Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout20020606.tiff Weld County Planning Department GREELEY OFFICE JAN 2 5 2002 Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue RECEIVED Greeley, CO 80631 Date: 1-19-02 RE: Case Number USR 1368 TO: Lauren Light, Planner As an adjacent landowner, I am concerned about the proposed dog kennel (to include training, boarding, special events, and two dwelling units). As agriculturally zoned("A") Zone district property, the proposed"dog kennel" use seems inconsistent and incongruous with surrounding land use. Having a kennel (and other intended uses)will detract from the surrounding landowner's property enjoyment and value for the following reasons: 1. Noise—kennels are noisy operations. i.e. barking dogs, etc. —thus detracting from enjoyment and reducing the value of surrounding land owners property. 2. Houses—as zoned agricultural, my understanding that county rules prohibit two home on the proposed property. 3. Increased traffic—as an agricultural producer increased automobile traffic contributes to the difficulties of operating and moving agricultural machinery. 4. Special events—what does this imply? If it means more traffic, people, noise, and parking—I am not in favor of such use of the property. For these reasons, I am opposed to the proposed use. Sinc J Tom Goding 970-223-2510 2002-0606 II I EXHIBIT ' , Matthies Properties, LLP 337 South 127h Street Weld County Planning Department Omaha, NE 68154-2309 GREELEY OFFICE FEB 1 9 2002 February 12, 2002 Attn: Lauran Light, Planner RECEIVED Department of Planning Services 1555 N. 17th Avenue Greeley, CO 80631 RE: Case Number USR_1368 As an adjacent landowner, we are concerned about the proposed dog kennel(to include training, boarding, special events, and two dwelling units). As agriculturally zoned("A") Zone district property, the proposed "dog kennel" use seems inconsistent with surrounding land uses. A kennel (and the other intended uses) will detract from the surrounding landowner's enjoyment of and value of the property for the following reasons: 1. Noise - kennels are noisy operations. i.e. barking dogs, etc. - thus detracting from enjoyment and reducing the value of surrounding landowner's property. 2. Houses - as zoned agricultural, it is our understanding that county rules prohibit two homes on the proposed property. 3. Increased traffic - because we depend on an agricultural producer, we are concerned that increased automobile traffic would contribute to the difficulties of operating and moving agricultural machinery. 4. Special events- what does this imply?Does this mean more traffic, people, noise, and parking. 5. Set back from WCR 43 and WCR 78 - these area,set forth in subject case. For these reasons, I am opposed to the proposed use. • ce ely, Ma hies Properties, LLP Fred J. Matthies Managing Partner Telephone: 402-334-1833 Hello