HomeMy WebLinkAbout20131806.tiffINVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION
Applicant Robert L. Seltzer Family Trust
Case Number USR12-0022
Submitted or Prepared
Prior to
Hearing
At
Hearing
PC Exhibits
1
Letter from Dolf & Susan Veit dated 3/22/2013
X
2
Letter from Greg Reider & Karen Schriner dated 4/14/2013
X
3
E-mail from Lynn Johns (Applicant) dated 4/17/2013
X
4
E-mail from Pat & April Thorpe dated 4/24/2013
X
5
Letter from John Brunetti
X
6
E-mail from Steve Ceplius dated 5/28/2013
X
7
E-mail from Lynn Johns (Applicant) dated 5/28/2013
X
8
E-mail from Mr. & Mrs. Dean Felton dated 5/30/2013
X
9
Letter from Pam-Imler Cooper dated 6/6/2013
X
10
E-mail from Lynn Johns (Applicant) dated 6/12/2013
X
11
Letter from Concerned Neighbor (no name) dated 6/13/2013
X
12
E-mail from Nancie & Loren Seaton dated 6/15/2013
X
13
E-mail from Keith & Nancy Fichter dated 6/15/2013
X
14
E-mail dated 6/17/2013 and attachment from Dolf Veit dated 6/17/2013
X
15
E-mail from Kelly & Pat Auker dated 6/17/2013
X
16
E-mail from Bill Schwartz & Family dated 6/17/2013
X
17
E-mail from the Zadel Family dated 6/17/2013
X
18
E-mail from Chad Linker (Northern Colorado Constructors) dated 6/17/2013
X
19
E-mail from Steve Ceplius 6/17/2013
X
20
E-mail from Arlen Siert dated 6/18/2013
X
21
Letter & Photograph from Pam Imler-Cooper
X
22
Photographs
X
23
CD disk containing video
X
I hereby certify that the 23 items identified herein were submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the
scheduled Planning Commissioners hearing.
Luc
it
Chris Gathman — Planner
March 22, 2013
Barbara Kirkmeyer
Weld County Commissioner
District 3
PO Box 758
Greeley, CO 80632
RE: USR13-0015
Dear Commissioner Kirkmeyer
We are writing to strongly urge the Weld County commissioners to determine that a proposed shooting
range adjacent to our property at 85O2 County Rd. 10 constitutes an unacceptable change to the area. I
was approached by the neighbor Lynn Johns about the possibility of selling our property as part of the
development plan for the shooting range. I informed him that we would entertain the Idea under
acceptable conditions. I believe I made it clear to Lynn that I did not want or intend to live next to a
shooting range. We have been developing our property to market it, in preparation for retirement, as a
horse ranch. A shooting range would make the property unsellable as a horse ranch. There are over a
dozen homes close enough where the noise of a shooting range would be very disruptive. I believe the
development of this nature would deprive the property owners of one of the key values that brought
them here, peacefulness. Even a facility like S.A.F.E had planned off Highway 66 would not prevent the
noise from being a nuisance with the proximity to our house. We intentionally built our house a half a
mile off the road to make sure the lack of road noise and dust would be another marketing point.
Sincerely,
Susan Veit Doff Veit
datida Ic4C-1 (1-421
EXHIBIT
t)5?- t3-0GIS
April 14, 2013
Weld County Planning Commission
1555 N 17`h Ave
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Case #USR13-0015
Dear County Commissioner:
We are writing to object to the proposed project for the development of a shooting range located south of and
adjacent to CR 10 and approximately 750 feet west of CR 19. The objection is based on the following reasons:
1. Given this is an agricultural zone; there is livestock on surrounding properties. The constant noise
produced by gun fire will agitate and cause stress to the animals. One of the properties adjacent to the
proposed shooting range is a horse ranch. The introduction of a shooting range would be detrimental to
the horses. It would also impact the environment for riding given the increase in noise.
2. There are several residences surrounding the proposed shooting range. Many of these households have
children. Children should be able to be outside without danger of gunfire. Given the close proximity
and the outside activities of the children, the children are at risk of entering the range unintentionally
putting them in harm's way.
3. The residents in this area have advocated for seven years for the owners of the compressor stations on
CR 19 to install equipment or take other measures to reduce noise levels. By adding a gun range this
would create additional noise pollution for the residences. The residences directly in between CR 19
and the proposed shooting range would be caught in the middle between both facilities causing
constant annoyance from the noise. Thus increasing noise pollution rather than decreasing noise
pollution. This is the opposite of what the residences in this neighborhood have been fighting for these
past several years. The Johns family has been part of this fight to reduce noise pollution. It is difficult to
understand how they could now be considering adding to the noise pollution disrupting the peaceful
country life that many of us have sought.
4. The noise introduced from a shooting range would create more disruption and cause more stress than
the constant noise produced by the compressor stations. The compressor stations produce a low,
steady noise. The shooting range would create more intrusive noise as the noise is not constant but is a
series of periodic bangs at various noise levels and intensity.
5. Lastly, a serious concern comes to rise when thinking about property values and ability sell property in
the future. The compressor station located on CR 19 has already impacted the value and desirability of
the adjacent properties due to the noise level and lack of aesthetic views to the east. The addition of a
shooting range will make local properties even less desirable thus impacting the possibility of future
sales and current property values; especially for the properties located between the compressor station
and the proposed shooting range.
The proposed shooting range may be an activity for which the John's find enjoyment and have a passion.
