HomeMy WebLinkAbout1.0 Application7 a'
BEATTIE & CHADWICK
ATTORNEYS AND COUNSELORS AT LA\^
7I,O COOPER AVENUE, SUITE 2OO
GLENWOOD SPRINGS, CO El60I
R*t
STEVEN M. BEATIIE
GLENN D. CHADWICK
KAREN J. SLOAT
CYNTHIA C. TESTER
April 19,2001
By Hand Delivery
Don DeFord
Garfi eld County AttorneY
to9 8m Street
Glenwood SPrings, CO 81601
Re: Westbank Ranch Homeowners Association
Petition to Vacate Road Easement
Oak Lane - Westbank Ranch Filing No' 1
Dear Mr. DeFord:
Enclosed please find an original and four copies of the Petition to Vacate Road
Easement filed on behalf of Westbank Ranch Homeowners Association'
Very truly Yours,
, '',t ,a / ' z:
l''. [i'i ;'tt L) (' l( "' t' ;'"1 iL-'<--
,- dl"rn D. Chadwick
!, .''
GDC:clh
Enclosures
Cc: Westbank Ranch Homeowners Association
1-t7-o /
reuepxorE (s7o) 94s-B6se
FAX (970) 94s-8671
cfil B
TO:
FROM:
DATE:
RE:
PETITION TO VACATE ROAD EASEMENT
OAK LANI'. WESTI}ANK RANCII FILING NO. 1
Board of County Comnrissioners, Garfield County, Colorado
Westbank Ranch Homeowners Association, Petitioner
April 19,2001
Road Easement Over LotsZ2 and23, Westbank Ranch Filing No. I
Petitioner Westbanl, Ranch Homeowners Association ("Westbank"), a nonprofit
association, by and through its attorneys Beattie & Chadwick, hereby petitions the Board
of County Commissioners of Garfield County, Colorado, to vacate a "Road Easement"
sftown on the plat of Westbank Ranch Filing No. 1 at the west end of Oak Lane, across
Lots 22 and 23 of the Westbank Ranch Subdivision Filing No. l, pursuant to Section 43-
2-301 et seq., Colorado Revised Statutes.
l. The Road Easement that is the subject of this petition is at the west end of
Oak Lane, as shown on Exhibit A attached, a true and correct copy of a portion of the plat
for Westbank Ranch Filing No. l, recorded in January l97l as Reception No.248729 in
the records of the Garfield County Clerk and Recorder (hereirrafter "the Plat"). Oak Lane
ends in a cul-de-sac within Westbank Ranch which stops short, and east, of the property
to the west commonly known as Prehm Ranch. There is a "gap" between the end of Oak
Lane and Prehm Ranch. The "Road Easement" is not part of Oak Lane.
2. The Plat contains certain language granting to Garfield County "for public
use the streets shown hereon including avenues, drives, courts, places, alleys, roads and
lanes, ... and the utility and drainage easements shown hereon for utility and drainage
purposes only." A copy of this portion of the Plat is attached as Exhibit B. The only
itreets shown on the Plat are Westbank Road and Oak Lane. The dedication language
does not include "road easements."
3. There is in fact no road located on the Road Easement, and a fence is
located on the boundary between Westbank and Prehm Ranch. The Road Easement
shown on the plat is not a public road or right-of-way, and has never been used as such
during the 30-year existence of Westbank. However, the developers of Prehm Ranch,
Marlin, Ltd. ("Marlin"), have asserted that the "Road Easement" is a public right-of-way.
To the extent any party may claim an interest in the Road Easement as a public road,
Westbank asks the County to vacate it.
4. Marlin applied to Garfield County in January 2001 for a driveway permit,
seeking to use the subject Road Easement for access to proposed development on Prehm
Ranch. Westbank opposed the application. The Board of County Commissioners
Pctition to Vacate Road Easement
Oak Lane - Westbank Ranch SuMivision
April 19,2001
unanimously denied the application at its meeting on January 15, 2001. Among other
things, the 6ommissioners-noted that in its initial development application, Marlin did
not propose any access through Westbank, and affirmatively stated that the northwest
u"""r, fo prehm Ranch from Lounty Road 163 was adequate to handle the proposed
development. See, Draft Minutes of January 15, 2001 meeting, lines 427-430, Exhibit C
attached.
5. Westbank is informed that Marlin has recently obtained permission from
the County to build a bridge over Four Mile Creek, connecting the northwest end of the
prehm Ranch property to ihe southeast end near Westbank. This enhances access to the
southwest r..iion of Prehm Ranch from County Road 163, and further eliminates any
necessity of access to Prehm Ranch through Westbank.
6. The Westbank Homeowners Association, at its annual meeting on April
16, 2001, by majority vote of the quorum present, approved the filing of a petition to
vacate the subject Road Easement for reasons which include:
a. Neither Westbank nor any other party has no present or future need
for this Road Easement for any purposes.
b. The notation on the Plat of a 60-foot "Road Easement" across Lots
22 and 23 does not create a public easement because a "road easement" is not
among the enumerated items dedicated for public use on the Plat.
c. The developers of Westbank Ranch did not intend to create a
public easement or right oi*ay by the notation. See Aflidavit of John Huebinger,
ir., attached hereto as Exhibit D. Mr. Huebinger states that the "gap" between the
end of Oak Lane and the west boundary of Lots 22 and 23 was intentional, to
avoid any claim of public access, and that he did not intend to create or establish a
public right-of-way by designating a road easement at the Oak Lane.
d. No actual roadway exists on the subject Road Easement.
e. The subject Road Easement has not been used as access to the
Prehm Ranch during the past 30 years. See Exhibit D.
f. The creation of public access through Oak Lane, in conjunction
with the development of Prehm Ranch, would create a continuous roadway from
the area of the Glenwood Springs municipal airport to Westbank along the
southwest bank of the Roaring Fork River. The result would be severe negative
impact on traffic through the Westbank Subdivision.
7. Westbank knows of no planned or potential need for public use of the
Road Easement by Garfield County for any reason including public safety. Adequate
transportation routes exist without access to Prehm Ranch through Westbank.
Page2 of 4
Pctition to Vacatc Road Easetnettt
Oak Lane - Westbank Ranch Suldivision
April 19,2001
g. The public interest will not be disserved by the vacation of the Road
Easement.
g. The Road easement is not within the limits of any city or town.
lO. The Road easement does not constitute the boundary between two
counties, nor the boundary of a city or town.
I l. Vacation of the Road Easement will not leave any land adjoining the
property without an established public road or private access easement connecting said
land with another established public road.
lZ. This Petition is verified by LaIvIar Podbevsek as President of the
Westbank Ranch Ilomeowners Association. See attached Verification'
WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests that the Road Easement described
herein at the west end of Oak Lane in Westbank Ranch Subdivision Filing No. I be
vacated; that the Board of County Commissioners of Garfield County consider the
vacation of said roadway at a public lneeting; that notice be given of a hearing as ntay be
reluired by law; that the Boar-d of County commissioners pass a resolution vacating the
,oud*uy; and that the resolution be recorded in the real property records of Garfield
County.
Respecttully subnritted ,hi, lq'lllday of April,200l'
BEATTIE & CHADWICK
Attorneys for Petitioner Westbank Ranch
Homeowners Association
710 Cooper Avenue, Suite 200
Glenwood Springs, Colorado 81601
Phone: (970) 945-8659
FAX: (970) 945-867t
Steven M. Beattie, #6829
Page 3 of4
Petition to Vacate Road Easement
Oak Lane - Westbank Ranch SuMivision
April 19,20Ol
LIST OF E)GIIBITS
Verification and Attestation of LaMar Podbevsek
Exhibit A: Portion of Westbank Ranch Filing No. I Plat, showing Road Easement
Exhibit B: Portion of Westbank Ranch Filing No. I Plat, showing dedication language
Exhibit C: Portion of draft transcript of Board of County Commissioners meeting on
January 15, 2001 concerning Prehm Ranch application for driveway permit.
