Reclamation Ridge gravel pit sues Granby after town finds it violated permit
A long simmering dispute over the operation of a gravel pit on Granby’s west end recently boiled over into legal action when Reclamation Ridge LLC filed a lawsuit against the town.
On Oct. 23, attorneys for Reclamation Ridge, LLC., a gravel pit operation located on the western edge of Granby on West Meadow Road, filed a lawsuit in Grand County District Court against the town of Granby, alleging the town abused its discretion and exceeded its jurisdiction in its administration and enforcement of a conditional-use permit that governs operation of the gravel pit.
The town board approved the permit between the gravel pit and Granby in mid-March 2017. The lawsuit against Granby was filed after the town board unanimously found the gravel pit in violation of the permit following a public hearing held in late August.
The Granby Board ruled Reclamation Ridge violated the permit’s prohibitions on equipment and materials, or gravel, being visible from neighboring properties. The town levied a $2,500 fine on Reclamation Ridge in late September. A little less than one month later, the lawsuit was filed.
The lawsuit against Granby lists 10 specific alleged violations committed by the town. Among its various claims, Reclamation Ridge asserts the town committed violations by not giving written notice that the pit violated the permit, that various individuals who registered complaints with the town about the pit’s operations had no standing to do so, that Granby failed to give the pit the “right to cure” the alleged violation, and that the town abused its discretion by not applying the same restrictions to the town owned gravel pit that it applies to Reclamation Ridge.
Reclamation Ridge is asking the court to find that Granby exceeded its jurisdiction and abused its discretion, according to the suit. The gravel pit is also asking the court to cover its attorney fees and related legal costs and such other relief as the Court deems just and proper.
Reclamation Ridge submitted four exhibits in support of the lawsuit including a copy of the permit, a letter from Granby Mayor Paul Chavoustie notifying the gravel pit of the imposition of a fine, a copy of an amendment to the permit and an email from town staff asking Reclamation Ridge’s owner Ken Evans to sign the permit.
For its part, the town of Granby denied all the allegations listed in the complaint filed by Reclamation Ridge. Most of the denials in Granby’s response to the lawsuit filing are sparse with the text of the response simply stating the town denies the allegations “as pled.” The notable exception is Granby’s denial that the town did not provide written notice to Reclamation Ridge that it was in violation of the permit.
“The town denies it failed to provide Plaintiff notice of the alleged violations as pled in paragraph 6.A.,” reads the town’s response filing. “The Town provided notice by, but not limited to, sending notice of the alleged violations to the Plaintiff more than 10 days (30 days, in fact) before the hearing.”
Granby’s response to the lawsuit further claims that Reclamation Ridge’s complaints are barred based on a series of legal arguments. Granby asserts that Reclamation Ridge failed to assert a claim for which relief may be granted. The town also asserted that the contract Reclamation Ridge voluntarily entered into with Granby bars the gravel pit from raising its listed claims, and that the claims are also barred because Reclamation Ridge did not raise all the claimed violations during the August public hearing.
The response from the town was filed Dec. 4.
Start a dialogue, stay on topic and be civil.
If you don't follow the rules, your comment may be deleted.