proposed rezoning of Lot
9A, Vail Village 2"d Filing from Heavy Service (HS) District to Public Accommodation (PA)
District, located at 28 S. Frontage Rd. and 13 Vail Road/Lots 9A& 9C, Vail Village 2"d Filing.
Applicant: Nicollet Island Development Company Inc.
Planner: George Ruther/Allison Ochs
A request for a variance from Section 12-7A-9, (Site Coverage) and a request for a proposed
minor exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-12, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
residential addition, located at 292 East Meadow Drive/A part of Tract B, Vail Village First Filing.
Applicant: Mountain Haus Homeowner's Association, represented by K.H. Webb Architects
Planner: Bill Gibson
A request for a final review of a proposed major exterior alteration, pursuant to Section 12-7A-
12, Vail Town Code, to allow for a hotel redevelopment and addition; a request for a final review
of a conditional use permit, pursuant to Section 12-7A-3, Vail Town Code, to allow for a
fractional fee club; a recommendation to the Vail Town Council of a text amendment Section
.
�
i�
L��,
„
1 ",G4-�`-����rowN o�vnrL ''t
� -
�,��,"�" � . c�' � l�
12-7A-3 (Conditional Uses), Vail Town Code, to allow for retail uses in a lodge in excess of 10% _ ,
of the total gross residential floor area of the structure as a conditional use; a request for a final
review of a variance from Section 12-7A-10 (Landscaping & Site Development), Vail Town
Code, to allow for a deviation from the total landscape area requirement, located at 20 Vail
Road, 62 E. Meadow Drive, and 82 E. Meadow Drive/Lots K & L, Block 5E, Vail Village 1 St
Filing.
Applicant: Sonnenalp Properties, inc., represented by Braun Associates, Inc.
Planner: George Ruther/Warren Campbell
The applications and information about the proposals are available for public inspection during
regular office hours in the project planner's office, located at the Town of Vail Community
Development Department, 75 South Frontage Road. The public is invited to attend project orientation
and the site visits that precede the public hearing in the Town of Vail Community Development
Department. Please call 479-2138 for information.
Sign language interpretation available upon request with 24-hour notification. Please call 479-
2356, Telephone for the Hearing Impaired, for information.
Community Development Department
Published December 27, 2002 in the Vai! Daily.
2
�1r,A�IiP � _��5�?A�t _CX'' _�i�"-� � _
�a�i.l.
, , MEETING AGENDA
GENERAL PROJECT MEETING
Project: Four Seasons Vail
Date: 10/19/04 Participants: Owner
Time: 10:30 AM JHG
Location: Vail Architect
SPD: Peter Speth City of Vail
i � i 1 �
I. Project Scheudle and Requirements
O1 Milestone Schedule Review overall schedule
02 City Approval Process Discuss timing,process,etc.
03 Permit Requirements Review City and other jurisdictional requirements
04 Construction Timing and Limitations Review City restrictions
OS
06
ii. ���r�i�r- C:o�,r�;�-,•o,.i� c,Y T�Wt�r-w2r�mE
ol '�,l�t[.f �-!O. 9�-�'3
02
03
04
OS
III.
O1 �LlIIt 1 Z!�? �" i�
02
03 ��Ir�l_j ZG23" Lo.vsrtz�,•�..riaJ 5.r]��%�
04
OS �
06 . �i��t�cf� --
-- �
IV.
O1
02 (...iV i� f�o V�-4�-- .��Z10fZ �__ iY�ur h.1�L �F _ _ ' .r.l
03
04
OS
06
07 -- -
08 ---- --
09 ---
10
File:Meetine Aeenda 10-19-04 Aaenrla(21
U]
2
3
5
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
�
m
20
21
22
23
24
'� Task Name
� Finalize Architect's Proposal
� Architectural Schematic Design
:;i Select Civil, ID, Enviro&Geote�
Select Misc.Consultants
Arch'al Design Development
Interior Design Schematics
Select General Contractor
Demolition Permit Drawings
Demolition Permit
GMP Documents
Foundation Permit Drawings
Foundation Permit
Finalize GMP
Construction Permit Drawings
Interior Design Development
Interior Construction Document:
Building Permit
Complete Construction Docume
Demolition
Dewatering/Site Excavation
Foundations
Structural Frame
Interior Construction
Post Construction
Project:Vail Milestone Schedule 9-24�
Date:Thu 10/14/04
Task
Split
Progress
Duration
2 wks
4 wks
4 wks
4 wks
13 wks
13 wks
6 wks
7 wks
6 wks
13 wks
13 wks
6 wks
6 wks
13 wks
13 wks
8 wks
8 wks
6 wks
13 wks
16 wks
32 wks
48 wks
9 wks
Conceptual Milestone Schedule
The Four Seasons Hotel - Vail, CO
The John Hardy Group
September 24, 2004
u 4th Qu 1 st Qu 2nd Qu 3rd Qu 4th Qu
Start
Mon 10/4/04
Mon 10/18/04
Mon 10/18/04
Mon 11/15/04
Mon 11/15/04
Mon 11/15/04
Mon 2/14/05
Mon 2/14/05
Mon 4/4/05
Mon 2/14/05
Mon 2/14/05
Mon 5/16/05
Mon 5/16/05
Mon 5/16/05
Mon 2/14/05
Mon 5/16/05
Mon 8/15/05
Mon 8/15/05
Mon 5/16/05
Mon 6/27/05
Mon 10/10/05
Mon 1/30/06
Mon 6/19/06
Mon 5/21/07
Finish
Fri 11/12/04
Fri 11/12/04
Fri 12/10/04
Fri 2/11/05
Fri 2/11/05
Fri 4/1/05
Fri 5/13/05
Fri 5/13/05
Fri 6/24/05
Fri 6/24/05
Fri 8/12/05
Fri 5/13/05
Fri 8/12/05
Fri 10/7/05
Fri 10/7/05
Fri 6/24/05
Fri 9/23/05
Fri 1/27/06
Fri 9/8/06
Fri 5/18/07
Fri 7/20/07
�T
��;� �
, ;����_F���,��>;: Milestone
„ � � , , , . , � , , , , , Summary ��
Project Summary �" ���°�`�
Page 1
External Tasks
External Milestone ��
Deadline �;
file:Vail Milestone Schedule 9-24-04
Date:Thu 10/14/04;Time:4:07 PM
3rd Qu �4th Qu �1st Qu �2nd Qu
TT R OF IND RSTANDINC�
This LETTER OF UNDERSTANDING ("AgreemenY') is entered into by and between Nicollet
Island Development Company and Holiday House Condominium Association, doing business as
Nine Vail Road Condominiums, as of the Agreement Date. Nicollet and Nine Vail Road
Condominiums hereby expressfy acknowledge that they have agreed in principle, pending
complete and final written documentation, as foliows:
1. Dates and D _fini ionc
a. Agr_ _m _nt Dat_: September�_, 2003 �
b. Nine Vaii Road: Holiday House Condominium Association, doing business
as Nine Vail Road Condominiums
PO Box 5733
Vail, Colorado 81658-5733
Telephone: (970)479-7100
Facsimile:(970)479-8852
C. Nine Vail Road Re�recentative: Ms. Gwendolyn G. Scalpello
d. �lic�llP.t: Nicollet Island Development Company
600 Foshay Tower
821 Marquette Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
Telephone: (612) 332-1500
Facsimile: (612) 332-2428
e. Ni _oll _ R _precentative: Mr. Thomas J. Brink
f. xia in�parking Stalls. "Existing Parking Stalls" shall mean those four (4)
existing surface parking stalls owned by Nine Vail Road and located on Nine Vail
Road's Property and situated to the North of the Nine Vail Road building and South
of the existing Alpine Standard properly.
g. Pronoced Parking S alls. "Proposed Parking Stalls" shall mean the four (4)
proposed surface parking stalls to be constructed by Nicollet for Nine Vail Road and
located on Nine Vail Road's Property and situated to the South of the Nine Vail
Road building, to the North of the West Meadow Drive right of way and immediately
adjacent to the existing driveway servicing Nine Vail Road's underground parking
structure.
h. P�i�: The"Parties"shall mean both Nicollet and Nine Vail Road.
i. Nine vail Road's PronertT. "Nine Vail Road's Property" shall mean the real
property located and commonly referred to as 9 Vail Road, Vail, Colorado and
legally described in Exhibit A.
j. Pronosed H�tel'c Pronertr,�,. "Proposed Hotel's Property" shall mean the real
property to be acquired by Nicollet and commonly referred to as 13 Vail Road, Vail,
. Colorado ("Chateau Vail") and 28 South Frontage Road West, Vail, Colorado
("Alpine Standard")and legally described in Exhibit B.
k. Access to the Exictin,9a Parkin4 Sts a11c. "Access to the Existing Parking Stalls"
shall mean the access route beginning at Vail Road and continuing directly west to
the Existing Parking Stalls. This access route was part of the Easement Agreement
recorded in the Eagle County Recorder's office on August 28, 1991 in Book 561 at
Page 54, however, this Easement Agreement is no longer effective and has not
been renewed by the parties to the Easement Agreement.
2. Purnoce. The express purpose of this Agreement is to set forth the Parties' mutual
understandings and agreements regarding the demolition of the Existing Parking Stalls by Nicollet
and the construction of the Proposed Parking Stalls by Nicollet and to provide a framework to guide
the Parties in finalizing the documents required and necessary to carry out the Parties'
understandings as contained herein, and, in the absence of such mutual agreement, to establish
terms and conditions by which the replacement of the Existing Parking Stalls by the Proposed
Parking Stalls will be accomplished.
3. Nicoll _ �c �bligationc and D �ti _c. Nicollet has agreed with Nine Vail Road to the.
following in connection with NicolleYs proposed construction of the Four Seasons Resort Vail:
a. Nicollet will demolish and remove the Existing Parking Stalls and related
hardscape at its sole cost and expense.
b. Nicollet will design, grade and insta�l landscaping in the area demolished by
Nicollet and located on Nine Vaif Road's Property consisting of the Existing Parking
Stalls and related hardscape area, at NicolleYs sole cost and expense, with
landscaping materials, shrubs, trees, etc. to be mutually agreed upon between
Nicollet and Nine Vail Road and consistent with the proposed and existing
landscaping in the surrounding area and in compliance with the future approval by
the Town of Vail.
c. Nicollet will design and construct the Proposed Parking Stalfs at its sole cost
and expense, including the relocation of conflicting utilities(if any)and the relocation
of Nine Vail Road's underground parking access panel, if necessary.
d. Nicollet wil� cooperate with Nine Vail Road and use its best efforts to minimize
the disruption to Nine Vail Road owners and guests during the demolition of the
Existing Parking Stalls and the construction of the Proposed Parking Stalls by
scheduling the work to coincide with low occupancy periods at Nine Vai� Road, e.g.
between winter and summer seasons.
e. Nicollet will ensure that construction of the Proposed Parking Stalls will be
completed before Access to the Existing Parking Stalls and the Existing Parking
Stalls themselves have been eliminated, demolished, modified or affected or in the
event that Nicollet desires to eliminate, demolish, modify or affect the Access to the
Existing Parking Stalls and/or the Existing Parking Stalls themselves before the
Proposed Parking Stalls are fully constructed and operational, then Nicollet shall,
prior to such elimination, demolition or modification, provide Nine Vail Road with
four (4) temporary parking spaces at a location mutually agreed to but adjacent to
the Nine Vail Road Property, such as, in the Gateway Building parking facility, in the
Vail Village Inn surface parking lot accessed from Vail Road or on the Proposed
Hotel's Property.
2
f. Nicollet will negotiate and enter into a construction agreement and construction
easement with Nine Vail Road prior to Nicollet commencing construction and
demolition of the Parking Stalis and the Existing Parking Stalis.
4. Nine Vail R�ad Ohlia�ati�nc and D �ti _�. Nine Vail Road has agreed with Nicollet
to the following in connection with NicolleYs proposed construction of the Four Seasons Resort Vail:
a. Nine Vail Road will, after completion of the construction of the Proposed
Parking Stalls and completion of the landscaping in the area of the Existing Parking
Stalls, accept and receive the same from Nicollet and thereafter bear any and all
cost and expense (without right to indemnification or contribution from Nicollet)
related, directly or indirectly to the maintenance, repair and replacement of the
completed Proposed Parking Stalls and completed landscaping, subject only to any
contractor warranties in connection with the work performed.
b. Nine Vail Road will cooperate with Nicollet and use its best efforts to minimize
the disruption to NicolleYs construction of the Four Seasons Resort Vail during the
demolition and construction of the Existing Parking Stalls and Proposed Parking
Stalls.
c. Nine Vail Road will negotiate and enter into a construction agreement and
construction easement with Nicollet prior to Nicollet commencing construction and
demolition of the Proposed Parking Stalls and the Existing Parking Stalls.
5. Fina1 Agreem _n �. The parties agree that all agreements contemplated by this
Agreement shall be finalized and agreed upon in writing by the parties within thirty (30) days of the
date -of approval by Council of the Town of Vail of�Ordinance (d�fided belaw)R}o:-��ri�€
�893 at second reading. The Parties further agree to negotiate in good faith to complete the
agreements contemplated herein within the time frame set forth above.
6. Notices and Communications. All notices and communications sha�l be given to
the parties through their representatives as set forth above, unless such information is modified, in
writing, by notice given to the other party, in which even the modified information shall be used.
7. Arbitration. Any dispute arising under this Agreement, including but not limited to
the development of terms of any and all final agreements contemplated hereunder, shall be subject
to arbitration under the Construction Arbitration Rules of the American Arbitration Association (the
"AAA Rule"). In the event the American Arbitration Association (the "AAA") determines that it is not
able to resolve the nature of the dispute (including but not limited to the creation of the definitive
agreements contemplated by this Agreement and referred to herein), such arbitration shall be
established and conducted under the Uniform Arbitration Act of the State of Colorado. In the event
of any such dispute, or in the event of the inability of the parties to agree to the definitive agreements
to which this Agreement refers, either party may apply for arbitration, which shall be conducted in
accordance with the AAA Rules, whether conducted by the AAA or otherwise. Neither this provision
nor any other provision of this Agreement shall prevent either party from applying for interim judicial
relief, as appropriate, pending the determination of any dispute or the creation of any agreement
through arbitration. In the event of such arbitration, each party shall bear its own costs, expenses
and attorneys' fees, and the arbitrator shall not have the authority to award costs, expenses or
attorneys'fees against any party.
8. Binding Effect. This Agreement is specifically required by Ordinance Number 9,
3
Series of 2003 of the Town of Vail, Colorado ("the"Ordinance") in satisfaction of Condition number 7
of the Ordinance as it pertains to the Existing Parking Stalls. It neither addresses nor removes �tld
is ir�d�.�endent of the unresolved and ct�rrentl� diy.���t�issue of historic rights of Nine Vail Road to
access across and park fs�n the Hs�y-+�r�fChateau �Vail parking lot. Thus upon execution by the
parties this agreement becomes binding upon the parties, their successors in interest in and to the
purchase rights of Nicollet in the Proposed Hotel's Property and the Ordinance, according to its
terms and as a condition of approval of the Major Amendment to Special Development District
Number 36, Four Seasons Resort. This Agreement, however, does not relieve the Parties of the
requirement to execute all of the formal written agreements required and necessary to completely
fulfill the obligations, duties and intent of the Parties as contained herein, subject to the arbitration
provisions contained herein. The Parties further acknowledge that this Agreement does not discuss
or address all of the necessary and essential terms of the agreements contemplated by this
Agreement and, as such, the agreements shall remain subject to further negotiation regarding the
terms not expressly contained herein, again subject to the arbitration provisions set forth herein.
9. Con ing _n _i _�. The parties expressly acknowledge and agree that the terms,
conditions, liabilities, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall not be binding upon or
enforceable against the Parties unless and until: (a) The Town of Vail Town Council approves on
Second Reading the Ordinance and Ordinance Number 10, Series of 2003, and (b) Nicollet or any
successor in interest or person or entity which succeeds to the benefits of Nicollet under the
Ordinance completes the acquisition of the Proposed Hotel's Property.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties hereto have executed this Agreement effective as of
the Agreement Date.
NICOLLET ISLAND DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
By:
Thomas J. Brink
Vice President& General Counsel
HOLIDAY HOUSE CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, doing business as
NINE VAIL ROAD ASSOCIATION
By:
Gwendolyn G. Scalpello
President
4
EXHIBIT "A"
Legal Description — Nine Vail Road's Property
4 n��r9 <79'th�Nc�riltf,•3tit ni�e-t�u��a�1c*�•c�f�c�ctis�n"' 'i'€�e�nshi}� � ,<��e h K�tnuc� �0 ��`�5t c�f(!ic �,izth F'rinc i}�
1�1eri 3i�+n an 1�.inc�pai-t c�f�l n15 4 L�,1�o�cj C'crt�;�mc��tl.�tl���.��caFSlite� 1 of�?_ci('V,iil '4'' �!,. �a.�
l��.i.l.in�T,_.�.c�i�nt�_.s�l..L:�s��.ic:.,_.S:t�t�tc�._.cz:f.:_(�.c,.l.c�.r.a��t_...m.ca.��.e.._�.a.r.cl.c�.ul�f�.l..y.:...�c,.�:r.i:l�e.d..x��...i:c�.l.l.ati.�.s:
Cc�mmi°nci€7c at t17e Nc�i-[he.��5t cc�rnc�r iaf a�-�i 1 �;��c•ticn� 7;
thence Sc��il�rle-���n l ���lcir�fh 1"�iSI liE��af�fhti;��r f�c�as onty�t:(.it�tt_t.C1�.1���i � 5,�Tion 7, 39-"?(�
I:�_.G�.(:_S.i)IfS:I2..C.L�TI7:�-.41I�-�Y.i3Y.._L1.I11:..S�:I:...�.�...:1.._)I.1.�,�3���:.aw��....:�.c�_...�.,.
rh�����rc�•t�i� �3n ��n��1��tt� fhe ri;hf �>f 100<���r,f...f>�;41'47" �md •alont*���ic� 5nn�1�h rirrlli-«�l=«��}�lint,�S a2
fs;��.._pUint_«n the �G�est liEie nf V��ii Rcricl c��i pc�int l�ei���iht� '�t��rtl�����stcily cnrner o�t s�+id C ot�
A;
,.._.....__.lh.e�l.c,�.._c.��i1�:nuu�r..�l.��.ng...�la.e..al'��.r.�Y��n.Li c�n.�.�i...�iiie....a�a.d_al.c�:ng._Lh�...:[��x.ilts:.clz:...l.i.n�:._��:C_�ai.�l._L�.�t...�,.._I.S..'?..�.�.
jc*t,t tn thr�'V�irth�•v.�titc?r1V cr�rncar ol��aitl 1 0[ �1_
��h<��rice«i� �an ��3��>ie fo t�h€�1eft c�f'1(i(�)t�c;;reE,�;4t'47"anr� �Iong tl�e ti�'c1�t lin< <,f c�ai�l f i�3t 4 139 15
�,�.t��1i��t�-�i�.���7in o�f�(���cinnii��7_
�_....._ihe;.�a.�.c....czn_�m...ai�gle._tc�...i1�e...1�.IL«.i::.?;..d�:�;r.�.e5...�.3_'..12.°'T..__l.S..Cz....l..�.._(.'e:.�.t...t.c�.._th.0 1h::.�s1_.lin.�:_.f�f.:��.ai.l.._K.c�.aci;
- il�c��7ci�c�n �an�i�7tTlt�tc�tl�c�ri<T}�i r�f''; �c v:•,,4 5 S'1`�., 3pi� ��1�}n�T,�3ici Wecr linc?(i� 1 S fc,.:,r•
- the��ce�,on ��n a�7�lE��tt� t17e.ri�,}�t n�f9(1 d vrree-s Q(?'f)0'' 9R 7� Ye�t r�t�l�e��1c���t�ht•rly 1in�rif't�r:�•ct
1�I��a 3otiv T).�jy_�;;
=-_..._xJ�.��as;:�cui�in..�igl.e._t��._.tiis:�r..i.gl�t._�af_�.�.�is:�Tr.���_1..�_'..a.�1.'_..ari.�...a1c�.ia.€�.�ai.sl..:�cuth�:.r..l�...l.i�.a.e...ansi..a1�,►i��
t?��rv���t�n the�'lc f1�l�avincr-i r�3tiiuti t�f 7'75 00 f���c,t,.;���et�fir�31 �3n�lf����t��h r�E.,��,e,a 0(i'1`i", ��n •arc
�iat�ne���cif 1 C)�97 tc�ef l�f}a nnini{�f'1��ai�c�3t�.
- tlis�l.�C_til.izt:t�;5�+i i �nvr,nt anc3;i}c�nT�s�ic3 Nt�r h�rly lincy I I.f��.�
_._�._ti�e.ia.c:.�.ciiY._��n...a���i.�...1�._ttt�;..r..iu�i:t.._is.l:...1..=k..l.....�is:g�'.�.e;�._4.t;_'�..[)°'>......l..t)..1�.5.t�...:1'�c:t;.
- Cl7ence<m �n an«lE�tt��[h��lt�ft s�f'1{)'� �l�rree; 1;'17" l��i--�(-�,'i'tr
- tlae37ct,�m «�rle tt7 th�°ri��}��� t>f 9� ���rr��5 flf)'C)(?"` 1 R � 7 fe�>t;
t�hei7ce��r�i7 �m ancle to €l7�1�f�i�f 90 i�>�r��,:es 170'f)O" fi7 f)��I�e.et, nxire r,r l�,cti f�r,thr��tri3r>n��int�o:�.
k�y7' ' <7• ccmt:aiE7i�?4 ;47_s 1 Si3 ��i�?�_.�r f)('"s ;i�E,�,_ more c�r Icss.
5
J! g�T L4L797
O
1�al De��ri ��ra —Prr��c�sc��i �-Ic�t�l Prnn��,
Pa f"F1: ,�� f'F�<at�;��a a� l'��°rl - a�•�r�a��• f"����a��rat'snn r1(hl� V�,r1 P�:a�.., 11nt«1
,�t�art c�t' �h,�Nortllt°ast�._�ii�r�_1e��of`�°�is�n ?_ 'T�{��unshi�7� 5oirth R�n�e $0 ��Je-St<>�I� �he Sixth Prii1�;1}1�11.
��S.e.��.i.di�li�...ancL.t�.�irtg..a..�.�.rt..szf..Lc�.is_�,...13.,._and._C....c,.f.�..�aaa�.c�.d�.c�..:1'Ia�.._c�1�.�h.e.c�Ll c�t:�...�L:Vai.t._�'.i.l1a�.�.S.�.c.ond
l:ilin�= f i�iin3-nl�l;,{`rlca 4t•�ix*nff�IDI4)i"�tic} msx�� �rr€icy�'�r1};cj'tic'rj��<*c3 •ie fnllr}t��c�
- C'orl��nsnc;inc at ti�c�Ncx-thc�i�;t('c,ra�.es_tzL�.tti�l :��c�n i:
=...._..._..tl�e:.u�:.i;....�.t�.u[ta.�r.I;�._�n..d.al.anY�..:ti�.�...L,��s.t...i.in.e....cz��..ti�.e...l�.c�.�thu.as:c_��n.�-.c�.u�-ter...�.1:_�.ai�i.�.e:.cti.un...Z,._?).?�?....f'�:i1
tt7 tli���fit�itl�h i•i�h�l�-n�F tva�- I'sn�.t�f f�i S. Hitr3tcvs3�: '�lc�(.
- the���c�an ��n ��aigle tt� t'1��ris�lrt c��f 1(�Q tl Y re��5�l'4T'and alon� r3id St���fth rir t�1�� •�y la'ns_?i a!i
S:e:e.i_.(i1_t�}1.c�int c�n il7e W��;t li��e�ff��iail Rti'�1. 5��ic��t�czi111 l�ein�the Nc�rt11�asi,ri�- �e>rnc�r c�f�;��if�T «t
r1;
- t�henne cS�«�irai�ii��,��l<Zn�tla�•�ttirHment�if�ne���l li�ie�3nt� alt3nr th�•�i�t}rF�lu�rlv Einc cif����ir3 1 n�t A 15� (�
ie�t1�2_�int�tin the N«ri�1aw���;t����°(y rnz�nt,r raf saicf 1 {�t A �x i noint�h���ii�g the tri�e oint c�f'
,y,• ��
-..._._._1(�c:n.�.i;._.c�.n_.�an...ang1�._t�...tt7.�:._1.�:.i:l._«.f;._l..(?[t..�l�.v�r..�.�;.:;...�..1___�.7'..`..�1.c�...�1.1t)i.��..]:h4...��4_s;�t._I.inv._t).9:...��ii.d_L.C1L.9.,....1...1..�2_.�}.fl
1�e.t:
- rhe��ce on an ���igle tc7 the left t�#�7'� ��E��r�� �s�` 53�1�" 1 Sti 1 i fi et Eo�thi�� W��ti4� lin�o�f�Vail Rn��i•
- �h��nc•tan ��n�r le,tc�tl��ri«]��t izL���..t1t,,�r'E'�4 53't�"an 1�,� u ;xi�i ���/�es lin���g�LS�.�:.�.t, �
__._ .I:I].�l.l.C.k._Qll..tlTl i3llt?I.�...Ct�.FI1t�..Ci4'l�i��f:...l_(f..f�._d��..�:.�:�ll.f,.'.�4�3"'__l�.��..1_�...tt�:.t_t�>.lta.i;__1t�LstJ..in�....czt�said L�>.t..A.
- the�7cr oi� ��n �}3i�flE��fc�tl7e left�n�(�1'��1�1t�sre�e� 17'1 1"_ �(i7_�0 fc�e�
ehei�ec°c�n r3n �3nc1t tc� ihc�ri<rllt c}t�9(?cif,��•e�5()t}'CI(!" 1R i7 fr��i;
_�.SL4llLiiri�lr?IP ttD fllt'�t'Il t)�_{_�Q_{�{;.=TC-�"`'.,5� �)l),- $�.�Q1s<S:.L:
-..._._..._tl�c:.�a��_c�.i�an.,�i�le...i�_tt��._r..i.�*:l�.t._c7.f._.1..Q2...dc;�;���;.�:s.._1.3..`...l..i".......1._Q..l..�.t�._.(:i:.�;t>..m��r.���r....i.�`4_tiz_.tla.e:.�.�zr.th�t1.}::
linc;nf 41'e�t R1.��«��-T)rie•,,•
- t�hE�n��t oi��in ������le Co il����ri,rht rsf'�� cif�,rce-4 1 s';{)", ��nd •iloi��7 tliE°e�3id Nr�rrl�f��rl�� 1�n�,�h�1�t� 4��>r�t
tc7�iutlC t?-f�S:1tLY�;
=--_.ilieal.c:�.._c:�.nzlin�ii�g._al.c�.n.�..��..id.�.czrtl.zsx.l�,�_..l.i.ne:..and..�!_nn�..a...�cai_1:.�:.1u._Lb.�...].�:t:t...ha.Y.ii7g..a..��adi.u.�ai'_.�?�,Q.O
f�#: a clntr�+l ��nv*le n('C)fi cs�,��'��"1�„_ an �rc cii�ts�r�c�.x czt`'iR.ti� it�cxt i�t thc�G�`c,rcxl}� linr��if�1 c�t
�
thence on ��n angle Cc'i thf��riri�t of Rd�l� �rret5 48'i5"an-I •�1o��the V4��5terlv lini��t�f'1 nt�', �'il ?5
S:s:��.t..t�[h.k...�.�>.��lli...r.i�h.t-.tz1_.�:a�'....LtTis;.._(l.l_..I.]._�_...H.L.�:�14i:.i1Y..I�.£1__G.�
- thr�iire n�a ��n �an�le tti Fix��ric�h�oP9t)t3c�>�•F�e�C?1Y{}CY' �ni3 �iloi3t�1>>it'1 4ci��th ri��tt ni'�v-��� lint� �C)�(1t)
feet miirc iir 1e�55 �I�n the triu��noii�t t�Pbf°��€nninrr
7_Q�I.i:.I.:NL:I�_.lcL'.l.:L�-LA�1L-':�5.l.._"�.1L::I�1':I. ti�i..:ln���t�sz..ai�.�l l��x_c..��._ti�..a«�...('r.u�n_s.uh.�.c�,t_�r..cx.�.�.r.ty cic�s��'t.l?�d..a�
i�}Ilc»
A i:ri�n�>i�l��r ,•:�S�xn�E��Lit�L_tlte N«rth��-est��czt�:is�[���t�c�f'I.c�l� A af;�me.ii�ie�,�.���nf�S}t,�.t� I rif? of V�•�il
1�'S.11acs...S.�:�;c�n�f�.ilitag,..C:iaunt��._��i...i�a�l�,,..4.tai�:._ai:..�'..ca.l.c�ra�ii.,...rn.car.�...}��.rti.�:ui.ar.l.�:._dc4�:xibr.�..a�...fi�.11ct.iv:s:.
- Ccm�mt°ncit�s7 at the 1�c3�iherj5f c�t�r-n�r c�l St,i�tic�i�s 7 '1�c�ti-tim4hin � `ioi�th R•+n4Je�i(� �t�',�t c�{'ih� �;i�tl�
1'ri�aLpp'Tc.,r�cl i,�n.
-._._._...11u�n.c.�:��,utla.e:rl,�.ansi..a.l��1���..11t�...:l�a.�.t...li.n.�.t>:(�Sai.d...S�:z:Lican.7._._.�tl.?(�_t�;:�.1..1s�..th.c:_:zuuth_.r..i�;lit-t�l.=i4-.a}�
11ne t��f l;_�,- Hic'.,Il�av N� c�- �_,
rhE��ncc,nn �,n ��3iclE°l�ti t17e ritrlli i3P I(ltl iie�?re��5�I'r17'" ��ncl aliii��,5�3ic! S�iiit�i� ri�rhr-«f-w-av lin�.,
17�.f)9 ft��er 2i�the�Nortl�tiv���5t �•arnc,r��(�S�i�i l,c�t A anc9�tc�t�ie tr��e�r�i3i�e�;i� ' <r
_._._......._tl�c.���ti:c�.n._z�n...angls:..ic�....tl��....l.c..t:t_c�.#�.�_U{3_d�;gr.cc;,_ �1 �7.'..L�t�ci..a.i�}J.�g th�.._��c�L_Lin.c c�l s.aid_L.c�t A,_.��..���
6
`
j
� i
- thrnci?tm �m-an�slc�tn th� letl ot'9�c1e�FreeS{3t1'(�(}", S_(?____C) f2�c�1_ �
-._.._i:Il.�.11(:f�.._41l_i3.A_sii]�tT,I.(;.Li1...EI.1.C:...I�LI_i).�_..�ii__tl.���T,I..i:.L.S..?��_�.5_�..:, .f�:..�i.C2..�S.s,.1...1i2...LYIC:Nfl.illi.�.i.Cl.f..1�.f..:aillf:�_L�tL.°�.; !
thei7c�e�on �3n s�n�i��to t�hE��lnft t�f 1(?� t�s�re-e:;�9�4'7'?°'s3nc3 a3�mzr 5aiti'�.li�rth lint c,f;;�)0�tc��r rrt rh� �
l:t'13t: h('}tY1�C111I1111SJ'
Al�?.,
,('(�(;� T'�(f�R WI°I'F1 ��n 1-'�34c�m�an for In�7rt�5s��i��3 1 zrcee tc��incl trom ��i[7j.c����cart� cje�cril�c c� �3c fc711es��e. �
• f
A._ti_iail�u:iaf�_t��sG.n�.cnl.at._ihe St�uthl�.�.,�L_c.c�in�i s�:f...�i._��.ari...c�.#.:..l�cai..�..c�t�..4me�i�te.d._Nla�i.c�f.Sh.�c..i.._L u!'?.._�f�_4':�.id
Vil1s��7�; Sc�t�cm i I�'ilinrr- C:c}€enl�•cif F't�l� 4i:�1c�iif�('tolr�r�irli� inc�r.�}���rticE�I��rly cicyvcrihcd °aa fiilk3����• � .
- Cc�n��n���;.in`r at tl�e Nc�rth���5i�c_�«1cr caf S�t:lit�.t1 Z_I�:i���_ttyl�11p�_4t�u:tl�, R—jn�c RO 4�'e5i c�i'lYt�4i�lh ��
l.'_f�.in.ca.�al...t1 t.�r..i.di.an:
- th��ru-e.4n��thE��rlv<�nd s�lc�n«1�1�E 1'.•itit lin�����(�€ri �;�,c•ti�7n� ;�?�� It�c-T t�i t}�t� Sn��t�h �•rGht-c�f-�vav
lin��of 1 i 5. Ni�>h,��' Nc� F' .
- t�lae�ic��on ,��frle� �t�fli���ri«l�� t�f IO4?d��,�t's`:s:s 41'47"an ��ltinu said Srnrth ri�;(it-of-w:+ti� lins; � ��
l_'Z�_(32.1:e�:.t..2��...th�_�t�r_tl�.ti�:.�st...s:.czrni;.r....i.,..t:.sai.cl...Lol...�;
- t�hent��,��n,�n aa7g1E��t�o�17t°le(�i�nf�i Q(i fi�rrc�e,�ll'47"rind �ilc�n�,thf� L�"��#linc�r�f�ti�i�l T nt 4 95 �(1
��PN1 E4'I'}3i'�il'tIP��7(711t1-Of(��alilillll�,; ?
�
- th__ tnce c�i�si c'�'�"�si thc^ It.ft_}2avin`r a rarjiu�nf 15 (}U 1-.c�1_a f�entrai �nLJlt of 70 ci �T ,<.- `��>",'L
i1LS:....1.{:.11ctlLst.{�_�_�U�'_.I:ES:'.:L...1:tY_.i1..�2.t21I1L..4.��_1�3t1�E;.I].t;
- thc�nrt°al�m�J Saici P:�ngc>r�i SR (l� ft�c[�
the�net�c�n rm antic�fo the ri�rlil ifi�1�fi c�e�?t��ti�'i";�" fi7(}� €r��°t tn ihe t�rc�tit linc�ti{�t��ii3 1 {�r A; I
thej�c.t.c�n s;n '�tc?Ir�tc�t1�c� ri`�,.12LO11�.z r�k,,rr,,a 5 a't�„.an 3 -ilc� {r ai l�_l�_'�_,1� QQ fc,,,t rr,t�t:�r I
l.i;ss_1��_.ihc:_.ir..u�...�.t.i.e.�.t.._cr.:f:.h�::�.inn.in�,...<".ca.�.�nt}-....c�.1�..L���,,�1.�:,_:±i•ate.._c�.t:..�::.izl.t�.r.�tcic�
P.�►RC'F.1: R� A1n���e �tanrl�i�Sj, -- .l�'�t?S�lfil� inr�,,�,�nd f'.nrp��,,-j,�j,,�
A F'112I C)}� I ()(' A C)t-' .Al�9f�.'VC)1�1) ��1af' t)1�' SHi f�,l 1 C)i� 7 t)1• L',411, VI(.(.aC�l� �,P?f"f�Nl) I'(i IN{� I
CC)[,1��1'Y (�l i��1t�1.1-; S"C'4'I'I' {�1� t`{}i C)Ral)C) l�it)RC' ('�R'C"IC'C11 A(tT Y I)l�SC'k1131=C) A�;
[�n1,1.nG�+"S:
l;i'CilNNll`,i(� AI, IHF�, N(?Rl'Nl�rT Sl'I�fZI 1' ('(�KNt-'R C)1� `+AfC) t ()T , A 1Ht�VC'F�. `i(ll C�FI ;9 (
1)C?��ft}?5�=tl MINCt1 f?S 1; �I'{'()NI)4 F�:,�4"t A'�1C) AI t)N(; C H1�: 1� �R'C'Nl,i Y I I1V :{?1�tiAll7 I (�)'I' 4 f
A 1)!S`I'A�1("F�;i�I' "1>?_(iy F:I f.!` l.t) I�HF; NOR'I'H��:.AS'(' (;(�R1�1'k (11= S.A1C) [,n'f" ,4• ,l_HF�NCI' S(�f;'I'13 �
O...i�.t::.(�.L�1.L� 2:z:1r1..t�I�1'I:S ()4__S.I:.�'L?N.I2.�.L:A4:I::.ALQN.t�__I.H:LL.a�1:.L:Et:[�Y....L.i'�1E:_C)f_....:�AIU._L�3.:C`_A,....A '
i?CS'CAitiC'}� O(�` 1�; f}(? i:1.F"1., ,l.N(�(,F' Nt31��I'F-t 7d f)I�t��R[�4'i lf; Nil�[!11'C�C i� CF-'r�(l�:f�� ta:r:��r �
I)i�"IANt"I; ()!� itifi 1'i }�frl.l' "I'(� A P()('�1_ ()C� 1�1'fC�RtiF�-.,T.T{)N �'!°(°H "C'HF� �:Vl.c;-i°E�RI v C IN(�' C)f�
tiAtf) I.CI"T' ,h, `I"Hl'N(�1=', 1�()R°I'H tl I)f?(�}kl:C-;�''� M►�1'L1_:5 1)Q Sf?C't)'�(i)`� �1�C?fi"T' At�C) A1,(71tiC� S�'1IT:�.
�'�.L..`�::C�.1t.L.1.'.._...L1.N..[;._._Q.f�:._.C.�.l:i?..._L.(�"]'......�.,.....,�......[�.IS.':1:',�:�.�..E:......Q.}?.......I...l.i},.(1.t)....I�'.F�F::I::_.._C_��....:I::H.I:...._'1:'R.�I.L,._..t?.�1.��:'l:'._S),I�:
i�e::.,t;r�vN���r�v.r•v ��i: C::,�c��.r-; �;.ra.ca� c7r c��nr c�rzar�� �r_c�c;��.r,�-r��x �`�rH a� ��_���1I�:N,f,
r�c�rz arvruf��;� a�;r� r�c;Ftt��;s r3i.�i�vt� a ���K�r.. c�r� t.n•r a {��� an-�r��v���r�l� �-�aFa r��-� sFtt:;�:-�. � �r� �
��att. t�•r�1�;Y �F:c�c>�t� i�C .t�;it.S�?!.?'�_t��JL_1��1_t�t1:L:.�_:�r,a�r��-: n[:� C"�(2t.�r�anc� �r1�.1�
I.'_A:E�':I:.I.C_11:L:1131.:�.'....__:I�.�S.(:.E�1:f3:f'.L).......4..5......L:.(?L.L().11:'::s.:......._.....C.C�:�'t.�'I.LiL�.G..l.I�tS.:i_.....:�::1---.":I'HL.......I4.C?:li�I:::H E:.�4:I:1::I3.L_Y'
("()RN1?R f)}� I.i)`1'a 'I'1-IC'N( F� `iC?CI'I'N � I)i='(eRl�E `�' 2+ IV11�1 I'(¢:5 41() `ii�('{7RT)S f'A4'7�AN1) ,al (Z\I(i
FNI�. 1?A�,l'f::�2t.4' t Ci�l' (lE' tiAil) I.(�'1` a � 13I5'T'ANC`1� (�)i� 1?; {if) T�l�l.,(. ,l'(1 "I HC� 'C'RI i(� T'C}fN"T' f')1�`
131='(e1NNINt;: IHL NC'1; 1�;{�R'T"N "'-�L�L:�i�l�.E`S �() V91Nt l'i"I"S 1� `�i=C:(�)�C25�L:S'LA T7C�'I,�'1(-'C? ()E'
�.4_c7...��..l.�r�:r�....:�..t�.._;�_.�>��lr��r� c?.��....i.��.��.�.��i.��t..�.����:.��_.�z.:� ..a����..:u�:�.�:.�:i�.�,��...�r�.�._�� .s:��.��.._.���:�.a.
�
"(Nt�;1�CF�: `;(�[I,I.H t} I)1?��€tf�f:,S ?'i 1�11RIt�'T'1;� t)(� Sf�C'{)14i)5 F'AS'f A�Jf 4( t�N{; la'f-S'1'I"RI Y" I T'��C:
A I7C4'C',4N F ()1� �915 T�'I�I 1'� 'I'E{C �IC1� �,(�tl'lN 7� 1)1�C��t1 M�S ;() 1411Nt1I'i'S 1? St=C'(�i�C)S I:A.�L_�1
1}.1.�:.i.:.�.iv_C.L..�.l�:_..15C...13._1:.1�L':I:._..:.I.:U_.�_�}'t)I.N::.1.:..._(1l:_.iN:I.L,.K�[:;C"['IC):�(_._�.�!.l:..l.'H....L.H:E.._L;�,.S"1'LRLY'_._L.I:'�::[: U.E�.
S;�►I? ►.C}'l' A� t'Hf"NCl' NC)R'1.H t} f?i�C"rRFI�S ?; �1C'J[�"i'f�S f)f��E•�`r)t�;i�v t� t'��' 4NI) ql r>n�S.i 4t11J.�
L'AS'1'l'itf:V' T.(�:F�, �1 i)1�;'1'aNCf=' t?T: �c) 15 C 1-��,I, .!�(l T`H1-' '1'RI r�� ��nrN�� nr; iz�:r:Ahrr.rrnrr•. r,r-�r rorr r�,
O4� F�;A(;I,f? �'('A`i'1�.f?4� 'Ot (�RAi)O_
8
EXHIBIT "B"
Legal Description - Proposed Hotel Property
9
TOWN OF VAIL
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding is made and entered into on the day of
September 2003 by and between NICOLLET ISLAND DEVELOPMENT CO., a Minnesota
corporation and the TOWN OF VAIL a Municipal corporation, situated in the County of
Eagle, State of Colorado.
WHEREAS, Nicollet Island Development Co. is planning the development and
construction of a mixed use project consisting primarily of a five star hotel, a fractional fee club,
condominiums, retail, employee housing units and related facilities at 28 South Frontage Road
and 13 Vail Road, Vail Colorado (Lots 9A and 9C, Vail Village 2°d Filing) currently and
commonly known as the Chateau at Vail hotel and the Alpine Standard/Amoco gasoline station;
WHEREAS, in connection with its proposed mixed use development Nicollet Island
Development Co. is requesting from the Town of Vail certain entitlements pursuant to its
applications for a major amendment to Special Development District No. 36, a conditional use
permit for Type III Employee Housing Units, a conditional use permit for a Fractiorlal Fee Club
and a rezoning of Lot 9A, Vail Village 2nd Filing;
WHEREAS, in connection with the applications and requested entitlements, Nicollet
Island Development Co. is required by the Town of Vail to make certain off-site/public
improvements (as specifically set forth in detail below) along South Frontage Road and West
Meadow Drive consistent with the Town of Vail Streetscape Master Plan, as amended;
WHEREAS, as a condition to the second reading of Ordinance No. 9, Series of 2003, the
parties are required to enter into this Memorandum of Understanding setting forth the
responsibilities, obligations and requirements of the parties in connection with said off-
site/public improvements to be performed by Nicollet Island Development Co.;
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants hereinafter set forth, the
parties hereto agree as follows:
I. DEFINITIONS
1. When used in this Memorandum of Understanding, the following terms shall have
the following meanings unless otherwise specifically defined. The singular shall include the
plural and the masculine gender shall include the feminine and the neuter unless otherwise
required by the context.
"Improvements" shall mean those off-site/public improvements as specifically defined
in Section III below.
"MOU" shall mean this Memorandum of Understanding agreement and all exhibits
annexed hereto.
"Nicollet" shall mean Nicollet Island Development Co., a Minnesota corporation, whose
address is 600 Foshay Tower, 821 Marquette Avenue South, Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402;
Attention: Thomas J, Brink
"Parties" shall mean both Nicollet and Town of Vail.
"Project" shall mean the mixed use project being planned by Nicollet and consisting
primarily of a five star hotel, a fractional fee club, condominiums, retail, employee housing units
and related facilities to be located at the Property, which mixed use project is the subject of
Ordinance Nos. 9 and 10, Series 2003.
2
"Property" shall mean those properties commonly known as the Alpine
Standard/Amoco gasoline station and the Chateau at Vail hotel, located respectively at 28 South
Frontage Road and 13 Vail Road, Vail Colorado - Lots 9A and 9C, Vail Village 2nd Filing.
"Town of Vail" shall mean the Town of Vail, a municipal corporation, whose address is
75 South Frontage Road, Vail Colorado 81657; Attention:
II. PURPOSE
2. The express purpose of this MOU is to establish the mutual responsibilities,
obligations and requirements of the Parties hereto regarding the Improvements to be performed
by Nicollet in connection with Nicollet's entitlements and Project. These Improvements are
required to be made by Nicollet based upon the design and functionality of the Project or as
specifically required by the Town of Vail in connection with Nicollet's entitlements.
III. NICOLLET'S OBLIGATIONS
3. Nicollet shall be responsible, at its sole cost and expense, except as specifically
provided herein, to complete and perform the following (collectively, the "Improvements") in
connection with the Project:
(a) South Frontage Road. Nicollet shall perform the following
improvements along the South Frontage Road, using new and first class materials, as approved
by the Town of Vail and the Town of Vail Design Review Board and in accordance with all
applicable federal, state and local laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations: (i) widen the south
side of South Frontage Road and install a left turn lane in South Frontage Road to the entrance of
the hotel and a corresponding left turn lane to the entrance of the existing Town of Vail Police
Station; (ii) install medians in South Frontage Road from the main roundabout to the western lot
line of the Scorpio Condominium property; (iii) provide all landscaping and lighting within the
3
proposed South Frontage Road median to be constructed by Nicollet; (iv) install an attached
heated paver sidewalk/walkway (6 to 8 feet wide) adjacent to the South Frontage Road from the
bus stop adjacent to the Weststar Bank east along the Scorpio Condominium property and the
Property to Vail Road including all lighting retaining walls, railings, utility relocation, curb and
gutter, drainage and landscaping as necessary; (v) relocate the fire hydrant adjacent to South
Frontage Road; and (vi) pavement overlay from the centerline of South Frontage Road to the
property line of the Property from the main roundabout west to the bus stop adjacent to the
Weststar Bank (subject to timing and coordination of the CDOT overlay project that will be at
CDOT's sole cost and expense).
