My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ENFORCE37700
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Enforcement
>
ENFORCE37700
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/24/2016 7:46:36 PM
Creation date
11/21/2007 3:42:13 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1980143
IBM Index Class Name
Enforcement
Doc Name
COMPLAINT
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.
/
4
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
<br />- 3 - <br /> <br />(a) The Board failed to provide notice to Plaintif <br />of the second date for the Board's consideration of Spillers' <br />application, contrary to its directives in its August, 1980 <br />meeting; <br />(b) The applicant's notices required by §34-32-112 <br />(10)(b), as amended; and the applicable regulations failed <br />to comply with the statute in that they failed to state the <br />proposed date of completion for the operation; <br />(c) The applicant failed to timely file a copy of <br />the application with the La Plata County Clerk and Recorder <br />as required by C.R.S. 1973, §34-32-112(LO)(a), as amended; <br />(d) The applicant failed to give notice to all <br />adjacent landowners as required by C.R.S. 1973, §34-32-112 <br />(10)(c), as amended; <br />(e) The Board failed to designate persons signing <br />a petition protesting the .application as interested persons <br />entitled to receive notice pursuant to C.R.S.'1973, <br />§34-32-112(16)(c); as amended; <br />(f) The Board failed to order a hearing on the <br />proposed application even though good cause for a hearing <br />was shown pursuant to C.R.S. 1973, §34-32-115(1), as amended. <br />•12. The procedural violations of the Board prevented <br />the Plaintiffs from fully examining the application and formula <br />objections thereto, and prevented the Plaintiffs from presenting <br />their views Co the Board at the time it considered the application <br />13. If the permit is issued, Plaintiffs will be damaged <br />and will sustain irreparable injury in that their residence will <br />suffer substantial structural damage and Plaintiffs will be <br />subjected to significant levels of air pollution and noise, and <br />the area in and around the affected land, including Plaintiffs' <br />property, will be impaired for conservational, aesthetic and <br />recreational purposes. <br />WHEREFORE, Plaintiffs request this Court to stay the <br />issuance of the subject permit by the Board pending judicial <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.