The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About2.00 Staff Report & Exhibits BOCC 02.6.2023Garfield County Board of County Commissioners Public Hearing Major Impact Review for a Kennel, Large (Files No. MIPA-07-22-8908) Applicant: Alpine Animal Hospital Land Company Representatives: Teija Heikkila Date February 6, 2023 Exhibit Number Exhibit Description 1 Public Hearing Notice Information Form & Attachments 2 Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended 3 Garfield County Comprehensive Plan of 2030 4 Application Submittal 5 Staff Report 6 Staff Presentation 7 Referral Comments from CDOT Brian Killian 8 Referral Comments from Road and Bridge, Gale Stephens 9 Referral Comments from Garfield County Sheriff’s Office Levy Burris 10 Referral Comments from Garfield County Public Health Ted White 11 Referral Comments from Consulting Engineer’s Comments, Chris Hale PE 12 Applicant response to original staff recommended conditions of approval. 13 Referral Comment from Eagle County, Troy Hangen 14 Referral Comments from Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection, Bill Gavette 15 Applicant response to PC recommended COA #9 regarding capacity 16 Excerpt from CDOT permit 322110 for Alpine Animal Hospital 17 Waiver of 7-107 Driveway Standards Request, Judith Kittson, P.E. 18 Referral Comment Chris Hale, PE on Waiver Request PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE INFORMATION Please check the appropriate boxes below based upon the notice that was conducted for your public hearing. In addition, please initial on the blank line next to the statements if they accurately reflect the described action. My application required written/mailed notice to adjacent property owners and mineral owners. ____ Mailed notice was completed on the ______ day of ______________, 20__. ____ All owners of record within a 200 foot radius of the subject parcel were identified as shown in the Clerk and Recorder’s office at least 15 calendar days prior to sending notice. ____ All owners of mineral interest in the subject property were identified through records in the Clerk and Recorder or Assessor, or through other means [list] __________________ _______________________________________________________________________. Please attach proof of certified, return receipt requested mailed notice. My application required Published notice. ____ Notice was published on the ______ day of ______________, 20__. Please attach proof of publication in the Rifle Citizen Telegram.  generally used by the public. I testify that the above information is true and accurate. Name: _____________________________________________ Signature: __________________________________________ Date: _____________________________________________  X TH 29th December 22 TH 19th December 22 TH TH X My application required Posting of Notice. TH 16th December 22____ Notice was posted on the ______ day of ______________, 20__. TH ____ Notice was posted so that at least one sign faced each adjacent road right of way December 23, 2022 Teija Heikkila on behalf of Alpine Animal Hospital Land Company 94. utl *-*tt-;ttË=_ -'sÛ;ü1-- tr Fìstum Ræêlpt (hårdcopy)$ tìêtumü Rðcêlpl (elætrcntc)$--+S-0¡l-'ü Certitl€d Ma¡l Rsslrictod O€llvery $ Adult Signature R€qulmd s Adult SlgnatuG Restrictod $Dêllv6ry $t1,6ü 17 .85 J t\-J¡ -[ ru fiif Etr r'¡ltfEE [f,r!.¡rl ru ru E]rr 12/Lg llo¡e :;1 ¿¿a¿ 6 t ctl :i,l .','' ü5(r1 51 s4. üt $(hârdcopy)RoæiPtReturnn $(elælronlo)RecalPtFðtumE sDellvaryRostriotodMallCoñitledD ÐRoqulrodSlgnatureAdult D€llvery $B6srlctèdAdultSlgnalußn addlæ $ü. áü €r!ru -.0 ru r\.tEt rl C' E3a ar!-¡ -a ru ruúr- æ H"lt¡n Postmâ& $!lá} ::í:- L. U.S. postat Service'" CERTIFIE D MAIL@ RECEIPTDomestic lvlait Only For vlsit ouf webslte al www PS Form 38OO, April 201 S psN 7sso.02-000.e047 See ñeverse lor lnstluctions U.S. Postal Service'" ' CERTIFIED MAIL@ RECEIPT Domestic Mail PS Form 3800,April 2015 PSN 7530 J2.000-e047 See Reverse for lnstructions $4. trü n Retum Recêipt (€lætrontc) D Certiliêd Mâ[ Rsstrict€d D6l¡v€ry fl Adult signatuß Requ¡rsd ù $ $ 0 ù ---$ü-årl---+ffir*---t0;üÏ-- R6tum Bæelpt (hardcopy) SlgnatuB Restdatsd Dollvsry $ü.611 $7. 15 :ftfr! J¡ rurr;f Et¡ ¡.-ltf trf,tf [fr!.