My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REV103393
DRMS
>
Back File Migration
>
Revision
>
REV103393
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/25/2016 1:14:13 AM
Creation date
11/22/2007 1:05:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
DRMS Permit Index
Permit No
M1977210
IBM Index Class Name
Revision
Doc Name
IDENTIFICATION OF LEGAL ISSUES
Type & Sequence
AM3
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.
/
8
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
iii iiiiiiiuiiii iii <br />999 <br />ROCKY MOUNTAIN ASPRALT - SUMMIT PIT <br />(WALDO CANYON) <br />IDENTIFICATION OF LEGAL ISSUES <br />A. General Rules of Construction or Interpretation of Zoning <br />Actions. See generally 82 Am Jur 2d, Zoning and Planning, <br />Sections 66-68. <br />1. If the language of a zoning action is perfectly plain <br />and unambiguous, there is no need oc warrant for <br />construction. <br />2. In cases of ambiguity, the past practical construction <br />over an extensive period by the officer or adminis- <br />trative agency charged with its administration is to be <br />accorded great weight in determining its meaning. <br />A zoning action should be construed in favor of the <br />right of a property owner's unrestricted use of his <br />property. Lombardi v. Board of Adjustment, 675 P.2d 21 <br />(Colo.App. 1983). <br />A zoning action should not be extended by implication to <br />include restrictions not clearly prescribed, i.e., <br />notice of unstated conditions of a zoning approval <br />cannot be imputed to third persons without knowledge of <br />the condition. See Perlmutter Associates, Inc. v. <br />Northglenn, 534 P.2d 3349 (Co o.App. 97 <br />5. Zoning actions should be given a fair and reasonable <br />construction in the light of the manifest intention of <br />the decision-making body, the objects sought to be <br />attained, the natural import of the words used in common <br />and accepted usage, the setting in which they are <br />employed, and the general structure and language of the <br />law as a whole and in all its parts. <br />6. Words are to be given their ordinary and generally <br />accepted meanings. One should not "resort to unusual <br />and strained definitions to work the denial of a use <br />permitted within the familiar and popular understanding <br />of the words used." Lombardi v. Board of Adjustment, <br />supra. <br />7. In the context of a variance for a gravel operation, one <br />jurisdiction has held that: "In order to determine the <br />scope of the variance, we must consider both the <br />representations of the applicant and the intent of the <br />language in the variance at the time that it was <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.