HomeMy WebLinkAbout2.0 BOCC Staff Report 07.17.2000BOCC 07117100
PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS
REOUEST:
APPLIQANT:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
ACCESS:
WATER:
SEWER:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
A request for review of a Special Use Permit to allow
a Kennel operation.
Williarn Pinkham.
A portion of the NE1i4 of Section 15, Township 7
South, Range 89 West of the 6ft Prime Meridian.
Approximately five (5) miles southeast of Glenwood
Springs offof County Road 125.
Approximately 40.0 acres. A log home and metal
building are currently on site.
Thlrty foot (30') recorded "non-exclusive" access
easement offof CountY Road 125.
Single well which allows for the watering of domestic
animals.
ISDS.
A/R/RD
A/R/RD
I. INTRODUCTION/DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL:
The applicant, Wiltiam Pinkham, has approached the county to receive a Special Use Permit
for the purpose of allowing a Kennel. The subject property current$ has a log house
(applicant'i primary residence) and a 30' x 50' steel building on-site to be used for the kennel'
The subject property is accessed via a thirty foot (30') recorded "non-exclusive" access
easement offof CountY Road 125.
The applicant is proposing a dog kennel on-site to house, raise and breed husky dogs for
p.rrorul dog sbdaing/racing and a future tour (dog sledding) business to be run off-site. The
tour business is a future venture where the dogs are to be brought to a designated site (off-
site) to meet clients for dog sledding tours. No parking of vehicles by clients is to occur on-
site. Client vehicles are to be parked at the off-site area where the dog sledding tours ilre to
occrr. A total of five (5) employees is envisioned at the peek of the tour business' One (l)
employee will reside on-site to help with the dogs and an additional employee along with a
total of three (3) guides will be employed for the totrr business, not to reside on-site. Ample
parking is available on-site for the resident's of the premises and the single employee to be
II.
on-site (12+ parking spaces available). There will be approximately three (3) vehicle trips per
day to and from the subject property including family and the single employee on-site. Hours
of operation will be from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Sunday througlr Saturday (7 days a week).
This will include the operations of the future tour business. Clearly, the dogs will be housed
in the steel building over night but no operations will be conducted except from 8:00 a.m. to
5:00 p.m.. Night training and camping out have been proposed in the application. If this is to
occur, it must be off-site, and any traveling to and from the subject properly must occur
between the hours of 8:00 a.m. and 5:00 p.m.. Origrnally, waste remaining on-site was
proposed to be treated in a large pit, first by burning and then adding lime. At the hearing of
June 19, 2000, a letter presented as Exhibit "G" dated June 14,2000, from High County
Engineering proposes a new sewage disposal system to accofirmodate the proposed 40 dogs,
in addition to the existing ISDS on-site. Breeding is not proposed to begin for two to three
yeils. The applicant is proposing a maximum of forty (40) dogs at any one time on premises
once breeding is begun. These dogs are to be housed in the existing 30'x 50' steel building
(See infonnation in submittal) which is fully enclosed. The applicant also initially proposed a
two (2) acre penned area where the dogs could be let free to nm and play which would have
been mostly utilized dwing the summer season. As per the letter of May 26,2000 (See pgs.
7, 8), from Austin, Peirce and Smith, P.C., the applicant's attorney's, the steel building is
now to provide a substitute to an outdoor dog run. Thus, the outdoor dog run is no longer
being proposed.
AGENCY COMMENTS:
A. CITY OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS: The city of Glenwood Springs states in a
memorandum dated04124100 (See p.9), "No comment."
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES: In a letter dated May 8,2000 (See pgs. l0-
12), the Division of Water Resources states in part, 'o...it is our opinion that permit
no. 216161 does not allow the use of water from this well to supply the dog
kennel...The applicant may wish to review...whether or not it would be beneficial to
surrender the existing well perrnit and apply for a commercial exempt well permit."
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH: No comments were received.
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT: In a response dated received May 26,2000
(See p.13), the BLM states in part that the BLM is working with Mr. Pinkham on a
Special Recreation Permit for the dog sled tour business which is part of this
application. As a condition of any approval of this Special Use Permit, all necessary
permits from BLM will have to be obtained for the proposed tour business. BLM
further States, "Until the EA (environmental assessment) is completed, we have no
confirmed information that would lead us to recommend a denial."
ROAD AND BRIDGE: No comments were received.
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE: In a letter dated June 7,2000, (See pgs. 14, 15), the
Division of Wildlife expresses significant concerns to the impact to wildlife from this
proposed use. The subject property is considered severe winter range for elk and is
B.
C.
D.
E.
F.
III.
extremely valuable to mule deer. DOW recommends, "...all dogs should be kept in
their kennel or otherwise restrained...I recommend that the proposed pen area be no
larger than one acre and that it be clustered close to the kennel and home site...The
use of the pen during winter months should be restricted. I frrther encourage that all
activity be limited to ttre area immediately surrounding the home/kenneVpen complex
during the winter months in order to minimize disturbance to the atea." Staff notes
that the proposed pen has been withdrawn from the application and would not be
allowed under the zoning of the property. Further, a condition of any approval will be
to resffict the dogs to the kennel building except when fransporting them to and from
the property for the purposes of the proposed sled touring business which is yet to be
approved, and any night training.
RELATIONSHIP TO THE COMPREHENSIVE PLAN
Objective 4.1 (Commercial and Industrial Uses), states, o'To ensure that commercial and
industrial development are compatible with adjacent land uses and mitigate impacts identified
during the plan review process."
The area is relatively rural in nahre suggesting it would be an acceptable location for the
proposed special orl. Ho*"rer, as discussed below, there are ZonngResolution regulations
*t iit *rsi b" adhered to to ensure compatibility/minimization of impacts with adjacent land
uses. As per the discussion below, this application as it has been applied for, would not be
compatible with adjacent land uses. This is especially relevant with respect to noise
emanating from the steel building being proposed to be used to shelter the dogs'
Objective 5.1 (Recreation and Open Space), states, "Encourage the location of active
recreational opportunities that are accessible to County residents."
The approval of this application allowing the provision of dog sledding tours would promote
Objective 5.1 of the Comprehensive Plan.
Given the discussion below regarding compatibility/rninimization of impacts with adjacent
land uses, this application does not conform to Objective 4.1 of the Comprehensive Plan.
Thus, this application does not appear to generally conform with the Comprehensive
Plan.
ZONING RESOLUTION:
The subject property is zoned Agricultural/ResidentiallRural Density (A/R/RD) which allows
kennels as a Special Use.
Section 2.02.311 defines a kennel as, "An establishment other than a pet shop or veterinary
clinic, in which more than four (a) adult dogs or domesticated animals are housed, groomed,
bred, boarded, or trained, with or without fees being charged for services and no more than
two litter of dogs or domesticated animals are bred in any one calender year." The applicant
will have to comply with this definition as a condition of any approval.
IV.
Section 5.03 CONDITIONAL AND SPECIAL USES:
As listed under Zone District Regulotions, conditional and special uses shall conform to all
requirements listed thereunder and elsewhere in this Resolution plus the following
requiremenls:
(1)Utilities adequate to provide woter and sanitation service based on accepted
engineering stondards and approved by the Board of County Commissioners shall
either be in place or shall be constructed in coniunction with the proposed use;
The letter received from the Division of Water Resources states in part, "...it is out
opinion that permit no.21616l does not allow the use of water from this well to
supply the dog kennel." At the hearing of June 19, 2000, the applicant submitted as
Bxtribit "H", an application to lease water from the West Divide Water Conservanry
District as an initial step to attempt to satisfy the state's apparent need for a
commercial well. However, at this time, no information has been submitted to the
Planning Departrnent to be sent for review by the Division of Waler Resources with
regard to their coocems. As such, the letter from the Division of Water Resources is
stiil valid. Thus, the application does not comply with this regulation.
