HomeMy WebLinkAbout20053206.tiff BEFORE THE WELD COUNTY', COLORADO, PLANNING COMMISSION
RESOLUTION OF RECOMMENDATION TO THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS
Moved by Doug Ochsner,that the following resolution be introduced for passage by the Weld County Planning
Commission. Be it resolved by the Weld County Planning Commission that the application for:
CASE NUMBER: USR-1524
APPLICANT: Carmen & Bart Beck
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE-2740; part SW4 NW4 Section 8, T3N, R68W of the
6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a
kennel, including a doggy day care service for 136 dogs of an
unspecified breed and the breeding of Labradors, in the A
(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 34.75; east and adjacent to CR 3.
be recommended favorably to the Board of County Commissioners for the following reasons:
1. The submitted materials are in compliance with the application requirements of Section 23-2-260 of the
Weld County Code.
2. It is the opinion of the Department of Planning Services'staff that the applicant has shown compliance
with Section 23-2-220 of the Weld County Code as follows:
A. Section 23-2-220.A.1 --The proposed use is consistent with Chapter 22 and any other applicable
code provisions or ordinance in effect. Section 22-2-60 A.Goal 1 states "Conserve agricultural
land for agricultural purposes which foster the economic health and continuance of agriculture."
The area designated for the kennel already has existing buildings and improvements making it
impractical to farm the site.
B. Section 23-2-220.A.2--The proposed use is consistent with the intent of the A(Agricultural)Zone
District. Section 23-3-40.H of the Weld County Code provides for a Kennel as a Use by Special
Review IN THE Agricultural Zone District.
C. Section 23-2-220.A.3 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with the existing
surrounding land uses. The surrounding area is dryland pasture with five parcels, some having
homes within a quarter mile of the site. Conditions of Approval ensure impact on the existing and
future residences will be minimal.
D. Section 23-2-220.A.4 -- The uses which will be permitted will be compatible with future
development of the surrounding area as permitted by the existing zoning and with the future
development as projected by Chapter 22 of the Weld County Code and any other applicable code
provisions or ordinances in effect,or the adopted Master Plans of affected municipalities.The site
lies within the three mile referral area for the City of Longmont, Towns of Mead, Berthoud and
Larimer County. All municipality's returned a referral indicating no conflict with their interests.
Larimer County did not respond to the referral request.
E. Section 23-2-220.A.5 --The site does not lie within any Overlay Districts.
Effective January 1, 2003, Building Permits issued on the lot will be required to adhere to the fee
structure of the County Road Impact Program, Stormwater Mitigation Program and the Capital
Expansion Fees. (Ordinance 2002-11); (Ordinance 2005-
F. Section 23-2-220.A.6 -- The applicant has demonstrated a diligent effort to conserve prime
agricultural land in the locational decision for the proposed use. The site is designated "High
Potential Dry Cropland" by the USDA Soil Conservation Services.
G. Section 23-2-220.A.7--The Design Standards(Section 23-2-240,Weld County Code),Operation
Standards (Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code), Conditions of Approval and Development zciicat \
Standards ensure that there are adequate provisions for the protection of health, safety, and
welfare of the inhabitants of the neighborhood and County.
2005-3206
Resolution USR-1524
Carmen & Bart Beck
Page 2
This recommendation is based, in part, upon a review of the application materials submitted by the applicant,
other relevant information regarding the request, and responses from referral entities.
The Department of Planning Services'staff recommendation for approval is conditional upon the following:
1. Prior to recording the plat:
A. All sheets of the plat shall be labeled USR-1524. (Department of Planning Services)
B. The applicant shall submit a waste handling plan, for approval, to the Environmental Health
Services Division of the Weld County Department of Public Health & Environment. Evidence of
Health Services approval shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. The plan
shall include at a minimum, the following:
1) A list of wastes which are expected to be generated on site(this should include expected
volumes and types of waste generated).
2) A list of the type and volume of chemicals expected to be stored on site.