¡r{ ruru E:] t\- . ..t zfâlß'\ czs filtq ffffi w&GT 94. üü D Betum Bscolpl (hårdcopy) E Rgturn Rècalpt (doc'lronlc) f]cartilled Man noeùlotód Dsllvory E Adult slgnaluro R6qulr€d s $ s s sAdult SlgnâluÞ Rætllc'têd Osllvory (chêcrbox, add ¡ $ü.6ü s7.85 $4. üft $ s $ $ ô **ffi$-* - ffiilr* $0. ¿iû $7. t5 Þ t4 . rlü E Returñ Rooolpl (hardæP9 E Return R€co,Pt (elsclronlc) fl carllliÊd Mall F98lri9l9d Del¡very É Adutt Slgnaturô Rsqukod ." $0.0fi --{HS-Adult Slgnatute R€6ttloted Dêllvary sü. dllPostago oþ fil'¿i13Co¡rbon ð,t $û. drl $7.85 ru¡I- ruJ¡ rurr:r Eo rì CJ[f Ef trl r\- -nrì ru rucf l-! 9'/2 co'rm4F#cp #A $4. ûCr E Foturn Êsælpt (€lætrcnlo) f] Certtfl ed Mall Fætdotsd Do¡lvery E Adult Slgnstlre R6qulrsd Lf Adult slgnsturc Rostrict€d D€llv€ry $ $ s ù --T0-ilü- Reco¡pt {hârdæpy) $lJ, óû 37,SF $4. rlr-r ---$g-st:iL**+*'{t{t-- *--.ù0;tü- feøbox,t Rêturn Recoipt (hardcopy)n R€tum Rec€¡Þt (Êl€ctmn¡c) C€rt¡t¡ðd Mall R€str¡ctod DêllvsryrAdultSlgnatureRequlred Adult S¡gnature R€strlct€d Dellvery $tJ. érJ ffiffirx'&Ëo S4. ût:l ¡ Faturn Fecolpr (hardcopy) Ú netum Fæ6lpt (€læln¡lc) f] Certitted Matt nætrloted Dol¡v€ry E Adult Slgnâlurs Requir€d s 0 $ s sAdult glgnsturu nå3!lcted ocllwry sü.6ü $7.85 $4 , r:r'1 --tffitfr-- ¡øøbox,n Return Recslpt (hardcopy)tr R€turn RecêtÞt (electronlc)n C€flif¡ed MÊll Restrict€d D€llvery Adult¡Slgnature Requlßd D Adult Slgnature R€strlcted Dellv€ry $[t.6¡ $7. g5 s4. ü(l n Feium Rocelpl (hatdcopy) E R€tum R6cslpt (olocttÞnlc) Ú Oer¡nø Ual Re'+¡ctod Del¡v€ry ncquirodSlãnäturoFIeoun DellvoryRssÛlcledSlgnåluþ s 3 $fl.6ü $7.85 $4. üü -+fh{t----st;tffi *-$È-{j&- feebox, Ret¡lrn¡Recêlpt (hardcopy) RètumE Rêcelpt (èlectronlc)n MâilC€rlÌfled Rsstrlct€d Þ€livery Adultü Slgnature Rêquired flacun SlgnatuÞ Re$rlcted Dellvêry $ü .6r:l $7. g5 jJ- Eo mJI rurr :J. Et¡ rl E¡ E¡ EI EIrrJIrt ruru Efrr t2/rg/2fl2? lletø I l,¿tuì 6t3J0 üFtrl -':ì-.'Æ Postmah. ' . ,,t äÅ t*wwlBo 94. ü[ loo s(hùdcoPY)RecêlptRelurn $RocolptRoturn (€lsc'tronlo) sDollveryRstrlctedMa¡læ.lltlútr $Requlr€dSlgnatureAdutttr tDsltuotyFestt'lotôdslgnatuteadult ad<l ifJ.6fl 17,85 ${.t-]u $ $ $ $ $ --$f"{uJ*- -*ffitu- add ûft IilI fl Adult Signaturê Restricted Oellvery (ehacktrRetumRecelpt(hardcopy)tr Return Recsipt (elsclronic)n Certifìod Mail Restrictêd D€lìvêry Iaoutt Signaturê Required Postage $t-1" tiû J¡ J m-¡ ru r\-¡- EO EI E¡ EI E¡rl -Erq ru rutf r\- wß tfû1 55 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 1 Exhibit 5 PROJECT INFORMATION AND STAFF COMMENTS Type of Review Major Impact – Kennel, Large Applicants (Owners) Alpine Animal Hospital Land Company Representative Teija Heikkila, PetVET Legal Description 87 Tract in Lots 7 & 12 Lying northerly of Hwy 82 Except 0.18 Acres Practical description 17776 Hwy 82 Carbondale, Co 81623 Lot sizes 3.982 Acres Zoning Rural Comprehensive Plan Residential Medium DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPOSAL The application proposes the creation of a dog daycare and boarding facility, separate from the existing veterinary clinic, which will house more than 8 dogs at one time. This meets the definition of a Kennel, Large (referred to as a Large Kennel from this point forward) found in the Land Use and Development Code, as amended. The application represents that only operational changes are being made to the existing site and development Veterinary use has existed on the site since the 1960’s. Current ownership has been since the 1970’s. It appears that SUP 99-103 approved the use. The approvals were updated by a new special use permit approved by Resolution 2008-106 at Reception #755796. This permit applies to parcel #2391- 333-00-005. At that time, no residential use was present on the site, though an apartment has since been added. Building permits exist for each structure, including permits for expansion of individual structures. Likewise, septic and well permits are present. The existing SUP permitted a kennel as part of the veterinary hospital. The applicant is separating the two uses and the kennel will be expanded beyond the number of dogs (15) allowed by the current SUP. The parcel is located between Highway 82 and the Highway 82 Access Road near Garfield County’s border with Eagle County. The site takes access directly from the Access Road, which is CDOT rights- of-way. CDOT provided referral comments. The parcel currently has two buildings