As per Section 5.03.15 (3) of the ZonngResolution, discussed below, this
application does not comply with required sewer/sanitation service. Thus, this
application does not comply with this regulation.
Street improvements adequate to accommodate traffic volume generated by the
proposeduse and to provide safe, convenient occess to the use sholl either be irt
place or shall be constructed in coniunction with the proposed use;
Access is via a recorded thirff foot (30') "non-exclusive" access easement off of
County Road 125. However. this road (CR 125) may be difficult to navigate under
varying weather conditions given its general condition.
Design of the proposed use is organized to minimize impoct on andfrom adiacent
uses of land through installation of screen fences or landscape materials on the
periphery of the lot and by location of intensively utilized areos, access points,
lighting and signs in such o manner as to protect established neighborhood
character.
Given that sound/noise concerns as discussed below have not been adequately
addressed by the applicant, the proposed use is not designed/organized to minimize
impact on adjacent land and protect the established neighborhood (A/R/RD zoning)
character.
Further, no screen fencing or landscaping has been proposed by the applicant to
address this regulation.
Thus, this application does not comply with this regulation.
4
(2)
(3)
I
Staffnotes, any signs for this Special Use would have to meet the requirements of
Section 5.07 darfi;ld County Sign Code of the ZonngResolution as a condition of
any Special Use aPproval.
Section 5.03.15 Kennel states,
(1)All kennels shall be completely enclosed within a building that prevents any sounds
from emanating.from thi property boundary in all agricultural and residential zone
district. Commercial zone disticts may allow kennels with outdoor dog runs,
provided dogs are only allowed outside during the hours of 8:00 a.m. lo 5:00 p'm'
'and
it can be demonstrated that no noise will emanate beyond the property
boundaries to any residential area after those hours.
At the hearing of June 19, 2000, the applicant *!ryI*d as Exhibit "G", a.written
document containiog information on a number of different wall panels whiclt appea.r
to reduce noise emanating from buildings which utilize these wall panels. Of the
several different panels listed in this exhibit none were identified as being those
which will be proposed to be used. In addition, no plans were submitted showing
what rnitieation would be proposed in the existing building. Also, there is no
indication-that these wall panils will prevent any sounds from emanating from the
property boundary (i.e. no engineer's stamp or opinion that this will be effective)as
required in this regulation.
Thus, this application does not comply with this regulation'
No dust, noise, odors or source offilth shall emanate from the property.
As discussed above, noise has not been adoquately addressed by the applicant' In
addition, without addressing the sewage disposal issue below, filth emanating from
the subject properfy has also rot been adequately addressed. Thus, this application
does not comply with this regulation.
An individual sewage disposal system capable of handling all waste for the kennel
shall be installed.
At the hearing of Jgne 19, 2000, the applicant submiued a letter from High Country
ilgrrieeffi iui*a j*" r+, z00b as t{on "G'. This letter discussT th: issue of
walte disp&al for the proposed kennel. ln this letter, High C.ount-V Engineering
states thai the design flowfor a sewage systsm to accommodate the proposed 40
dogs be 1800 gpd. This sewage systsm is to be a separate system in addition to the
aflaayexisting ISOS ol lh: prop.ery serving the existingtouse. Thus, the new ISDS
svstem m conluncuon with the existing system would result in over 2000 gallons per
day of dom.rti. *urt. water (as conflrmed in a verbal conversation with High
Cotmtry Engrneering). Since domestic waste water is to exceed 2000 gpd on the-
subjectproferry, an engineer, registered in the state of loJora{o, must confirm that
the proposed rystem and existing system will meet the Colorado Departrrent of
(2)
(3)
(4)
Public Health & Environment regulatious for exceeding 2000 gpd on a single
property. This has not been addressed by the applicant. In addition, any new sysiem
inu*t UJ skmped by a Colorado registued engineer certifyingthe adequacy of the
system to handle forty (40) dogs arrd other existing or planned domestic use'
Thus, this application does not comply with this regulation'
No outdaor dog runs will be allowed, except in commercially zoned areas and
approvedwith conditions consistent with a. ahove.
The original outdoor dog run has been replaced by an indoor substitute, as per the
applicant's attorneY's letter.
V.SUGGESTED FINDINGS:
1 That proper posting and public notice was provided as required for the hearing before
the Board of County Commissioners.
Z. That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all
interested parties were heard at that meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed Special Use Permit is not
in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order, prosperity and
welfare of the citizens of Garfield County.
4. That the application is not in conformance with Sections 5.03 (1), 5.03 (3), 5.03'15
(l), 5.03.fi (2), and 5.03.15 (3) of the Garfield County ZonngResolution of 1978,
as amended.
5. That the application is not in general conformity with the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan of 1984, as amended.
RECOMMENDATION
Staffrecommends DENIAL of the applied for Special Use Permit for a kennel based on the
following:
l. The application is not in conformance with Sections 5.03 (1) (utilities (water and
,.*.r)irru"), 5.03 (3) (impact on adjacent properly issue), 5.03.15 (1) (noise issue),
5.03.15 (2) (noise and filth issue), and 5.03.15 (3) (sewer issue) of the Garfield
County ZonngResolution of 1978, as amended.
u.
6
nAY."6.?A@Z 1:38PM PEIRCE & SNITH
,l
AUSTII.{, PBIRCE & SMITH' P'C.
Argornop At L:w
600 E. Hopkins Avenue
Suite 205
Aspen, Colorado 81611
NO. B3'/ Y . 1/ 3RUSTINo
Frederisk F' Pekce
Thomss Fencon Smtrhi
Ronsld D. Ausrin
OFCOUN3EL
John M. LassalecEe+t
iAko Adrulr ed ln D ehw ar e
' +Aho A&nifir,d ir Vl *shingwo
May 26,2000
Via Facsimile 945'77E5
Jeff Lauriel' Senior Planner
Garfield County Building and Planning Department
109 8'h Sfeet, Suite 303
O Glenwood SPrings, CO 81601
RE: Pinkham Special Use Permit - Kennel
Dear Mr. Lawien:
Mr. pir*ham has contacted our office to reprrsent him regarding !i1 Applicationt'or a
spocial fseiir-i, for a kennel. we are in reoeipt llv"y correspondence to IvIr. Pinkham of May
10, 2000 and wish to Jvise you of the actions tt at ui. Pirrkham is currtntly pursuing based on the
reoommendafions in your corespondence.
To achieve compliance of $ 5'03'15 Konnel of the zoring Resolutioa' Mr' Pinl6a'1 it
contactrng sound "ogil&;r.g*dint U,e steel bern stnrcture on the proP-ertyto be used for horsing
the dogs, ttis sh11 riu;" ,un.itty privides for-full enclostue, and Mr' Pinktram is coutacting the
ilgrrr?rr;;grdt"g meBsures to befter soundprogf t!? -structrue'
Adequarc Prengation of this
sfructure would ud,iru6 subsections t, i, ana + of $ 5,03,15 as the stuctrue should be completely
enclosed, prcvent SounOs from omanating &om the prop^uty boundary,.contain the dust and noise
"iin" xrnirel activities, and would provide a substitute for an outdoor dog run.
your oorrospondonco also addressed the issue of Mr, Pinkham's wel[, PeunitNo. 216161'
not being adequate for supplyiug tbe aog rennet, \k:-,Piffiam is currently in the Plocess of
submiffing an application fli i "ommerciaiwetl
permit. He lras conBcted represe'lrtatives Sonr the
SlvA\Brsndilo\oFFlCEAPtnlcham\Spociol Uac Fcrmit\trurien l*nc;r 05'26{0'upC
Teleplrora
(9?0) 925.2600
Fecrhtle
(e?o\ ets.l?zo
7
HUs I IN I'LII<UL & SNI IH t'tu.tssr r.3/3
nAY .26."8@g 1 :3BPI"I
AUSTTN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C,
Arornayr Ar L,aw
Garfield County Buildilg and Planning Department
May 26,2000
Page 2
Division ofWater Resources to initiate this process. You rvill be kept apprized of any developments
with regard to this application
Mr. pinktram is pursuing all of the abovo so that they m4y be resolved.before the June 19,
2000 hearing before the Board-of Cournty Coursrissioners. He greatly appreciates you input and
advice. pleaie adyise Mr. Pinkham and myself if any of the above does not comport to yolu
recommendations iu yoru May 10, 2000 correspondeace. Thank you,
Very truly yours,
AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C.