However, given the livestock in the area, the number of residences in close proximity, the existing noise
pollution, and the possible impact on property values and sale ability, this is not an appropriate location for such
a facility. We ask that the planning commission consider this objection during the review of the proposed
shooting range. The commission will find the reasons listed above are cause to decline the application for the
shooting range.
Sincerely,
to4A7
Reider
g
Karla Schriner
From: j & L Pipeline
To: Chris Gathman
Subject: Gun Range
Date: Wednesday, April 17, 2013 2:30:20 PM
Dear Chris:
In response to recent letters that you have received from two of our neighbors.
One subject addressed again and again is the oil and gas situation.
Because of this we no longer live in a desirable agricultural area.
When the oil and gas proposed their expansion, we showed up in force to protest.
Unfortunately the county allowed their enlargement and increased activity. Our area
is no longer an agricultural one but an industrial one. Everyone who wishes to re -
coupe their investments should think along these lines.
Shooting guns, hunting, etc. is perfectly legal in unincorporated counties all over this
country. We have had a shooting range on our property before 99% of our neighbors
ever moved into this area, and it will continue, we only ask to make it public, to
afford to build a NRA safe range for all to use.
This will buffer the gunshot sounds and direct the noise upward as well as providing
the best control of the discharged rounds. We already live in an area that is not quite
by no means because of the oil and gas compressor station and all the traffic from
their trucks coming and going. We will also have controlled hours. Unlike Sunday,
April 17th, when someone west of us was firing an automatic weapon at 7:oo am.
It is up to you all, but shooting on our property at various rates will continue and
is legal to do so we only wish to provide a safe and need service to law abiding
citizens.
Lynn Johns
Chris Gathman
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Dear Chris Gathman,
april thorpe [althorpe92@gmail.com]
Wednesday, April 24, 2013 10:05 PM
Chris Gathman
RE: USR13-0015
We reside at 3403 CR 19 and it has been brought to our attention that one of our neighbors has requested to
have a gun range on their property which is to the north of us. We would like to express our feelings against
this! We don't feel that this is the place for this. There are to many homes near by and the noise is also a very
big concern! They already discharge firearms from this location and it is very loud and we really don't need to
hear that everyday. This will also hurt our property values. Please let us know of any decisions regarding this
request and if you have any quetions please contact us. Thank You for your time.
Concerned citizens,
Pat and April Thorpe
1
Chris Gathman
Weld County Planning Services
Mr. Gathman:
TBR Ranch is a horse ranch and boarding facility lying directly east of Lynn Johns who
has applied to Weld County for a permit for an outdoor firing range.
We have some major concerns about the proposed outdoor shooting range and the direct
effects that it will have on our property. In summary, they are:
1. Loss of quiet country lifestyle from 9am to 7pm shooting immediately
adjacent to the property.
2. Concern of errant shots fired while children playing right next to property
line and the livestock in pens.
3. Increased liability of spooked horses ridden by owners riding in outdoor
arenas next to property line.
4. Concern of spooked livestock injured by fencing when fleeing gunshots.
5. The mental affect on livestock caused by constant loud gunshots.
6. Loss of property value due to loud environment.
As life time members of the NRA, we respect the rights of our neighbors and have no
issue with the occasional shooting that our neighbor, Lynn Johns, does on his property.
However, there is a big difference between that and the building of a public outdoor
shooting range. Currently, when Mr. Johns shoots the recoil is heard throughout our
property, inside our indoor riding arena, and from inside both of the homes on the
property. We can ONLY imagine the amount of noise that would be produced by an
outdoor shooting range operating six days a week from 9:00am to 7:00 pm and are
extremely fearful that we will no longer be able to enjoy our own property with the same
intangible quality's if the range is built.
We have a great concern for the safety of our children, clients and livestock. Children
frequently play at the west edge of the property just feet away from the proposed range.
Their safety could be compromised by a stray bullet, naive or immature shooter.
We also have a great increase in our legal liability with the proposed range. TBR could
be held legally liable when a gunshot spooks a horse with a rider on it and bucks a rider
off
There is also the question of the safety of our livestock. We have four pastures holding a
total of 23 horses that border Mr. Johns property. I have concerns about what could
happen to these animals both by stray bullets and the possibility of running thru fencing
from being spooked from the noise.
There is little question of the negative affect on livestock from constant loud gunshots.
This causes an animal to live in a constant spooked condition similar to the affects on
soldiers in a war zone.
We too are concerned about the effect on our ability to generate income because of the
effects on our client base and property value. We purchased TBR as a country retreat and
a quiet place to get away from the city. It allows for us and our clients a place to enjoy
their horses in a safe, peaceful and quiet manor. With an outdoor shooting range and the
noise that it would produce, we would no longer be able to enjoy that peace. From a
financial stand point the noise generated could be devastating. We are very fearful that
clients would remove their horses from our property due to the noise and safety concerns.
Lastly, we are greatly concerned about the effects the range would have on our property
value. If this range is to go in then we would have an extremely hard time selling TBR as
a residence or as it's currently being used, as riding/boarding stable. This could devastate
our property value.