3) The waste handler and facility where the waste will be disposed(including the facility name,
address, and phone number). (Department of Public Health and Environment)
C. The applicant shall submit a dust abatement plan for review and approval to the Environmental
Health Services,Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment. Written evidence
of such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Weld County Department of
Public Health and Environment)
D. The applicant shall provide written evidence to the Weld County Department of Public Health and
Environment that the applicant has contacted the Colorado Department of Agriculture (CDA),
Division of Animal Industry. A copy of a current license issued by CDA is acceptable. Written
evidence of such shall be submitted to the Department of Planning Services. (Weld County
Department of Public Health and Environment)
E. The septic system SP-98000037 currently described as a wood working shop (proposed
grooming area and office) shall be reviewed by a Colorado Registered Professional Engineer.
The review shall consist of observation of the system and a technical review describing the
systems ability to handle the proposed hydraulic load. The review shall be submitted to the
Department of Public Health and Environment. In the event the system is found to be
inadequately sized or constructed the system would be brought into compliance with current
regulations. (Weld County Department of Public Health and Environment)
F. The plat shall be amended to delineate the following:
1) The attached Development Standards. (Department of Planning Services)
2) The existing sign located at the entrance to the site.The sign shall not exceed sixteen(16)
square feet in size. (Department of Planning Services)
3) The approved Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
•
4) The location of the new Single Family Residence. (Department of Planning Services)
5) The location of the Kennel Managers Residence. (Department of Planning Services)
6) The traffic patterns for the internal circulation of the on-site structures,including the Kennel,
the new Custom built Single Family Residence and the Kennel Managers Residence.
(Department of Planning Services)
G. The applicant shall submit two (2) paper copies of the plat for preliminary approval to the Weld
County Department of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1524
Carmen & Bart Beck
Page 3
2. Upon completion of 1.above, the applicant shall submit a Mylar plat along with all other documentation
required as Conditions of Approval. The Mylar plat shall be recorded in the office of the Weld County
Clerk and Recorder by Department of Planning Services' Staff. The plat shall be prepared in
accordance with the requirements of Section 23-2-260.D of the Weld County Code. The Mylar plat and
additional requirements shall be submitted within thirty(30)days from the date of the Board of County
Commissioners resolution.The applicant shall be responsible for paying the recording fee.(Department
of Planning Services)
3. The Department of Planning Services respectively requests the surveyor provide a digital copy of this
Use by Special Review. Acceptable CAD formats are .dwg, .dxf, and .dgn (Microstation); acceptable
GIS formats are ArcView shapefiles, Arclnfo Coverages and Arclnfo Export files format type is .e00.
The preferred format for Images is .tif(Group 4). (Group 6 is not acceptable). This digital file may be
sent to maps@co.weld.co.us. (Department of Planning Services)
4. The Special Review activity shall not occur nor shall any building or electrical permits be issued on the
property until the Special Review plat is ready to be recorded in the office of the Weld County Clerk and
Recorder. (Department of Planning Services)
5. In accordance with Weld County Code Ordinance 2005-7 approved June 1,2005,should the plat not be
recorded within the required thirty (30) days from the date the Board of County Commissioners
resolution a $50.00 recording continuance charge shall added for each additional 3 month period.
SITE SPECIFIC DEVELOPMENT PLAN
SPECIAL REVIEW PERMIT
DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
Carmen & Bart Beck
e` USR-1524
1. The Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a kennel, including a doggy day
care service for 116 dogs of an unspecific breed and the breeding of Labrador's, in the A(Agricultural)
Zone District,as indicated in the application materials on file and subject to the Development Standards
stated hereon. (Department of Planning Services)
2. Approval of this plan may create a vested property right pursuant to Section 23-8-10 of the Weld County
Code. (Department of Planning Services)