JML/sls
cc: Mr. BiU Pinklram
SIVA\Brsndilo\OFFICE\Finkhm\Spooid Usc PcrmiilLeuricn lrncr 05'26'00'wpd
8
GARFIELD COUNTY
Building & Planning DePartment
Review Agency Form
Date Sent: 4"Y]"'O'reeEvED ApR z E row
Comments llue-: 6/1/O0
Name of application:- Kennel
Sent to:
Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please noti!'the staff
contact in the eventyou are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be
used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary'
Written comments may be mailed or faxed to:
Garfield County Building & Planning
Staffcontact:
109 8e Street, Suite 301
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fax: 970-384-5004
Phone: 970-945-8212
E-mail : " garcopln@of. net"
General comments:
This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial
The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial:
Name of review agency:Date:-
cl
By:
Revised ?/10/OO
@u uuu UVUJ J jUC/W
STATE OF COLOTUDO
OIFICE OF THC STATE ENCINEER
Division of Waler Resources
Departnrnt of Natural Resources
I 3l I shermao street. Room El 6
Denrrtr, Colorado 80?03
Phore: (3O3) 866-]591
FAX: (303i 856-3589
h&p//water.statc.co.uyd€fau lt. hum
Jeff'Laurien
Garfield CountY Planning DePt
109 8th St Ste 303
Glenwood SPrings CO 81601
May 8, 2000 Qreg t. walcher
Executive Oirecb(
t,tal o.sim9!on. P.E.
Sl:te Eog,iae+.
Sill O"en,S
('(rycrn(r
We have reviewed the proposed use of the wellwith permit no. 216161 for a dog kennel'
whictl is to house up to 40 d"g;. it is generaly accgpted that a oornrnercial business is one that
receives payment for proOu"G ot ="*i-ceJrendered.'
Assuming tha! the. proPosed dog kennel wilt
clrarge for products or services, the use of the \^rater from a well in the dog kennel can be
coniidered a commercial use of that water'
permit No. 216161 was issued pursuant to CRS 37-92-6O2(3XbXllXAl, in accordance with
the exemption described under cRS 37-9i-602(1xb): As stated in condition 3 of the well permit,
-The use of the ground water from this well is timiidO'to fire protection, ordinary household
purposes inside up toa iingfe family dwelling_s, the inigation of not more than one (1) acre of
home gardens ano ra:wni u7,O tf'u *atedng o"f domestli animals.' No provisions for commerdal
use are included in this exemption.
However, cRS 37-92€02(1Xc) specifically desCnbeS an exemption forwells used in
commerCial bugnessJ.. W.ff ptti"G bf ini" nafure are approved pursuant 1o the Statre
Re:Randell N. Smith, Well Permit No. 216161
SE% NE% Sec. 15, T7S, R89W, 6TH PM
W. Division 5, W. Distrid 38
Dear Mr.
EngineeCs APril 9' 1985,
ffiil;;l;;;noiit*o,rouebeneficialtosunendertheexistingwell
pennit and ippfy for a comrnercial exempt well permit'
Therefore, it is our opinion that permit no. 216161 does not allow the use sf water from this
well to suppty the doj X"n"ir. lf you oi tne applicant has any questions conceming this matter'
please cori,tict Craig Lis of this office for assistance'
SincerelY,
lku Z+'
Kenneth W. Knox
Assistant State Engineer
Enclosures: April 9, 1985, Policy cOnCeming the Evaluation of welt Permit Applications for
Exempt Commercial Uses (two pages)
l$/t(CMURandell Smith Well-doc
oc: Orlyn Bell, Division Engineer
Joe Bergquist' Water Commissioner, District 38
/D
RICHARO O. LAT,iMggvgrngr
JEFllS,q. OANIELSON
Statg EnEioeer
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
DIVISION OF Y/ATER RESOURCES
1313 Shernlan Street-f,oom 818
oenver, colofado 80203
(303) 866-3581
April 9, 1985
l,e40RA!{D[M
TO: ROBERT A. LOSIGE\BAIJGH, ASSISTAiIT STATE
ERCD,I: .IERIS A- DAI{IEI.SON, STATE El$GIl'rEER.
SLTBJECT: POLICY CONCERNII'IG THE EVAIIJAII0N 0F
EXEI,,PT CO'&'IERCiAL USES
&\GIIEER FOR GROUND HATFX
I{EIL PERMIT APPLICATIONS FOR
In Lg?Z che legislature established a rebuctabl_e prestllptio.* - io subsection
ii-g1:iozisjCul(-II), C,R.S,, rhar wells used solely for household purposes. in
" ri"rf;-lrhity'areffing will not materially injure rhe vested water rights
of otirers or any othei exiscing welJ. This presunpciol i.las been useC to
approve nany peiritS for "housihold L:se" wells app.-ropriating ground Hater
tiiburary to overa-Dpropriated strean systems-
By including snall capaciry we1ls used for <irinking als san-rya;y facilities in
,'."*"r.1ui businesi in tne exempti.ons of Section 37-92-6A2(l), C-R.S., !h:
Iegislacure appaiently incended f6r such wells to be approved_ under special
iiiiiing c6riditions, however, the presunptions. of subsection
il':gijoiz(s)abr(ii) ao'not appty to chese well- permii applications. Therefore
iir"y-*"li'Uu' Juif rated pursuant to suliection 3i'gz' 602 ( 5) ( b) ( I )
In or<ier Eo assist in rhe evaluation and provide for approval of certain
limitea uses of r.rell permit applications co serve drinking and sanitary
iacilities in a corrneriial busiirLss, it shall be the policy of the Scate
f"ii"""r thar if rhe proposed annual diversion an<i the consrrnpcive use of
uai.r from the wel} do nof, exceed chose values of ordinary in-house pur?oses
insia.-i iingfe-fanily dwelling, there shall be a rebuttable -PresL$tpcion chat
such uses wi-ff not injure othLr vested water righcs or wel1s - This policy
itt"if be implenented by applying a rebuttable presrmption of non-injury when
che follor.ring conditions are met:
1. No other |rarer supply source or system is available lo serve the
properEy, An affidavir by the applicant affirming. this sicuacion
must accornpany rhe applications as well as an afficiavit frorn eflY
enticy capdbld of servihg che use that ic will not do so.
tl
o
i!E\s
9to*'-9-
6.
Robert A. Longenbaugh
The reLl nus.' be uire only yreli on che sice.
The sita flusi have been eslablished prior to June I, LgiZ, or Elusi
be exerpt frcm rhe definicion of a subdivision pursuant co Section
50-28-101(10)(c) and (<i), C.R.S. For locs in subdivisrons approveC
af;er Jrn* l, L97?, clre reccrunen<laiions tnace in the brate= sugply
reviere process will be hcnored. Ground Harer procucticn i"-i1l be
Iimiced to che aqu:.fer agprove<i during Ehe revie',r pracess and uil.i
be res:ricied to one aquifer oniy by Concicicns of Approval..
the pumpiflg race shali noc e.rceed i-5 gallons per minuce -
The anrornr of grorrnci Hater diveried shall not excee<i 1/5 ecre-Eoot
annually (t0a,600 galLons) . The applicart mts-r slrDporc the
appJ.ication w-:.E:-r evicierce Ehat rhe proposed use will not create a
demerrci grea'rer tiran 1/5 acre-foot.
