Debora M. Palizzi Gloria A. Bennett and Palizzi & Son, Inc., a Colorado Corporation v. City of Brighton, a Municipal…

Summary

The court held that condemnation valuation evidence may include the entire property's reasonably probable future development use, even when the condemned strip would have to be dedicated as a condition of annexation and rezoning. The dedication requirement is relevant to the weight of the evidence and development costs, not a basis for excluding evidence of the property's potential use as a whole. The court therefore reversed the court of appeals and remanded. Justice Coats, joined by the Chief Justice and Justice Martinez, dissented, arguing that the strip could not legally have the higher use and should not be valued as part of a nonuniform parcel.