HomeMy WebLinkAbout20010984.tiff 26371 Hwy 392
Gill, CO 80624
March 5, 2000
Affordable country Homes
Attn: Brian
2337 10 St . #C
Greeley, CO 8063:
This letter is written to relate to whom it may concern, that I do
not oppose Affordable Country Homes selling seven lots just east of
me. Thank you.
Judy Gonzales
2001-0984
EXHIBIT
;3
Wem cn"in) r'lanning Dept..
To: Weld County Dept. of Planning Services 2 2000
Case: Z547 RECEIVED
Objections to the above case;
1. We moved to the county to get away from dense population and to enjoy the
agricultural atmosphere. We do not believe it is in the best interests of this area to
have such a development.
2. We currently raise elk on our property and even though they are domesticated they are
very nervous animals that only bond to one or two people. We have spoken to Dr.
Maifeld DVM concerning a development so close to our property and he stated that
such a development would be detrimental to the health and growth of our animals. We
would request the entire area zoning remain agricultural.
3. Our home was recently appraised by Union Colony Bank for $550,000. We
understand that the proposed development is for small lots with low cost housing.
We do not believe such a development is in keeping with the quality and cost of home
construction that has most recently occurred in the area.
4. The entrance to this development would be just east of a hill crest on Co. Highway
392. Since the completion of paving on Highway 392 to Hwy 14 traffic has increased
dramatically and continues to increase. An entrance onto Hwy 392 such as the one
proposed would be inviting more serious accidents.
We would like to attend the hearing on Aug. 3 but unfortunately we will be out of town on
business. Thank you for addressing our concerns.
Sincerely,
ix •
A `L / '�(n /Ltd L J G�(�
Larry Ai
Deb Holestine
26254 Highway 392
• Gill, Co. 80624
attachment; Dr. Maifeld
r. reN
@REELE ' eataitAIDa 80634neld County Planning Dept
(97U 353405.
:JUL L8 zoo()
RECEIVED
July 27, 2000
To Whom It May Concern:
I am writing this letter in regards to the sub-division that is being proposed close to the
Holestine Elk Raising operations. The Holestine's have tired to isolate their operation as
much as possible on their property. Elk are not domesticated and any people that are
"looky loos" will make the elk very nervous. Often they will run into fences in an effort
to get away,jeopardizing the elks life and injury.
If a sub-division were to go in close to their operation, people would be wanting to
investigate the elk and would be a definite detriment to their operation. I am sure there
would be constant conflict in this regard.
If you have any other questions or inquires please call.
Sincerely,
e 7(a/ flgr/%
Ron Maifeld D.V.M.
Maifeld Veterinary Service
n ^ = EXHIBIT
. .
. . it,
-
,.
•rlii ; ...-• 1
9u1 dl;,y Mope ,',
1 •
i ;•.,t• ;I .
•. • , .
•
• i_ . 1
Iii Ai:LOT ` ' i '
•
:Ili].
{'t' ' '.ypleaff 5eptc E4ve ` \�
1 a .�
i. : ;'--; —. •.."-— —1 r---..—----y. .V , P .-1;,. - ..•
ji E .,C:.tr. ,2'0-Ltttity1'tiGu4apC rr,eRlGr. >n
0'e> ,side, 7 ,
I 1�rk k!''!1'. • �Jf
i; 5pnre6'.7,• ! t ,` ,Ds�e Pcx rr' iwe, t23
I1 t
Y't.,'•,::•.... It .. .i''� ,r ... f' 4 1 •riu,,,3E1 we.Aci.G•C+._ 1
-/
/ � «-i .,a:2"tin.
.:. _ '.1. ,I bra' •'r ApYistitO.>, !sok / 1 s....:-.,� aid J C+Q+a'rep‘.