Tne conswptive use of the heE,er shaLl nct e-xceeC IOt of che volirae
of gror.u'rd water Civerted. The return flow frcm ;he u-se of ijre Hater
rtus-. be. oischarge<i Co ihe sa.u:E strean systen in a lccaEioa 50 as to
noE iljure ary vesied warer right. fu approued septic cark and
non-evaporative leach field is a$ accepcable discharge aethod.
Other tfpes of ciisoosal sfstems trusc be evalr:atei tc oeternine the
a:rounc ariri Locacion of ihe reiura flow.
2.
4.
Exan"oc ccmnercial wells r.hich do not :neet the above criteria wilI be evaluacei
on the basis of material injury,
7. Thc use of rhe waiel diverceri isfaci.iilies only in sr inciividual.
heier are pemi-Lied. ouisicie oi ihe
8. -{ cocal,izing fiow ileter nusi 'ue
arurual <iiversion iecord.s mus-r be
submitted ro rhe Division of t'later
ti,miced co drinking and sanicary
con-nercial business. l'io uses of
bui!-<iing.
insrallec. on the well, Pernanent
mainiaieeC by the well ohner anci
Resources annuaily.
is essenti.al to reduce the back
be modified or revokeC only in
o. ,C*-l^^
s A- Daaielson
This poiicy becomes
Iog of reli permic
hirrilng.
JAD/RGH/jp
cc: idai Sinpson
Dirrj.sicn Engineers
4597r (6)
effective i,rneciiately and
IL
TOTRL P.64
GARFIELD COUNTY
Building & Plawiag DePwtmcat
Review AgencY Forrt RECEIVEDt',lAY262OOO
Date Sent:
Comments Ilue: 6/1/0O
This reviewagency recommends (circle oo"1ty'6p'-' t Denial
The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial:
Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notifr the Staff
contact in the "r"niyo* are unable to respond by the 9Plit"9 Po* This form may be'
used for yo* t tpoote, or youmry a{ach-your own additional sheets ils necessary'
Written iomments may be mailed or fored to:
Garfreld County Building & Planning
Staffcontact:
109 8e Steet, Suite 301
Glenwood SPrings, CO 81601
Fax 970-384-50M
:Phorie: 970-945'8212
\ E-mail : r'gilcopln@of. net"
General comments: I
'rr h {.aoo,.+ i
1$,C*,*r*".-*?5.
r-, - 'i
t..tJrt \
Name of aPPlication:
.^4.{L/Y\,Olt" I'
1lfrfl04
donra-L.
l3
Rerrised 1/?O/OO
-++i . A."* ,
"nS. ,.6l t*;.t'i t.,Q
Sent
o
rt",.it
STATE OF COLORADO
Bill Ourens, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF NAruRAL RESOURCES
DIVISION OF
AN EAUAL OPPOfrTLTTIIY EI/ROYER
John W. Mumma, Director
6@Broad,l,ay
D€n\Er, Colorado 8@16
Telephone: (WlD7-1192 ForWldlife-
For People
June 7, 2000
Garfield County Buililing and Planning
109 8th Street, Suite 301
Glenwood SPrings, CO 8160f
RE: Pinliham Special Use Permit- Ke'nnel
Mark:
I have reviewed the Special use pemnit application submitted by Mr. pinkham and have several
comments to make conceming this project. I cannot stress enough the iryortance ofthis property to
wiLllife. A review ofthe oiuirioo,Jwrus maps of the area shorrys that this property i-s located atgns
prime winter habitat for both deer and "lk rh; property is considered to be severe winter renge for elk'
perhaps more iryort*try due to oei, aerririog oo-t."r; this area is extremelyvaluable to wintering
mule deer. Mr. Pinllham's property, as well asthe surrounding atea,is classified as winter range' severe
winter range, a winter conoe,lrtiation area, and critical habitat' In addition, mule deer use the area as a
migration corridor to access the surroundiog .r"r.. As more and more dwelopme,nt takes place in the
Foirde, and Dry Park areas, the value ofthis area increases'
with the above facts in ,,inq I have ooncems about how the proposed useofthis area will impact
wildlife use. In his letter, Mr. pinliham me,ntions having f o - +o sted dogs kenneled on the property' The
mere presence of these dogg not to me,ntion the barking and other noise that is associated with these
animals, will serve as a detere,nt to use of the area by both elk and deer. In addition, these dogs will
almost certainly have iryacts beyond tl" prop"rrv lines^of tle pinlfiam property that will af[ect wiLllife
usage along the entire ninsa.. There is afo -*iioo of fencing 2 acres to create a pen *ihere the dogs
will be allowed to run and play. If the dogs are able to see wildlife anil begin barking, they may cause
e,nough stress in the animai so that they [ave. In-hard winters, uihe,n elk and especially deer are
concentrating in this area, the dogs andthe activities associated with them wifl be an additional source of
stress on the already stressed animals. Another concern about this projeot relates to Mr. Pinlfiam's plan
to utilize these dogs ro, J"a to,rs. t have spoke, r with the BLM about my concerns with his plan to run
the tours in the Thoryson creek area. Theie is no guarantee that permission will be granted to oonduct
these tours on public Lnd. Therefore, Mr. pinkham may set up a kennel but not have a place to run his
dogs.
I have several recomme,ndations concerning this project. First, all dogs should be ke'pt in their kelrnel or
be otherwise restrained. Roaming animalsiouLl easily chase wildlife on the property' causing injury to
DEPARTMENToFNATURALRESoURCES,WadeBuchanan,ActingExecuti\EDirector
WLDLIFE coMMlssloN, Cn*x i"ri", Chair. Mark LeValley, VieChair Bernard BlacK Serdary
Oi^lz EaJ' _ l'^_h- ' Dhitia lraa ll6h^'
tal(
WILDLIFE ffi
deer and elk or otherwise inducing stress on these animals ufren they are in a weake'ned condition' This
becomes eve,n more crucial during more harsh winters. I also beliwe that e,lrclosing the kennel would
he$ reduoe iryacts by oreating toa . visual and auditory s&Teen. I reconrme,nd that the proposed pe'n
area be no larger than-one acre and that it be clustered olose to the kennel and home site. This would
he$ to minimize ttre area of disturbance as mtrch as possible. The use of the pe,n during winter months
should be restricted. I would further e,ncourage tnaiau actffiy be limited to the area immediately
surroun.lirg the home / kennel / pe,n corytex-auring the winter months in order to minimize disturbance
to the area.
Thank you for the oppornrnity to comment on this project. I apologize for getting these comme'nts to
you late -a .ppr"ririe yonr iatience. Feel free to contact me ifyou have any questions'
Sinoerety,
Matt ThorPe
DWM - Carbondale
947-2920
@ I
,_s
I.
PROJECT
REOJEST:
APPLICANT:
LOCATION:
SITE DATA:
ACCESS:
WATER:
SEWER:
EXISTING ZONING:
SURROUNDING ZONING:
JF COMMENTS
:view of a SPecial Use Permit to
operation.
William Pinkham.
A portion of the NEl/4 of Section 15, Township 7
South, Range 89 West of the 6th Prime Meridian'
,tppro*imat"ly five (5) miles southeast of
Cienwooa Spiings off of County Road 125'
Approximately 40.0 acres' A log home and metal
Uuitaing are currentlY on site'
Thirlry foot (30') recorded access easement off of
County Road 125'
Single well which allows for the watering of
domestic animals.
ISDS.
