The URL can be used to link to this page

Browse Search

Home My WebLink About20131967.tiffApplicant Jeff Childs INVENTORY OF ITEMS FOR CONSIDERATION Case Number USR13-0024 Submitted or Prepared Prior to Hearing At Hearing 1 Surrounding Property Owner — Cherie Berthod letter dated May 17, 2013 X 2 Surrounding Property Owner — Ronald and Carolyn Grande letter dated May 20. 2013 X 3 Surrounding Property Owner — Lynn and Linda Lewis letter dated May 17, 2013 X 4 Surrounding Property Owner — Richard Bettale letter dated May 20. 2013 X 5 Surrounding Property Owner — Jane Murphy letter dated May 17. 2013 X 6 Surrounding Property Owner — Corrine Lewis letter dated May 17, 2013 X 7 Surrounding Property Owner — Andy Johnson letter dated May 17, 2013 X 8 Surrounding Property Owner — Mike and Rhea Hoops letter dated May 17, 2013 X 9 Surrounding Property Owner — Saliha Greff letters dated May 29, 2013 and May 17, 2013 X 10 Surrounding Property Owner — Dan and JoAnn Borys letter dated May 31, 2013 X 11 Surrounding Property Owner — Richard Metzger letter dated May 17, 2013 X 12 Surrounding Property Owner — Martha Schmauss letter dated May 17, 2013 X 13 PowerPoint Presentation from the applicant X 14 Summary of the Neighborhood Meeting held on June 12, 2013 X 15 Surrounding Property Owner — Dan and JoAnn Borys letter dated June 20, 2013 X 16 Surrounding Property Owner — JoAnne Benedict's letter received July 2, 2013 X 17 Surrounding Property Owner — Philip Benedict's letter received July 2. 2013 X 18 Surrounding Property Owner — Corrine Lewis letter received July 2, 2013 X 19 Surrounding Property Owner — Martha Schmauss' letter received July 2, 2013 X 20 Surrounding Properly Owner — Ron and Mary Ann Hocker's letter received July 2, 2013 X 21 Surrounding Property Owner — Dan and JoAnn Borys letter dated June 20, 2013 X 22 Surrounding Properly Owner — John Haley's letter received July 2, 2013 X I hereby certify that the twenty-two items identified herein was submitted to the Department of Planning Services at or prior to the scheduled Planning Commissioners hearing. Diana Aungst , Planner May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: RECEIVED HAY 2 2013 Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, /44'3 Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 D I9 May 20, 2013 RECEIVED MAY 21 7013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, 14696 Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 EXHIBIT trims- coati EXHIBIT pc 94-5 -calk May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: RECEIVED MAY 2 4'nil Weld County r'lanning Department GREELEY OFFICE The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, lye iSY Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 ti)a' a/t1- .42 /M -1),e,& .47/ /?4 26f-/°° dim / 'leg 1Z-6 edAdy- yitez-L &via ezfeyz.4. goeitz.1311-0-7)-4, >t.v .14,;0 /D& G`% 12_/ L%Ldl�1J �, GLe g 4 f Welt f;/149;/1.e's j3-ez , Xiia RECEIVED May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: MAY 28?nil Weld County Piannnng Depslflii�t# GREELEY OFFICE The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, /i:4 yj Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 EXHIBIT• RECEIVED May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-OO24 Dear Planning Services: MAY 28 'nil Weld County :=tanning PRoMt tififil GREELEY OFFICZ The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, Jr?c7 Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 EXHIBIT RECEIVED May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: MAY 2 8 7010 Weld County Panning Department GREELLY OFFICE The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, j d Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 RHIBIIH . RECEIVED MAY 30 ?n1') Weld County Harming Department GREELEY OFFICE May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, 1.4-x`{ field County Road 32-. ----- Longmont, CO 80504 EXHIBIT 06f4 0o 7 May 24, 2013 Special Use Permit Case #USR 13-0024 I have two additional comments/concerns regarding the referenced permit. It indicates that the owner would operate with 75 regular kennels and 25 day care residents. The Longmont Humane Society typically houses about 100 dogs and a local veterinary clinic operates a day care that tops out at 30 dogs. By comparison, this proposed kennel is no "mom & pop" operation and it will definitely impact the existing environment! This permit would also include operation of a retail outlet. I have lived at this location for 43 years and I am very familiar with Weld County's priorities in approving special use permits for agricultural purposes. But this is not agriculture or even residential development, it is a purely commercial business that has no place in this location. Andy son 1489 ounty Rd. 32 Longmont, CO. 80504 I .?7 May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: RECEIVED MAY 31 Intl Weld County manning Department GREELEY OFFICE The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, Mike and Rhea Hoops 14407 Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 s EXHIgIT,, VSRO Saliha Greff 14445 County Road 3 Longmont, Colorado 80504 (720) 987-9386 May 29, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Case # USR13-0024 RECEIVED JUN 039nii Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE Dear Planning Services: In addition to the attached letter dated May 17, 2013 which we have signed, we would like to offer the following additional information to help inform your consideration of the application by Jeff Childs for a Special Use Permit to operate a large scale (75 dog) dog kennel and 25 dog daycare center at the intersection of County Road 3 and County Road 32. My husband Todd and I moved into the neighborhood at the address of 14445 County Road 3 in January of this year. Our personal goals were to move to a desirable area that was in close