Exhibit D: Allidavit of John Huebinger, Jr.
Page 4 of4
VERIFICATION AND ATTESTATION
srATE OF COLORADO )
) ss.
coLrNTY OF GARFIELD )
I, LaMar Podbevsek, state under oath that I am the President of the Westbank
Ranch Homeowners Association, the Petitioner; that I have knowledge of the matters
which are the subject of this Petition for Vacation; that I have read the foregoing Petition
for Vacation; that the Westbank Ranch Homeowners Association has authorized the
filing of the Petition for Vacation by majority vote of a quorum of its members at a duly
called annual meeting; and, that the statements in the Petition are true and correct to the
best of my knowledge, information and belief. I further state that I have full
authorizaiion as a representative of Petitioner to execute this Verification on behalf of
Westbank Ranch Homeowners Association.
Subscribed and sworn to before me this / /4 aay of frp n' 1 .2001 by
LaMar Podbevsek, as President of the Westbank Ranch Homeownerd Association, the
Petitioner.
Witness my hand and official seal.
My commission expires: / - Z 4- ZOo 4 .
LaMar
I
2
3
.l
5
6
7
8
9
l0
ll
l2
ll,tl,l
l5
l6
t1
l8
l9
20
2t
'22
23
2,1
25
26
27
28
J9[.
30
3l
32
33
34
l5
36
37
38
39
40
4l
42
43
44
45
46
47
48
49
50
sl
52
53
54
55
56
57
58
59
60
/z^4Affi+)
["r/-h fp7", fu"r"*)tlb^"*-' 4W''*fig" 0/t?'1a-'^B*
JANUARY 15.2001
pRocEEplNGS OF THE GARFIELD COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS -fr ftt"-e_!,n
GARFIELD COUNTY. COLORADO
'f5e regular meeting of the Board of County Commissioners began at l0:00 A.M. on Motrday,
Jaslary 15, 2001 rvith Clrainuan Johr Martin and Cotulnissioners Walt Stowe and Larry
McCowp present. Also preseltl were County Actnrinistrator I]cl Creen and Clerk & I(ecorder
lvlildred Alsdorf.
LALI- IO ORTJER
Chairn-ran Martin calleo tlle lneetlng to orcler at tU:UU A.M.
BUILDING & PLANNTNG ISSUES: "
PUBLIC MEETINGS:
il. Prehrn Ilanch Drivcrvay Pcrntit
Attorney I{ick Ncilcy rcl;rcsents tlte owner o{'thc I'relrnr l(atrch; Peter Belau is their engineer;
'l'onr Russell, Carflekl County l(oad & llridge; Mark llean, Garficld County l'lanning Dept.
l)cter llelau - thc a;rylicatiort rccluests pernrission and authority li'om the LIOCC to constructa12'
rvirlc clrivcway zrpl)roach otr the right-o['-way of Oak I-ture, arljacent to Applicant's property
locatecl on tlte north side o[road li'onr the Prehm ltanch into the West Bank subdivision for the
purpose of obtainirrg access to property
Tottr Russell - I st, reviewecl application lbr Northem driveway - need better turn around at
entratrce to the rattclt llrollerty - 2ncl, reviewed entrance on Westbank Subdivision Roacl, Oak
Latre - il. appears to meet all of the standarcls at Road & Briclge.
Cottuty Attorrtey Don DeFord - primary legul issue to resolve is access frorn Oak Lane to the
Prehtn property - revierved Subdivision Plat for Iriling No. I of the Westbank Itanch Subclivision
- it inclicatcs a t'oacl eascutcttt lturportcclly declicated to lhc public (that runs l-roln the cul-de-sac to
thc botttttlary ol-the prollcrty):tncl acceptccl by the Conrntissioners - has a lctter ll'onr Mr. Neiley
rvitlr thc Icgirl opitriott [ltitt lrc bclicvcs llrat kr bc atletprltc ptrtrlic ilcccss - t]OCC has lcttcr li'o1t
N4r. Beattic irrclicltirrg that lrc tlocs noL tlrirrk tlrat provitlcs .sullicient lcgal right lirr use try the
a;tplicant - this is issuc to bc rcsolved.
I)ort - tnap o[ Wcsttrank I;ilirtg No. I - would bc valuablc Ibr I]OCC to review docunrent - far
ttpper leli side ol'plat, Oak Way right-ot'-way, sonrcthing called a "road easement" that runs from
that cul-de-sac to Lhe property boundarics - lhere's a conrrnissioner's cerl.ificate signed by the
Chair, Mr. Mattivi, accepting all public dcclications - there is a dedication that grants to the
llublic use of the strcets, avenues, drives, courts, placcs, alleys, roads and lanes as they arc shown
ott tlte plat - Itasn't sectl alty otlter docunrent other thalt this that would grant the applicant to use
that property.
Rick Neiley - tlre plat provicles an express 60' road easeurent extending frorn the encl of Oak Lale
to corttrtrot) prol)crty bottntlary - tltcre is language clcclicating to public use all of the roads sfiotvp
otr (he plat - road easentertt rvas nclt dcvclopecl by thc original developers of thc rauch because
they clidn't ltavc nny use lbr it at the tinrc - there is a gatc and existing road going on to Prelun
Itanclt fi'ortr the ettcl o1'Oak Lane - has not been used nruclt in the 1;ast - there is gated access
tltere ancl we propose to cotrtitrue haviug private gated access prinrarily serving one home - also
ltrovidecl entergerlcy ilccess to tlrc ranch if uccessary - nrinirntrnr County standards state serve no
tnore thaur 20 vehicles perclay - we rvould not everanticipate having that kind of tralfic on this
t'oad extettsion since tltere is ottly oue honre located on 35 acres acljaceut to the Westbank
Srrbdivision - in his researclt lte revicwed titles to (hc two lots (l-ots22 and 23) over wlrich this
easenlent passes and both ol'those lots lrave express rescrvations of title lol easements as
depicted on the plat.
Exhibit C
6l
62 I)trt:lic irlPttt
63
64 Warrel WrigSt, lives at Wcstbank, on Doarclof Dircctors ol IIOA - besicles strong turnout of
65 Westbapk lrorlcgrvners opposecl to propo.sal, reccivecl list oIowners ol22lots who telephoned in
6(r i. otrjcct t6 ;rrgpesal - i lon stnrrrgly ol)l)oscs - unncccssary - ttot bcctt ltecessary for ranch in the
(t1 l)ast: it roaci is ollenecl, opcrls oak Lane to the airPort roarl, this wottld be step one in the process
6ll t.rvnrtls a ssl)er liiglrw,,y il,r.ouglr thcrc - has potential to seriously dalnage Westbank cotunrutlity
(r9 - lristoric ilccess to l)rchnr l(anch lras bccn CI( I l6/163 N (known as Prelrnl Itoad) - if ranch is
7O cliviclecl into 8 prarcels, rvhy shoulcl historic access change? - only one lot rleatr Westbank -
7 | (brought o,.,
",1lr,rg",nent
ol'cut-cle-sac li'onr plat fi'om Filing No. I ) - John Fluebinger (developer
12 of Westbalk) wantecl to lirnit access to Westbank li'om the ranch arca by wrapping Lots 22 and
i!il 23 aroulcl t5e cul-cle-sac - Mr. WLight suggestecl Coturty nray have wauted right-of-way through
74 lots, the Declication Certilicate tloes not aclclress a road easement - it talks about service and
75 urility easelrepts - peoptc who rvalkecl the Colorado Midland Railroad (CMRR) in the 70s ancl
76 ggs cogld barely lvalk through - no one has driven tlrrough in recent tittres - all utilities have
77 rigtrt-of-rvay - in early 1990s optics line put through, clearecl out, translbrnler station, telepltone
7g ltoles, and guiclelines in the right-o[-way - it is not true tlrat tlris area has beeu used as access -
7() otrjects to perrnit lbr clrivcrvay [rccause thcy are asking lbr a 4,000' clriveway cottttecting two
ti0 Coupty ltolds, not a sltort clrivervay cottttectirtg a ltousc or garage to a ptrblic road - tttlclerstood
8l tltat a clrivervay pcrnrit was to allow private property to acccss a public rozrd without interfering
82 rvittr someone else's l)roperty - ttre encl of the cul-de-sao is the encl of thc County l(oad, in order
tl3 to acccss the Prclrnr l{anclr one has to cross private property - that is ltot perrttitted in a driveway
84 pennit - a clriveway is rct;uired to ctrtcr the public roacl at an attglc ol'90" attd no lcss than 60" to
85 tfie centcrline - thc proposed driver,vay is leaving the Courrty ltoaclat maybe 5" or 10" - it doestt't
86 lit the a;tplication - using a clriveway pernrit is not the proper way to try and get access - LIOA is
87 concerned tlrat sirrrple process norv to access 8 gated lots, Westbattk itt the future will ltave zero
88 control over horv those gates are operated - the 8 lots can subdivide later, wlrat is 8 houses now
Si can beconre hunclrecls of houses later, all that trallio will flow tlrrough Westbank - what the
90 County sees rlow as giving access to 8 lots, 5- I 5 ye als fronr now could bccorne a bypass - that's a
9l trertrendous risk to Westbank l-lOA - they believe it is a public safety ancl security issue that no
92 r.uore tralfis goes tlrrough there - I'IOA strongly opposed to proposal - recluests that proposal be
9l dcnied.