A/R/RD
AIR/RD
The applicant, william Pinkham, has approached thg.county to receive a Special use
permit for the purpose of allowing a Kennel. The subject property currently has a log
house (applicant', pii*ury resideice) ut a u 30' x 50'it""f U'itaing on-site to be used for
the kennel. The subject pioperty is accessed via a thirty foot (30') recorded access
easement off of CountY Road 125'
The applicant is proposing a dog kennel on-site to house, raise and breed huskry dogs for
personal dog sleddiritru.Ing uni u future tour (dog sledding) business to be run off-site'
The tour business t irut*."renture where the'doi, ur. to be brought to a designated site
(off-site) to meet rri.rt, ro, dog sledding tours' No parking of vehicles by clients is to
occur on-site. Client vehicles rL to be p"arked at the off-siie area where the dog sledding
tours are to occur. A total of five (5) employees is envisioned at the peek of the tour
,\*f
BOCC
A,
B.
D.
II.
business. one (1) employee will reside on-site to help with the dogs and an additional
.-ptoy.. along with a total of three (3) guides wilt be employed for the tourbusiness'
not to reside on-site. Ample parking is available on-site fbr the resident's of the premises
and the single employee io b" on-tit e (12+ parking spaces available)' There will be
uppro*mully three (3; vehicle trips per day to and from the subject property including
family and thl singleemployee on-site. Hours of operation will be from 8:00 a'm' to 5:00
p.. SrrAuy thror[h Saturday (7 days a week). This will include the operations of the
future tour business. clearly, G oogt will be housed in the steel building over night but
no operations will be conducted except from 8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p'm" Night training and
,ulnping out have been proposed in the application. If this is to occur, it must be off-site,
and any traveling to and from the subjeciproperty must occur between the hours of 8:00
a.m. and 5:00 p.m.. Waste remaining on-rit is proposed to be treated in a large pit, first
by burning urrd tt.n adding lime. Bieeding is not proposed to begin for two to three
ylurr. Th-e applicant is prJposing a maximum of forty (40) dogs at any one time on
premises on#breedirrg'is begunlThese dogs are to betroused in the existing 30'x 50'
steel building (See information in submittal) which is fully enclosed. The applicant is
also proposing a two (2) acre penned area where the dogs can be let free to run and play
which will be mostly .riitir.O iuring the summer season. As per the letter of May 26,
2000 (See pgs. 7, S), from Austin, Plirce and smith, P.c., the applicant's attorney',s, the
steel building is now to provide asubstitute to an outdoor dog run. Thus, the outdoor dog
run is no longer being ProPosed.
AGENCY COMMENTS:
QITY OF GLENWOOD SPRINGS: The city of Glenwood Springs states in a
rne"notanaum dated 04124100 (See p.9), "No comment'"
DIWSION OF WATER RESOURCES: In a letter dated May 8, 2000 (See pgs',
10J2)Jl" D*sion of Water Resources states in part, "...it is our opinion that
permit'no. 21616l does not allow the use of water tiom this well to supply the
dog kennel...The applicant may wish to review...whether or not it would be
beneficial to surrenier the exiiting well permit and apply for a commercial
exempt well Permit."
DEPARTMENT OF TIEALTH:NO COMMENTS WETE TECEiVEd.
BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT: In a response dated received May 26,
,000 (S.. p t3I tfre gil\rl states in part that the BLM is working with Mr'
Pinkham on a Special Recreation Permit for the dog sled tour business which is
part of this application. As a condition of any approval of lhrs Special Use Permit'
ull n"..rruryiermits from BLM will have to be obtained for the proposed tour
business. gLI\4 further states, "Until the EA (environmental assessment) is
completed, we have no conflrmed information that would lead us to recommend a
denial."
rfr
ROAD AND BRIDGE:No comments were received'
DIVISION OF WILDLIFE: In a letter dated June 7,2000, (see pgs' 14' !-l)r tle
Division of WitaUfeQr-*ses significant concerns to the impact to wildlife from
this proposed use. The subject properfy is considered severe winter range for elk
and is extremely valuable ion,ut. d.er. DOW recommends, ""'all dogs should be
t ept inttreir kennel or otherwise restrained...I recommend that the proposed pen
area be no larger than one acre and that it be clustered close to the kennel and
home site...The use of the pen during winter months should be restricted' I further
encourage that all activity te limited to the area immediately surrounding the
home/kennel/pen comple* during the winter months in order to minimize
disturbance to the ur.u.,, Staffnotes that the proposed pen has been withdrawn
from the application and would not be allowed under the zoning of the property'
Further, a condition;i;"y approval will be to restrict the dogs to the kennel
LrifAirg except when ttantporting them to and from the property for the purposes
ofthep-,opo'"asledtouringbusinesswhichisyettobeapproved'
objective 4.1 (Commercial and Industrial Uses), states, "To ensure that commercial and
industrial development are compatible with adjacent land uses and mitigate impacts
identified during the plan review process'"
The area is relatively rural in nature suggesting it would be an acceptable location for the
proposed special ur". Ho*ruer, as discu-ssed bilow, there are ZoningResolution
regulations which must be adhered to to ensure compatibility/minimization of impacts
with adjacent land uses. As per the discussion below, this application as it has.been
applied for, would not be compatible with adjacent !an{ uses' This is especially relevant
with respect to noise emanating from the tt..l brilding being proposed to be used to
shelter the dogs.
objective 5.1 (Recreation and open Space), states, "Encoutage the location of active
recreational opportunities that are accessible to county residents-"
The approval of this application allowing the provision of dog sledding tours would
prornot. Objective 5.1 of the Comprehensive Plan'
Given the discussion below regarding compatibility/minimization of impacts with
adjacent land uses, this applicition Joes not conform to Objective 4' 1 ofthe
Comprehensive Plan. Th;, this apptication does not appear to generally conform
with the ComPrehensive Plan.
E.
F.
C.et ZONING RESOLUTION:
The subject property is zoned Agricultural/Residential/Rural Density (A/R/RD) which
allows kennels as a Special Use.
Section 2.02.311 defines a kennel as, "An establishment other than a pet shop or
veterinary clinic, in which more than four (4) adult dogs or domesticated animals are
housed, groomed, bred, boarded, or trained, with or without tbes being charged tbr
services ind no more than two litter of dogs or domesticated animals are bred in any one
calender year." The applicant will have to comply with this definition as a condition of
any approval.
Section 5.03 CONDITIONAL AND SPECIAL USES:
As listed under 7-one District Regulations, conditional and special uses shall conJorm to
all requirements listed thereunder and elsewhere in this Resolution plus the.following
requirements:
(t)tltilities adequate to provide water and sanitation service based on accepted
engineering standards and approved by the Board of County Commissioners
sltilt eitlrei be in place o, tiill be constructed in conjunction with the proposed
The letter received from the Division of Water Resources states in part, "...it is
our opinion that permit no. 216161 does not allow the use of water from this well
to sufply the dog kennel." Thus, the application does not comply with this
regulation.
As per Section 5.03.15 (3) of the ZoningResolution, discussed below, this
application does not comply with required sewer/sanitation service. Thus, this
application does not comply with this regulation.
Street improvements adequate to accommodate traffc volume generated by the
proporri use and to provide safe, convenient access to the use shall either be in
place or shall be constructed in coniunction with the proposed use;
Access is via a recorded thirty foot (30') access easement off of County Road 125.
However, this road (CR 125) may be difficult to navigate under varying weather
conditions given its general condition.
Design ctf the proposed use is orgunized to minimize impuct on undfrom adjucent
,trt oTlond throigh instollation of screenfences or landscape materials on the
periphery of the lot and by location of intensively utilized areds, access points,-ligiting-and
signs in such a monner as to protect established neighborhood
(2)
(3)
(1)
character.
Given that sound/noise concerns as discussed below have not been adequately
addressed by the applicant, the proposed use is not designed/organized to
minimize impact on adjacent land and protect the established neighborhood
(AIR/RD zoning) character.