proximity to Boulder, Longmont, and Denver allowing for a quiet country type atmosphere with practical amenities close by. We selected this 5 acre plot after nearly 2 years of searching in Weld County. We have many friends and co-workers who are looking for a similar lifestyle and considering this exact area to avoid the excessive cost of building an acreage home in Boulder County. The reasons for our strong opposition to granting the Special Use Permit are as follows: 1. This location is prime for acreage development and tax base revenue. There are many people like us who cannot pay Boulder County prices for the luxury of this lifestyle — one which is quiet, "neighborhoody," and peaceful. County Road 3 and its intersection with County Road 32 is approximately 1/2 mile from our location. The addition of —100 dogs barking at night will simply destroy not only our reasons for moving here, but also the potential for the County to earn a valuable tax base from others who are seeking a similar lifestyle and developing adjacent to the area. To grant one individual a Special Use Permit to operate a grossly oversized dog kennel and pet daycare operation would clearly destroy the opportunity for many others to move into the area and enjoy the many benefits it has to offer. Granting the vs EXHIBIT 1 application will not only deter new development and reduce existing property values, but it will also invite litigation by those of us currently living in the area to pursue private nuisance claims for breaching our collective rights to the quiet enjoyment of our property. It's simply not worth it. 2. The proposed use is, by design, not going to be operated in a manner that is compatible with existing and planned land uses in the neighborhood. Unlike other parts of Weld County, the intersection of CR 3 and CR 32 is quite residential and is set up to function as a neighborhood with acreage lots. The placement of a large scale commercial dog kennel operation is clearly not consistent with a residential development model for the following reasons: a. The proposed location abuts and is adjacent to residential properties where the land owners should expect to have some quiet enjoyment of their land. This kind of commercial operation would be best located in an area where there are no people in a close proximity in the evening hours who want to spend time with their families and get a good night's rest. The people who live here are solid contributors to the Weld County community and we hope the County will consider their needs for a quality lifestyle — and not be short-sighted when considering this Special Use Permit application; b. County Road 3 is neither designed nor engineered to sustain the expected traffic flow for 75 kenneled dog owners, and moreover, for 25 daily dog daycare owners to transport their pets in and out multiple times per day. As it stands, there is a split in the maintenance obligations of the road between Weld County and the Town of Mead. In the winter, this would prove incredibly challenging for not only the residents of CR 3, but also the patrons to the proposed business; and c. Highway 66, as you know, is a one lane road permitting traffic speeds at 60 miles per hour. The turn from Hwy 66 onto CR 3 is less than desirable from a safety standpoint, and increasing the traffic flow and turn volume would only increase the danger to all who travel on these roads. 3. Operation of an Animal Boarding facility is highly regulated and requires strict compliance with certain conditions — including sanitation and sewage management. Mr. Childs is a first time operator of such a facility and has no demonstrated ability to meet the County's and State's requirements in this regard. It would be much more appropriate for Mr. Childs to test his skills in an area that does not have a direct impact on people's day-to-day home lives. There are many locations in Weld County and elsewhere that are suitable for this purpose. 4. The Common Sense Position This particular area is already vulnerable to extensive oil and gas operational activities. The citizens understand that oil and gas development is an immediate risk to their ability to enjoy their land and the peacefulness of this location. However, the difference is that the drilling operations are short in duration and eventually the associated noise nuisance ceases. If the County were to approve the Special Use Permit, the County unfortunately will be assisting with the generation of constant noise pollution, sewage problems, rodents, and other negative impacts that are detrimental to current Weld County residents (many of whom have lived here for several generations) and others who have made significant emotional and financial investments to this area. We respectfully suggest only that you ask yourselves whether you would want to live, sleep and eat so closely to this particular kind of commercial establishment when you are considering this matter. We thank you for your consideration of our position and we look forward to discussing more live at the public hearing. Saliha Greff May 17, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, '-1,1t-t5, Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 RECEIVED May 31, 2013 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Ave. Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Case #USR13-0024 JUN 0 4'MI Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE Dear Planning Services: The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which we believe would have a negative impact — more specifically as follows: 1. A large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2. 24/7 noise in our quiet neighborhood 3. Possible odorous smell of excrement if not carefully monitored/disposed 4. Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Dan & JoAnn Borys 14737 County Rd. 3, Longmont, CO 80504 EXHIBIT V►sftt3-ooa 4 RECEDED May 17, 2013 JUN 0 4 Weld County Pr,;:fining L ,urtment GREELLY OFFICE Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re:Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, aa-ee V`, cm (ALA (\'1 --M6/6-17q5- Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 EXHI_BIITa� v0(u3 s May 17, 2013 RECE"VED JUN 0 4 +1 Weill County r lannirn, ..partment GREELEY OE h LCE Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 Re: Case # USR13-0024 Dear Planning Services: The above referenced application has presented numerous concerns to our neighborhood, all of which would have a negative impact. More specifically as follows: 1) Large increase in vehicular traffic on our dirt road 2) Noise to our quiet neighborhood 3) Possible odorous smell if not carefully monitored 4) Negative impact on property values of the neighborhood We would like to request this application be denied for the above reasons. Regards, /7'11g.r?rio sr rmoSs f `y7`/5 Weld County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 U J J cu -, • co .I.J O >r% 2 O DC E co V Co>,. O !tA O O -O Co to C st 0 m b.0 0 CI >4 • • — V co LL tDA C :E.75_, Co 0 ID tDA .C L_ a) > 0 a) 0 VI imate ate contro ro U a) C O • • Lobby and Check -in Area ch CL) U • Q) V) a.1 L_ 0 C 2 E 0 O cc C 0 O L) E 0 0 cc C 0 co C E w Grooming Room y insulated for sound to mitigate any noise issues U- • • • • Space for the dogs to run and play in an outside environment imit sound and visibility of animals Landscaping to and not be changed. cu L_ D U OD CZ C .� F a) L_ D 0 CD OD co a) L_ U Co 4--J 0 2 • • • 24 hour supervision • • U c6 LL 4A 10 ca O m au u c a) -a v) a) co c O v) s. 4) a_ Monday — Friday 6:30 am to 6:30pm • • Saturday 8:00am to 12:00pm E O N I C 0 4J C CU E 4J C 0 0- 0 - co CU 0 U I co C D • ....... E 0_ NJ 0 73 O O C O E C co O. O 4_, 4-I O_ icu D 4) _C -0 E 4_, c Lu a) O O on 4_, CD c 4) -CI cn Q al -O 4 -O VI co = c O 0 al, , E d be enforced O a Ln E • • -o a) a) a (n 0 0 co a) co MO 0 a) U C cu 4- >% The outside fu -o cu a) o > 4) a) to C CD ti - a) -O a a) 4- (/) 0 = 0 a) QJ -C V 0 V) Co M -O 0 4-0 (1) U C Water wou N v V) a) 0 C C co (13 4-1 O 0 0 4 - CU .C a U - 24 hour supervision a) OD C a) E CD C a) 0 V) To 0 co 4J o- n a) .i.7) 0 cn 0 O Q O co - o Landscaping would be used to limit sound and visibility of animals Kennel policy to minimize noise • • • • • move any dogs that are barking continuously back inside the kennel a C U CD a) 0 co 0 C 0 a,o C CD O L C 0 U C 4- 0 0 4-1 CO Co CO 4 - -+ CB E C I I animal is trained to minimize the barking Noise mitigation will be a top priority and can be reasonably obtained v 4-1 a) Ca C E Cr; 4J CD 4J a) E CD Q -o co a) i X a) a) >- C 0 CB 0 a) F - tan s_ co 0 C L 0 U a) 73 a) c co an C Co a) 0 L_ C 0 U >- C ca 0 CD 0 co -o co 0 an C ? • a� .c.r) 0 0_ co C 0 co a) 0 L Ca L 0 co U co 4-1 O a) a CD W . — V Q > C = -O 0 -0 C >. 4U co C �c 0 cz V C a 0_ co V 0 O- o_ _c0 V CD C a) a) • N co -0 co a -I-) , -0 co V) co a) V O_ V a) E O au • -0 C a.) 0 CU 8,E co 0 a) O C U . - CU CU CU MI C Waste Hand . cu . a) co (1) --z3) b0 a O a) 73 E Q .E . L . _ co a) Co '- 0- < -0 -0 -o a) 4-1 a) 4- C V) - o -o C CD -o a) C C6 a) V _o cu L._ 0 CU 4J 4- 0 C CU U C CU c o � V a) 0 .0 +.., co 4-J 0 a) (13 ,,,>- 0 _c i5 .4-) u 0 c E 4-) o_ +-I a) a, C > 4_, 0 c a.) >. -o L_ 0 cu cu o_ ._.. a) bp %� oa,O . hA C a) C CD O. V ._ 9 9 (13 O tit O a) ID -a O +-J a) O_ O 2 0_ a) 4-) _c 4-I a) U C CD 4-.) L... a) a) _c F- N M CC U -C 4J S- 0 C CC U O a) V a) -o a) _.o -o Customers wou (N CO CC U C O v) a) C D 75 C co LO lD I O ane off of Hwy 66 (Safety) C s_ D 4 — CU v) co S CC U CR 5 is a paved road i ari u i 0 V -O 0 0 s O mo b.A a) •_. 0 N L- Q I CI) C o a) E O t1A C 0 n 0 O a ul L_ .4▪ J J E O 0 M r-i O eN CU C OD CU a) 2 O O O to .v z Noise Issues • • . L O >- C a) O -o c C Cl.) C 4-J a) O -, a) CO > C co CD 4-J C Ca D - O a) U0 E a) . a) a ro -a Q C C •— ca C t/) ra a) a) Gi C C a--' L CU O v) a) a) }, - a) CO )< _c L _C tiow (1 }' Q (1) -C ta.o >' a O +-' C a) CE Q O C >- C p —O a) o O i a) J C co Ca Cab ' L W 4-) -0 0.0 _C C a) O_ ' — v - O ` ) O n — � ° U *----- 73 O nA ' — CO -O O O >- (1) (1) >, a) a,>- N _C CU cu - m O 1— C< Q v -O 6 Z O U C I I 0_-0 J ▪ I I - Sod Farm Cap 0 cp r -I v > O d --+ 7U co l T a) V) V) CU U C6 O CC U C co N M CC vi m O v CL0 in C6 QJ O IL v, C � a) -0_ >- Ca U 4- I IL • o_ _cm' -0 0 +-' c (f) m m 4-I . a) c6 ..0, cu 4-J 4-) a_c c L_a) IDcua� can Q .- - C L 2 4-) a) o_ _o c o _c o_ cu to o ti C .— >. E 4-J . — +� I>: -O ° ° CO c o E cn 49 LIT •_ L- cu a, E L — v) scu ow 0 2 = cu 0 a) • V) _c c C C 2 V U 2 o -0 a, u fD C -J -0 ct5 o E co 2 O.cuE_ •— >. CD 4' _c > E OL- u t _c cu ▪ L_ a_c 4 F- -0 0 0• 756 0 L_ 0 ID • a) a) _c - 0 0 4-1 CU -0. v) a) L_ a) D 4- Rocky Mountain Kennel, LLC Dear Neighbors, Hi there! As neighbors, thank you for being part of this site review plan. I have received your letters that were sent to Weld County Planning and Zoning Department. I do welcome your input and look forward to meeting you. I am very hopeful that your concerns will be satisfied because of the attention to detail and level of sensitivity that I plan to maintain. I would like to set up a neighborhood meeting to discuss your concerns and answer any questions you may have. I would like to call the meeting on Wednesday June 12, 2012 at 7:00pm at the corner of CR 3 and CR 32. If you can't make it to the meeting I could meet with you on an individual basis any time that would work for you! First, I want to assure you that smells will not be an issue. This is going to be a very professional and clean operation! As CFO of National Western Stock Show that hosts many agricultural and animal events throughout the year, including the famous Stock Show, I am well aware of how to maintain a well run facility. Also, with