:i;5 4,-., c.oytAl,.t, • 1 / LC: 3 (t'
] t.1 C?,1 X73:,P.LtaYCk^_— y+,y, 7 wQF... ray .4 4 ''
..'•tall C"'-1 -. -tr..'. I I f . r\ '� 20•g ; '4 0, f Y'.�'fi a.;, t,.•w
till
I ,.` _ ._._ .�c.��...::..! �L. �1•.. y ;,1
•
I ,''''''.. J
•
ti•• 1iii.\
CDser . 9
`t.I%•'•A-,.,.:• t • .1 r+,N!' „PK
12 00 12: 31p Mike & Andrea Mellor 970-353-0234 p. 2
a. EXHIBIT
July 24,2000
To: Weld County Department of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley,CO. 80631
Case Number: Z—547
Name: Affordable County Homes, Inc.
For: PUD Change of Zone from A(agricultural)to PUD with six E(estate)lots and one A (agricultural)lot.
I am writing to share my concern regarding the property owners'plan to spilt farm ground to create a sub division
that will only benefit the current property owners. My husband and I currently own a 12-acre piece of property that
was split off of an original homestead in the Gill area many years ago. When this was done the owners removed the
water rights from the property and made it impossible to access water for any future owners to maintain the property
with. The problem we are currently dealing with is the fact that we live in the desert and can not count on enough
rainfall to keep anything except weeds alive on the place. I understand that Affordable Country Homes, Inc.plans
to break the acreage into ten acre lots and we know from experience that ten acres can not be kept nice and green
with anything growing on it unless there is water. I also understand that the water situation in our area will not
tolerate that many new homes drawing on the supply from Lucerne without affecting everyone in the area. Without
some form of irrigation and residents that plan to actually irrigate their lots our current quality of"Country Living"
will be diminished as the lots with the weeds will create an eye sore in our agricultural environment and make our
weed control job even more challenging.
My husband and!have tried to seed our 10 acre pasture with dry land grass and the wind blew it away for two
seasons wasting much time and money. We planted wheat for ground cover and to control the weeds,but without
water even the wheat struggled to grow. We have tried to gain the support from the neighbors we have to access the
head gate so we can get water to our place,but none are interested in this and water is so limited any way that there
is no guarantee we would have any to purchase! We have considered simply applying for a PUD change of Zone
and splitting the property to make a profit because the property is useless this way,but how fair is this to our current
neighbors? Everyone we know who lives in the area hates to see all these farms split up for residential purposes
even thought we understand that money is the driving force,but is it what is best for the area? Those of'us who
want to live outside of town are currently feeling like we are living in the middle of town and need to improve our
places, split them, make some cash,and move despite all the hard effort to create our dream home.
The other issue of concern is that it is impossible to get any one to address the management of land in our area
without fear of retaliation from the property owners who apparently have their own concept of property ownership
and land use. I have made many attempts to contact the Division of Planning to address concerns regarding the first
piece of property that Affordable Country Homes,Inc.sold off after their purchase from the original owner. The
home is located very close to the road on SH 392 and the new owners have moved two mobile homes onto the place
since moving in and they have been very creative about their utilization of recycled materials. As a neighbor I have
many concerns about the permits they have including sewage issues. The trash created at this site is affecting the
surrounding neighbors as it is blowing across the field and getting hung up on fences and landing in our yards.
Neighbors have witnessed inhumane practices including the tying and dragging of live pigs around the yard at high
rates of speed. A litter of ear tagged pigs was dumped into one of the water ditches and was traced back to this
residence. During special occasions guns are fired off into the air and illegal airborne fireworks are also used. It
appears that these owners have more livestock on the property than is permitted,yet despite being on the road where
everyone can see these problems no one has put a stop to any of it. My reason for pointing all of this out is simply
to give an example of what is occurring in our neighborhood currently and why we have many concerns about this
companies plan to continue altering our neighborhood.