94
95 Steve Beattie - resident ol'Westbauk - attorney - here in both capacities - as attorney, point out
96 lcgal aspects oI issuc - according to Wcstbanl< Filirrg No. I Plat, there is private property between
97 llrc borrrrtlury ol'tlrc cul-rlc-sirc tll'Oirl< l.irrrc unrl thc lrorrrrrlary ol' I'relrnr llanch - wlrut docs it
98 nletll rvhere lhcrs's a nol.atiotr ol'roacl cascrnent on that cntl ol'the plat, the developer's
9L) r'epreserltative woukl havc you belicve that this was a tledication to the public and therelore is
100. availablc to this developcr for its privatc purposes, in fact, Ibr the record, precisely what the
l0l developerol'Westbatrk l(anch dedicaLcd back in 1970-1971 as relates to roads was the following,
102 "hereby grant to the County of Garlield for public use the streets shown hereon includirrg
103 avenues, drives, courts, places, alleys, roads, and lancs" - that's what rvas dedicated to the public
104 at that tiure - in lirct, it was ittclusive language becausc tlrere arc only two suclr things shown on
105 here, Westbank Road and Oak Lane - through an cngincer's tlcpiction, the 60' right-of-way ol'
106 Oak Lane rvas in lact showu otr lhere - on the lar leli ol'the plat there is circle at the end - that
107 sanre cleve loper or his al.torney knerv the clil'lbrence between roatls, larnes, and the like, on the one
108 hancl, and easetnettts ort tlre otlrer because latcr in the sanre cledication, it says "the public lands
109 slrorvn hcrcort [br their intlicatecl llublic usc atrtl the utility ancl clrainage easenrents shown hereon
ll0 lbr utility atrd clraittage purposes otrly" so tlrerc werc utility casenrents declicatcd for that purpose
I I I orrly, there were roittls, lanes and streets cledicated, but therc is no reference to road easements
I l2 being dedicatccl - this roatl easetnent was nol dedicated to the public by this dedication language -
I l3 it rvould ltave been easy to put irt "ancl road easenrents" if that was the intent, but tlte developer
l14 chose not to do that - tlre tluestion then bcconres, wlry in the world is it thcrc? - Jolrn Iluebinger
I l5 is still arouncl, hc developecl Westbank Mesa as well as Westbank Subdivision, Mr. Beattie
I l6 believes John rvanted to preserve tlre possibility that L<>ls22 and 23 ntight be sold, but if he and
I l7 Art Srnall decidecl tlrat they woulcl like Lo expand Westbank dorvn there, there was lancl rvhich
I l8 .was etrcuntbercd by a road cascntenl as .shown <ln ar ;llat, lbr lilrther extension - Mr. I]eattie talked
I I 9 rvith John Fluebinger - the road easerner)t, if that's r.vhat it is at all, it is rnerely the reservation of a
120 road easenrent itr Iavor of the developer not a dedication to the public - i['it's not a dedication to
lzl tlrc,utrlic, lvc curr't grant tlris drivcway ilccoss - this is thc ttrost tttttlsurtl driveway any of us has
l2Z "r,", ,"",, - it,s 1 4,(xjg' long tlrivcway tlrat counccts tlrc airPort to Westbank - there are rttles and
l23 r.u.gul1tisls sct lirrtlr irr tlrc applicirtiott, atttl Iltcrc aro ltt lclst Iivc rcsPccts in wlrich this
l24 all];licati.u lbr a clriveway pcrrnit cloes not nreet your own rulcs; /ll apPlicaltt clocstt't represent
125 ail ,artics apd irrtcrc.sts, lrc'rJ have to rcprcscnt Wcstbarrk arrcl the trvo propcrty owtters itt ortler to
lz(t rc;:r.cscrrt ull grar.tics anrl ilrtcrcsts, /12 tlris is not Ibr the lrona ficte pttrpose of access, it rnakes it
127 ezrsier arrcl nrore conrfbrtable fbr this clcvcloper, it woulcl ntake it ruore convetrient for the
l2g clcvcl.,cr to gct in tlrrough the south cncl, it's not in lhc public interest of Westbaltk to do so,
l}g tlrere,s a business p,,r1rur" to nrake the lots nt<lrc salitble altcl have cotrtitltlotls access through
130 t6ere, #3 tle rules-say to conrplote all work within thirty days, this driveway is 4,000'lottg, Mr'
l 3 I Ileatrie rloesn't think they can clo it in thirty days, ll4 it is stated in alrylicalion that driveway
nZ ilccess 5as to be betweep (r0o ancl 90", it's a roaclway in the guise ol'a clriveway easement - Legal
til poi,ts, tlris is not publicly cleclicated riglrt-of-way on here, the driveway access catl't proceed,
Il4 t6ere are strong p',,bli. purpose reasol.ls not [o clo so, there's already access to the Preltnr Ratrch,
I 3 5 it,s a great .o,1..rn at Westbank, Mr. Ileattic is authorized to state on behalf of the developers of
l3(r [(ose Ranch, LB Rose ltanch LLC, that in the short tiurc since they received uotice, they oppose
137 tlris aplllication lbr the sanre rcasol'ls stated in Mr. lleattie's four page letter to the Conrtnissioners
l3g olate Friclay, Ivlr. I-lucbirlgeropposcs thc applicntion as lvell. l'lcase exeroise yourdiscretion
139 wisely, tlon't buy into thc liabilities tlrat this muy crcate - deny the application.
