(1) The general assembly hereby finds and declares that:
(a) It is necessary and desirable, as a matter of public policy, to provide for the establishment of vested property rights in order to ensure reasonable certainty, stability, and fairness in the land use planning process and in order to stimulate economic growth, secure the reasonable investment-backed expectations of landowners, and foster cooperation between the public and private sectors in the area of land use planning.
(b) The ability of a landowner to obtain a vested property right after local governmental approval of a site specific development plan will preserve the prerogatives and authority of local government with respect to land use matters, while promoting those areas of statewide concern described in paragraph (a) of this subsection (1).
(c) The establishment of vested property rights will promote the goals specified in this subsection (1) in a manner consistent with section 3 of article II of the state constitution, which guarantees to each person the inalienable right to acquire, possess, and protect property, and is therefore declared to be a matter of statewide concern.
Source: L. 87: Entire article added, p. 1837, § 1, effective January 1, 1988.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in
5
cases (
2 in the last 5 years), 1996–2025 · leading case:
City of Golden v. Parker, 138 P.3d 285 (Colo. 2006).
City of Golden v. Parker, 138 P.3d 285 (Colo. 2006).
· cites it 2× “§§ 24-68-101 to 106, C.R.S. (2005). Under the statutory scheme, a "vested property right" is defined as "the right to undertake and complete the development and use of property under the terms and conditions of a site specific development plan.”
Parker v. City of Golden, 119 P.3d 557 (Colo. Ct. App. 2005).
“2004, which provides a specific procedure for a landowner to obtain vested property rights from a local government, we find nothing in the agreement itself that supports this interpretation. Indeed, there is no statutory or other code citation following this particular contract…”
Scythian v. Mtn Vill. (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “City of Boulder v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colo., 996 P.2d 198, 203 (Colo.”
Scythian v. Mtn Vill. (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
· cites it 2× “City of Boulder v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colo., 996 P.2d 198, 203 (Colo.”
— Colo. Rev. Stat. § 24-68-101(1)(c) — 2 cases
Scythian v. Mtn Vill. (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“City of Boulder v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colo., 996 P.2d 198, 203 (Colo.”
Scythian v. Mtn Vill. (Colo. Ct. App. 2025).
“City of Boulder v. Pub. Serv. Co. of Colo., 996 P.2d 198, 203 (Colo.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.