(b) Vail Road. Nicollet shall perform the following improvements along the
Vail Road, using new and first class materials, as approved by the Town of Vail and the Town of
Vail Design Review Board and in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws,
statutes, ordinances and regulations: (i) install an attached heated paver sidewalk/walkway (6 to
8 feet wide) adjacent to Vail Road from the South Frontage Road south along the Property to 9
Vail Road property, including all lighting retaining walls, railings, utility relocation, curb and
gutter, drainage and landscaping as necessary; (ii) relocate the Spraddle creek piping and install
new box culverts; and (iii) pavement overlay from the centerline of Vail Road to the property
line of the Property from the main roundabout (South Frontage Road) south to the property line
of 9 Vail Road.
(c) West Meadow Drive. Nicollet shall perform the following improvements
along West Meadow Drive, using new and first class materials, as approved by the Town of Vail
and the Town of Vail Design Review Board and in accordance with all applicable federal, state
and local laws, statutes, ordinances and regulations: (i) install an attached heated paver
4
sidewalk/walkway (6 to 8 feet wide) adjacent to West Meadow Drive from the western most side
of Mayors' Park west along the 9 Vail Road property and the Property to the western most
property line of the Property, including all lighting retaining walls, railings, utility relocation,
curb and gutter, drainage and landscaping as necessary and to match and be coordinated with the
final approved Town of Vail Streetscape plan for West Meadow Drive; (ii) all design
improvements along West Meadow Drive from the centerline of the right-of-way to the property
line of the Property and the 9 Vail Road property from the western most side of Mayors' park
west to the western most property line of the Property (specifically including any drainage and
grade tie-ins necessary beyond the western most property line of the Property), including all
drainage, lighting, art, streetscape enhancements, utility relocation, edge treatments, curb and
gutter and landscaping as necessary and to match and be coordinated with the final approved
Town of Vail Streetscape plan for West Meadow Drive.
(d) Pedestrian Walkway. Nicollet shall perform the following improvements
along the western property line of the Property from the South Frontage Road to West Meadow
Drive, using new and first class materials, as approved by the Town of Vail and the Town of Vail
Design Review Board and in accordance with all applicable federal, state and local laws,
statutes, ordinances and regulations: (i) install an attached heated pedestrian sidewalk/walkway
along the western property line of the Property from the South Frontage Road south to West
Meadow Drive, including all lighting retaining walls, railings, utility relocation, drainage and
landscaping as necessary.
IV. EASEMENTS
4. Nicollet shall be responsible, at its sole cost and expense, to prepare and submit
all applicable roadway, drainage, and pedestrian easements for dedication in connection with the
5
Project or the Improvements to the Town of Vail for review and approval by the Town of Vail,
Town Attorney and all such easements shall be filed and recorded with the Eagle County Clerk
and Recorder's Office prior to the issuance of a Temporary Certificate of Occupancy for the
Property.
V. TOWN OF VAIL'S OBLIGATIONS
5. Once the Improvements have been completed by Nicollet and accepted by the
Town of Vail, the Town of Vail shall be responsible for all maintenance, upkeep, watering,
mowing, trimming, weed control, snow removal, debris removal, repair and replacement of any
and all Improvements located in a public right of way or in a public easement, including any and
all cost and expenses associated directly or indirectly therewith and Nicollet shall have no
continuing or further obligations or responsibilities in connection therewith.
VI. FINANCIAL GUARANTEE REQUIREMENTS
6. Nicollet shall provide and post with the Town of Vail a Bond in the total amount
of One Hundred Fifty Percent (150%) of the total cost of the Improvements (as mutually
determined and agreed to by and between Nicollet and the Town of Vail), to provide financial
security to the Town of Vail and to assure the completion of the Improvements by Nicollet. The
Bond shall be provided and posted with the Town of Vail prior to the issuance of a building
permit for the Project.
VII. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
7.1 Amendments. This MOU and all documents and instruments executed in
connection herewith may be amended, modified or supplemented only by a written instrument,
executed by the party against which enforcement thereof may be sought.
6
7.2 Bindin E�ffect. This MOU shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of
the parties and their respective successors and assigns. The obligations assumed and agreed to
be performed by each party hereunder with respect to the Property shall be binding upon such
party and their respective successors, assigns and transferees. The covenants of the Parties
contained herein are intended by the parties to be covenants which run with the land under
applicable law. Nicollet agrees to make any transfer of any interest in the Property subject to the
obligations contained in this MOU.
7.3 Colorado Law. This MOU shall be construed and enforced In accordance with
the laws of the State of Colorado.
7.4 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence of this MOU. In the event the
provisions of this MOU require any act to be done or action to be taken hereunder on a date
which is a Saturday, Sunday or legal holiday, such act or action shall be deemed to have been
validly done or taken if done or take on the next succeeding day which is not a Saturday, Sunday
or legal holiday.
7.5 Countet�arts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which
shall constitute a separate document but all of which together shall constitute one and the same
agreement. Signature and acknowledgment pages may be detached and reattached to physically
form one document.
7.6 Attorneys' Fees. If legal action is commenced in connection with the
enforcement, interpretation, or breach of any provision of this MOU, the Court as part of its
judgment shall award reasonable attorneys' fees and costs to the prevailing party.
7.7 Invaliditv of Certain Provisions. Every provision of this MOU is intended to be
several. In the event any term or provision hereof is declared to be illegal or invalid for any
7
reason whatsoever by a court of competent jurisdiction, such illegality or invalidity shall not
affect the balance of the terms and provisions hereof, which terms and provisions shall remain
binding and enforceable.
7.8 Entire A�reement. This MOU and the documents referenced herein set forth all
the covenants, promises, agreements, conditions and understandings among the Parties
concerning the subject matter hereof and there are no covenants, promises, agreements,
conditions or understandings, either oral or written, between them other than as are herein set
forth. All negotiations and oral agreements acceptable to both parties have been merged into and
are included herein, it being understood that this MOU supersedes and cancels any and all
previous negotiations, arrangements, understandings and representations and none thereof shall
be used to interpret or construe this MOU.
7.9 Notices. All notices, certificates or other communications required to be given to
the Town of Vail or Nicollet hereunder shall be sufficiently given and shall be deemed given
when delivered, or when deposited in the United States mail, first class, with postage fully
prepaid and addressed as follows:
If to the Town of Vail: Town of Vail
c/o
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
If to Nicollet: Nicollet Island Development Co.
c/o Thomas J. Brink
600 Foshay Tower
821 Marquette Avenue South
Minneapolis, Minnesota 55402
7.10 No Third Partv Beneficiary. This MOU and any financial guarantees required
pursuant to its terms are not intended for the benefit of any third party.
8
7.11 Indemnification. Nicollet agrees to indemnify and hold the Town of Vail
harmless against any and all liability, loss, damages, costs and expenses, including reasonable
attorney's fees, which the Town of Vail may hereafter sustain, incur or be required to pay by
reason of any negligent act or omission or intentional act of Nicollet, its agents, officers,
employees, contractors, or subcontractors, which is incurred in connection with or is of any
nature whatsoever arising out of the construction or the installation of the Improvements which
Nicollet is required to perform under the terms of this MOU.
7.12 Termination. So long as the Town of Vail approval for the Special Development
District No. 36 — Four Seasons Resort remains valid and has not terminated by passage of time
or otherwise, this MOU may not be terminated, in whole or in part, without the mutual written
consent of the Parties hereto.
WHEREFORE, the Parties hereto have executed this MOU as of the date first set forth
above.
NICOLLET ISLAND DEVELOPMENT CO.
By: Thomas J. Brink
Its: Vice President & General Counsel
TOWN OF VAIL
B y:
Its:
9
STATE OF MINNESOTA )
) ss ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY NICOLLET
COUNTY OF HENNEPIN )
This instrument was acknowledged on the day of , 2003, before
me a notary within and for said County by Thomas J. Brink, the Vice President and General
Counsel of Nicollet Island Development Co., a Minnesota corporation, on behalf of the
corporation.
Notary Public
STATE OF COLORADO )
) ss ACKNOWLEDGMENT BY TOWN OF VAIL
COUNTY OF EAGLE )
On the_day of , 2003, before me a notary public within and for
said County, personally appeared to me personally
known and by me duly sworn, the of the Town of Vail, a municipality
named in the foregoing instrument and that the seal affixed to said instrument was signed and
sealed on behalf of said municipality by authority of its
acknowledged said instrument to be the free act and deed of said municipality.
Notary Public
10
09/1�/09 12:16 FAg 612 a�2 2428 SEMPER DEVELOPMENT LTD. C�042/003
�
1 �
HI� I�EVEL�JJl'MEN'T �C7.
September 10, 2003
VIA F,A�CSIMQl�
(4151789-1885
A1 &Xv�nns:Martens
Scorpio Gondominiums,Unit SOG
Vail, Coloz'ad�
Re: F'roposed k'our Scason Resort Vail
Dear A1&�Yvqxtne:
Reecipt of your September 2, 2003 facsin��ile correspon�denc� <:oncerning the above
referez�ced rnatter is hexeb�aeknowledged. Please except m�a�olo�y�or t]ie dclay in responding
to your correspondence,unt'ortunately, it cvu.ld not be avoided far a variety�of reaso�s.
in cnnnection witla ybur correspondez�Ge, I wauld like to clarify a ,.omment a�tributed to
me conceming the view you wotxld have from your balcony after completion of the construction
on the Cl�ateau at Vail pxoperty. M�recollectio�z af our conversatioz� an �v]tlr�7�C011_�was tl�ac I
insisted that the first pictuxe you �resented to me and Ihe Town �oun.ci (labeled "view from
scorpio top fl�or nc eom�r loQking south") was not a carrect represen�:r xon aF the view fron:�
your balcony but was in fact a z�epresentauon of the view from the Fm�itage �toad side of the
Scorpio Condo�oainium building. A.£ter you continued to assez�t that thi�, picture w�s a carrect
represEntation of the vi�vv from your balcony, I stated tlaat if that piclure� was eorrect then. the
praposed eonstructaon on tlxe Chateau propezty did impact your view xr�?re tha�n I understood
from aur earlier studie5. In connection with the second �ictu�c you pr��sented to �ne and the
Towza Council (labeled "v�iew from scarpio top floor se corner loolcuig �outh"} I stated tlxat I
believe dus w�as generally a correct representation of tlae view from your 1>aleony azicl was more
representative df my underst€�ndiz�g regardi.ng your view. Nevertheless, I agreed to review yo�.ir
request to see z� it was possible to rewark the building to shift cert�i�z condomini��ams axxd/or
fractional fee uuits to other ar�as of the building in an effort ta provid.e .rou with a rnore apen
view from your balcony_
Since aur initial conversatior�, we have spaken briefly twice l�y telephone wherein I
informed you that we had ascertained that die fixst picture yau present�ec� ta the Tot�m Council
(labeled"vicw from scorpio tap floor ne cornor looking sauth") r�vas in faci a computer gen�rated
simu.latian of a�view from the Frox�tage R�ad si�le of the Scorpio Ganc��mi sium building lookivag
south and it Was not a view from your balcony and that the second pictur� presented t�� tk►e Town
Cauncil (]ab�led "view f2om scozp�o top FIoor sc corner loo�ing sr�uth°') was ,� eamputer
aenerated simul��ian of�the view frozn yo�r balcon�.
Unc'I'ahnr i:mser 821 MxtquC�rc A��eruc
J.2�0]7�h Srrcer,tiuire 57U Suite G04—Fah:t��
7.]4mcr,C..Q NQZt12 Minneapvlin,MN S:i k02
3U3 825 850Q i Fax 3(13 835 7200 6t2 333 15Q0 i Fax 61g 332 2428
d61 I
09/10/03 12:17 FAX 612 332 2428 , SEMPER DEVELOPMENT LTD. �003/003
, I
1�1& Xvoane Martens ;
Septcmbe� 10, 2003 �
Page 2
After reviewing your request conc�rning the view from yaxi.� balcony, we have
unfortunately determined that wc are unable to accommodate your reyu.e;st. Zf yot� have any
fu,rther qu�stions regarding this matter, please do not hesitate to contact me.
�
Very tnil ours,
�
r
Thomas J B �c
President eneral �:��unse]
T�B:It , � ,
cc: Mr.Richazd I�e�zt, Scorpio Condominiitim Association President
Ms_ Allison Ochs,Tawn of�/ail ' ,
Mr.�2,uss Forrest, Town of Vail
� �
NINE VAIL ROAD
Condominiums in Vui1 Vilinge
September l0,2003
Forrnerly the Holiday House
Mr. Russell Forrest
Director of Car.lr.;u:��t;��e:��'.c�pment
Town of Vail
111 South Frontage Road West
Vail CO 81657
Re: Holiday House/Nine Vail Road Condominium Parking
Dear Russell:
Thank you foi- ihe recent letter regarding the Town's position on the access and parking associated with
Holiday House which have been historically located across and/or on the adjacent Holiday Inn parking lot.
Although your letter seems to be, in effect,an attempt to rule on whether or not Holiday House has the legal right to
park on Holiday Inn gro�znd, we do not see that type of determination as being the role of the Town of Vail. Rather
the role of th�e Town is to review the historical land use commitments which were made in association with
developments approved by the Town, and to avoid unjust and illegal termination of rights which have been
historically re�cognized. Because legal title to parking and access rights did not seem an issue during our previous
communications, which related to zoning and land use regulations, legal title was not dealt with. Based upon your
recent letter,acival rights to parking and access now seem to be the focus of the Town's concern. Because the Town
may feel that it needs legal justification for 1;,cognizing the access and parking rights of Holiday House, this letter
will provide the historical and current basis for the position of our Association and owners.
In th�e case of the parking for the Holiday House, the original and historic calculations developed by the
original owner of both Holiday House and Holiday Inn, and relied upon by the Town of Vail in connection with the
satisfaction of the land use regulations in effect at the time included certain parking and access routes which were
located and nnaintained on the Holiday Inn parking lot. This occurred at the behest of the developer of both
properties when there was,io division of the property. The parking rights serving the Holiday Nouse at the time of
its development in approximately 1972 were required in order that the underlying property could be developed and
were, therefore, appurtenant to that property. At the time the Holiday House was divided (both by lease and by
deed), the us� of the Holiday lnn parking lot for access and parking continued and compliance with land use
regulations in effect at that time required that the associated parking and access rights accompany the lease and
conveyance of the condominiums. The Holiday House and the Holiday Inn were, in fact, under identical ownership
until 1983 ani� identical management imtil 1989, and the minutes of the Holiday House Condominium Association
in �978(when ownership and management were identical and the condominiums were held under leases)confirmed
that the Holiday Inn parking lot was available for the use of Holiday House occupants.(pages 1 &4 of those minutes
follow this letter).
When the Holiday House property was deeded out to individual owners in July, 1983, each deed conveyed
to the grantee a co�.uo.:�ir�i�::,. unit with its appurtenances. An example of one of those deeds, which seem to have
been identical to one another except with respect to the respective property description and the grantee, follows this
letter. Each d��ed provides that title to a condominium was conveyed
TOGi�THER with all and singular the hereditaments and appurtenances thereto belonginp, or in anv wise
apperta�•nin�, . . . (Emphasis added)
As an appurtenance to the Holiday House property, the right to uses historically associated with and appurtenant to
the Holiday H��use passed to each owner of an individual Holiday House condominium unit.
You have :ndicated that the T�wn of Vail will not recognize any parking rights of Holiday House or its
owners on the Holiday Inn property because there exists no written document conveying those rights. You seem to
aclrnowledge the fact that the Town has, in the past, recognized and relied on the parking rights with which we are
9 Vail Road • Vail, CO 81657
800/$72-7221 970/479-7100
concerned in making land use decisions related to this property,but now the absence of a written document is relied
upon in the T��wn's decision to depart from its past analysis and practice.
Although no written document has been discovered formally dedicating the parking and access rights with
which we are dealing,the validity of such rigl�ts has been discussed in a recent Colorado Supreme Court case which
has been brought to my attention. In Lobato vs. Taylor (copy enclosed), the Supreme Court recognized that
easement rigrits associated with certain property, which have been historically used by the owners of that property
and upon which the viability of that property depends, are to be recognized, notwithstanding the lack of formality of
the arrangemE,nt. Although the Lobato case involved agricultural lands, the principle is the same. Like the Lobato
lands which depended on the Taylor lands for viability, and the Lobato owners who historically used the Taylor
lands, the Holiday House and its owners have historically depended upon and used the Holiday Inn parking lot for
parking and access botn fo:practical purposes and for satisfaction of regulatory requirements of the Town of Vail.
Under such circumstances, without regard to adverse possession issues or any temparary agreements which were
entered into f�or the purpose of providing interim evidence of certain rights, the Holiday House has certain rights
which should. be recognized by the Town of Vail in determining the interrelationships of the properties with
reference to its current regulatory scheme.
Based upon the factual background with which we are working, it seems apparent that (a) the historic
conduct of the parties, (b) the use of the Holiday Inn property, (c) the dependence of the Holiday House
development upon parking on and access across the Holiday Inn parking lot for compliance with land use regu(ation,
and(d)the reliance of Holiday House owners and occupants upon the use of the Holiday Inn parking lot have each
established the right of Holiday House owners to use that property for parking and access.
Based upcn this analysis, we request (a) that you reconsider the Town's past position that Holiday House
has no rights within the context and framework of the Town's land use regulations relating to parking and access on
or across the Holiday Inn property, and (b)that the Town of Vail require that any development of the Holiday Inn
property preserve and respect those rights upon whose creation the development of the entire property(Holiday Inn
and Holiday House)depended.
Very truly yoa�rs,
� -, 1
� ' ,% �l-�.:(�c,f��,--
��t,�LB`Gy�+..
�' J
Holiday House Condominium Association d/b/a Nine Vail Road Condominiums
Gwendolyn G. Scalpello,President
Cc: Mr. Ludwig Kurz
Mr. Rod Slifer
Mr. �JJick Cleveland
Ms.Diana Donovan
Mr. Bill Jewitt
Mr.Greg Moffet
Mr. Chuck Ogilby
Owners,Holiday House Condominium Association
.,�4i4 � d+�,r,y,a�.�,a r�.#��y a+��j .�f:_'j'e�� tf f�,Us���"j��ti.i�-`� .���)�4!��`''tit�f}�a j,F�.hi�., , t. t ..t:• < �y �•. �srf� r.�....� ,1 „�3:.+..�,.i.,.,s t�,r�F;_+b�s�..�}{ fy;t�
�f' � ���� �� .��� � ��}};�j1f7� � �,�n;�.��d,,��P, } ��.. ���' ; "�"� ;� ,:x.� ,: ��.�, ,�!`�t��fi���1,,�,y !f
�.Pi�� •.� �..��;'i3�f'a ��.� �)y�r�r„s. ' ,�iF�,��l.�, ,i.. ?��: '.Y "�$�:� :I,.. ,, i -,..�,�.t.:tiyi„ � �,-9 .�,t�� { �.;,�H��,,,u^)f�
„s � E�w,i i a�, .�!D � �- � �„ u:,.� , �� t ,f . ,�. _ t �-,�, r..�,,�,� # ..�. ,�t n�ts �.: ��, �
.'�, ��F i ��:��4 �,1.�r`�i ,.,n,��. :�t�����n i�.ai,» �.l. i,� i�����,���. �y. ! .a :.��fr:� ��,���r 6.E6,�y G �7 �I,,,, ..�.��I��.,yl�,.i(, ..7..>�IEI,i�:, a�i:�,��,}5.��
����nF"a r i� ,� ��,f � � 2� �,� �� �� ��r s 9a i r �7 y {d, i'�i� �+, p
�f�,l��i � !' ,Ai�4, rr,�,Z� ,s�, ���, 'f��j .:;��i f�,.���;� '�i !�.;.�f � ,,p� ��;
I� f�f ) ;�r t� �U. � i �i � i �. i 1; .,i 1 {
v�i i � f �2� „ t t i � �'I, i � i� i�r �!�?.}
z * � t.
i� r � : i ���I �t�-
�I �������.�, �� �� !.
�. � I
� i �' t`.'� � �� i ,j i 1 �� �:� i i ,�
, I � , r .'. . , . . ,. tt s� i � ��d�
� �c�n���ri7��aiirn �:ssc�c��a��ct� �, � � ,� �
, �, � '' '` �G
��� �� � i� �rl-.
i ; ' ` ,I
,' ' �
r � , ,
tt � � �� i ;i � � � il i
s��'' :it r � a �l , v � �� l
I ' y I' : 7 i '�' a ,� i3�.1
i � i b,� ,. �; t rj;
I . � t ��,�', � >Lt
� � f �'� I r 1 f�d
� ' i �� r � t � , + j� i i+�� i�+'i ;
� � , �t � n ,� � � ��
li��u' i � ! i i �i ��f � � A i i i . Ir
J I� S S f .' i, �t ! i ��i
, � � y� y,, µ � '� ;�
�r� � �l I ; ";��� ' �, ._ �,�,��L.�_'r� I � ��� � i ,� �i fi � �
' Cbnda�ti.rii�u.m ��sr�c3:�°��.c�ra �rznu��.� �h����-�,� '�� � ' ��' }
r� i� ��. 1 I �,t 1�'� �° � � ���
, �; , � � ' �rill�5t�,��;� �.��`�:,a.; ��� �.��� �:� , , �, ' ;
, � , �
, ` '� ' � �;� , � ,< �:
�," � �;; �. '� � ,'� 'f' , �; ' � , � ; ,,
� t i � :.II i I ��� � i it � ��i �ti) i� ' � {f�;
�t��i i �; i � ; I i ti � � i�d o�
j,i,
�'�t ' � n`_, ���' f'
�� i� ��
, �,
� �}�
,�:�, r� 1�t n �n �
���r�a � � �,� d �,e �: � '� , ;
�t� < <,
, ! , E „ ;, ,��
� ��s , � ', � ,�- � ,�' , ����
� ,i
�
,s 1 l:;�
�'S �,
�
`, t�t^7xi�: , .�:
} �-+ �-` y.� y, �� � � � < <
�IJ���, . M�. �41r������:v 4Y��..��C�Lt ' 'I, �� 4�r ,i �� ' � . i � -�.,
,�t 1 � ��1'lyy � ���1� 1`Yl.��.1.11G�: ."'� . � �.l � � I ' 1�1..�; � tl l A�
11 � ` . ,�I �'V .�I.�
F
� '' �;�� , ' �M��.��� �Jam�S� �atsc�i� � !� , � ; `� ' , ��� � `�3 ���� � � � �
� , , � �<
,- a „ � �
, ,
',�1� � M�. �TQ �:e�o�a� r�����.se�,��.�q ,A�r� t�c�r�r�r�a S���c�s.�.���nca � �, �� t�
� � , ;
' � ' i � ' ' +'�4
! , � � ,
� 4 I �tt��� s ' ' � i �i� ,
��� � � ; � , � �� � i '�, ��, � i �
��,��yk. � i ,` .�'�'�� �G—���x'S r �� ��.'�'�,E.'�`e"3�,, ��.Tldt���` ' ! i � ' �; � �i r �^� i' � �� t ,�����
'�i�� ; ����� �2�TIC��l'c`�:��. �' a,
� ��� , � , A�s�s�ar�i� l��n��age�`��� a�d ; Cc�z�c�r�mxr��.��n. �Mar�a��m��i� � � � ��,�,
' K��.� " . , - . � �,
� � , , �', � ' i,�
'�+ ��5� K�'�5�..�a`3�'� ��.YF�f"`'r-'�p'� +4.1� �`c'��.��'� ` 'L �' � ; �G � e � � � i i ;i
���, ' � ��?}7��J1�� �1�.,� ,�Ily �:C?T2'�.�'C7�.�E?'v" i t � i r i� ,� i �:i,��
�ri � i '.� � �i i �. i �;.
,�E � � M,i�C:� �R��d, ' �a�,�ri`��n�.Y�ce .�����.3����� � , ' , ` � `�
, '
�1� .-i .i �� �� � � � � ; i �' i i, � t .J � I
�i,� �' �11S:t� 'Ut3��.�'�� �'�]"CY'!�� �i`��5�'C Mc7.1T'II�C�f�'�� � � i'�� � � �i ; i ��! f i � 't'.�� � �:?
'''' R�.C��` Dc"i1�ICly �,:CS�'l'�r"e'��"� ',�e'�.1."II'I..C:r," � � �`, ,I i i � i �i �� � ,lt�`i
i�$ il i i :I � i i i ,� i � t t i � i> nlf
� � s. i ; li �
�di+3;st Q �i'1 E�'�1;21 kJ�.' i�X� -c"1� ',1.�. ��) ;t",i TTl � r , � � > >i � � � I
�s. � � �. � � Y , � � , n , ��.
���E� „ '� , ' '!i n� , 'i,
� � ; ,: �� ; , i , i�< <�„ , i ,
,�'�r+ � ' �� ':�1i���r.: �.n R��r�.ew�s Co�r►��x�'�s���' ,�� ����'�r��� ��:5"76-���191�7,�� ��; �.�97�'�� �.�"���6�, , '' � ���
��� ! 157�� ���n�r�as�`:� w�s � �e�n. �, a � �, , , . �� �' �`� � , ,� ,;��, , ' �'� '� ��i
�
'�,��� � _ �rcipc���r�; Budt�et=-, ma�j o'r cc�'s� , i� �r��.�n��na�c� c��,� .td �th� ;,Y���� ! .�ti�` , t�e � ' �;�
- � �c��.lr��ri�nr� ' �� � ;;, �
,
� 1;',, ' �� J. �xt� riq:�wpa�nti.ng �nd" �t�i��.z�inc�� and �'ep�a.�';�' � ' ' � � ��, ,,,, '?' ' ;
rl�� `� i : � �, ����Tl'��'�:I.CJx' �c'�:3,21'�7-Y"1CJ r�.TTt� �'£i���d,�,�'�• � � ; ' �� ��, ' , , n.,,�.� , �'; ,��,
�� r
,,;� � � 3 W�'�e� �i�ma�� c���� tc��� �;ic� bXz.�ld up, �'ec���ornraei�c� ��a�. ;�ap�,�h��� '' ''�,
, „ �' � ,
��,, , � pane��"�t ��i�t c�� a�a���o��z�rt���1y . �3�8,b�0 : � �� ��,� � ��� �,�
i �'(���,-C.''�` CC� ' � a � �.IS'��T7'`dR'1C�'� ��� � � , '! i ��
G , mm�nts rari r�p��.r.�, �i�c�.-'rh� ' � �
� , , , � .� ' �. z�
, 1: C;arpe��.�nc� ,�rqr�.�.�n h�'�v,i;I��r �s�ci, �a�eas. ' � ,; , � , ` ' " r;
� = � ;'' 2�.� �511gye5�1o1z th��.:�,'�..�as;t:G�r'�`:;c��' �c�ac��'`p�ti?�c,�'r� pJ.���'', h��v,y' zzia�.� ''c?n �;� �i
��'�,Q;;," ' �he mos'�� wc�rn ��ea�� cs�r���.��,�y� en�r'�:�c:��i`��nc�; .e�evatQr lanc�-�� .:��� '
,� i,rlt,�s� ; I., ' � � i '; �� , i ,
' '� � � 3 ��temp�� �av� 'kice� m�c��i,tC�� �'�s�w ,a�d ��;�e�m, ,�h�s 'nc��.,`���°a�r�,� � �:� �
� � �. .
S iX G G,."G.5'S�U 3.�. '' , � ';� , t'�, u
ii i �'`i r i ,i i: i " .i i�
,�_,
4. S�u ' �st;�.n�a ' th�t�'wh�fi� x t� i , � �,�'�� to` �.n t��.; ,�r ��� �,.��.�`�
�; � � �
5� �' � � � s �-, � p , ;,
� �� �ii-��:� �t.;_l�� -�<�r� �:�+�� x��p��� o-�c� ,�z�da�t�,d�a;���'' �in �wc�xn ��e�s �� ,��
,
� ' n. ' 'I'�� M��n��nanc� .R���:e���: ��7��' :�� budq���a e��h. y��� �.� ��e�uxxic�d ;t-r� I,',.
, �f��, ��ot�n���s at' �r�� c�� iye�.:��' ��` � � ` ,,' ' � � ;;�''.
� 1 . 5ugge�t::��n was th�t,` ��s�:�v�. i� z�o� , �<e�,"tir_ned ,� b1#t held j,bv�r ,�..c� '•�.
' � b� �:�sed�� E�,�° �any� ;a�� � �]��. � ��t u�� r�i�.�r���nar�rea ���c��c��� '� ` , ,� � ;�`�; �
>��� � ` << � 2 . � De���ic�r��; rnad� t�o a.r��.�uc��:��� wc��c�xr�g ;�-r� ,�c�nr��a�n1�.z��:urn dec��:�,a�.�r�ns ' , ;
i�, �"11C�'1 �.�]i�� �'��S��T��..' 7.«�i7 �7�251'1c3T°l��Tl�` . � � � � �,� � f� ��� �, ' ' �
,� � .1��.50 .Y`(:f:C7TTt2T1�'TiC��'� '� fl: �:.C)�1�=�,�:",#" 0�.�'S.�.'�' �O�'1C�C)Ill:'t,7l,J„L1.I11' r']S�'w47C1�.���ri �� :�
� y , Pi
� �� � 'ii ���" ��1�1� m@���C"l,f...l:�.`3 ��!_ ����.w�i �'ic`��`�@.�'.r'i g '� i i i u ',�i �� r ,
' i � � ' i i �� ' ` } ��' i i i � � � ih a �' {li �
`i ir
i i I I' !: I I �� � i �i .� � G f il �l
�' �
i i � 'a` i ', � 'i � � I r :i ' �'i i i� �� � � .�i� i � � ,�� ��� i�j���l .; � �; )�:
i, i�1� ��,,,n` 2f: . ��� �.� f�'.R�.b.�»,��. d�'lf.l:�7 _ '7f12�}17!_'.�l::L"?1�,;:�i >,� ��� � � !� . �' , `� .
��{� i�_"7�''� '1�� f���,i'SifJ�f Udr{A�' ��I+ ;Y7+ 'V� •!y'�;, �m��r`�p +sy�stt7,qi5 �j°i� �'i� -&� 7ri 3,',�.'Y�:di fi�':Y a.qwy Ha,�t d t �i �,i,.�,:,�.
j 4tr�t�} �i 11lY!f�!y�P ftij#��Y�k;k`i +f�t�G{�� ��,`��� 'f 19r� Xir� %�k+�° �I����St�. Y t'��S�n� � ! � � qvl�
s�� I�"iC� ,�( i ��t` .. P��i� ���:!,f n Y, .���5 t� ;.:�IFr 4�itj r����'r{�¢z{ �J_,.��,.1y� �t+��ry r� @ a�r t � j�
P�r �tdM1�4t f�. �f rt �"� 1 r ,�.'.7 fFI r��S��""I � i �r��tof iVlwr�Ay 1�t d �� ( ; '� I�:��i �14���.
i � { I�t �,��n i i " a�� t� , � t f i, � , i
n��i � �� � i f � i �t i l� �
�� '"� 1 �t �il '�� I �; 1 � :
!I � I N�
+ � ' i y:r� � `s � �.� i � l�i� i �j`I;ir� 1��.�
t i
,,�y J � i � 1{I�
i ��'a i �,� I�� ' i�;
i � �} v�(� r h�
�x',
.E
�,
,
�.���.. i' . d, � . � .. �� I f rt
� � a i, � :�������, ��L�U�.^ �'" i, 't �� Ic>. � � i i�,d.i � i � t'C�.
������ I. � �� "-�r � � ':� � ha ti
ael � � ��'� ��t ' ��', �''v s r i ' '�p ���� f ��4
� i i �,r
r: { u, �
a,•,� .. � l y l I���.f�,
����� ( i. , 1.,� 1;
�'� 4 �t. � i ���a��l�'7AL}�� r � � ;� �.¢�`
.���n�t��rt�1�tz�zt t� t� � ��;
, ,. �,
° ��;,. � � , � � �����
,t�' , , ' d` � i ' ,;;, �,��,Ir
i
r
��,. i , � ,� r
�i I
� ' � � � i i. i i ��. fi-
������J� � � i i�. � 'r �r � 1 �� ��1 i f i S��
i� � .,
i , i' ���i � 1 i ' ; � ,.� �, i 1.��
t i, i , i � , � � �,' , , , i ,� i , i i�,
, . , . . � , l t' : i� I �i � �I
, '? ��Cor�c�orn�n�i�tr�t �Mee�-�.ng MYr�t�ft�� ,�� • ��,. , r� � , ,, � � � � ; ' �,�
�����fr ����� � , � � ��.� � � �- � ' �.i i''� ,i ����;
,.�u1� S '� � i i., ,j , I i 4�,��
!. i r
i iL:
"� e 1 1 }�,�,
x1Jf 1 �
t
�� , � 1 i ,. . � ., �.. . �..
�,�t' , ` �. Qc��s�ic�� � f:l� �`� 'c��u�:� l�� �.a���ed' c��` e�.�,ma.i�a�.ed�' r�r ap�1;�.`�d ,
� � u ' � ,i: i � , t i� � � � � f��1
�1,�'ei�� i� C)27�� ��C�LI�°1T7� W:LX`1'�:E��'. i`,. t °' , �;
1��, Y ,�'. � � i, � .�I�
� ,, ,
,:,�` ' b. l�c�st rawn��s b���:,XzK� �..r� own �s.�I���.�.es, ��' ;:, � ' ;�,i t '
,
�, �� , r , ��.
�,,,� ` ` l`. "� ���r��;ari� ���s���sed� ��`o� ,!,�,,i ,'?
, �,.
_ ,, � c Conclus�.�r�>;�`�hK�t' �a�.,t?b . ��� b,� e �.zn� , � ,,;�
, ,
;, , r an 'indivi�u�,�. �a��3:�` � � ; � , �' . ,�� „� 1
, , �
' ` � , . � i� � I � �� �� �����;�� a�� �I���
� �,. �t'or�dar'n�.n�:um- 5t�`��m��7.� �:,' �. � � ���� ,; ' , ` ` � ; ' �� �' �; � �'��
� ,
,�,.;� ° , ' 1 . ,Ch€�ck"s ,e�n s�'�ct�.>�n�s�� r����d �� ' b� m�d� aut;-,t� �o��:�a� Hiaiis�,� � , � ' ' � ,;
�
rr��,,,,< < ,� '.�r�ndarr�ir�:ium 'A��t�c�.ata:c��.': ` � F � ;�;� }��'',�r`; � � s ,�:
����� , �� ,, _ � ,
���;;�' Z � �`c�r' �1.�' r��.her ,k�i.�ls,�'�nd pe��c��ya�,' 'ch��c�es c�u�iY�c�� ���a�r'!'cYi�c)� � � ��;�
4}���,,: � ' ' ' , i��eas �.r� b���mac'�� �out�� t�a -k�t�l�ir�ay �n�` ��If � � ,. ;I , � ', <<�;
�;���j' �� ', 3 � Con�rc��,�.er r�c�`��s��c�� �.h�.� ;�ss�x�'��y�c��;�� f.h��e � �,�e' ��a`o ;'�����"��e � ��,
, , � � , , � �. �
, � ���
� '� � � �.caoun�:s � �: � �"� . , ' � , ,�; , �, , � ��: �'';
, �� , ��. ��;L gg��q� �a�-�s zn �,C�ndt�miz�xraxn�' �� ; ` '` ' ,' , � � ` ,` � �
� , „ � �,� � ��.
-�����f` �• ,; Rec�t►est; �(a �ur�:h���.:�z�a' �.c�.t�,i��.r�na1 c�,rt . ,' ''�` ' ,,� � �� ` � �,�� � ';
�
��x���s��� , ;. � ,� �Z . 3�equ�s�� ta p�.�.cr�,' ��..gn, 4�i .�h�..�,���'ac�e ;ca�� asklnt� �us�r ��t� ��1.�as� ��
'� ' � �^��`CUl"�I �F.�a�.t�'�.�"�`t5 ,gc��'�t�g`� �c��°��l LO���'-z] '�.'Zri1.�11C-�G�. , ,' i,'i � , �
G�
� , �
f . � � t.
;<< N .�. park'z.i�c� , ,.
f}wi��,� � 1 Wl��en na p�rk�n,c� ;i� �x��i��}�1�:� �..n� c��x�ge�,,,, the ,.Ha�.�d�y �`Cnn P,a�k , , , ��:
,a�,�;;�i � ;.; t ,�_ ? ing,��, �.a.�: 15 ,c��»�u�'*h ','�C�� ..`'��lE' Y.I.�f�' Cil� 't�'1�" C011�am!1.n��nrn5, ,L�,1thQtxC�rl�!;�i$ �� '��i � i,ll
1=
, :, � �� o� ��ye�,,� "fi��,r����'M�� :�nc��k ��r�e�a'� �.� ��'�b�.'�m � ; �� , ' f
t��' , , �' 2 ` �;�';�cl� -.�p� pa��.a.z��' ''p�.�u'� �� I:"'r�in� IJ�:�k c��: ,��r���'�..��y` Tnn.� � ' � ��,� '�� �'��;�
, � , � ��
` � ii �(� , ��C>c�.�'G� C��' ��r`E�C`�C7x''� !;' ", � ; ,'� < ; ,�� , `, � � ��
,
;f, �' ;,, �� ' �.t �.� ��.m� tc� ����ab�:�s.�h ;� 8a��d r�� D�:r�c�c��s `�t� ac�' as ��.�sp�� � ','
F � � �� " �; � il�+ ' t�� ' 1
, ' ', ' �� betwe�n '� owz���� �a�`ie�,.t�i��i�g���4ie�#� � `� �'� `� � '" ��'; ; � �, ;� ,;; ";
' �2. ���ter wi1.�. ���b� .,���t����r�;c�u�����.�� �tc�.L�azi�.eers- , ,�' � � `� � � ;� �, ,� ,?
' � �.7 . ��� .��1,.1.qL ';��.5.1.''}w1e `f ' ,:' � .� ' � �;�, ;,� r i �;t ,�i
-��.+I7.'�,` ''�CJ � P,'.I. 'E�'G'�..!I�►�T[1�G^�x'S. ' � I � �J
� r � "
� ' ' ' ��1� r< < ���,� �; � lai
i , .,, ,� � ,, , ,�t
� t , , �'i �� ��
�
. �
�GG'�:'l.rit� ��'Wc35 �r�U�}�'tJ.�I7�'C�. c'3'�'; ��".�. .�}��� �:I'ft''r i. , � ti �. �ri�� , 'r� � i ';;� ��� ,'
i � �i �; r � ;, , +� �
� � ��� s � ��'� ;,.� i , , ��� ;
��� ii � „ ' ` �� � ��,i
�� ` i I'� ��; � ,� s i ��,� !� ��i � I � '��t l�,:i � � ,.�
�'4 I, � � : 1 fx i,�. 1 � i .; � I t�;:
ii �'i � i 1 � �� i ��f q i � I �r
I I , �' i i '� i S" � � �r �i i � i����' �� �f; � �t i({ (�
1 . i
. r � .�, ; . �.
i � i �1� i f � i ���� i� �;1
i ;I„fi i i a,t�
� i `�� � ���: i� ` ,t , � ���� i ����,i<.�r.
,.I i � s � 1,���. ,�� � .,... �; �,
i, �t � � �,, i ,j , , � , .:
.� ; ; � � �i i � i 'i ; P � :�i
i i i ti � I;�I i i!�., 1
_ � `� � i �
ii. i i
;�,i i „ I � i�i i
� i.� I � �� i' ��
� �1 � � 1 �
�" ,1 l I 1 '�� � 1 I I
i� � �I' ��I I �'� ,��� I 1� �
� I �
�
��
{ I �� I t li',:'
`��� j� �. F� 11 �' � I � I � I � � � 1
I � t � � l
� I , �' t f �i s �, d i . �', t i ._ I �II ; r ��
� � I, {t ' I � �� � ! � � I t i i '�. � ?i i � I - � �� �:
fi � �'.[ 1� �„i i ��1 . ,i � ) � ��i � , J f.'i i '' � . i r i .., i ra
. i ��i i le � �... i � i� �; �� �,, � I � 1 � I ( I � � �tl3)�
, � , . , i . i ' � � �f�'
I' i i : ' i '. � ; , ;i �i f � f " il� i ii
1 1 I I ! !
I ' 1 ' � 1 � il f '! (1 � h,
�.�i � � ��� � �� � � � � � I i 1 � � ���:
I
� � i� � I {1 � 7.:� ' ,� � I � � � ii �� �j�:
I� ,f i � �' � � � f � ,.��i i I i� � �
' � � �� � � � i i �ii � i{ �� .k
� �' i I� I �� i .� � i i r � �
� ��,� i i ��. i �� � F��I �I � -'i �)
i� i , r 1 . l � � �' ���' � i i :� ��.
�� �. I � i � 1 (� r � i f � e
� , !I
1 I �f f I I } 2 ,�-.I 1 f �1� ! I I 4f '�I I �:
� ��� � � � � I , � i I i�� �l � i '�, � 7 7 i n
� 7 �� ��� � i ,I�, ���i f� f � �� j' � I .;
i . : 1 . t,�t I I i'�I .I I�.;
!� i f � ; �; �. ' I� �� �� UI �; i•� i
i 1 i( � s .i: �' i � . �� �� � i 1 ^ i� � 1 � ,:,
1 r � � u
' ,
� � ,q�S� �� ��� � i':� b r i � � , ��,I � i i '�> 't 1� �(� � �
i
�f.f' i '�� F �.'I � ` � i J I � �� 1 i .,i � �;
��� �� ;� �, �f ;?
,rl� .�.i( t i,.'I�� , i ,: i �'.�i � t� i �� � � � �. I � �� iI� I ,�.. �i � .�ii
� .f ��� ._� r� i i� � I i���,�� i�� �yi, �i ��r fii���� ii i .i� � �1�i f ���,
, �, .,,i . . . ��'), , i, �n.�,r�, ,� � t�� /"3 �„ ,� 1�i7;�i� I iU„�II, I I I i�i ;i f i i i'`f i 1 1 I 11.�� � ��l r "J� i,
�l , .. 7 r�r=�, r�rr � .. Fyrnh�,��i^7a t°.;���7�1 , .. . .. . , ,i i ,. . �� D ....,'... J"',
�.�,: . ,' „�.n,N,...r N»...,.»../�MA,.,.M. ._._ . .. 2 6 � 8 5 q
, ►R+�1«n..rAµ.., ..,....A�r�I..............
'! , N«i.M1na N�,. . . _. . ... M . ...� � —....�
� . "�'�.."'.__. t�Odl�
c. n
�:.�:�..�;:---
� JOHUIlt. ; ..����L'ER
r
'i, . , or •
eac�E � �o
a.
� ''� ' T��iMI)►,►.�►, MNIIYIIII� 26th � July
V
�� ' puc 10 II �6 ,8 i
iu83,�N�W������ yAIL H. l� GO.,
r,°�yp�niteJ Pai�tnershiP .nnx�.��"r �� y�:�'��d.�'
� ,�nn. • .
'� GUILLERMO OYNICK. 7AMARA OYNiCY.� ��f;��� •"" �' �
l��lurudu�ul lh��flr�l�m�l.un�l
IVCL1A OYNiCK and CARLOS OVNlCK 54��,,�pO. '"
N'IIIIMV��MM�������'�"��" �/o Dr, Jose Jyn lc k� 1 5 V J e s t 7 2 n d S t r e 4 t� N e w Y ork, N.Y• 1CO23 �i
M�d:{l�lv uf��������I��n(tha�r��imd pni 1�. �
��Clhr �'uuul�'uf . � """"'-'-'" �
N'I T\h v M l:l'1 1.1'l u u u u��u i d p u r�w��f t h��f i r w l p r ll,fnr and in rnnwidnrau�n���I lh�•�������•� '""-'- U04LAN5, I
'LN UULLAkS AN11 OTHEIt GUOU AND VALUAOLE CONS1DEkA1lON5----•------ ,
to th� ��Id y�nY of tt.o flnt p�rt In Mnd p�ld bY tM Nld WrtY o! �� ��eond Pan, �� recNF. •wh�r�of I� heroby
�cMnowl�AKed �nd eonM��A, h�� Mr��in�d, Rnnl�d.wid�nd eenv�yed. �nd Ay ibe�s prvwn��oue. ur�nt boiKu,.�
MII, convey n�d conhrm, unto lh� ��f4 prr�Y of tM NeonJ p�rt, hb Mln �nd udM��� foravcr. sll the tollowmx
dncrltwJ bt m pera�l of I�nd.Nlu�t�, Iy1nR�nd MInR In th�
County of E09�! md 8uu o(Colondo, to•wlt:
� FEE CONDOMIN�UM UNIT 1B, I
TNF. IIQLIDAY �IOIISE,
� according to t'�e maN thereaf f11ed for record and the Condoininiu�n Ueclaratio�� i
� for the HoliQ�y Hous� recorded 1n Book 229� at Pege 935, County of Ea91e, I
� Stete of Colorado, �
uMwM�www�.�Ir..�wMAwMwJNr� .,,.,�-,,.-.�,..w.._.._....__..� �
��.�,�
�„X,x...�
TII�M:'I'llh:ll wilh nll und,inKUl�r thr brr�Jltwmrnu nd�ppurtrn�nvr�lArraW Lrl��nrtnK.,�,r������� ''"j"��'J:S4.