No screen fencing or landscaping has been proposed by the applicant to address
this regulation.
Any signs for this Special Use would have to meet the requirements of Section
5.07 Garfield County Sign Code of the ZoningResolution as a condition of any
Special Use approval.
Thus, this application does not comply with this regulation.
Section 5.03.15 Kennel states,
(3)
All kennels shall be completely enclosed within a building that prevents any
sounds from emanatingfrom the property boundary in all agticultural and
residential zone district. Commercial zone districts may allow kennels with
outdoor dog runs, provided dogs are only allowed outside during the hours of
8:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. and it cun be clemonstrated that no rutise will emunate
beyond the property boundaries to arty residential area afier those hours.
No evidence has been submitted by the applicant demonstrating that the steel
building to be used to house the dogs will prevent any sounds from emanating
tiom the property boundary.
Thus, this application does not comply with this regulation.
No dust, noise, odors or source of.filth shall emanate from the property-
As discussed above, noise has not been adequately addressed by the applicant. In
addition, without addressing the sewage disposal issue below, filth emanating
from the subject property has also not been adequately addressed. Thus, this
application does not comply with this regulation.
An individual sewage disposal system capable of handling all waste for the
kennel shall be installed.
No evidence has been submitted by the applicant demonstrating that the existing
ISDS will be adequate for the proposed purposes (40 dogs), nor has a new sewage
disposal proposal beyond a pit been submitted. The existing ISDS or a new
(2)
Y*
w W
system must be stamped by a Colorado registered engineer certiffing the
adequacy of the system to handle forty (40) dogs and other existing or planned
domestic use.
Thus, this application does not comply with this regulation.
(4) No outdoor dog runs will be allowed, except in commercially zoned areas and
approved with conditions consistent with a. above.
The original outdoor dog run has been replaced by an indoor substitute, as per the
applicant' s attorney' s letter.
SUGGESTED FI}:IDINGS:
1 That proper posting and public notice was provided as required for the hearing
before the Board of County Commissioners.
2. That the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners was extensive and
complete, that all pertinent facts, matters and issues were submitted and that all
interested parties were heard at that meeting.
3. That for the above stated and other reasons, the proposed Special Use Permit is
not in the best interest of the health, safety, morals, convenience, order,
prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County.
4. That the application is not in conformance with Sections 5.03 (1), 5.03 (3),
5.03.15 (1), 5.03. 15 (2), and 5.03.15 (3) of the Garfield county zoning
Resolution of 1978, as amended.
5. That the application is not in general conformity with the Garfield County
Comprehensive Plan of 1984, as amended'
RECOMMENDATION
Staffrecommends DENIAL of the applied for Special Use Permit for a kennel based on
the following:
L The application is not in conformance with Sections 5.03 (1) (utilities (water and
sewer) issue), 5.03 (3) (impact on adjacent property issue), 5.03.15 (1) (noise
issue), 5.03.15 (2) (noise and filth issue), and 5.03.15 (3) (sewer issue) of the
Garflreld Counff ZorungResolution of 1978, as amended.
NU. U3/ v.l/3
neY .26.?AAA 1:38P1'1
Frederick F, Peirce
Thomss Fenron Smith+
Ronald D, Ausrin
OFCOUNSEL
John M. Lassalecrev"
i Also Admirr ed ln D elaw dr e
* tAlso Adrnined in Vl *shingon
RUSTIN PEIRCE & SNITH
AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P'C.
Argornop At L.aw
500 E. HoPkins Avenue
Suite 205
AsPen, Colorado 81611
Teleplrorre
(970) 925.2600
Fqeshtle
(e?o\ ez5.17zo
May 26,2000
Via Facsimile 945'7785
Jeff LaurieD' Senior Planner
Garfield County Buildiug and Planning Dep4rtment
109 8r" Sil'eet, Suite 303
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Pinkham Special Use Permit - Kennel
Dear Mr. Laqrien:
Mr. pinkham lras contacted our office to represent him regarding !i9 Application-tl u
Special Use Permit for a kennel, we are in reoeipt of y91}l' correspondence to Mr' Piukham of May
10, 2000 and wish to advise you of fie ,rtionr ttrot Mi. Pirrtcham is cunently pursuingbased on the
recomrnendatiops in your colTespofldgrlce'
To achieve compliance of $ 5.03.15 Kennel of the Zonin| Resolution, Mr' Pinlham is
contacling sound *;ilg;t;;egarding t6e steel barn structure on tho property to be used for housing
the dogs, This struc;ur, ,urruitly provides for full encloslue, md Mr' Pinlcham is contecting the
ongineers regarding mea6ures to bett;; soundproof t!r1 -stnlctrue'
Adequate PreParation of this
structrEe would adiross subsections t,z,-itiiof $ 5,03,15 as the stntcture should be completely
enclosed, prevent sounds from omanating from the prop^erty boundary,.contain the dust and noise
of the kennel actiVities, and would provide a substitute for an outdoor dog nm'
your correspondonco also addressed tlre issue of Mr, Pinkharn's well, Pennit No' 2L6t61',
not being adequate for supplying the do! [e1nel \Ir,-,Pink5am is crrnently in the Process of
submitting an application fli I commerciaiwetl perncit. He lras contacted represeutatives n'om the
SUr/A\Brsndl\o\OFFICEPtnkhom\Speciol UEc Pfinit\llurien Lcttcr 05'25{0'ury4
7
HUs I IN I-L]I<UL & 5MI IH l'lu.u5r Y.5/3
nAY .Z6.ZggZ 1! 3UPl1
AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C,
Arconrcys Ar Law
Jeff Laurien, Senior Planuer
Garfield County Building snd Plaming Deparment
May 26, 2000
Page 2
Division ofWater Resources to initiate this process. You rvilt be kept apprized of any developments
with regard to this application.
Mr, Pinkham is pursuing all of the abovo so that they may be resolved before the June 19,
2000 lrearing before the Boarcl of County Conr.rrrissioners. He greatly appreciates you input and
advice, pleaie advise Mr. Pinl,r*ram and myself if any of the obove does not comport to your
recommendations ig yoru May 10, 2000 oorrespondence. Thalk you.
Very truly yours,
AUSTIN, PEIRCE & SMITH, P.C.
JML/sls
cc:Mr. Bill Pinldram
SIVA\BrendE\o\OFFICE\Pinkhsm\spooicl Use Permir\Lntlrien Lencf 05'26'00'wPd
8
GARFIELD COLTNTY
Building & Planning DePartment
Review Agency Form
ou,. s.n 4leV/oc>O 'REeElvED ApR z fi ?tw
Comments Due: 6/1/0Q
Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notrff the staff
contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be
used for your response, or you may attach your owt additional sheets as necessary'
Written comments may be mailed or faxed to:
Garfreld County Building & Planning
Staffcontact:
109 8th Sffeet, Suite 301
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fax: 970-384-5004
Phone: 970-945-8212
E-mail : "garcopln@rof. net"
General comments:
Name of application:
This review agency recommends (circle one): Approval / Denial
The following are suggested conditions of approval, or are the reasons for denial:
Name
q
By:
ofreview agency:
Date.
Rerriqed ?/1OlO0
Sent
nq'f-aa-aaa@ 15:59 DII.] I^IATER FESOUPCES 363 866 3589 P.q2/44
STATE OF COLCRADO
OTFICE OF THE STATE ENCINEER
Division of Waler Resources
Oepartment of Natural Resources
1 l1 I Sherman Streer, Room EI 6
Denver. Colorado 80203
oL^-^, a?6tr oae lco!, IUIIC. IJUJ' UUU-JJU'
FAX: (303i 866-3569
hEp/waklr.Jtatc.co.usr'default. htm
Jelf Launen
Garfield Coun$ Planning Depl
109 8th St Ste 303
Glenwood Springs CO 81601
(',1wgrntlr
May 8, 2000 GreS E. Walcher
Executive Oi/eclol
t{al o. sinrglon, P.t.