proper management and care of the dogs, noise from barking will be at a minimum. The dogs will have plenty of exercise and play time that eliminates the tendency for nervous barking. Also, they will be kept in at night. Remember, I plan to live there as well! I am with you on any noise and smells! Also, my website and staff will direct the traffic to the facility from CR 5 to CR 32, which is paved and closer to development. It is just the more obvious route. Therefore, traffic on CR 3 should not significantly increase. Below gives an outline of the project and provides more details: The facility would include inside climate controlled stalls for the overnight boarding and rest time during the day. The facility would include an office area with an examination room, lobby, and bathroom and grooming room. The facility would be built to blend into the environment and would be a quality engineered building that would be fully insulated for sound and mitigate any noise issues. I will also build my personal home on the property for 24 hour supervision. All dogs would be inside at night and would also have nap time during the day. The kennel concept would allow space for the dogs to run and play in an outside environment with all the other dogs 4 to 6 hours per day. Dogs need a lot of exercise and space to run and play. Therefore the kennel would include large fenced areas for the outside play environment. The outside space would also include multiple smaller fenced areas to accommodate smaller and shy dogs. The Kennel would include 50 stalls. 75% would include one dog per stall and 25% would include two dogs per stall. Also included is Doggy Day Care, grooming services and vet services. The EXTIT maximum number of boarding dogs (overnight) would be 75. The maximum number of day care dogs (no overnight boarding) would be 25 for a total maximum number of dogs of 100. The Kennel would cater to area residents that do not want to leave their dogs at home while at work, gone for the day or on vacation or extended trips. The landscaping for the site would include the grass land that is already in place with added trees and shrubbery to enhance the appearance of property and surrounding buildings. Landscaping would also be used to limit sound and visibility of animals. Most acreage would remain agricultural and not be changed. In addition to building the Kennel, I would also build my personal residence on the property for 24 hour supervision Hours of Operation: The operating hours would be Monday — Friday 6:30 am to 6:30pm. Saturday 8:00am to 12:00pm. Sunday — Closed (by appointment only — 12pm to 2pm) Number of employees proposed to be employed at this site: The operation would start with 1 full time employee and 1 part time employee. As the Kennel grows the employees would increase to 5 to 6 full time positions. Traffic Plan The entrance to the property would be off of CR 32. Most customers would be taking CR 5 north from Hwy 66 and turn west on CR 32. All entrances to the property would be greater than 350 feet from the intersection of CR3 and CR32. The required number of parking spaces would be made available to the customers and employees around the kennel, including the proper number of handicapped spaces. Most traffic would be in the morning for drop-offs and in the evenings for pick-ups. The operation would start with approximately 6 customers/employees per day and would grow to approximately 29 customers/employees per day. See calculation below. Total Dogs 4,380 10,220 21.170 Average Stay 5 5 5 Total Drop offs 876 2044 4234 Total Pickups 876 2044 4234 Total 1752 4088 8468 52 52 52 Per week 34.00 79.00 163.00 Per Day 5.00 11.00 23.00 Employees 1.00 4.50 6.00 Total Traffic 6.00 15.50 29.00 Dust Abatement plan All roads and parking on the property would be gravel/road base to reduce the amount of dust. Also a speed limit of 5 mph would be enforced to also reduce the dust. The outside dog areas would include 3 to 4 inches of pea gravel to minimize dust; the outside dog areas would also be fully fenced. Noise Abatement plan The facility would include inside climate controlled stalls for the overnight boarding and rest time during the day. The facility would be built to blend into the environment and would be a quality engineered building that would be fully insulated for sound and mitigate any noise issues. I will also build my personal home on the property for 24 hour supervision. All dogs would be inside at night and would also have nap time during the day (12:00pm — 2:00pm). Landscaping would also be used to limit sound and visibility of animals. It would also be the policy of the kennel to minimize the noise by moving any dogs that are barking continuously back inside the kennel. Animals that have a history of uncontrolled barking would not be allowed back until the animal is trained to minimize the barking. I also would be living on the land and will be very close to the kennel operation, and I will not allow any uncontrolled barking and will therefore take care of any problems as soon as possible. Waste Handling Plan All dog waste will be cleaned up/picked up immediately and stored in sealed dumpster/trashcans and will be collected by the local trash company once per week or more if needed. All dog kennels will be cleaned and disinfected daily to prevent diseases with an in floor drainage system that is connected to the engineered septic system. The impact on the surrounding properties will be minimal and noise mitigation will be a top priority and can be reasonably obtained, which would continue to promote the health, safety and general welfare of the present and future residents of the neighborhood. I want to be a good neighbor and friend, I look forward to talking to you further about the details of my project and answer any questions you may have. I look