Thank you for your consideration,
��AnndreaL.Mellor
nd( 1y
FROM: DEBBIE CLARK PHONE NO. : 9703526479 ^ Aug. 14 2000 04:35PM P2
8-14-00 Ex as
"1 NIT
Department of Planning Services j
Case Number Z-547
To Whom It May Concern:
I strongly object to the change of zone request by Affordable Country Homes,Inc.
My property is directly west and would be impacted by the addition of seven new home
sites.
This property should remain agricultural. By adding this subdivision you create:
1) increased traffic congestion and hazard to vehicles traveling on state
highway 392 (too many vehicles entering onto the highway at the top
of a hill).
2) The increased number of residences creates an increased risk to
livestock from pets.
3) Increased potential for trespassing and damage to farm ground.
4) Increased noise to the area.
5) The water for this property flows through my land, sharing the head
gate. There is potential confusion for people not understanding
irrigating procedures.
6) Eight homes have already been permitted within one-half mile of my
property in the last year. I do not want an additional seven modular
homes.
Splitting your property to allow one additional home is one thing, splitting your
property for an additional six modular homes is not acceptable. I do not want this
zoning change.
I spoke to surrounding property owners about this proposal and I hope they
have written in or show up to the hearing for they agree with my position and
strongly object to the proposed zoning change. I will be out of town on business
the 15th of August and unfortunately unable to attend the hearing myself.
Respectfully Submitted
Tom Clark Phone: 970-351-8714
26293 Hwy 392
Gill,CO 80624
August 11, 2000 EXHIBIT
To: Weld County Department of Planning Servicetd County Planning C2p►
1555 N. 17 Avenue
Greeley,CO. 80631 AI 1G 15 2000
Case Number: Z-547
Name: Affordable County Homes,Inc. F C It I V E I)
For: PUD Change of Zone from A(agricultural)to P six(estate)lots and one A(agricultural)
lot.
I am writing to share my objections related to the above request. My objections and concerns are as
follows:
1. The original home with 8 acres that was sold separately from the rest of this property,is a
filthy discussing pigsty. I don't know how many people live there. There are 2 houses and 2
trailer houses on the property now,with someone living in them all.The property is cluttered
with trash and filth. How did they get these trailer houses on this 8 acres I would like to
know.There is every kind of animal you can think of on these 8 acres. They are shooting
guns all the time. They are constantly burning,I don't know what,maybe it's dead animals or
the remains from all the slaughtering they do,but the stench is awful. Last weekend I
couldn't go outside because T would get sick to my stomach. We have complained to the
Health Department and the Planning Department with no action taken. If this development is
allowed T can foresee the rest of these acreages looking the same way.
2. What arc they going to do for water? The water system out here will not tolerate the addition
of more homes. There already is a shortage of water in many of the existing homes in the
area. They cannot run the washing machine and flush the toilet at the same time.
3. This was a valuable farm_ When is the world going to wise up and stop destroying farming
land? So another farm goes under. Without any water and no irrigation water these 10 acre
lots will go up in weeds. The country living will be diminished and the lots will be nothing
but an eyesore,just like the one mentioned above. In this agricultural area it will make weed
control even more challenging. I will be even more irritated if these 10 acre tracks receive
irrigation water to water nothing. We are having a terrible time getting irrigation water to
water our crops.
4. I am also concerned about the addition of more cars entering and exiting their residents on to
Highway 392. This highway is posted at 65 miles per hour and there are so many accidents
on this road already. We don't need 7 additional homes entering onto 392.
5. I moved out here 5 years ago to farm and to get away from people. I guarantee I do not want
these homes just across the creek from me. Please don't allow this to happen.
Thank you for your consideration.
Fran Licscr
AUG-15 00 11:54 FROM:EURNS DIS 3 970-506-4979 T0:970 304 6498 Pf7GE:02
EXHIBIT
32489 Hwy, 37
Gill, CO 80624
(970) 351-8784
August 14, 2000
Weld County Dept. of Planning Services
1555 N. 17th Avenue
Greeley, CO 80631
Dear Planning Commission Members:
RE: Case Number Z-547(Affordable Country Homes, Inc.)
