My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
2022-03-16_PERMIT FILE - M2017036
DRMS
>
Day Forward
>
Permit File
>
Minerals
>
M2017036
>
2022-03-16_PERMIT FILE - M2017036
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2025 5:45:08 AM
Creation date
3/17/2022 8:51:14 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M2017036
IBM Index Class Name
Permit File
Doc Date
3/16/2022
Doc Name
County Special Use Permit
From
Loveland Ready-Mix Concrete
To
DRMS
Email Name
BFB
MAC
Media Type
D
Archive
No
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
91
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
enumerated conditions.4 As required by the Land Use Code, the <br /> Board found that each of the six special review criteria in section <br /> 4.5.3 — the criteria by which the Board reviews and evaluates a <br /> requested special review use — had been met or were inapplicable. <br /> In assessing one such criteria, it generally concluded that Ready- <br /> Mix "has demonstrated that this project can and will comply with <br /> all applicable requirements of the [Land Use Code]." <br /> B. Procedural History <br /> I; 14 <br /> NLGC later timely filed a complaint against the Board and <br /> Ready-Mix in district court seeking judicial review of the Board's <br /> Findings. An amended complaint followed, raising two claims. <br /> 1 NLGC's first claim sought declaratory relief under C.R.C.P. 57. <br /> It challenged, in part, the constitutionality of Larimer County Code <br /> section 2-67(10), which entrusts members of the Board with the <br /> sole discretion to determine whether a possible conflict of interest <br /> warrants their recusal. NLGC argued that the provision, as applied, <br /> 4 The Board's Findings approved Ready-Mix's special use <br /> application, noting that "Commissioners Donnelly and Dougherty <br /> voted in favor of the Findings and Resolution," while "Commissioner <br /> Johnson voted against the Resolution," but it did not address the <br /> earlier request that Commissioner Donnelly not participate in the <br /> matter. <br /> 8 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.