3. One hundred sixteen (116) is the maximum number of adult dogs allowed on the site at any one time.
Dogs over the age of six(6)months are counted in the maximum number of adult dogs in accordance
with Section 23-1-90 of the Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
4. Animal and feed wastes, bedding, debris and other organic wastes shall be disposed of so that vermin
infestation, odors, disease hazards, and nuisances are minimized. Such wastes shall be removed at
least weekly from the facility and disposed by a commercial hauler. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
5. All liquid and solid wastes(as defined in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and Facilities Act,30 20 100.5,
C.R.S., as amended)shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against
surface and groundwater contamination. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
6. No permanent disposal of wastes shall be permitted at this site. This is not meant to include those
wastes specifically excluded from the definition of a solid waste in the Solid Wastes Disposal Sites and
Facilities Act, 30 20 100.5, C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
7. Waste materials shall be handled,stored,and disposed in a manner that controls fugitive dust,fugitive
particulate emissions, blowing debris, and other potential nuisance conditions. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
8. The applicant shall operate in accordance with the approved "waste handling plan". (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
9. Fugitive dust and fugitive particulate emissions shall be controlled on this site. (Department of Public
Health and Environment)
10. This facility shall adhere to the maximum permissible noise levels allowed in the Residential Zone as
delineated in 25-12-103 C.R.S., as amended. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
11. Adequate handwashing and toilet facilities shall be provided for invited guests of the facility.
(Department of Public Health and Environment)
12. An individual sewage disposal system is required for the proposed custom home and shall be installed
according to the weld county Individual Sewage Disposal Regulations. (Department of Public Health
and Environment)
13. Any septic system located on the property must comply with all provisions of the Weld County Code,
pertaining to Individual Sewage Disposal Systems. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
14. The facility shall utilize the existing public water supply, Little Thompson Water district. (Department of
Public Health and Environment)
15. If applicable,the applicant shall obtain a stormwater discharge permit from the Colorado Department of
Public Health & Environment, Water Quality Control Division. (Department of Public Health and
Environment)
16. If applicable, the applicant shall operate in accordance with the requirements of the Colorado
Department of Agriculture, Division of Animal Industry. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
Resolution USR-1524
Carmen & Bart Beck
Page 2
17. The operation shall comply with all applicable rules and regulations of State and Federal agencies and
the Weld County Code. (Department of Public Health and Environment)
18. The access drive to the residences and the kennel area should have adequate gravel of the equivalent
to provide an all-weather access to the facility and should be graded to prevent drainage problems.
(Department of Public Works)
19. The historical flow patterns and run-off amounts will be maintained on site in such a manner that it will
reasonably preserve the natural character of the area and prevent property damage of the type
generally attributed to run-off rate and velocity increases, diversions, concentration and/or unplanned
ponding of storm run-off. (Department of Public Works)
20. A building permit shall be obtained prior to the construction of any new building or addition to the
existing building. (Department of Building Inspection)
21. A plan review is required for each building for which a building permit is required. Plans shall include a
floor plan. Plans may be required to bear the wet stamp of a Colorado registered architect or engineer.
Two complete sets of plans are required when applying for each permit. (Department of Building
Inspection)
22. Buildings shall conform to the requirements of the various codes adopted at the time of permit
application. Currently the following has been adopted by Weld County: 2003 International Building
Code;2003 International Mechanical Code;2003 International Plumbing Code;2003 International Fuel
Gas Code; and the 2002 National Electrical Code and Chapter 29 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Building Inspection)
23. The building use will probably be classified as B (kennel). Fire resistance of walls and openings,
construction requirements, maximum building height and allowable areas will be reviewed at the plan
review. Setback and offset distances shall be determined by Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code.
(Department of Building Inspection)
24. Building height shall be measured in accordance with the 2003 International Building Code for the
purpose of determining the maximum building size and height for various uses and types of construction
and to determine compliance with the Bulk Requirements from Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code.