I own a farm and residence on the south side of Colo. 392 concerns with the proposed zoning change requested in the above mentioned case.and just east of W.C.R. 5I have lived on
this property for the past twenty some years and have
understand that the proposal is requesting seen significant changes in the rea. I
could mean up to p uestm six estate lots, but I have received
eq g
twenty-six modular units being placed on this robelieveinformation that of this
income or affordable housing as they have labeled it,will detrimentalto our rural eon this type
of low
of my concerns are:
ty. Some
There are a number of livestock operations in the immediate area, and with increased
population, there will be a conflict with animals at large (dogs - in particular).
• There is a definite safety issue, in that I don't believe there is safe access out of this property
on to Highway 392 - as this is just past a hill crest.
•
I have children who attend Platte Valley schools and ride the school bus. These buses are at
capacity now -I don't see how we can accommodate the increase in school bus passengers
that this type of housing inevitably will create,
As I stated earlier,I have lived in this area for many years. I understand that growth is inevitable,but
I don't believe that a housing development ofthis type or density demonstrates consideration for the
rural farm and livestock operations in the area.
Thank you for the opportunity to voice my concerns. I trust that you will give this matter the serious
attention it deserves.
Sincerely,
Linda L. Erbes
Weld County Planning Commission 8/15/00
1555 N. 17th Ave.
Greeley,CO. 80631
To the Planning Commission:
I am writing regarding case number Z-547. I have concerns about utility
provision, project design, and about the public process utilized during this review
process.
My concerns about utility provision and project design include:
• A letter from the state engineer's office, dated 8/3/00, states that the applicant
has failed to demonstrate having acquired an adequate water supply for the
subdivision. This is a serious concern, given the huge demand for water in
this county, now and in the near future. I request that the commissioners
require the applicant to demonstrate that, without any doubt whatsoever, a
more-than-adequate water supply for all the homes can be acquired.
• The applicant's plan is to remove 39 of the 76 acres from agricultural
production. How is this plan consistent with the goal of the county
comprehensive plan to"...preserve prime agricultural soils and productive
areas...", when the comp plan also notes that the minimum viable field size is
80 acres? The applicant states that the 33 acres set aside to remain zoned for
agriculture are the most productive of the 76 acres, but as the commission
knows, few fields are consistent in soil type, and are composed of more and
less productive soils.
• The covenants governing this proposed subdivision do not specifically require
any particular livestock fencing. As there is potential for a significant
increase in the number of livestock in the area, I am concerned about negative
impacts on traffic safety(animals running loose on highway 392), current
residents' livestock(dogs running loose and killing our livestock), and
increased noise(barking dogs, etc.). I request that the commission require
specific language in the subdivision covenants mandating adequate fencing of
livestock to contain them, so as to protect them and prevent possible accidents
and nuisances.
• The applicant proposes planting a row of trees east of the subdivision"to
protect views of the neighbors to the east". As there are a number of
residences to the south and west, I believe the applicant's plan should include
privacy plantings to the south and west of the subdivision, and ask that the
commission make this a condition of approval.
My concerns about the public process include:
• Publication of this hearing in the South Weld Sun, in Keenesburg. Why was
this paper chosen, rather than the Greeley Tribune?
• The sign giving notice of this proposal and this hearing, and which was to be
posted on the property by 7/31/00, is not on the property now, and has not
been for the last three weeks. I request that this hearing be continued,to allow
for adequate prior public notice, and thereby compliance with the law.
11BIr
__
• I oppose the planning staff's request to submit the final plan for staff review
only. This proposal leaves sufficient unanswered questions that I believe the
public has a continuing interest in the final outcome. I request that the
commissioners mandate a commission review of the final plan .
Remectfully,
ie Boyle
26414 Hwy. 392
Gill, CO. 80624
Hello