140
l4l Davc Lccty,02l8 Ouk [,anc, last lrousc and the closest otrc [o tlris proposcd subdivision tltat's
142 goilg to join Westtrarrl< I(anch - rctirecl, lived here for lburyears, recetltly bought Lot 20, spent
143 1ll rctircnrcut savirrgs bccausc ol'the scclusion ol'this ltt-lttse, our door is 50'li'onr Oak Larlc - part
I 4 4 p l' t ltc l'e ilsoll tlrcy ruovctl Irerc is tlre scclusiotr autl tlidtr't wattt to worry abottt chilclren and
t.l5 glaptlchildLcn bcing closo to roaclrvay - rcsllcctlirlly requcst you cleny aplllication - uscd to be
146 with the highway clepal'tnrenl - scconclary access, rneans access - tltat's a niistronter itt nry opiuiorl
147 - ollce you grant this drivcrvay, it's wide open all the way to Midland Avenue, Four Mile and the
l.!8 airport.
t4e
I 50 Greg Souder, 16 I Oak Lane, purchasecl houre about 3 years ago - nlost importattt was the privacy
l5l and seclusion ol'a cul-dc-sac - people lvho visit subdivision drive dowtt Oak Larte at s;reeds itr
t52 exccss ol'the speed linrit until they corue to the cul-dc-sac, r'calizc it is not a tltroughlvay, tlten
I 5I tunr aroultcl at high specils and clrive back out - this happens I 0- I 5 tirncs per day - rve higlrly
154 r'espect our privacy - do rtot wallt to see a tltrottghway or a bypass.
155
I 56 Steve Ranclol, past pre.sidcnt ( l9tt3) of'the Westbank I.IOA, presenl nretrtber of tlte I-IOA - lived
l57 ip Wcstbirnk since l9tt0 - witnesscd a problcnr that tlrc Ct"runty has tro cotttrol over the specds
158 tlrlt arc going tlrrctrgh Wcstbauk - it is a racctracl< cvctr totlay - yott'vc opetrcd up attd paved
159 l(oad l0grvhicltisaclircctshotli'onrCarbondale-wenowlravcthcabilityifrveopetrtrpthis
160 roacl to havc scvcn or cight ntile shortcut li'onr Carbonclalc to Surtlight Ski Area - I'tn very nruch
I 6 I opllosecl to it - hope the Conrnrissioners will understand that Wcstbank is strpposed to be a
162 private, cluiet contttrunity - I hope you vote ag,ainst it.
t63
164 Fred Rowtapcl, lives adjacent to Mr. Leety who spoke llreviously, lived there fot 23 years - llever
165 poticed anybocly using Oak Lane as ar) ilccess to Pre hm Ranch property - read a letter to the
166 cditor by the .llprarrou's cxprcssirrg conccnl erbout people driving on I-lighway 82 and passirtg the
167 school bus without stopping when the rcd lights are llashiltg - we have school bttscs in Westbank
l6ti pickipg up chilch'en all thc tinre - askecl Mr'. Stowe, who used to walk Westbank Iload regularly
169 rvitS lris rvil'e, iIhe wasn't sonrctinres aliaid Ibr hinrself because of tlre traffic wlten the golf
170 coLll.se was operating, couring out of the clubhouse - we have scriotls collcerlls abottt excess
17 | tralfic tfiat ntight be created by this - we would appreciate you trot allowing this.
172
173 Dan Gerro, 708 Westbank ltoatl - has two stuall children, ages 4 and 3 - biggest cotlcern with
174 opeping tSis ugr is the lack of shoulder, space that's currently on Westbank l(oad, it's barely wide
175 "n<lug5
lbr trvo cars to go by as it is - aclcl nrore tratllc to tlrat, rvltat does tlrat do for tlrc sal'ety of
17 6 or.rr cSildrep - the current posted speed linrit iu Westtrank is 25 m.1t.h. - as of today we ltave two
177 clead deer lay ipg on the side ol' Westbank Iload - at 25 nrph if you see a deer, you shou ld have
17g plenty of tinre to stop - wlrat happens if clrildren arc riding tlteir bikes atrd there's tltree or lbur
179 tirnes the atnouttt of traffic we have today?
180
Itj I Kcl Kulrvicc, 0352 Wcsttrtnl< I(ontl, livcd thcre closc to 7 ycars - lived with the golf course
Ig2 clutrllruse apd tlrc clrurrk rlrivers - wc havcn't sccn nrtrch itctiort taken by tlre policc or tlte slrerifl's
183 tlcpartnrcnt - wc travc tlrrce chiltlren ol'our own - opctring trp tltc ilcccss wotrld crcate a lravsl
184 route to Clenwootl tlrrouglr Wcstbanl< and would also orcitte tltat sattte access lbr the
I lt5 tlevelopnrcnt of l{osc ltanch - wc'vc got atrotltcr cottple hundrcd ltouses and cotrdotninittrns
186 ilcross the way - on thc plat that there is a road easernent, but that road easetnent calt easily be
lB7 irrterpreted as a road easelltent for Lot 22 Lohave a driveway, not for the property adjacent to it.
188
I g9 .lorly Noel, real estate agent with lleruax, 0985 Llighway I33 - representing both the buyer and
190 scllcr ol'Lot 22, Oak Lane - it is being represented as a single tantily residence at tlte private end
l9l ol'a cul-cle-sac rvith rivcr li'ontagc - Mr. Neiley nrisspokc wltett lte said that in the title
lg2 corluritprent to the buyer and seller that rcpresentations were rttade of the easeluents - l would
lyl ;lrovide inlbrrnation to you but I can't bccause nothing ltas ever beetr recorded on tlte easetneut -
igq NIr. Neiley shoulcl be aware ol'that because he's the attorttey who wrote the offer to purchase for
I 95 l-ynn Cantrell - he's nolv the attorney ol'record for that contract that is set to close at the end of
196 the tttoltth.
t97
198 Milton Cass, 0644 Westbank l(oatl - my great-grandfather canre to Aspctt in early 1880s - l've
199 rvorkecl irr this vallcy lbr thc higlrway dcpartment lbr 30 ycars as a lbretrtalt in charge of
200 nraiutcrrarrce arxl snorv rcnrovrl - bccn rctircd l2 ycars - l dclrt't deny the tlevclollcrs tltcir chauce
201 arrd tlrcir choicc arrtl tlrcir riglrts - but I clo r:cho all tlrc concelns of the people here today about
202 the salety <;f our area plus the laclt ol-crirne rve havc in our little closed area - as a higtrway nran
203 looking at the roacls can utrdcrstand County ltoad people lhinking tlris is a good alternate route -
204 it's tinrc lilr our v:rllcy to rcally livc up to tlre fact tlrat we neccl sonre of these areas that are
205 pristine, no high trallic, a place lbr chilclrcn to play - I hope you will consirler our corlcerns.
206
207 Jolur Flaines, Iivc at tlte con)er ol'[airway Lane and Westbank Itoad - hopes Cornnrissioners will
208 listen to whal Warren Wright ancl Steve Beattie hacl to say - I think you've got a real challenge to
209 cottvittce the public that you'r,e douc the riglrt thing il'you allorv the developcr lo extend this road
Zl0 - attotlter thing is il'the dcvelo;ler bouglrt this property counting on having tlte road go tlrrough,
2l I tlterl.'s ltis probleltt, not ours - with those concerns, I ask you to deny this application.
212
213 'fcrry Drake,0377 Westbarrk Road - we've been in Westbank since 1978 - fclt incredibly
214 notrderful knowirtg that it was probably one ol'the safest lllaces to raise children - people ancl
215 children walk on the road - niy real concenr is salety, as well as neighbolhood charactcr - nry
2l(t ltustrattcl attcl I clitlu't protest Wcstbank lvlcsa becnusc we know that change is necessary and lbr
217 tltc goocl - this is ttot tltaL typc - I truly hopc that you corrsidcr that this is a salety issue and one o['
218 neighborhood character.
219
220 'finr 'fhulsott, 818 Coloraclo Avctrue, Glenwood Springs, attonrcy with Balconrb & Green PC -
221 \ve represettt tlte cleve lo;rer ol'thc l(ose l(anch Devclopnrent - l(B l(ose Ranch LLC - found out
222 about this at 4i30 l;riclay alienroott - I was authorizecl by Bill IIatch, ntallager of Ilose Ranclr
223 developtnetrt, to.ioitt in opposition to this application for the sanle reasons sel forth in Mr.