� •,yl FFU��IIO�I�Ifn(IU ilu�i�•��I�.����
�11111111 IIIIII IIII't'1'V/'I'Ml��tl Iltl�l 1'�'VI'1'Ml��fl��IVIIINIf11IVF MIII 1'1'MN1/111'1'11.1' �IIM�
r.twlv,r�Khh t�llv,InWr«.t,ririm rnd drmrnd whrl�uvvv�of lbr��W p�rty nf tbr ffr�l pwrt.rn hv�in luw or�•q��it>."�. I
in Mnd�o thu rbovr bxrKMinrd prrmbr�,wlth th�h�r�dlumrat��n4 rpyurtrn�ni•r�.
T��IIAVY.ANI�'f�i Ilnl.t�thr Mr1A pr•ml.v�rM�vr b�rr�lnrd�nd dr�crllwJ,wlth lha MI�P���t�•nxnr�•�.��nt��thv�Mn�
�mrly nl'Ih�,����•�����I I���rl.bin III•II'M IIII�I NMMINIIM fur�wi•r,Aud lhv�I•Id pur1Y��f lhv flrnl purt,(nr hun.��IL lu� h�•n�. i
��KVi•utor��Mu1I MAf11I11I�U'NIUI'11,duu+rovrn��l,R►�tlt.b��R�in.�nd�K�rr lu Mnd wlth thr�xid perty uf the.veund purt. I
hl�h��rr nnd n��iKne.thut at Ih�tnnv nf lhr vn���IInR�nd drlfvrry uf tbe.r pre�rnt�,he{�well Friavd uf th��prami.e, i
ulwvu cunvuy�d,un uf Inrud,�urv�P�'rf�'vl,MIIM�IUIY MRII IOIItl�tlM�{IIItl�'�lNlu 1/(IOIItlf�IYOCI�,in Iww,in fv��n�mpla.rnd luu �
K�Mid 1'IKbI.f1�ll p��wvY ubd Irwful wulhorily to Krrnl,b�►Rxfn,M�II und eanvey tbu wrmr in muiuu'r und (ui m u�
rforrrnld,Mnd thot thv MMme�rv frvv rnd rlr�r frnm �II formrr �nd uthur Krrnu, brrKnin�,Mul... lien�, u�x�•�. I
�����NmMn«�nA�ncuml�r�ncr�nfwh�trv�rklndorn�tur��urv�r� except General Taxes tOP LIIE'
year 1983 end subsequent years� easements of record ar in existence, and g
recorded declaratlons, restrictlons, reservations and covenants. �
rnd lhv nbu��vd bnrRNinvd prrmV�v»in thr qulrt rml pvaenMb��poM►arrfnn uf th���id purty uf the»ecund purt.In.
hrlre und wrFiKn�uKaln�t rll rnd rvvrY(wr�un ur p�rrunr IawfullY rl�.ImVnK nr to clufro the wl�ulr or uny P���'t thrr.•��L I
Ih�� rnul purt�'uf lh��flrMt pnrt nhnll Nnd wHl WAItRANT ANII NOREYF:II I)F:h'F:NU '1'h��einKulur nun�6vr .hnll
Ineludo lhv plurnl,lhe plurql tM �InM�INr,Mnd lh�uw.�f rny RrnJrr ehdl br Mppllcablr tu ull Renderr. i
INN'1'I' KKN'IIY.ItF�11F'.Ih���ufdpnrlyulllu�firrlpnrtl�nhhrn��ml,'r��Gh'���j��Limi�L'I� '��Jf1111C1'S�1IIII'I �
���'tAMlsFS C0. a Colorad� GenFral VAiI d j ,I
fartAerahip BY: Associated Inns and i�`�
f��� ..
• Restaurants CumPany uf /Nixria�, an Ohio �y; µoy�,rt, L,�Sol lz, try t'7111is n�! �•ti?�'ir,lvie.
r �' Corporatlon as General Manaying Partne ��� J��n ;`,_,� ___�t�,rr,cy-i.r-r'�at
i . j.' by,H1-111s t1. f+IcFarlane. PresiCent gy`Ni� is M. Mcl ar,lane , �' ��� i�
� �:��. -� � �� �/rf�il �- I ` ���
/ , /:� � �:;�.,,i.,
, . � ?�+'�� BY:' Peu��. aai�ey ��j ,
,`,�� '�i 1STATCUYCOLORApU 1 MM�
j �'' nf � W111is M. McFarlen, D,tt.�-'.n-Fa�l't
, c� ,, .. r�.u��r penver bY �
�. �I�,.„i I�i�
�.' �1���(or,��(oi1Pt I�I�IY11111VIII WH�NPY.tl11WI/�/IKV/I I�Pf��rv mr�bin ?6th ,
,.,, ;: � 4AIL H. l. CO.� � L1mlted Partnerxhip, lfV, RuGert. I.. '.��I�.�, � � '
��,�;; ��iwe�;:,�,y 8a11ey� W�111s M. McFarlane and CAt�IiF`i CO., o Colornda Genr.�•��� Pres.
. • Pertn rsh p� BY: Assoclated innz ayd Rrstaurants Cau�/ari1 �,�,' ''�''i� �}y��,��j�
� . r,�1��,1t `r Qrk�? orporati 198�s Gcnr.ral 11a��a in� r�rt�ior �Y��',��, ��. �/,.,���.,�.��.��. ,.,. ,,,,
� � , ,�,��1 , �z�1�i lune 2?. + (�., , � � . /' 'T1
�� ti �v\��r�1 m4552 S.Quebec S�. 1��.��-�I'i ��,� �, �« ��';,' �� ,
,,�i.� � J 'c, 802a1 -,�:...
i _D9t111DG�_.,...�._..�-,'k-r..cr•._.. 1/ i`
� . '/ U`'+.. '�. R ..» �.., ... ' , ....f � e��MJ C• nunr.: .�.m��;i ,��
� 'i' ����N Ihre+m�A. WAIIMANTI DKrD+I'W PMCqIMrM�M�ar1—n�c �.n
� � .4 • ' .� �,j`\, � ���� , � �Qllq ilt�i
� �j�� � V—5,�'7 Go,
P,+1 M.. ��� k ��4��4�'✓/�I����"`�` -�,' � � ��' �'�.;. l . � .
°xY '�di' �.i ..,,ptnt+.�.x.��'ir ��j's.. .� ,..��.� 1. � � ��.
, �...., . . . . ,.:
a
"x� � Y, i � � � � � ' � L �.1 � ' y"� � ,'l;�
-��� � ��r!�re�r�,+'� f ., / ,� ' „ ', . � T ,
-- . . .. . .. . . , _ � r r r•: . r . n�. .,a.�.. +. �.�,
` . :' ' ,. �. , ' - _ •.;
..-- ---- - -- ---- - • -- .._ _. _ __ ._ __- - -------- _�__._�....... ____ .._---. _�_..____...� - _ .�.._..,--.. —��__.
9;$ Colo. 71 PaCIFIC KEPORTER, 3d SERIES
Campisi; Hugh R. Denton; Robert Paul h,
Eugene LOB�TO; Zack,Bernal; Gabrieli- R.esteli; Eugene J. Kaflia; Avis VI. Qf
ta Adeline Espinosa; Edward Espinosa; Anderson; Clifford R. Jenson; Don W.
Pete E. Espinosa, Jr.; Corpus Gallegos, Jacobs; Raymond E. Gauthier; Francis �•
by and through his conservator Yvette P. Heston; and Howazd G. Frailey, R.e-
Gallegos; Gloria Gallegos; Rupert spondents. na
Gallegos; Raymond Gazcia; Charlie vo, OOSC�2i. 3,
Jacquez, Jr.; Adolph J. Lobato; Bonifa-
cio "Bonnie" Lobato, by and through Supreme Court of Colorado,
his Conservator Teresa Lobato; Carlos En Banc. na
Lobato; Emilio Lobato, Jr.; Jose F. Lo- cla
June ?�, 2002. we.
bato; Presesentacion J. Lobato; Gloria .�---
:l'iaestas; Norman .l�laestas; Robert ten
"Bobby" VIaestas; Raymond J. VIaestas; Successors in title to original settlers ot acc
Eu ene VIartinez; �Iark l�Iartinez; �1ga- 1�1e:dcan land rou
g grant.brought action against ber.
tha l�ledina; Gilbert "Andres" VIontoya; landowner who had fenced adjoirung moun-
Shirley Romero Otero; Eppie Quintana; tain property, seelang rights of access for pre
�
Lucille Samelko; :�-nold Yaldez; Ervin grazing, hunting, fishing,, tunbering, hre- me�
L. Vigil; Larry J. Vigil; 1'Iichael J. Vig- wood, and recreation. The District Court, �, F
il; Billy Alire; Robert Atencio; Frances Costilla County, iblax C. Wilson, J., dismissed
D. Berggran-Buhries; Jose Fred Car- complaint, and successors in title appealed. acce
son; Elmer�Ianuel Espinosa; l�Iarguri- The Court of Appeals, 832 P2d 1011, af- orig
to Espinosa; NIoises Gallegos; Ruben firmed. On grant of certiorari, the Supreme adjo
Gallegos; Richard J. Gazcia; .l'Ianuel Court, 876 P2d 1210, reversed and remand- fenc
Gardunio; Ruben Herrara; Jeffrey Jac- ed. On remand, the District Court, Costilla settl
, ; quez; Adelmo Kaber, Crucito Maes; County, Gaspar F. Perricon�, J., dismissed the
Daniel D�Iartinez; David l�Iartinez; Jesse complaint and denied landowne�'s motion for deve
:l�lartinez; Leonazdo Martinez; Rosendo attorney fees. On cross-appe��;s, the Court of
.l�iartinez; Solestiano .l�Iartinez; Alfonso Appeals, 13 P.3d 821, affirmed. On grant of �• E
l�Iedina; Gilbert 1'tedina; Leandazdo certiorari, the Supreme Court, Mullarkey, '
�'Iedina; Loyola vledina; 1'Iarvin i�'Iedi- C.J., held that: Q?successors in title to ori�i= ment
na; Orry Medina; Baymond Y. il�Iedina; nal settlers had a prescriptive easement on eren<
Rudy l�Iontoya; Gurtrude C. Olivas; ac�oining mountain oropertv: (2) successors
Eppy Wayne Quintana; Robert Romero; in title to original settlers had an easement �'' E�
Shirley Romero; Anthony Sanchez; �estoppel; (3) successors in titie to original �
Bonnie Sanchez; Eugene Sanchez; settlers had an easement firom prior use; and strue
Evan Sanchez; James Sanchez; Jose G. (4) scope of riehts of successors in title were ' Cana�
Sanchez; Rufino Sanchez; S.R. San- limited to pasture,firewood and timber. �0�
chez; Vernon Sanchez; Ronaid A. San- Reversed and jurisdiction retained. benef
doval; Elesam Santistevan; Daniel Seg- ber o
ura; Floyd R. Solan; Cazolyn Taylor; Martinez, J., dissented in part and filed revea
Sam Valdez; l�Iartha Vialpondo; Joe P. opinion. ment,
Vigil; And Walter Vigii,Petitioners. Kourlis, J., dissented and filed opinion in , a'i� r
v.
which Rice,J.,joined. their
terpre
Zachary TAYLOR, as esecutor of the Es- conte.•
tate of Jack T. Taylor,Jr., deceased; the 1. Easements a3(11
Taylor Family Partnership; J. Hoy An easement can be in gross or appurte- � 7. Ea
Anderson; �l�Iarvin Lavern Stohs; nant; an easement in gross does not belong Wa
Edythe Kelly Stohs; Chazies W. Gelder- to an individual by virtue of her ownership of Ir
man; William F. Phinney; Harlan A. land, but rather is a personal right to use , nal se
Brown; Dena F. Fuhrmann; Jimmy C. another's property,while an easement appur- ; rights
Crook; Freeland D. Crumley; Joseph P. tenant runs with the land and is meant to � erty t1
. . . . _ . _ - .... . , , - . .__ ,�-°:�_
. , , � - ,,.•, . .,:, ;
- _ . . ,_ . . . . . . � .... . . . .. . .,. . � .. . . .y . . _ . ., � ,. ... .,. ....
.� � . . . i. .�. .. _ ' '• lr . ` .• , . .. ` . .. - ' � � .. . . , - �_ . . . �..
.. :�.•': , 1 . ,j . ..._ �.-- . ... .. . .. > .. _ _. . �. -. _._ . . .. . .�.. . ... . ,.. ._. ' . .-�". . � � .. . . -' - . .
I
� LOBATO o. TAn.oR co�o. 939 ,
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
�t Paul ) benefit the property, or an owner by virtue pasture, water, firewood, and timber in 150
is M. of her property ownership. year old document granting original settlors
�on W. ( access rights was a reference to property
2. Easements«36(1) y
rancis � which included fenced mountain propert ,
�y, Re- An easement is presumed to be appurte- where successors to origina]settlors accessed
� nant,rather than in gross. fenced property for over one hundred years
� 3. Easements<-3(1) to exercise rights outlined in document, re-
sources listed in document were only avail-
� Access rights successors in title to origi- able in fenced property, and deed which
na1 settlers of Mexican land grant were �.�sferred property to landowner subjected �
� claiming in adjoining mountain property property to all rights of way and claims of '
were best characterized as easements appur- local people to "pasturage, wood, lumber and
tenant to the land, as under Me�can custom so-called settlement rights." -
lers of access to common land was given to sur-
rounding landowners, the access was used to 8• Easements c>3(1)
�gainst � benefit the use of the ]and, and there was a Waters and Water Courses a156(2) •
moun- j presumption in favor of appurtenant ease- Document granting access rights to orig-
ss for � inal settlers of Mexican land � '
i ments. grant to ad'oin-
� �e� ing mountain property for pasture, water,
Court, 4. Public Lands«203 firewood and timber was intended to create
nissed � Mexican law could not be a source of permanent rights that ran with the land,
�ealed. � access rights claimed by successors in title to where access to common areas was an inte-
1� �' original settlers of Mexican land grant to gral feature of the settlement s stem
y grantor
preme � adjoining mountain property that had been in document was operating under, and agree-
mand- � fenced off;where predecessors in title did not ment by which grantor's immediate successor
ostilia l settle on grant until after land was ceded to obtained titl� to mountain property provided
nissed � the United States, and thus their use rights �at settlement rights conceded to settlers
on for � developed under United States law. were confirmed by successor.
�urt of 9. Easements<-15.1
ant of I 5. Evidence a448
arkey, � The question of whether or not a docu- �ough 150-year-old document written
origi- � ment is ambiguous may be answered by ref- �Spanish by French Canadian purporting to
�nt on j erence to extrinsic evidence. �'ant to original settlors of Mexican land
essors � grant access rights to adjouung property did �
�ment � 6. Evidence a450(3) , not comply with nuances and technical re-
1�� � Extrinsic evidence would be used to con- 9�'ements of the conveyance of property
�; and � strue doeument written in Spanish by French �ghts, law of implied easements recognizes
were � Canadian purporting to grant to original se� that rights may be implied even though they
tlors of Mexican land grant er�joyment of the were not properly expressly conveyed.
benefits of pastures,water,firewood and tim- 10. Easements a12(1)
ber on adjoining land, as e.xtrinsic evidence Frauds, Statute of a60(1)
l filed revealed ambiguities in 150 year old docu-
An easement is created if the owner of
ment, document was ambiguous on its face the servient estate ei er enters into a con-
ion in I with respect to where settlors could exercise �-act or makes a conveyance intended to
� their rights, and document could not be in- create a servitude that complies with the,
terpreted without putting it in its historical Statute of Frauds or an excention t� thP
iconte.�ct. Statute of Frauds. Restatement (Third) of
��_ ` i. Easements«12(1) �'operty, § 2.1.
�elong ' Waters and Water Courses«156(2) 11. Dedication�-i
hip of In action by successors in title to origi- Easements«5
o use , ( nal settlers of Mexican land grant seebng Estoppel c�52(8)
AP�'- i rights of access to ac�jouung mountain prop- Servitudes that are not created b.y con-
�nt to � erty that landowner had fenced, reference to tract or conveyance include servitudes creat-
I. . . .
. �;
�. ,--- .- __�- � . _.,._ . _ .,,_._ ,.-..-„-t_..._,-_.. -._..�.,..-�-�--��^�-�..•_--.-..._..,,. .
, ' .. _ ' , • .
� } .. . �F. 4 � 1 . r �l !' ' .'f �y Y::. 4.+ .1h1V' .1 �7
.. � . � �� . .. . ' : . ' t'. �\ " _ � .�� . . .. ..I ' ' _�.��_ri..._'�1..� t_ L� ....,5. . , . _� _ . . � .�_. .. �1.,\_ t . . . . .
; . . . . . ' .. . . . . � . �.' '� ' � .. �' r '� • . . � _ . � . . . �`�' , .
. ._._..._..�_.�...__°--°�----_ _.�._.._..' -'---•..._--'�,__.:....-_'-.--.._.�.:..:. -'-' -._.,_.._�.w'.�.._.�...��..��.�-.........,.�� -� . ;,�,�� . .
� --vy ,..�..�.
� 940 Colo. 71 PACIFIC KEPORTE�t, 3d SERIES
�
ed by dedication. nrescr;ntion and estoppel estates were once under common ownership; , ,
Restatement(Third) of Property, § 2.1. (2) the rie�hts alleeed were exercised. 'or to -�' � {
13. Easements a15.1 ' the severance of the estate; (3) the use was :
not merely temporarv: (4) the continuation of '
Implied servitudes may be based on pri- this use was reasonablv necessarv to the
or use, map or boundary descriptions, neces- enjovment of the Aarcel: and �5) a contrarv '�
sity or other circumstances SU1TOUndine th2 b
intention is neither e.�cpressed nor implied. � g
conveyance of other interests in land, which Restatement(Third) of Property, § 2.12.
b ve rise to the inference that the oarties °i
intended to create a sexvitude. Restatement 19. tiVaters and Water Courses a12i 'L
(Third) ot Property, § ?.1. . �
:�ll water in Colorado is a pubIic re- m
13. Easements a� source, dedicated to the beneficial use of �
�n easement by prescription is estab- Public agencies and private persons wherever �u
lished when the prescriptive use is: (1) open they might make beneficial use of the water no
or notorious; (2) continued without effective under use rights established as prescribed by �
interruption for the prescriptive period; and law.
(3) the use was either adverse or pursuant to Z0. Easements a15.1 �5'
an attempted, but ineffective grant.
� Colorado law recognizes implied ease- titl�
1�. Estoppel a83(1) ments in the form of profits.
A court can imply an easement created � �a
,� ,�rk by estoppel when: (1) the owner of the ser- 21. Easements a15.1 tior,
� ,! vient estate permitted another to use that Successors in title to origina! settlers of of
` '°� �''`�� land under circumstances in which �;t w� iYlexican land grant had implied easement on whe
M1� �'v reasonable to foresee that the user would adjouung mountain property, where there , title
� substantially change position believing that W� P�or unity of title between successors' erec
'���� ,1,;''' the permission would not be revoked; (2) the �tle and mountain land owner's title, access °n �
to common areas was an inte C.R.
;; ,% user substantially c ange position in rea- gral feature of
}'�� sonable reliance on that belief; and (3) ' ius- settlement system of Mexican land grants. �s �
tice can be avoided only by establishment of access to resources of common land was not
a servitude. only a typicai but necessary incentive for
setUement, original owner of land grant � title
15. Estoppel a87 granted settlers access to mountain land, �n'
Whether reliance is justified for pur- o��� o�er's immediate successor ac- ' Perfe
poses of an easement by estoppel depends �owledge in agreement that mountain land ; tabli:
upon the nature of the transaction, including W� subject to settlers' access rights, succes- ' docui
the sophistication of the parties. sors to original settlers accessed mountain � g�nt
land for over one hundred years, and deed to evide:
16. Estoppel a83(1) � settle
Deception is not required in order to mountain land's owner subjected land to ac-
cess claims of local people.
establish an easement by estoppel. Z?_ E
17. Estoppel�+83(1) 22• Easements a8(1) I.
An easement by estoppel is an equitable Although adversity is a necessary requi- � nal se
remedy; it recoenizes that when a landowner site for adverse possession claims, it is not � mount
induces another to change position in reli- required for a prescriptive easement. sors'
ance upon his promise, he is estopped fi�om 23. Easements a8(1) succes
then denyin�the existence of the riehts sim- add st
ply because they did not meet the formal Adversitv is not re4uired to establish a � where
conveyance rules. prescriptive easement when other evidenr� � implic�
— — makes clear that the parties intend an ease- � owner
18. Easements c�15.1 ment, but fail because they do not fully artic- inform
An easement im lied &om prior use is ulate their intent or reduce�heir aereement claims
create when: (1) the servient and dominant to writing, or because they fail to comply 6 erwise.
5
_ �
, , . _. . ; _ . � . -.- , : - _ ..- - - .: � �t-:- �- :. .-
. . \ _ .
' . , • t , . ��;, -
_ . . � . . ,. . . . � ._ . .., . _ , , . _..
.. :aY' , a ..�Y � t- �/ � � . .. � . ' . � , .. . . . . .
—� .Y- . � _ . ..��, _ _ . ... � _ .. . , . ' . . . . . ' . , . .' . . , . .
' . ' .. � • � . . t ' . . . . . . .
` "' �'�"'_ `�' i . .. . ..- . . . ' . � . .. � ..� .... . .. .. .,. . - ._. �. .... � . .. � . . . . .. . ..... � ' . .
I
I LOBATO v. TAYLOR colo. 941
Cite as 71 P3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
mership; with some other formal requirement imposed 28. Estoppel c�8?
prior to in the jurisdiction. Predecessors in title of owner of moun-
use was � tain land that was originally designated as
iation of 24. Easements a5 common land during settlement of Mexican
to the Use of mountain land by successors in land grant permitted settlers of adjacent ara-
��n�'�'Y , title to original settiers of Mexican land ble property to subs�antiallv change their ✓
implied. i grant was open and notorious, for purposes position believing that permission to access ��'
.12. • of establishing a prescriptive easement, when common ]and would not be revoked, for pur- �
� successors' use of land was not only well poses of establishing an easement by estop-
'7 l�nown by predecessors in title of owner of pel in action by successors in title of settlers,
blic re- � mountain land, but such predecessors even where access to resources of common land
use of � directed the location of grazing by settiers' was not only a typical but necessary incen-
�herever i successors, and owner of mountain land had tive for settlement of Mexican land grants,
e water notice of successors' claims from language in access to wood on ]and was necessary to heat �
^ibed by his deed. homes, access to timber on land was neces- . .
sary to build homes, access to grazing was
25. Easements a7(5) necessary for maintaining livestock, and •
Use of mountain land by successors in deeds associated with common land and sub-
d ease- t��e to originai settlers of Mexican land sequent actual practices showed that access
grant continued without effective interrup- M6'hts were intended.
tion for the prescriptive period, for purposes 29. Estoppel ca8?
tlers of of establishing a prescriptive easement, Settlers of arable property in Mexican
nent on where successors and their predecessors in land grant substantiallv rhan�ed_thCLr �Qsi-
� there h�e grazed livestock,harvested timber,gath- �on in reasonable reliance on belief that per-
�essors' ered firewood, fished, hunted, and recreated �ssion to access common land would not be
access on land for more than 100 years. West's revoked, for purposes of establishing an
�.ture of C.R.S.A § 38�1-101. easement by estoppel on common land in
grants, 26. Easements a5 action by successors in title of settlers
vas not against owner of common land, where set-
ive for Use of mountain land by successors in tlors moved onto arable Iand and established
grant title to original settlers of Me:cican land permanent farms.
� land, g�'ant were pursuant to an intended but im- �
or ac- Perfectiy executed �rant, for purposes of es- 30. Estoppel c�83(1)
in land tablishing a prescriptive easement, where Injustice could be avoided onh� bv estab- 't
succes- document executed by original owner of lishing a servitude over land that served as
�untain grant though imperfect as an express grant common land during settlement of Mexican
leed to evidence intention to grant access rights to land L;rant, for purposes of establishing an
settlers. easement by estoppel in action by successors
to ac- in title of original settlers of arable portions
27. Easements c�61(S) of land grant, where under Mexican laa•
In action by successors in title to origi- �nt to fee owner would have been revoked
re ui- nal settlers of Mexican land if settlement did not succeed, fee owner at-
q grant, owner of �.acted settlers by convincing them that they
is not mountain land had adequate notice of succes-
sors' prescriptive easement claim, though "�'ould have access to common land to obtain
successors did not formally file for leave to �ewood, timber and pasturage that they
add such claim until 11 years into litigation, needed in order to survive, and a condition of
blish a where all of their factua] allegations clearly subsequent conveyances of common land a•as
idence implicated prescriptive rights, and deed to �at subsequent owners would honor access
� ease- owner when he purchased land specifically �gh�� �
�artic- informed owner that land. was subject to 31. Easements a15.1 �
�ement claims of local people by prescription or oth- Easement bv nrior use was estab ishP�
�omply erwise. over mountain land that served as common
.. �..-.�_.. . ��r., r �.��F�-r..r.�s�s������.�s.w..�w..w����-r r� �.r , r.'1c:r�+"'^P►'��i.Y+yv!.: r+re�..�.��� �-
. . .. ' . . . ' . . � ' ' ; . . .
. . . ' �l . . . . ' •. , . . �f � �• � ` ' , . ' � � .
. . . _ .i� .. . __._ i . _ c 4 .._. . . . - � .. �1 . . . .
. • . .,. . , , . . . .., - . - . � - ,
, . ,,
.
___ . - . _
_. __.. _ _ ...__. .. ..._........._._.,. _ __._._,�-----.__..._._.___-w.,_.._...__...___.__.._......__�,_�__.._.-,__.__...._�._....�.....�_.,.�. -----_._,_
,
�
. ; �
942 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER., 3d SERIES
land during settlement of iUlesican land Federico Cheever, Gorsuc}� Kirgis, LLP, �
grant, in action by successors in title of set- Loretta P. Martinez, Denver, CO3 Attorneys t
tlers of arable property of land grant, where for r�micus Curiae Colorado Hispanic Bar �
before settlement arable lahd and common �sociation.
land were originally under the common own- � P
David J. Stephenson, Jr., Denver, CO3 At- p
ership of the fee owner of entire grant, prior torney for Amicus Curiae Rocky iblountain ; t1
to severance of the estate it was necessary Human Rights Law Group. ; e;
for the settlers to exercise their access rights m
to common land in order to obtain firewood, Chief Justice y1ULLdRKEY delivered the �
timber and pasturage needed to aurvive, er- Opinion of the Court.
ercise of access rights was not merely tempo- �e wstory of this property rights contro-
rary and was reasonably necessary to the versy began before Colorado's statehood, at a
enjoyment of the arable land, and a contrary �e when southern Colorado was part oi �
intention was neither e.Ypressed or implied. yje.�ico; at a time when all of the parties' da�
�2. Easements a42 lands were part of the one million acre �.a
Scope of implied profits that successors Sangre de Cristo grant,..an 1844 Nle:dcan o��
land grant. Here, we determine access �,e
in title to settlers of arable land in Vle:dcan �gh� of the owners of farrrilands in Costilla
land grant had in adjacent mountain land lanc
� that served as common land were for p�_ County to a mountainous parcel.of land now ces:
known as the Taylor Ranch. :1s successors Bea
ture, hrewood and timber, where document in title to the original setUers in the region,
esecuted by fee owner of entire land grant the landowners exercised rights to enter and II
referenced pasture, firewood and timber but use the Taylor Ranch property for over one ente
not hunting, fishing and recreation, such hundred years untii Jack Taylor fenced the g°'
rights were the same rights fee owner of land in 1960 and forcibly excluded them. tries
entire land granted to United States in fort These rights, they assert, derive &om Me.�d- and
lease, and such rights were likely the most can law, prescription, and an e.�cpress or im- g°��
necessary rights for the survival of the origi- plied grant, and were impermissibly denied �
nal settlers. (Per Mullarkey, C.J., with two when the mountain land was fenced. the I
justices concurring.) Neva
We are reviewing this case for the second �o
time in this protracted twenty-one year liti- U��
Eley, Goldstein and Dodge, LLC, Jeffrey gation. In the first phase of this litigation, ;; prope
� Goldstein, Otten, Johnson, Robinson, Neff the trial court:dismissed the plaintiffs'claims, � ,
3� Ragonetti, PC, William F. Schoeberlein, holding that a federal decision in the 1960s .�• , ;�; +• vant t
u asked
Robert 1�Iaes, David i1�lartinez, Walters & on the same issue barred their suit. We a of Ne
Joyce, PG Julia T. Waggener, Kelly, Ha- reversed and remanded, holding that the no� _. � - �` `'i ri hts
glund, Garnsey & Kahn LLC, Norman D. �ce given in the federal case did not comport � the ;
Haglund, Don Hiller& Galleher, PC, Watson �th due process. �''he subject matter oF the ' Congr�
Galleher, Elisabeth Arenales, Denver, CO3 ��?Tent appeal is_the_landolvners'substantive ;r,. to the
Attorneys for Petitioners. clauns of rights. The trial court and the of Con
court of appeals held that the landowners
Wolf & Slatldn, PC, Albert B. Wolf, Ray- g�ed to prove rights on any of their three In �
mond P. Micklewright, Jonathan L. Madison, theories. � recruit�
Denver, CO3 Attorneys for Respondent. We find that evidence of traditional settle- Ao�on
Richard Garcia, Denver, CO3 Richard ment practices,repeated references to settle- leased
Reich, Costa Mesa, CA, Attorneys for Amici ment rights in documents associated with the States
Curiae Bi-National Human Rights Commis- Sangre de Cristo grant, the one hundred Fort M
sion, International Indian �eaty Council, year history of the landowners' use of the settle c
National Chicano Human Rights Council, Co- Taylor Ranch, and other evidence of necessi- t. rhe
mision De Derechos Humanos De Seminario ty, reliance, and intention support a finding allowe�
Permanente De Estudios Chicanos Y De of implied rights in this case. While we essenti
to —!0:
Fronteras. reject the landowners' claims for hunting, 36-toi
• . - . .. .. . ' . � . .. , _ . '_ ..r� . . 'c:. . _ ' ' .• ' .... . ....' -•
. . ' . � � . � � . • � . . � . . _ �... . . . ,� ..
. . . . . . . .. . . ' _. . . . . . .. , . � .l' .. � ... • .. . _. .�. . �
� r'•� ` t�' 1 , t:, ' ' 1. � .. . , t`, .1 , • . , .. � .� . . ' . � . .� ., � • . , . ".".
s.}t•I.t�Y{Wy_� , . . " �_ .�.:+u._.i....�......._....._.�... .c....._......��.,......�..�__�.�....�.._..r_,.._ ... _...�...._......�._�__.��..�_."..._ '. ' _'_'•—• � . �..,
Y fy
'� �I
:��. .
� LOBATO v. TAYLOR colo. 943
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
fishing, and recreation rights, we find that he employed was common to Spain and �Iexi- �;
i the landowners have rights of access for co: strips of arable land called vara strips �;�
' grazing, firewood, and timber through a were allotted to families for farrning, and �iI
' prescriptive easement, an easement by estop- areas not open for cultivation were available
� pel, and an easement �om prior use. Fur- for common use. These common areas were '�f
`� thermore, we retain jurisdiction in order to used for grazing and recreation and as a !I
� esamine the trial court's due process deter- source for timber, firewood, fish, and game. i`
mination. In 18f3, Beaubien gave established settiers �
deeds to their vara strips. That same year, �
� I. Facts and Prior Proceedings Beaubien executed and recorded a Spanish 1
In 1844, the governor of New 14exico language docur.ient that purports to grant ��
granted two Yle:dcan nationals a one million- rights of access to common lands to settlers
acre land grant, located mainly in present- on the Sangre de Cristo grant. fBeaubien
day southern Colorado (Sangre de Cristo Document). In relevant part, this document
grant), for the purpose of settlement. The ��'antees that "all the inhabitants will have
original grantees died during the war be- enjoyment of benehts of pastures;. .water, �
tween the United States and Me.�dco. The tirewood and timber, always talang care that
land was not settled in earnest until after the one does not injure another." i
i�
cessation of the war, and Charles (Carlos) A year later, Beaubien died. Pursuant to
Beaubien then owned the grant. a prior oral agreement, his heirs sold his €;I
In 1848, the United States and \�Ie�dco �nterest in the San�-e de Cristo grant to j
entered into the Treaty of Guadalupe Hidal- William Gilpin, who was Colorado's tirst ter- ���
go, ending the war between the two coun- Mtorial governor. The sales agreement (Gil- j;
tries. Treaty of Peace, Friendship, Limits, pin agreement) stated that GIlpin agreed to �
and Settlement ('h-eaty of Guadalupe Hida1- Provide vara strip deeds to settlers who had
go), February 2, 12348, U:S.—iblex., 9 Stat. 922. not yet received them. The agreement fur-
Pursuant to the treat , Nle:dco ceded land to �er stated that Gilpin took the land on con- �
Y
the United States, including all of California, dition that certain "settlement rights before �
Nevada, and Utah; most oF New Mexico and then conceded . .. to the residents of the '
Arizona; and a portion of Colorado. The settlements ... shall be confirmed by said
United States agreed to honor the esisting W�liam Gilpin as made by him." �
: property rights in the ceded territory. Rele- In 1960, Jack Taylor, a North Carolina
' vant to the Sangre de Cristo grant, Congress lumberman, purchased roughly 77,OU0 acres �
, asked the Surveyor Genera! of the Territory of the Sangre de Cristo grant (mountain �,
' of New Mesico to determine what property tract) &�om a successor in interest to William j
rights e�dsted at the time of the treaty. On Gilpin. Taylo�'s deed indicated that he took i
� the Surveyor General's recommendation, the !and subject to °claims of the local people �
Congress confirmed Carlos Beaubien's claim by prescription or otherwise to right to pas-
to the Sangre de Cristo grant in the 1860�ct ture, wood, and lumber and so-called settle- ��� .
of Confirmation. 12 Stat. ?1 (1860). ment rights in, to, and upon said land." �;i
�;
In the early 1850s, Beaubien successfully Despite the language in Taylo�'s deed, he
� recruited farm families to settle the Colorado denied the local landowners access to his i
portion of the Sangre de Cristo grant. He land and began to fence the property. Tay- �!
leased a portion of his land to the United lor then filed a Torrens title action in the �
States government to be used to establish United States District Court for the District iI
� Fort Massachusetts and recruited farmers to of Colorado to perfect his title (Torrens ac-
, settle other areas. The settlement system tion).' Taylor v. Jaquez, No. 6904 (D.Colo. !I
: 1. The Colorado Torrens Title Registration Act rens Title Regis[ra[ion Act,see Rael v. Taylor, 876
� allowed land owners to file an action that would P.2d 1210, 1219-23 (Colo.1994)). Because Tay- ;
essentially quiet title to their land. §§ 118-f0-I lor was a North Carolina resident he invoked I
� to -102, 5 C.R.S. (1952)(now codified at §§ 38- diversityjurisdiction. i
� 36-101 to-199;(for a full discussion of the Tor• �
I
i
Z Y. ' ... .. . . .. . . �.... . .l .. .._. . :-• ♦. . -.]_' _.� . : � ; � . .. .�.. �I . .
.. .... �i. 'i. ' ..... . , _ .. -!'... .._ '' . . . . . ... . .. . t... ' ♦ � .. • 1 •.. � ;1 . � . . � . . .. ... .
i.r. 1 .. • , . ' ' 1 � S .♦J .l ' �Iv� .4 'l � .
� , . . � � • 1� � 1 � .. . - , �A. l..t. r �`-}�,��+�,T�y
. _ �. -�.� . V
` . '' . .. ' . . -.t . . , , • . . � � - - � . _..} 'y-`-�.
. ..�.. . .. ......... ... . .. .w ..... . . �.� .. I.w.L:...�...r ,�• ....�_...�.-�..�.�... . r. .-. " � _ ....[•:.�...�.:st.��_.�.�
�.::
j''i 944 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
�,; Oc� 5, 1965). The district court found that process and class action certification issues
� the local landowners did not have any rights before holding a tx�ial on the merits. During
�, to the mountain tract; the Tenth Circuit the due process phase, the court dismissed
Court of Appeals affirmed. Sanchzz v. Tay- most of the plaintiffs. The court determined
Ilar; 377 F2d 733 (lOth Cir.1967). that seven of the plaintiffs could pursue their
In 1973, Taylor purchased an adjoining, ��s regarding the mountain tract and that
i' roughly 2,500 acre parcel that was also part three of the plaintiffs could proceed with
j of the Sangre de Cnsto grant (Salazar es- their claims regarding the Salazar estate.
tate). Taylor's predecessor in title to the Without further hearing, the court denied
Salazar estate had also filed a Torrens title class certification. The court then held a
' action in 1960 which detei-mined that local ��on the merits.
' � landowners ha.d no rights in the estate. To- After the trial, the court made a finding of
� gether, the mountain tract and the Salazar fact that the landowners or their predeces-
estate are]moum as the Taylor Ranch. sors in title had "grazed cattle and sheep,
�' harvested timber, athered firewood, fished,
� The current case began in 1981. In that g
i; year a number of local landowners filed suit hunted and recreated on the land of the
' in Costilla County District Court. The land- defendant from the 1800s to .the date the
owners asserted that they had settlement land was acquired by the defendant, in 1960."
rights to the Taylor Ranch and that Taylor The trial court further found that the com-
had impermissibly denied those rights.= The munity referred to Taylor Ranch as "open
court held that the doctrine of res judicata range," and that prior to 1960, the landown-
barred the suit because the Salazar Torrens ers `�vere never denied access to the land."
action and the Sanchez decision regarding The court also stated that it did"not dispute"
Taylor's Torrens action were binding upon that the settlers could not have survived
: � � the plaintiffs. Rael v. Taylor, No. 81CV5 �thout use of the mountain area of the
� ant.
! (Costilla Co. Dist. Ct. Sept. 22, 1986) (Judg- �'
, ment for Defendant on Motion for Judgment Despite theses findings, the court deter-
j , on the Pleadings or for Summary Judgment). mined that the landowners had not proved
; � The court of appeals affirmed. Ra,el v. prescriptive rights because their use was not
� Ta�lor, 832 P.2d 1011, 1014 (Colo.App.1991). adverse. The court further held that the
� This court granted certiorari and reversed Beaubien Document was not an effective ex-
- � and remanded, questioning the constitutional press grant of rights because it did not iden-
� adequacy of the publication notice in the tify the pa.rties to the rights or the locations
Torrens action. Rael v. Taylor, 8i6 P.2d where the rights should be esercised. Re-
12T0. 1228 (Colo.1994). We directed the trial ga1'ding an implied grant by Beaubien, the
court to determine which of the plaintiffs court concluded that Colorado law did not
received adequate notice in the Torrens ac- recognize the implied rights the landowners
tion and to hold a trial on the merits for claimed. The landowners appealed both the
those who did not have proper notice. Id. due process determination and the rulings on
On remand, the trial court granted Tay- their claim of rights.
lor's motion for summary judgment on the The court of appeals affirmed. Lobato u.
Me�rican law claim. The court then bifurcat- Taylor, 13 P.3d 821 (ColoApp2000). The
ed the proceedings: it determined the due court agreed with the trial court's conclu-
2. Jack Taylor died during the pendency of this 3. Taylor daims that the Salazar estate is no
litigation. His son, Zachary Taylor, stepped in longer at issue in this case because our opinion
� as the executor of his father's estate. At some in Rael did not expressly discuss this propertv.
point, the Taylor estate sold the Taylor Ranch to We find that the Salazar estate is still at issue.
another party. This pam bought the land sub- • The trial court, on remand Erom Rael, continued
ject to the landowners'claims and subject to this to make findings oC Fact regarding the Salazar
litigation. For the sake of simplicit��,Jack Taylor estate. To[he extent that Rael did not speciEical-
and his successors in titie are referred to as ly address that portion of the Taylor Ranch, it
"Taylor"in this opinion. was an oversight.
__._ __..r _.� ... r...�-----^ — - ^�—�- -° ^ . ' .�� _
, � . . �: .... , ,�,; ..i °:r �' ,,. •,'
�� ,T . ;� f '� �%t, ;Y.
. .. - . . - . . t. � r r. .Y .Y' �i,'� �� .1�.
. . . - . . . . � . ' _ . . . . � . - . .... .. . . .... . . . !� _n'�< .. . . i' . . .J_
•��,��;✓,����ii�kf'```•'�"`^'^ ' .�-��41{v.� �'�"�r��'j��1��':Y:i�Z�l�� '�'`� (rlf�� s_��"�K`�h i �.. ` )-4 ; i� .•�i.:. � ` - .� . .
e�. � i �1
'q.�t x�,aJ kr�)�yl��W�l,XF,.�h'� � ��, �`s''y.... '- ���,{ ^ i-�'.`. i '�.,,., . '.�� . . ''>�' . �.�� . . . . -' .
�.� .:.nti ��` �.�� 1� �, ��• . . .(er \� � . ^ . -� ' � � . . �� _' . . �: . �� � � . . " � .
1`��'�<.3 t a �1.,..� _ �i . - . - � .r. . ' . . , -. , ' . . .. . . . . .. .
��:� °`-A..i -'�._3-�--��� �rd:= -'r.�:.�d:...�1..a�............r.r..M.....:..>a..����.:.�_
' � 'I
y
� • � . ..
' LOBATO v. TAYLOR co�o. 945 ,!+
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002) t
� • sions regarding all three of the landowners' [l,2] An easement can be in gross or ��
i theories. Regarding an e.�cpress grant ,of appurtenant. An easement in gross does not �
rights, the court of appeals engaged in�'a belong to an individual by virtue of her own- ��
i technical application of the 1863 property ership of land, but rather is a personal right
� laws of the Colorado Territory. Id at 831. to use another's property. Leuritz v. Por¢th
The court concluded that the document in- Family Trust, 36 P.3d 120, 122 (Colo.App. !�i
; cluded neither the "christian and surnames" 2001). r1n easement appurtenant, on the oth- ;`.`��
of the grantees nor an accurate description of er hand, runs with the land. It is meant to
the property to be burdened. Id Further- benefit the property, or an owner by virtue
more, the court of appeals noted that that of her property ownership. See Laz� Dog,
� because the document does not use r,he 965 P2d at 1234. An easement is presumed � ;'i
words; "and heirs and assigns" it does not to be appurtenant; rather than in gross. ;
indicate that Beaubien intended any rights to Lewitz, 36 P.3d at 122; Restatement, .supra,
run with the land. Id. Because the court § 4.�(2).
rejected all of the landowners' substantive In this case, the landowners allege that the "
claims, the court did not reach the question yettlement rights were to be used in connec-
of whether the trial court erred in its due �
tion with their land. They argue that the
process decision. firewood was used to heat their homes, the '
We granted certiorari. timber to frame their adobe houses, and the ��," �
, grazing necessary to the viability of their
II. Analysis farms. 'I'he landowners also assert that the
settlement rights were granted to their pre- �
The landowners claim rights to graze live- decessors in title by virtue of their intere9t in �
� stock, gather firewood and timber, hunt, fish, their vara strips and were in fact a necessary
� and recreate. Before discussing the sources incentive for settlement in the area.
of the settlement rights,�we characterize the �3] We conciude that the rights the land-
claimed rights in order to determine the owners are claiming are best characterized ',F
rules of law that govern them. � easements appurtenant to the land. We !�
r
' reach this conclusion from the evidence that .
; A The Rights at Issue under Mexican custom access to common
� The parties, at various points in the volu- land was given to surrounding landowners,-
' minous briefing of this twenty-one year-old the evidence that this access was used to
' benefit the use of the land, and the presump- ��
(itigation, agree that the rights at issue are
most appropriately characterized as profits � �on in favor of appurtenant easements. �
� prendre. A profit � prendre—in modern Having established the nature of the rights ��
; parlance, a profi�"is an easement that con- at issue, we now turn to the sources of these �� �
fers the right to enter and remove timber, rights. ( •
minerals, oil, gas, game,or other substances �
&-om land in the possession of another,." Re- B. Sources of the Rights '� •
statement (Third) of Property: Servitudes �e landowners argve that their settle- �f .
§ 12(2)(1998) [hereinafter Restatement]. ment rights stem &om three sources: Me.�d- '�
� Thus, a profit is a type of easement. can law, prescription, and an e.�cpress or im- ii
I� This court has described an easement as"a Plied grant from Beaubien. �
I right conferred by grant, prescription or ne- Regarding the Mexican law claim, the
cessity authorizing one to do or maintain landowners claim that community rights to
` something on the land of another which, al- common lands not only are recognized by ;
{ though a benefit to the land of the former, Me.�dcan law, but also are integr-�.l to the
i may be a burden on the land of the latter." settlement of an area The landowners fur- �
� Laxy Dog Rancic u Tellumy Ranch Corp., ther point out that in the �eaty of Guadalu- � .
� 965 P.2d 1229, 1234 (Co1o1998)(quotation pe Hidalgo, the United States government
i marks omitted). agreed that the land rights of the residents
�
�
�ti[°�'%�_";,' 'f,�:��.:r . 7.' .' .. .�� --,ic '�w..s.�. �.K r. �..'i'.:,. -'y�:��+....�,r ����� . " . , ' . .
� . . . � . . . � . ..... . _ .. . ^ . . . L . � . . .�' . ' .. . . . � .. . .
�. . � . . . . . . � . � . . . � . . . � � � ' �
rF.. `, .., � '�.` 1 . , . . - }� •.. . . �.. . . .
. . •i.:" . . . . . . _ . . +:4 . t . ._ � .. ._ . � .� ! i� . ' . .
�� . i . ... � � • ♦.y f i� y 4�4 ��' ;j y�:�< ° - ••':C� 1T'a�!�n.`' !.'
' � . � . ' ' t' 'y _ .'Si . . ' . ���N"_'�i'�-�Mj
' . � . •� �. 'Z , `i. _ , '"n�t�!'Yd�r--,a�-.r.�..