forward to meeting you at the neighborhood meeting. If you need to schedule an individual meeting please feel free to call me anytime, I look forward to meeting you and getting to know you better. Sincerely, Jeff Childs 303-475-1528 Neighborhood Meeting When: June 12, 2013 Where: Corner of CR 3 and CR 32 Time: 7:00pm Attendance Andy Johnson — 1489 County Road 32 Jane Murphy — 14757 County Road 3 Richard and Martha Schmauss — 14745 County Road 3 Terry and Nancy Gould — 14741 County Road 3 Linda Lewis -14584 County Road 3 Corrine Lewis — 14504 County Road 3 Ronald and Carolyn Grande — 14696 County Road 3 Richard Bettale — 14491 County Road 3 Todd and Saliha Greif— 14445 County Road 3 Cheryl Berthod — 14834 County Road 3 The meeting started a little after 7:00pm. I called the meeting to order and gave an overview of the project and went over various points as outlined in a letter sent to the neighbors on May 31, 2013. I also referenced a letter I sent to the surrounding neighbors on April 6, 2013. I showed all the neighbors the plot plan and several questions were answered on the layout of the property. It was noted that all utilities come off of CR 3 and therefore the buildings were placed to be the most cost effective and also the concerns from the fire department about the water flow and the proximity of a fire hydrant on CR3. The neighbors concerns were the following: • Traffic Issues: The neighbors were concerned about traffic on CR 3 and the left turn from Hwy 66 onto CR 3. o I proposed to direct all the customers down CR 5 to CR 32 by means of advertising on the website and brochures .This will most likely be the preferred route by customers because there is a left hand turn lane on Hwy 66 onto CR 5 and CR 5 is a paved road. CR3 is dirt and gravel and would not be as desirable. This is also the best access from I-25 where most of the travel will come from, at least in one direction. I realize that I can't force customers in this route, but I will strongly recommend that path. It is also a more efficient route as far as time is concerned because the speed limits on Hwy 66 and CR 5 are both 55 miles per hour. • Property Value would decrease: o Property values surrounding other Kennels in the area have not decrease; in fact property values in those areas continue to rise. o According to the seller of the property and as the majority land owner surrounding the property, it is in his best interest to preserve land values in the immediate area and he believes a dog boarding facility will not adversely affect the economics of the area. o Several neighbors suggested that the land should be developed with houses. • That would put as many as 25 houses on the land which would increase traffic, incurring an average of 250 trips per day. Each house would have an average of 2 unsupervised dogs, with possibilities of incessant barking and the area would lose its agricultural feel. • Smell issue o An ill maintained kennel that smells bad is not likely to be successful and attract quality customers. This is the first part of my business plan - to have the best care possible. o All dog waste will be cleaned up/picked up immediately and stored in sealed dumpster/trashcans and will be collected by the local trash company once per week or more if needed. o All dog kennels will be cleaned and disinfected daily to prevent diseases with an in floor drainage system that is connected to the engineered septic system. o Smells will not be an issue at all compared to the existing dairy and feed lot to the east o I was also informed that the land owner three properties to the west plans to start a pig farm with up to 1000 pigs on his property. No neighbor was concerned by the pig farm as far as smell or noise. As CFO of National Western, it is my first hand experience the level of noise and smells from large quantities of pigs. • Noise issue o All buildings would have a high level of insulation for sound proofing. o Landscaping would also be used to limit sound and visibility of animals. o All dogs would be inside at night after 6:30 pm. o All dogs would be supervised during the day o Policy of the Kennel in minimize the noise • All continuously barking dogs would be taken inside • Continuously barking dogs would not be allowed back unless the dog had training to stop the barking such as obedience training and/or bark collars. o I will also be living on the property and will available for 24 hour supervision. o This project will be designed and managed to high standards; thereby noise and smells will not be an issue o I understand there have been issues among the neighbors concerning ill behaved barking dogs in the past. With proper and professional canine management and care, this errant behavior is mitigated. The meeting concluded at approximately 8:30pm. RECEIVED June 20, 2013 To whom it concerns, JUN 26 'nil Weld County i'lanning Department GREELLY OFFICE Please accept this letter as our statement re: Case #USR13-0024 as we will be out of town for the hearing on July 2nd. We are the property owners directly across Road 3 to the west, the northern part of our property at the intersection of Rd. 3 and Rd. 32. We "settled" here in this neighborhood for its seclusion and surrounding small farms, ranches, homes on acreage. It is a quiet, residential, agricultural neighborhood. Our neighbors pursue boarding, raising horses, cows, growing hay, etc.. We have split our parcel of —20 acres into 2, one of which is this north end, on which we have intended to build another home. We have already taken steps to construct this new home — we have plans drawn, a culvert installed for the entry off of Rd. 3. Our plan was then be to offer our current location as a luxury acreage site. The operation of a dog kenned directly across from us would obviously destroy this plan. The proposed use of this