We ask that the City Council please take into consideration the safety, well being, quality
of life and property value for the neighbors of Mr. Johns. And the extreme effects that
this range will have on all of us. We recommend that City Council either deny this
request or have Mr. John build an indoor range
/ger
John Brunetti
President
TBR Ranch LLC
3867 Weld County Road 19
Fort Lupton Colorado 80621
From: Steve Ceolius
To: Chris Gathmao
Subject: Objection to Re -Zoning USR13-0015 Lynn Johns Proposed Shooting Range
Date: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 12:53:53 PM
Dear Mr. Gathman:
I would like to voice my objection to the proposed shooting range at the Lynn Johns property, USR13-
0015. My wife and I have lived in the area for just over a decade. We purchased the property to get
away from the noise of the suburbs; and, we planned this would be our retirement home. Since then,
we have had to endure, for numerous years, noise from an unenclosed compressor which was added
at the pumping station up the road after we moved in, as well as the addition of 8 other compressors
at the facility, and greatly expanded oil field servicing activity. I understand the compressor station was
zoned industrial when we moved in, so we were aware of that. However, we didn't plan on the county
allowing an added, unenclosed compressor to operate for so many years before being quieted.
Now, the county is being asked to rezone a property for industrial usage so a shooting range can be
built. As much as I believe in the rights of property owners, Mr. Johns knew what the property was
zoned when he purchased it, as did we all. Now, he is essentially asking the the rules be changed in
the middle of the game to benefit himself exclusively. I feel this is unfair to the rest of us. And, it has
the potential to seriously damage our property values, which have already taken a hit due to the
expansion of the above mentioned compressor station. If Mr. Johns wanted to build a shooting range,
then he should have sought out and purchased property with an industrial zoning to begin with. If the
county is going to apparently arbitrarily allow zoning changes to suit the interests of single individuals
and corporate interests, then why having any zoning rules at all? You might as well just allow anyone
to build anything they choose, especially if it has the potential to increase the tax revenue for the
municipality. Everyone for themselves.
As I said, Mr. Johns knew how the property was zoned before he purchased it. I urge you and the
commission to reject his application. I believe the interests of the many, especially in this case,
outweigh the narrow interests of one. Thank you for you consideration.
Cordially,
Steve Ceplius
303-229-9106
3444 County Road 19
Fort Lupton, CO 80621
From: J & L Riveting
To: Chris Gathman; "mailto:tbrranch"Calive.com
Subject: Re: Case # USR 13-0015
Date: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 2:57:18 PM
Dear Chris,In response to TBRs Letter,It comes as great surprise to receive this
letter. I had talked to Dawn,Johns wife at length.She had no problem with the
range,and went as far as to say some of there customers were interested in shooting
at our current range.We are attempting to provide a safe area for others to practice
the sport of shooting,as well as have a place for law enforcement to train .Currently
there are many people shooting in our area,in uncontrolled environments,we wish to
correct this.As far as spooked horses,we live in unincorporated Weld county,Hunting
and gun activities are legal,anyone riding a horse not gun broke does so at there own
risk.John should know that.In addition to these things I would like to add the
following;We where here prior to there horse operation.When they wanted to build
this operation I was not happy about it,Growing up around horses I know what
comes with them;insurmountable flies as well as a great deal of horse manure.But
they are allowed to operate and directly impact our life and living counditions.For
crying out loud John and Dawn do not even live out here.In closing ,I would never
thought about the range,if it had not been for the oil and gas operations being
allowed to do what they have done to our area.What we propose is perfectly leagle.If
we are not allowed to operate our range,Then your horse operation would need to
close,as well as the oil and gas cease there operations. Our area is no longer a
peaceful agricultural area,it is industrial and commercial. Sincerely, Lynn Johns
Original Message
From: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us>
To: J & L Pipeline <jlpipeline@aol.com>
Sent: Tue, May 28, 2013 8:25 am
Subject: FW: Case # USR 13-0015
Dear Lynn & Jolene,
Attached is another surrounding property owner letter.
Sincerely,
Chris Gathman
Planner Ill
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley CO. 80631
Ph: (970)353-6100 ext. 3537
Fax: (970)304-6498
From: Dean Felton
To: Chris Gathman
Cc: albodega@mesanetworks.net
Subject: RE: Objection to Re -Zoning USR13-0015 Lynn Johns Proposed Shooting Range
Date: Thursday, May 30, 2013 1:40:46 PM
Dear Mr. Gathman:
Steve copied me on his response to his objections to the possible approval of the shooting range
referenced below. My wife and I have property adjacent to the Ceplius property and have very
similar concerns as outlined by Steve below. The noise from the facility will impact residents (7)
days a week, I have done research and it is not uncommon for a shooting facility to have noise of
90 decibels or greater at the boundaries depending on the shooting site configuration and far field
noise should also be considered also. This facility could also potentially add hundreds of additional
vehicles a week traveling on weld county road 19. Road 19 already has considerable truck traffic
supporting the oil and gas facilities in the area and the "S" turn south of Weld road 8 is not
conducive to even heavier traffic flow. This facility will impact all residences in the area not just
residences adjacent to the proposed site. Weld County commissioners should review the impacts
to a I residences in the area and make a decision based on the existing property owners interests
not just the in the interest of (1) property owner. My wife and I own (2) building lots on road 19 for
our retirement home and also urge that Weld County planning commission to reject the planned
zoning and land use proposed by Mr. Johns and associates.
Respectfully,
Mr. 8( Mrs. Dean Felton
3434 Weld County Road 19
Fort Lupton Co.