Slatc tn$in*r
rtE:Randeii N- Smith, Well Permit No. 2i6161
5E7o NE/l SeC. lC, I /5, t<dVvv' o ln rNl
W. Division 5, W. District 38
Dear Mr. Laurien:
We have reviewed the proposed use of the wellwith permit no. 216161 for a dog kennel.
which is to house up to 40 dogs. lt is generaily aecepted that a mrnmercial business is one that
receives payment for products or services rendered. Assuming that the propooed dog kennelwill
charge for products or services, the use of the water from a well in the dog kennel can be
considered a commercial use of that water-
Permit No. 216161 was issued pursuant to CRS 37-92-602(SXbXllXA), in accordance with
the exemption described under CRS 37-92-602(1Xb). As stated in condition 3 of the well permit,
-The use of the ground water from this well is limited to fire protection, ordinary household
purposes inside uB to 3 single family dwellings, the inigation of not more than one (1) acre of
home gardens and lawns and the watering of domestic animals." No provisions for commercial
use are included in this exemption.
However, CRS 37-92-602(1Xc) specifically describes an exemption for wells used in
commercial businesses. Well permits of this nature are approved pursuant to the State
Engineer's April 9, lgB5, Poliqv Concerninq the Evaluation of Well Pefrnit Applications for Exemot
gommercial Uses, a copy of which is attached for your referenoe. The applicant may wish to
ieview tnis poticy to ascertain whether or not it would be beneficial to sunender the existing \^/ell
permit and apply for a commercial exempt well permit.
Therefore, it is our opinion that permit no. 216161 does not allow the use of water from this
wellto supply the dog kennel. lf you or the applicant has any questions conceming this matter.
please contact Craig Lis of this office for assistance.
Sincerely,
/ku /'Lv'
Kenneth W. Knox
Assistant State Engineer
Enclosures: April 9, 1985, Policy Conceming the Evaluation of Welt Permit Applications for
Exempt Commercial Uses (two pages)
l0Vl(CMuRandell Smith Well.doc
cc: Orlyn Bell, Division Engineer
Joe Bergquist, Water Commissioner, District 38
p
. fiAY-ag-"AW 15:59
RICHARD D. LAfuifuI
Governor
DIU 343 856 3589 P.q3/q4
JEFIS A. OANIELSON
-Strra Eaa;^oo,
OFFICE OF THE STATE ENGINEER
DIVISION OF WATER RESOURCES
'1313 Snerman Street-qoom 8'tI
oenver, cotorado E0203
tJUOI Ogg-JJO !
Aprrl 9, 1985
IiilY0RA.f{Dr},l
TO: ROEERT A. LONGE/\EAIJGH, ASSISTANI STATL ENGINEER FOR GROUND }TATER
EROY: JERIS A. DANIEISON, STATE EliCIlrEER,
SUBJECT: POLICY CONCERNING T}iE EVAIUATION OF l{EiJ, PERMIT APPLICATIONS FORE}fr}'Irt CS&,IERCiAL USES
tl
]1 ^I_92_2^-9he- l_eg_islatllre established a rebuEtable presurptibn in subseciion37'92-6A2(3)(b)(II),-_q.R.S,, that r+elIs used solely -for h6usehold purposes ina-single-family dwelling will not uraterially injure f,he vestea witei rightsof others or any.othe-r existing weIJ- This piesunpcion has been used roapprove many permits for "household Lrse" welli app-iopriating ground *ateitribr:tary to overaupropriaced strean sysr,ems.
By including small capaciry wells used for <irinking anci sanirary facilities ina coffirercial business in the exemptions of section sr-gz-602(i), c.R.s. , tirelegislacure apparently incended f6r such wells to be appror.red und,er special
lirililg - _- go5r$itions, however, the presuirptioii of subsicrion37'9?'6A?t3)(b)(ii) do not apply to chese werl'permit applications. Thereforethey musc be evaluared pursuanr-ro subsection Si-gz-O0z(5)(b)(I)
In orcier to assist in che evaluation and provide for approval of certainlimited uses of well permit applications co serve driiiing and sanitaryfacilities in a conmerciar busihbss, it sha1l be che policf of rhe srarlEngineer that if rhe proposeci annual diversion anci rhe consr.rnpcive use oihrater from the weLl do not exceed chose values of ordinary in-house pu{posesinside a single-famrly.dwel}ing, there shall be a rebuttrblu p.esu,rpcion'rharsuch uses will not injure other vested warer righcs or welli. liis poticyshall be implemented by applying a rebuttable prlsunption of non-in;ury wheiche following condirions are mer:
1- No other lraler :Ypp1y source or slstem ls available ro serve the
ProPerEy, An affidavit by the appticant affirrning this sicuarionmust accomPany che applicazions as wetl as an afficiavit fron afly' enticy capable of servihg che use thac ic wirt not do so,
o
fiA'.{-A1-ZWA 16tW DII] I.IATER EESOUPCES
Roberi A. longenbaugh
7. Ine use of rhe wate. d,iverteri is ]imiced cofaei.iici,es onfy in a"r inciivid.ual cor,laercialliarer are pemicted ouisicie of the building.
?- The r.rell nusi be che only r+eli on che sice.
5' rne sira nr:sr have been esrabrished prior to June l, Lg'iz, or Bustbe exe;ot t1c-m - ths definiiion of a subdivision pursrr"n. cb Seccion50-28-101(10)(c) -r:rd-iaj';-L.n.S. For tocs rn subdivlslons approrreCafier Ju,:.e L , LgjZ , che reccrrunen<lai.ions $race in tire iii"= 'iupply
ravie:', - process will be honoreC. Grourrd warer pEoducticn .*lli -
berinicec tc i;\e aquifer agprovec euring the rene,,* process anci wiLiho ra.:--;--v+ r=JLiruu€d tc cr-re aquifer onlr b;, ConaiCicns of Afprovai.
4. The pr-rnoi-ng race shall noc e-rceed J-5 galrons per mlnuce-
5- The amotni of gror.u-rci water diver;ed shall not excee*i ir,5 acre-Ecotannually. (:.0a,600 gall.ons). Tjre applicant must suoDort cheappJ.icatior wi"i: evioence rhar ihe propbsed use wirl ,,C'create a
demz-rrci greaier tiran llj acre-fcoE.
6' The consuurgtive use of tlre kater shail not e-xceeC lot of che volimeof grotn<i r{arEr diverred. i;;";;}i; frcm rhe use of Ere Haiernust be oischargei co the sene streen sysien in a lccatioa so as tonoE injure a1r vesged warer righrr. ln approvec sepeiC- cank andnon-evaporative leach freld is an accepcable disctarge ae+-hod,Ocher tyP:s of ciisoosal- sysrems trust be evah:acei tc <ier:er,:iine
-ihe
anounc anci Lccation of ihe reeurn flow.
383 866 3589 P.A4/64
drinking and sanicarybusiness. rYo us-.s of
installed on the well. Pernanent
maintaieeC b,v Che well oliner anci
P.esources arnuaily.
is essenEi.al eo reduce rhe backbe modified or revokeC only in
ilErfl t0:
Pag: 2
Exemoc ccnrnerciar r+errs r'hich do not meet the above crtteria r+il.r be erraruareierr LRe DasLs oi maEerial injury.
This poiicy becomes
1 ^- - E.vS ux l,v'e-L.L perilIi
t-.+l - r q.!rr r glrt5, .