land is abhorrent to this neighborhood. This would put us directly across from the proposed kennel buildings if/when we do build on our north end. We are adamantly opposed to this proposed use; the thought of having 100 +/- dogs right outside our front door, across the street is unacceptable to us. This proposed use is a commercial business, not in any way fitting in the agricultural zoning of this neighborhood. It lends to possible future pursuits which are not in keeping at all in the rural agricultural setting. When we were first apprised in a letter by the buyer, Jeff Childs, his proposal seemed "mild". Since then we've become aware of the scope, the size of this venture. It is just not welcome in our neighborhood. Take a drive down Rd. 3 and you will witness the quiet rural nature of this neighborhood. This will not fit in the present use of this neighborhood. We understand that the owner of this land for sale, through his realtor, has threatened saying if this is not approved he will split the land into 2.5 acre sites for modular homes —what sort of intimidation is this?! We do not want to endure the noise of or have in our vision 100 possible kenneled dogs across the street from us. We do not want to be anywhere near to the smell, the traffic, the dust, the lighting, etc... This is not a valid use of the agricultural zoning of our neighborhood. It is not a neighborhood for a commercial business. This is not a small mom/pop proposal being presented. How would YOU like to live beside a kennel? In looking for a house in the country, you would certainly look elsewhere. This would have a huge effect on our property values. Our homes are our biggest investments in life. This proposed use will undoubtedly impact our personal and emotional investments and well being here. ocmtmt4 We've all met with Jeff informally and have nothing against this man — he seems like a very nice guy. But his intentions for this piece of land we strongly oppose. We don't believe this is fair — all for the benefit on one individual who is seeking to test his entrepreneurial skill. We urge this use be denied. Respectfully, Dan & JoAnn Borys JoAnne Benedict 14753 County Road 3 Longmont, CO 80504 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 This letter is in regard to the proposed dog kennel at the intersection of Weld County Road 3 and Weld County Road 32. My husband and I bought the land at our current address on Weld County Road 3 in early 1971. We were looking for a beautiful piece of rural land suitable to raise a few horses. I am very concerned with the scope of the proposed dog kennel in this rural section of Weld County. I believe it is incompatible with the land use for this area for the following reasons. 1. It is my understanding that the planning commission does not normally allow a large dog kennel operation within 500 feet of surrounding properties. A prior dog kennel in this area was rejected for that reason and that person only wanted a kennel of 50 greyhound dogs to be raised for racing, not a large commercial operation.. 2. This dog kennel is not just a simple desire to have a place to breed some dogs, but it is a major commercial enterprise. I understand that they want to have boarding, day care, bathing and grooming, a vet clinic as well as a retail shop to sell dog related products. Their facility will accommodate as many as 75 to 100 or more dogs. That will require hiring several employees. Such a commercial enterprise is not compatible with the rural nature of this area. This area has always been deemed low density agriculture and those of us who have settled in this area expected it to stay that way. 3. I am also very concerned with the increased traffic on Weld County Road 3. I understand that the proposed owner has said he will tell people to use Road 5, but we know that people will do what is convenient. If they are coming from Longmont or going to Longmont, they will use Road 3. Road 3 was never designed for that level of traffic. It was designed as a farm access road only. As a matter of fact the Weld County Commissioners guaranteed to Platte River Power Authority that the road would remain a farm access road only and they gave PRPA permission to put high voltage transmission lines on the county right of way. If the increased traffic requires upgrades to Road 3, it may require that the high voltage poles be moved off the right of way. I think that the PRPA would require that the county cover the expense of purchasing new right of way and the cost of moving the poles. This is an unnecessary expense that the county should not have to incur. Since there are other places that would be more suitable for a large commercial dog operation, I suggest that the planning commission deny this special use request. JoAnne Benedict EXHIBIT L/SR Philip Benedict 14753 County Road 3 Longmont Colorado 80504 Weld County Department of Planning Services 1555 North 17th Avenue Greeley Colorado 80631 This is my comment concerning the building and use of a dog boarding/care, veterinary services, and retail sales facility at the intersection of CR32 and CR03. We have been living here for 42 years. I have seen all but two of the structures on road 03 built. I have noticed how the homes in their own usual, unusual way fit into the fabric of this neighborhood. They are all, for the most part, residences with acreage for agricultural use. It is a quiet neighborhood primarily because road 03 is a short gravel farm road. Traffic except for rare drilling occurances is very light. Because of the PRPA HV power line towers the road is forever designated a farm road. This dog kennel with a capacity of 100 animals worries me. It appears to be an anchor facility for the three 20 acre parcels. I can't imagine anyone would envision a primary residence located 100 feet from 100 dogs barking