with permits. The southern building is the kennel (Barn Yard) with housing unit, while the northern building is the animal hospital (veterinary clinic). Each structure is served by individual OWTS. The parcel also has a well, two septic systems, and irrigation ditches. Circulation is shared by the two structures, which do have individual parking. The application’s traffic study examined these items as well as traffic impacts. The sketch site plan shown on the following page is from a 2008 application and does not include all current improvements. A site schematic from the application also follows. The western most drive from the 2008 application has since been blocked with animal yards part of the Barn Yard operation. File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 2 Exhibit 5 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 3 Exhibit 5 APPLICABLE REGULATIONS A Major Impact Review is required for a Large Kennel within a rural zoned area. The following Land Use and Development Code, as amended, items were specifically considered during the review of this application. 4-105. MAJOR IMPACT REVIEW. A. Overview. Applications subject to a Major Impact Review shall be reviewed and a recommendation made by the Planning Commission, and decided by the BOCC. B. Review Process. Applications for Major Impact Review shall be processed according to Table 4-102, Common Review Procedures and Required Notice. Figure 1 Site Schematic from Application Wastewater Plan File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 4 Exhibit 5 C. Review Criteria. An application shall comply with the applicable standards of this Code. 7-603 Kennels These standards apply to both Small and Large Kennels. A. Enclosed Building and Noise Prevention. All Kennels shall be completely enclosed within a building, however, a Kennel may have dogs outdoors if the noise from the Kennel does not exceed the noise standards pursuant to section 7-603.B. and complies with other Garfield County regulations as provided. B. Noise. No noise shall emanate from the property boundary in excess of the Residential Zone District standards contained in C.R.S. § 25-12-103, except as permitted by C.R.S. § 25-12-103(2) and (3). C. Waste and Sewage Disposal System. 1. Liquid and solid waste, as defined in the Solid Waste Disposal Sites and Facilities Act, C.R.S. § 30-20-100.5, shall be disposed of with either an OWTS or shall be stored and removed for final disposal in a manner that protects against nuisance and surface and groundwater contamination. 2. All other waste shall be removed from the site by a commercial hauler to an approved Solid Waste Disposal Site. D. State Licensing Required. All Kennels shall be required to provide the BOCC with a copy of the license issued by the State Department of Agriculture The application will also need to maintain compliance with the previous approvals, except as those are explicitly changed by any permit issued. REFERRAL AGENCY COMMENTS 1) Garfield County Sheriff’s Office – No concerns at this time. 2) Garfield County Road and Bridge – Had no comments regarding the proposal. 3) Colorado Department of Transportation – noted that the applicant has a permitted driveway and has no further comments. 4) Garfield County Consulting Engineer, Chris Hale PE – providing comments related to grading and drainage, OWTS, parking, driveway, and noise study. 5) Garfield County Environmental Health, Ted White, PE – commented on water, wastewater and noise. 6) Carbondale and Rural Fire Protection District, Bill Gavette – had no issues or comments on the application. 7) Eagle County, Troy Hangen – No comments or concerns. Other Referral Agencies contacted: Garfield County Building Official, Oil and Gas Liaison, Colorado Division of Water Resources, Colorado Health Department. File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 5 Exhibit 5 Figure 2 Aerial Image of Site File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 6 Exhibit 5 PUBLIC COMMENTS No public comments have been received as of the time of this staff report. STAFF ANALYSIS CODE ANALYSIS 4-105 Major Impact Review – Section 4-203.B General Application Materials – The application provided required documentation related to ownership and representation for the application. Section 