0. /fi*-i,^
a- Danielson
JAD/RGH/jp
cc: i{ai Sinruson
I't irricini tr.*;! 4 ' -Jlvrr 5rl5rrlg=i )
4i9?I ( 6 )
B. -{ tocaiizing frow neter ,nusi bearulual <iiversion records nus-,. besuburlrted to rhe Division of ir,arli
effecrive iiruneciiacely and
IL
TOTRL P.A4
GARFIELD COUNTY
Build.ing & Plamiag Departwent
ReviewAgency Form RECE|VEDI.{AY262000
Date Sent:
Comments Due: 6i1lOO
Name of application:
Garfield County requests your comment in review of this project. Please notify the staff
contact in the event you are unable to respond by the date listed above. This form may be
used for your response, or you may attach your own additional sheets as necessary.
Written comments may be mailed or faxed to:
Garfield County Building & Planning
Staffcontact:
109 8e Streeg Suite 301
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Fa:r: 970-384-5004
Phone: 970-945-8212
, E-mail : r'garcopln@rof. net"
General comments: i
$ 6iq sn ,1 'v"
,+,x1,\ fm **
This review agency recommends (circle or")'@/ Denial
The followirg are suggested conditions cf approval, or a^re the reasons for denial:
'1
qrY.-#tJ
AF
4".
)"nad
Con',.aL.--tsi a."""''.5 .f1.9',.dt*;t',(U
l3 Rewiced ?/?n/OO
Sent
'{. ,r,a n, ^ .
ofr
..T
Name
By:-
STATE OF COLORADO
Bill Otlgts, Governor
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES ffio PJylglgJlsrwrLDLrFE
John W. Mumma, Diredor
606O Broaduay
Denwr, Colorado 80216
Telephone: (W)297-11912 For Wldlife-
For Peaple
June 7, 2000
Garfield County Building and Planning
109 8ft Street, Suite 301
Gle,nwood Springs, CO 81601
RE: Pirkham Special Use Permit- Kennel
Mark:
I have reviewed the Special Use Permit application submitted by Mr. Pinkham and have several
comments to make concerning this project. I cannot stress enough the importance of this property to
wildlife. A review ofthe Division's WRIS maps ofthe area shows that this property is located along
prime winter habitat for both deer and elk. The property is considered to be severe winter range for elk.
Perhaps more iryortantly due to their declining numbers; this area is extremely valuable to wintering
mule deer. Mr. Pinkham's property, as well as the surrounding trea, is classified as winter range, severe
winter range, a winter conce,ntration area, and critical habitat. In addition, mule deer use the area as a
migration corridor to access the surrounding areas. As more and more development takes place in the
Fourmile, and Dry Park areas, the value ofthis area increases.
With the above facts in mind, I have conceflls about how the proposed use ofthis area will impact
wildlife use. In his letter, Mr. Pinkham mentions having 30 - 40 sled dogs kenneled on the property. The
mere prese,nce ofthese dogs, not to me,ntion the barking and other noise that is associated with these
animals, will serve as a deterrent to use ofthe area by both elk and deer. In addition, these dogs will
almost certainly have iryacts beyond the property lines of the Pinlchamproperty that will affect wildlife
usage along the entire hiltside. There is also mention of fencing 2 acres to create a pen where the dogs
will be allowed to run and play. If the dogs are able to see wildlife and begin barking, they may cause
enough stress in the animals so that they leave. In hard winters, when elk and especially deer are
concentrating in this area, the dogs and the activities associated with them will be an additional source of
stress on the already stressed animals. Another concefll about this project relates to Mr. Pinkham's plan
to utilize these dogs for sled tours. I have spoke, r with the BLM about my conceflls with his plan to run
the tours in the Thoryson Creek area. There is no guarantee that permission will be granted to oonduct
these tours on public land. Therefore, Mr. Pinlha- may set up a kennel but not have a place to run his
dogs.
I have several recommendations concenring this project. First, all dogs should be kept in their kennel or
be otherwise restrained. Roaming animals could ea$ly chase wildlife on the property, causing injury to
DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES, Wade Buchanan, Acting Executiw Director
VV|LDLTFE coMMrssroN,S,ly"J^1fl: ?jTj:^y-"5"::^rily:Iil,19lT. Bernard Brack, secrdary
lult
deer and elk or otherwise inducing stress on these animals when they are in a weakened condition. This
becomes eve,n more crucial dwing more harsh winters. I also believe that enclosing the kennel would
help reduce irnpacts by creating both a visual and auditory scresn. I recomme,nd that the proposed pen
"r"" b" no larger tharone acre and that it be clustered close to the kennel and home site. This would
help to minimize the area of disturbance as much as possible. The use ofthe pen during winter months
should be restricted. I would further encourage that all activity be limited to the area immediatd
surrounding the home / kemnel / pen complex during the winter months in order to minimize disnrrbance
to the area.
Thank you for the opportunity to comment on this project. I apologize for getting these comments to
you late and appreciate your patience. Feel free to contact me ifyou have any questions'
Sincerely,
Matt Thorpe
DWM- Carbondale
947-2920
IS
/ Zzt',ur-;<'.Z*t,;/,'/- '(='
June 14,2000
Mark Bean
Garfield County Planning and Engineering
109 8th Street
Glenwood Springs, CO 81601
Re: Pinkham ISDS and Building Sound Damping
HCE Project No. 2000004.22
Dear Mark:
The purpose of this letter is to discuss the preliminary design of a ne'uv sewage disposai
syste- ior 1565 Dry Park Road (County Road 125)in Gart'ield County. C,rlorarlo. On
June 8,2000. HighCountry Engineering,Inc. (HCE)personnel met nn-site rvith the
owrrer, IvIr. Bill Finkham. io discuss the possibility of constructing a 40-dog kennel on
the property. At the meeting, Mr. Pinkham relayed the County's rcque-st that-tire
propos6d kennel be serv'iced by either the existing individual se'v!'age dispcsai s:/stem
or a nevi individual system.
According to county records, the existing septic system was designgd lix a tl-bedroorn
residence-and contains one 125O-gallon ieptic tank and one 20'x4i'x.3' gravel absorption
bed. Based on the fact that a typical absorption bed contains a 1-foot gravel layer, the
existing 3-foot gravel layer sh6uld be capable of additionai 244-SF'9f_ silgwalli;ercolation.
Thus, ihe existing absorption f,reld should contain approximately 1064 SF of abscrpticn
area.
Based on the 1994 Colorado Department of Health Regulations, the servage-demancl for
kennels is 30 gallons/dayldog for a total demand of 1200 gpd. Applying a factor of saf'ery
of 1.5 (stzurdard) the design tlow should be 1800 gpd. Tlte equivalent septic ta1{l sio_rge
volume and absorption area based on the original 1984 percolation tests shouid be225A-
gallons and 1139 SF, respectively.
After visiting the site and reviewing the preliminary data, it is m1'Qpinion that a new ancl
separate indfuidual sewage disposal system should be constructed fortheproposed kennel.
Pbnding a percolation teat, it also appears feasible to construct a gravity florv standarrj
absorption bed or chambered system on the site.
923 Cooper Avenue
Glenwood Spings, CO 81601
phone 970 945-8676 ' fax 970 945-2555
14 Inverness Dive East, Ste 8'144
Englewood, CO 80112
phone 303 925-0544 ' lax 303 925'0547
Mark Bean
Re: Pinkham ISDS and Building Sound Damping
HCE Project No. 2000004.22
June 14,2000
Page2 of2
Mr. Pinkham also requested that HCE investigate the possibility of insulating the existing
steel building with noise control materials. I have enclosed product information from
Tectum, Inc., which manufactures cementitious wood fiber, industrial strength acoustic
panels for both walls and ceili!gs.-.Noise reduction coefficients have been provided for
your review, or you can view the Tectum, Inc. web page at http://www.tectum.com.
If you have any questions or comments, please feel free to contact me.
Sincerely,
HIGH COTINTRY ENG4
Roger D. Neal, P.E.
Project Manager
cc: Bill Pinkham