224 Beattie's correspoll(lettce to you - tltere are very signilicant issues regarding ,,vhat the intent of
225 tlris 2 l' easetuettt rvus - rvltetr we were drawing up the l(ose Ranch application, we lrad several
226 nreetitrgs rvith the ltonreorvtters out at Westbank and one ol'their big collcerns was the traffic
227 goirtg to the goll'cclurse clubhouse - rve agreed to l<lcate the clubhouse on the Itose l(anch
228 property to take the tralllc o[f of Westbank Lane - if you're establishing a thoroughlare tluough a
229 residential neiglrborhoocl, you are changing the neighborhood iu a very substantial rnamrer and
230 that should only be tlone in the nrost serious of situations.
23t
232 Steve Beattie - tttissed two items - # l. Mr. Neiley and Jody Newell, who represents the buyer and
233 seller of Lot 22,hatl dil'l'ering views on what tlrc title cornnritnrent has told people in lhe past -
234 \\,attts to tctttlet' to the Iloard fbr thcir considcratiotr is a copy of tlre title conrnritment fi'onr Jolur
235 I-luebitrger's salc of [-ot 23, it's ottc ol'thc two lots rvrapped around the cul-de-sac - the title
236 cottrtnitttrcttt is circtrlar - itt l tctrr /1 1 8, " Easemcr.rt.s, rcstrictions and riglrts ol' rvays as showlt orr
237 the Plat of Westbartk l)lanncd Devclopnrent Subclivision, l;iling No. l " - neither does it expressly
238 tcll the owners ol'tltcsc lols your;rro1;crty is ir:rllrcssctl witlr a roadrvay caserneut nor does it uot
239 say tltat, it just says all llte easemenl.s shown on the lllat - it doesn't give explicit notice that tfiere
240 is any roadway easellrent out tltere - #2. Asked to be sure tlrat BOCC had rcceived his letter of
2,ll
2,12
243
244
245
246
2.17
248
249
250
251
252
253
254
255
256
257
258
259
260
261
262
263
26,1
265
266
267
268
?6?
270
)tt
272
273
274
275
276
277
278
27t)
280
281
282
283
284
285
286
287
288
289
290
291
292
293
294
295
296
297
298
299
300
llst l?r'itlay, nntl tlocs BOCC t'ccorul include thc subdivision plat of Wcstbank Filing No. I ? And
SSccts I altl 7R fi'onr llrrartcch? And includcs the lbtrr pagc application for a driveway permit?
Chairrnan Martitr - yes.
Ir4r. Neiley - Prehnt Ranch has no intentiort of creating an extension of Midland Avenue, or any
rgacl tftat rvoulcl be avnilablc for public traffjc - do trot plan to pave or extend road - only primary
lcce.ss to opc lr6usc on thirty-live acrcs - all of thc roacls within Westbank Subdivision are public
roirtts - rvc [avc thc right to usc a ltutrlic road - wc eu'e syrnpathctic to the collcerlls abotrt thc
aptogut of traffic on that road - we're synrllathctic to the cotlcerlls about the speed - tltere are
rleclrapisprs wlrich can be inrplenrentecl to control tlrose thirtgs - people will want to get to tlris
epd of tfte ranch to lish, to hike and to do o(her things on tltat roadway - we believe when this
strbclivision was platted in l 97l , itt't irrtcntion existecl to allow flccess to tlte l'rehnr l(anclt artd that
is tlre specific l'easoll and the only reason that the road easetnent is described on the plat and that
the road extension of Oak Lane is tlepictccl on the plat - I dott't know that John lluebinger
opposes this - I see no letter fronr hinr - rvhen I spoke to hirn he didn't inclicate an oppositioll - we
think our inrpacts rvill be nrininral - rve would participate with Westbanl< l-lOA in ptrrsuing with
Carlleld County rnechanisnrs to reduce and control the speed of the public roads tltrough the
subdivision - we clo reclucst that the County approve our rcqucst for a drivewfly access.
Conrrnissioner lvloCown - asl<ed Mr. Neiley if all of the lots arre shown currently uncler single
orvncrship? - ),"t - askerl Mr. Noiley whcn he was here a rnonth ago asking to create this
tlcvclopnrcnt i['thcy askccl at thitt;loint lbraccess tlrrouglr tlrc south cntl'/
Ne iley - no - wltctt we wsrc seeking subdivision excnrption approval, wc were talking about thc
tlrree lots clepictccl ort tlte upperctrd ol'that lllat - thc llrirnary ilccess as wc stated is fi'onr 163
l{oad and we've agreed with Garlield County to iucorporate sonre signilicant improvernents to
that roacl, turttouts, guardrail, etc., to nrake that the prinrary ancl nrost irnproved access to the
ranch.
McCown - wasn't that the only access mentioned a month ago?
l)eter Bctau - ettgineer with l]rrartech Engineering - clicl the design work on that application and
rvas uot aware that there was a road easement available h'onr Oak Lane at that tinrc - I rvas told
atrd rvas uncler tlte uttderstanding that the two lots on the entl of Wcstbank wrappcd around that
cul-cle-slc itncl thcrc was no acccss available - I clcsignerl lhc acccss lor this develogrment - alter
tlrc lirct, lrascd on sonlc t'cscurclr tlral. Mr. Ncilcy clid, rvc lourrtl that thcrc is inclecd a road
casclnerrt, so I Iclt tlrat it is ir good tlesign to llrovidc scconclaly:lccess to this propcrty for bot"h
safety autl thc convctrience lor tlrc pcople who live hcre - tlrat sanrc good dcsign is 1:robably what
happened historically, l'm only s;rcculating - the County typically rvill require a road easement to
provide future acccss to thc acliaccnt prollerty - that's bccause it's good design and it's good
plauning.
McCown - Mr. Neiley says all of these lots are currently under single ownership, even if you're
proposing to build a l2' uninrproved road driveway, is there anything to prohibit the owtrer fi'orn
conlrritting a 60' wide easernent across that particular property sincc it's all singly owned now?
Mr. Neiley - there's nothing that wouklpreclude that - it'it's a couclition of issuance of the
driveway llcrmit that that not be a pernrissible use lbr the clriveway permit, rve would have no
objection to that - that's trot our itttetttion at all.
Walt Stowe - asked Mark Bean, if they do not have this continuous access through here, thert we
have a problenr rvith a length ol a cul-de-sac being in excess of tlre 600'wlten rve start reaching
those I'inal lots, is that Itot correct?
Mark Bean - 35 trcre splits are not subject to any kind of subdivision statrdards - iI it were subject
to any ltrrther review or subclivisiou action it rvoulcl bc sub.iect to that.
Walt - I guess we are not ettcunrbcring you i[we don't allow tlrat? Because you can still builcl
your road with a cul-de-sac sitrce you clon't have to lbllow our County stanclards. I just
l0l ,rc,tionc(l tlrut rvc rvuulcln't bc cncunrbcling his riglrt to tlcvclop that if we dcnied the driveway
:102 ilcccss bcclusc hc's rrr-rt sub.icct to thc Coruriy stauclarrls that would apllly to ltornral I)UD
301 rcgulatiorrs. IIyou lurvc a iontl tlrat is ovcr 600'loug, you havc to lrave an alterltative accsss [t
304 tlre end for lire control, or solnctltirrg to (hat e{lect.
305
306 Chair,ra' Ivtartin - because of the 35 acre seuate bill rules and regulations which do not ltave
307 rcview upclcr subclivision reguliltions of Carfield Cotrnty attcl statewide rule.
108
30g llob o,Dounell, live at 00g9 Wcstbank ltoad, foflilerly a nrenrber of tlte board - cluestion for Mr'
3 I0 Neiley, you nrentioned that the driveway will be used as access for fishentten, wltich people did
3l I yott ltave in mind'/
3t2
313 Mr. Neiley - one of t5e purposes we see tbr the roacl tlrat curently rutts through the ranch on the
1l; otaruit beclistoallowtheorvnersol'lotsonthenorthpartol'thepropertytobeabletogetdowtr
3 I 5 to tle south part of the property to access the river, not lbr the gerteral public however'
316
317 Bob O'Dorlnell - so tltat's not a ptrblic access then?
3r8
I l9 N,lr. Neiley - rve clon't intencl in any wily to create a public access along eitlrer our entrance roads
320 or any oI the roatl tllrottgh tltc ratrch.
