Vail Daily letter: Preserve the lodge
I am peering through a looking glass at the Cordillera imbroglio between the private property owners and a commercial healthcare company that would change the character and use of the lodge altogether from an a complementary amenity to a revenue making endeavor for a non-member or alien profiteer. I do not own property at Cordillera, but I have enjoyed the lodge and that quaint little Irish Pub out on the point from time to time. For you see, the Lodge at Cordillera is an amenity and attraction to outsiders like me, and is a statement to the whole community that the welcome mat is out for all.
But to the point, it is a matter of recognizing a private property right — a nest of twigs I would liken it to. Ergo, you take a twig away from the nest from time to time and no one notices; but over time, and through the process of depletion, you have no rights, but the lasting obligation to pay taxes for something which you never bargained for in the first instance. If the lodge was a concomitant influence (amenity) that induced the Cordillera property owner to invest in the development, and still is conducive to the enjoyment of his residence for the purpose intended in the first place, then the lodge is as much of the property as the driveway, the scenery, and the infrastructure itself.
Finally, and I say most emphatically, that the county land use regulations, the Cordillera Subdivision Improvement Plan, and extant HOA Declaration of Covenants itself are meant to protect, preserve and nurture private rights that have vested in those who invested in the project. Unless and until the owners of Cordillera, to the man, consent to destroy or terminate this valuable property right, the Lodge at Cordillera, this asset must be preserved in its present and historic use. This is only equitable and legal; this is the function of government itself. Were the commissioners to expunge this amenity or right, would the county then reassess the values of the residences at Cordillera as a result of the diminution in value, en masse? If you condemn and terminate a property right, then you must compensate the victim or aggrieved party — this is an American, a conservative and constitutional concept.
Choose wisely, fairly and legally!
Support Local Journalism
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.
User Legend: Moderator Trusted User