Laserfiche WebLink
EXHIBIT "N" <br />SOURCE OF LEGAL RIGHT TO ENTER <br />1. You heard the discussion at the Board meeting on March 22, 2000 between the attorneys for [he <br />AG's office and the District. They are working out the legal wording to answer this question. I <br />would assume that you would get something from the AG and when 1 get something from the <br />District's attorney, I will let you know. You heard that the Development Company is defunct and <br />all assets were transferred to the District. <br />v ~~! ~ yr i /r ~: ~ ,~~d ~ ~ l LL~ <br />0~2. It is true that Lot 14 was covered by covenants affecting mining,. I seriously question whether f~~ <br />/ t~h~Division wants to_be in the~osition of enforcing restrictive covenants in Pueblo County5 This ~/ <br />property is m an A-1 Agricultural Zone and Natural Deposits, Extraction and Processing is a use `~ <br />`l~ ; allowed by a Special Use Permit. The County Planner explained to me that the County attorney has i ~~ <br />~~ }, tlI been explicit and consistent in his position that the County Planning Commission does not and will <br />i <br />Th <br />f <br />i <br />l <br />h <br />b tf <br />G~~j~b <br />orce restr <br />ct <br />ve covenants. <br />e covenants are a matter to <br />e reso <br />ved between t <br />J not en <br />e parties <br />t <br />/""" <br />involved. Since the County could approve a Special use Permit for mining. [again seriously <br />e\tuM ~ <br />~ <br />° ~ <br />question the validity of the possibility of the Division withholding approval due to the restrictive <br />covenants. However, this is now a moot point since Lot 14 Eras been removed from the application. '~° <br /> .~ i"-' <br />N-1 <br />