,
�. �. ._ ,� .. . •
. _ ... . � . . - .- .
. . , - . " " -�"W 'y
.
..
. . • . � •
-
. ..•• 3_. ' ' : ._..'.>.�...�� .�.. . '.. -..'..• 'a�; �
, __ . ...._..__...""�._ . . . . ..... _ . _. . ._ . . . ,�4i.�.._ _
i I 946 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
k�i
i! of the ceded territories would be "inviolably to the United States, we conclude that Mexi-
�� respected." Under the landowners' theory, can law cannot be a source of the landown-
+ the treaty dictates that the court apply Mexi- ers'claims.
� can law to the Taylor Ranch and accordingly We disagree, however, with the court of
recognize the settlement rights. appeals' resolution of the landowners' other
�� The landowners further argue that use claims. While the Beaubien Document can-
' rights can be found via prescription. For not support an express grant of rights, when
� this claim, they point to their regular use of coupled with the Gilpin agreement and other
' the Taylor Ranch ]and for over one hundred evidence, it supports a finding of a prescrip-
� years unti] the area was fenced in 1960. tive easement, an easement by estoppel, and
� an easement from prior use.
Lastly, the landowners assert that their
, ' use rights were obtained by either an ex- 1. The Beaubien Document
� press or implied grant from Carlos Beaubien.
For this claim, the landowners rely primarily � evidence of a grant of rights from
; on the Beaubien Document. Carlos Beaubien, the landowners rely pri-
� marily on the Beaubien Document. The doc-
iThe trial court dismissed the Mexican law ument was written by Beaubien in 1863, one
claim on motion for summary judgment, and year before his death.
after a trial on the merits, rejected the two One English translation of the document
remairung claims. The court of appeals af- reads, in part:
fu-med. The court of appeals held that the plaza of San Luis de la Culebra, May 11,
Mexican law claim failed because whatever 1863.
• rights may have existed at the time of the It has been decided that the lands of the
� Treaty of Guadalupe Hidalgo were subse- Rito Seco remain uncultivated for the ben-
� „ quently extinguished by Congress's 1860 Act efit of the community members (�ente) of
, of Confirmation. Lobato, 13 P.3d at 829. the plazas of San Luis, San Pablo and Los
The court further held that the landowners
� I could not claim prescriptive rights because B�ejos and for the other inhabitants of
i � these plazas for pasturing cattle by the
their use of the Taylor Ranch was not ad-
• 1 verse. Id at 834-35. Lastly, the court held Payment of a fee per head, etc. and that
� that the Beaubien Document fails as an ex- the water of the said Rito remains parti-
•press grant of rights and that Colorado does tioned among the inhabitants of the same
� not recognize implied easements in the form P��a of San Luis and those from the other
� ' of profits. Id at 832r33. side of the vega who hold lands almost
_ , adjacent to it as their own lands, that are
� [4] We agree that the landowners cannot not irrigated with the waters of the Rio
cIaim righ�s under Mexican law. Their pre- Culebra. The vega, after the measure-
decessors in title did not settle on the Sangre ment of three acres from it in front of the
de Cristo grant until after the land was chapel, to which they have been donated,
� ceded to the United States� and thus their will remain for the benefit of the inhabit-
use rights developed under United States ants vf this plaza and those of the Culebra
� law•. Me�can land use and property law are as far as above the plaza of Los Balle-
higtily relevant in this case in ascertaining jos. . . . Those below the road as far as the
the intentions of the parties involved, see narrows will have the right to enjoy the
infra. However, because the settlement of same benefit. ... �IVo one mayJ�l¢ce any
the grant occuiz-ed after the land was ceded obstacle or obstruction to anyone in the
; 4. It is evident from the record that permanent admit that "[t]he erection of Fort Massachusetu
� settlement of the Sangre de Cristo grant did not in 1852 ... marked the start of the settlement of
beein until after 1848. Although some settle- che area in earnest" and that the permanent
� ment was attempted prior to the Treaty of Gua- , settlements were established as follows: "Costil-
dalupe Hidalgo, those settlers did not succeed. la and Garcia in 1849; San Acacio and San Luis
S due, in part, to Indian hostilities and aggression in 1850; San Pablo m 1852; San Francisco and
s between [he United Scates and Mexico. The La Vaife in 1854; and Chama in 1855."
� plaintiffs, in their second amended complaint,
. , , �
, . _ . .. c. . , - � .
, . � . .
� '- � , �� . � . � . . . ... . .� , • . '� � . f �,: � �i• .
. . . . .� . . . , .. . . . - . . - . � . . . ., .. . • . � ... . ... - . . • . .. ... � ._ . . � . . . . .��, . . . .. � i�.
1 ) ',�.11 � � ! . • ' 1.
� i '�, ��,��`��','�y;��,� +�'tiu;?fs1,"'.,,l;or +�=".: c` �`4. i :•: � . . r . . .� .
� 3t� 1�T�O j"A 7ti.� �d.:��`l f}.���il:�ti, � .� t. , �� i,.. • . � �t - . ' , .
'� ,: �,.r�� — • , � . � ; . .
�7 � i :} r�. ._" . .i . . . . ,. . � . . . . . . „ •
J. ..�:i. ,1•• _ __ —_ " _.Y..i.Lrn�..�...L.. �.ti_..�t-y�.....Y.�.......r..�.�.x.�.....�t��...�.�f»....�_..� �_...�� . • .
—��y `•i
•� t . . .
I �
� LOBATO v. TAYLOR cato. 947 �
Cite as 71 P3d 938 (Colo. 2002) �
. � enjo�ment of his legitimate rights .... [5] Extrinsic evidence is relevant in in- ''f
Likewise, each one shouid take scrupulous terpreting the Beaubien Document. In Laz�
f
care in the use of water without causing Dog, we articulated when a court could e.ram- '
' damage with it to his neighbors nor to ine estrinsic evidence in order to ascertain ��r
anyone. According to the corresponding the nature of an easement. In that case, we
rule, all the inhabitants will h¢ve enjoy- e.�cpressly followed the Restatement and con- ,:
ment of 6enefits of pastures, water, fzre- cluded that "[o]ur paramount concern in con- l;��
-zuood and timber, ¢lzua�s takinq care that stnung a deed is to ascertain the intentions F:
one does not injure another. of the parties." Lazy Dog, 96a" at 1235. We I�
also recognized that "circumstances sur-
(Emphases added.) rounding the grant may be relevant to inter- �''
The landowners assert that this document Preting the language of the grant." Id at I
evidences an e.�cpress grant of settlement 1236; see also Restatement, . supra,
rights on the Taylor Ranch land. The trial � 4.1(1)(noting that an easement "should be
court conciuded that the Beaubien Document �terpreted to give effect to the intention of
did not vest any rights in the Taylor Ranch. the parties ascertained &om the language �
The court noted that although the document used in the insttument, or the circumstances � _
lists rights of pasture, water, hrewood, and ''�ounding creation of the servitude, and to ��
i:
timber, the only locations specified for access carry out the purpose for which it was creat- I`
are the Rito Seco and the vega, two areas ed"). Moreover, the question of whether or ;i
not the document is ambiguous `may be an- �i;
that the parties agree are not part of the y�,ered by reference to e.ctrinsic evidence." ��
• Taylor Ranch. The trial court did admit � ��
Lazy Dog, 9(i5 P...d at 1235. 'f
e.ctrinsic evidence to determine whether t
i there was a "latent ambiguit�' in the docu-
ment. However, because the court ultimate- [6] Here, we look to e.Ytrinsic evidence to
construe the Beaubien Document for two
ly found that the document was unambigu- reasons. First, as La�y Dog tells us, e.�ctrin- �
� ous, it ruled that e.�ctrinsic evidence could not sic evidence may reveal ambiguities. Sec- '
be considered in interpreting the document. ond, the document is ambiguous on its face �� .
�
The court of appeals affuzned. Gobato, 13 �th respect to where the landowners could
� P.3d 821. The appeals court agreed that the exercise their rights.
�
� Beaubien Document was ultimately unambig- Lazy Dog tells us that e.�ctrinsic evidence
� uous and that the trial court properly treated may reveal ambiguities in modern docu-
� the e.�ctrinsic evidence of Beaubien's intent. ments; that principle can be only more true "
i Id at 832. The court then applied 1863 �� respect to the Beaubien Document. We (
� Colorado property law and concluded that �e attempting to construe a 150 year-old ��)
, the Beaubien Document did not meet the document cvritten in Spanish by a French 'j
formal requirements for conveying rights to Canadian who obtained a conditional grant to !�
the landowners' predecessors in title. Loba- an enormous land area under Me.�cican law ! ' �
to, 13 P.3d at 831. Moreover, the court held �d perfected it under American law. Beau- j� �
that profits must be expressly granted and bien wrote this document when he was near ��
I thus rejected any claim of implied rights. the end of his adventurous life in an apparent �`
!d. at 832-33. attempt to memorialize commitments he had �
i made to induce families to move hundreds of Ij
We agree that the Beaubien Document �es to make homes in the wilderness. It 1
I does not meet the formal requirements for
an espress grant of rights. However, we �'ould be the height of arrogance and nothing ; �
i but a legal fiction for us to ciaim that we can
• find that the document, when taken together ���ret this document without putting it in
with the other unique facts of this case, !
its historicai conte:ct. �
� establishes a prescriptive easement, an ease- �
ment by estoppel, and an easement &om For the most part,the document is reason- .
� prior use. ably specific in identifying places where
� i
�I. ' '
ae:�w�'� � . , . - . , �-.• . .;�t•;, _ •.y�•' _ -:.l:'.1. ..�s.. �y_��.�.. . . . '�. . ... . . ... � . .
-�-• - . . \ � . . . � . . . . . . ♦ . � • � � • ' .. . . . .
- �� �..].�n�.. . � � s �'.r.�! :d� � -li ' •' ��t ... .1 � . .� � . � . ,. .. .
���7._ 2 c._ . .. 1_.�� .. . . _ .. ..... � . . . ..... .._ .... .... . "a_..__ r..�.. '1 �. ._., • . .... � - �� . ' • . .. ...,.
�.r .' • . . . • � � ' 1 y. .< ��� �..� ,1' . . .'
_i' c:',1 `��.�`" �,�+
, . . . � - . - — u i � . � � • - � " �'1;
• ' . � , ., � . . f � . . � .. _ j. . '�- '� .. . . , .. ' - '. �K .v'r. 1
� ..r .._..._"'_'.._...___—` � .. r .. _. . .t_ ., .. .. . . _4:.�.�.�..�,..�. ..r.�.c.+i���'.... . _ :. . . . _4 .......-���'�'4�A.n.—Z``�. a
:'i 94S Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPOKTER, 3d SERIES
�i! rights are to be exercised.s That is not tn�e that Beaubien meant to grant permanent
�, with respect to the rights asserted by the access rights that run with the land. !
� landowners. The key language reads: "Ac- !
' cording to the corresponding rule, all the �7� We first discuss the location for the ,
Iinhabitants will have enjoyment of benefits of rights. The evidence in this case esta.blishes !
pastures, water, firewood and timber, always that the reference to pasture, water, fire- �
�� taldn care that one does not injure anoth- �'ood, and timber in the Beaubien Document
� g refers to access on the mountain area of the �
i er' grant of which Taylor Ranch is a part. �
Thus, given the specificity of other parts of First, the trial court found that the land-
the document, the lack of specificit,y in this owners or their predecessors in title accessed 1
. � sentence creates an ambiguity. We cannot the Taylor Ranch land for over one hundred ''
� determine from the face of the document Years to exercise the rights outlined in the I
.i what lands were burdened by the rights Beaubien Document. This stron ] • su
;� Beaubien conveyed to the first settlers. g y ggests
that the parties understood that the Taylor I
� Following Lazy Dog, we look to the extrin- Ranch land was the location of their access '
j; sic evidence in this case. Amici assert that rights. �
i ' the contrast between the specificity of the
Second, experts testified that the re- '
majority of the Beaubien Document and the sources listed in the document were only
II casual reference to the settlement rights at available in the Taylor Ranch area of the �
� the end of the document can best be ex- �.ant. Expert testimony established that �
� plained by the events surrounding the execu- summer graZing,wood, and timber were only �
i� tion of the documen� Beaubien penned the available in the mountain area of the grant.� '
,
� document at a time when settlement was
This is perhaps the most si�uficant evidence
; . moving to the northern area of the grant, that points to the.Taylor Ranch as the loca- '
� which lies northwest of the Taylor Ranch �
� tion of the rights.
area At that time, he wrote the Beaubien
j � Document to establish common rights to the Third, the landowners' access rights are
� ' area in and around San Luis and at the same expressly mentioned in Taylor's deed. The '
! ' time memorialize settlement rights that had deed subjects his propert,y interest not only
� already been in existence in the more south- to "rights of way of record,° but also to "all
ern areas of the grant, where Taylor Ranch �ghts of way heretofore located and now
� maintained and used on, through, over, and
- I is located.
across the same." It further subjects the I
� We agree with the amici. From the trial conveyance to "claims of the local people by
� cotu-t findings, e:cpert testimony, the docu- prescription or otherwise to rights to pastur- i
ments associated with the grant, and a re- oye, wood, and lumber and so-called settle- j
view of the settlement system under which �nt rights in,. to, and upon said land." 1
Beaubien and the settlers were operating,we �Emphasis added.) This resolves any doubt �
i draw two conclusions. First, we conclude that the access rights were meant to burden
that the location for the settlement rights Taylor's land.
referenced in the Beaubien Document is the '
mountainous area of the grant on which Tay- [8] There is also ample e��idence that the i
� lor Ranch is located. Second, we conclude document was meant to create permanent I
� 5. The locations referenced in the beginning por- eastern boundan'of[he Sangre de Cristo grant is
� tion of the document all refer [o areas in and along the peaks oE the Sangre de Cristo range.
around the present day town oE San Luis. For Thus, the Taylor Ranch is in the mountain por-
example, the document explains that che vega is tion of the grant on which wood is available. In
three acres in front oF che chapel that still exists contrast, the western portion oE the grant is
in the town of San Luis. ' along the valiev Eloor and thus was deared and
6. Of Taylor's 80.000 acres, a 77,000 acre area used for farming. There are obviously other
has historicallv been called La Sierra or the mountain areas oF the original million-acre
Mountain Tract. The Taylor Ranch is situated Sangre de Cristo grant other than the Taylor
on the eastern most part of the grant. The �nch; these are not at issue here.
� �..___._.__ - _...�_ ..,�.� _ .�___,....._.,_-..,• . .-r.---�
. . , • , , _ . ;
,. • . , � , � . , . , •'� ' `�.' r_ .:.-� ;.;.'• .:
, �• • • . � T �,.' '�z• ;
. . . . . . . .. . .. . . .. .. .. .... . . . ._. _ .� .. . .. . ;�..
�.� ti��.�a3l y ",� :.�..� �}•. R,, .� • • _-•i � �r , � f t •; `• . - .
•0 �. � n
� ;+�-�t; -.1i�,'X :f,���� t +rd;, t:n+�It i l . �'ti � i::
C� i 3x.^. �� 4'� »I. 1 :r e'{� " Ec.:�7 Y ��.; �'i i ��• , . •' � .• �k � . . :t ' � � .
*^ � i ,. _ , . , . � : _ • , . • '
�� I��t �, . . . . � . . � , .. . . ' .. . .. . .
+�.r,i�µ(?� .. . _ _ wvsr�..r.�.w�._.r_e�...r.�_..J,.r......r.��.....r.,...�..__..+_w,.._...._.<.._....._. .
' `�.:
I li�
LOBATO v. TaYLOIt coio. 949 i�;
Cite as 71 P3d 938 (Colo. 2002) ;�
rights that run with the land. Both the lands for gathering firewood and for graz- i
� settlement system under which Beaubien.and ing a few head of livestock fiu-nished the '+!,
i,
the settlers were operating and the G�1pin bare necessities for the village families, a �i��
agreement are strong evidence of this. lifestyle to which they were accustomed. ���
Access to common areas was an integral �'a G. Clark, Water in 1Vew Mexico, A Histo- i'
feature of the settlement system under which �J of Its lYlanagement and Use 34 (1987) I!i
the settlers and Beaubien were operating. (emphasis added).
Under Spanish and .l�Iesican law, the govern- Under colonial and lile�dcan taw, the differ- I��
ment awarded community and private grants ence between a community grant' and a jI'
, for the purpose of settling the frontier. See private grant was that the common lands of
1�Ialcolm Ebright, Land Grants and Law- the community could not be �old; the grant- �'
suits in Northern Neav �Ylexico 23 (1994). ee of a private grant could sell the lands.
The Me_�dcan grants were issued under See Ebright,supr�, at 25.
specific procedures. The governor would re- E.rpert reports submitted in this case re- I�;
fer a petition to the local ¢lcalde (mayor) for veal that Beaubien and the original settlers ;
his recommendations on whether the grant operated under this traditional system.
, should be made. Availability of pasture, wa- Common areas were not only a typical fea- f�f
� ter, and firewood on common lands was ture but a necessary incentive for settlement. �',
� �unong the primary considerations: ;�s discussed above, because the Sangre de �•
The primary considerations were whether Cristo grant was part of the United States at '�'
� the land was bein used or claimed b �'
g Y the time permanent settlement began, this !
� others, the sufficiency of the petitione�'s y1exican settlement tra.dition is not the J„R
' qualifications, and in the case of a commu- So�ce of the landowners' rights. However, ''
� nity grant, the availability of resources because the settlers and Beaubien were so ,li
� like pasture, w¢ter, and itrewood familiar with the settlement system, it is
!d (emphasis added). Large private grants highly relevant in ascertaining the parties'
� were made during the Mesican period. If intentions and expectations. F
the recommendation from the alcalde was 'I`he e.�cpress language in the Gilpin agree- ;tj�
� favorable, the governor would make the pri- ment, recorded one year after the Beaubien ' �
� vate grant to an individual. 'I'he individual'9 Document, further supports the conciusion
j ownership, however, was conditional upon that the rights referenced in the Beaubien
� successful settlement of the grant. Document were meant to burden the ]and.
� Agriculture and stock raising were the pri- Gilpin was Beaubien's immediate successor ��!
1I mary means of subsistence for the settlers on as owner of the grant land. The Gilpin �I
( the grants. Id. at 25. The settlers supple- agreement contains an e�cpress condition con- `f
finented their irrigated plots by use of com- hrming the settlers'rights: ;f� "
. monly accessible community or private grant [Gilpin agrees to the] e.rpress condition
lands for gathering firewood and grazing that the settlement rights before then con- �j
livestock: ceded by said Charles Beaubien to resi- � '
The pattern of land tenure and use was the dents of Costilla, Culebra SL 'I4-inchera, 'f j '
foundation for these tightly knit communi- within said Tract included, shall be con- 'E
� ties. Produce from their small irrigated firmed by the said William Gilpin as con- �� ,
1 plots su��lemented by the use of common firmed by him. il
7. Because the lands of a community grant could the San Luis vega and chapel referenced in the
` not be sold and were held in common in pecpetu- Beaubien Document. The chapel and the vega
� ity, settlers could use them for hunting, Fishing, continue to exist in the town of San Luis and
gathering herbs, and rock quarrying, among oth- they are used for the originally intended pur-
i er uses, without any question or contlict with poses as a church and as a common pasture.
` subsequent landowners or the need of couru to Although a portion of the Beaubien Document
� define the intended uses. Some private grants establishes these two community grants, the gen- _
operated like community granCS; others did not. eral references to se[tlement rights were meant
` See Ebright,supra, at 25. Two examples oF com- to memorialize access and use rights. This is I!' .
imuniry grants in the Sangre de Cristo grant are clear Erom the Gilpin agreement.
i i
�
''�'v.'�'�'r'i+SL,:`�;- ' _ . • .,� � �.1. ♦• .t.}..•;"��••v�r.�r�<^ —...•w•„'� - '. � .,
. .x . . . . � . . . _� � . . . . _r�.�_ ��?;'�.c�.^. - 'ti::' .. "�•:�-:� - . ..�_ .
. : � � � � ., � ' . . , . : ' _ .. . ' � � . . � � . � .. �• . • . .
• ..L���1:/.~ "r«.�s .. • '. ' . ' __ ,.•-. . . ...�� 'Y . . . .e.y __.� __ �... ._•'. _r. .... 1 .. �,�� .. ;{ . . • , . ' . ' . . .. .
'�.
/ .�. ' . . �� . I •. s�.� ! .t� h. �,�' _ ^ _ _ ..1 �-.F��,��.
• . . . . '� . � . t� . ; �. . . .. t., a�. . ... �.� . - -�� ,_,�'.1�,
. �
� � .. . -i. . .. . ' .... - ._ � _ - �' - '
- ....1 �.y.;...�'.. ...'nr.. .v�:•
. ' ' '_ '_._.. .. . . . , . .. r • . ... .._ ._ . . . ,. . . . .. . . . . . ... '���i�'r�� �
�'4I
i�l: 950 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
�� This deed also recites that the settlers paid a Implied Servitudes
;I consideration to Beaubien for those rights
� and that Gilpin succeeds to the settlers' obli- �10-12] An easement is created if the
gations to Beaubien, including payments due owner of the servient estate either enters
Ion promissory notes heid by Beaubien and into a contract or makes a conveyance in-
his agents. The Gilpin agreement is in Tay- tended to create a servitude that complies
� lor's chain of title and Taylor's own deed �th the Statute of Frauds or an exception to
� the Statute of Frauds. Restatement, supra, �
' e.�cpressly refers to the lando�cmers' settle- �
� ment rights. § 2.1.
� Thus, we conclude both that rights were Servitudes that are not created by contract I
, granted and exercised from the time of se� or conveyance inciude servitudes created
� tlement and that the Beaubien Document by dedication, prescription, and estoppel.
� memorialized them. Moreover, we conclude Those whieh are not created by express
!� that the location for the rights is the moun- contract or conveyance are the implied ser-
�' tain portion of the grant of which Taylor �itudes,.which may be based on prior use,
' Ranch is a part, and that the benefit and map or tioundary descriptions, necessity,
�� burden of these rights were meant to run or other circumstances surrounding the
with the land. conveyance of other interests in land,
' which give rise to the inference that the
[9] We do not take issue with the court of P�es intended to create a servitude. '
appeals' application of 1863 Colorado proper-
ty law to the Beaubien Document. It is not I� § 2.8 cmt b; see also Wright v. Horse �
surprising that Carlos Beaubien failed to Creek Ranches, 697 P2d 384, 387-88 i
comply with the nuances and technical re- (Colo.1985)(noting that an easement may be
i quirements of the conveyance of real proper- established by "necessity; by preexisting �
! ' ty rights. Beaubien's failure to comply with use; by express or implied grant; or by '
� the territorial property law, however, is not prescription"); Wagner v. Fairlamb, 151 �
� the end of the inquiry. The territorial su- Colo. 481, 484, 379 P2d 165, 167 (1963)(no� �
i preme court made it cleaz that rights to �� that implied easements are "not ex-
! � access and use the property of another land- pressed by the parties in writing, but . . .
owner could be found in the law of implied anse[ ) out of the existence of certain facts
easements. Yunker v. NichoGs, 1 Colo. 551 �Plied from the transaction").
� (1872). The law of implied easements recog- Easements can be implied in a number of
- � nizes that rights may be implied even though situations. Easements created by prescrip-
they were not properly e.�cpressly conveyed. tion, Restatement, supra, § 2.17; easements �
� This well-established area of property law is by estoppel, id. § 2.10; and easements im-
concerned with honoring the intentions of the plied from prior use, id § 2.12, are the most �
parties to land transactions and avoiding in- relevant to this case. We discuss each of �
justice. these in turn, discussing both Colorado case �
law and the Restatement, which is consistent
2. Implied Grant of Settlement Rights �
with our precedent.
The evidence in this case overwhelmingly
� supports the conclusion that the lando�c�ners [13] An easement by prescription is es- `
� have implied rights in the Taylor Ranch. We tablished when the prescriptive use is: 1) �
first review the law of implied servitudes. open or notorious,2) continued without effec-
� Second, we discuss how traditional settle- tive interruption for the prescriptive period,
ment practices, repeated references to settle- and 3) the use was either a) adverse or b)
� ment rights in documents associated with the ,pursuant to an attempted, but ineffective
Sangre de Cristo grant, the hundred year grant. Id. § 2.17, § 2.16.
� history of the landowners' use of the Taylor
Ranch, and other evidence of necessity, reli- [14-17] A court can imply an easement
' ance, and intention support a finding of im- created by estoppel when 1) the owner of the
, plied rights in this case. servient estate "permitted another to use
._ - _ , ��.. ,-.- -�r-----�;-- -. . -�.---.----�-�-----------n— �
. ,.
' . . � ^ .. . . •r . � ti � t��rt •�.} r(�f��� �� 1, 4rsr � 7
� � - . - .i � 1. ��y r �� r 'r i �', � y � j.
... , . �. . . .
. . . - . . . . . ' . . . - . _ . . � . _ �. .��. ._ _ ..... _ . . !' _ . �:. �. . << � .�.
t
����. ..;L'�p�Ir;''�^�i�Cf w�Sy-t�t�'�"� �.u.J. ;c��� +�� .' ..."C.� .li 4; .� .i �� r • .. '. . ' . "' .
e�,Yr..,�7��+l�,i�?�v1'Y�i?'�Y`�-r7{,'}.`yyt.yita,`�.h�l.Fti-� �t-,`. .n !� �,.., , � ' ..�' ' , . . _ . . .1��". . . � � . , •
�1_.1yM.a�/t�•7�,i�- ��l��� 14�� � NY. \_ 1 Y� -� :ri.J - rr.�t../.r�.J+E.��-�.r-�_u�-..Nw�'L._��a..��r.��'.._. � " .
oY\�i II.� ' .
�1
�I��
LOBATO v. TAYLOR co�o. 951 ''
Citeas't P.3d 938 (Colo. 20021
that land under circumstances in which it performed by both parties and possession i.r
' was reasonable to foresee that the user taken in pursuance thereof, the bar of the ;��
would substantially change position believing statute is removed and equity will enforce �i�
that the permission would not be revoked,"2) the right thus acquired").
, the user substantially changed position in I�
reasonable reliance on that belief, and 3) �18� � easement implied from prior use �'�
injustice can be avoided only by establish- is created when 1) the servient and dominant
esta.tes were once under common ownershi ��
ment of a servitude. Id � 2.10. Whether P• '�
2) the ri hts alleQed were esercised '"
reliance is justified depends upon the nature g a prior to i
of the transaction, including the sophistica- the severance of the estate. 3) the use was MI�
tion oi the parties. Id. § ?.3 cmt. e. The not merely temporary, 4) the continuation of �
this use was reasonabl I``'
Restatement does not have a requirement of y necessary to the il'
deception, neither does Colorado.g See enjoyment of the parcel, and �) a contrary
Gr¢�bill v. Corlett, 60 Colo. �51, 154 P. 730 �tention is neither e.�pressed nor implied. I�
(1916); Hoehne Ditch Co. u. John Flood ftestatement, supra, § ?12; see also Lee v.
��
Ditch Co., 68 Colo. 531, I91 P. 108 (1920). Sch. Dist. Vo. R-1, 164 Colo. 326, 435 P2d ���
:�n easement by estoppel is an equitable 232, 235--36 (1967); Proper u Greaqer,: .827 �
remedy. It recognizes that when a landown- P2d 791, 593 (Colo.App.1992). The rationale
er induces another to change position in reli- for this servitude is as follows: �
�;:
ance upon his promise, he is estopped &�om The rule stated in this section is not based �
then denying the e.�ristence of the rights sim- solely on the presumed actual intent of the
ply because they did not meet the formal p�es. It furthers the policy of protect- 'j I
conveyance rules. The rule "is founded on ing reasonable e.�cpectations, as well as ac- ��I
the policy of preventing injustice." Id tual intent, of parties to land transactions.
. § 210.
Restatement,suprc� § 2.12 cmt. a. ��I
,i Colorado ]aw has repeatedly recognized Colorado has long applied this implied )
this equitable right. For esample, in Gmy- easement. This court has found an easement ��
� bill, we examined a landowner's right to ���,
fi om prior use in Lee. In Lee, the owner of ��:
maintain a water ditch across the land of his one pazcel of land claimed a right of way ����
neighbor. The owner of the servient estate across his neighbor's land to access his prop- ��
had granted the owner of the dominant es- e� �e servient and dominant estates had �
tate the right to establish a ditch across his y
� land. This was an oral promise; the parties once been under common ownership and this
� did not comply with conveyance and record- �ght of way was used before the severance '
� ing formalities. 60 Colo. at �2, 154 P. at of title. Seven years after the severance of �i.
� 730. In reliance on the parol agreement, the title, the defendant bought the servient es- 1f
� owner of the dominant estate used the ditch
tate and attempted to block the right of way, •�
as the irrigation source for his land and claiming a lack of an enforceable agreement. :;!
cleaned,repaired,and made improvements to Thls court found that an easement from prior !��
use had been established. Lee, 164 Colo. at �;
the ditch. Id On these facts,we noted that, I.�'
"[i]t is too well settled to require discussion 333,435 P.2d at 236. � .
that under the circumstances above stated a Similarly, the court of appeals found an i�!
licensee holds under an irrevocable license, easement &om prior use in Prr�per. There, ��f.
� and his right is as valid as if acquired by the plaintiff landowner used his neighbor's �.
� grant." Id at 553, 15� P. at 731; see also land to access his property. This use had � �
� Hoehne Ditch Co., 68 Colo. 531, 191 P. 108 begun when the two plots were under com-
� (applying the "well settled" rule that "al- mon ownership. Although the neighbor al-
i though an oral contract relating to realty is lowed this use, there was no formal agree-
} within the statute[of&auds),where a consid- ment. The neighbor sought to rescind his
! eration has passed, and it has been fiilly permission after twenty-five years of the i
i
I 8. Auben v. Totivn of Fraita, I92 Colo. 372, 559 rights as opposed to estoppel in the contest of i •
� P.2d 232(1977),has no impact here because that easements,such as ditches. I
I case deals with estopprl in the corttext of water
�
1
iZ;ps ::,_ •,��_�,o . - . . .- . . , -2';a t -.x .},.•^�- '.,,-- - -,' � , . , • .
. . . i . ' , ' ... . -. . . . . . . . . . .. .� . ' . . . - . , .
� ' ♦ , � . � . . . • .. . : ' . • . . .. . � . ,
.�.. . . - . •/,� I. ` ' .� �_ .. •� � .�( � ' - � . � . � •
• . _ . . • ... .. >'•r�'j .r _ . » . . _.. . . , .. • . , . . . . , ,.
. . ' . . �� � � i� � f� :� :�,. � ... . , • � . . � .- -F! 7:
' . . . ' . � . .. . � . '� . . .. ' ' . . . � � . .�• , - - • ti ��c• . �.
- - p � . • , .. . „ . . .
. ' : ..., . . . .... .� -. . . . . _ '
• __ .. . . . .. .-...� _ . . -, ' �- ..'
_ .. . . ' "' ... _ . . .. .. _ •- . ...... _. . . . .. .., . .. ..' '_ .. ._�.�;�`._.� _:.;�3
�,
,��
�;;�
I!� 952 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
� �,!� easement's use, and to construct a fence. limited the rights: "A court cannot rewrite a
Proper 827 P2d at 592. The court found contract and thereby change its terms when
that under these facts, an easement from it is plain, clear and unambiguous." Id at
1i prior use had been established. Id at 594. 604-05, 396 P2d at 602. In D¢wson, then, a
Having outlined the law of implied ease- czvcial element of an implied easement was
i ments, we now turn to the facts of this case. �ssing because a contrary intention was
! expressly stated in the deed. For that rea-
� b. Application to the Landowners' Claims son,we deelined to imply additional profits in
� Despite the long history of implied ease- Dawson.
; ments in Colorado, the court of appeals in Although this court has not addressed im-
• ; this case rejected the landowners' claims of Plied profits for over thirty-five years, there
an implied easement. The court did so be- is a modern trend to apply the same rules to
cause it believed that, although ea.sements in easemenfs of access and to profits. See, e.g.,
ii the form of access rights could be implied, St¢te v. Kortge, 84 Or.App. 153, 733 P2d 466,
I easements in the form of profits could not. 469 (1987)(noting that "[w]hether defendants'
� Lobato, 13 P.3d at 833. In reaching this �bhts are in the nature of a profit a prendre
conclusion, the court misapplied a 1964 deci- or an easement, the interests in this case are
' sion of tMs court, Dawson v. Fling, 155 Colo. governed by the same general rules"); Fi-
� 599,396 P?d 599 (1964). gliuzzi v. Carcajou Shooting Club, 184
i Wis2d 572, 516 N.W2d 410, 415 (1994)(ap-
; In Dawson, the Flings claimed easement
� rights to a lake owned by a corporation. The p��'u'� a statutory rule of easements to prof-
I document establishing the rights was a deed 1� � p� because the court was persuaded
' which read, in part, that the lake could be by the Restatement of Property § 450 Spe-
1 cial Note (1944), which states that it treats
� used "for boating and su�imming purposes, , „ ,
` for the use of said grantees by themselves, 'easements and `profits the same because
' "in no case was there a rule applicable to one
their heirs and assigns, their servants, of these interests which was not also applica-
� a�ents, friends, guests, and whomever they ble to the other").
� may select." Id at 602, 396 P2d at 601.
� Although the deed specified boating and [19] The Restatement explains that, al-
' � swimmin ri hts, the Flin s etitioned the thou h some
g g g p g profits such as mineral and
court to find that they had the right to fish water rights y have specific rules, generally
- I as well. This court concluded that the lan- as between easements in the form of access
iguage of the conveyance clear]y limited the rights and easements in the form of profits,
, rights to boating and swimming and thus "there are no doctrinal differences between
declined to imply fishing rights as well. Id. them." Restatement, supra, § 12 reporter's
at 604,396 P2d at 602. note."' "Generally, the rules governing cre-
In dicta, this court asserted that "[a] right ation, interpretation, transfer, and termi-
to profits a prendre must be e�cpressly gran� nation of easements and profits are the same
ed." Id, 396 P2d at 601. However, from ��erican law." Id § 1.2 cmt. e.
the circumstances of the case it is clear that Easements and profits are treated equally
� this court declined to find implied rights because the same public polic,y and practical
� because the deed of conveyance expressly considerations that underlie implied rights of
a
� 9. The case before us contains no claim to water by law. See Bd. o( Coc�nty Comm'rs v. Park
use based on [he Bcaubien Document. We note County 5portsmen's Runc{:. LLP, 45 P.3d 693,
� that on April 10, 1852, the settlers of the Sangre 706(Colo.2002).
) dc Cristo grant commenced construction oF the
San Luis People's Ditch, the oldest irrigation
� right in Colorado in continuous use. See Carh �0. The first Restatement of Properry, conciuding
Ubbelohde et al., A Colorado History, Revised �at the same rules apply to easements of access
� Centennial F.'dition l95 (1976). All water in Col- �LO Profits,dropped the term "profit." Howev- j
orado is a public resource,dedicated to the bene- er, because the word "profit" is useful as a �
ficial use of public agencies and pri��ate persons descriptive ternt, it survives. Restatement, su-
' whcrever the�� might make beneficiaF use oC the Pra.§ 1?cmt.e.
, , water under use rights established as prescribed �
i
,
, -- .. - .--. .. , .. ..,r.; _ ..... .... --• . ' . .' . � . - ^^' . _ —,.�.1T=s+-.r...�^++..q.yr.t^�"'�
. . ' . , . . , � . . . � � . ... � ., � �'
� � ' ... � , . . � - . . � ... .. . . � � . . .t..' �t ti�y f ,:.^ �s��',.
, . � . .. , . , . , . '!1.� �
. . � . . . . . . .. _ _ • . . . .i . ... .. . . . ..... . . . ... . . . ,. .. .... . . . . . . _ ...� _ . .._ .. • ��'.
�y ; .t'• � .�J ,a. j` �, ��. s:� , ' . • .. - . . _
t• , "� `;� �' '�' e .. . • <".. . , . . • . � : ' , . . ' � ' 1 �. . �._ _ . -
, . ,
.r�..,,y;��: .. ---- � �.... _,_,..__•.�__�_�__._._._._._.._�..._.,...--- ----.-_ .�..w�:__._.....__..._..�. .._.._...._.... _ ---^ ._.._ ._. . . , .
'j[I .. � . . . .
LOBATO v. T�IYLOR colo. g53
Cite�71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
access also underlie implied profits. A rec- appiy these principles to easements of access
ognition that parties do not always comply but not to profits.l' Such a limitation would
with strict rules of express conveyance; a be directly contrary to our legacy of implied 's
desire to effectuate the intent of the parties, easements. F�
and the aim of fairness apply equally to ���
easements and profits. [?0] Having concluded that the trial court ;;(i
Colorado law is replete with precedent that �d court of appeals in this case incorrectly ��;
reflects a strong policy to be tive to parties' held that Colorado law does not recognize ;��;
intentions and recognizes that Colorado's �Plied easements in the form of profits, we �,•
unique history and geography further neces- now apply the law of implied easements to ��j
sitate judicial recognition of implied rights in the landow-ners' claims.
'kl
land. See, e.g., Roaring Fork Club u. St. ��1] Our review of the record leads us to i �
7ude's Co., 36 P.3d 1229, 1231 conclude that there is ample evidence to im-
(Co1o2001)(noting that "our lativmakers `I
[have] recognized that our arid climate re- ply certain rights in the landowners to access
and use the Taylor Ranch. The prior,unity �'.f�
quire[s) the creation of a right to appropriate of title of the landowners' and Taylo�'s land; •j
and convey water across the land of anoth- �
er"); Lazy Dog Ranch, 965 P2d at 1235 (in the necessity of the rights; the significant �'.�
reliance upon the promise of these rights;. �«: .
determining the scope of an easement, noting the fact that the rights were exercised for
that the "paramount concern" is to ascertain
the intentions of the parties and that when a over one hundred years; and fact that these
deed is �ilent as to a particular right, the �ghts were memorialized in. the Beaubien !
court shall look at the circumstances sur- Document, the Gilpin agreement, and every
• rounding the transaction); Thmnpson, 895 deed of conveyance in Taylo�'s chain of title, �
satisfy every element of the Restatement test
��,
� P2d at 540 (in implying an easement, noting .�;
that "sound public policy dictates that land �d the implied easements we recogni�ed in ;
i should not be rendered unfit for occupancy the cases discussed above. !
and that there is a presumption, therefore, �
that whenever a party conveys property he i. Prescriptive Easement {
i n cess for the benefi- _ i � �
conveys whatever s e ary Because Taylor's deed indicates that Tay �
; cial use of that propert�' (quotation marks lo�'s ownership of the land is subject to the �
� omitted)); Yunker, 1 Colo. at 554 (noting �andowners' prescriptive rights, we begin 1
� that certain water rights are necessary for ,�,ith an application of the law of prescriptive j.
i enjoying land and that the law will "imply a easements. The court of appeals in this case '� �
h grant of such easement where it is especially concluded that the landowners failed to prove �I�
Inecessary to the e�joyment of the dominant a prescriptive easement claim because their �•',
Iestate," and that such rights come not out of use was not adverse. Lobato, 13 P.3d at 834. �
the literal terms of the contract, but rather The court erred in this respect. �r
' out of "pre-e:asting and higher authority of ''
laws of nature, of nations, or of the communi- � '
[2'l] Although adversity is a necessary �
ty to which the parties belong"). requisite for adverse possession claims, !! �
Thus, the aim of honoring parties' inten- Smith u. Hayden, i72 P2d 47, 52 (Colo. ';�
� tions and avoiding i�justice that the Restate- 1989), it is not required for a prescriptive �; .
ment e.�cpresses has long been the goal of easement. Courts often find prescriptive �,'
Colorado law. Specifically, Colorado has a easements even when the owner of the ser- I
strong history of implying servitudes based vient estate allows the use. Significantly, the ; (
on equitable concerns. As the Restatement Restatement articulates that a prescriptive �
concludes, it is arbitrary and inconsistent to use is either:
i
I 1. Notably,one oF the goals of the Restatement is law.... [t is designed to allow both craditional �
to "present[ ] a comprehensive modcrn creat- and innovative land-development practices using i •
ment of the law of servitudes [hat substantia(ly servitudes without imposing aRiGcial constraints i
simpli6es and clarifies one of the most compler as to form oc arbitrary limitations as to sub- I ,
and archaic bodies oF 20th century American stance." Restatement, supra, Introduction at " �
_x . ' `_ . . - • • -
• � :: . � . ,
- � � . .
.,. ,
... �'_�1?nn� �;!` . , . - . . .. .. ...�. . ...��.? �2 tl�.'�.. .......a �� -. , . � .�� . .. .1. . ' . ;f � .. . .� . . - . .. .
. i. f } t y` ��^ _ - °.�.:o ,�,�:��'�+!
. ' � . . 't . . - . . .�.
• , , .. - , . ' � -•,. -
- � t . .... .. _.. ___ — . . . ....._..-...._a .. -. ' . ....:an�..w�.� �.�.- . . . � •- �_ . .. '" "' .� .�..�...:Z``K
1:,
�:,
:` 954 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SEftIES
,;
� �
( (1) a use that is adverse to the owner of not fully articulate their intent or reduce �
i; the land or the interest in land against their agreement to writing, or because they
which the servitude is claimed, or fail to comply with some other formal re-
j (2) a use' that is made pursuant to the quirement imposed in the jurisdiction." Re-
Iterms of an intended but imperfectly creat- statement, supra, § 2.16, cmt. a. Thus, the
,• ed servitude, or the e�oyment of the bene- court of appeals in the current case erred
� fit of an intended but imperfectly created when it required a finding of adversity in all
� servitude. circumstances.
! Restatement, suprq § 2.16. Having established that adversity is not
r Although an easement by prescription required when a grant has been imperfectly
: without adversity has been codified only in attempted,we turn to the facts of the current
the recent restatement, "it has alw�ays been case. The trial court's findings of fact and
present in American servitudes law." Id our interpretation of the Beaubien Document
' § 2.16 cmt. a. Because many jurisdictions fit every element of a prescriptive easement.
technically required adversity for a prescrip-
tive easement, decisions in those states often Lz4). First, the use must be open and
' used "convoluted e�cplanations" to explain notorious. There is no doubt that the land-
� how a permitted use was actually hostile and owners' use was well known to Taylor and
� met the adversity requirement Id Some his predecessors in title. The trial court
�' courts aclmowledged an exception to the ad- noted that Taylor's predecessors in title not
I versity .rule in certain circumstances. See, only lrnew of the landowners'access, but they
e.g., Nat'l Props. Corp. v. Polk County, 386 even went so far as to direct the location of
N.W.2d 98, 105 (Iowa 1986)(noting that there grazing. Most significant]y, Taylor and his
may be a prescriptive easement even "where predecessors in title had espress notice of
� the original use was with a servant [sic) the landowners' claims of right from the lan-
owner's consent"); Kirby v. Hook, 347 Md. guage of their deeds. The use was open and
380, 701 A2d 397, 404 (1997)(applying an notorious.
exception to the "genera] rule (that] permis-
. sive use can never ripen into a prescriptive �25� Second, the use must continue with-
, easement . . . where there has been an at- out effective interruption for the prescriptive
� tempt to grant an irrevocable easement Period. In Colorado, the statutory period is
which is void because of the statute of eighteen years. § 38-41-101, 10 C.R.S.
i &auds"). Other jurisdictions, such as Colo- (2001); Proper, S27 P.2d at 595. Here, the
irado, simply glossed over the adversity re- �� court explicitly found that the landown-
� quirement without comment. See, e.g., ers and their predecessors in title "grazed
� Wright, 69 r P2d at 388 (finding an easement cattle and sheep, harvested timber, gathered ;
� by prescription in the form of a right of way �'ewood, fished,hunted and recreated on the
across the servient estate even though the land of the defendant from the 1800s to the
use of the right of way was permitted and date the land was acquired by the defendant, �
ultimately reduced to writing); Pro�er, g2 i � 1960." The trial court also found that this ;
P2d at�95-96 (listing adversity as a require- access was never denied. This more than
ment of an easement by prescription but satisfies the statutory time period. •
then, although the parties stipulated that the �26) Third, the access'must either be ad- �
use was permissive, finding a prescriptive verse or pursuant to an intended, but imper- �
easement for access and use of a commercial fectly executed, grant. Here, the access was I
parbng lot via a compleh application of pre- permissive, rather than adverse. However, �
� sumptions). there is ample evidence of an intended grant
[23) It has long been established, then, of these rights. The Beaubien Document,
that the element of adversity is not required' although imperfect as an express grant, evi-
in all circumstances. It is not required when dences Beaubien's intent to grant rights to
other evidence makes clear that the parties the landowners' predecessors in title (see su-
; intend an easement, but fail "because they do �ra). Moreover, the express language in
I
. . � �
_ _. ------ .�_. __..----- ---__.___ _...---- -
. _. _ _. .._ _. _. - . , _...�,,....._.�...,..__�,___._.
. � '. , � � � . : ., _ . . . . � � . . , . � . ,. � ��� , . .
.�� T r �� ]��,�'- �y�= � .� i..I �.`i �4 :�� : 1 " Z r '`- . '• ' - .. -
� � �.' \��:� 4 t+ .�4�: i � i � wl . ti �* _ .
_ t ':�„ 1 j . r.�;� .,7.{.���V �'t �.� ��• ' 'S.. .. . . , . ` � , - . ... � . . . l . . � - . •
. '.j_'��, ��. i . , � • . � � ' ' � . . _ . .
"l'�� .Y- � , " .. . - . " . . . . . .. . . ..
� i.y _ �e." _ — ' _ __... —w�..c - ....t..':.r�:..«.-.....�.�._...r.......r.�..._......�.-.c.:..a.r..__��.�_' " � .
... ii��' . .
(� . . . .