like dogs and behaving like dogs and wanting attention like dogs. This reminds me of the cliche 'camel's nose under the tent'. If no one wants to buy parcel #2 for a residence which fits in with our neighborhood then I can see a commercial special use request for something that doesn't fit. And likewise for parcel #3. This kennel will not fit —in because of the commercial building itself, the appendages of the dog runs, the waste storage facility and water treatment and large paved lighted parking lot. I can imagine this kennel project as a virus in a healthy host. The host cannot prevent the continuous commercial expansion. The kennel should be denied or its presence will forever permit added commercial encroachment. People who have business at the kennel will leave their house in a hurry. Otherwise they would not have business at the kennel. If they hurry from the west they will use dusty gravel road 03. If they hurry from the east on Ute Highway. it's a tossup(road 03 or paved road 05). There is no legal way the kennel can mandate the use of paved road 05 to the exclusion of dusty road 03. People will take the shortest route to their next destination. Weld is a large large county. It takes hours to drive. Visiting any Colorado county map will attest to that. There has to be many other places which are zoned for large commercial dog kennels before settling on a short dusty farm road in the middle of an agriculturally centered neighborhood. What I really see is an unfitable project dropped into this neighborhood. Imagine putting Funky's Fried Fish 4 Fox Hill or WaImart's parking lot '@ Gettysburg's 'Field of Death' or Lefty's Licorice Stand (a Arlington Cemetery. I don't want to wake up some morning and while doing stock chores see a camel's head -- or even a nose. Not even camel tracks. Thank you for the meeting and your time. I really appreciate it. Philip Benedict EXHIBIT I in U5k./3-0D21 c>4.4.4."-tA.1 . /-5L6.--0� /'G'- oc 3 6 fjo_5Oc, ..ry li-t--u-�li.e q. - e - Led .,ter .;- .may a e a ic-o-yc%--.c/ J. a ego --c, a .2/ Gtr -:.e. _o`o- " 4,7L. (4,a-c:cr,,,i 4` 4774-z=4,-7- . --e-/e-,,z_..- Z7L ..y - �v tz__ -t.(,..e a ..‘4,-,E, - --elf.c.a-,,.r....,,L.. ci-e-e,e2efe, --t-:-,., 6t., -&_,4;a.. ilt-e--6- ee-,-,e---e.,--,:l Gc- -«r, r )C d' a. r„ C,- ; /4Z -1, 6-44770 wL . 4 ..e__ -'..e_, fit ' --7u-e-',C'o;.,� t� Ali G .„,.,,z tea__-_ O .e.-- c L t , >--?'ci4 td �- .. dce,d- . . , y?? -14 -6,-/ ec uz li:Ails ue p 3, pa -cam z Gt 1 ,-1-7•Wet-e.—, • ,La-&--e-teecde 4.-4- t. c ,life ' a..dr -& a .771 -64.7-z-.0,2.-- 46.--,,,--- y --„e4; ---7,-,ele__ -Y pi.c.--;.z- ' - e- eiwz -o-v% 2 C�v�.c z.�a�� .-eu� -7e- -��aC� u vu� s�� . i �G ,e,,_ ,,,,„„,,„,- ,./ "i --14„,,r, ,,,,_. a....- e-40-,71-7744---44,e.le 4 -e).1,2 -?-41.44..1 h•d-- - ,e-u-e-.Z-/--ed-/ et a -7i- ed --/-a-ie, e -a ayl,41 .4-0-4.- No L- 00 + ,-,-,- /,', ir 6-(„1 4. -Az_," O3 ci'`,9.,2 -6;- - ai. d -a- e - d--- eZ7e3 . EXHIBIT I IZ L15-12_. I3-cot1 Martha Schmauss 14745 CR3 Longmont, CO. 80504 I live here with my husband, Rick Metzger. We are retired but continue to keep a few horses and to cut and bale hay for ourselves and our neighbors. We are talking about selling and moving to a smaller home in the next few years. We moved here almost 23 years ago from the city. We loved the peace and tranquility of our neighborhood. Putting a kennel in our quiet neighborhood would have a detrimental effect on our entire way of life. County Rds. 3 and 32 are in poor condition and have always been dusty in summer and rutty in snow and rain. An additional 50 trips a day from dog owners would make things even worse. The peace and quiet we have treasured will be broken by barking dogs, in violation of our noise ordinance. We worry about the smells of stored dog waste, storm water drainage and the possible decrease in water pressure. Our greatest fear is the devaluation of our property. Nobody is going to want to move into our neighborhood with a kennel so close to us. This isn't a place for a business. There are many more commercial locations that wouldn't impact families and their quality of life. Weld County would be far better off financially with property taxes from high end residences, just across the Boulder County line, than one kennel that would repel any residential building or sales. Please look ahead to the big picture and deny the special use petition. Respectfully, gee (2_ Martha J. Schmauss EXHIBIT tcf �� / .2-4 Board of Planning Commission This letter is to express our opposition to the proposed dog kennel at Rd 3 and Rd 32. Our address is 14762 WCR #3 and we have lived at this address for 14 years. We moved here from Erie where we had a small farm also but Erie surrounded us with housing developments and small businesses. We looked for a long time for a place where we thought this would not happen to us again before we settled on our present location. This proposed kennel will be a definite devaluation to our property, which adjoins the kennel property, and to the entire neighborhood. The traffic on Rd 3 will increase considerably causing more dust which we already fight constantly. We have a quiet neighborhood and the traffic noise will be a major interruption to our lives. I cannot imagine the noise and smell that will be generated by a 100 dog kennel. We already have a problem with water rationing. How much water is a 100 dog kennel use not only for watering the animals but also for cleaning and maintenance? He is planning on using this property for retail use also. This is an agricultural neighborhood and retail again will be causing more traffic, more dust and more noise from people at a retail store. I believe the county would realize much more tax base with residential property in this location. What is going to happen if his grand plan does not become profitable and he has to close the