4-203.C Vicinity Map – Application provided a vicinity map. Section 4-203.D Site Plan – The application provided a basic site plan and requested a submittal waiver from some details usually required. The application is not proposing any significant changes to the site, including topography. Section 4-203.E Grading and Drainage – There is no proposed changes to Grading and Drainage. There is currently no evidence that additional grading is required on the site. Section 4-203.F Landscape Plan – The application requests a waiver of this requirement since it is not proposing any alterations to the existing site. Section 4-203.G Impact Analysis – The applicant responded to these items in their responses to Article 7 Standards. Noise may have the greatest impact on the surrounding properties. Section 4-203.J Development Agreement – NA Section 4-203.K Improvements Agreement – NA Section 4-203.L Traffic Study – The application includes a traffic study prepared by River City Consultants. Impacts to the Hwy 82 Frontage Road were considered. The original CDOT permit, #309106, was updated by CDOT upon application of the owner to permit #322110. This permit accommodates the proposed use. The traffic study estimated ADT using past data from the boarding facility and veterinary clinic. Future expansions were projected. Those projected traffic counts were not high enough to trigger improvements to the frontage road. Section 4-203.M Water Supply and Distribution Plan – The site is served by a well. The well permit was provided. Water quality test results were within established parameters. There were no concerns presented regarding the well production as demonstrated in the 4-hour pump test. Section 4-203.N Wastewater Management – The veterinary clinic and the kennel are on separate OWTS for wastewater management. Each system has a septic tank and an absorption field. The wastewater management plan addressed both systems. The report noted that the Animal Clinic’s septic tank is not protected by a fence or similar barrier to prevent heavy traffic over top. File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 7 Exhibit 5 The OWTS that serves the proposed kennel and existing employee housing was originally designed and permitted for the first veterinary clinic on the site. The report indicated that the system has adequate capacity for the proposed uses and some expansion. The report looked at the two units in concert and noted that they are below the thresholds that would require state permitting. The reports include some recommendations staff would encourage the applicant to take into consideration when operating their uses. Article 7 Standards The application provided response to the applicable Article 7 Standards. Section 7-101 Zone District Use Regulations – The proposed use is allowed by major impact review of within the Rural Zone district. The application posits that the proposal will allow for the kennel use without requiring further impacts on natural or agricultural systems. The use has previously (and currently) been allowed on the parcel as part of the approvals for a Veterinary Clinic. Section 7-102 Compliance with Comprehensive Plan and IGA’s – The proposal complies with Garfield county’s Comprehensive Plan. No IGA’s are impacted, though referral request was sent to Eagle County due to the proximity of the parcel to that county. Section 7-103 Compatibility – The expansion of the kennel use may have negative impacts on surrounding properties. While traffic, wastewater, and water supply have been adequately addressed, noise impacts may require additional mitigation. Section 7-104 Source of Water – The proposal is served by an onsite well. Section 7 -105 Adequate Central Water Distribution and Wastewater systems – Provided materials indicated that water and wastewater systems are sufficient. Section 7-106 Public Utilities – Public utilities are in place and adequate. Section 7-107 Access and Roadways – The application included adequate driveway permitting and traffic study information. The consulting Engineer noted that some of the internal drives do not meet these standards and the applicant should request a waiver of standards prior to any permit being issued. The waiver request has been provided since the PC hearing