Building height shall be measured in accordance with Chapter 23 of the Weld County Code in order to
determine compliance with offset and setback requirements. Offset and setback requirements are
measured to the farthest projection from the building. (Department of Building Inspection)
25. The screening and landscaping on site shall be maintained in accordance with the approved
Landscape/Screening Plan. (Department of Planning Services)
26. Up to eight (8) employees beyond those living on site shall be allowed. (Department of Planning
Services)
27. The Kennel Manager residence shall be limited to a modular home for one employee. (Department of
Planning Services)
28. The hours of operation are limited to Monday to Friday 7:30 AM - 6:00 PM; Saturday 8:00 AM - 12:00
PM (Noon) and Sunday 3:00PM - 5:00PM. (Department of Planning Services)
29. All dogs of an unspecific breed and the Labrador's shall be inside by 8:00 PM until 8:00 AM.
(Department of Planning Services)
30. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Design Standards of Section
23-2-240, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
31. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with the Operation Standards of
Section 23-2-250, Weld County Code. (Department of Planning Services)
Resolution USR-1524
Carmen & Bart Beck
Page 3
32. Weld County Government Personnel shall be granted access onto the property at any reasonable time
in order to ensure the activities carried out on the property comply with the Development Standards
stated herein and all applicable Weld County regulations. (Department of Planning Services)
33. The Special Review area shall be limited to the plans shown hereon and governed by the foregoing
standards and all applicable Weld County regulations. Substantial changes from the plans or
Development Standards as shown or stated shall require the approval of an amendment of the Permit
by the Weld County Board of County Commissioners before such changes from the plans or
Development Standards are permitted. Any other changes shall be filed in the office of the Department
of Planning Services. (Department of Planning Services)
34. The property owner or operator shall be responsible for complying with all of the foregoing Development
Standards. Noncompliance with any of the foregoing Development Standards may be reason for
revocation of the Permit by the Board of County Commissioners. (Department of Planning Services)
Motion seconded by Tom Holton.
VOTE:
For Passage Against Passage Absent
Michael Miller
Bruce Fitzgerald
Chad Auer
Tom Holton
Doug Ochsner
James Welch
Erich Ehrlich
Roy Spitzer
Paul Branham
The Chair declared the resolution passed and ordered that a certified copy be forwarded with the file of this
case to the Board of County Commissioner's for further proceedings.
CERTIFICATION OF COPY
I, Donita May, Recording Secretary for the Weld County Planning Commission, do hereby certify that the
above and foregoing resolution, is a true copy of the resolution of the Planning Commission of Weld County,
Colorado, adopted on September 20, 2005.
Dated the 20th day of September, 2005.
trtkeli ;11-1L/
Donita May
Secretary
1 -�Q- 2OCtfi
Lots 4, 5, 6&7 of Block 2 into one (1) lot in the Western
Dairymen Cooperative PUD.
LOCATION: South of Hwy 119; approximately 1/4 mile east of CR 7.5.
Glen McWilliams, representing DBM Consulting,asked for clarification whether this was a consent item rather
than a continuance.
The Chair replied that it was for consent. As neither the applicant, the board members, or members of the
audience wished to have this item removed from the consent agenda, the Chair requested a motion.
Doug Ochsner moved that Case 2nd AmPF-431 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with
recommendation of approval including the Development Standards and Conditions of Approval.Tom Holton
seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning Commission for
their decision. Roy Spitzer,yes;James Welch,yes; Erich Ehrlich,yes;Tom Holton,yes;Doug Ochsner,yes;
Paul Branham, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1524
APPLICANT: Carmen & Bart Beck
PLANNER: Kim Ogle
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Lot A of RE-2740; part SW4 NW4 Section 8, T3N, R68W of the
6th P.M., Weld County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and Special Review Permit for a
kennel, including a doggy day care service for 136 dogs of an
unspecified breed and the breeding of Labradors, in the A
(Agricultural)Zone District.
LOCATION: South of and adjacent to CR 34.75; east and adjacent to CR 3.
Carmen Beck,applicant, 1234 CR 34.75, Berthoud,CO 80513,requested this remain on the consent agenda.
The Chair asked if there was anyone in the audience who wished to speak for or against this application
remaining on the consent agenda.
Ben Russell, 16376 CR 3, Berthoud, CO 80513, opposes the application. He lives next door and believes
there are more dogs than anybody ought to have already. They are too noisy. This facility does not fit
with his future plans for his property.