321
322 Llob O'Donncll - cloestr'l ltave a clear pictttre ol'ltow tlrat works.
323
JZ,I Clririrruun lvlar.tin - tlrc largc lot will bc privately orvncrl aud tltcrc's tto ttccd to ltavc public itccess
325 rlorvl tlrrougl tlre ir subdivision at tlris tirtre - they have not proposcd it arld tltere's tlot a
326 rerluirelrcpt to gct to public ilccess lor ttrc l)shernran, unlcss they allow it, it's up ttl tltcnt'
327
328 Bob O'Dorurell - I see all the lots along the river, they're privately owtted, but I don't get the
329 cottrtuent abotrt Iisltertnetr.
330
331 Mr. Neiley - his point lvas ouly that these lots could use this l'oad to access the riverside and
332 llutting conservation easeurents and rights of access along the river attd att owller of a lot oll the
331 gpper epd of t5e ranch sould clrive clown the old Midlarrd riglrt of way to fish on any part of the
334 ratrclt proPertY.
33s
336 IJob O,l)olltcll - duripg soustructiorr, would this so-called clriveway be used by constructiou
337 r,chiclcs?
338
J19 N4r. Neiley - yes - you can see where there's a house rlcpictcd ou the 35 acre parcel adjacent to
340 tlre Westbapk Subclivision - certainly wc woulcl lrave to travc access for cottstrttctiolr vehicles in
l4l orclcr to build a ltottse there.
342
343 Bob O,Dortnell - I think that woulcl be a real problenr - vehicles coming t}onr the gravel pit up
344 109 Roacl, copcrete tnrcks, earth nroving equiptnetrt, would be corlting down Westbank Road
345 throug5 your clriveway and returning durirrg the construotiou process - I think that would have a
346 very ttact inrpact on rhe Wcstbank resiilents - I woulcl like to add Irly contntents that the Board
347 cloes not approve this drivcway.
348
349 Dave Leety, 02lg Oak Lane, Lot 20 - Coloraclo Senate Bill 35, I believe, states that anything 35
350 acres apcl greater ceur be re-subdiviclecl. Is that correct? - yes - so why thert couldn't'these people
351 w6o buy these l'ive 35 acre lots re-subdivide those aud in essence, double, triple, quadruple.
352
353 Chainnan Martin - I believe that is a possibility'
354
355 Dave Leety - jtrst like tfue so callecl seconclary r<lad is a possibility - it cotlnects to everything else
356 on tSe portS apcl wcst sicle of this property - (br everybody that's here rigltt ttow Serlate Bill 35
357 states t5at apy o{' tlrese peol;le wlrn buy thcse 3 5 acrc parcels catt cttt tltose up into trtore lots and
358 hcre we go - it's wide ollerl to tnore than just 8 single residettces.
359
360
361
362
363
364
365
366
367
368
369
370
371
372
373
374
375
376
377
378
379
380
381
382
383
384
385
386
387
388
389
390
39t
392
393
394
395
396
397
398
399
400
401
402
403
404
405
406
407
408
409
410
4ll
412
413
414
415
4t6
417
418
4t9
420
Ken Kuhviec, 0352 Westbank Roacl - the lot at the far south end of the Prehm property that
slrrws u 5o,sc bci,g dcsigletl, lras it bccn subrnittctl for approval, or is that just a fictitious
tlrivcway put i. t5eie to sSow tSat tSey treed access to that spot?
C[airnratt Martin - doesn't believe any building pcimit has been requested'
Mr. Neiley - we haven't submitted a building pennit application yet'
Chairnratr Martin - it's an iclentified builcling lot'
Mr. Kulwiec - yourre putting a driveway to a non-existing house'
Mr. Neiley - we need a driveway before we can locate tlte house, sure' We need to know what
our acc'ess it.
Mr. Kulwiec - who owns that property?
Mr. Neiley - said lot is owned by the entity that owns the entire Prehm Ranch.
Mr. Kulwiec - t5ey owl the entire Prelun Ranch? Are you tlte representative for the entire
prehrn Italch? - yes - saying you want access both sicles, you wallt two driveways to your lot'
Mr. Neiley - this application is for access from the south only.
Mr. Kulwiec - it's access frotn the south only.
Mr. Martil - t5ey do Save legal uccess from County Road 163 ott tlte north to their present lots
that they've identified.
Mr. Neiley - in response to the concern about further subdivision or further subdivision, we are
curre.tly hnalizing our covenants lbr the ranch as a whole which will prohibit future subdivision
of a.y of t5e parcels within Prelun Ranch - our intention is to create only 8 building sites and to
pr"r"rr" t1e maxirnum arnount of this ranch in its present condition as is possible - we have no
problern accepting a condition of the issuance of this permit that would not allow it to be used for
any aclditionul ,l.u.loprnent on this ranch other than what we ale representing here today - I think
we Save beel consistent in our representations to this comrnission with respect to what our
intentions for this rauch are when we processecl our subdivisiort exemption application I believe
we told you the sarne tSing - the intention is to linrit clevelopment on this property to maintain the
natural colditiol of the ranch to the greatest extent possible and to make the development carry
r5e value of the propeily, but also protect itself in terms of the desirability of the ranch for
owners uow antl ilrto the fluturc - that is a stipulation that we can certainly accept in coturection
with the issuauce of a driveway pennit.
Velma Rowland, 0150 Oak Lane, lived there for 23 years - the application is signed by A. A.
Lawson - who is he?
Mr. Neiley - Mr. Lawson is the principal of the entity we created to buy this ranch which is
Marlin Colorado Ltd. - he has an interest in the project - as in most development situations,'we
prefer to use a lirnitecl liability cornpany for purposes of the development - [ represent Marlin
Colorado atrd also Mr. Lawson personally.
Chairman Martip - we have an applicatiou in front of us that has been reviewed by staff,, we've
had public oomurent as well as colnlnent fronr the applicant, any discussion or do we have a
nrotiott?
Walt Stowe rnotioned to deny rhe clriveway application; Larry McCown seconded; grounds on
denial?
Mr. Stowe - it would definitely open up the lrossibility of that becoming a thoroughfare which
would inrpar. t lhe Westbanll llubdivision itt ir tretnendous way - the fact that Rose Ranch
12l
422
423
424
425
426
427
4?8
429
430
431
432
433
434
435
436
437
438
439
4
44
Developrnent had moved the clubhouse out of there is going to make that a rnuch safer
ir,:iglrborhootl - I tlrirk we rrre u{)n'rpounding the problem if we open it up to potential future
tral'(ic, no nlalt,,' .rlrlt v call it it's still going to be a bypass, and I personally would use that
tususltorlcut,,r .:clf iil, .lcdtogstuptoSunlight-l'nrnotsosurcalotolotlrcrpeople
woultlrr't think tlrc saurc w.ry.
Larry McCown - agrees with Wi,ir s rcasoning and would likc to ernphasize that upon the initial
anplicatiort the appf icant felt that the access as presented to us was adequate - we as a Board felt
. :,.tt it was an adequal.e access to the allowcd dcvekrpment of these 8 lots - I still stand on my
rnitial decision that the access olf of County Itoacl 163 is aclequate to hanclle this developrnent.