and is discussed below. Section 7-108 Land Subject to Natural Hazards – No known natural hazards impact the property in a way to require additional mitigation in this application. Section 7-109 Fire Protection – The parcel is within Carbondale and Rural Fire District and has adequate fire protection. Existing structures were permitted as commercials buildings and built to the standards at the time permitted. Section 7-201 Agricultural Lands – File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 8 Exhibit 5 No further impact on agricultural lands by the proposal. Section 7-202 Wildlife Habitat Areas – The application will not result in further degradation of wildlife habitat areas. Section 7-203 Protection of Wetlands and Waterbodies – No wetlands or waterbodies were noted on the property. Section 7-204 Drainage and Erosion – No additional grading and drainage is required. Section 7-205 Environmental Quality – The proposal will not result in further degradation of environmental quality. Section 7-206 Wildfire Hazards – The proposal will not increase the risk of wildfire in the area. Section 7-207 Natural and Geologic Hazards – No known natural or geologic hazards require additional mitigation for the proposal. Section 7-208 Reclamation – No construction is proposed with this application. Section 7-301 Compatible Design – Animal waste will be managed with approved solid waste service providers. The proposal will use existing facilities that have operated in the past as this use, with no complaints known by staff at this time. Section 7-302 Off Street Parking – As indicated in the traffic analysis, adequate off-street parking exists for the proposed use. Kennel use is not included in the LUDC’s Table 7-302. Staff accepts the analysis presented in the Application. With over 6 spaces for clients as well as an additional 5-8 employee spaces. The consulting engineer recommended an ADA compliant space be provided. Section 7-303 Landscape Plan – No impacts to the existing landscaping are being proposed in this application. Section 7-304 Lighting – All lighting shall continue to meet the code’s requirements. Section 7-305 Snow Storage – Adequate snow storage exists on site. Section 7-306 Trails and Walkways – NA Section 7-603 Kennels – A Enclosed Building and Noise Prevention The application states that dogs will be kept indoors at night. Some outdoor exercise will be provided for kenneled dogs during normal business hours. File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 9 Exhibit 5 The facility must abide by noise nuisance standards. The applicant has provided a noise study and mitigation strategies discussed below in Section VII of this report. Staff notes that the existing veterinary and kennel uses have been functioning without complaint for several years. If nuisance complaints are filed and sustained in the future, additional mitigation may be required. B. Noise See discussion above. C. Waste and Sewage Disposal System The proposed use includes disposal systems for liquid and solid waste. D. State Licensing Required The applicant provided a copy of the state license with the NTC materials. ADDITIONAL STAFF ANALYSIS The application included a response to existing conditions of approval for the current uses. This application would allow for a kennel use to permitted separately, exceeding the previous limit on the number of dogs. PLANNING COMMISISON HEARING A public hearing was held before the Planning Commission (PC) on December 7. At that hearing, the Planning Commission voted to unanimously recommended approval with the following recommended Conditions of Approval. PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. All representations made by the Applicant in the application for the Kennel, Large shall be conditions of approval, unless specifically altered by the deciding authority. 2. The construction and operation of the Kennel, Large shall be done in accordance with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations governing the operation of this type of facility. 3. The Veterinary Hospital uses approved under previous Special Use Permits shall maintain compliance with all applicable, previous conditions of approval. 4. Prior to permit being issued, the applicant shall provide a noise mitigation strategy to maintain compliance with all necessary noise codes. 