Geraldine Russel, 16376 CR 3, Berthoud, CO 80513, concurs with her husband that there are dogs
barking all night, more dogs than should be allowed, and that the applicant is doing this backwards. The
application for the facility should have been made prior to establishing the business, rather than the other
way around, as was done in this case.
The Chair asked Mr. Ogle if this property is presently in violation and how many acres it contains. Mr.
Ogle replied that it is presently in violation, having been discovered by county staff during an inspection. It
is thirteen acres and their use by right allows them four dogs. The Chair asked how many dogs Mr. Ogle
estimated on site presently. Mr. Ogle replied there were maybe twenty five.
Doug Ochsner asked if there is opposition does this case then come off consent. Mr. Morrison said if two
or more commissioners would like to hear the case,_it should be heard. Mr. Ochsner and Mr. Spitzer
expressed interest in hearing the case so the Chair opened it for public hearing.
Kim Ogle, Department of Planning Services. Larimer County, the Towns of Berthoud and Mead and the
City of Longmont are within the three mile notification area. All municipalities returned a referral indicating ry ,
no conflict with their interests. Larimer County did not respond to the referral request.
k;?:,
Tt .
Surrounding property uses include farmland and rural residential parcels in each direction. The property isr; «' q
sited well off CR 3 with access off of CR 34.75. The facility consists of two metal skinned structures with
the facility completely screened and fenced. There are five property owners within 500 feet of this j \
proposal and seven property's of record.
Thirteen (13)referral agencies reviewed this case. Seven (7)offered comments that have been
incorporated into the Conditions of Approval and or Development Standards
The sign noting the hearing date and location was posted ten days prior to this hearing by department staff
and is evidenced by affidavit and photograph by the Department of Planning Services.
Staff has supporting images of the surrounding area and facility.
The Department of Planning Services has reviewed Case USR-1524 Site Specific Development Plan and
Special Review Permit for a kennel, including a doggy day care service for 136 dogs of an unspecified
breed and the breeding of Labradors, in the A(Agricultural)Zone District, and recommends approval of
the proposed amendment.
There are three people who have expressed opposition and one letter of support in the packet. The
location is in the ag zone. The access road is a gravel drainage road and there are no drainage issues.
The facility is fenced. The application process requires that weeds in the adjacent area be mowed.
The Chair asked Mr. Ogle if this facility is operating at present and accepting dogs for day care. Mr. Ogle
said it is and they may continue operation even if in violation. There were no more questions for staff.
Carmen Beck, applicant, 1234 CR 34.75, Berthoud, CO 80513, was asked to approach the microphone
again. Ms. Beck said she boards and grooms on fifteen acres. She was raised in this area and she and
her husband looked for property to raise their family and conduct their grooming/boarding business. She
picked this area for its location and feels she provides a good facility. She has made considerable
improvements to the property since purchase; an asphalt drive, cleaned up noxious weeds, and prepared
thirteen acres for planting.
r
Mr. Ochsner inquired about the current building,whether that was the kennel and would she be adding
any more buildings. He also asked how many dogs that building currently holds. Ms. Beck said it holds 20
animals in its current condition. She plans to add to the building but said she doubted she would ever
have over 70 animals. Because she has two litters of labs a year she asked for a higher number of
animals and specified 136 to protect herself. Mr. Ochsner asked about agencies she is responsible for
reporting to. Ms. Beck replied that she is licensed by PACFA and the State of Colorado. Her kennel is
inspected regularly and up to PACFA codes. She has contacted the Department of Health and
Environment to ensure that septic and waste disposal is appropriate.
Paul Branham inquired how many dogs were currently on site and if there is space to house all of them
inside at night. Ms. Beck replied that there are currently fifteen dogs on site, that she has 20 runs inside
which is adequate for current housing needs, that it is heated and ventilated, and her animals are not
outdoors past 8 p.m. Mr. Branham asked if there were 136 animals on site, would they be accommodated
in the current manner. Ms. Beck said they would be.
The Chair said that Weld County only counts animals over 6 months of age, therefore would she be
agreeable to reducing the overall number of animals requested in the application. Ms. Beck said she
would be more than happy to reduce the number.
