HomeMy WebLinkAbout20102253.tiff ,�dtifeC
o rite w 41 to rt /kit
3. * ri;-44 treobi
: ii.
I' - - '#4 .
ri
ii, , tp
, xnctu gen/
Jon NA
Monday, June 21 , 2010 Weld County Planning Department
GREELEY OFFICE
Chris Gathman �� �N
Weld County Department of Planning , 2 3 ?n in
fl
1555 N. 17th Ave. RECEIVED
Greeley, CO 80631
RE: Case # PZ- 1150
Dear Mr. Gathman,
I'm writing you today in response to the recent notification you sent concerning an application for a Change of
Zone on an adjacent parcel of land. The proposed change to a PUD with 8 residential lots and 4 outlots is of
great concern to us, and our non-profit organization would like to state its unmitigated objection to this change
being allowed. I hope you, your department, and all Commissioners will carefully consider the following
asons why we oppose this use.e .
he Wild Animal Sanctuary moved to this portion of Weld County 16 years ago in order to build a facility
compatible with the open space and undeveloped land that was prevalent in the area. At that time, surrounding
land use consisted of dry land wheat crops and open grassland - with the nearest residence being an old farm
house located a mile away. . . and no other dwellings for many miles.
Over the years, keeping in 1 i ne with the County's goal of not breaking land into small parcels, new people
coming to this area (including the PUD applicants) chose to purchase land near the sanctuary in order to build
themselves a home in the country with plenty of open space of their own. Most, if not all, took the time to come
to the Sanctuary before they purchased their land in order to learn about its mission, as well as how it
rehabilitates the animals and provides them with large acreage habitats to live in.
Of the people that have purchased land adjacent to the Sanctuary, only one has ever built a residential structure
adjacent to one of the Sanctuary's habitats — and that was done by one of our long-time volunteers who wished
to purchase land and build a house next to her favorite charity. Having her so close to a habitat was not a
problem, since she understood how the animals were rehabilitated, and how their lives may be affected by
having someone living right outside of the animals' territory. She has since been transferred by her employer to
CA, but retains ownership and control of the property, including what renters are allowed to live on the
property.
EXHIBIT
Il The Wild Animal Sanctuary I B
"Saving Captive Wildlife For Over 29 Years "
1946 WCR 53 * Keenesburg, CO 80643 * 303-536-0118
www.WildAnimalSanctuary.org
2010-2253
`. .�a� fe Co, rhiew Witqt
Ator r
CQisyrirrli
G
7rn ii I 71
a ;3‘.,. :74 .,
6c.
{_ O
otenctu ovrn
.� . , a
„„,, 131,
However, the concept of having a high-density housing project directly adjacent to one of the Sanctuary's Tiger
habitats is quite different, and represents many potential problems. People by nature are very curious, and it
would be all too natural for a multi-house neighborhood to find the tiger habitat adjacent to their mini-
subdivision a source of entertainment. Having people mulling back and forth along the tigers' territorial
boundaries would be very disturbing to the animals. . . and definitely counterproductive to the type of
environment the Sanctuary provides for its rescued animals.
In addition, much like Weld County's Right To Farm Statement - concerning city people moving to the country
- it's highly likely that sooner or later one or more of the people who chose to move into this proposed
neighborhood, would at some point decide they do not like having a Wildlife Sanctuary next door, and would
unrealistically want the Sanctuary to relocate somewhere else.
In relation to the following sections pertaining to PUD developments, the Sanctuary feels there are many
aspects that are highly incompatible with the proposed development being situated adjacent to the Wildlife
Sanctuary, and asks that you consider these sections questioning a PUD's compatibility with adjacent sites.
c. 27-2-70. Compatibility.
he density, design and location of land uses within and adjoining a PUD shall be designed to be compatible with other uses within
and adjoining the PUD. Compatible uses shall be determined by evaluating the general uses, building height, setback, offset, size,
density, traffic. dust, noise, harmony, character, common open space, ,screening, health, safety and welfare of the PUD in relation to
surrounding uses. (Weld County Code Ordinance 2003- 10)
Sec. 27-6-40. Component One — environmental impacts.