Mailing Address
725 Alpine St.
Longmont, Colorado 80504
303-651-9012 home
303-702-5199 office
From: Steve Ceplius[mailto:albodega@mesanetworks.net]
Sent: Tuesday, May 28, 2013 12:54 PM
To: cgathman@co.weld.co.us
Subject: Objection to Re -Zoning USR13-0015 Lynn Johns Proposed Shooting Range
Dear Mr. Gathman:
I would like to voice my objection to the proposed shooting range at the Lynn Johns property. USR13-
0015. My wife and I have lived in the area for just over a decade. We purchased the property to get
away from the noise of the suburbs; and, we planned this would be our retirement home. Since then,
we have had to endure, for numerous years, noise from an unenclosed compressor which was added
at the pumping station up the road after we moved in, as well as the addition of 8 other compressors
June 6, 2013
Chris Gathman
Weld County Planner
Re: USR13-ool5, J&L Shooting Center
Dear Mr. Gathman,
This letter is submitted as another in the growing list of neighbors objecting to the above proposed
shooting range. After reviewing the County's website on this matter and reading every attachment, not a
single neighbor has submitted support for a commercial shooting range in our backyard.
The notion that 8-io foot berms will completely contain and muffle the noise of gunfire and 't00% of the
bullets, shot and debris from the skeet shooting aspect of the business proposal is absurd. Most of the
property owners in this area have livestock that would be adversely affected by the particular type of noise
generated by a firing range on a daily basis. If at all, those berms should be at least 15 feet high.
The risk of stray bullets (which can travel up to a mile) hitting someone or something should scare the ever-
loving crap out of every homeowner within "range." There are at least 6 residences within 14 mile and
another 10 within a mile. If allowed to use high-powered rifles at the proposed site, those bullets can travel
up to 5 (five) miles, impacting who knows how many dozens of families. Neighbors have kids. Are they
supposed to stay indoors all the time because there's a firing range?
This area is also the summer home and/or overnight stopping place for nearly zo species of migratory birds.
They won't be back with constant gunfire. The indigenous birds will also leave, as well as most of the rest
of the wildlife, and that will have a serious impact on the environment and the surrounding farmers.
Mr. Johns' statements in many of his rebuttal letters to your office, about this area having converted to
mostly commercial, are also inaccurate. Please take the time to drive around the surrounding area to see
the variety of agriculture and wildlife that still exists in Mr. Johns' own neighborhood when you come to
post the signs for the public hearing.
I do not deny the increase in oil & gas traffic has depleted the property values in the area. But to add a
business that will increase that traffic by over 5,800 vehicles per year (using Mr. Johns' own estimates) is
by no means a solution to an existing problem.
The thought of hearing constant gunfire from 9:ooam to 7:oopm, Tuesday through Sunday is unsettling at
best and not why I moved to rural SW Weld County. I am not against guns. We own several makes and
models. My husband, along with several of his friends and family members hunt every year. We eat what
they shoot.
The thought of having guns for sale so close to my home is also very disturbing. The potential for the
increase in crime is very real if this proposal is allowed to proceed. Will they be limited on the type and
amount of firearms and ammunition on site? Delivery of goods will also increase traffic in the area. And
exactly how are they planning to store the ammunition? Temperatures reach well over ioo degrees inside
steel buildings out here in the summer. Will ammunition be climate controlled for public safety? I live
inside the blow zone if there's an accident. My fear is real. Due to the type of business, will they be
required to install surveillance cameras? What impact will that have on the neighboring property values?
EXHIBIT
V3C\3-oo1S
My home is less than 213 of a mile from the proposed site. The increased traffic, constant gunfire noise
pollution, constant worry of an ammunition explosion in summer months and the very real risk of stray
bullets going onto a neighboring property are the main reasons I am against this proposal.
Concerned neighbor,
Pam Imler-Cooper
3225 CR 19
Fort Lupton, CO 80621
720-685-8059
From: J & L Pipeline
To: Chris Gathman
Subject: Re: USR13-0015 staff recommendation
Date: Wednesday, June 12, 2013 1:55:04 PM
Hi Chris, I just wanted to make a few comments before Tuesday's meeting.We do
feel this is being blown way out of proportion.We have lived here longer than any of
these people,Except Joe and Lori Harrison. The gun use and hunting have been
active for the last 17 years we have owned this property,and will continue long after
this matter is settled.We are only taking what is already present in our
area,dampening the noise,controlling the hours and making it safer ,than the
present.The neighbors safety is much more at risk every time they get into their
car,than it will ever be from our range.As far as property values,their are many gun
advocates who would like to live close to their range.As their are far more pro gun
Americans,than not.This will expose them to a new market,should they wish to
sell.The range will also bring limited job openings.As far as traffic,this impact will be
minimal compared to the oil and gas operations.Also the majority of the traffic will
be coming from the north,away from these people,and it will be passenger cars and
trucks,not 1OO,OOO pound trucks .As far as a indoor range,That is not in our scope at
this time,Denver and Aurora have plenty of those in heavily populated areas! We live
in rural Weld county,while living here,anyone knows things are allowed here than
are not allowed in covenant controlled areas.We put up with allot from our
neighbors that we do not like,but we also understand where we live.And people have
the right to profit from their property .I strongly request you to reconsider your
stance toward this project,based on the following: 1) We are making our area safer
and offering a service to our community. 2)This activity is already widely active
currently,and is legal to do so. 3) We all rejected the oil and gas proposal in the
strongest terms.You still allowed them to continue. Dismissing our safety
concerns,loss of property values,noise ,dust, etc..we expect the same consideration
you gave them. Thank you, Lynn P.S. feel free to send this letter to whomever you
wish.