LOBATO v. TAYLOR colo. 955 ! '
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
the deeds of conveyance for the Taylor The trial court found that during the 1850s
Ranch, &om Gilpin ultimately to Taylor, indi- Beaubien e.cecuted a lease to the United
cate an intention that the rights burden the�' States government for the maintenance of �!'
land. Fort NIassachusetts on grant land. In this
lease Beaubien granted the army the right to
[27] Thus, the landowners have estab- ,i.
lished a prescriptive claim.12 "pasture, cut grass, timber and collect fire- :�tl
wood" on Beaubien's land. We can safely �;
u. Easement by Estoppel assume that the United States was more �I
[287 The landowners have also estab- 'ophisticated in its dealings with Beaubien
than were the landowners' predecessors in I�'
lished every element of an easement by es- ��e and that it insisted on putting Beau- 'G
toppel. First, Taylor's predecessors in title t� jl
"permitted [the settlers] to use [the] land bien's promises into writing. Under these ;i
under circumstances in which it was reason-
circumstances,it is reasonable to foresee that � i
that a settler would substantially change po- � �
abie to foresee that the [settlers] would sub- �,,
stantially change position believing that the sition believing that the permission would not iit
, be revoked. ��
permission would not be revoked.' Restate- I��;
ment, .supra, § 2.10. The settlers' reliance (29] The second element, that the user ;•���
was reasonable because rights were e.�cpect- substantially change position in reasonable !`� �
ed, intended, and necessary. It was e.�cpect- reliance on the belief, is easily found. The . ;� �
ed because of the Mexican settlement system landowners' predecessors in title settled "
;�.
discussed above. Also discussed above, this gQaubien's grant for him. They moved onto !�'
settlement system, combined with the actual �e land and established permanent farms. 1 �
practices and the deeds associated with the ;j'
Taylor Ranch, show that rights were intend- [30] The third element, the avoidance of ;G
ed. injustice, is also undeniably present. The ��',
i The rights were also necessary. The original Sangre de Cristo grant was given on
� laintiffs' e ert, Dr. Marianne Stoller, testi- the condition that it be settled. Indeed, un- ,
� p � der Mexican law, the grant would have been i's
fied that access to wood was necessary to. revoked if settlement did not succeed. The �ri
heat homes, access to timber was necessary
' to build homes, and access to grazing was settlers, then, fulfilled the condition of the ; ' � �
necessary for maintaining livestock.�� More- �nt that made Beaubien fee owner of one �'
� over, Beaubien included each of these re- �on acres of land. � i
i ;,'
sources in a lease to the United States for Beaubien attracted settlers to the area by ;�
! the first military post in Colorado. See Le- convincing them that he would provide them �J,'
j Roy R. Hafen & Ann W. Hafen, Colorado: A with the rights they needed for survival. '�
' Stary of the State and ifs Peo�ole 130 (1947). Beaubien lmew that families would rely on i� •
i
�r; 12. The trial court in the current case heard evi- 13. Dr.Stoller,at one point in her testimony, also �
dence and cvled on the prescription claim as a mentioned that the setden fished, hunted, and •F•
matter of judicial economy. However, the court recreated on the land. She did not, however, !�
also ruled that the landowners could not bring a indicate that such practices were necessary. �
' prescription claim because Taylor did not have Significantly, in her written report, which the f I
' adequate nocice. Our review of the record does landowners submitted [o the[rial court. Dr.Sto(- !I
not support chis determination. Although the (er lists the landowners' rights as use rights to '�'�
I landownecs did not formally file for leave to add '•Pasture,Eirewood,timber,and water." .�
a prescription daim until 1992, all of eheir factu- ;;E
al allegations from the birth oE this case clearly ' �
implicate prescriptive rights—paRicularly their �4. The landowners' expert, Dr. Stoller, agreed f,�
claim that they and their predecessors in tide �at the rights inc(uded in Beaubien's lease to the
continuously accessed the Taylor Ranch for over Sa�ernment were significant: "he gave[the Unit- ��
one hundred years. Significantly, the deed oE ed States ArmyJ use rights for pasture, cutting
conveyance explicitly inFormed Taylor that he grass, firewood and timber to the adjacent
purchased the land subject to the "claims of the lands..,. Thus he was foilowing the same prac- I
local people by prescription or otherwise." (Em- tice in the 1863 document for his settlen,and for �
phasis added.) Taylor had adequate notice of che same reasons—the need for these resources I�: '
this claim. for human survival." � •
�
,j .
��`K4_y, �`,-r:{1.;'�'- . - - , , . . '... , '-) ..���` ..'1��� � °ib.�ri� _�-'::« a ::?.:st�._ . . '.e•�. . . . ' .
, � .. � ♦ . . , . . . , . ' � ' . . . . ' .. . � . .
rv '.�n�n • .i � �� � �>�{.�:R �• , vvy f � .�l 1 �.l. ',,� ' . 11 , ... , . ' � .. �..
.. . ..' "_ l... , . _ � . . .. _ . � . . . . � . . .. _ . . .. ._.. . . ' .. . ' .
f �. . . ' . . . � .• . .• � •f �� } .�`. . .. .. . 1 •
� ' . . . . ' \ .. l: . � ' � .. . . . . . .. • � ♦• •�_ .. , � . •C•, ��. _
� . . - .. ' . .. . . . . . . , . . . • _ ` ' ,
. ,
....-.t . .�...�. -� .`�-„ ' . .� ��. .�.�� .�. i ._ t.� N
. . . __ ..' ." . . �� ._' ' � .. . . . . . . _ � . . . . ... .�� '�. ��_ �".i-.���f-�i'�`�
�I.
. '`f 956 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER,, 3d SERIES
�' his promises and leave their homes to travel Custom, expectation, practice, and language
i hundreds of miles on foot or horseback to in the documents and deeds surrounding the
establish new homes. Taylor ranch property indicate not only that
A condition of the conveyance of Beau- a contrary intention did not e.�ist, but that I
? bien's land, from Gilpin do�c� to Taylor, was the parties affirmatively intended for these
� ri hts to exist. �
i that the owner honor these rights. Although g
� these promised rights were exercised for Al] five elements of an easement from pri-
� over one hundred years, although these or use have been established. � �
ri�hts were necessary to the settlers' verv
• ; e.�istence, and although TaS�lor had ample C. Extent of the Rights i
� notice of these rights, Taylor fenced his land
over fo Having found that the landowners have
; rty ,years ago. It is an understate- �plied profits in the Taylor Ranch, we now
� ment to say that this is an injustice. must address the scope of those rights. We
1I The landowners have established each ele- imply the rights memorialized in the Beau-
ment of an easement by estoppel. bien Document. We do so for four reasons.
Ii First, the document is the strongest evi-
) iri. Easement From Prior Use , .
, dence we have of the parties intentions and
�` [31] Lastly, every element of an ease- expectations. Second, the rights in the docu-
Iment from prior use has been shown. First, ment were likely the most necessary. Third,
I both Taylor's and the landowners'lands were the Fort Massachusetts lease lists these
originally under the common ownership of same rights. Fourth, the document is the I
� Beaubien who owned the entire Sangre de only evidence we have of an attempted ex-
i Cristo grant before settlement. See Tamel- press grant. This is particularly important
I � ing u United St¢tes Freehold La.nd & Emi- for the prescriptive easement claim. See Re-
� gration Co., 2 Colo.411 (1874). statement,suprn, § 2.16 cmt. a.''
: Second, the rights were exercised prior to ��2J Accordingly, we hold that the ]and-
� the severance of the estate. As discussed owners have implied rights in Taylor's land I
above, many of the rights the landowners
} � for the access detailed in the Beaubien Docu-
claim were needed and expected for life in menb--pasture, firewood, and timber. These
; the San Luis Valley. This necessity existed easements should be limited to reasonable
. from the first days of settlement—indicating use—the grazing access is limited to a rea-
that these rights were exercised prior to sonable number of livestock given the size of
severance of title. the vara strips; the firewood limited to that
The third and fourth prongs—that the use needed for each residence; and the timber
was not merel}� temporary and is reasonably limited to that needed to construct and main-
necessary to the enjoyment of the land—are tain residence and farm buildings located on
also easily established. The trial court's the vara strips.
i findings of fact establish that the rights were
exercised from the time of settlement until III. Remaining Issues
Taylor came on the scene. Moreover, as p�er the years, a host of contested issues
discussed above, the rights were reasonably have arisen in this case; many were not
necessar5-. addressed on appeal because the court of
Lastly, no contrary intention is expressed appeals' holding that the landowners did not
� or implied; thus, the fifth element is present. have any rights rendered the ancillary ques-
� 15. The landowners acknowledge that the Beau- ' tive easement in che absence oF adversity, there
bien Document does not reference rights [or must be evidence oC an attempted express grant.
hunting, fishing, and recreation and thus that In this case, the Beaubien Document is the only
there is no evidence oC an express or implied evidence of an attempted express grant to the
grant..oC these righu from Carlos Beaubien. landowners. Because ii makes no reference to
However the landowners claim that these rights hunting, fishing, or recreacion, chere can be no
. . , exist via a prescriptive easement. We disagree. prescriptive easement Eor those rights.
As discussed above, in order to Eind a prescrip-
, c
, f.. �.... wFT f'.+*w�.'�.�^ �•.U. '�. �s i� �7'�'<�'M.t'�474�,TN�S:G?Vt�t�iF
. , . _ . . .. ' , , . _ . . , ••t t` -:� Y ♦���i�ti 4:��v� �n 1`.� V'Ki eY �...
. . . . . . - . , . . . . . . �:, .'� .i:__ �_.. . .._ .i� . 1 .�C�'e1: ,?•. � .. �'_"�'..�[
�f . .,t�i� +.��i( s«�ItV- y�r`i..t. .t�r `. �x � � .._ ,�� ♦..�e . � �. . .. •. t•. . ..;- : - - -_: - � . ' ,
1 3 i.,� ��� l�S,Ej .+.� i�if� j � .•� lµy. � _ �-.�• ` .,�.. . ..:� .. ti .. s •� . � ±� � - � . .
4 �..'�"?.k � `a�tr!•y 7,w�v � �. ,,,,. � ��.�,�.'+l..ma:ericrstcswrs�:.+:.s..�t...-.i...�:�._ .r?:�.....,:.;.,,,.�t.... � , ,
f 1L� -artsM'��rl�i�.r�y�iy c�wY.`.���..i«".+F:+is' r G . u'��'_ . .. " .
�I'�
I LOBATO v. TAYLOR caio. g57 ;
• Cite as 71 P3d 938 (Colo. 2002) , , ,
� tions moot. We have reviewed the remain- Justice iVIt1KTINEZ dissenting only as to
ing issues and conclude that the only appel- part II.C. I
• late issue that must be addressed is whether � the opinion by the chief justice correct- i'
the trial court engaged in the appropriate ly notes, this case involves the settlement , �
due process inquiry on remand trom Ra,�l. �ghts of people who have been largely dis- '�
In Rae� we remanded this case for a de- possessed of their rights in land when Taylor i
termination of which landowners received ad- fenced the property. There is little dispute
� equate notice in the Torrens title actions. that the settlers enjoyed e.Ytensive rights in
876 P2d 1210. Although in Rael we high- the lands that comprise the Taylor Ranch for ;�
lighted facts in the record that indicated about one hundred years. Rather, the dis-
Taylor l�.�ew that local landowners claimed pute concerns the e.�tent of the rights, if any, �
rights in the land, on remand the trial court that survive when we construe settlement ;�'�
found criteria other than landowning disposi- �ghts conceived in a different era pursuant '.
tive. The court dismissed most of the plain- to contemporary standards. In short, the }�
tiffs, allowing only seven to pursue their �culty of this case is that we must address i
claims regarding the mountain tract and only the grave injustices imposed upon the set- i'4j
three to pursue their claims regarding the tlers' successors in interest by interpreting !�n�
Salazar estate. This must be reviewed. documents from a different era, intended to ; �
reflect Beaubien's intent, through the per-
: As a matter of judicial economy, and as a ,pective of modern property law. Nonethe- i �
� matter of fairness, given the forty-one year less, equitable principles in our modern juris- •. -
' denial of access to the Taylor Ranch and this p�dence, properly construed and applied,
twent one ear liti ation, we decline to re- I
: Y- Y g permit us to recognize the rights of the
� mand this case to the court of appeals for a settlers and their successors in interest. '�I
' determination of this issue. Rather, we will gecause I concur with the chief justice's
� revisit the due process issue after full brief- analysis and conclusion that the landowners
; ing, in a separate opinion. See Ballow v. have access rights through a prescriptive
� Phico Ins. Co., 875 P2d 1354, 1364 easement, an easement by estoppel, and an ��`
� (Colo.1993)(retaining jurisdiction rather t}ian easement from prior use, I join to make it
remanding to the court of appeals as a mat- the m�jority opinion and refer to it as such `�
' ter of judicial economy). herein. As the majority explains, the Beau- �
� bien document is an imperfect attempt at an I :
, IV. Conclusion ecpress grant of rights clearly "meant to '�'
� In sum, we imply access rights in the create permanent rights that run with the �`
� landowners to the Taylor Ranch for reason- land," maj. op. at —; such access rights i�.'
I
able grazing, hrewood, and timber. We re- were an "integz'a1 feature of the settlement i�
� ject the landowne�'s claims for hunting, fish- gystem under which the settlers and Beau- j�,
` ing, and recreation. Before we remand to bien were operating." Id at —. Addi- ;�,
the trial court for a permanent order of tionally, the Gilpin agreement provides fur- 'f
� access, additional briefing is necessary in ther support that the settlement rights ;�
order to determine which landowners re- granted by Beaubien were intended to run i;.
ceived adequate notice in the Taylor and with the land because that agreement re- . '
Salazar Torrens actions. The clerk of this quired that Gffpin take the land on the condi- ,.��
court will set a briefing schedule for the tion that he recognize and confirm the settle- ;'
parties. ment rights. i�
I also agree with the majorit�s analysis i
� Justice MARTINEZ dissents only as to and conclusions regarding the implied servi- i;
; part II.C. tudes upon which it bases its holding. The �I
i f
Justice KOURLIS dissents, and Justice majority determines that the same rules +
RICE joins in the dissent. should be applied to easements and profits �;
and adopts the Restatement's position that �;
Justice COATS does not participate. easements by prescription do not always re- i �� .
;
.�. _ . - , .. . . . � � . . . . .. , . T� .,.. .. . . . _ : . •- - .. . . . . . . .
,. . n.. . .. ' . ' � � " ' / � . � i _ � . r ' . • .� . .. .. . • . . .... _ ..1 . ' . . ,' . . . ' . . .. �'
. . ' . . - ' . � � .l. ..i . � .. .. , . .. ,:1� - :-}! !.•
. , . . . . . . ' � ; . - . .. ... ..i• . . .. _ '�' � 1
. . . . . . . . . . . . ... . . � .. 'ti .. . _.
_ 'i '. . ' ... � - � .
,
. . .. . � .. ,_ , . . _ �_` �
. _
' .:�..: _ . . .. ._ _ - _,. .-;. -S.. . .'a..: :..�. _:. - -. . _ -. ,. -. . .. �- .� � _ .. - .�, ..:. .
I;
��;'�' 95$ Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
I�i! quire a finding of adversity; instead such that "settlement rights" encompassed more
easements may result from an intended but than grazing, firewood, and timber, I would
i� imperfectly created servitude. also include access rights for fishing, hunting,
In addition, I agree with the majority's and recreation through a prescriptive ease-
conclusion that the landowners' access rights ment, an easement by estoppel, and an ease-
II are also found through an easement from ment from prior use.
� prior use and an easement by estoppel: The
� elements for both of these easements are met I. The Trial Court Findings Regarding
� in this case. I articularl a ee with the Settlement Rights for Fishing,
i p y �
majorit}�'s strong language regarding the in- Hunting, and Recreation
justices that are avoided in finding access The trial court made strong findings that
' , rights through an easement by estoppel. "[t]he plaintiffs' predecessors in title grazed
i In short, I summarize the majority's analy- cattle and sheep, harvested timber, gathered
' �� sis, and my support for it, to emphasi2e the firewood, fished, hunted and recreated on the
�' many areas of agreement I have with the land of the defendant from the 1800s to the
; majority and the extent to which I concur date the land was acquired by the defendant,
� and join the majority opinion. in 1960." The trial court also found that,
�j However, it is significant to me that the P�or to 1960 when Taylor fenced the land,
;� tria] court's findings that the landowners also the landowners referred to that land as
'� enjoyed access for fishing,hunting and recre- "open range" and that the landowners were
�! ation are supported by the record. As a "never denied access to the land for grazing
result, I would apply the reasoning of the of cattle, sheep, harvesting timber, gathering
Imajority opinion regarding prescriptive ease- firewood, fishing, hunting, or recreating."
' ment, easement b,y estoppel, and easement My review of the record reveals that that the
from prior use to conclude that the landown- �� court's findings of fact that fishing,
' ers have also established� access rights for hunting, and recreation were included in the
fishing, hunting, and recreation. Thus, while settlement rights contemplated by the Beau-
j I join the majority opinion as to its analysis bien document are correct.
regarding the source of the landowners' Several expert historians filed reports in
� � rights, I do not join part II.C. of the majori- this case, some of whom also testified at trial.
ty's opinion, which excludes fishing, hunting, Some of these reports include commentaty
• and recreation rights from its holding. How- regarding fishing, hunting, and recreation as
j ever, I recognize that part II.C. of the chief p� of settlement rights. For exampie, the
j justice's opinion is the controlling opinion in report filed by Dr. Michael Meyer, professor
; this case. emeritus at the University of Arizona, con-
More specifically, though I agree with the cluded that the common lands in the settle-
majority's finding that the Beaubien docu- ment systems provided material resources
ment is an imperfect one and accordingly such as "fuel to keep warm during the cold
must be considered alongside e��trinsic e��- winter months, a�•aried diet of fruits. vegeta-
dence in order to find the landowners have bles, grains and meat." The reference to
� access rights through a prescriptive ease- "meat" as one of the resources available from
ment, an easement by estoppel, and an ease- the common lands implicitlt�refers to hunting
� ment from prior use, see maj. op. at 94 r-948, that took piace on the common lands. Dr.
� I believe that document cannot be read to Meyer's report further expanded on the uses �
� limit the landowners' access rights to graz- of the common areas, stating that ;
ing, fu-ewood, and timber. In my view, the [t)he common lands were put to many uses
� imperfect nature of the Beanbien document in Spanish and Me�can New Mea-ico, in- ;
requires us to look beyond that document to • cluding fishing, hunting (of wild turkeys,
determine the full scope of the landowners' deer and other game), threshing, recre- �
access rights. As a result, I would not limit ation, the gathering of wild herbs, fruits �
the landowners' access rights; instead, based and nuts (especially pinones) and the dis- �
on the 2vidence in the record demonstrating posal of refuse but most importantly they
�
. # ,..__._ _..�. r , -, -,... - �.r„-....-_.__-_-�,-� � . . ._ ..-... �.Y..�.,. ►�+�-�"�
. . .. . . _ . . , y ,� , �,;;;=.�� ��-t� �.,�..
. _ • , . . . . , . . . . : . , , '�� . .. :�..
�.' � � ,`h` � ' � � , 1 +� . ` i � .. . . . . , . _
r � 1
S-.t -t°�J� � \� 4j..q,�j'�; t �iy,YLY+,A,:' ��y � �. �(' . , � i:.,_• ��' � Y . . , . ' .. ,
1 � ��. .�:. � T'.{ � .. �' . .� ' i .. . ' .. . � .
'} -1�-`�j'n, •.,r�'.l.,ty'se�l ' 1�1._ — ..w.� - ....i•'_ a...aculwa.�a:..1..�.-.......-ar�..r.._..�-i.� "a..�._.�. _ .. � •. .
., V �`�` ,
1
� �
� LOBATO v. TAYLOR cato. 959 ' • �
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
were used for grazing, watering of stock the te.�ct of the Beaubien document when
animals, and the cutting of wood. interpreting the intent of Beaubien and the
Dr. Meyer's report also explained tliat settlers with regard to access rights. When
among the various primary documents giving �ked about Beaubien's purpose in authoring `;
a legal basis for common lands use is the the document, Dr_ Stoller replied that his- ;:'
, Plan de Pitic, which was the founding docu- P�'Pose was to record the use rights of the
ment for several New D�Iexico towns, but also people to the common lands. However, she �i
"specifically given general applicability for all specifically pointed out that one reading the �Fi
of the towns in the northern New Spain." Beaubien document must look beyond the `'
This document provided that common lands actual te:ct of that document in interpreting �i;
be set aside around each settlement "so that the rights it includes: ''
the settlers can use them for recreation[and] He set aside land for pasture, lowlands, j��
go out with their cattle without doing dam- the vega lands, specifically saying that �
age." these lands were to be used only for ani- +!�
Dr. Marianne Stoller, professor of anthro- mals that were necessary for domestic pur-
pology at the Colorado College, filed an ex- poses.. .. And he designated the lands ;�';
pert report and testified at txial. Although that could be used for pastures; for '"
,�.
her report does not explicitly mention fish- flocks—�nd he did not use the •word
ing, hunting, and recreation, her report con- `flocks,"but this is to be understood, given .
cludes that the Beaubien document clearly the nature of the economy of these people,. '
� guarantees the landowners' right of access an agro-pastoral economy.
to common lands. Significantly, her report �Emphasis added.) Dr. Stoller further es- ��
� also concludes that the Beaubien document plained the need to look beyond the text of
� `is made more understandable by looldng at the document to properly interpret the scope
� the context of the political and social cir- ,;
1 of the access rights it contemplated:
cumstances surrounding its creation, and by
understanding the nature of tha economic Because (the Beaubien document], like any
' document, has to be inte reted. And one
circumstances, ecology, and topographical � E
� characteristics of the area" has to go beyond it to understand the ��
Although Dr. Stolle�'s report did not ex- geography. That document contains place y,!
names. One has to know where those �
pressly address fishing, hanting, and recre- place names are. It refers to different
ation, her trial testimony did. When asked
I to express her opinion regarding the use of tYPes of lands. One has to know what ,
those lands are, where they are. All those "
the common lands by successive generations �
of landowners between 1863 and 1960, she �ds of things are necessary in order to �t'
' replied, in pertinent part, that "[t]hey were �terpret such a document... . The lands ,
used for hunting of wild animals. They were sP°ken of in the document include the '
used for fishing... . And recreation." When agricuitural lands, they include the moun- �
asked whether there was specific, visible evi- � lands, they incIude the pasture lands, '
dence of such use of the common lands, she the vega lands. Lands, in other words, !�
replied: that provide different resources and that ,� �
� There were roads that went pariway up �'e for different purposes. �i
� most of the tributary valleys.... There T�s �stimony demonstrates the necessity of '
� were trails that crisscrossed the mountain looldng to other evidence beyond the Beau- ,I�
� lands.. .. There were signs of people hav- bien document in order to fiilly understand
� ing cut wood for the purpose I described. the different uses that settlers made of these �i
� There were animals,there were there were lands. Such other evidence demonstrates
sheep and cattle graang. There were wild �at fishing, hunting, and recreation were �
� animals to be seen. There were fish in the uses to which the lands were put
n
e streams. Thus, Dr. Stoller's testimony is significant
C Additionally, Dr. Stoller, consistent with her for two reasons. First, her testimony estab- -
.� report, testified that one must look beyond lishes that any interpretation of the rights
� .
�,`� ti +_.:�, �c: ' . . , . . , -.,, , ��„- z , ,
-. -.. .. .� . .. ,.:
`. . . , . ' ' � - . . . .
' ' n. •, �.. . . . .. . �-, � , . . � .
. . . ,U'.,._ . _., .. , �. �. . .!' ... _. . .'t 7.r . .. » . � ti: ... . • .. ' �.� ... �� .-��-� . � . . �� -. • � - . . . � , . . ... ..
. . • . . � . . � . � � y: . '��1 .�1.: �� � � • '- . ..
... . . . . '. . ... . ' .• ' ' " - . '` ' ..f, ' . ' .• ' ...
, � � � .... .. .. . .... . . ' ... . ..� . . - . ._ .' . : : . . . . . � . .. . . _ ,. � .� . ..,_ ^�
+:.
k � JsQ Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
I;�
C�' contemplated by the Beaubien document back to the Plains tribes, opining that a1-
must necessarily go beyond the specific text though these tribes practiced agriculture,
of that document and consider other evidence hunting was the mainstay of their exis-
of the social, political, historical, and econom- tence... . Large animals such as buffalo,
iIic circumstances at the time the document mountain sheep, antelope, deer and ellc
was authored; we must look beyond the text provided not only food but also material
�� of the Beaubien document to determine the
goods. They used the hides to make hous-
scope of the access rights to which the land- ing covers, sinew for thread, rawhide for
� owners are entitled. ropes and straps, and tanned sldns for
, Second, Dr. Stoller's testimony demon- clothing and shoes.
; strates that fishing, hunting, and recreation, We can infer that this use of the lands for
• � although not eapressly mentioned in the hunting continued after the Me.�acan govern-
; Beaubien document, were important to the ment began to approve land grants such as
; settlers, just as grazing and gathering fire- the Maxwell and Sangre de Cristo grants
wood and timber were. Accordingl}�, I be- based on community opposition to the Max-
�� lieve that the evidence of settlers' fishin well
g, grant: The Maxwell grant, unlike the
� hunting, and recreation activities is evidence Sangre de Cristo grant, did not expressly
�� of the "political and social circumstances sur- reserve rights to common lands for settlers
i� rounding" the creation of the Beaubien docu- through a document similar to the Beaubien
� ' ment, and that such evidence increases our document. As a result,some members of the
� "understandin the nature of the economic y �
I g communit feared that the Maxwell nt
� � circumstances, ecology, and topographical would be put to commercial use to the exclu-
� characteristics of the area." sion of historical, local use b,y the setUers for
! Further, the expert report and testimony hunting and � ?jng. In particu]ar, soon af-
� of Dr. Maria Montaya, professor of histQry ter Beaubien received the Maa.�vell grant, a
iand American culture at the Univers;ty of community member named Father Jose An- ;
Michigan, also supports the trial court's fxnd- tonio Martinez lodged an objection. One of '
ings. The majority of Dr. Montoya's schol- Martinez's grounds for objecting wa,s that �
I , arly research and writing relates to the putting the lands that comprised the Maxwell �
� j Maxwell land grant The Maxwell grant, al- b�'ant (which were put to similar use as the
, though not the subject of the present case, lands that comprised the Sangre de Cristo
; is nonetheless closely related to the Sangre �'�t)into private hands would deprive those �
I de Cristo grant that is the subject of this living on the lands of their livelihood, which I
� case. The Maxwell grant, located directly to consisted of hunting as well as grazing live- ,
the southeast of the Sangre de Cristo grant, stock.
was�also o�med by Beau�ien. Dr. Montoya The conclusion that hunting was an impor- �
test�ed that the history bf the two grants is ta.nt aspect of the settlers' activities on both i
, closely related and that she studied the the Maxwell and Sangre de Cristo grants is �
� Beaubien document in the context of her supported by the findings of another expert. ,
research of the Maativell grant. A report filed by Malcolm Ebright, an histo- i
More specifically, Dr. Montoya's report rian, attorney, and president of the Center .
noted that the activities of the settlers that for Land Grant Studies in New Me�co, also �
� lived on both the Maxwell and the Sangre de concluded that Martinez opposed the Max- i
Cristo grants were similar. She explained �'ell grant because the grant "included the ,
� that on both grants, people "settled along the communa1 hunting and grazing lands" of set-
river valleys using similar land use settle- tlers.
i ment patterns of community living based Finally, testimony from at ]east one of the
f around a plaza with privately held strips of � landowners also supports the trial court's
� land (varas), and common areas used for conclusion that recreation was included in the
hunting, grazing, and wood collection." settlement rights contempiated by Beaubien
p (Emphasis added.) Her report traces the and the settlers when the document was
use of the land that makes up both grants authored. Emilio Lobato, Jr., who resides
. _ _�._.__.,._ . _,.._..,._ _ M.... ��,... ,.. .� .,�-�.._.�-�:�..-..�9,-. . "
. , , , . . , i � � ;. , ,,.� "��•;
. . ... . . . .. _. .. .. . . . . _ ... . . . r,•:
( � � �
��; �tt� � } �'.��4 -��7,, ,:�` .:1� �..l.s���. .� . . . ' '. � . ' ,.. i� • � � � ; .
t . . . . �. . . ' , . . ' .. ' .. , . , .
.' .. . .. . . .� . . , , . . . � ' .
, � i .
. .
,L,��_y '. ___�_... . ��.�._.�_��.��._.__ '. ' __.'_....'" ._...'_"_'_" "
T — - �------'-"--�._...__._��_..�..�_�__.�..._..� -- —...��_..._. .�S
� ��i . � . . . �
' LOBATO v. TAYI.OR Cola 96j �
�
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
near the Taylor Ranch, can trace his ances- recreation as well as for grazing, Srewood, i
try back to Cristobal Lobato, one of the eatly and�timber.
settlers. In addition, his great-grandmother Looldng, as we must, beyond the Beaubien
was an original settler in 1851. He described document, which is imperfect, to extrinsic
the use he and his family made of the land evidence to determine the full scope of the „I
when he was a child, stating that he would access rights intended by Beaubien reveals `�
use the land for "hilang, horseback riding, that access rights for fishing, hunting, and �"
just exploring." He also testified that he and recreation must be recognized. The Gilpin '
his family would go on picnics on the Taylor agreement is one source of important extrin- �:'
,
Ranch land. Although such contemporary sic evidence. Significantly, both the Beau- ��;
recreational use of the Taylor Ranch lands bien and Gilpin documents refer to settle- i�
occurred several generations after Beaubien ment rights as if the scope of those rights ��
authored the document and the original set- W� understood. Because I believe that ��
tlers arrived, the fact that such use persisted there was no attempt to enumerate the spe- ';�
frorn generation to genera.tion is further evi- cific settlement rights in either document,
dence that recreation rights were considered that neither document specifically mentions ';'
settlement rights and thus contemplated by hshing, hunting, and recreation is not dispos- �
the Beaubien document. itive as to the scope of the settlement rights ;� �
accorded to the first settlers. -
In sum, the evidence presented at trial and
through e.�cpert reports, as well as the testi- � a result, e.�ctrinsic evidence beyond
these documents must.be considered. Such
rnony of at least one lay witness, supports i
the trial court's findings of fact that hshing, e.rtrinsic evidence includes the social, eco-
I hunting, and recreation were an important nomic, political and historical character of
� part of the settlers' activities in the region settlement rights. r�,s my discussion of the
� that includes the Taylor Ranch at the time record reveals, evidence adduced at trial sup- �
�� the Beaubien document was authored in the Aorts the trial court's findings that fishing, ��''
1860s. In addition, much of the expert testi- hunting, and recreation were contemplated �
rnorry and reports� also concluded that the by the Beaubien document, and thus the ��
Beaubien document must be construed by Gilpin agreement, although not mentioned
considering the social, economic, historical, ���dually in either document. According- �i �
and geographical context in which it was ly, all six access rights sought by the land-
authored, and not strictly based on the actual owners are properiy recognized through a
i te.�ct. As a result, applying the same analysis Prescriptive easement, an easement by estop-
as the majority, I conclude that fishing, hunt- Pel, and an easement from prior use. ;
� ing, and recreation rights were contemplated Because I would hold that the landowners ��
by the Beaubien document and must there- have access rights for all six settlement
ri hts, I am un eisuaded b the four reasons �
fore be included in the access rights to which g P Y '
� the landowners are entitled. given by the majority for limiting its recogni-
� tion of access rights to grazing, firewood,and �f
timber. See maj. op. at 956. I brietly ad- ' �
II. The Scope of Access Rights �ess each of these four reasons. �!
• My disagreement with the majority opin- First, the majority asserts that the "docu- '�
ion is with its application of easements by ment is the strongest evidence we have of , � •
� prescription, by estoppel, and &om prior use the parties'intentions and expectations." Id. ��(
� to limit the landowners' access rights to "the While I agree that the Beaubien document is ;'t
! rights memorialized in the Beaubien docu- strong evidence of the parties' intentions, (
� ment." Maj. op. at 956. Instead, applying that document cannot be considered as the ;i I
� the legal &ameworks of easements by pre- only e.�cpression of those intentions, or even �
� scription, by estoppel, and from prior use to the strongest e.�cpression. Instead, because
� the trial court's findings of fact results in my the document is imperfect and ambiguous, � .
determination that the landowners are enti- extrinsic evidence must be considered in re- ;'�
tled to access rights for fishing, hunting, and constructing those intentions. Because the �
!
�� - � . . . _ . . '�F
:t.� - -- , .- _ � - ' ' -. . .-• . :. - �� . . - ..� . .
.. . j.M1�}w_Yrk�s+i� . . _. � ,. . � . ...�... r�.s_r�� J. . ...... �� . .5 . �e_ ... •�_ ... . . .��' ���� ' . :f . . .. � .. � . � ... .
�. .. . j . -
ti o t
�,'. . ,' 1 �,-5 , ` :',• . r;�, ,N',`�.Frr��;�
, • ? ' '� f'� ` � , ,.�-x x-e< <:
. ya.
. - . . . . � ._ . ' ' ' .. � :']'�,.� y. .
. . . � � . � " ' ' . . - . . --� __ . , .. .. . . . . . . ' , � : . .'.1:'a.- �
� _ . . _ . . . . . ._ .._ . . . . ��
�
�;;, 962 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES �
�i. �
'� ; trial court's findings of fact regarding a11 six ing and collecting firewood and timber that
i' ` settlement rights are supported by the rec- are contained in the Beaubien document and I
� ord, I find that it is logically consistent to the settlement rights of fishing, hunting, and `
determine that the landowners have estab- recreation that are supported by other evi-
lished access rights for all six settlement dence in the record. As noted, the Beaubien �I
Irights; to find otherwise treats the Beaubien document is an imperfect, ambiguous docu- �
! document as a proper, perfect, e.�cpress grant. ment that must be interpreted and construed �
f Second, the majority contends that the by referring to extrinsic evidence; the evi- �
� rights in the document were "likely the most dence adduced at trial strongly supports the
; necessary." Id I agree that grazing herds trial court's findings of fact that all six rights �
� and gathering firewood and timber were nec- �'ere considered settlement rights. i
; essary for the survival of the settlers. The Accordingly, I believe that the legal con- �
record supports such a conclusion. See id cepts of prescriptive easement, easement by
� j However, a finding that fishing and hunting estoppel, and easement from prior use, when i
; were necessary settlement rights is also sup- applied to the evidence adduced at trial, com- ;
� ported by the record. Further, although pel my conclusion that the landowners are '
' recreation is arguably not necessary for sur- entitled to a11 six settlement rights. I
� vival, there is ample evidence in the record
�' that recreation was considered an important III. Conclusion �
� settlement right. See part I, supra. �
I i While I agree with the majority�s articula- ;
��� Third, the majority gives weight to the fact
� tion of the controlling law in this case, I �
that the Fort Massachusetts lease lists the
I same rights as the Beaubien document to disagree with its application of that law to `
I limit the scope of the landowners' access �
� support its exclusion of fishing, hunting and
recreation rights. However,because the rec- rights. Because I conclude that the trial `
� court's findings that "[t]he plaintiffs prede- �
ord reveals that the purpose of Fort Massa-
chusetts was importantly different from the cessors in title grazed cattle and sheep, har-
purpose of the Sangre de Cristo settlement, I vested timber, gathered firewood, fished,
� � hunted and recreated on the land of the
I do not give great weight to that ]ease in defendant from the iS00s to the date the �
� � discerning the full scope of the landowners'
� � access rights. More specifically, as ea_ land was acquired by the defendant, in 1960" �
plained by Dr. Stoller, the purpose of Fort �e supported by the record, I would find
Massachusetts was to "protect the settle- that the landowners er�joy access ri�hts for i
; p y graZing, collecting firewood and timber, fish- �
ments ... and to further U.S. olic towards I
_ � Indians of rounding them up and confining ing, hunting, and recreation on the Taylor �
i them to a reservation." Although the righLs Ranch. Accordingly, I dissent from part
to graze and collect timber and firewood II•�• of the majority opinion and join the
I.
articulated in the lease were necessary activi- majority�opinion as to all other parts.
' ties for maintaining an army fort, the funda-
mentall,y different purposes between Fort Justice KOURLIS dissenting. �
! Massachusetts and the Sangre de Cristo set- �]though I have great sympathy for the
tlements lead me to give littie weight to that historic and present plight of the landowners }
lease as evidence regarding the scope of the in this action, I cannot support the majority
landowners' access rights. opinion for two reasons. First, it is my view
Finally, the majority argues that the Beau- that in 1863 Charles Beaubien attempted to
bien document is the "only evidence we have make a community grant for the benefit of
1 of an attempted express grant," which is the inhabitants of the plazas of San Luis, San
j important for a claim of a prescriptive ease- Pablo, and Los Ballejos. The law in effect at
4 ment. See maj. op. at 956. While I agree the time did not recognize such a grant and
with this as a statement of fact, I do not �instead required individual identification of
believe that it provides a basis for discrimi- grantees. Hence, the Beaubien Document
nating between the settlement rights of graz- had no legal effect.
. _ __ � ----�- _ _._......_____._ __.. _., __. - _,- _ - ---- - --- --._._____ -- --
♦ . . � .s`• � � . 1 l �'� e r • . • . . - .
�ii.. . �.lu4{� � $ .t��i�.'� t M'/'y�lr. ♦r, 4y t�� 'S. � -.� L� - �� •: • � � .. ' .
�+..�.3� +�7kr��'/t" �Y',` d R.�'��L„# � `i l.a ".� '� ..1 t t� �. .. � �. l . . , . ,
�f r,�ti.�' �.�;;�� t•�: ti ,�:, '� w ', ,.
j? .�.'q� � �L ii't_,. _�'�i. •i, �� - 1 y� •J � _"�i�,.J ' Lta.�u✓✓�ri�.O�...+�...i'�r...w�...a.��.�,...�..,� ^ •
'� f A' '
��
�
LOBATO v. TAYLOR Colo. 963
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002) . . -
� Second, I find no ambiguity either in the irrigable plot, and the right to "use the re-
legal description in the Document or in the maining unallotted land on the grant in com-
absence of grantee speci.ficity. The legal de- mon with the other settlers for pastures, �
scription referred to the lands of the Rito watering places, firewood, and logs for build- ';
Seco. The trial court found that the lands',of ing. ... ET]he common lands were owned by
the Rito Seco do not overlap with the current the community and could not be sold." il�Ial-
Taylor Ranch. There is no ambiguity; rath- colm Ebright, Land Grants & Lawsuits in !�
er, the Document simply does not apply to Northern New iVlexico 25(1994). �
Taylor Ranch. Additionally, the omission of Charles Beaubien received a private grant ;;:�
grantee names was not an ambiguity: it was from the government conditioned upon set-
a clear attempt to create a communal grant, tlement requirements. Beaubien, in turn, ':'
which was not legally recognized. created what I construe to be a community ;'��
Because the Document is not ambiguous in �'�t to the prospective inhabitants of three ''�
any pertinent part, it cannot support an im- Plazas. In the Document, he stated that: ���
� plication of rights not e:cpressly set forth. It has been decided that the lands of the ;��,
Prescriptive easements, easements by estop- Rito Seco remain uncultivated for the ben- �i'�
pel, and easements from prior use do not efit of the community members (gente) of �.�'!
�':
apply to these facts. the plazas of San Luis, San Pablo an�:Los '-;'
Accordingly, I respectfiilly dissent from B�ejos and for the other inhabitants of _
� the majority opinion and would instead af- these plazas for pasturing cattle by the i
� firm the court of appeals' opinion upholding Payment of a fee per head, etc. . . . Accord-
'; ing to the corresponding rule all the inhab- i
the trial court. itants will have enjoyment of benefits of
� pastures, water, firewood and timber, al-
� I. Community Land Grants
� ways taldng care that one does not injure
` The historical records indicate that some- another. ','I
I one seelang. a land grant would address a �e Document is clear on its face that i� �
petition to the governor of the region de- pertains to the Rito Seco and intends to �
� scribing the land and the individual's qualifi- convey certain rights to the inhabitants of `
! cations for ownership. Malcolm Ebright, the three plazas. Beaubien enjoyed private G'i
I Land Grants & Lawsuits in Northern New �and: he granted communal rights on that .
Mexico 23 (1994). If the petition was aP- land, pursuant to Spanish custom and tradi-
` proved by the governor, and the alcalde (the tion. Under the Beaubien Document, the
� mayor), then the governor would issue the settlers received a communal �ight to use ;�
� gran� Id.There were two types of grants of certain lands for their personal needs. Now, i;,'
� land fi-om the government: private grants to �e landowners assert rights that their pre- :
individuals who would own the land and who decessors historically exercised in common
� could sell it after they met a requirement of �� a number of other inhabitants of the f' � .
establishing possession of the land; and com- �.ea. Those rights are not recognized either a
� munity grants.� Id.at 24. by statute or case law. ��
' Large private grants were made in an �� ,
• effort to settle new areas. The individual II• Communal Grants Are Not ,
would not gain full title to the property until Recognized In Our Law i �
� he had encouraged a sufficient number of A Territorial Laws �
' people to move into the area, settle it, and In 1863;the year Charies Beaubien esecut- ��
Iestablish communities. ed the Beaubien Document, under Colorado
� In a comm�nity grant, each settler would Territorial law, a document conveying any t{
f receive an allotment of land for a house, an interest in reai estate had to meet several �
I �
1. As one commentator notes,the themes found in land and communal land, and the impoRance of �
� the land tenure and law in Spain and 1Aexico are Spanish custom. Malcolm Ebright,Land Grants �
� repeated in the southwestern United States in the & Lawsuits in Norrhern New N[exico 21 (1994). -
nineteenth century: a tension between private
I� i ,
..---, '; -.. , _ .. . . �-_ . _ , _ . �., ._. . ._ .-- .
'r:. , . _ .
. . . � . . .
- , ,,:., , .. .. � � " . • . � 'r .. „ ... . . '� . .. .:� � � . �� �.. . . ,�:
. .. . ._ ... . . ....,. .. . . .. , ._ �� . .
. •• • . ` • � y S s _ .,'- .... : 1 .h: -} ._!,
. + - . - . - _ -.
.. . ' • . . , � • �
.'� .. .__...._ _..._.. ' ._. ., _._ . _-- _.. a z.�<< �_ �.i,..�::...� . . . .. . .. -•- . _:--�.�.:�.s-_.,.-..
I .
�� � 964 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
i;
� � � formal requirements, including the require- adjudicate land claims and how to establish a
i� ,
� ! ments that it incorporate an accurate de- common repository for preserving written
scription of the property and the names of claims to specific lands. See II Colorado and
the grantees: � Its People: A Narrative and Topical History
the christian and surnames of the . of the Centennial State 372-73 (Leroy R.
I� Hafen ed., 1948).
� grantees ... and ... an accurate descrip-
tion of the premises, or the interest in the Under the common law, the grantor
� premises intended to be conveyed, and merely warranted that he was seised of, or
i shall be subscribed by the party or parties possessed of, the title that he purported to
� malang the same, and be duly proved or convey. The obvious deficiencies of such a
� acl�owledged, before some officer autho- system led to the eventual enactment of re-
� rized to take the proof or acknowiedgment cording acts and other statutory conveyanc-
• i of deeds, or by his,.her or their attorney in ing requirements in every state. 2 Cathy
i fact. Stricklin Krendl, Colorado Methods of Prac-
' Territorial Laws of Colo., lst Sess., An Act tice § 62.1 (4th ed.1998).
i' Concerning Conveyances of Real Estate, 64, The regulation of property transfer is
j 64, § 2 (1561). The requirement that the strictly a matter of state law. Casner, supra,
document identify grantees by name is indic- § 18.27. As the Supreme Court has noted,
j�• ative of the territorial legislature's overt de- "[a)s it is indisputable that the general we]-
�'' cision not to honor community grants that fare of society is involved in the security of
� failed to mention specific grantees. the titles to real estate and in the public
I
� The Beaubien Document flatly fails to registry of such titles, it is obvious that the
� meet that requirement.� The Beaubien Doc- Aower to legislate as to such subjects inheres
� ument does not give the christian and sur- in the very nature of government." Am.
� names of the grantees, instead orily referring Land Co. v. Zeiss, 219 U.S. 47, 60, 31 S.Ct. ,
� generally to the "c�xninunity members" and ?00, 55 L.Ed. 82 (1911); see also BFP v.
� � "inhabitants" of spec�ed villages. That Resolution 'I�ust Corp., 511 U.S. 531, 544, '
omission is a legal deficiency that makes the 114 S.Ct. 1757, 128 L.Ed2d 556 (1994) ("It is �
� be ond u
; , document invalid as a conveyance under the Y q estion that an essential state inter-
; � operative law. est is at issue here: We have said that `the I
Compliance with real property law is a general welfare of society is involved�in the I
matter of substantial importance. See N Gecurity of the titles to real estate' and the
- American Law of Property § 1827(A James Power to ensure that security 'inheres in the �
i very nature of[state] government.' ") (altera- `
- � Casner ed., 1952) [hereinafter Casner]. In tion in original). I
� the early years of our history, the questions �
Iof who owned what and who could sell what P�vate property ownership is nothing �
without a" `bri ht line rule' to determine the �
I were legitimate and pervasive concerns. As g
I; a citizenry,we clearly believed in the sanctity ���ty of a title and of its potential encum- �
I� of private property and the ownership rights brances with predictability and without the �
I associated with it. However, we struggled need for litigation." Michael H. Rubin & E. �
� u�ith how to clarify those rights as against Ikeith Carter, Notice of Seizure in Mortgage
� those who would dispute them, and how to Foreclosures and Tax Sale Proceedings: The �
� secure title to property such that it would Ramifications of Mennonite, 48 La. L.Rev.
