lj) eens) 10CA2681 Yacht Club v. Dillon 12-29-2011 Em ‘Sstann COLORADO COURT OF APPEALS Court of Appeals No. 10CA2681 Summit County District Court No. 0O9CV143. Honorable W. Terry Ruckriegle, Judge Yacht Club Condominiums Home Owners Association, Steve Delaney, and Robert R. Duncan, Plaintiffs-Appellees, vw ‘Town of Dillon, Colorado, Defendant-Appellant. JUDGMENT AFFIRMED Division IV Opinion by JUDGE GRAHAM Dailey and Gabriel, JJ., concur NOT PUBLISHED PURSUANT TO C.A.R. 35(f) Announced December 29, 2011 Davis Graham & Stubbs LLP, Richard P. Holme, Andrew M. Low, Denver, Colorado; Gassman Law Firm, LLC, Edward C. Gassman, Loveland, Colorado, for Plaintiffs-Appellees Nathan, Bremer, Dumm & Myers, P.C., J. Andrew Nathan, Ellis J. Mayer, Denver, Colorado, for Defendant-AppellantDefendant, the Town of Dillon, Colorado, appeals the trial court’s judgment entered in favor of plaintiffs, Yacht Club Condominiums Home Owners Association, Steve Delaney, and Robert R. Duncan. The bases for this suit are defendant’s ordinances which impaired plaintiffs’ available parking and made it illegal for them to park in defendant's right of way. Plaintiffs filed suit requesting a declaratory judgment on their claims of equitable estoppel and abuse of police power. The trial court found in favor of plaintiffs on both claims and further found that the legislation was retrospective. We affirm on the basis of abuse of police power, and therefore, do not reach the other issues. I. Background Plaintiffs’ are the owners of the Yacht Club Condominiums (¥CC), which are located in Dillon, Colorado, at the intersection of Gold Run Circle and Tenderfoot Street. The YCC was constructed between 1966 and 1967, and defendant did not require plaintiffs’ predecessor to include on-site parking for the property, pursuant to the Colorado Supreme Court decision in City & County of Denver v. Denver Buick, Inc., 141 Colo. 121, 347 P.2d 919 (1959) (Denver Buick), overruled in part by Stroud v. City of Aspen, 188 Colo. 1, 532 1P.2d 720 (1975). The YCC has as many as sixty-six separate dwelling units but only has on-site parking space for approximately forty-three cars. Since 1967, plaintiffs have tandem parked (parking one car in front of another in a single space) in the on-site parking, causing some cars to protrude into defendant’s right of way. Still others parked across the street, also in the right of way. Prior to 2009, there is no evidence that defendant ever passed or enforced any law outlawing tandem parking or parking in its right of way, either near the YCC or anywhere else in Dillon. In 2009, defendant passed two ordinances central to the case at hand. The first ordinance, number 04-09, concerned a road renovation project. Part of this project included renovation of the road and recreation path in front of the YCC which effectively removed the areas plaintiffs used for parking in the right of way. ‘The other ordinance, number 10-09, redefined “street” to include rights of way and gave the chief of police authorization to designate no-parking zones within the rights of way. By mid-November 2009, the chief of police posted ten no-parking signs across the street from the YCC and painted “no tandem parking” on the ground near