Original Message
From: Chris Gathman <cgathman@co.weld.co.us>
To: J & L Pipeline <jlpipeline@aol.com>
Sent Sun, Jun 9, 2013 9:27 am
Subject: FW: USR13-0015 staff recommendation
Jolene,
In a follow up to below. By clicking on the link I provided you on Friday - it gets you to your
main case screen. All you have to do is to click on the arrow next to "attachments". All of
the documents/letters received with the application are listed and all you have to do is to
click on whichever document you wish to view to pull it up. Hopefully that helps.
Sincerely,
Chris Gathman
Planner Ill
Weld County Department of Planning Services
June 13, 2013
Dear Chris,
I have read through all of the letters that have been submitted from my neighbors, as well as the
responses from Mr. Johns. I am not against guns at all. The people that have contacted you have
brought up some very valid points, as well as Mr. Johns bringing up some valid points. Please see my
concerns below.
1- From looking at the plans, it looks as though the range will be directed to the NW, which is
County Road 10. I am not sure how far south of Road 10 the range will be but, would YOU
honestly drive down Road 10 KNOWING that a stray bullet could possibly hit you?
2- In the plans, it states that there would be a maximum of 20 people per day that would be
traveling to the range. If this range is a success, there would be A LOT more than 20 people per
day, especially if it will have a free day for Local law enforcement. This will increase the amount
of traffic on Road 10, which is maintained by the county by our tax dollars. This will also
increase the dust that we will be subjected to, and will require the county (again OUR tax
dollars) to do more maintenance work on these roads.
3- Yes, we do already deal with people that are out there shooting. But it does not go on every
single day for 10-12 hours a day like this proposed shooting range is requesting.
4- Regarding the neighbors being able to come and shoot for free. That is a very nice gesture,
however, the people that are currently shooting are either already land owners or have the
permission from the landowners to shoot and/or hunt on their property. The people that have
permission to shoot/hunt, would not pay to go somewhere to practice when they can do it for
free.
5- Despite what some may think, we are still an agricultural zoned area. There are neighbors in
close proximity of this proposed range, with children and livestock.
6- The impact that this will have on the Wildlife in the area would be a very negative one. I have
pictures of Bald Eagles on my property and surrounding. This Proposed shooting range would
scare all the wildlife away and we would have more Prairie dogs making a negative impact on
the properties, as well as bringing a higher risk of diseases that these rodents carry. This would
be considered a major health risk that should also be taken into consideration. Without the
wildlife to control the rodent population, we would be in the same situation as Boulder County
is and not be able to remove the rodents, putting people and animals at risk of disease.
EXHIBIT
v5e. 13- CO 1S
7- 8-10 foot berms are not going to deplete the noise that we, as neighbors, will have to listen to
10-12 hours a day.
8- On the site specific development plan it states that the hours of operation would be limited to
9AM-7PM Monday through Friday, however, Mr. John's proposal says it would be Tuesday thru
Sunday from 9AM to 7PM. So, WE, as neighbors, would need to listen to the gunfire during the
times that we normally would be outside, ALL day long, when we should be enjoying the peace
and quiet which was the reason why we moved to the country in the first place. During the
winter hours will we also need to deal with the lights from the Range as well? Unless the range
would be indoors, how are the lights going to be controlled?
9- Regarding the water usage. Our wells are at the same level and are using the same source. By
digging another well, this is going to tap into neighbor's water sources. The water in our area is
not good quality, by tapping into it to support a business, how is this going to affect the
neighbor's water?
10- If there are the portable toilets put in for the business, it states that there would need to be less
than 10 customers per day. The proposal is saying up to 20 customers per day. This exceeds the
maximum amount of people, if you include the employees as well as the customers.
11- On the Administrative Review sheet, it states that if the Shooting Range is used by more than 4
individuals on a regular basis, that shooting must be supervised b a range officer or an instructor
qualified by the NRA. How will this be enforced?
12- How often will someone be out from the Weld County Department of Planning Services, Public
Works and the Health department, to make sure that the range is in compliance?
13- In reading some of the responses from the Johns', to the neighbors that have written in, they
are saying they do not plan on building any more buildings, but in the Plans it states, as well as
some of the response emails, that if the outdoor range is a success, then they will be looking
into building an indoor range in the next year. This will, again, increase the traffic in our area.
I understand that you are trying to provide a safe place for people to go to and that is appreciated.
However, people move to the country for the peace and quiet. Listening to tractors, birds, horses,
cattle, etc. and dealing with the flies, and odors is a part of the Country life style. I don't want to be
near a shooting range, so I didn't move near one. It is like people moving close to a Dairy and then
complaining about the smell and the flies. Well, they ARE animals, they do poop, there will be odors and
flies, but if you chose to move there when it already existed, then shame on you. Another example -
People buying a house near an airport and then complaining about the noise the planes make???
The people that are protesting this, are not on the anti gun bandwagon. They are mostly all gun owners
themselves. HOWEVER, we do not want to have to listen to BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG,
BANG,BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG,BANG, BANG,
BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG, BANG,BANG, BANG,BANG, BANG,BANG,
BANG,BANG!- (Gets a bit annoying, doesn't it?) ALL day long.
I hope that you take into consideration all of the responses that you have received from the property
owners that would be affected if you were to approve this range. I agree that a firing range is needed to
help promote safe use of firearms, just not in an area where there is livestock and families in such a
close proximity.