535,592(1988). �
become marketable to a subsequent purchas- ;
( er. In fact, in Colorado's early history, one Our legislature adopted a thorough statu- �
� of the issues to which the territorial govern- tory regime intended to ensure titles to real
� ment fell heir was the question of how to property are secure and marketable. See
� 2. The trial court found that in 1856, before he , of the requirements for conveying use rights and
eaecuted the Beaubien Document, Charles Beau- profits a prendre, and could satisfy them when
! bien entered into a lease with the United States he chose. Lobato v. Taylor, 13 P.3d 821, 830
' government that met all sta[utory requirements, (Colo.App.2000).
thereby demonstcating that Beaubien was aware
�
----------�^—�_.___-.-.. - �...._�, -._.._ �_ , .. -_.. _-- _...-- . .,.._,._ �--�:...�---�-..-...�.
• :. , . . . , . _ , . ,' , �t," . �, , ;:
� . �.. . � . .� �. , r . - • . . . - . .
7 f +>. i � � .,�� . !•r•
� �,� .1 ��f'�i �4.� � �.� ��a�- l �� r� � t�. ,. ,�� . . .. � - . :4� . .. , _ .. .
t , i i.�. �. . . . . . • ..
' ,M,fO�' r - - - ....�. - -..�........+...w.r.,.....�,....,..wr�:.+.... z...�...._...��...�_........,......��-..r.. �.�_.-�__. � . .
LOBATO v. TAYLOR Colo. 96� ' ' �
Cite a+71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
§§ 38-34-101 to 38-35-204, 10 C.R.S. (2001). comport with those laws, and it, therefore, ; .
This court, over the decades,has consistently has no validity as to the landowners here.' !
required conveyances to comply with such �e Document intended to create a grant �
laws at the time of the document's creation to �
to the members of a community: such a : I
give full effect to the goal of security and �.�t was in contravention of the applicable
marketability of real property titles. See, statutes and was,therefore,invalid.
e.g:, City of Lakewood v. �Ylavromatis, 817
P2d 90, 96, 101 (Colo.1991) (concluding that, B. Case Law
although a city filed and recorded a right-of-
way in the road book, because the recorda- Just as our statutes do not recognize com- �
tion did not comply with the specific provi- munal grants, so too, case law reaches the �
sions of the 1888 recording statute, the stat- same result. New Me.�co has been the loca- ;;i
:��:
ute in effect at the time of the road petition, �on of most of the litigation concerning com- .i
it did not give constructive notice to subse- munal grants in the United States. Over the !
quent purchasers; therefore, because the course of that litigation, those courts have
road petition was a transfer of an interest in declined to recognize communal grants, and
real property, it had to comply with all the have further determined that they must�look
specifications of the applicable recording act); to the record title to the property, anci not
Hallett v. Alezander, 50 Colo. 37, 46, 114 P, inquire behind it into the traditions or histo- ( -
490, 494 (1911) ("The evident purpose of the rJ' that might support converting those •
� recording statute is, to provide an effectual �'ants into individual grants:
, remedy against the loss accruing to subse- [T]he courts estahlished as a basic princi- I
, quent purchasers of real estate arising &om ple one of not looldng behind the title, thus
� the esistence of secret or concealed convey- precluding any e.xamination of laws and �
� ances thereof unlrnown to the subsequent customs prevailing at the time of annex-
' purchaser. 'I'he remedy is made effectual by ation by the United States. If title papers
� requiring every deed to be recorded befor� it were available to prove the right of use, ,�
� can be of any effect as against such purchas- the tribunals treated the land as belonging '
� ers."). to the community in fee simple, They also
� That a purchaser would know what he is recognized the right of partition of the �i
I buying by examining the record title to a common lands among the heirs of the orig- � ' �
� parcel of real property, and that an owner inal grantees ... in total disregard.of any
could be assured that such record title prop- right of usufruct in descendants of families
erly evidences svery legitimate right that which had enjoyed the use of the common
impinges on his fee simple ownership, are lands for generations. `;�
� matters of no small, import. City of Lake- Ira G. Clark, Water in New il4exico: A His-
� wood 817 P2d at 94 (noting that recording tory of Its i4lanagement and Use 36-37 �I .
, acts serve the important purpose of permit- (198?). Another commentator observed that: j
' ting a purchaser to rely on the condition of gecause it wa9 considered a real property �
� title as it appears of record and creating an question, it was left to the New Nle:dco !
accessible history of title). courts to translate the right of usufruct
Therefore, very simply, the Beaubien Doc- into common law terms, that is, to define ;
� ument, like every other real property trans- the interest the residents of land grants ;�
, fer, must be held to the standards of the law have in their common lands as opposed to �; •
in effect at the time it was executed in order the interest of the patentees. •In general, 'i I
to protect the certainty and marketability of the New Mexico Supreme Court hae decid- ,
property interests. The Document does not ed on very narrow legal grounds that the �
3. Not on(y does che Document not identify grant- P.3d at 831 (citing !n re Esrare of Netivby, 146
ees, but it also omits the words "and heirs and Colo. 296, 299, 361 P.2d 622, 623-24 (1961) ;
assigns." As the court of appeals noted, the (stating that, at common law, without the use of
abse�ce oF chat language in a document convey- words of limitation "and his hein and assigns"a
ing an interest in real property meant that the conveyance passed only a life estate)). �
conveyance passed only a liFe estate. Lobato. 13
�:,; ::�•-;..�.,�.�. . ..-.. ..� . _.. . .<<.. ":* '" .. , :- --. , . . '
� . _ . ._ . .
- . . . . ' • . . ,
• . . .. ,c L -- -. � . �. `"� .,. .. . ... -'. _ � _ � yS .. - ... ._ ' . ` . . .•+ . � ' . . :t ... • .� , ' . '. � ... .
.r.;�-
� I '� • .. . ' .. l: ,� ,� y. . ' . . 1.�, . ' ./ . . ' . . . -`.1 �-•t� l.• .�
, .
� . ... ... �. ... .. ' . .
. . . � . � � �� ..���.. . . .� ' ' •� ^ . . .. . .. �.-� w �_ \ �
' . ; . _
. ... ' __. .. . .. .. .. . . �� ' ` ��. �__.. ..... .� . .. . ��. ����
I �
�
, �� 966 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES ' �
� ; patentees have complete title to the'com- on the contrary was claimed by many oth- I
' mon lands. As a result, the rights of ers. The claim being in common with and �
� ; community land�grant residents have been similar to that of the general public in this �
damaged and, in some cases, extinguished. area, the appellants certainly could not
I� ' Michael J. Rock, The Change in Tenure New acquire a private easement unto them- I
i, Mexzco Supreme Court Decisions Have Ef- selves.
I fected Upon tlae Common L¢nds of Commu- Martinez, 295 P2d at 214. �
' nity Land Grdnts in New Mexico, 13 Soc. Similarly, in Sancicez v. Taylor, 377 F2d �
� Sci.J. 55, 56 (1976). 733 (lOth Cir.1967), the Tenth Circuit de- �
� For example, the �erra Amarilla Grant clined to give ]egal significance to community �
' was a community grant that was patented to rights even in the context of adverse posses-
� ,
' ; an indi�ridual, Francisco Martinez. The New sion. Id at 738-39. That court addressed �
, Mexico Supreme Court ultimately denied the the acquisition of the same prescriptive prof- ,
' right of usufruct upon the common lands its on the Taylor Ranch that the landowners �
�' portion of the grant, holding that, if the land here claim. In concluding that usage in com- ;
�I grant were a "private grant, the [Congres- mon by the inhabitants of the area had not
� sional] act of conf'u-mation merely carried vested them with prescriptive profits, the
j' out the treaty obligation; if it were a com- court first noted that "the public cannot ac-
II, munity grant, the common lands were mere- 4�'e by custom or common prescription
ly government domain and the confirmation profits a prendre in another's land." Id. at
;`I constituted a grant de novo to the grantee, 738; see ¢!so 3 Herbert Thorndike �ffany,
� Francisco Martinez. Under either view the Real P�rroperty § 842 (3d ed. 1939 & Supp.
� absolute title was vested, by the act of con- 2001) (noting that "there can be no prescrip- �
! firmation in the said grantee.° H.N.D. tive right of profit in the public"); id § 935
� Ldnd Co. v. -Sua,zo, 44 N.M. 54^r, 105 P.2d ("[A] right [by the public] to take profits �
ji44, 749 Q940). from the land, as distinct from the mere �
In a successor case in New Meaaco con- right to use the land, cannot be establishec:
cerning the same land grant, the plaintiffs by custom, since the effect of such a custom
� asked the court to legitimize rights based �'ould be to exhaust the profits.").
� � upon language that conveyed "the right to Finally, the court observed that in dealing
pasture and water livestock, to cut wood and �th similar claims for profits on land origi- ;
to use the roads upon a1] the lands, suitable nating from a Mexican land grant, the New �
for such purposes, of the entire Tierra Amar- Mexico Supreme Court held: �
illa Land Grant." Martinez v. Mundy, 61 "The claim by the appellants that they j
N.M..�i, 295 P2d 209, 214 (1956), ovemcled have acquired by grant or prescription, the '
on. other grounds In� Evans Fin. Corp. v. right to cut wood, water livestock, pastur- ;
Strasser, 99 N.M. 788, 664 P2d 986, 989 age and the use of roads was not shown to �
, (1983). The court declined, citing H.N.D. have been exclusive to the appellants but '
I
� Land Co. for the proposition that the original on the contrary�was claimed by many oth- ;
grant conveyed all right� to Martinez and ers. The claim being in common with and �
f
none to the settlers of the region. The court similar to that of the general public in this i
went on to examine the question of whether ai'ea, the appellants certainly could not �
the plaintiffs had acquired rights by adverse acquire a private easement unto them- �
possession and concluded that they had not selves. All circumstances must be consid-
because "a prescriptive right cannot grow out ered in detezzr►ining the acts that would �
of a strictly permissive use, no matter how lead to a prescriptive right and we do not �
long the use"; and because find such acts present in such force as to
[t]he claim by the appellants that they refer to a prescription." i
have acquired by grant or prescription, the S¢nchzz, 377 F2d at 739 (quoting Martinez, �
right to cut wood, water livestock, pastur- 295 P2d at 214). Again applying Colorado �
age and the use of roads was not shown to law, the Tenth Circuit held that the use of �
have been exclusive to the appellants but land for pasturage, natural products, and �
�
, . i
�
.. ' . — .. . . .-..-,-.. . _.- .,..;r.,..-----" •-�---,�..i-.,.-,...-r.�..,r--.-rr,--••..r, ...�,rr•,..-r„�e• .7�f-�*�-a+►rrw* .�'{!4.F'"'.7�
. , • : , � 1 .. . - , � ._. ` �. .. . � , ` � �. .. � .t rr� ;,> f_ .�,`_� �i�a� ,�,-.
. . . � . . .. . .. _ __ . . . .i . . . . . ,.... . ..�. � ... . , . . . . . .. ...,- .. . . . . . _ .. ., , . . . ...� . C�.
���, k`i11��.`�.S't�4�i.-�\a�i�..y,���.,�� � ��,�T +t� � ' -:,` t ,J1 � �� .� - �' . .F � - . ' � � .
q''1.�R.f:f��t�:iy�;%�1}�xf�t'1'�'.�. t�'Y�Y'3'`fa i `,l,ay .�,' �t�.`.:. �S s:��... . �.' . :,. ` �.' � ,... �-� .� -� . �:� t. . , . . . ' . , , ,
"3if2�l� � ��'S�,rPi, a .J� � � .�.�h��"���_�'' isuz �ti3-is.�ftw.:a:iu:r�.u�:...+1�i'.:cwra.�•..uM.��w..Lu.wL..r.K..-:..�L.���.0 � . .
'tIFIf
� 11�' .
LOBATO v. TAYLOft Colo. 967
Cite as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002) ,
timber does not ordinarily constitute adverse Initially, I dispute the conclusion that the
possession. Id (citing Smith u Tawn of court should look to e.�ctrinsic evidence at all.' ;
Fowler, 138 Colo. 359, 367, 333 P2d 1034, However, even considering that e.��trinsic evi- ;�
1038 (1959) ("The pasturage of cattle on un- dence, I find complete support in the record
fenced land cannot be regarded as h�stile for the trial court's conciusions that the Doc-
and adverse to the owner of such land.")). �ent is unambiguous. First, the Beaubien
The Tenth Circuit concluded that the land- Document is not ambiguous in its legal de-
owners' claims were tantamount to an asser- scription as it pertains to the Taylor Ranch.
tion of unlimited equitable ownership and In fact, the Document describes the property
thus inconsistent with Taylor's fee-simple ti- as "the lands of the Rito Seco." T'he lands of
tle. Sdnchez, 377 F2d at 739. the Rito Seco do not include Taylor Ranch.
Although the majority asserts that the Docu- �'
In short, American legal tradition has cho- I�
sen to honor private property rights, some- ment lists uses, specifically, summer grazing, I;
times to the detriment of communal rights. wood, and timber, that are only available in �
I have found no court that would recognize the Taylor Ranch area of the grant,.see maj. ;;
the easements that the landowners here op. at 948, the trial court made a different ;
urge. Because real property rights depend factual finding to the effect that.the vegeta- .�
upon predictability .and clarity of law, by tion pattern of the current Taylor R.anclr land
attempting to do justice here in contraven- �s identical to that on the land north and
tion of our precedent, we risk injustice else- adjacent thereto. Further, a witness for the
' where. landowners, an architect, land pianner, anc�
e:cpert in map generating whose testimony �
' III. The Beaubien Document Cannot on vegetation the trial court credited, stated
Support Implied Rights that these resources were available through- i
; out the mountainous areas of the Sangre de
i A Ambiguity Cristo grant, not solely on the Taylor Ranch,
j
i The majority does not dispute that the W�ch occupies only a small portion the �
court of appeals correctly applied the applica- �'�t.' The trial court considered evidence
� ble laws to the Beaubien Document and bearing on the location of the landowners' ;
agrees that the document cannot act as an use of timber, fire�vood, and grazing and '
e:cpress grant of rights. However, it con- concluded that: "The evidence cleariy estab- • .
� ciudes that the Document, coupled with ex- lished that none of these locations [lands of
j trinsic evidence, supports an implied convey- the Rito Seco] are situate on the land owned
jance of profits. Maj. op. at 946. I disagree. by the defendant." See also Sanchez, 377
I4. [n La;.y Dog Ranch v. Telluray Ranclt Corp., depicted vegetation on the Taylor ranch, isn't
I 965 P1d 1229, 1235 (Colo.1998), we held that it? �
� Colorado generally follows the "four corners" A. Yes, the same general patterns would tend
� principle when construing deeds, but condition- to be contiguous. �
ally allows extrinsic evidence in some circum- Q, pnd carry on farther north; is that fair to
� stances to determine whether the deed is ambig- say? �
uous. Specifcally, we stated, " 'In determining q. yes. '
whether a deed is ambiguous, a crial court may ,
Q. So,would it be Cair to say that the(ine that �
conditionaily admit e:ctrinsic evidence on that �he line dividing the north side oF the Taylor j
issue, but iF it is ultimately determined that che ranch from the lands to the north of that line '
� document is unambiguous, the conditionally ad- j
� mitted evidence must be stricken.'"' !d.(quoting are indistinguishable? �
� O'Brien v. Vill.Land Co., 794 P1d 246. 249 n. 2 •�•• I
(Colo.l990)). A. Well, it would be basically a continuation "�
oF the vegetation.
5. Specifically, the witness testified that there are Q. Okay. So, one could put to use the lands �
large timbered poRions of the grant that are not north of the north boundary of the Taylor ;�
located on the Taylor Ranch. Later in the trial, ranch in the same fashion that you could put i,�
the witness, while being eramined by the de- �e to che Taylor ranch, iuelf; is that Fair to
Fense, testified regarding the area in the grant � ;
located to the north of the Taylor Ranch: Say' i`
A. Yes. I
Q. [The area north of the Taylor Ranch] is _
vegetated in almost the same manner as you've �
i
- t*M-.�,��. `:'� - , . - , . . � �. . � .. .. .. . . -.•'^ - , . .. . . .- `�s'- ".. . . .. . . . , . .
� ' . ` . . . � . . . . . ' . . . . � .. . . , .
" ... •... . . ._.. �.__ ... � . �. . . __. ._ . _. . .. . _ . ...... . .. . .. . ... . .. . ..i • . • � . , .. • . '. ' . � '. . ., ..�
, , . � . • �. i ` ."�. � , . ' . .. . � .t } , -
. � _�_. - -... � --..•� ..• - - "
__.__ .. , . . • - • � �.
I . � . ....._ ,�..___-_ .. _.� . .. �. . _... _..... ._, .�. ,:�_,._:ti'
' � J68 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPORTER, 3d SERIES
I,
� ,
� F.2d at 737 (stating that the Beaubien Docu- ment (Third) of Property: Servitudes
�� .'1 ment made no mention of land located on the ' 12 2 2000 herein
I § ( ) ( ) [ after Restatement] de- -
Taylor Ranch);p Lobato, 13 P.3d at 831 (con- fines a profit a prendre as "an easement that
cluding that"it is undisputed that the specific confers the right to enter and remove timber,
I� locations referenced in the document are not minerals, oil, gas, game, or other substances
on defendants' property."). The majority ac- from land in the possession of another. It is
I knowledges the trial court's finding that the referred to as a `profit' in this Restatement."
` only ]ocations specified in the Beaubien Doc- The Restatement distinguishes between
� ument are not located on the Taylor Ranch. easements and profits stating "[p]rofits a
; 11�Iaj. op. at 947. Hence, the Document is not prendre are like affinnative easements in
� ambiguous in its lega] description. that they create rights to enter and use land
� Similariy, there is no ambiguity in the in possession of another. However, they also
� failure of Beaubien to mention individual create the right to remove something from �
� grantees' names. As I discuss above, he the land." Restatement, supra, § 12(2) cmt.
!! intended to create a communal grant for the (a). It further clarifies, "Profzts are ease- �
� benefit of the inhabitants of the three plaZas. ments plus. Profits are easements (rights to
� Accordingly, I find no basis for viewing the enter and use land in the possession of an-
�� Document as an incomplete or flawed con- other) plus the right to remove something
!' veyance that can give rise to implied rights. from the land." Restatement, supra,
'� ' § 12(2)cmt. (e) (emphasis in origina]).
I' N. Easements Thus, the Restatement aclrnowledges that
;� In any event, the three legal theories ad- profits a prendre provide a greater property
�I vanced by the majority for the creation of an ��rest to the profit holder and, conversely
; easement are not supported by the facts. stated, a greater detriment to the servient
j' estate. See S David A Thompson, Thomp-
I A Easements Versus Profits 1� Prendre son on Real Property § 65.03(a) (1994) (not-
I begin wlth the proposition that I view the ing, "Despite the fact that profits are now
� distinc±ion between profits a prendre and considered by most writers to be governed
� ' easements as material. Although in prepar- by the same set of rules as easements, . .
� ; '
ing the Restatement of Property, the Ameri- [i)t is also clear that functionally the two
can Law• Institute (ALI) initially referred to areas deal with distinctly different ldnds of
both easements and profits as "easements." transactions." Thompson also observes that,
� � in 1998 the ALI reversed its position, once in the Restatement(Third) of Property intro-
J again fmding the distinction between ease- duction (Tentative Draft No. 1, 1989), the
� ments and profits significant. See 4 Richard ALI highlighted that "[t]he term profit has
R. Powell. Powell on Real Property 34.01[2) been resurrected from the oblivion into which
(2002). As the majority noted, the Restate- it was consigned by the 1944 Restatement
i6. The coun in Sundiez reasoned that thc Beau- the purchasers. Apparenth� [he conftict arosc ,�
� bien Document must be limited to the lands it when the sale to Taylor ended the Free use of j�
! speciCicall� reCerences, which lands do nol in- the lands in the area Cor pasture. wood, and j
cludc the 7a��lor Ranch propeR�-. The only other recreational uses. The hardship caused, how- `
option would be to appl}� it to the entire grant, � ever,does not establish a legal right.
which would be inconsistent with Beaubien's in- gy the terms of the agreemcnt bet�veen GiI-
tent. Smiche;., 377 F.2d at 738. The coun stat- p�n and the executors of Beaubien's estate,
ed: Gilpin undertook to cam out certain commit-
We agree with the trial coun that to construe ments which Beaubien had made to settlers
the instrument as a dedication of the lands to during his lifetimc. Essentiallv, this is a com-
the extent claimed by the appellan[s would be
inconsistent with the contempfated salr oE thr mitment to convey title to certain settlers upon
lands remaining unsoid at the time, and to � receipt of agreed payments. There is no lan-
apply it only to the [Taylor Ranch] would re- guage in the agreement which could be con-
quire a rewriting of the instrument. None of strued as indicating that either Beaubien or
the settlers. including these deFendants, have Giipin intended the dedication which appel-
f , ever, and do not now, asseR any privileges Eor lants seek to establish.
' [he use of lands a(te� sale and occupancy by Id.
, , �
� -.�.��. ,. ..- . ..,-.r-.T- rw..,....-..� r_+ -r!'��.-saZ7r„��rnr -'".- y,yh*,T.r ��
_ . _ .. , , . �.y .....a,'i (F�S7'F?R^r-'rt.9.T,1+�y'1'�I�..�Y'�="'�{
. . � . �� � . .v i t. .`.'. "?2 ;�t A ���� ;Y�:•:�.
, . . • _ . .. . Y , 4 �4 'i�. � •i,
• . . , . . . . �.... . . . . ._. - ,-. � . . . .. _ . .. .. . �'..
.� ..� :_� .a � - r;. . - . . _. . - � -
� : 1 11 � Y ' . ` , i �� • . ' . t�' . . ., , .. � . �. �. , .. : .
LOBATO v. TAYLOR coio. 969 �
Cite�7 t P3d 938 (Colo. 2002)
�s because it describes a device that is used for (1) a use that is adverse to the owner of �i
: a purpose quite different from the other ser- the land or the interest in land against �
at vitude devices, and occasionally calls for which the servitude is claimed, or ;�
r, somewhat different considerations, if�not dif- (2) a use that is made pursuant to the i
+s ferent rules."). terms of an intended but imperfectly creat-
is ed servitude, or the enjoyment of the bene-
„ Similarly,we have held that profits a pren- fit of an intended but imperfectly created
�n dre involve a greater interest than easements servitude.
a
and must therefore be espressly granted. Restatement, supra, § ?.16 cmt. (a) an-
n Alexander Daavson, Inc. v. Fling, 155 Colo. nounces that prescription operates in two
d �99, 603-04, 396 P2d�99, 601 (1964) (holding separate factual situations. The first situa- ;
,� that a profit a prendre must be espressiy tion is a matter of settled law and occurs :I
� granted and cannot be implied &om an ease- when the use of the land is without the
n ment). Hence, under Colorado law, because consent of the owner. See also id. § ?.17 �
i�
t� ' profits a prendre are more onerous to the cmt. (c) ("In the most common situation, the •;�
o- t� �
�o
burdened estate than an easement,' the im- prescriptive use is made without the consent `'
portation of laws governing easements is in- of the �ervient owner."). Restatement, su-
n appropriate. p'r'a, � 2.16 cmt. (fl further states tliat to be
�� adverse a use must create a cause of action
� for interference with an interest in property
B. Easements by Prescription �e �espass, nuisance, or interference with a
�t Under Colorado law, an easement by pre- �er''itude benefit. To fulfill the definition, �
scription requires a showing of hostile use, the use must be made without authority and
`�y without permission of the property owner.
�y without permission of the owner. The Re-
Id; see also Smith u. Tozvra of Faculer, 138
nt � statement suggests that easements by pre- �olo. 359, 367, 333 P.`Ld 1034, 1038 (1959)
p_ scription can also arise out of a permissive, �„ �� adverse ciaim must be hostile at its
,�_ imperfectly created servitude. This court inception, because, if the original entry is not ;`
,w � has never previously adopted that section of openly hostile or adverse, it does not become
,� the Restatement and these facts do not war- so, :.nd the statute does not begin to run as
. rant such a step. against a rightful owner until the adverse
�•o claimant disavows the idea of holding for, or
�t The Restatement, supra, � 2.16 allows a
prescriptive easement to arise out of a use �n subservience to another, it actually sets up
at, an exclusive right in himself by some clear,
that began as permissive, under the terms of �
° an imperfect conveyance. The section speci- Positive and unequivocal act.' "). Uses made �
ne pursuant to licenses are not adverse. Re- �
�
fies: statement, supra, � 2.16 cmt. (�. Similarly,
ch A prescriptive use of land that meets the uses made pursuant to servitudes created �.
•nt requirements set forth in '?.17 creates a expressly, by implication, or by necessity, are �I
servitude. A prescriptive use is either not adverse a �
�,� .r��t 7. As a morc minor point. I would also obscrvc ... Subordination reyuires [hat thr uscr act ,
nd that thc right to grazr cattle is probably a profit a with authori-r.ation, ezpress or implied, from
��v- �� prendre coupled with an easement, for it is the the landowner,or under a claim that is deriva- 1
• right ro make some paRicular and continuing tive Erom the landowner's title....
;i�_ use of property as well as to remove something When a property owner gives permission to �
,i� From it. use property,the law implies that a license was
���� 8. Restatement, supra, § 2.16 cmts. (� and (g) �ntended. Unlcss additional [acts suggest oth-
�rs fuRher provide: ecw�se. rt is assumed that the paRies intended
'R'� Uses made in subordination to the property �at [he property owner cetain the right to �
'On owner are not adverse. even if the property revoke the license at any time. Permissive
an- owner has not given permission,a�d the use is uses do not give rise to prescriptive rights. �
on- not otherwise authorized. The reason is that '''' i��
or the property owner is not put on notice of the A use that is initial(y permissive can become �`
?��- need to take steps to protect against the estab- adverse only by express or implied revocation {�
lishment of prescriptive rights.... or repudiation of the license. �
�
;!
� �
�.�__. .�-I� . _ ... _ . ... .. _ - �,... .. - - -.. .. , , , .: .. .. .. '
. ,. . . .... .. � _ �
• - �..- � , . �� ." , . ,
. . . .lr I . � . . . • �� .ir r. ♦ r.. .Y . . . .. . . � .. ... l .. . .. ..1�. . ' . . :1 . • . � � ' . .. � �
.. .� • . . ' 'I i y � �t,:': 1 . . . , . . '1 _ :1'`:.}���Y
, . . � ' ' . ' It �; . . . - _ �. '. ;�� . •!i�C` . �.
. . . . . . .. . . , . . "' . ... .. ' ' ' . .. � ' . _ "� .+A, . ..
. . . � .. . '' . � ' .. . � . . . . . . . . . .. • . . ` - ,,, � ,- .
, . .. e. ._ ._._ "'.. ... ._. ..w .._. .._. �., . i�t;'...xa�.�r_.... . �...,.�.__._.. ... . .. -_ �_. . ._. ..a—�:4� ��
, 1!� -
; � �
J'jQ Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPOftTER, 3d SERIES .
I I
I As to the second factual scenario, the Re- cmt. (a). The Comment suggests that it
I, (
statement of Property: Servitudes (1944) did makes sense to assume that when the parties
i not contain the possibility of creating a pres- begin a joint-use arrangement,they intend to (
I�'`i criptive right through an intended but imper- create mutual servitudes rather than licens-
i. fectly created servitude. The earlier Re- es. Id. § 2.16 cm� (i).
� statement provided: An easement is created
�` by such use of land, for the period of pre- In addressing whether a use that is made
Iscription, as would be privileged if an ease- P�uant to the ternis of an intended but
; ment existed, provided the use is (a) adverse, �Perfectly created servitude results in a
� and (b) for the period of prescription, contin- Prescriptive easement, only the Michigan
� uous and uninterrupted. Restatement of Court of Appeals has adopted the second .
� Property: Servitudes § 457 (1944). It fur- scenario set forth by the Restatement.
� ther specified: A use of land is adverse to Plymouth Canton Cmty. Crier, Inc. v. Prose,
the owner of an interest in land which is or ?42 i4lichApp. 676, 619 N.W.2d 725, 730
�; may become possessory when it is (a) not (2000) (finding that where the parties execu�
; made in subordination to him, and (b)wrong- ed an express easement that did not fully
�. ful, or may be made by him wrongful, as to �iculate the parties' intent to permit load-
� him, and (c) open and notorious. Id § 458. ing activities, and those activities occurred
'I under the mistaken belief that the e ress
;; ' The ALI did not return to the subject of �
� ! servitudes until the creation of the Restate- easement permitted them, the use created a
iIment Third. Restatement, supm, fvvd. 'I'}1e Prescriptive easement).
! Restatement(Third)of Property introduction Hence, the Restatement section would al-
� (Tentative Draft No. 3, 1993) e.�plains that ]ow for claims of prescriptive use to be made
' the creation of the second portion of the in circumstances in which a document con-
�I Restatement was precipitated by a desire to veyed certain rights, but did so imperfectly,
provide a more satisfactory theory to reso]ve and the possessor wishes to validate those
I ca.ses involving common drives and party rights even through periods when he was
� ' walls than adverse possession, because under maldng use with permission. The Restate-
adverse possession, the time for asserting ment would itself limit application of the
� i legal claims to recover the possession of land section primaril}� to common wall or drive-
would be limited. way cases.''
The Restatement proposes that uses in- The section is not consistent with Colorado
. i volving common driveways, boundary fences, law. First, it is not consistent with the sta�
dams, and party walls are ineptly suited to utes, which provide that adverse possession
the requirement of adversity because, in occurs only if the use claimed is truly ad-
these situations, the initial use is permissive ��
and equity demands the continued right to verse.
use the common facility; therefore, the Re- Second, it is not consistent with our case
' statement proposes to dispense with the re- la��. This court has consistently held that .
� quirement of adversity but other��ise adopt the same requirement of adversity applies to
� adverse possession law for those circum- acquiring easement and profit rights by pre-
stances. See Restatement, supra, § 2.16 scription as to the acquisition of title by
9. The comment to the Restatement assumes that Eiciary is obvious, these cases do not present
in cases not invo(ving common drivewavs, pam� Eactual diEFiculties. The second scenario contem-
w•alls,or other joint-use Eacilities, the parties will plates cases involving a claim of prescriptive use
affirmativel}• express their respective intent to based on oral grants or agreemenu to create a
create a servitude. See Restatement, supra, servitude. Id. It directs that such claims should
§ 2.16 cmts. (h) & (i). It contemplates two ap- only be accepted cautiously because "they direct-
� plicable situations in which prescription ma�• �y thwart the purpose of the Statute of Frauds to
cure a defect in title in non-commomfacility con- Eorce parties to provide writfen evidence of the
� texu. The first involves uses pursuant to express existence and terms of the interests in lands."
� servitudes [hat were not in full compliance with Id
the Statute of Frauds. Id. § 2.16 cmt. (h). The
comment notes that since the intent to create a
serviwde is clear from the wri[ing and the bene- �0. § 38�]-103, 10 C.R.S.(2001)
� + ..._ _��__.._._. ..... ._., � , �...�_.... -..._,_ .'-,��., ..... . '.. . �-^ . .. � -t..-•.-r�,e.��,.,orA,.�.,...,.-"�*-�
. . : � . . . . , • .' . .. , ... ... . �. .. .. , � � � . ' ` . � ,� . ;� .'4., 11 't�'r'�.
�i� � ,� . .� �� �,,�.� . �.e.�. �� .r� . ��" , r . . - . - - � � � : . .
.t,st� 5 :l`�1.'l v`ia•i. �7 �t''� '�1�ti` i. � � •l� . . . ^-r� ' . `� _ ._ . , , .
aes�...GirY_`' {�..r�r.y ' ����, ...ar _,y... ..�.srti...�..�..r�:Nr..a.ew:�.,_..�..�....�,_,.....e..i.'_..�..�...,.�.....�..,......r..� ._..._. . _ � .. �
1 •I �
� LOBATO v. TAYLOft Colo. J71
� Clte as 71 P.3d 938 (Colo. 2002) '
j adverse possession. See, e.g., Tawn of Silver any of his successors in interes� Thompson
� Plume v. Hudson, 151 Colo. 394, 398, 380 defines the elements for an easement by j
I
� P2d 59, 61 (1963) (holding that to establish a estoppel as: �
1 prescriptive easement the " `possession,must (1) conduct, acts, language or silence i
( be hostile, not only against the true m,rh�cer, �ounting to a representation or conceal- �
(� but against the worid as well. An adverse ment of material facts; (2) the party to be �
claim must be hostile at its inception, be- estopped either Imows the facts or the
( cause, if the original entry is not openly circumstances require the facts to be im-
� hostile or adverse, it does not become so, and puted to that party; (3) the truth about the
the statute does not begin to run as against a facts must be unimown to the party claim-
; right�ul aumer until the adverse claimant �g benefit of the estoppel at the time they
' disavows . . . a holding by permission.' ") were acted upon; (4) the conduct must '
� (emphasis in Silver Plume); Rivera v. Quer- occur with the intention or e:�pectation that "
� ee, 145 Colo. 146, 149, 358 P2d 40, 42 (1960); it will be acted upon, or under the circum- '�'
(holding that the prerequisites to acquiring a stances that it is both natural and probable
�� prescriptive easement are the continuous, that it will be acted upon; (5) the conduct
�' open, and adverse use of the right of way for must be relied upon by the other party,
the statutory period); Krendl, su�ra, and, thus relying, the other party must be
( � 65.�(3.1) ("In Colorado,the law of prescrip- led to act upon it; and (6) the other party '
� tion has become an extension of the doctrine ,�
must in fact act upon the conduct and
of adverse possession, requiring all the ele- change position for the worse. �
( ments thereof."). Thus, the adoption of the �
' second prong of the Restatement test, which 7 Thompson,suvra, § 60.03(b)(3). '
( can create a prescriptive right in the conte.�ct In Colorado case law, easement by estop- �
� ot permissive, consensual use is contrary to pel can sometimes arise out of a parol agree- �
our law, and I would decline to engraft it. ment that.intends to convey a certain right �
IEven if the court adopts the doctrine, the � a mere license; however, there must be i
( facts of this case do not support its applica- conduct on the part of the party against t�
tion here. The Beaubien Document is not an �'hom the easement is being asserted that
( imperfectly created servitude. It is a clearly �0�� to a false representation or conceal-
created communal grant to lands within a ment of material facts. Pagel v. Reyman,
( particular area The majorit�s application 628 P2d 166, 168 (ColoApp.1981) (holding '
( of the second prong is not merely curing a that the plaintiffs failed to establish the ele- �
small defect in an e.�cpress agreement, as ments for an easement by estoppel in a case r
contemplated by the Restatement. We are involving a road easement for a trailer park) '�.
dealing with a document that was quite clear (citing Aubert v. To-wr� of Fruita, 192 Colo.
j in its intent and application; however, it is 372,374-75,559 P2d 232,234(1977)). .
; not enforceable at law. In such circum- The majority relies upon two cases for the !
� stances, the second prong of the Restate- proposition that the facts before us in this �
ment, even if applied, would not support the case support an easement by estoppel. Both i
creation of prescriptive rights. are water cases, and both deal with the ac-
quisition of ditch rights by parol agreement.
i C. Easements by Estoppel Both are inapposite, in my mind, because �
� I would also decline to apply principles of �ey are predicated on the underlying policy �
j easement by estoppel, because there is no �at is e.�cpressed as follows:
showing here of misrepresentation or con- It is indeed a generally prevailing state �
� cealment of material facts by Beaubien or policy in those states dependent upon irri-
':
� 11. Aubert is a case involving the asseRion of 1011—(2 (1957) (deEendants claimed that che ti- �i
senior water rights. The court declined to Find ded ownecs to the property were estopped From fj
that the deFendant was estopped from claiming contesting their rights because che owners had
the rights, relying for the principles of estoppel accepted the benefit of improvements on the
upon a real property ownership case. Jacobs v. property).
Perry, 135 Colo. 550, 555-56, 313 PZd 1008, �
.., ....,:_. •,-`...... . - � -• •- . . . . - • -..
. . _ . _ .. - •. ._, - ,• .. . _.
. ,.._: ... ,. .. _
7.�?r',�.�.. . _ - . , .. .
. �.. y ._ , _. �. � , � ". . , .,. .. . ,'t.�-•�� . .. .. . . .. . . � ._ ' �1 ... . ,i '.r, . . . , :, ... , . ', � . � .,
. . � ;•, , � . , , ` � ` ' -t .._
. : _ ' - ' R �
' � . . - .� _ _,:.� �.: e..;_.�y`�t.�::
.. _ _ _� . . . . . _. ... ". r -.. ..... . ..`�_•.,. --c. .. . . . . . . . . . .. .�. _ (
f�: ;
I� �
�,: 972 Colo. 71 PACIFIC REPOSTER, 3d SERIES �
�� ! gation largely for successful agriculture, implied when a property owner has used one
� ; �
both in the interest of economy and to part of a single piece of property for the
prevent any unnecessary waste of land in benefit of another part of the property and ,
,' the construction and use of ditches, that, then divides and conveys the property. In
'' where one ditch can answer the purpose of those circumstances, the new possessor of
�! more, the right to use the same ditch is "the previously benefited portion of the land
i granted to others than the owners. may also possess an easement over the previ-
Hoehne Ditch Co. v. Jolzn Flood Ditch Co., ously burdened part of the propert}�." 7
� 68 Colo. 531, 540-41, 191 P. 108, 112 (1920). Thompson,supra, § 60.03(b)(4).
� In both cases, Hoehne and Cfrczybill v. Cor- Thompson suggests that the elements of
• i lett, 60 Colo. 551, 553, 154 P. 730, i31 (1916),
the court permitted the establishment of a an easement implied from prior use are: "(1)
� ditch righ�of-way by estoppel without the common ownership followed by a conveyance
necessary element of misrepresentation of a separating the unified ownership; (2) before
�Imaterial fact, but only in the conte;rt of wa- severance, the common owner used part of
�' ter rights. To the contrary, in Bijou Irriga- the property for the benefit of the othes part,
, tion District v. Empire Club, 804 P.2d 175, a use that was apparent, obvious, continuous
;� and a arent; (3) and the claimed easement
�;: 185--86 (Colo.1991),we declined to permit the pP
( I petitioners from asserting that the Irrigation is necessary and beneficial to the enjoyment
�t' of the parcel previously benefitted.'.' 7
� District was estopped from objecting to use
i: Thom son, supra, § 60.03(b)(4)(i). The un-
�� of a reservoir for recreational purposes be- P
j' cause, although the District had Irnowledge derlying premise is that, because the re-
� of the facts, there were no findings regard- �ned property was necessary to enjoyment
� ing unreasonable delay in the assertion by of the conveyed property as shown by histor-
; the District of its rights. Also on point is ical use—the grantor must have intended to
i Holbrook Irrigation District v. Arkansas convey the easement with the grant.
! Valley Sugar Beet & Irrzgated Land Co, 42 ,
In Wagner v.'Fairlamb, 151 Colo. 481, 379
F2d 541 (D.Colo.1929), in which the plain- p 2d 165 (1963), the plaintiff constructed a
j tiffs sought certain water rights by operation road across the defendant's property that
of estoppel. The court there noted that eq-
� � uitable estoppel requires overt acts and dec- followed a mule pack or wagon trial that was
larations of the party charged, designed to in existence when the property was under
induce another to alter his position to his common ownership. Id. at 483, 379 P2d at
- i 167. This court recognized that an easement
detriment all of which must be proven by may be an express easement (which appears
clear and convincing evidence. Id at �g• in a deed or contract for the sale of land) or
There has been no sliowing in this case an implied easement (which arises out of the
that Beaubien or Gilpin either misrepresen- existence of certain facts implied from the
ted material facts or intended the landowners transaction). Id at 484,379 P2d at 167. The
to rely to their detriment upon a parol agree- court noted that implied easements have gen-
( ment. Indeed, to my lmowledge, the only erally not been looked upon with favor by the
conte�ct in which such a doctrine has been courts. Id. The elements adopted by the
� applied to the acquisition of easements has court to prove an implied easement were:
' involved ditches and ditch rights, an area in
� which rights are so firrrily entrenched as to (1) Unity and subsequent separation of ti-
be included within the Colorado Constitu- tle; (2) obvious benefit to the dominant
tion.'x and burden to the servient tenement exist-
ing at the time of the conveyance; (3) use
D. Easements by Prior Use ,of the premises by the common owner in
Easements by prior use, sometimes re- their altered condition long enough before
ferred to as easements of necessity, can be the conveyance to show that the change
� 12. Article XVI, section 7 of the Cotorado Consti- corporations for rights of way to convey water.
[ution establishes the right of all persons and
_ , . . _ ,;.e-•+�tt�v-t:r.ev:Y im'tcn^�-vYw�'?+*iT"+.�'t+wv:.m,/7-cr�'�sL'TJC�,��'3����r�
. , S y�- _�q•.��..--.-..��w�' .."�?"i�.r.:•r"'^, . , .r Y: •� �� �`�. C�� �r� .l.��'.�i�'.• .:n;ti.��.� �Y ';1.��:���:'t."Y(�r� ..
• .. „ ; ,c •�, , z, � � ',.
' , . . . .. . . . ._ . i . .� . , �r � � , �'• .. � i , , , ,. , . . .
�� F •-� 4 ' � � i r . ._ . • -
`,�� • i : �
� .t 4 .+
.t� 3���.� .� L�.t J� r.�� ,�;�'���f ^.�. 1`�>-•- . � .i . . . ` , � - -..1� . . . � .. • .
' `,7 �j , ,� : , .
. �ua's.:a:s..i+....�-• ...s..�.,j:!....�er.i.wa.:r.a...�aw.�Ci.v....�.�..,.a�.:v�':�it�_......�.._ �..., u..... n-�.. . � ..
� --;`r
1'IATA—MEDINA v. PEOPLE Colo. 973 �
Cite as 71 P.3d 973 (Colo. 2003) . ,
was intended to be permanent; and (4) the Taylor Ranch. Under those circum-
necessity for the easement. stances, an easement by necessity cannot
Id at 484-55, 379 P2d at 167: Noting that e:ast. ;
a11 four elements must be present to su�port j
the creation of an easement, the courC in V. Conclusion i
j Wagner rejected an easement, finding that I do not believe that the landowners here
�; the use was "a terminated intermittent"rath-
have established their right to use the Taylor
� er than permanent use. See also Lee v. Sch. Ranch lands as they claim. They cannot, in
; Dist. Vo. R-1, 164 Colo. 326, 332, 435 P.?d my view, rely upon the Beaubien Document
�� 232, 236 (1967)(easement by necessity found because it did not comply with the laws in
� because of adequate proof of consistent, per- effect at the time of its esecution by failing to
j manent use of road prior to severance). identify specific grantees. T'he document
� In Bromley v. Lambert & Son, Inc., ?52 was not ambiguous, and therefore cannot
� P?d a95 (Colo.�pp.1988), at the time of the ,upport rights by implication. Further, none
� severance of the parcel, the plaintitfs had no of the theories for implication of an easement
� access to their land escept by right of way apply to these facts.
over the defendant's property. Id at �96.
� The city later constructed a public street �ccordingly, I would affirm the� cor�rt of
( adjoining the plaintiffs' property. Id The appeals and thus respectfully dissent from �
� the majority opinion. '
f court stated: . I
Colorado recognizes implied easements
( that arise by pre-existing use. A showing I am authorized to state that Justice RICE ;
of necessity is required to establish an Joins in this dissent.. ;
easement by pre-existing use. Proof of
necessity is required as of the.time of the E ;
severance of the original property ircto sep- o T KET Nu�eER svsr�M �
arate estates, because it is an indication of
the intent of the original grantor and �';
grantee that a permanent servitude be im- �
posed on the servient estate in favor of the
dominant estate.
Antonio l�r1TA—MEDINA, Petitioner, E '
Id (citations omitted); see also Proper v. �
Greager, 827 P.2d 591 (Colo.App.1992) (not- �. '1
ing that the required necessity is the necessi- The PEOPLE of the State of ;(
ty for the easement at the time of severance, Colorado, Respondent.
not at the time of the court hearing).
Accordingly, to imply an easement by prior No. O1SC70'l. �
use, the landowners here would have had to Supreme Court of Colorado, �� �
show that the mountain property was being En Banc. �
used by Beaub•ien at the time of the convey- �
ance of the vara strips as a necessaty acjjunct June 2, 2003. ' ,
in order to support the viability of the vara � yiodified on Denial of Rehearing �
strips. Only by that means could the land- June 30, 2003. i
owners demonstrate that Beaubien necessari- �
ly intended to grant to them such rights. i
The evidence does not suggest that Beaubien Defendant was convicted in the District
was then malnng use of the property nor that Court, Pueblo County, Dennis Maes, J., of
Taylor Ranch was necessaty to the communi- second degree murder, and he appealed. The i�
ty. Rather, the evidence demonstxates that Court of Appeals, 51 P.3d 1006, Rothenberg, w�
no one lived on the property at the time of J., affirmed, and defendant sought certiorari. 'i
the grants, and that the grazing, timber, and The Supreme Court, en banc, Kourlis, J.,
firewood use occurred on property other than held that: (1)defendant was entitled to crimi- �
,I
�,�,��_...._ ��
��'.�...- :�-:- -- . . � -
r�— - -�, . . _ . . '. � . _ � . _ ' ,
� . . . . .
- k.. . ., . . . ." .
„ .. • ,' .. .. � . . . . �. .•+ � , � ;� ' , ,
. . . � , . , . , .. . , , .. .. �... .. � . • _..,.
1!