Clrairnran Martin - the issue of private property lwnership arouud thcr cul-de-sac has not been
!irlly satisfied lo nty point of view - I believe llrurr: nrust be an agreernent in place or a wriltcn
agreettrettt that allows orossing ol'that privati: l)ropsrty f<-rr that purpose - I also believe that it
does change tlre neighborltood drastically - I do believe that we are still allowing access off of
Courtty ltoad I63 and not denying access to the lower 35 acre krt - llte motion is to deny for the
findings; all those in favor; carried.
b. Consider an Amendmeltt to the Dnvid Sontng SI]-35 Approval Done in Resolution
No.79-l6l
Aplllicant: Leolrnnl L:rlrsburgh
is LaCroix from Garfreld & Ilecht representing Mr.Lansburgh; Leonard
44).
443
444
445
446
447
448
449
450
451
452
453
454
455
4s6
457
458
459
460
46t
462
463
464
465
466
467
468
469
4't,l
47t
472
473
474
475
476
477
478
479
4S0
,4t31
Crt'l
Curt
I Sprirrgs Road, Carbondale, CO; Mark Befln, Garfield County Planni partment; and
Attorney Don Del;ord were present.
Don rev the noticing requiremcnts with Mr. LaCroix and determi these to be adequate
to proceed.to nreet the Sulation. Don advisctl the Comrnissioners they wcre
Mark Bean - this'a little unusual - it's an amendment to an tion from the definition of
subdivision that w approved originally by Resolution No.:16l - quick history; prior to 1984,
Garliel t County did require a plat for any kind of a su vision excrnption, they were
approved by resolution nly - Resolution 79-l6l lvas ar ed then again in 1980 to corect the
scrivener's error in the o inal - approval was changed forrr lots of 4,4 l2 and apploxirrrately
l4 acres - they .rrc listecl in staff report - the appli nt has chosen and is requesting an
atnendnreut to change lhe uration of those lo to be 7.9,7.96,8.31 and 9.938 acres each -
of lots - subsequent to that originalthat approval cloes not change i of the r
rrlrlrroval in 1979 - therc are a cor
thcy are over 4 acres in size would t
of tlr ir igs,tlr;rt conre into play here, all of these lots since
be eligible for an accessory dwelling unit bynioal
s;lccial use slroulcl tlrey be requcsted -ly tlre water rights that are associated with any of
these lots clo tlot appeflr to nllow that toAtrr - I also notecl in rny staff report that one of the lots
tlrat was lreing creatcd which wasLot/, sh\s a snrall leg showing a small fiouse corning out of
tltat - that's a prescrr, uccessot'y or gy'st dwel\g that was built by the original property owler
tltat's ttow going t' r,c tlte principg/,dwelling on\irrgle lot - the reasol I uste this is so you're
aware tltat down the road, slrou[.sornebody \i..r,t \builcl anothcr structure on tlat, they,re going
to ltave to go through a speciaJ,/usc pennit process o\"y coulcl arguably expand t5e existing
house if they cltoose to attd t'ok" it a little bit largcr - i\enns of the legal access they have
provided, or are prol,,.rsingfwo separate 40' witle accessprovloeo, or are prol''rlsltlf,rAwo separate 40'wide access e\ements along the conrmop lines
between Lots 3 anti 4 anj/l and 2 - tlrcy will need to acquir\ driveway aicess permit from Road
ct I3ridge between I otsf att,t2 - there's an existirrg well on L\ that will be sliared by Lots 3
artd 4 with a well ., ,ry'rgagteement to define the use of the wetN.1.,., / lra.s rn existing well that
ttreets its needs ' tlrcy'tew well pernrit would be needecl for Lot I - i'. i ,.rke to , rr . LaCroix last
week, he indi rat they are in the process of tlying to acquire thelprrnit for Lot I - [r-om
stitifs point of Y.ilfo,dott'l see n rxrrticular protrlcm with the opprorol\ttr. amendetl ,lat,sub.iect to, aud I,}{n suggesting a ]r, ,uoi l,ure, at least the one note that lly suggest, is
tlte cotttrol ot'y'oxiotls tvcedr; is the reslr,nsibil rl, of the property owller - tho\ther i
ul'the subdivi:;ion actiou, l'rrt not sure we c,ui l,nposc trrosr: sipce we are ar
that #5 be prit,r to approvi I of arry 1 lrrt llrirt ;r \r,utl pcunit for l-ot I be acquired.
sonrething -
,
GLENIVOOO. SPRIiH'
ffBTlrEATlOa{ oF DEDICATIO{ AiO OlYltlERtlP
Know oll mrn by lfce€ trrsrlts ltnt WESTBANK
RAt.lCl-J Nfr. I [Tp b.tiro dr owrr h hrr ilrrrCr oRAl.lCll t{r. I LTD b.lrp dcoryrr krfur rkny'r d
oll llnl rDolollllnl mol pnply dfftb.d a^l116:
;nrl of, toEt 1.r.1t qd I hr Scti<n 2. Tqf,rrGItrrs €f) \{cl c'f tlxr 6th Frr*rrlml }lltrldk
SI.JRVEYOR S CENTIFICATE
l, Gorge W Nelson, do l-creW ctrhfy lhot lonr o
rygistsrBd lord Sulgu lber6.d irter tte hrtof tn
Stute d CokxuS, thot this pbt is o true. arrrt ordgglliete lot of ilre WE5-TBANK RAMiI t,!,Al!NED
Df.VELCIrMtrNT g/BDVlSlOtl os lord ort, rtoltd,dsJtcoted crd Su,t/n hcoon. ttul- urh rlhf'r*os moaefiom on mrlob srrlrq/ of ootd poperly b5r me orrCwloer my rrpervtslcn od arrtrdty strovra ihr locolrcnord dimenrions of 1lu lcts, eos<tionls orxl slreelscrfsoU oul.tltusih oc itrs oorno ore._gloked u1r,r ttigru_nd
go,emirg ltn rutdtvrticn of lord. ---
. . ln- witneor H,t)firsc,f I lu,e oel rny lund oft, rcdtt\a 2/ &yorlfu-lz_A.D. g*.
thcrr N}'M'W ,5.49ft:1t^torr S6aIO,W TS.mn:therE N20'O?'W toO.Oo fii,ErEG N6t'l8'14,y, ZIl.6l tt:t rc llQ:f?lr2frl 5,@.lE ft.ttle r Nlt'zt,W llO.OO?t.;1trrcc SB,6'o5,W t9o.mft;'fhsEa Nzo'5I'E. tOO.oO ft,;lhgrr N6Bf 2'I'W I:lo.OO ft;rhrrco NU'4}E Zr@ ft;lhrrr NI6'y2'4S,lt, ZDlfi fli'ltrno 663'oe'52'W tE9.S7 fii1tHE6 97I'D'W il2 7D ft;lttru NO{'51'E ll?S,ll pi:llrero gSO'rZ'E tW.Zt fijltErE $72'15'!O'E lg,l.62 fl,1therEo SO9'OO'W Z26,OOft.'ith€rEo SC,rr'5I,W 82.@ft: '
{r'rTr SO?'OO'E T9OO fl.;ltlrrrco 555'YYU 99.OO fi.';lf)s 3I5'r4'E Z\F.N ft.illlern NB6'5O'E afl.N ft'i1l)or,EQ NAZ.y.E ,,z/to.d)?t:
tlrcr-ca SzO'tJ, 4c.E ts9.OO fi ;'llrrr'r l'fi9'24'20'E 2tO @il ;llnro Nol'10'48'W 2tjt.lb f I't]f** N7t'15'E 2n.@ ft.;ttn* N4l'oo'E 5r2.i4 ft.';
Jhorra 6(&'@E 435.@ ft,i'lhorce S2o'Oo'E Zto.m fti{t)€r@ S@IfO.W :paAOft.:therra S4B'16'29'W 2it1n'ii'.lrsEE SEo'5o'W 2\O.ZO fi.;''therEo SG9'24'Z}'W tgo.m fr-.'therq NqO.Irs,AO.W T,OOo?t:.rr,e@ s@.u,zcw 2g.c-t fi:'ft'€rn S2oT5,4o.E' 266.@ ii.iltrorre S66.og'4s,W 96s-t ?t: '-ft€rra |Ot 2j'.yl.W t@.3cift.tttura p?!:o6'E ?fi.@ii;'trErE6 967.o6.E tSooc ft'frfio pdrf ofbrs'mho cd crtrlnkp .**;;d,#J or hs;Fr ry frua p,u*r tu .,t-O.rJj "jlia,ru.atir Er. rrb krr <ru Hqrcr'oi]&r-rli,Hl *r,ffi#"rlnffiffigr,,
flq:,! f;e:ffi 31,'# ff ,1 E'.1? m:LP., ll :S,ld';il".sffi :Y"ffi ;L*i3,f ffi1;mffi
ffi'-ro'#ittffiW#*..#.gl* i*:,,5trriffi a; na a..,,i,t
EIYIIII,|IED llttJlln tV of[L,p,tg,,AIt, nto ,
O$,E8: WESIDAMI( BArcU No.l,LT[
0f, \{cl c*'tll(i 6th Fn*rclgnl }i.fldtrn.q-d
t' torr ?.0. 15. l,l. ll.21.orrd2C kr $:thn t
Itrnc ll, \Tdl o+ ll|(i ldlll Pnr{lFEl }v1lfldEln.(fxtgnrl o( tott ?.0. 15. l,l. lt 21,orrd2C kr $:thn D!.