Roy Spitzer asked if this application includes future plans, or is it already in existence. Ms. Beck said
these are future plans for the next five years.
Tom Holton asked about the cats, dogs, birds, and horses mentioned in the application. Ms. Beck said
the county asked for clarification on types of animals and so she included her own personal animals. Mr.
Ogle said her animals are a use by right based on her acreage.
The Chair opened the hearing to the public.
Ben Russell, 16376 CR 3, Berthoud, CO 80513, said he expects the whole area will be the Town of Mead
in five years and is concerned with noise and impact to surrounding future custom homes. This is not
what they had in mind when they located there. Not all of the dogs are inside at night as they are
r-- awakened at night.
Geraldine Russell, 16376 CR 3, Berthoud, CO 80513, questioned the number of dogs, as Mr. Ogle said
25 dogs and the applicant said there were 15 on site, so which is it. Mrs. Russell also questioned why if
the applicant purposefully sought this property, didn't they also purposefully go for an application prior to
starting the facility. She said it appears that in Weld County one does what they want and then puts the
Commissioners to work and makes everybody jump through hoops. She is tired of being awakened
through the night by the barking; she never sees the dogs being walked; she is concerned with breeding
as there are not enough inspectors, only 96 nationwide, to prevent puppy mills; and finally she is
concerned with the impact on future growth in the area. The Chair added that a percentage of Planning
Commission hearings are the result of violations. Mrs. Russell responded that she understands, but she
wants citizens to apply first and then open a business, not the reverse.
The Chair closed the public portion of the hearing.
Carmen Beck, applicant, responded that because she runs a boarding facility in process, there were 15
dogs on site this morning. When Mr. Ogle was on site two weeks ago, there may have been twenty to
twenty-five dogs and numbers change due to the doggy day care. Ms. Beck said she did not submit her
application first because she did not correctly understand the process. She thought she could take over
the previous USR on the property and did not realize she needed to change the USR until the county
brought it to her attention. Responding to Mrs. Russell, Ms. Beck said she has over three acres of fenced
property, including outdoor misters and pools, she plays with them daily, and it is a privacy fenced facility
to cut down on noise and the dogs getting agitated from traffic. Ms. Beck said she has been breeding and
is licensed by PACFA and that she has been inspected yearly by them since 1985 for both grooming and
breeding. The kennel has been inspected twice and if the animals were not being cared for properly they
would cite her. The inside runs are six feet by four feet, double the PACFA standards. The outside runs
are three times the standards of the Department of Agriculture. The animals are not penned up all day.
She has five exercise yards for them that are the size of most back yards.
The Chair asked about the early morning and late night barking. Ms. Beck replied that the dogs are let out
at 7:30 a.m. and brought in by 8:00 p.m. and the barking may be coming from inside the building. The
Chair asked if there is insulation in the building. Ms. Beck said there is, that a few dogs bark but generally
it is quiet.
Mr. Holton asked if the plan included in the packet is already completed and if so, what parts, or is this for
future expansion. Ms. Beck replied that it is partially completed. There are six indoor/outdoor runs along
the east wall and the free standing runs in the middle are complete. The west wall is not complete at this
time but will also include pens at some point.
James Welch asked how many dogs are actually there overnight and how many there just for the day.
Ms. Beck said it varies daily but that over holidays she has had as many as thirty dogs on site. Presently
the majority of the dogs on site are her own as she has eight dogs herself.
The Chair asked Ms. Beck if she would be agreeable to reducing the numbers of dogs on site from 136 to
a maximum of 116. Ms. Beck said she would.
Mr. Welch asked how many dogs she put at a time in each pen and that he had counted forty-two indoor
pens on the plan. Ms. Beck said she can house two dogs per pen per state requirements. She also has a
small dog boarding room houses that houses fifteen dogs.
The Chair asked about her_Oans to build a custom home and allow the kennel manager to live in the
modular home and if that request was in the original application. Ms. Beck said that was correct. Mr.
Ogle confirmed that this information was in the original application.