Had there been a shooting range already in the proposed area, I would not have bought my house, it
would be like moving near the dairy and complaining about the odor/flies, mooing, etc.
Thank you,
Concerned neighbor
From: Nancie Goodvke
To: Chris Gathman
Subject: USR13-0015 - RE: Proposed Gun Range - Chris Gathman
Date: Saturday, June 15, 2013 4:01:08 PM
RE: Proposed Gun Range
We are strongly opposed to the proposed gun range, as it would greatly decrease
our property value due to the noise and increased traffic that it would bring.
If the gun range were allowed, it would be the end of our quiet country life, and
make our property extremely difficult to sell. The gunfire will make horseback riding
more dangerous; and the increased traffic on the county roads that I now enjoy
riding on, will be near impossible.
We, as well as other neighbors out riding, could get seriously injured due to
unexpected gunfire spooking our horses. The gunfire will also increase the risk to
our farrier while shoeing our horses.
We are also concerned that the gun range would draw in trigger happy gun owners
who would shoot at cats, dogs, horses, mailboxes, road signs, etc. We do not want
to get shot by a stray bullet while out in our yard, or while enjoying a horseback ride
down a county road. We will not feel safe on our own property if this gun range is
allowed.
Loren was just recently shot at by another neighbor proclaiming to be shooting at a
target located at the bottom of their four -foot berm. Two stray bullets from a high
power rifle hit the front of our barn door missing Loren within three feet. Berms do
not stop bullets that are discharged over the top of them, which was obviously what
happened here.
I would also be concerned in regard to the bald eagles, golden eagles and other
migratory birds that surround the irrigation pond located on Road 19 & Road 8. The
noise would drive all these birds away, as well as any humans considering moving
into the area.
Nancie & Loren Seaton
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
nancy fichter
Chris Gathman
USR13-0015
Saturday, June 15, 2013 8:32:35 PM
To Whom It May Concern:
We are opposed to the above USR because of the abundant permanent oil and gas
equipment in the vicinity of the gun range, the numerous homes in the area, the
increase of noise in an agricultural area, increase in traffic on country roads which
are already very busy with local traffic and a great many oil service industry vehicles.
We live one mile directly south of the proposed USR. There are cattle and horses
and all sides of us and we feel that there would only be negative affects to us and
our neighbors. Sincerely, Keith and Nancy Fichter, f8706 CR 8, Brighton, CO 80603
Chris Gathman
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Attachments:
Dolf Veit [dolfveit@gmail.com)
Monday, June 17, 2013 10:31 AM
Chris Gathman
USR13-0015
Sound Levels.docx
Concerns about the sound levels.
1
Chris, I might have missed it but I did not see any sound level estimations in the attachments.
Below are the sound levels for an assortment of guns and the formula for calculating the sound
attenuation due to distance. Using 156dB as the sound from an average gun and 659 feet as the
distance(middle of property) the sound level at the property line wound be 109dB. The sound from the
worst case gun at 170dB would reach the property line at 123dB. Accurate calculation of attenuation by
berms and trees is not plausible. Therefore, compliance with noise levels is unlikely. My barn is 50 feet
from the property line and the house is 150 feet.
http://www.freehearingtest.com/hia gunfirenoise.shtml
Gunfire Sound Levels
Gunfire Noise Level Reference Chart
Below we have listed critical data describing peak sound pressure levels
produced by firearms used in shooting and hunting sports. A serious
byproduct of this exposure is sensory -neural hearing loss, which cannot
be restored to normal. With the ,ntroduction of MUZZLE BRAKES and
PORTING, the risks of heanng loss dramatically increase. Use this chart
as a reference guide for promoting the need of using adequate hearing
Protection.
Notations
Keep in mind that conversational speech is approximately 60-65 dB,
and the threshold of pain is considered to be 140 dB. According to Dr.
William Clark, Ph.D. senior research scientist in charge of the NOISE
LABORATORY at the Central Institute for the Deaf in St. Louis, the
damage caused by one shot from a .357 magnum pistol, which can
expose a %hooter to 165 dR fnr ?costar, is equivalent to over 40 hours
in a noisy workplace. Dr. Krammer, PhD., Ball State University, Muncie,
Indiana has documented the following pressure levels.
Table 1. SHOTGUN NOISE DATA (DECIBEL AVERAGES)
.410 Bore 28" barrel
26" barrel
IS _' barrel
20 Gauge 28" barrel
22' barrel
12 Gauge 26" barrel
26' barrel
18 _" barrel
150dB
150.25dB
136.30dB
152.50dB
154.75dB
151.50dB
156.10dB
161.50dB
Dr. Krammer continues to say that shotgun noise averaged slightly
more that 150dB. This is approximately 14dB beyond the threshold of
pain, and more than sufficient to cause sudden hearing loss ',nth
complications.
Table 2. CENTERFIRE RIFLE DATA
.223. 55GR. Commercial load 1B _" barrel 155.5dB
.243 in 22" barrel 155.9dB
. 30-30 in 20" barrel 156.002
7mm Magnum in 20" barrel 157.5dB
. 308 in 24" barrel 156.2dB
.30-06 in 24" barrel 158.5dB
.30-06 in 18 _' barrel 163.2dB
.375 — 18" barrel with muzzle brake 170 d5
http://sengpielaudio.com/calculator-distance.htm
Calculation
of
the
sound
level
L2, which
is
found
at
the
distance
r2
Reference
from
sound
distance
source
r1
Sound
at
reference
level
distance
L1
r1
Search
for L2
3 m or
ft
156 dBSPL
�'�'�
Another
from
distance
sound source
r2
Sound
L = Li
level
- L2
difference
at
another
evl
distance
el
2nd
L
r2
146.84 dB
1109.16 dBSPL
659 m or
!calculate
Formulas to calculate the sound level L in dB (sound pressure
level or sound intensity level) in dependence of the distance is.