myT, o, hrprrot6d, ceraut'
lirrrnstip C sarlh, Ifqp 69 116.1'of th 6ltr fttrrtyul . o
lr't .tdbn, qd drcrtbrd oo lUbr,rr:
-oto @rrt w,tuu_t rtr.l{,i (Lt11iof,I.,,.i,.,
S.clton ?, T?3. RO9W of ilr 6ttr rU. b.rENUj',45't5'ti Z.Xtc.t1 91 .
rlurcr 527'f,w Z'la5s st:terrcr 561'CE'4TF 5l.lI ftttlrc-rcr shn'(rl'?9'Yl 4O)bLCt'i,lEnc. N79.n'W 492.sid. ft;
Tq,vrdrb 76<rrlt\
I$"1;u$;
;H",ffffi,g1* Qst'ntv 'r Gornerd ffcnirs
A.D te;11.. ituJle'v d-kt=>!i'--,afu-lOlcirrmri
PLANNING COfrlMtsStON CERflFTCATE
ccrrjTy cq,ffi l!tc.{.rt'! ctrtIlttcAIE
^-L*.,ryt
o1pro,tl W lie fr:ld-of CcrrnrB+brnr c(
ff ["E*.{Yi,ffi,x"ffi *#2**-.ay t21v. _Ll tlltry ]ylln 1tE clgk anj Reorjcr cf,Gorf relj qf,.rrty ord fir cdr6,lf,rE6 b 1fl€ oxrr,t1no putrk ddkollm, rtpurr-furo.r,: <rilrt-tj !,'ilJr rerc,.Lcrnry g.rJ tL cdrri$lf,rEa b 1ru or.rty cflrp puDlk ddkollr,, rtrcnryrJrroon: li:L,ct b{ln,ti1lr'cl b1h6
RA]mL.u! opporct in ru rrry atertcr*e;,?r"U
$,ftty .1' t^, rumrp or orrrl nrl r"ry c,f j rnp oro rno nli qrirrrdrirnEel, or turcmcnly_ dedtaoted -to -ttE Ft lE .hndr. rhe.etr or o6rcmenly
qxcpt 01 rp6(rfbily ogrerd r" ry iri E*J;i:T.Lygfl-oF lgtqq lrEr ,ord oqaowl rrnil rhm#fltrllH*-Hq-f, =*:rqryflHfr?{f,ffi,Y"ftHrm#:Fpp,g*_Etfl_'rEjl'u,r h# -;;f"bd
b ttro rtirfo6l'on cf, ru -pod-"f6lil;tr.r.
nher my
LEFII( A}O
fbnd ond Atbrt:ffi
RECOfiDER,I CEflT]NCTTE
. Thr ptrl_ror ffLd tr rccord h lho OlTrr of ttrryk ord Aodc ol . orCnt- - J{ --,-t on1 h du! rmrtied tn ga<-_-_'R+r":-
lr'/, ,1
Colo.Geg. 1.5, -ItC6
/.4'
nnl d fho CmU of 6,o{toU,
Srmu rrca.mnoo )cqrtIry cretiqF,ELpiIrtn orgdrq Oriloiim
Cbk ord nsntl*
Exhibir B
AI?FIDAVIT OF JOIIN HUEBINGER, JR.
WESTI]ANI( RANCII PLANNED DBVELOPMENT SUBDIVISION
John Huebinger, Jr., being lirst duly sworn, states as follows:
l. I have becn a resident of the Roaring Fork Valley continuously since
t964.
Z. In tlre early 1970's I was directly and persottally involved in the
developrnerrt of Westbank I{arrch Planrted Developtnent Subdivision ("Westbank").
Ot6er persons who were clirectly and persortally involved included Arthur Srnall and my
wil'e, Dolores J. Huebinger.
3. When Westbank was originally subdivided and platted, the owner of the
property was Westbank Rarrch No. l, Ltd., a Coloraclo linrited partnership ("Westbank
ifa,rch No. l"). Tlre general nrarragirrg partner of Westbank Ranclr No. I was Westbank
Developrnent Co., Incorporated ("WDC"). I was a parttlet'in Westbank Ranch No. I and
a sSareholder of WDC. Westbank l(anclt No. I has sirtce been dissolved and is lto longer
in existence.
4. Ttre first filing for Westbank was Filing No. 1. The plat for Filing No. I
was recorcled irr Garfield County ort Jatruary 20,1971 as l(eception No. 248729 (the
"Filing No. I Plat").
5. Orr the Filing No. I Plat, Westbank llartch No. I dedicated for public use
"tlre strcets showrr lrereorr," as well as public latrds arrd utility and drainage easentents.
T6e only streets shown on the Filirrg No. I Plat were Westbatrk Road and Oak Lane'
G. Oak Lane is tlre rnost westerly road withilt Westbank. Oak Lane dead
ends i1 a cul-de-sac near, but not on, tlte westerly boundary of Westbank. The dedicated
courrty road right-of-way for Oak Larre stops short, and east, of the propertybordering
Westbank on the west, wlticlt is colnntonly known as Prehln Ranch.
7. The "gap" which was created between the westerly boundary of the Oak
Lane cul-de-sac and the easterly boundary of Prehrn Ranch was intentional. Westbank
Ranch No. I did not walrt the current or future owners of Prehnr Ranch, or attyone else,
claillilg that a public riglrt-olway had been created all the way to the boundary of
Westbank property. Westbank Ranch No. I wanted to prevent claims that Oak Lane and
t6e otlrer sireets in Westbank could be used as public access to or tltrough the Prehrn
Rarrch or otller points rvest attd rrol'th o[Westbaltk.
8. Prehrrr Raltch is not adjacent to the dedicated Oak Lane riglrt-of-way.
g. lt was not lt'ly irrtetrt or the intent of Westbank Ranch No. I to create or
establish a public right-of-way frorn tlre westerly bourrdary of Oak Lane to the Prehm
Ranch property.
Exhibit D
10. Oak Lanelras not been used as access to the Prehm Ranch from the
begirurirrg oF lny iltvolvetttei. witlr Westbank to the present time.
THE STATEMENI'S ABOVE ARE TRUE AND CORRECT TO THE BEST OF
MY KNOWLEDGE, IINFOI{MATION AND BELIEF.
STATE OF COLORAD
COUNTY OF GARFIE]-]
)
) SS.
)
Subscribecl arrd.sworn to before nre ttris 184Au, of lfla-'1,2001, by John
Huebinger, Jr.
Witness nry hand artd official
Huebinger, Jr.