Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20021069 a rs to. BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS PHONE (970)336-7204, Ext.4200 FAX: (970)352-0242 P. O. BOX 758 WillGREELEY, COLORADO 80632 C. COLORADO March 27, 2002 David and Lona Cowan 7309 Henry Street Fort Lupton, Colorado 80621 Dear David and Lona Cowan: Your application for a Site Specific Development Plan and Use by Special Review Permit#1369 for a Kennel in the A (Agricultural) Zone District has been recommended unfavorably to the Board of County Commissioners by the Planning Commission. The legal description of the property involved is shown as part of the Section 27, Township 2 North, Range 66 West of the 6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado. If you wish to be heard by the Board of County Commissioners, it will be necessary for you to indicate your request by signing the bottom of this letter and returning it to this office. Regular hearing procedures will then be followed. In order to proceed as quickly as possible, we must receive your reply by April 26, 2002. If we are not in receipt of your request by that date, the matter will be considered closed. Sincerely, BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS WELD CONTY, COLORADO IL'Glenn Vaad, Chair GV/eeg i I/we, 41.7, 777, er-ec,a..2, , do hereby request the Board of County Commissioners to consider the above mentioned application. _. EXHIBIT IF 2002-1069 use # 13to0i 5/13/2002 -- Re: Docket Number#2002-36, Special Review Permit#1369 for a Kennel by David and Lona Cowan To Whom it May Concern: We protest the issuance of a kennel license in regard to this case because: • The parties involved, the Cowans,have not been able to contain or manage the dogs they now have. Both the large and smaller breeds of the dogs they now own have escaped from their property to aggressively menace both people and livestock on other properties. Any restrictive fencing currently in use is not sufficient to contain these dogs nor does it appear to be intended to retrain them. • When these dogs run loose they endanger other people who live in the area. Some of these dogs have been shot and killed or wounded while on other peoples' property because they were threatening or attacking people and/or livestock. • The parties involved have not adhered to current regulations and limits governing the allowed number of dogs on a property, but have repeatedly exceeded the required limitations. Since the limit is 4 dogs in this area of Weld County, and the parties involved admitted in court over a year ago to owning 11 dogs (without a kennel license in place), we would ask the court how this violation was overlooked and allowed to continue without penalty while other people in this area have had to meet the imposed animal restrictions that are in force in this area. • These dogs pack together in a group containing 6 to 8 animals and have often been witnessed chasing and tormenting the parties involved own 3 horses. This abuse is allowed to continue for long periods of time with no effort on the part of the owners to correct the situation. • The property in question couldn't possibly approach meeting any requirements pertinent to obtaining or maintaining a kennel, as an inspection would clearly show. The parties involved have said that their dogs are trained to be guard dogs and to protect their children. We believe the parties involved should be required to prove their dogs are trained, and that they, as owners, are willing to be responsible for the actions of all dogs in their care. We have seen no evidence that shows a willingness to take any responsibility for their dogs' behavior, and, if anything, the parties involved have either placed blame on their neighbors, or chosen to ignore any damages their dogs have done. We question why the county would even consider this property as sufficient for the successful operation of a kennel. We believe this would endanger lives, and be a disservice to the people (and livestock) of our community. We have been told that calls to animal control or to the police have been infrequent on this issue, but we beg to differ. The concept of only a few calls complaining about these animals may be due perhaps to the gross lack of response by both law enforcement groups to prior calls made to them about these animals, as has been our experience when we have called. Respectful G2t/ -����t'fc/� ames and Karen Belver vc/ EXHIBIT USt- #/3W CAROL Harding - Cowan permit Docket number#2002-36 Page 11 From: "Trina Buschman" <tribush@hotmail.com> To: <charding@co.weld.co.us> Date: 5/21/02 9:38PM Subject: Cowan permit Docket number#2002-36 7340 Henry Street Ft. Lupton, CO. 80621 May 21, 2002 Board of County Commissioners Weld County Centennial Center 915 10th Street Greeley CO. To Whom It May Concern: We have received a letter stating that out neighbors have requested a permit to have a Kennel not to exceed 25 dogs, ten horses, and five cats. We have many concerns about our neighbors receiving this permit. First of all, they can not maintain a clean environment for the animals they have now. Therefore, additional animals would make things worse. We are strongly concerned about health hazards for the animals and others around them. We live directly across from them and we believe that them having that many dogs is not safe. We have three grandchildren and we do not want to have to worry about all of those dogs that close to us. Another concern is the noise that those dogs would make. We do not want to be disturbed by them at all hours of the night. As you can see we have many reasons to be concerned with them receiving this permit and we hope you will take them into consideration. We are strongly against this permit request. Thank you for your time. Sincerely, Ernest and Trina Buschman MSN Photos is the easiest way to share and print your photos: http://photos.msn.com/support/worldwide.aspx 4 excl. Ltso_#13th t (J K- 13(I 1.-en4til, r Di 1i (i2v-074- Si�at �;6skA 7-kw��d�u 111th i 0206 ine 'M'arPs-i hA. usl i. .c „st `,,V WI•rF NAMI f gN/M' NE m it e.til II. iI AtONC c;NCEp.E��T PNO ! f llI NF�I.T 9H IMN �i��yy + 5T FFI ii.i q�q.r�Ep631 '� Ir ARM IMep•Nf4L THE 'fir • , Ti sE.nasai emo. "'Tslity: 4 ar, j. ILt4 .w d. Dc a .r,'" fi -train D. s. . [s /�/0 Z- tier ...... Et EXHIBIT H Weld County Planning Department Department of Planning Services Weld County Colorado Reference Case Number USR-1369 To be included in the Public Hearing dated March 19,2002 at 1:30 in Room 210. We protest a kennel permit to be issued under this case number because: 1) The requesting parties have consistently shown a lack of control over their dogs' behavior and activities, 2) The premises where these dogs will be housed cannot possibly contain any of the dogs currently on the property. If anything, the dogs are often running loose and are menacing to anyone they happen to come across. While these dogs have been running loose outside of their yard we have often been threatened by these dogs while taking out our trash or working in our own yard. 3) The parties making this request have consistently been in violation of the county laws and statutes that dictate the number of dogs allowed on an acre parcel of land and should be penalized like most of us would be. We have heard(under oath) that the parties have had 11 dogs at one time when they were only allowed to have 4. 4) Because the current condition of the property is in need of corrective attention, such as more secure fencing to better contain these dogs and suitable humane housing for these dogs, we believe the property values in the neighborhood would be negatively impacted. 5) The indifference and lack of respect the dogs' owners have shown toward the laws of the county, and the property of their neighbors have resulted in a situation where damage the dogs do on other properties is not compensated for any loss suffered. The owners have not acted in a responsible way to correct damage their dogs have inflicted on other properties. The dogs included in this kennel request are supposedly trained as guard dogs, but they do not limit their guarding to the boundaries of their owners' property. This "guarding" and menacing extends into other properties and neighbors have had to prepare to protect themselves on their own property. The dogs pack together in groups and are indiscriminate about what they are allegedly protecting; it is not limited to their owners' property or children. If these dogs are so highly trained,why not have a demonstration to prove the extent and effectiveness of their training. In the past, when other kennel permits were applied for, the county required adherence to standard restrictions that served the interest of the community to be affected. If the county now finds the parties requesting this kennel permit compliant to the standards involved in operating a kennel, it will be negligent in its duty to uphold the law and protect the safety and rights of other law abiding people who must live with the consequences of the county's decisions. StgG >61/ Jamesaren Belver 1 EXHIBIT Aristocrat Ranchettes I l S2 4131oq Hello