Intent. The intent of Component One is to identify and isolate any possible impacts the proposed use may have upon the environment
on the site, as well as on neighboring sites.
Sec. 27-6-70. Component Four — site design.
Intent. The intent of Component Four is to ensure that the PUD is established with consideration to the site's advantages and
limitations, as well as the compatibility of the development to adjacent sites. The design of the site should consider all existing
features, both natural and man-made, to determine those inherent qualities that give the site and the surrounding area its character.
4. A statement which demonstrates how the uses allowed by the proposed PUD rezoning will be compatible with land uses
surrounding the PUB Zone District, including a detailed description of how any conflicts between land uses surrounding the PUD
Zone District will be avoided or mitigated.
Sec. 27-6-80. Component Five - common open space usage.
Intent Common open space is an essential community asset and an important component of a development's design in a PUD.
Common open space attempts to preserve ecologically important environments, provides attractive views and space for recreational
activities and buffers the development from other land uses. The intent of Component Five is to ensure that each development provides
an appropriate amount and type of open space within the site.
• The Wild Animal Sanctuary
"Saving Captive Wildlife For Over 29 Years "
1946 WCR 53 * Keenesburg, CO 80643 * 303-536-0118
www.WildAnimalSanctuary.org
•
aufe e c A
OA Tr"- r
4.
y , i
if,'
•... N
.
Sec. 27-10-10. Purpose.
The purpose of this Article is:
J. To evaluate the impact on surrounding properties.
L. To recognize and respect both individual rights and connwnity interests and values when development is proposed.
We feel it is imperative the farming and open space which has been so prevalent to the area needs to be
preserved... as well as the area's historical low-density housing needs to be maintained. Given the Sanctuary's
unique mission, choosing to allow a PUD to be located directly adjacent to a Tiger habitat would not make
sense for either property.
As Executive Director of The Wild Animal Sanctuary, I would greatly appreciate your consideration in this
matter, and would also welcome the opportunity to discuss this issue at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely,
• 77-7
Pat Craig
Executive Director
• The Wild Animal Sanctuary
"Saving Captive Wildlife For Over 29 Years"
1946 WCR 53 * Keenesburg, CO 80643 * 303-536-0118
www.WildAnimalSanctuary.org
Chris Gathman
ilubject: FW: Comments on Case# PZ-1150 Rezone from AG to PUD
Chris Gathman
Planner III
Weld County Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Avenue, Greeley CO. 80631
Ph: (970)353-6100 ext. 3537
Fax: (970)304-6498
Original Message
From: Shellane [mailto:s.henders@yahoo.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 07, 2010 10:39 AM
To: Chris Gathman
Subject: Comments on Case # PZ-1150 Rezone from AG to PUD
Chris Gathman, Project Planner
Case #PZ-1150
Name: Sherry Wigaard & Velois Smith
Proposed Project: Change of Zone from Ag to PUD for 8 residential lots with Estate Zone Uses
along with 4 outlots
Re: Comments from Bosky Farms, LLC, property owners at 2340 WCR 55, Keenesburg, (adjacent
•operty owners on the east side of WCR 55)
The following are comments regarding this proposed project:
While we understand that property owners have the right to develop their property, we would
respectfully remind the Planning Commission and the Board of County Commissioners, that
Colorado is a "Right to Farm" State (C.R.S. 35-3.5-101) .
Specifically, we have concerns about possible nuisance complaints from people who purchase
these small Estate lots that are directly across from lands that are family farms with
agricultural production as their sole livelihood.
Surely, there must be some mechanism by which these future lot purchasers are informed and
advised of the generally perceived nuisances that go along with adjacent agricultural
operations such as, noise from farming equipment in early morning hours, dust, oders from
fertilizers, crop spraying, etc.
Thank you for your consideration.
If you have any questions or comments, please don't hesitate to contact me, Shellane
Henderson, Bosky Farms, at (303) 514-6348.
• EXHIBIT
. C�
1 2- FT-)
Hello