Sound level L and Distance r
L2=L1-I20•log
l"
1
1' L1 -L2
•10 20
i
L2
L
L1
J1O 1og
l2
From: Kelly Auker
To: Chris Gathman
Subject: USR13-0015 Proposed Shooting Range
Date: Monday, June 17, 2013 2:50:14 PM
Dear Mr Gathman,
Here is SW Weld county we like to look at our farms as Home. Myself and my husband
both object to the proposed shooting range in our area. We are a mile away. We have and
continue to deal with The Motor cross speedway. And it grows every year with noise For
years now we have endured new businesses and old destroy our country atmosphere. The
dog kennels on road 6 gives us the barking dog syndrome at any time. The Gas and Oil
companies continual hum as they drill day and night and now this Shooting Range. Now
someone wants to benefit themselves financially with a shooting range and destroy our quiet
peaceful setting again. The safety issues related to the gun range is astronomical.
Please we are all asking that you deny this application from our area. Let them take it to a
safer place where peoples homes and lives will not be affected. This is one business we do
not want or need in our area. No outside shooting ranges should be allowed in any area not
secluded by 5 miles in any direction for safety. Should you find the need to put one within a
mile of your home, would you?
Opposed to Shooting Range.
Kelly and Pat Auker
From: Schwartz(aStairMeisterLogWorks.com
To: Chris Gathman
Cc: nicole
Subject: Aginst USR13-0015 Proposed shooting range
Date: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:09:47 PM
Dear Chris Gathman
I am against any proposed commercial shooting range in my neighborhood. I already have to listen to
my current neighbors shooting off there guns anytime from first light to even past dark seven days a
week. I would like to enjoy the piece and quiet that I do receive between the already on going gun fire.
Even as I write this there is gun fire going on less than 500 yards from me. I would like to enjoy my
semi retirement soon with my wife and two full time grand children with out the ever annoying gun fire
around us anytime of the day.
Thank you
Bill Schwartz & family
From: Ben Zadel
To: Chris Gathman
Subject: Letter of Concern (USR13-0015)
Date: Monday, June 17, 2013 3:48:15 PM
To whomever it may concern,
As residents of the immediate area, we believe the proposed firing range on CR10 will have
a strong adverse impact on the surrounding community. We have lived in the area long
enough that we have acquired a way of living that is peaceful, serene and inviting for
families and visitors. This area has seen many changes with the oil industry over the past
decade and we understand the need for this industry to thrive domestically. The oil
industry however, didn't bring the long term consequences to the area that a firing range
will.
The first consequence is an obvious drop in property value. This really hits us extremely
hard as we currently have the infrastructure in place to build a subdivision on our property.
Not only does the gun range affect the value of the property, but it will also devastate any
interest that we can generate in the area.
Another consequence comes in terms of all of the livestock in the area. We have cattle on
our land that would be negatively impacted by the intermittent sounds of gunfire. It is hard
on them to be constantly spooked at random. We are not alone in having cattle. This area
provides numerous acres of rich pasture land and the firing range will be a problem for all
the ranchers who choose to remain zoned as agricultural to make a living.
Our highest level of concern is overall safety. High powered rifles have the potential to
discharge rounds that carry for up to five miles. That's ten times further than the distance
from the firing range to our location. We know that there will be berms in place
surrounding the range but as our home sits atop a hill, what is to stop an errant round
from hitting the top of a berm and going through or even totally missing the berm and
making it to our home. We frequently have children at our home throughout the week and
couldn't imagine the devastation of anything happening to any of them.
We believe that for the listed reasons above, re -zoning of the proposed site should be
denied for the purpose of a gun firing range. We would like to keep our living environment
as serene as possible and would be in constant fear of any disastrous outcomes from a gun
firing range.
Thank you for your time,
The Zadel Family
EXHIBIT
9 t 7
kyle. \ 3 -- O C ►S
4200 Weld County Road 19 Fort Lupton, CO 80621
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Attachments:
Chad Linker
Chris Gathman
Objection to Proposal(USR13-0015)
Monday, June 17, 2013 4:08:23 PM
inlage001 onq
To whomever it may concern,
We operate a business at the intersection of CR 10 and CR19 and feel that the opening of a firing
range at the proposed location would be a detriment to our day to day business and a hindrance to
the way of life of the surrounding society. As a business, we bring in prospective and current clients
for meetings at our office. We make every effort to ensure that the prospective and current clients
feel comfortable and safe in our environment. With that said, we feel that the firing range could
jeopardize our ability to provide an environment conducive of a professional atmosphere.
To further explain this claim, when clients come to our office they expect, and deserve, extreme
levels of professionalism while on our property. Due to the fact that the firing range is within a half
mile of our location, there will be recognizable gun -shot sounds in the air near, and within our
office. When trying to attain new business, we believe the recognizable sounds of the firing range
will bring the negative emotions of recent events that have been instilled into all of our minds,
straight into our very important meetings. This will undeniably result in an undesirable change in
behavior during preliminary and continued discussions.