Mr. Branham asked if this property was a kennel prior to her ownership and how long she has lived there
and operated the kennel. Ms. Beck responded that the property use was previously a landscaping
business and offices and sold to her with her understanding that a business could be operated there. She
has been in operation for two years.
The Chair asked where she got the idea that it was okay to continue operating a business. Ms. Beck said
the former property owner said he had been granted a USR and that it was okay for a business to operate
on that property. The Chair requested information from Mr. Ogle about the former USR for the property.
Mr. Ogle replied that there were two USR's on the property,the first for a woodworking business and most
recently for a nursery. The Chair then asked if the USR's are vacated when the property is sold. Mr. Ogle
said the applicant must request a vacation through the county. The Chair inquired if there are provisions
in the application for a second home. According to Mr. Ogle this is outlined on page four, items four and
five.
Mr. Spitzer asked Mr. Ogle about his overall impressions of the business and whether it was well run. Mr.
Ogle said yes, it was well run. When he visited the site, the manager invited him to tour the facility and he
found it to be;well ventilated with no flies; the dogs were contained in pens and runs; the eastern fence
area was huge and contained 5 to 6 dogs; he did not see feces; there were misters that activate at certain
temperatures; and overall it was a very nice facility. Mr. Spitzer then asked if the east town limits of Mead
were about two miles away. Mr. Ogle said the town proper was at least two miles from this facility.
Erich Ehrlic asked Mr. Ogle for the correct distance of the facility from the Town of Mead and pointed out
that Mead had sent in a referral citing no problems with this facility. Mr. Ogle verified the Town of Mead is
a mile and a half away.
The Chair asked Mr. Ogle if there were any changes to the Development Standards and Conditions of
Approval. Mr. Ogle said there are none. The Chair wanted to look at page five, number three of the
development standards. The applicant said she would be willing to agree to reduce the number of dogs
from 136 to 116.
James Welch motioned to strike 136 and change it to 116 for the maximum number of adult dogs on page
five,Development Standard number three. Roy Spitzer seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary
to poll the members of the Planning Commission for their decision. Roy Spitzer,yes;James Welch,yes;Erich
Ehrlich,yes;Tom Holton,yes; Doug Ochsner,yes; Paul Branham,yes;Bruce Fitzgerald,yes. Motion carried
�-. unanimously.
Mr. Ogle said the same modification needs to be made on Development Standard number one.
James Welch motioned to strike 136 dogs and change to 116 for the maximum number of adult dogs on page
five, number one. Roy Spitzer seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of
the Planning Commission for their decision. Roy Spitzer, yes; James Welch, yes; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Tom
Holton, yes; Doug Ochsner, yes; Paul Branham, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald,yes. Motion carried unanimously.
The Chair asked the applicant if she has read and agrees with the Development Standards and
Conditions of Approval and the changes made to them. Ms. Beck said that she had read them and was in
agreement with everything.
Mr. Spitzer said that based on his site visit, this was probably one of the best facility's he has seen, there
is nothing within a half mile, there are no neighbors on the gravel road either way that would be disturbed
by the dust, and this is a pretty good set up for the applicant's business.
Doug Ochsner moved that Case USR-1524 be forwarded to the Board of County Commissioners with
recommendation of approval including the amended Development Standards and Conditions of Approval.
Tom Holton seconded the motion. The Chair asked the secretary to poll the members of the Planning
Commission for their decision. Roy Spitzer, yes; James Welch,yes; Erich Ehrlich, yes; Tom Holton, yes;
Doug Ochsner, yes; Paul Branham, yes; Bruce Fitzgerald, yes. Motion carried unanimously.
CASE NUMBER: USR-1522
APPLICANT: Alberto Loya
•-• PLANNER: Jacqueline Hatch
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: S2 SE4 Section 30, T3N, R65W of the 6th P.M., Weld
County, Colorado.
REQUEST: Site Specific Development Plan and a Special Review Permit for
Commercial Rodeo Arenas and Commercial Roping Arenas, to
include both indoor and outdoor arenas in the A(Agricultural)
Hello