Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br />' Boulder County Land Use Department <br />March 23, 1992 <br />Page 2 <br />' Fraser was encouraged by Charles Steen, Sr. and his son, Mark <br />' Steen, to contribute financial support largely directed toward con- <br />struction and equipment of what was to become known as Gold Hill <br />Mill (Mill). <br />As the unanticipated magnitude of Fraser financial commitment <br />grew beyond the relatively modest beginning, Fraser came to realize <br />' the existent informal arrangement was insufficient to secure what was <br />then this substantial and mounting Fraser investment. <br /> Steens proposed formation of a Colorado limited partnership to <br />' be titled Gold Hill Ventures Limited Partnership. Mi Vida (yet to be <br /> fully formed as a corporation) was to be designated general partner <br /> with Cosmos and Fraser, the limited partners. <br />' <br /> Cosmos interest apparently was to be defined as the financial <br /> contribution theretofore contributed to the Mi Vida/Cosmos <br />' association, Gold Hill Ventures; the Fraser interest, as that aggregated <br /> financial support contributed to construction and equipment of the <br /> Mill; and Mi Vida was to contribute certain patented and unpatented <br />' claims surrounding the Cash Mine and the Mill. The Mill was then to <br /> become an asset of the limited partnership. <br /> This limited partnership remained unformed, largely because <br /> the general partner (Mi Vida) incorporation remained incomplete <br /> accompanied by the inability of the proposed general partner to <br /> reassure Fraser. There was a claim by Mi Vida (Mark Steen) that <br />' Cosmos had not fulfilled its financial commitrnent. This uncertain <br /> state of affairs continued for a protracted period during which Fraser <br />t sense of insecurity grew. <br /> Unable to rationalize and resolve these circumstances with the <br /> incompletely incorporated general partner, Fraser requested from <br />' Steens (Charles Steen, Sr.) and Mi Vida, the Mill property be deeded <br /> over, which deed was to be held by Fraser, subject to recording when <br />' and if Fraser was to sense their security interest further threatened. <br /> The underlying circumstance causing the insecurity in the first <br /> instance remained unresolved and other conditions developed <br /> contributing to just the heightened insecurity, the pre-condition of <br /> which, recording was contemplated by the parties to be appropriate. <br /> Frasers caused the deed to Gold Hill Mill to be recorded in early 1987 <br />' In this manner Fraser took recorded title as of February 5, 1987. <br /> <br />1 <br />