1�
TOWN OF VAIL
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Yail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2138
F.4X 970-479-2452
www.ci.vail.co.us
August 21, 2003
Gwen Scalpello
PO Box 160
Vail, CO 81658
RE: 9 Vail Road Condominiums/ Part of Lots A, B, and C, Vail Village 2"d Filing
Dear Gwen,
The Holiday House and Holiday Inn were developed during the same time period and by
the same developer, according to the information documented in the Town of Vail files
for these two properties. However, currently, the properties are subdivided and owned
by separate entities. In recent history, the development potential for each site has been
based on the lot area of each individual property. Staff does not believe that it has been
adequately demonstrated that 9 Vail Road Condominiums has a legal right to additional
parking on the Chateau property.
The documentation provided to the Town of Vail indicates that 9 Vail Road has had a
revocable easement agreement for access across the Chateau property, to the 4 parking
spaces on 9 Vail Road Condominium property. If you have other documentation,
indicating that you have legal rights or a lease for parking on someone else's property,
staff will be glad to assist you with your parking issues.
I hope this letter provides you with the information you need. If you have any further
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 970-479-2369. I would be glad to
discuss this with you further.
Sincerely,
��'��
Allison Ochs, AICP
Planner II
Town of Vail
���RECYCLED PAPER
� PY
„ FILE CO
.�
TOWN OF YAIL
Department of Community Development
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
970-479-2138
FAX 970-479-2452
www.ci.vail.co.us
July 23, 2003
Gwen Scalpeilo
PO Box 160
Vail, CO 81658
RE: 9 Vail Road Condominiums/ Part of Lots A, B, and C, Vail Village 2"d Filing
Dear Gwen,
This letter is to provide information regarding the nonconforming status of the 9 Vail
Road Condominiums. The property is currently zoned Public Accommodation zone
district. The condominium plat for the property was recorded in 1973. The Pubic
Accommodation zone district has been amended repeatedly over the past 34 years,
since the original ordinance creating Zoning Regulations for the Town of Vail was
adopted in 1�969. In addition, the parking regulations have also been amended
numerous times over the past 34 years.
Staff reviews a project for compliance with current zoning regulations, and then identifies
any nonconformities that may exist. I have provided you with a letter, dated July 14,
2003, which outlines the nonconformities that I have identified for 9 Vail Road
Condominiums.
I hope this letter provides you with the information you need. If you have any further
questions, please do not hesitate to contact me at 970-479-2369. I would be glad to
discuss this with you further.
- Sin erely,
Allison Ochs, AICP
Planner II
Town of Vail
���RECYCLEDPAPER
NINE VAIL ROAD
JUtI@?_3, 20�3 Condominiums in Vail Village
Mr. Russell 1N. FOr�est Formerly the Holiday House
Director o`rommunity nevelopment
Town of Vaii
75 South Fro�itage �a�d
Vail, Color��o 81657
Re: Holiday Ho��se ��ndartiinium� clb/a NinE 1;'�ii Road Con�ominEums
Dear Russell:
� ..F� ��I., 1 .J �.� -I .,.�L .S. !.. 1... , . ,. .
a� ii�`41 i. � U.-'.-' .�u ii :aoa i.•i ili:ei�.� !_i: ... .. h�C:�:,1 iy .�i.�.:vu.i�✓;�� U��.._�:� i iiiiiiii:�:'�:� u.i�i .<.::svi.i,;1�v5.�.
Fioliday Hduse Condo�Yiiniu:ns. T�i�=y irdscat�r�that at time of development. Fioliday House
Condominiums�vas aliotted 41 parKlny spaces: 27 in its underground garage, i at the entrance
to the underground g�rage, 8 at the northwest corner of the praperty where 4 exist today, and the
rpmainin� 3 a�an :�n�pecified locaticr�, obviously in the Holiday !nn parking lots. This aliocation
�vas reconfirmed in plans dated 1972 and 1991.
I reviewed this material with Ailison Ochs Friday, June 20, 2003. She told me fhat staff had
reviewed the issue of parking at Nine Vail Road during the original SDD request by Waldir Prado
for the construction of the Vail Plaza Hotel West. She said that it was the staff's opinion that Nine
Uail Road was non-conforming�vith respect to parking because it was an illegally formed
subdivision and that it had had an easement to protect its parking spaces as a result of that
subdivision. She also said that because some of the spaces on the plans had never been
constructed, ai�y permission to construct them had lapsed.
I have reviewed the records in the Community Development files for both Holiday House and the
Holiday Inn ar�d find ��;; record of the opinion which Allison recalled in the files. I therefore
request documentatian of the staff opinion regarding tfne non-compliance of Nine Vail Road with
respect to parking and the basis for that opinion, as it has a direct bearing on my appeal to the
Tc�wn Coun��i! curr�ntly schAdu�ed for�luly 1
Very Truly Yours,
:r , �
� � .
�.� r-r.,�C -,... ` �.-�E G L�c---
� �
G�vendoly� G. Scalpe!lo
I�resident
9 Vail Road • Vail, CO 81657
800/�72-�ZZ i 970/4�9-7 ioo
, �-r ��.-,
�
.�CHITECTS A.� A
JOSEPH E. MncMII.LAN
THELMA FEL�HAMER-Aesoc��.'re
1471 SOUTH HOLLY STREET
DENVER, COLORADO 60222
TELEPHONE 303 - 757-6496 ��
May 5, 1971
Mr. Ed Struble
Bvilding Official I,
B� 631 �
Vail, Colorado 81657 �
Re: Variances requi.red for Holiday Inn Condos�.niuru gddition
i
I
Dear Mr, Stx2tble: ��
1�s agreed over the teleph�ne today, you will post our I
property and start the variance application in process for �
the drive�ay to �he proposed main entranee. Mr. Paul Bailey �
will attend the boaxd meeting at the scheduled 9:� P• � I
time on Thursday, MaY 13, 1971, in your office or at a new '
location as directed. i
May we have a letter from you stating that, in your I,
opinion, a variance will not be required f or parking and i
for balcony projections on ths drawings as now prepared ,,
and or� file in your o�fice. We need these questions an-
swered so that the architectural control board will give tza i
an affir�tive answer on onr request f or design approval. ,
.. On this date, we have also �iled one set of the ,
drawings to Mr. Tpree in Colorado Springs. I also an-
olosed copies of our corresp�ndence. We hope t�at he can ,
respond to this request for iriforaation quite soon. I
Thank you for your help in this u�tter.
Sincer ely yovr s,
E.'�Yl���-�-
J seph E. MacMillan
JEM:v
CC: Paul Bailey
7. Proposed elimination of the driveway from Vail Road to the Chateau Vail parking lots
permanently eliminates any possibility of constructing the spaces originally laid out and approved
on Holiday House property. This damages Holiday House Condominium Association by
depriving it of access to shared parking and thus leaves it permanently short of parking in addition
to being non-conforming with respect to parking.
The 46 owners of Holiday House Condominiums and our Association therefore respectfully
request that the Town of Vail recognize that the"current number of parking spaces"as defined in
condition 7 of Ordinance Number 9, Series of 2003 means a number more than the four it has
considered to date.
Sincerely,
� ,� .
,� ,a
,, ���-x-���;;�,��,.�.�.�--
Gwendolyn G. Scalpello'�
President
Holiday House Condominium Association d/b/a Nine Vail Road Condominiums
Cc: Mr. Ludwig Kurz
Mr. Rod Slifer
Mr. Dick Cleveland
Ms. Diana Donovan
Mr. Bill Jewitt
Mr. Greg Moffet
Mr. Chuck Ogilby
Owners, Holiday House Condominium Association
Plans from 1972 show the allocation as follows:
27 spaces in the Holiday House garage;
2 spaces at the Holiday House garage entrance;
8 spaces on Holiday House property accessed via the driveway to the Holiday Inn;
4 spaces on Holiday Inn property.
Plans used in 1975 in an application for a fence on Holiday Ho�ase property show:
27 spaces in the Holiday House garage;
3 spaces at the Holiday House garage entry;
8 spaces on Holiday House property accessed via the driveway to the Holiday Inn;
3 spaces on Holiday Inn property. li
Plans used in 1991 show: I
27 spaces in the Holiday House garage; �
3 spaces at the Holiday House garage entry;
5 (? copy unclear) spaces on Holiday House property accessed via the driveway to the i
Holiday Inn;
6 (? Copy unclear) spaces on Holiday Inn property.
i
In no event were fewer than 3 spaces for Holiday House planned to be located in the Holiday Inn
parking lot.
Further, Town of Vail code Section 12-7A-12 (5) Lapse Of Approval states: I
"Approval of an exterior alteration as prescri6ed by this article shall lapse and become
void three (3)years following the dafe of approva!by fhe design review board unless,
prior to the expiration, a building permit is issued and c��nstrucfion is commenced and
diligently pursued to completion. Administrative extE�nsions shall be allowed for
reasonable and unexpected delays as long as code provisions affecting the proposal
have not changed. (Ord. 39(2009)§ 7: Ord. 23(1999) § 1)
While the Town may wish to interpret the approval for the spaces to be constructed on Holiday ,
House property as lapsed, these ordinances are well beyond the date of permit and construction
for the Holiday House. Buiiding permits were issued and construction commenced within the
prescribed period. Only a few surface parking spaces on Holiday House property were not �
constructed, since the Holiday Inn parking lot adequately served the needs of both buildings.
Regardless of the interpretation of lapse of approval for spaces on Holiday House property, the
spaces in the Holiday Inn lot surely were constructed, although specificaily designated spaces for
Holiday House are not identified on any plans or otherwise required.
4. Continued consideration of joint parking requirements for Holiday Inn and Holiday House are �
contained in the Town of Vail files. (See plans dated 6/1/72 and 3/27/91; DRB application dated
May 15, 1975; Ruben to Town Council 4 December, 1978; Ruben to McAdams 13 December,
1978; Parking calculation attached to Holiday Inn application for deli 1995.)
5. Until 1989 Holiday House was managed by Holiday Inn wi7h shared facilities and shared
address. No requirement to construct additional parking on the Holiday House site was perceived
due to the shared parking facilities. (See Gillie to Town of Vail Community Development July 2,
1989).
6. Staff is apparently attempting to interpret the easement between DAB Investments Inc. and
Holiday House Condominium Association as eliminating any rights to parking on Holiday Inn I
property while securing access to the four spaces constructed on Holiday House property. The
easement contains no such provision; it preserves ingress, egress and travel across DAB
Investment property for access to parking lots as well as specific access to the four spaces on ;
Holiday House land. j
I
� �101'1— c,�, � .�'
. _ .
.
1� �C��
���y 2s, 2oos NINE VAIL ROA►D
Condominiums in Vail Village
Mr. Russell W. Forrest
Director of Community Development Formerlv the Holiday House
Town of Vail �
75 South Frontage Road
Vail, Colorado 81657
Re: Holiday House Condominiums d/b/a 9 Vail Road Condominiums
Dear Russell:
In my letter of June 23, 2003 I requested that staff document its opinion and the basis for its
opinion that Nine Vail Road has no claim for parking beyond the four surface spaces on its
property accessed from the entry drive of the Chateau Vail. To date I have received no response
that addresses that question. Therefore, I submit the following information and argument in
support of my request that the Town of Vail expand the conditions for approval of the Four
Seasons Special Development District to include additional parking for Nine Vail Road
Condominiums.
1. Holiday House Condominiums d/b/a Nine Vail Road Condominiums were constructed under
the code of the Town of Vail as indicated by Town of Vail files. It conformed to zoning at the time;
setbacks on Vail Road are marked on the plans and the need for variances for balcony
projections into that setback were waived by the town (see MacMillan to Struble, May 5, 1971 and
Struble to MacMillan, May 7, 1971, Variance application 8/1/72, Rose to Reed August 8, 1972).
2. The property purchased by the condominium owners in 1983 was platted and legally
subdivided by the developer in 1973.
Town of Vail Code Section 13-1-3 (B)states: "Prohibitive Conveyance: No lot or parcel
of land, nor any interest therein, shall be transferred, conveyed, so/d, subdivided or
acquired either in.whole or in part, so as to create a new nonconforming lot, or fo avoid or
circumvent or subvert any provision of this Chapfer."
It appears that staff is relying on this code section in reaching its opinion that the purchase of the
land in 1983 was an illegal subdivision and therefore severed any claim that the association may
have had to parking on the combined sites.
However, Town of Vail Code Section 13-2-2, Definitions, Subdivision or Subdivided Land, also
states: `A. Meaning: 1. A tract of land which is divided into two (2) or more lofs, tracts,parcels,
sites, separate interests l�ncludinp leaseho/d interests) ...
The Holiday House Condominiums land was platted in 1972 and duly recorded in Eagle County in
1973. The condominium declarations were also recorded and included not only a leasehold
interest in the land, but provision for subsequent purchase by the owners of that leasehold
interest.
Therefore, I believe the condominium association land was properly subdivided according to the
zoning requirements of the Town of Vail in 1973 and that the Town of Vail cannot retroactively
claim an illegal subdivision in 1983 using zoning and subdivision regulafions applied to the site
after the leasehold interest describing the subdivided tract had been recorded.
3. The original plan for the Holiday House, approved by the Town of Vail, called for shared
parking with the Holiday Inn. Forty-one spaces were allocated to Holiday House.
9 Vail Road • Vail, CO 81657
800/ 872-7221 970/479-7100
N�� ;��
v
I��y 7 , 1971
Mr. Jo���,h � . �IacMill�n
�47�. Soufih Holly S�Creet
D�:r�v�er, Cc�larada �02 2 2
Sub���fi; Ho13da� House Condamini�m�
�our lett�r Qf` I�a� 5
�n di�dussin�; your progos�d driveway at th� �,in en�ran�e tfl �hs
subj�et building wi�h th� Town Ma�nag�r, it ha� be��n d�fi�rrni�ed
t��t a vari�.nca wi.11 no� b� requir�ed. xnstea,d, �I�� Tawn i� her�-
by author�i�.in� you to e4n�truc►t �this driv�r�a� �� $�4�rr� �� yo��,
prel.imi.nax^y_ plans on the b�si� th�t if �z�r3 u�hen the TQwr� i$
�required ta r�mc�v� s�me, �eg�.a�em�nt �o$�s �.i13 be y*ou� �€�sporr�ibilit�.
A-� �th� sam� ti�e 7 it has �c��� �tb light that Spraddl� C�eek wi1.3.
hav� to be �iverted ar�c� ouz� S�ree� �upEr�n±�nd�n�,. i�. ��t-� Bt��n�.�t
requir�s info�mation a5 soon a� �oasible can hour �*a� ���n to d� �
thi� .
A uaz�i.�an�e w�,1,1 no� be ��.qt��red �c�r p�r�t�ng nr b�laan}� pro jeeti�rr�s
sine� both �re witha.n th� �t��;d�rds r�:,��t3,�ed b� t�� Ur�ift�rm
Bui�.ai.r�g coaa.
As w� discus,��d in aur p�c��,e et��ver�a�ior�, T will ���ept any
deci�ion rr.ad� by M�+. Pete Tyree c,� Col�re�do Sprin$�.
R�spectf'ti�,ly,
Z'OWN OF VAIL
Ed �trtab].e
Buil.rlin� Off ieial
aW
ee: Mr. T. J. A4inger, Town �Iana��r
- �..1 ��'
ArrtICATION TO APPEAR BEFORE THE
^ BOARD OF ZONING, APPEALS AND EXAMINERS
Date Appiication Fi•led
I , Paul T. Bailey , representing Vail H. I. Co.
• � , respectful,ly request a variance
from the, requirements of 5ection 4 of the Vail Zoning
Ordinance in order to �roject into the street set back with a small
trianqle of space at halconies o£ apts. lI: and 2H and part of
basement wall - See atta,ched Exhibit A.
and/or Section • of the Uniform Building Code
as amende.d and adopted by the T,own of Vail in order to
In making a determination on zoning, the Board considers only undue
,'
hardship; need for the proposed variance; compatibility of the
proposed variance with the surrounding area; effect on future develop-
ment of the area and; health, safefiy, and the weltare of the inhabitants ,
of the Town. ',
in Building Code variances, the Board may consider oniy suitability of ',
alternate materiais a�d methods of construction and; reasonable in- �
terpretations of the provisions of fihe Code.
The adminis�trative official may challenge any variance granted which i
goes beyond the scope of the powers of the Board,
It is understood that a fee of 525.00 payable in. advance and that a �
ten ( 10) day posting•period is �equired prior to a public hearing on
the above requests. ._ . i
�
Signed• �
. "�`± i ' � ? �,...,, !
,
Please list adjoining property owners so they may be notitied
Gulf Oil Co. , 1708 S. 3ellaire, D�nver, Colorado
Mountain States Tel,ephone Co. , 93Z l4th Street, Denver, Colorado '
;'�
t r T T t . .. . s . .. .
,-�x�`�, � .`�`VJ �`.� ' . ^ � ' ` �. ' \\?�J�
x ,yl t J` � ��' A . ..-t..: 1�' ' ..,6�:_' '!,'i j 1C' �'S i S ���
�YV' -tf .,'` -� 1 � � . � �.
� � \
^�Y^ f � -�'r ''.� � \ iti ���� � ',\ � �r I� \��� �\
� s'� � 1 � � ,�� / � x Y ����� � �
t �
� _ �x3�.� �� t� � � � :` �,, \�,' ���tI�N Cfc
�r f '*3 "'�.j _ \ •.
' �'3, � ` ' , ' �• °, , -�' �`�9�� �o fL iZ �s��
z, ` ` � �, � :,� � �- ,� '��.
,.
� \ �
� � y� 1��; '�,� S J ..�"`�l�Y�� ��. , . i � y � i �, Y. . \�Qi �
ti �s.r � "�"�."' - , ..w � � . . � '�:. � ,�� ��
� � : �.�� •j � � .� �k � �.� \�
� ,
�'- �� �( � � "s \ ''� c'•y
5�l 1�4��' . ' - 1 ��. .. rLL k'� ,,\ ��'l
. �� . . K:� �e}:a.�i \
���. � .. ��
�� � � j t F�, \
� ,. � � . . . � b� ��,
� �' �' ��Y
"w��+}� . _ ' ' . �. • �''�� .�e/� �� " /
�a,�{'��::� , � . ' . �rfy r j - \/�.` ,�\Q
_ M'� C \
'� !�} . �� � �,� � , \.
`t '�:�� ," `�- �' x�"� \. \ \
�, ,. ,: , •J.rr- , ..� . ' � . �. ��Y. �`
_ ` � / . \�� :t ` 1. .}r.l'p \ �
.,.� ��-1 _ � . f��� �r� Z'' ' ..,q' �\ \ �� ,`�i� ��
..� � � ,y, �� .Y„+�.
. . a .3°+ ` Q� 1 �1\ / Q� 5
; �v'�:�� �.,. �.. ° �tD �� �y-(2.2 �' -����-
- _ i �:. � rfl, �� e,�
�P'"�+ ��y��4 — � �. �Y �� � . ��V�`� // � , '
. , �` i / / /r� \�� �
�>w.�'" ���(��� { l . \ `�/ ``� ,�X
��� �, � f � 1. i � . {�- // /. .#".
,.�-�'� , . �; � ; : '�� /�� / '� \� �. �
' � � � ,
'�. i � 'k . \
�,�.` �' � . \ � , ' �;-"{�u i,
� � � � \ ��k � �`.`.�
,
�r
r�, `�. ��- � �`} ��.��'"�'� � PLA k ��'
'4� .
:,�,-�;.� � �,: }Q�, � 5� _._.�g� ��
� � ,., ,:-
��„�� _ �`.
�� �°� �.,—..._ `- �" kt� --:-�x �--� + �� � \� ''
��+�"„'^''' ..�-,—�,�'.� � .' �-
�'�,
. '� : 4� 4
�.�''4;;x� �,: .. �-I D L.f D A�( 4--�G C_.1 S� AT U A,I 1.,
�R �—. == N
�
��°��-.. ���` ' �RG+-4
,_ _ � " ,�� � . I�_S�P+-� �.. //�r�G/l�1 L.�L�A l•.! _ _
�-�.
r� : `a .
—�+�s:�+'' ``-°
{�UQUS'�" $� � Q7�
Mr , Bruea Reed
Pinkard Canstructlon Campany
P . 0 . E3ox 26227 ,
Denver, Galorado 80226
Subjec�': Hotiday Hause Yarlance Applicatior� I
Dear Brucs : I
YJe have deci ded 'that s i nc€� yo�r ProJ�ction i n-�o the ;
r-equir�d sotback is �o minor, w� wili not require that !�
yau go -through fihe vari anem proceedure . ,
Tk�e setback as shown is approwed and wi11 not rsq�ttre '
a vari ar�ce . �
uestions lea�e feel free fin �all . '
If you hava an� q � P '
i,
Yours truly , !
j
TOt�fN OF VA I L ;
;
�
I
�
Ken# R. Rose, P.� .
T�wn Enc�i ne6r' i
�
�
dw �
i
I
I
. �i
II
�� I,
` . . ` (/'i�.�J'! f�r /��C��
L'
. � D�SIGN REVIT;��' B04Rll
i�� 7
T�A�l'E OF DII;E 1 I l�G v �� �J �� '7 �
,
h1Ln113ERS PR}�SEI+IT:� �� �, � �`' '��1 _
���7,-�i-�.
_i�.�.�-2 ���_ � �
;P-X�� �z�
SUFJECT: � �� ,Qit�
ACTION 1'AKE1.V BI' OnRD :
I�40TION: .' ti SECONDED BY ��J� ,_,��_
VOTE:. I'OR: AGAINST �
APr�TOVED: (,L�(�I'�/I�,.,�C>Lf-�
D I SAPPROVT�;D:
. . _ � - �����- .
sura.�iaHl�: � f�2� C�.� �l_ �1 . ��i �� —
�. ,P.1 L�,�-�..s _. C��(_r'���� .,1. ��! �/��,0.�/1
__[_���'?'� ��� G/ '�J,' t �> , �J.(�..r. _�". �' ����'G _
/ ..
,�j �Z.C�^, „��)l�c/l� ��-�—�`���, �L. 2.�G'�_ ,, .�_�:./,� _ �L'L f�C2—
-- -�-
, -
)C� �
' ��.� �
CIi� " : OI' `1'11I� - . � A�PLIC�.NT
. ���.. ...._._....
I i�y�, ' /.�q�1�,�� ' y�
� � 1` ^I �'Fi � � ,-:r.riT��thy�Y�,�yJ�..^X. '�5.�'.� �^ '•
+� � ' . . 1. I„S 1 .,'" _:rnci-�,'°�„sy�'���y��s� '*y�,�� � .
1 y � 1 � i .�i 3 .�'_s �'��+.a��*.+a>.--r `x` k �. .
i _I- ..1 �„�. �y.i �3h.�_
1 1 �
' VF , , -� . ... ._. . . . . . .��..;, � i �i''k. W1'+,'Nl�. _.M�•,,,`•n k'
"
✓ . - . � 1 .�
. v L , � . . F .
� . � �
�-_ . . .� . . 3�^ u .
,... . . ��, ��.
.. . . . _ . . . b=,.:
.
. . .. � . .. . .ar- t. ,
_ � . �
. . .. .. .� , ... . .. . . 1.. �P�-. 1C'...0 _ r
.
S � ....} .1. � .�Y 1' i ' wl"1X 4r� *-YY.^y� -M'f�' I:
�.. : � :. . -• � . :` _0 _ � �, , �,;� �t,'1�:ti ����'�"�`e+��_
, �'''r �� .1.. � _ � 4.+��-1 7``t„II�" �.'T �£�Xi�a•:.
r i� �`� _ ... � , � � a �y y-r`':���.,,,+I,N I��t� .-.��-a-���[�c93AFio'
' ��=�-'� f M ,
-..,•'t+,.�.-N+�-�t�°s � . .� ` ��i' + :.... �'.c�� �����?� e r`�'a�� �y�`�����`.
� T �� :
x*'.."��,'.
rT'-..�3 r-'9�.+s..,� � . . �.�'� "j � w�: ,,.,�"�P..,���..y�r` 4.�f��.t�'�, y�'x '„�,r �;.
>„ S..r.,,'�'y� � �.'� - . �: ' � :, 'Y-_it �5 a„r,�„y,i;(�ru�.�T ,���yr,���r�'•�
r �:- .+n�!ay, .� � ' ��., . � .��1 .r..t,.n;a'�^'+c�'4'�i ..'�,�.���y",.�..-«.:z.a�"��-
'V „�v�{�q 'F8� ... . . .�-. �.: - +"� 1'..: Y`, -'r+ )�..� �',1�.,,i�...L q od��q, Y a
3;� �1 r . � Y y�y+v�i�y.Y� r"�4y`� 'pr-C i
� `..� _ . t�,�: � h �,.;�;~�a������-'L. -���"`'Y' ����u v '' � F
.w"`��"'X���t „c� . 1� i . .� � .� -_.
,r-.:+.�E-'�hev..;� ic r _ r ,�'rSa�K�a e.- F�.�'7���� t
rd."Gr.++�q/ rr. F-* ve � .l .w..-� n�^+` � 1 r' yr(�'y �""4 y F �� �. :
„ru�m..,�.a� {¢� �r� .r� +.� ��:..�, ` IA� �^✓- �.,..*.. r-�yy:w.R��I ,.,n•.7'c v- +R,.
�^ ,y.a:���ie'..�.�y-.r � '� t . .,' �-_- ...�-...'"45`' '�-.�'�"j.�K��rwi.�r-.,yi,'{0 ��1�sRl'.R
'* - �,w-� � - ' , � :�� i � ,�,�,.,;�:r ...�.,.L'+P�:�„�`'"*y*����y,4�:
r "��
�,.„�.r�iw�c..�.a z �t . �t�,1 ��-•. l �,�r-�r�rY=���ltl�ut�.xs"`�+�,r �.�5."��u���Xw������:
�.e+Ww:wr,J x ` ������"�
n'+'r �� � +v. 1 � _�'Ym�r,-++.��;-I.ITCj U K��`rµ�.�`�,�.d .6�U ,.C�,..,,
+ �.. �-iz+4���� Y , i J � ` . +ry . _1 1._ �''} ,M^".�.�+r'�c��.�e�'� �q'rI�'C��� � Y^. '�y#-�`G�a.
a,�.. A �� � ... ��'?' '1' .�-+.,.�„e-'t-L,..,�V+ M-s�.i,l���,f.��'.�.�.N-r��"'"�,1pp•""�'.
�:�� F�R13+t � _ � i !] � �.�` rF'.�'1�C'k dk. , fi�J � - ._�' '..
��tr.-'a� .� � __ , '. . -�:.^ �..�.. l �.�;��t� D���-��j�.y+r� �����', '.i�
i� '� „�.�i ;,K t� � �����• ', �ti��l�'x���+�r�+7a"'�:w�P"""*� : - a�...,�;;,
.r��x�,C��a .„ . � . r �,�. - . s � r ...',r,� .r.m�.�"'_C...r-x.��.. h:"'�'�,... n ...p
.s iw,a,.�,nS+M a ,.,� . ..e i � l t„ � t` .*ct: ..�.�,'".�j1.n.�,,. � ryC ., ,M
y ..h r vk�v^' < �` v r' � r �4 "1`a�. � �.�y
��Y'fiax,4'�yrM*�+.� �' � ° '' .� � ,-�x��r.�-�...~,�r��''7 �I�'a� FS,i N �pu �.� �-�r� .
r r �-�i ,��,�.t't�'�wy• � H
1�FF�'�.�. " .. c� i � „ �iY .-i R�.5l '�I '.�.tr � :,�..
tt �r � . ,c �. n ,/1r' �' � §'' -�,,,s-e.,y"J'. .�a�,�rs'a-`d"i".,��.. "".4�.w� �;�- �,
����4.�w.c..sa'-. � .��^ �,r.r' t _ � : . "� � �u.��zy3�-,y����'�'<'�� �.i. �i
i - !�M.r� � r ! 1 f -�o+��� ��ly S'.. +'t'1eelyYr ,,��,,�v
y �
� y- ''� T�� �'A', p�„^ ��';,
„�n��a�+r�- ..� , '� +-. ..rt� . r'" . a . J �-,�sT'�U�'' li�+y,�,.�
r:,bn,yr�w.k"'`�' � c e.`. F .�? ..4 f�"., �y�-^./ ,"+� ''c�"�''r^� # {��'.�`•,��.�ui'�°..."M "' . . �'3'_
��-� n r� `�.. . _ �.- �`^tt'!-w.. �F '� � n
h: -d�..,r ti.�..:�..,.�"t ty u. � d,. y ..,,,•,r e•••a y4.M-.' :�* �ae. '� f-� T � �
aw�- ���"'��� s.� r.�ti'T�'� y,., 1 1 '�' M� c � -aC�'+� *r���FF�����1�9'����� 'ti�.� .�,� ,��
��. :.1�,-+b�"r�m� �F- � a_+ -��- ^ a �y�.r�.�" �b�f'"„+�.,e tijr� ���.cC- . ,.
r+ t � t +�� r ; .. ..r"4r-M a�, '"�+S +.rn �
,,,,, ,.�..,�,,"'t�y�,"�!: . ._+s `%• �� ki ri�! ""���"'w��r.rc`��!��� N � _ .
t^-Me.� .M �G`�a.{ _' 'f�*r.� , /. � 'w�r.1 >'va`v.,�"a+iys r�n,F: '1'T`� ,
� / � 9� �
� ���� 1' aa � '/ ��. ..� +r�`,�� ��,� �q�l:�� "T'ra k�':t�¢ �� i
v -�r,���,��, : r . . .. � ti 'y`�'!'fi.>�'�'^Y � .��;;�,_ ��., !J' �. `
z�-
�'rs�'�,:;,L i +k" :- t ��. � '^a�-''`'"�t� y+��''ti�''�......, x�r•�'7�3'"` �r 1 �i,,
1 �'s�.�e��Y r �.�.
.e .R...ar � �' "'°�� , . ,�, `� ,�,��`�,,,•�n•4ar��� �,`�����tL�r#+�-r�r. �,
.r.+-' L ;"` ' .d4 .k�Y.,�af�M f`�[�'x I
s �,�1,:� ' �. � �� �� �.. ' ' � � .�� �\�' 7�'o x'�� '�s��'�"'���.,'{''t.f t''�,�+�-��"t�'���w�v --' i
.
�'� f�.- ~�u HOLIDAY:a> � ;_ < �;*1 �`'��,``���'��„�"�^�����" e,,, �° '.
� � ; a �' '��- �*- � �
rw'" `� `�.,�ti.� I N N /:�� . �,.��;� �,�'�'_;�`':;, �ry'" r,_� '�
> '`�,,1.�,w.. „ ..'f/ .. i�� \�� �'�� �.;9 �ti.rr'�� . at�iv�j ,,,r���,,w � •, !
�. r �} �_'� ''/ �i `+.� r�" _ ��,���,.�,,,:;�.����+3 y..� ,'; I:
� � � .�' � j L.,� a .r ,w - y^ �..-,.'tr-! w -.P' .
� � � f-\'~� �n��� �t � . --++.�.,,.r ��'�'-".F,., ,�,�=��. �v�9.:. �
�.^ � I �'. N� a S¢S'0-?:A^` .i+-'��t-
x ,�f; � � F-��.�/� /��'A y,�q �{vr�.La,r� . Y f �w-�,t,x .,k��i; a�,�al.�^a" ' � w .
* , �"� _ ,. 'e� �. � �`w'Ir',�'�e�3 r�_N3�
-���I.,��.n:� / i .) t.�-� �e + ..� r ��Se� �`""«'"5'7"n ri 1� ^a �} ���r. '�.
'r.wTJ-�"4i' f �: T �'.) '^b}:,q w�Qi�+ C .r� .,..r , ".,�..+! �f"m�, ? �"� .. ' . ,
we \ ..j' '•• W�.a �
�,w•v.o c.'� r� \ .\. ,o,a..r� r, y., � ��"3„"'�, .
� ?�re.r.�,i:.� ,� .'y � `t �-�0..'3' ��C':ct�'i� ...s�� ,+rcrc• �,� �FY N��h ��r+,q;,rn-�v+a��� •a� '
r �` ..,1,, x� f\ . , ♦ . �[a.-a.� '"�Y�� r`P'_"���.� x � ti .^��'� .�';h�'��y„ ♦ w �`w�t I
'R,y£s� �r' y, -�� � \`,. ♦ �^�� r •r�a� u. ,.e^ `�Ybg-ra` �T^ ,�,t �.'�.'","�'r '"�^ya'�"'�
�"°�*""u"', \ ` f' \. �Y ' tl �..j.� x a `i a'a1? _ a'M�,y.. ..�'1i;�et ,
.�,t�g � �� - i . ,,._ �+-. .i� I �T°'q� .5���,,;��a'�,�,.,���.,�,4:..�
,
r . .
-� ".. Y ��s . -. -F'� '� ,.,s : -'A' +y.A
.e . . . r .��.. . .
�. � -�I, � x.
. / �r� t ' '� \ �\ 1�. �„i,-� ,,�,�5 �w�`s�+. �-�`�� � . �'
r- --dn•. f• . •xe�.� �.'P4.- � � . 1+ . ._ a � �.�\ _ . '° . ti'�.'"'�' `c3� '�'w"-,.M ...yt � �
' � . ��•y,� � �� . .:.A� :-f� L. . � �r w.n� *'�` �..r s n�c�� �i
ww..i,....3-�` ; k'i
� ^' � f V- n,c.,� L _ a \ � ! - -t va�-"7:��--r'��.z ��• -.1 �
-, >i` i' �\ ,:.'� �� / � -- �l� .,r � f�� :�� '����rr �- 5... +v ��T...re^'i` '� �,-tl'y,,�y.����-�a+. �,�
.i�.� / '�' . \. '.. / � ' . \.- \s. �t . ./T^^Jrt�"� ... ..
,, r:-�." . �. � �:i.� � � ��'' ' - �.' }`�-.�5' "�" u.""'H�3.^� iHym+ �.,'S,k"..��^�-�.;;�,;' �
r!', �v '\ � � •'� +��;� � ,�t ,�:�,. y Y W�^" +.
�-�°.4 �
'`eF' �. .. 1 � � � �j.�lt �-'� l�ti ._,' .-�> �,.1„'1, '�`�'•�a.�'",'�'�"y� :..: �r :.
.� a �✓
,�^'.^' > / ,� v ✓ fl . �, ^s.++��:,` �„``'„kt'
:. se�l4�jry.�=,' , .. +'�U, M.'fr . C : . C .':V'^41� .'��r.�lg`��+MM1 u.Y,��.;• � i!
. �r, p
` .,/�, ��� .:.{ � y cc S C !.� �r �s w, �_�r7 i ��..;5,� �wa�.-4�� ^k
y �/ �./ ,� _ �x,,i, ,�^+,.w v �,w � � •xv ��_��y�'����,� ,�"��• I
.. - .�.,. . � .:.
+$+�:.5.^' ;�•.`^'" '�
���::�i�- ��,�"".�wti�w^' �i�� r�. '"` �yy�Y�' +�.�..�d�+"k�t�d y�y4. ..�
`V. 'S.. /, i �_ � kw4��_'�,����f�Q?-i+K�fie�g.�.y` ~r+ +.
.. •W R!h'v,�'� r ' � �" �� ��.
'".w �y a 1 e'aeD,•L`�'` �s�,.d lcwi'A'S.i. r�+''�'"""d��p�...sY''.�tT...'s�+if5'ow-� �` �t. ..
�!'.:._. :a. "c a . �?` S'. `x,..r��- ''�'�i:7"'...s�"st`n4a.�w�r �� �r
( 7t ir r.�+xa,..»�P x"'`•
.+.+d.i..`� - �"'�ir ` *.._� 'L �+-"�! r"`ti v'-,"V'r'MS's�'t-�'��r.�e..v�y���tL��'(+�d+��✓/,
_ •�p,'.,,, I ..� �;a,:. x.y,,.,r.,eiT�.".�i•Ew.....�yH,y.`� �-h-2 L��'+� .
.r ' � s a � -��2:7f a3�"r��+A"5,'�i' ��ar i 3'�.. � t
�
F 1- , �13�rv`-«-�ni,.t.a�-T��� t�. .,t .
Z ...f-F-'!. `` .ni- 1,�% m.., :. ' � ,,,i��t a�����������r�,�+��i�� '�.
u^ I ".'.. 1 -.�a�" ' 9+. -z" y y j,� .�a`' 'h'� �.+ ..
z r ,i : � r-+�.,a �c ,�,�r
� �a r-^�i�..r, ��,�.e. .�5�'te��'�'�'�� ' ,�,+�irv"
� �.� � �rr •+. e .r�..N�-°.r �t ���
' 6,� t� .'�.. i � -'r'Y .�.. �r �"•--�''��r"'„fr� t4�,� �.2^`!:�c�'i?.71
r r� . . , -* - � � 4^R 't� � ��s .�-..-.+r .: -.✓ y�"^'Rp+:w"�
. 'F""" '*` ��"'h� � . �".� �'°;-e''`''wh,��t � �w�,w ...-�;�'r�,y^���e�fEti�
.� „a .,.� ' � � ,�.
� ,- ' '.,e..t . .
�HOLIDA � —� ,j _.I '-� �,,, : 1�. '--�'" ,._ �-��� �,. ��:,,� �,#,-..�.,����
vx: � � . �� ��.�.=� �4 � .-�.L.�s� �acc��� �*
�e.:
s�Ii;. _ ' ' ` , �'!�� � . .F-�..�-�w�t{'A;K '+4�a{�'�sy�',n.;;`2'�"e��'.
.,..
� �. xovsE����� :;. ri:;, �. _ �� �, ����`��������y���,
� � ,rA+� r ur.,� i �'r�'� .. �,y �5.�'f,"� )^�,. `w,��,,�.n, �'•�.,�i L
� ..�'i`r r?.� ' . . w� .i, w .,atw. � ' .
ti .. . s..
1 � . � � � . s� �,, uu"4� L,w -e �.^� '" S"`ry-`,,,+;�,�
r r � ..fe�.�4 •" . . ;�^ : ,r.x`.."',7 �.,. ,M..Ry �aL��.YJe�'$1�^.�,�?„�le. y
� J. .'. � G� A . � 7 �-r+�, J�'!tr„� Ii� �j5•,q ��F � y"'
�, . .. . '�' ��� - w� �i�u � .'✓ ��'���a,t.^�"�f �� . ��iy}. :;�,
� ��y .r�-=� C h:r' ��.r-.-�r� '� �n+�aCt+4x��x,v��' .��� � �4
,
-�1� �' a.�_ ,. - � �a3'_ � �'a, �+r�:�iy�3.^^ '_w _
�%. � � � ._ .. _�, �.5,�;�a �.a. ,u �•-'�*'4F .''S�i`ar�� � a w
. . �. . �rv. . , a, ..�:��w��
�!' . . .. . . � �� �wi
.-.. 1. " ,. .. �ti" "�.�+-n1- .+k .ukFw ]
. . . ' -, "y".� R^ ti-'
�
_1 i�k rj .-�.4 '� .- � . :..�` � k- . -�. _y� ,•".: �.-T-x4 .� '4'^.a"� � .�4�'F'1.y.,'���. . " . . i
� . -. � ';� . .� .,� . ..,
. 1� . �� �' .. . . :. . _� � , ''; -._. • � � '... . �;�+'7'k:�rnW+� '�b•...i+,w+::� .
� :k �" �� _ Proposed 2 rai 1 spl it-ra�1 fence shot,m:*in�.r ed � kt ����
x n M��'�
� ~ y �. .. - _,._: _ rr �. . � � ,� i, �F
� . _ � . ,.,^�+ �. h�,.. ���'+���i'�. ��.
-'G�Y P .J� ,• ` .. '' . . . •-'" C a L`n�.�.""Y'a'�ti��`"�l�Ckaa'2k"-�-""�'�4"�"�r6Y �+.y.. i
j \ .. -ii 1ac x;ti � '
�y,, ��
i�� S r�F � �� � .. ... .:�,. . Y.Zt���1�'��sL.ti'v��jta'fy�-�"'�♦a1`'4"K�'a"`� I
W �4Y°M } ��.''f�+"�,� �f v�tN»}Y L +'c.f '+N+
��
� r.�� `�' -. . . . , SITE PL�N � � "' ,a�;� �.�.�-, ��, ���;�� - ;
.a��. 1 +,� -�x��"„., �� x'fi , s�..,+-�, 5
^ .
-�.. �sr ra " . .. . -'i .. . . F�5:. v' N-�..�w .�t�ri,."',����
� .. . . . _ ... . � ���� � '
CI � �y� q�.�i.dnni,.r.,�,,'F.
�: . ,. .. . � .. . ..� . ..... . , . .
. _ . . ... _ . . .. � .�,r�.,...W'.a._�u.
- � , ,.. ;��m r� `�c:.-,
MEMORANDUM
TO TOWN COUNCIL
FROM DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
�JIM RUBIN, ZONING ADMINISTRATOR
DATE 4 DECEMBER 1978 .
REF HOLIDAY INN OF VAIL, APPEAL OF THE ZONING
ADMINISTRATOR'S DECISION REGARDING THE
PROPOSED LEASE OF PARKING SPACES TO
TRANS RENT-A-CAR. �
On November 29 , 1978, I received an application to
lease private parking from the Holiday Inn of Vail. The request
was to lease ten (10) parking spaces to Trans Rent-A-Car, a
rental car company from Denver, Colorado.
' I denied this application because Section 18. 52. 170
"Leasing of Parking Spaces" Subsection (b) (8) , prohibits the
leasing of these spaces for a Commercial Use. The Town Attorney
was in agreement with the interpretation.
In further research on this matter , I found that
the ten (10) parking spaces requested by the Holiday Inn were
based on the 1976-77 ski season. Using the parking statistics
for the 1977-78 ski season , the Holiday Inn and the Holiday
House would only receive 3 spaces.
The Holiday Inn has revised their request from 10
to 6 parking spaces , and still desire to lease them to Trans
Rent-A-Car. They claim there will be more vacant spaces this
winter due to better patrolling of the Holiday Inn lots.
In conclusion, I recommend this application be
denied. I do not believe that the intent or the specific wording
of the Lease Parking Ordinance is to permit the leasing of
parking spaces for a Commercial Use. Furthermore , based on the
use of the Holiday Inn parking lot last winter, I do not feel
they have sufficient parking for their visitors .
� V/LG-�-ia H1 Gr:.t.C,...� �
� ��
�
y�l�'
'�1'1
����� �� ����� �,
box 10o department of community development
vail, colorado 81657
(303) 476-5613 13 December 1978
P�Ir. Tom McAdams
Vai1 Holiday Inn �
Box 35 � '
Vail, Colorado 81657 �
Re : Parking Requirement �or the Vail I
Holiday Inn
. �
Dear Tom: '
In calculating the parking requirement for the �Iail '
Holiday Inn , I have determined there is an excess of nine (9) j
spaces for the Holiday Tnn and Holiday House. The reason ';
for this excess is the fact there were more stringent parking I,
requirements when the Holiday Inn and Holiday House were
built than presently exist . ;
The paxking requiremen�: for the two buildings , based I
ori the 120 lodge rooms , 27 condominium units, restaurant
and meeting rooms, is presently 138 spaces . The current '
capacity of the parking lots is 147 spaces which l�aves the j
excess of 9 spaces . ��
I
I , thexefore, give you permission to rent or lease nine (9) I
spaces to Trans Rent-A-Car , but with the understanding that no '
cars will be permitted to park along West Meadow .Drive.
�
If you have any further questions please contact me ..
Sincer�ly, ,
� �.� �
� 1�,,�-�s-�--,
James A . Rubin '
Zoning Administrator_ .
JAR/gew
. ii, ;: _
�;�
�� � [, , �
��,,j`z-.c�-a"'f... I h � �;�
�,I - � ...._ .:l . �y,,:�'�'r'�'_°k . ��� _ -�„�-�..-c���,
,;, � ���
I;! ���._...T.w����"��a � � r��-�..�.�.�.��_.`,�_�,.='.:��� _.S�� �,. ��
�.. .. . _
C � �' _ - �.
� a �i �,�.. ���.rr��.-��....,R, �:: ,� �� � �� ,�.�� �y,��
a�, �. „ : ryr
�• ` ;I ;�
I --�-_.._._.._
� I I Y'j ;�� ��,.`.�,�,��...� _ �=�-�� �-,� ---� �.
,� �� �T 1� . r •
I� ---__.___
; -
�� �� � �� � �
����i � :t=_.G%�,/:�c'--�-7r-. ' �.:�-r�'C�� �^'� �_ 1 �
�. �__y._ �..�_
Z� � �� � ----_-�:----_
�i, � ° t"�3_���'_J 3'1
II 2-� � (-�4 = 3-r.s aQ 3a -ro� �2 j�a
�� � r �� t - ,
� �-�:� a i �-
� ,: �a �
,_._....__.............__.... ._...�.,..___.__._ .
i� -.�....____.,_--�
i I a` � �T(�0�'� � �'1 Q�'r�'�. y - r.:, �'G7 p� ,�,�{`' C� f. (
ii -3 �� Q � � (1
,i , ..-�-� r.�:.�-�= ���������..� a d
�r k
I ��y � � �/�/�,� y/ � � ,�y y�q
ijl l.il./t/'L.� G /`.U:..�/k�r.{,...�,4. ��V':..d"4-T��I l
II�I . � �
j� -,--�--�..�
I; . . _ `�..� �`� � ,`'j D t 6>
�w
_._ .
.
__ :
a�� .._.._.
��i �..�....
�� ��i �. �~a ���� �! �?� ��'
li '
; J
��I _. �..,.�...__._.._.�:---..._.�._.._.�...__._..
....__...,�. .....--°-:.......�._---....�.__..r
------�..._�__,IJ.___-. I _.....�..._ m..___
'� �C,�,,�� � -� �'" � '- �
n'
�'If t..�. r6-�_dr�� ��i 6Y�^'�� �_
� �
'-- -..... �� . -.::.,,... . . .. '
I .. � - �.... .