We also pride ourselves on providing a safe and inviting workplace for all of our employees. There
is an overbearing amount of negatives that come with gun range clientele with the obvious being a
large mass of guns within a very close proximity. Whether our individual employees are pro -guns
or against guns, there is still a degree of discomfort that accompanies this situation for the
aforementioned reasons.
This proposed re -zoning is of great concern to us here at Northern Colorado Constructors and we
would like to be informed of all decisions on the matter. We appreciate the time that is being
allotted to hear our perspective in this decision and hope that it goes under advisement.
Sincerely,
Chad Linker
Ars
NORTHERN COLORADO CONSTRUCTORS, INC.
Chad linker
9075 WCR 10, Fort Lupton, CO 80521
P: 303.857.1754 I F: 303.857.2933 I C: 303.434.6599
help conserve our natural resources. Oo you really need to print this AWL
From:
To:
Subject:
Date:
Steve Ceplius
Chris Gathman
Objection to Re -Zoning USR13-0015 Lynn Johns Proposed Shooting Range
Monday, June 17, 2013 4:21:46 PM
Dear Mr. Gathman:
I'm unable to attend tomorrow's meeting due to my flight schedule (my wife will be attending).
Therefore, I would like to once again voice my most strenuous objection to the proposed shooting
range on the Lynn Johns property, USR13-0015.
I would like to say I am not anti -gun. I am a gun owner and shooting enthusiast; and, I do belong to a
range. It is situated, however, as to not bother other residents. I rarely even shoot on my property,
which is perfectly legal, as to not bother my neighbors unduly. I do believe in the rights of property
owner's. But, as the saying states: "You're right to swing your fist ends and the tip of my nose." Should
those of us in the area have to abide increased noise and traffic, and decreased property values for
the gain of a single individual, who knew how the area was zoned when he purchased the property?
I would hope the planning commission and county commissioners would consider if a shooting range
was something they wanted in their neighborhood before they rule on if it should be allowed in ours.
Thank you for your consideration.
Steve Ceplius
3444 County Road 19
Fort Lupton, CO 80621
Chris Gathman
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Mr. Gathman,
Siert, Arlen W [Arlen.Siert@XCELENERGY.COM]
Tuesday, June 18, 2013 12:09 PM
Chris Gathman
Objection to Proposed Gun Range
My name is Arlen Siert and I own the property at 3238 CR 19. I and every neighbor I am aware of strenuously object to
changing the zoning to allow a gun range near our properties. There are safety hazards due to the long ranges of bullets
and also increased vehicle traffic on CR 19 and surrounding roads. There is also widespread concern over nuisance noise
over long portions of the day and night. Current noise ordinances do not cover impact noise from sources such as gunfire
which must be measured differently and should be applied to impact noise thresholds which are not currently covered by
Weld County. The berm wall will be totally ineffective as a noise control measure.
This proposal will benefit the gun range landowners only and harm the rest of us. We have already been subjected to
constant gas compressor station noise and heavy equipment and vehicle traffic night and day, and compressor station
night lighting in excess of the Weld County Codes. Weld County has failed to enforce its own existing ordinances
regarding these constant nuisances. Enough is enough! We were here first.
Thank You,
Arlen Siert
(303) 619-3179
1
•
Wildlife Adversely Affected by USR13-0015
Without the annual summer bird populations, the rabbit, prairie dog, field mouse, kangaroo rat and
snake populations in the area will explode; as well as the insect populations. This area, like most
agricultural areas, relies on the bird migrations to help the farmers. Without the birds, the livelihoods of
many would suffer and illness from mosquitos in particular would increase in the area within range of
the sound of regular gunfire.
A bird consumes 113 of its body weight daily in order to survive. While raising young, that number is
exponential by the number of hatchlings in the nest. Some bird species, like swallows and flycatchers,
will raise two clutches of offspring each summer. Do you have any idea how many billions of mosquitos,
flies, miller moths, dragonflies, beetles, ants and other types of insects these birds collectively consume
over a summer? Enough to come back year after year to raise their young or stop overnight on their
migrations further north in spring or south in the fall. There are fourteen (14) different species that
nested on our property this year.
With our ever-expanding urban areas, it is especially important in a Right -to -Farm County that we
preserve their summer nesting grounds. They rely on us as much as we rely on them. I do not believe
any bird will live in this area if the proposed shooting range is allowed.
The following lists represent the birds sighted on our property in the last twelve (i2) months:
Migratory Birds:
Red -winged Blackbirds
Yellow -headed Blackbirds
Bald Eagles
Great Egrets
House Finches
Cordilleran Flycatchers``
Great Crested Flycatchers
Canada Geese
Swainson's Hawks
Little Blue Herons
Blue Jays
Indigenous Birds:
Mourning Doves':
Rock Doves
Northern Flickers
Red-tailed Hawks*
Killdeers
Nested on our property at 3225 County Rd 19
Respectfully submitted, Pam Imler-Cooper
Western Kingbirds
Mallards
American White Pelicans
Ring-necked Pheasants
Northern Pintails'
Robins'
Brewer's Sparrows"
Chipping Sparrows
Barn Swallows
Cinnamon Teals
Eastern Meadowlark*
Barn Owls
Great Horned Owls
European Starlings
21(9
t
l
•
i
I '• t t
L- (
3,\A 5:k eeVlo 1"
I
i
i
• .
EXHIBIT
Exhibit File contains CD with
Planning Commission
Exhibit 23
Please See Original File
Hello