My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2017-10-05_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (47)
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2017049
>
2017-10-05_PERMIT FILE - M2017049 (47)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2021 5:26:19 AM
Creation date
10/16/2017 2:50:55 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2017049
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
10/5/2017
Doc Name Note
Volumes I through IV, Part 7 of 10
Doc Name
Application
From
Transit Mix Concrete Co.
To
DRMS
Permit Index Doc Type
Application Materials
Email Name
AME
WHE
Media Type
D
Archive
No
Tags
DRMS Re-OCR
Description:
Signifies Re-OCR Process Performed
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
190
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
impediment to the right of Transit Mix to enter the Hitch Rack Ranch and conduct mining operations. <br /> In fact, the road easement is not the dominant over the mineral interests of Transit Mix. Second, the <br /> prior analysis failed to account for how the accommodation doctrine functions in Colorado. Under <br /> Gerrity, the various real property interests have a legal duty to accommodate the use by each of <br /> them of their real property interests. Thus, the road easement holders cannot bar the development <br /> of minerals in the vicinity of the road easement. Their rights are limited to precluding unreasonable <br /> interference with the enjoyment of their easement rights of ingress and egress in the pursuit of <br /> mineral development. <br /> (c) Any incidental effects on the use of Little Turkey Creek Road are expressly <br /> allowed by the terms and conditions of the road easement. <br /> (i) Little Turkey Creek Road Easement. <br /> While the analysis set forth above demonstrates that the existence of the Little Turkey Creek Road <br /> easement is not an impediment to the legal right of Transit Mix to enter the Hitch Rack Ranch <br /> property and conduct mining operations, there remains a potential point of confusion. In the prior <br /> permitting process, the easement holders overstated the nature of their rights under the road <br /> easement. Because this issue may arise in the context of road closures for blasting, we wish to <br /> address this remaining matter. <br /> As a general rule, "a servitude should be interpreted to give effect to the intention of the parties <br /> ascertained from the language used in the instrument, or the circumstances surrounding creation of <br /> the servitude, and to carry out the purpose for which it was created."23 Unless the instrument <br /> creating the servitude limits the rights of the servient estate to make use of its estate, then the <br /> servient estate may be used in any manner that does not unreasonably interfere with the enjoyment <br /> of the easement.24 <br /> The easement for the Little Turkey Creek Road was not created by a granting instrument, but rather <br /> by a court decree.25 The State of Colorado was not a party to the action giving rise to the decree, <br /> and thus its reserved mineral interests and its surface access rights under the Marsh Patent are <br /> senior to and wholly unaffected by this decree and the Little Turkey Creek Road easement. <br /> Moreover, even if the easement were applicable to the State of Colorado, which it is not, in this <br /> instance, the court order creating the easement clearly recognizes the rights of the surface owner to <br /> use its estate, and in no manner limits the rights of mineral owners to exercise their right to use the <br /> surface for mineral development. The decree states that Little Turkey Creek Road is a private road <br /> appurtenant to certain real property for the purpose of ingress and egress from those tracts.28 The <br /> owner of the surface estate has the right to erect gates and cattle guards on the road.27 The <br /> surfaced owner also has the right to erect a sign indicating that the road is a private road, and <br /> improper use of the road is a trespass.28 <br /> 23 Restatement(3d)of Property(Servitudes) §4.1 (2000); accord Lazy Dog, 965 P.2d at 1237 <br /> citing Restatement(3d) of Property(Servitudes) §4.1. (cmt. c)). <br /> 4 Lazy Dog, 965 P.2d at 1237-38; Restatement§4.9. <br /> 25 See Decree, Mid-Colorado Investment Company v. Hutchison, et al., El Paso County District <br /> Court, Civ. No. 54701 (June 11, 1968) (the"Decree"). <br /> 26 Decree, ¶ 1. <br /> 27 Decree, ¶4. <br /> 29 Decree,¶5. <br /> 7 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.