�fl _ _ _ _. } ;,� � ;�
r,�, (� � -
Ili '�' `��'G'ti".'e'i'�..C..�k . i�.,�`i�'�+�.a.-r..�,. "' � � �
�
i' �-�v��__��' ��;:��.�.�-�;,��'� cF:;���
rl __ _. � �_ ��� .. .
�
��� . _ � `..�.�...�
�;; �
_ �{ _ __
_
_ _.):'l��,. - _
,, _ _
;�
::; ���i�� �y9�... ,��,��i;Cr�r�,�,.i
�"4X� %�a L.r.�,�'�' r'�/t-'^*; l.��°L 1:
..,,/
�3 f' s:zA�, i k�§:.,p.,r �+ •� ��?. � r R� _� �!.
� �.- . '.C :.f•r.'a. . ,et�..�= .w..:.,:... �. .+:r . '�.:� . _..-..,.. �.� ..:.`� � . �',�L .:� -11_'S.} .1'.4` J. � � S�
i �
� - � trr . ��f }�u��,�':f�7+
�'!�"J�Ai�''��Y�j�
,� ,, 4.57'182 B-5b1 G-054 08���/'�.! .[2:39 F�G 1 UF � f�E�" �0�?,4Y�;��t r�kr��?.
' � ` J(JNNN�'1`TE PHILLIF� FAGLE Ct�UNTY CLF_RK', �:�L�Rt�DCI 35.Q0 4 �Q�� � ��!;'
t �� _ . . ,.,,,(`
. : ,;,r'
�. �� HOLZEyJ►]C HO��E COidlp09(Il�l'ILT11 ABBnCIA',CZC1��1 . ;, +� �.
" D�A� IpV��'TMl�7Pi�. xt�C. d,/b�'�� CBAT�AU •Y,�1It BO�IDIIY INli . -+.
l�ES�sN�s �ar: sunr. XC�,� �.991 to Jae� 9, 1992 " ;�.'
':a.
. y '>.;'i'r
F. �1
AGk1E6M�NT 33 MAb� ttxf.s ���'"` ^��y of `�� � 1991 ;� ''
� b�tw��n. Hclidb^� �lousa Condam�i:`iuxi� Associa on, a a Rnad, �� � '
� � ��
V�►iL, Colorado And CA8 lnvrstmanka, Ir�c. a! 13 Vail Roe�d, V�,il ��� �.
Co].or.xdo, bath of lCaql� Cau��y, s+t�te o� Cnl4rada. ' • °� �t;,� �
� !� - _ 7�.:
. ., �hw pasti�� e►gre8 �as �oll.owa: ik��
r"` �y s{
• . • .,
� .. i. r�s r�caLS or �,��►�r����n ,. .� . . ,4 i,���_
��:, .,, .:f�-:� - ,�: '• - , . _ . . ��. �
� ' °+''' 1.t Th• pa�rtf��c h�v• an inke���rt in a�djairainq r�al �sta�• {f°E�` i
�: �ituat�d in the City ot V�il , Caunty o# Eaqli, Sf�ita aA Co`1'i�r�d�.o ,ly�F. I
�� s�d describ�d, r�sp�ctivrly, �� f�l].owr. v; I
., . . �� S�� i
1.2 �olida�, iiouse Condomir�ium A�socintiens `�',.,,�,,� I
� I
�..,,;..;,�;�:
1► part o!` th• lio�th�aa.k ar►w-q�ur�rt�rr a� &�ctiprt 7, �'arr�shiQ �a �s;
11o9lgh� �taR � b0 N�at af ths 8ixth princip�3� K��;�.di,�a �A�1 .Lr��.s�� a �' �=4�i.
. p�zt o! 1La�rx A. s, aad � c�t ]Ya�r�nd.d !!�fl o! llhs�t 1 a� � a� V� � ;
. Vi�l�q� ���d�d lili.ng, Coutrt af E�glar, Bt�k� at C�sloraL�Os ��rq ,;
p�rtl�ularlg d�sarib�ci as �o�l.nws s �
:��ri�;;.,:
�;.��i;i
�e�a�ttcin� rt the, l�axth+�ast �ar�a�r e�� said BMCtion 7 f ���e�e�� �, ' ��',%�,_
� l�aukhirl,y a�rd �►la�e� th� �ast lina� at tEa�► �tartts���t ana-�u��rt��1r �� ��r
�, s�a�Q ll�ctior� 7. 39.30 tMe� �o th�► 8ou�b ri ght at Ma►y lin� a� v.�3°�
; Highway N�. 61 thena;� c�� �� �a�gl� tro the rfgh� of 1Q0 d�gr��� „'d�}� I
, �.�L�;;i �
i 4].'47" �r.d alonq saidl Sauth righ�t� 09� �a�y linf 25.4� test �r� a . I
i pai��nt on the 1toa�t liae ag Vsil Re�a►d� Suid pa�i�t b�rina th� ::�i?;;;�'
,,,�:�.
' Nocth*nact�rly corna� o� sacid Lr�t �►; th�nce co�ntinesinq alanq �h�r °�.-R,
I atorexrntia��d lin�r �nd el.oag the Nor�hsrly lin• at s�►ie� 1�mt l►� ,."i:;:�
;:,;;,`��..
' 152.b5 f�►�t to th� Iiorth�a��+t�erly carner ot sa�d Lat A= thsr��er �n �:�
i a�n �x�qlt to tfi� :.�ft af 10i1 da�gr�r�rr �1•47" end aXona� the� i1a�t '���.'
. :>:.,;,
linar cf s�ti.d l�,r�t A, 139�15 f+�e� �o tri�e trne paint af bwq inri�.nq� �
�h�t�ce fla a� mx�q�.� tQ the l.��t aL 73 �.egreaa 53•1Z", 156.13� �e�� � `'�`�''
ta th+� �►��tt lina� ag 'i�ai�. �aadx tt��nc�e on an sngle to the rig'ht af �r'
73 +degreaa 53°22" nn.d al.osxq said Yrarsk. line Z02.15 f.�ett th+�rrace� c�n ��'
��r �ngl� �o the riqht c�� g0 dsgre�s QCl'00", 98075 xe�t ta the -�;`;�
N�rtherly li.�e ot '�est Mera�cYo� nrivep th�nce on �►n angl� tca tkear ;;;ti``
right vf 58 d�gre:s 1�6'39" und a►lomq �saici Northerly I.ine srac� ';��:';
,,�.
a�long e, curvs �o Chm� lest� hq.wi.a�g a r�s�ius o� 175.00 feeti, a ,
csn�ral a��gle cef �6 d�r�r.ww�c Ob� 15'°� an +�r.c dl.stnnce of 109.y7 ,,;"
��er�: t r� a �,r�irtt �f. t.attgoer►tg t liane•A alu�ty �a t ci i nnq�>>! �rrci x l r�n�a �,
sai.d Noz'tha�rly line 11.OU 8'��st:; tt�ence crn an �rigle to ti�e zigl�t ��'�
[�g 141 c�egr.ass �6�3p", 101e50 Es�t: tlhenc� on an a:,�le to 1�[t. oC
,;:�
lOZ deqreea 13���*D 96.OI1 �ee�; �h�nce on ari ang�e to i.he rf,ght
o� 40 �yc�be� �0'�4"s 1.�.�7 ���to �:herice on an angl�� ta Ch� l.eft ,;
a! 90 degreae� ���a4", 67onq ��e�., n��r� ar ias�, t� th� �.rue pr�int :�,�, ,
oiE beginninr�; cont�inimg 28,3�'l.�x �quare feet ar 0.65 ac���a�, i
�sara c�x less. ;��; II
E1�,SE*5A'N'I'S �
1�7l1�� G� 7 '
i
�I
I
Y �I
11nN
%ewasr..r.� 1w'rr�wwvm��' . .
��.,�� '�� . . .'r��:' h .,i.•.�'A.R:7', ".iL�..h -�..��*.�ISL�:?.. ' f�sjw:: r� �,�.. ;�`iV Y'-.: '�.kl{-c, i �{�4 i .ts`'a t' ia�i g � } 1
fy . . . . .. __ ,,,�.;t: c.d' ��.5 .. k+ ��. �'�Y� ��NN,k„A4,..,yx ��l.jt '�i�i -�
4ry:. . h� . �1'� A�i'Li��`asc U< f.
p� .. . . :`a r,�.d�}.f r�.� .�r. . �
{•' ... a 9 � /i'��'�t. +7�4 1.
W
� 1����,
�' ,`�
��; �
� f�
i' 1.3 D]�E InV�stm�r�ta, Ir��. d/b/x Cha�e�u vail Kolid��► xrins ''��
�1: w..r.w.r.�++� . . ...... .�.I.I:-..C........�:MnR�..�1.Y'.J!!.r'.!!� `... . . ' ��}�
A''•
�..1 1r
t: � past ot the Horthea�st onr-qunrt�rr esf 8�ction 7� To�i* i,p �a � � �
�: Sauth, 1tM.»4� 80 M��ct of t.ar.� �ixth ltr ie�c1.p�1 M�ridiwn �a� ��i�n� �►'� ' :'«1�
�, j�irt Of .LOC• A� e� aAd C o! 1►�rMnd�d Mip 6� $�A�fti a. Ci't ��`�41,� �1'�l .�C''a .' {��
villa�� s�aoi►d tiling, Count o� Eagio, 8tat� �f Co�aor���p�r �c• ��-
T sr�:. ° �'", ,; 3��
���; particu�arly ��scxibrd a�t �a ]�ox�a ,:; ����
_ `' , '�`7' : +s
�� Caa�snainq at �h• �ac�h�aat �orx��rr o� ��td l�ectfa¢� 7 j t;a�,�nc` ��a`'�;;
��_ sou�h�e�ly ��� alanq th� 1��►st 1ln� a� kh�1 ftortih�a�t bA ,a` �t�t�r a� ,� ��
' s��d ��ctioa 7 t 39 0 3O ���� �rs �t�� i�e�utih ci�k� a� M�► -����6��S�tt.��,, °� , �"��r.,�
. st.�hw�►y l�o. 6 t th�ac� oa aa �rt+ngl� tv thr �fqht a� �,�� ��,��s � ;� .
'°` �: �Z" an8 al�oue� �aid �ou�.h �r�.ght of Ma►y lin�, ��f.��a, ��„�a a► ,��;`.
'
�" poi�tt on th* 1V�it lin� a! Val�. lload. �a#.c� �aai.n� #����#� �f ,-::},F �' ,�,;���!
Nartih+ea�t�rly cora�x af �aid Lo� At �l���ce coatinu�las� a� }pi�r'� s� y ; ;':.
�, ator���n�ia�sad li�rw ��d xls�x�g �.h�r Naz�l��erl� li�� Q� i�t�.`��L�ct� A, ��,�s�
y` 1Sx.b5 ��r�t tc a �a�rtt nn t��e t�aa�th�rr�itwr�� oc�rp�t o� s� °d �,�ak ,!, ,,�
•aid po�a� Mia tha kru� p�oint c,� bsqinniaq� ����Cs ��f �a�'rs�P�lx�;��,e y�F
,: to �h• liE� a� �00 idi�qes�►� �i°147" a��u�9 a�qP� th� �1'��ut ;�,����,�qy�"si���t �,Y;�
= Lot J!, 11D.Ab ��i�tr ti.he�caa nn a�r� arrngle� �¢ �fi+r 3:r�� t�`��► �r� ,���'a��►?�� "�'��
$�^ . • . �l i b{,r � i� , ( �
, 5�'l:t", �,56.13 f�st �o �ha ��r:t �.tc��, oi� Y�i.�. ltQsdl ������ ���i��'''�a l'� ` �,���';{�''
', anQl� to �b� right o! 73 d�g.sa�ea 53'12" ��d a�.aqg •�►'i�,'�3�' A��r��� l�x�� �- .�r� .
,. �li,13 fe��; th�ne� a�r ��a �ng:s.e ta �h�, eis�ht o! ]:Q6 �li�,q���i� ' , �,�,s `
�:. 06'66'„ 156�13 ls��� to �.w�� 1��r�t �.in� of ��r�d �,ot �� �isi�� F' a�4� �a` 4 ��,.
e " � N N s yx.+ �s � a r i : �,�,
� anq]ln ta th� l��t of 1�4 ds�yr��� 1� 11 , 67 tle 4�slt� �►�►� � ,oe'���; f :
� a�tgl� to th� ri ykt at' 90 d�gr��� 08�00", 18.27 ��r��t ,'1�l�'�i���r�ai�'*°is�.` �. ,
"� unql• to th� 1Ntt o� �►0 d�g�s�ees 00'00", 86.00 !'�st� �}i �a�t 'n�'�'��l�s`'t' ,,,i��
�nql* to rh� ciqht o# 10� d�g�cw`Fa� 13'17", 102.5Q �f*�;r ��e�t a�r ' ����
l�ss ta th� Nar�hrtiy line of �rew,r he�adae► Dr�vft 'tl�eue�r�;}�j� ��� ��.y.
;` �nqle te the right ot �8� d�re�rsa�s 1�°3tl" +�na �rlai�q t"h� s�� � � ; ' ���;;�
Not�la�rl 11n• 364.4� g:�rti ta � �aaix�� r�� curw� �h�nc• ���xr�inu�.���? ;E�`�
�" slt�aq �x�d l�o�el:!►erly l.ina ar�,c1 alo.nq a aurv� to t�e ls��`���i�rinq;.� : ���N
xadius o� 5x5.�0 te�t� a� c�entral �a�qle o�f d� d�qr�as Z�'1�", �►� �,�a�
' wrc di�t�enc� e�f 58.S� gtet tcx the M�ak.�r3,y T i�� af �.at C� �Ilir%ll4N ,;Fy��
` on c�n anql* t� tha rf.gt�t �� E14 d�q���e� 48'35" and al.artg �he ,,°.,";;,
,,.;,,;,
;; wrst+�riy Zir,+e af Y.ot CB 251.25 �d�t: �a t�h• South riqht ai x�y ,*+;h
lin� mf U.�. t�ighwuyr 1�u. 6r kh�en�� n� a� an l�e ta tt�� rt�iht at �d '"'
�.:;t'';.
;�� d�gra�s� 00'�!0'" a►nd alon�J �xid ����t�n right o way line 3tJt1.OQ ; ��Y�;;,.
fu�t� �ors a� Ies�, tc� tl�a trrne �oirrk cs! beginaing. .
;,:;iy;�;�.�:`�.
$° �OCiI��'HE�C 1G�T� t�n P��x�s►en� foc Zn re�s at�d �, ress ko �nEC� ��aae :,,�,`,�:
sub�trc� pro��rC� dls�cxibe�l �� ��llown: g ¢;�:,.,
(�i�
''y.
&, �ri�agulxr e�ae�rgnt ut tY�e Ntcarthaa��r�, c.c►cne�' of a� �srt of ILc�t d4, .��,�
�1 ;;f
of 7l�er�ndec� Ms o� She�ttt 1 n� 2 of Vai.l v'i l lag�e �'i l i nq Nn, 2, -�';$
Counhy a� S�g�e, St�t.e c�t;' Calr�r�,�`� m�r:e pas'tir.,iila�.ly clpsc�i }!,�»r.l r��
��1�o�s: :`r�%�
C�rat�emcinq nt t:he Nozt.heeg4: c r t r�f 3rctia�n 'l; Tawnghi� 5 '`1.?�:
��u�l�, xanga 80 ltrtt o� �he �ix�.h �rin�i p�l Mac3di�nf }he • �,
�e�u�he�rly �nd �i�rng �hr ��nt li�s �� ���.d 9�ctias� 70 3�.2� ����: �
;���
�an�inuecl
�.A.S��#�A?7.'S ',
��(y� z �� 7 ;F,:
.......,iL.--._..-......��_..._. 'r'4
�
i�,
:e,
4a71t�� E?-•5o1 �'-�Oti4 Jt�,,�,='r.�,`,'.1 i ..3"•� F�G �' iJF 7 ;,�,
��
�
� ,
,�, ...
,.� ...,.,.. Y._. - t,,����. �
Evlssl.ri:3 *t_. .�v� �., � _,,.�, �.,,..., .�... :,:. , �,• � :t+.-sPr t . d�., ? t4-'d.4 'Tt ! ' .6n{r, '� �•'�� s �d v l .
-� ,
, „ _ ... .
. ' . ...: f5 y���t ... � ��.. Tr�}i �
. '`+ttfi� ��r.�
ht ° � � - ''�F
� ' + -�t p'.. � ��;%�
R:. �(.'L .':� "
Can�.i nued `;��y=�cti
,.,•,;,�.�;`
� �a th� sauth ri�ht mg wr►y o! Iira�r at v.8. Hi�hMi� �1n. 8f th�csc�r ��„#�
aa o�� ea�g�!� �a �h� right o! ].Dp d�rgrf:• �1•4 " •nd al�n� ��i�.�E .�;�t�' `i,
�outla tight a� �ray lint,` 7.78.Oq �s�t ta tlie "Nartn�I�rdti �6zn�r �►� � ,
: �aid Lot A xnd to thf tru� pain� of brgin�iag, �he�tCr 'a�p �►,� ��. ..,Y '
�� � r �<v
�; ta t�ts 1�!'t a� 100 d�qr�s� �1��7°' and alonq kh�r M�r�t l��s � o�'°����I' ,� � ;
_ �at A, 65.�� iC��t= th�nca an �� ar:gl• ko th�► lw#t +�! �'A n; �4�}���,�t�
`: 0�°0 0 1 D. S.d O ����1 t hsa��• csra �n �►nq l* to t`!r� 1�t ti o! d��� �,��r,�wtt ��i
�x 29'31", 65.ab lRr� th th+� N�r.th �in� ot ��id Lot Af t�s*��� �r�«��� ;�.
�£ . aaql�r �a th� l�fk o� 105 d�re.�� �8�x2" ��d alang •�1`d;"�tb�t� ].'ii�i�;: ,�;,�
� o! 3'�.00 lf+�k t� th� tx�ua+ p�in� o! b�qir��niag j ��;,i,
,�s��,i.,
�•f�
`: islsbr �'.�u`�r
�:: � 'i�.'
� ���i14i�1 tf.�.b� S� �i��`���i. L�� .f.� Z��� a�.d �qstsa G.n ��� ���7w. � .,S �,y n sr1..� .
d
�� aubj��k psop��ty ctwsnti��� �►s i�o I.awrs �' ` z �y���
�i::. ; � 7 .{8��y �I
St� . � k �
`�� u trfan�ulaE aas�ra��nt �t �he� t�au�.t��rre�st eorn�r dt • gazt e�� .;��� �► � ;�°k��� .�k '
� o� �asnded ltt� ai �he�t 1 0� 2 u� v°�il Villaqe �111ng �a �. s�,��,�+y'��. ,s; `¢���r'
Cvaaty a� sa �. �ltaka r�� Col�ra�s, �r��r artiaular�l d •as�i`�i�it���"��' ,,;�
9 P _Y � � � ��
`: as tolltiws� , :,� ,` �r 5j � �4��c� I
ti� .' 7t�! ? ^•� i���: iJ �..:., `�rr. . I
�o�rrr+�neinq at �h� Nasthwua�t �c�i�er c�� �aid li�etian ?. 7ta���ipo � , � �
�` �outh, Eapg�e �0 M�ra�t o! tla� 83.:l:h �rincipal li�ridian; t`!i'�n'tz,e .: '���;�,r
� P5out3��rrly �n� a►long the I�a�t l.ine� ai sald 8�ati,on 7, �9 �;ki �e�e't",�.�, �-
�o the sauth riqht cf es�y li.ner of t�.�. Ri qbway i�o. 6t ��t4t►�js ��n �'���;� �
�en �onyls to th! ri qht at' i�a d�rgr�aes 1�1°�7" �atd alo�� ���.�I '#csu tih �`���
r�.qht ot M�y l.�n� i78.89 ta�t ta '<�� �'osthw��t Gc�ta�r o�' �;a�.`i2 �,ot ����
�.� thsnc• an an angl� �rs th� 1�t.� ��' 1d0 dfgrf�s d�.'�17'° ani�.a��or�� ;.,,;,,
tha M�st line o� sa3,d i.ot �� 95.00 �e�t to thR tru�t paim� tif' ;;r� ,
b�eqiflning f thfnce► ara u rurv� t:cr th�c k��t�, havin� u �s�diu�y�ai� y,, - �
15.QO tett. a csntral anqle c�t 7Q derc�reas 18'45 , an xTC J.����lL . ;44H5
mt 1�90� l:��t to a paint at ��ngdnta th�rncu alang scfd txs��i��, ����
��.05 �r��tt �l�ena� on nz� ara��e �a the ri4ht at 175 dwgzf��s i,; ?
25�33"r 6'�.�a ��et �r� �her t��e�f:. �l.��n� a� sa�id Lot A� thtn�e on �aaa ;� � '
,r�:
anql• ta th� rfght o�' �'3 a�a�c�u��e�� 53'2.2" a►nd slohq said 11��t li�n� ,':�:�;�;u�3'
15.00 t'�et, a�oxr ar la�g, t:c� Lhe trYya polnt ot l��g�inaing. '"���
Cout�u�y ot Itagl�e, r:�
Stat�e nf �c��.arado. Yl;:r_.r,
,�����
�� #,
a. C4NVEYAN�1� Ol� T`!lg IiA,�E1�151V�ffi� `�'l�it�
�.,:,;t��
2.2 Tha partiee tc� this egr��mertt c3�a� ce� ta ere�t.e e��sm�ent� <:,
;;��;,:
with r�ap�ct to the above-deac:rih�e�J e��i7r�i.ni.nq int-q nwn��j I�y� t'11�sm ;:ki
Eor ti�. btn:tl,t o£ aa�rlx af 1-h�rm . :;N'
>r,,;%��
2.3 Haliday Hnuee Condami.niuro Arsaciation and f�AB `"���
°:;::.., �
:tn�re�kmGnt�, Inc. d/b/a� Cha�teau Vai.l. Hr.],iday In'n hereby ge�nt �►n�� ;;�;,;�
r.�nvey ta �nd £'rom a�� �na�her, for � p�r��� a� an� ' ' ? yeti �rom� ;��
t.h.�r de�� at th�.� c�rve �nc�r �e���rn�n�.� t�r cnmm�rci�. �nd '�:f�,
�' ';�i;�; I
ze��.dentit�l, us� t►� a�tlin�d h�rzin?�e1ow. ',
LAS�NiEN'T.�'r
�_g c�r j _ '
i
I
I
�;571f��' f3-•a6.i F'-O_'�q t�t3,,%2t�;"'t � .. .:�•:' F'C.7 .3 C)f 1
I
�Yrrrli�f Iref�lw�lrrr --_� I
""'"-��rrmaww�lwa�rd._.......��.—W.----_—•m,,:r�.r1�Yw�w .. � -- - - -.._.�._�_ _._.�..e
� ... -�.
, �. N,:. ,> .,, . .. . . , ,;, � �.
�n - .� •., , -�
. 4 . .. . . SlJ�..s:1t Y't ::�s}5 1 n��. b �/
�a' �Y ,� � >�;at� �f.N s.k<'GTI�f�' Fy �,�, ,fy
��� a F � °�����'�i���i�}�X �Y�(� 'i
'N: � f• SY ,
��r-: t�,f��r.
Pr�' � 9�...' �5!il��, .
. �� r }i��'����i
�" i�tN� '�
,Y'f Y
"M fW f kH�si
!} 2.4 It is •gr�sd �h�t �t th• •xpiratien o! *na an� .y���° ��'x�� �: r :: ��r
,r� oi this �►qrea��nt, th� pxrtir� m�ay oontract ts. aqr.�� k�"�tfn�w:��'�r : � f�".s
E�> �a�saa�nt� yrant�d h�rain, 1ay a� edditi�nal rg��s�n�nt r�q�t�.Ci-�q '�'� �, s 5�;:
�; car�s�nt and ean►�id�r�tion th�r�ia��. . ' :.w , ,; � r>',�'
� � `
� . .� : 3
2.5 ThiE tau�ual grAnt o! r►a�fm�n��r s2ta1�. ruri with tk�� 1�►r�d � ` ��; �r;
�nd shxll b• bindiag upan xr�d sha].:. inrar• t� th� b�nst�fk; b�' �.�`�'S �! fAL���
p�rtiQ� h�r�to, the+ir succ�:�ors, at a►�sfgas, durlr�g t�hr twsa��zg�; � �< "d,.
� th�� agresm�nt. . � ���:, , ��
r �`; � 1
F� �I. . ��{iY ��1,5
,:s r,
: �;� fh�M�.�,
' 3. G011QTDl�J►'1'IQN x..
t
� na! .
� 3.2. �[olid�y Houae Condo�ainium 1►asocistion sqrt�s �� p� � �!�' i'����
� inv4sta��nt�r, inc. d/}�da Chateau Vail Holida�y r�tn �h� s�e;:.t��j `�S� s�,�,.�
; �a11ar (�1.091 , the r�c�ipt o� wh3c3� ir �ck�a�r�s�qa�f.. ���.��aE�'��r u�.a�,U,
` y�e►ad �nd valuabl� conaid�r�tiari, includinq �h� �autu��3. b�''r►ti'��.'��a�' '. ixi���,
� •nd Qe���ia�nt� cf •xch ai th• parti�� contain�e! h�►�i�in �: ` �,;r�� �,�v, ,�r:u
�e �rf it�t f��,%; ,
,� � llti.,y�tt�� p 1. �{�!
� 3.� rA� ]C�xv�atment�, Yr►c. d/b/+� c"het�au Va31 gali�m�r, >Ti��! ' '�k� ,>s, ,
�c� sg�retts ta p� �olid�y H�use �ondaminium Asscci:atioa "t3t�tx;'�t�m{'��! `, ° �,��s� �
�,� Oa� Dollar (�1.00) , th• r�cript at' which i,a �aknowrt�Rd�a��l;��;,��¢ �,,���� "
�i' ot�sr go�d and valeea�al,• co,n�lcl�eratian, including th� a�u`ta���, ` "� Y� .Y�.
s,; b�n�fi�■ and d�trimintf� af •ach �� th• �aarti�s c+ont+�insd�,hi`��r��t� � t�t�r
; ; y 1r9.�111 ''.:. �yI'r,�i V� �
' �. ar,��ts or rss �sr�taa��a� vs� a►�tn a�r�oYMaNS =" i�,I ` " �;;`�" �
:} .
> �= � . .'.
; �4.1 �11D 2A1V1C��M�NTS xNC.'� CH�T�Ai] V11IL ��i�Zn1lY �� �°'�:. ' � �;«�
� �115�l�EIdT � �t • ���;���
. ' �� . �� � ;
�G �"n� �en .a;��: m � ea�u r, u . �iy nn e �r,i � � �ari� . r, . ,
�� � � '� ���
t� �as�ruent for Zngxu�ss snd lCgress �o and from sub��ct p�CQp�"�"ty ,�:'�"
�, awn�d by Aoliday ,�ouse Conc�omi.nium A.anocintion. Such 16�1��m�rat ` �'°��F''
: con�iBts of the riqht ta u�e the a�aph�lt dr±ve�r�►y Zeadin� t�► pnd°°� ;tr��;N
�;, fram �.h�e �raeh. c��ceptecle �oc dri�re�+ey puxpases. Furthsr, •u�}a: ^��,
easem�nt ia ±o run ovsr �nd �cro�ses th� p�ropetty owned by Na13cl�t . �.���,
� Hau�e Candominium A�accir�tinn, mor� pa�sticularly descsib�d as ���r "`���
m� nsphalt driv�wa�y �.oca►tgd c�n the Saukhw�est cornsr �nd pa�t af Lok :5-�
i'; n und on �.h• �outhsaa�� corrter �ac�d ��►rt o� Lok C, and whi�h `,°;��'�
r:-,
J. �s�c�����r �asi �iaadora Driv�. ;���,�-.
;� ��,:,,
�� 4.x "Drivewey pur asrs" ree uwec� ir+ this Aqt�em�tnt m��►n,� u,��► ��
i ��'
of c�aua�rccial and rts�drnti.�1 dri�rtsway�. It is agr�sd the►t a►r� , z,'
v�hi.cl�� •hs11 u�� or travel ecrnsa tha r,iqhts ef wnp c���arih�� �`?�:i�;
;r,::
� hfrs int en d t h�re u hu l�. ba no z•m�tr ictiann as �o vs�►icl,o, axce}�t �r.��=
'� �� s�t �orth in the reCOrded De�2az�ticr� rsf the Hc�li3�y t3ouffi� ,,,r�`;
�; Cor�deminium Aesocintian ancl its Ay..-law�. It i� �+qreeci thr+h. l,he �U�>�j
dYiv�wmy �hall t�at br ux�d Lc�z �et.ki.riy vehi�.:les but� csnly lc�r� '�:��a
drivewt,y purpo�as. �,
;;
i �.
� 4 . 3 It ±� agread tha�t v�:�ic2,es c�rryiflg trash ta and ;Er�m t;rtp ;'�
� tre��h rsc�p��cl• m�y u�Q q� �r�v��, ���nog �M� �fqht o� way ,l.
e�e��eribed abe�vt oraly d�aring th� h�ure� nt� 7 : Q0 A,M� and BibA �.ty.
If � ':;;.
� s�r���r�°s
�e d o�'�7 °';
�5;.tt�4 R-•56.i r-OS� Di7,,•'��;; �;t �.�. �s�, Fc, 4 �1F 7 .�:
°;7
a�..�, ���,....o�...�:.,�.�.�..«�,,..�..._ ---� .w
� �
_.: - •
� r � p.::. ^..:>��.,.�yl .�..�.x.:< :..'r:,d .t. �,:,: t �:�f7:i' x ��,�d:r t� �.�3 ya� E4F+ r k�_ � f��.7
,t fe - . �.�;a�3 .,�;-d,r.. �,�5...�-".. . . . . . . . ... . . s„z�.k. 1 .j � �4�f� �,i s ,�;r .�i�}��r�Jy`�d�. �� ���
aR . - � ; '�{, f�4
y . ' . �����r r� �
r' r�ti,8`'z�i,?'�t v,
�': + ,j�,r �5.�,y�t
s rk}�� � 1i�v�`l� .
i. + t�1
� . �y4,���sa
'�a +��r
z;.
�• 4 .A HOY.IDXX H:�vB� CClNDOMINIUM ASSOCIIITION'S lSAS�MSN� TO :U$� " , w���
' All I V�dAY����'E o ` �X au�a. 4n am �._�u��� ,i ;�,
` �r'ac..a An • q:ran � •n asa'a�sn �lor xriq��a� sn� 1���y��s to ��n�c�; � ,�� `,i
E: �i��si �:.. a �
trc� subj�ct p:ap�rty� o•.vn�e� by gAn Inv�r�.t�a�r�ta, Inc. t� ` r A,
� Clxat�eau V+►il Halidiy inn. 8uch lt���m�nt consi�ts 0� th,�! ri�h� t�o ;��; ,,
uaw th� �sph�lt parkinq lot driv.rw�y l��dia� �tb i�id ���a t�i ;,,'� � t�,ry�
psrking lot ior dr�rRway purpose�. l�urt`htr, .�uah �a��;� �'�it i� tea> x ;��,���
�, run ov�r and acros� th• greap�rty owr�Nd l�y bA8 inva_�tn�n`���I,, Y�z�� .�*� ,. ���s"
i: d/b�/a Chst��u V�il �uli�ay Inn, mor� p�ttiaulirly ����e�� yr�4a� ,� ,
�, kh� as�h�lt driv�way lac:tad nn �h�r l�authw�s�;. c�rx�li'���yn,��dr"�;'��.�f' �o��� _'�''��
��� Lat 1►, av�r •nd accars �.�e •e�t road inta th�'.�p�►��;inq, �j'�`t o�n ����►� � `J;�c,. ,. ,
1=`" P 9 s��< i ����,;?.,
{f north sid• o! the arkin �c��e, whi.elx �cai���'a� th� ChM"fl�;��u �►�►��1�� � ���' '
I�Qli[aap Zriri paLki.ng lOk. "'' "`f�".���� ' �, �
' ... � �i��fe _��`i§'�`'+1�t4 tit�+��rt , il
�}� 4.5 It �• �tqr�sd that varhicle�� �rkin in th• p��.kinQ 1Q' +� '�'�' '`��. • I
� x "+' Iy'�, �+r.�FS.d,�' x��'1� x ''
i; �hs3,1 la� inti�lyd to �crars �he� p�r.�i.�� lok, i�ncl.udix�q �`�nF �� � ,,�h����f; :�'�` ,�; I
�,. and •qr�s�, l�y' ur� o� a�nd tirr�v�el ��r�a�a th• ��rking lo��f���ry�����'4' �+��� ��
!°uxther, it i�t �qr�ad that Haliclay �taue• �an ominium �, z �'���.��'���?;i�1 ,,F,�?�`�,� �i
�; �hall usf and travwl acr.asffi ttae pa►r�eing lot �a ucc�sr�y, I,`'�'��"�',��1`r�1 ��L74 �r,�'"�, i�
1 �v � k�4„f .
�: (�) parking ap�►a�s, loc�►t�d on prop�sty awnld by Hes�tt�'�8f���,�d���� 4 ra f�.��� �
�s: I
� Candoraintun Assoc3a�tian. �,��.�����; F,t,�'�,� ,� �
+: .,. �.ul�ld �� :+�'�N ° .t-�'
� tlr 41.6 �lOLxDAY HGU!{6 CONDtyFII�TIU3� ��9CICIATYOPI'8 1CR8EliENTYtrv� U$'f� ,� �`,��
�� ��AO�A�� ' :�: .. ' � ' ' • � �y ,�4���2 yFV?F �J,��yW�'�. I
}�' on om a u�e� •�t�oc i �n s gr.�n»� � a�n ase'm�nt �ar 1►i r�ep���� {o.��r��C� :'���°;; ,
�nd �►bovs aubject pra��rty owne�d by n�.9 Tnv�s�n�snts. I�ic �I�������� 1,)i,'�� �
" Ch�taau Vai]. 8ali�uy xnn. 5uch BasNm�nt con�rista a� C'ti� r�,��h�. �p ,`�f �
r u�a� the sirapAre over end e�laa+ra c�a�l psopar�:X or�n.ed by 1y14��` , �, '
r n. I
Inv��t�n+�nt�, iac. deb1� Gha�e�� �a►il Eloliduy Ir�n, max�t. � ,� ' �s��� (
p�r�icularly d�scribezl a� �h� ai�sp�c� unc9sr and o4cupied b�r �hei , N�,,,
d�ek Afld bi�1COfly af Unl� #1i af Holid�►y Kaus� Candaminiu� �r�;
Associa�ion a�s it overha►r�gK � central �Zart o� L�t B� and �h�e� .:"°,;f:.
grosnauc�s tyf C3ya��a►u Va�3J. Ho1 iciuy Icin awnsd ?sy DAB I1sve��t.m�n�sr ;,,�, ,
1Y1C. ��,h �
v��.
$. B�rF�lS5t1l8 �Y" !'iAY1R`Z7�%N]l.�1Cl� RtVIU YtYSI�Xr1�! n`�°��'�
,°:�'t�:�!'��.
• •-,�.,.,�r
5 .1 In the av�nC. a p��'ty ��u�+�s c�a�ma�ger tn drivewa,y or pt�rk?nc� �;`�;�,�
1�� }yy ia�� �k travel. ar�as�t gucY� right af wa�y, ths� par'��+� shall ;;�
bt��r the r�sporattit�fli�� xox� re�p�ir �xz�d tt�airi�en+anc� casu��d e�s a� ` a`�
� dirfct r�sult o� s�aid d�mac�e.
I:' ��:
� 5.2 '!'t1e re�pt�ir� and rnaint�n�rc;� to be underti�ken �nd :`;�;.�
per�`ormed under thi�t �qr.dc��nent ehr�ll incltide the frllo�•�in4: .<.,.�
1 �illing ctiuckhales, L"R�LlCE�AC7.f7r� �vith as�.+t,all , �a���i�:i���.� �,s��h��lt .s'
, �;:,
�ur�a�ces, ar�d repAirin.q cur.binq. 's's
� :;����..
�.3 The repnir� And a�a�in�.e�►��Yyce c�f the driveway for ��cess tc� .
<;='�?
�h• patk�raq lat �tC�t� thc� ��4tk;��g 1ot itsel� 5h+��1 remain tne ,�
r+��p�en�ibiiity �E DAt tnv�t��mp���f �nc, d�b/e Che��e�u vn�.' �;,;�
�ioliday Inn. �i:F
;�, I
�s�rc�r��rs
�!a��c� 5 r�i 7
��I';'
�
$.J 7.t a�i�' K—�Gi 1 F�—C)i.1 C).�,�,''r:�, `•'1 �:�''„t..,� r�ti 7 IJF 1
I
i
�
II
� �y
C� {�'k xr� a{_: �'v .Stir.,; $ r�a :;r ,� . �,_; ,.,, 4 �. �'' �., � f :.�w��i+ r a7 '��sa ��r� ��3 R�2.. :#r ,. d, c�.� n I P
a �,+�
•�•- �-�k� "A 7 � F ,{'h�� !��
'CI� ` - . y!' '4 +
�? �I. �,�',r� d ���Ya�Yjrt�r
F
N4, , ��4 1 �`�fi7���r#1��
fi'�:, � y 1 i 9 �Yr� U>. .
J: "F„e
5�� 5.` Tht r�pairs �nd rrsint�aanc� �� th* driv�way f�or ires��i tio�'�' �,r',�:;:
' th� tr�►sh r�c��tacl� ��a11 br �h� c�s,panrizb;il,ity of fl771D: ; �; ,,��;�
pa Tr�WS�r!:a�ntr, t�c. d/b0a �h�t�au �'a3� �loliday inn. j '. '�"u'''��'
, nirJ �
7:�� �'l��f�.i;`�'t;.
6. try'.����i1f'Y'�1?�ONB � "�QJ�y'�.`n`;�';i?F
.. .. tNY:� iC(�{ !'�
� a.l Th� partii4 s�e►pr�r�nt to o:�a uno�:�:�r that �a±ch l�a� tllr � ''.���
4L' �u�hoxity and powpr tr� Qrant the� •as�monL•e� d�scrib�a� 12�►r�i•in� ��d� �� `'
3z�,'�. �t� .. � 1:lAC iA
, turthsr, r�rpr�s�nfi th�t �h+� a��nts signing h�r�inb+�law an b��`��"�F Y ,� r,
� oi� thf g�sties ar• r�rpr�es�l.�p uut�t�ax�.aed ta bind th�� p�a��c�l�s�r�' ��� �t(r4 f��,;��:c
{F;: �A�f3�l �A aQtA��Altt. °i i`, ii��f��y-f��y�Fa�:�na�.�"��'#�
`F 7 }' wd����t r .
�. � . 4 .��� ��� , +..
� N l�y���v �y YI y�17�1
`�t'� !e Ai i�LaaROi,8 ���0 � `��]y��`�k����' ?• { yz�''ra� :
��r � i 9�t�6 �,ti(�r'k7�'".`r �S� §��+Y
ti� 7.� ln �ny dis�ut• at thb� �gr��n►�at, th• prfvailinq p��r��r } ,� r7�3y`�.
; rhall b� rn�itl�a� a� ��tr�en�y�'m l�a� �►nd caxt• is�urred iae'�Cri��rt�,;x� 1,N,,.�
�; �ctinn or g�ac��rding that s�a� b� hcou�ht arising aut bt,_�in�" �t �f r, ;,fi��° : ,
�� carsnecticn with, or by r�aaon ot Ghi� r.qz��w�+rnt. �,��'r� ��`� ,
�
�4 : .�,���a;��, �.y'r`�� . .
�:,,, Jer:REBU '� this / 3 day af ...a°�� Y' , 1991. ' �4
r i�;
q.: �..�.w„' � ,1;` i'lh .''.
. d �
�r.. °'`��+? ,',!'�ks��V��S�
`' SY2 #,�,���yr N3
4z' �s��,�f ���t<�j}�
��� NQLZDAY Otfl�1� CO�IDOMINI�M l�S�SOCTA���'XtSf� _�,;�#;�F' ��� ;�`
,
tly ,
s
y' :s �{>r r,,� _
�; .
� ;` � t ��{I'� � Lc"t .
�' z t ro�',� p��C_.
��s._ e►ry � af r, r.s �r� � � ' `';,<^kr,:,,
i1��Y 4� P�}� .,,.
�.��� (,�
�� � ��� ���4� �'4
� � � �� 'e �j� �
re �"� � FU�� n:
� �a t y Y� �� ��f�d
i= .' 2". GFLL�2 ,. �I�!e.r�fr e fp�'�
x , __.,,��
a .,�;Y�;�
� :
� �.5��1� i°�t�u9�
s�' '"+
; ra.
�,:. . ���:� f. <#ef,i..��;�
�h �,nd BY t �`,F��r`
"::1'�A!t'.:.d;
��
� DA� NV�S'�ML"NT�► I�1C. d/b�'a (;tUt.�'La►td Vd►I L HOY�I AAY Y Nt�T ff'�
' *I.�,
;�
t��
� �;
',{ �,� .__ ,,:,
,,,.;
�_ ,
er �+� ne:, r�s �n .__ ,:;;��
,�•
;y,,
ATT� T: '��;��;
� y,�,
c�' �•'3-�--lG,,,.� , .G t. la.a.
r r u •u r y � ��".�e :.,.�.;;,;��';�
;i<<�
_ ..;�,
(Sea1) ,s:4:�;
,,.,,�
':+;;��
�AS�iMl�NTS ?:;��'�
P+�ge 6 of_ 7
::`i:r
;'it
`.�
�Y
���
4 571�a�? 3—.5ti1 �'—G�S4 i't�• _;.�.•'°.! � .. . � F��; ti OF 7 `"
_ _ .__.__.._---________.._.__......,..wW...._.._..�.,�,,.:��
�
. f �
��{ ;td { .'.._:�� � r5,:.� ���.F'.*r ,... }.. '.e+ r d .:��:, � ..n°� (#;'""J:r✓sh-�?�'� �d,4�.:�'t�YsrM1"k�nss�.�a ..A.��� K.ys, �-N:�� ., a
'�`` �tl �
� , ' .. .7i+,3. �s ,'^'.���{�5`���i S' �f }' [�
- - Ay�!�u;�'�S�w.��}��2�!i��f��y"�'f:
��' � ihy �a�,�k�k1���4�M•.
/i t.�'t�"Y��a
'��qY�:� . .{r�,tz'r< r� G
S��_ - ��:' T�1�l'ittla���i�� ��� .
i: nr�t��{�'4 1 �rb .
���, �►r�rxovan r►a �a� ronx eY� `>;?�, ��.
�:�.: ��:•-'A,. 'i�:..,,-:;;����
'�� ATT'CYlN�Y� t01t H4L ' J►Y HQIYSL CONdt7!l.xNIU1i !►s�QCIATION ;�; �'!� `
; i� x;'��,;'�t�r.a��
r r:�• r
?� � r�� • ;�:,
Ni �1
e���
,�(' ayy/�qh . d f�Zl� NN1�� ♦q� � � x!)�'%�,
`L+,, ��N116`�/MY� � � . Y � SVIn�J.L� � � ,':rlp
� 101 tJnivsr�it , sui�� <60 �;;�,,,&`��
h:` D�awr, CO 8 20K ,','"'`.
�- (303I 321.-�597 �� � ���� •
;4..� !{��v1t� F ��,.T f
.' YN
�': 11Nb !lY a , �`' � ��
�� 4 �e��� J�+'+ .
e. � 1 �rr�s :1 t�9,�
• A1"'�'1l��'Y� �'0!l lyJUl ]CNVxs°i'MaNT3 s YNC. :� tS��; ���
` d/k!/! C1�1T�AU i171I Y. $Clx.I T�l1,Y I NN �,f s �� �'����
�;: ,, � +,�,Y
ry _
I"—: rC fj ,�.YClfJjly,,}
��
.' . y 4 4 , j� i�
'�.'„_ ' :7 ����.ytY.�.
. � �wy
KQ ,- /� ;�f"f/�1 rt�"���
�
ts;. !f' !T��R'1�! �#.�!_ . a r
. � ����af �6 j�.
� D lit��ncial ��rvlewa�, rn�. ,� :�� � ;���`. .
�� �0�9 Notth l2or�ncs "� 7t
,T'- n� lasb, Tsxat 7�40� �; }��'���
�,�,��
{9i5) S��t-22�'I �'����7t ;'�'� !
f ,�
xy: � �r; F��u�fi�'t
�:' f�
s � .
I �,����,,��n„
� 7� �i�+t�'
-'�u �Tt���,�, .
iy. " �•;:t'S
k:: ��I,'. ..
r:. . . ' '',',:�/:7ii,��F�. �
�'4� . `�F�,.i;:!,:,��� .
� J�""
; '^iHfti� �i
' ;,�'
ti, � ' +T7���1 �..
a� .i.r,.?. uN� ,
4 �:.+?,rti',
::1r.,
� : ,;,' '
{ :,t,��
+;. �.k
� i 7 k�
��j'�
t!' ''ii
I, 'i.�f��i,
�I� ''zGy�,�d ��.
.��I��if,� ,
;�;-
. 5
.:i`��y14%�y;�
1.�:.v[
.���yt r�..
:,��I�n
1�a15 Bl!!S�°d'S =a;e;
Page 7 a#` 7 ;�
_" �;;:
'��
�,.;�`rY..
4.�r�E��' Q`tt+1 !-�—�'>>-9 ���•, ..'�' ' :! l.. . _S";' F�Ci ' t�� ' i'',;+�;�
.. — I;,�r.
7�w;
>j,;:i;':�"
...�._._.., .....-....�..__..�._.�.......A,..,..,...._..,...,e..,,...�...�_,_...._.^..-._..�,.�.........�.��,„�`.,,w,�umw�w:.::... .