business? The land that could have been used for a number of houses has been ruined for quite some time and there will be no tax income for the county. How much money does the county spend on maintenance of rd 3 and rd 32 at the present time? How much more will the county have to spend for maintenance if they allow this business into our neighborhood. There will be people coming and going at all hours to drop off or pick up their dogs. I feel this is a definite safety hazard to the neighborhood as far as strangers being around at all hours. This will also cost the county for complaints by neighbors about strangers and about the noise from barking dogs. Thank you for listening to our concerns. Ron and Mary Ann Hocker I EXHIBIT ab LIST& I'_) - Ztf 1 June 20, 2013 To whom it concerns, Please accept this letter as our statement re: Case #USR13-OO24 as we will be out of town for the hearing on July 2nd. We are the property owners directly across Road 3 to the west, the northern part of our property at the intersection of Rd. 3 and Rd. 32. We "settled" here in this neighborhood for its seclusion and surrounding small farms, ranches, homes on acreage. It is a quiet, residential, agricultural neighborhood. Our neighbors pursue boarding, raising horses, cows, growing hay, etc.. We have split our parcel of —20 acres into 2, one of which is this north end, on which we have intended to build another home. We have already taken steps to construct this new home — we have plans drawn, a culvert installed for the entry off of Rd. 3. Our plan was then be to offer our current location as a luxury acreage site. The operation of a dog kenned directly across from us would obviously destroy this plan. The proposed use of this land is abhorrent to this neighborhood. This would put us directly across from the proposed kennel buildings if/when we do build on our north end. We are adamantly opposed to this proposed use; the thought of having 100 +/- dogs right outside our front door, across the street is unacceptable to us. This proposed use is a commercial business, not in any way fitting in the agricultural zoning of this neighborhood. It lends to possible future pursuits which are not in keeping at all in the rural agricultural setting. When we were first apprised in a letter by the buyer, Jeff Childs, his proposal seemed "mild". Since then we've become aware of the scope, the size of this venture. It is just not welcome in our neighborhood. Take a drive down Rd. 3 and you will witness the quiet rural nature of this neighborhood. This will not fit in the present use of this neighborhood. We understand that the owner of this land for sale, through his realtor, has threatened saying if this is not approved he will split the land into 2.5 acre sites for modular homes — what sort of intimidation is this?! We do not want to endure the noise of or have in our vision 100 possible kenneled dogs across the street from us. We do not want to be anywhere near to the smell, the traffic, the dust, the lighting, etc... This is not a valid use of the agricultural zoning of our neighborhood. It is not a neighborhood for a commercial business. This is not a small mom/pop proposal being presented. How would YOU like to live beside a kennel? In looking for a house in the country, you would certainly look elsewhere. This would have a huge effect on our property values. Our homes are our biggest investments in life. This proposed use will undoubtedly impact our personal and emotional investments and well being here. We've all met with Jeff informally and have nothing against this man — he seems like a very nice guy. But his intentions for this piece of land we strongly oppose. We don't believe this is fair — all for the benefit on one individual who is seeking to test his entrepreneurial skill. We urge this use be denied. Respectfully, Dan &JoAnn Borys EXHIBIT 1 aNDN 6 -31-z__ r5 cO` L.4 Zrray 2.7 20 /3 L % Ce4 D ( iwA/jy RA -A/ s/; A/6 C' , ss «j✓ / ec / i I Po 5e- b 7)6,G• irnwitlasc-e2 AI eV ele . *17 . y ,Ormz_s `70,+4` /f 9- i -ros ! a4o/ez e/A4/4-6 rz of //ifc Li/ 61-1✓13 re} "-Z. Ay "-Away Li vas 4 IW'?/ fir. (° 2 .s; -774 -sr 45/0-srr- e/ 7pf.6. ,elae pe›s,T 0 /e-64, EC--, t9z-y GiM ' C' -a OWR/5 44-4/0 O41 1!a'-- s/ p c'p £'c', a 4-s yzLz 7zi /tk-a-ni Oice Huy evr. 4J i/s-ve, 04)4/ ,l2mez) 77 -f -r s /Jvcr va -11'4. o vii ;c. Zf.) YSIfteS _a _rot/ 20 /O/ Gr./6 /4-7..//t/E y .C3 Au, of- o 16t ¢h+2.Wt / Ain? 77f Tai--'i✓ o P ,04.X . % /7,r ,9 -o Ty vie Tit& F/9n-0.1 i..5 zei_iJz ≤, t/6L..& Perm ! t. -y %axS'/ bzrit/1 mic-- a /I 5 4"1. 4-415/1 "Zto.t. 9 pp #1,1011e4i2udft . /9t-aU/G 1{z0/ la 6. L iE— D r,A 77ft s ST✓zrc rz V /1-5 A Li."4/f -- /24i/� 7c-Ad.r 1f/ H771/07- 11/e) /,Y/inco,//nt p4nTi To ,/ii_o/ 7 a7 6 nu.Ch/a / Ai _7ifies ,✓&Ale cc?L€,2_ . _ --- /Qt, orvci4e. ,vaid M 'v2- too 4}8 u --r G ✓‘ aieia * m 1,64u7ir sm ,4,e s ea-frcey pi6y 77,--e6 1, Piz /a6 .,v. 4/6., th 4}-uc/A yr C-ivAirc/vol rm."— Gc c. evec1G-4 /Zcs.sPcge-- Th f/z P20,c0/2TZers id 'y r 7u2rkt sc/T 4/E ibas. LSE 770-3' ,d "o≤ 60 ka,t/N CateGIO cwt./ dare arse. •'GL or Z. 10/247 f a .. 4 100 •v7"- 77, -*r j // P��Sv *-may iteitit.o 6 uowr t -t Gv� a0 y tfivE CA/c Po<5 /4 VA/ 1- / It' 2f'N,n f4 rE, ert6 4. C41 tee R- *S `?-Lis ! soc .7w csIer m t j- c £s 4 krv,v404-- 4 vmc�u l,�ou-moo Ppm< 1.ciou S 4P-77sr.77 /C/L rf_S rog.scieici i1 � //M'' A -a Alvc /Itsa Bch 7vt.,p /77fF n4' e".77- 5 P/2vPv S ia/‘ 7v 7"&-c.4_, 11/2 s Cc -4 Ewrs 7a Gr S et/e--2 77) cc s /hs l a/AJL5 _ L31,Ght-us& 41c2 -446-g- 0 , 777'7 s A-7srini Dv !.o Lc, c e.c_40 rite Ai I M Jr- To 7711 st,v d tiry W C2 " 3 z 77, C -4/57 -di iT tie)M'. y A.4L s �L12 z ©o 'c'v r- D ,1v 1 y /Yi a/ u s7 - y T/2-Ai--� c G 7h4 S' /Pc) /DL it)04.) i s 'n eeAvi P4-r?Ace.") C:di 7r/ PIC C_ o,✓o -24-ir/ PG s _ �.�,,� � eyti,vic a i9c yez.( Awn ,611/y 77n s ( cu csse-r:.. Hello