5. The application shall provide a Waiver of Standards request prepared by a qualified professional, demonstrating the satisfactory performance and safety of the driveway, including but limited to driveway width. 6. The OWTS components shall be marked, fenced, and/or trenched to be protected from animal and vehicular traffic or irrigation run-off. 7. All required ADA parking will be provided. 8. An updated site plan shall be provided that shows the location of all applicable features, including outdoor dog runs and any proposed sound mitigation walls. 9. The applicant and staff will collaborate on determining a maximum number of dogs. File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 10 Exhibit 5 SUPPLEMENTAL MATERIAL STAFF ANALYSIS The applicant has provided additional information in response to the Planning Commission’s comments and recommendations. Due to these supplemental items, included in the exhibits, staff has recommended altering the recommended Planning Commission’s conditions of approval #4 and #9 and removing condition #5. NOISE MITIGATION REALTED TO PC CONDITION #4 Exhibit 12 provides the applicant’s responses to staff’s original recommended conditions of approval, #4 which requested mitigation measures related to noise. The measures are: “a. Noise suppression acoustic panels: These panels are very effective in eliminating echo and reverb while overall reducing ambient noise in a space. These panels would be placed both inside the pet care (BarnYard) building as well as on the inside of the outside fence where dogs play. b. Smaller Group Size: Majority of dog noise comes from group play as the puppies get excited and escalate. BarnYard will be more observant in the play behavior of dogs that participate in group play and as necessary, reduce the group size if play becomes too high energy. c. Dogs that bark excessively: Barn Yard ownership will direct staff to diligently remove any dogs that bark excessively from the outside play yard. d. Staff Training: BarnYard agrees to provide additional staff training to prevent, monitor and control barking behavior.” Based on the above mitigation strategies, staff has amended the recommended Condition of Approval #4 to directly call out that the facility must maintain compliance with all applicable noise ordinances. DRIVEWAY WAIVER OF STANDARDS RELATED TO PC CONDITION #5 To fulfill the Planning Commission’s recommended Condition of Approval #5, the applicant has provided a waiver of standards request and CDOT access permit. The waiver request was reviewed by the consulting engineer and staff, and it was found to fulfill the requirements of 4-118. The waiver request, pertinent portions of the permit, and the consulting engineer’s comments are included in Exhibits 16, 17, and 18 respectively. Staff recommends not including this condition now. DOG CAPACITY RELATED TO PC CONDITION #9 The applicant provided a letter included in Exhibit #15 provided 120 dogs as an upper level for the number of dogs the facility should have based on current facilities. Staff notes that the PACFA license’s regulations include limits on the number of dogs based on the number of kennel staff present. Similarly, noise and other nuisance limitations may require the facility to limit the number of dogs or other animals to maintain compliance. Staff amended recommended Condition of Approval #9 above (now #8 below) to reflect this number. File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Board of County Commissioners Philip Berry, AICP 11 Exhibit 5 FINAL RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDED FINDINGS 1. That proper public notice was provided as required for the hearing before the Board of County Commissioners. 2. 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 Land Use Change Permit for the operation of the Kennel, Large is in the best interest of the health, safety, convenience, order, prosperity and welfare of the citizens of Garfield County. 4. That with the adoption of conditions, the application is in general conformance with the 2030 Comprehensive Plan, as amended. 5. That with the adoption of the Conditions of Approval and acceptance of Waivers, the application has adequately met the requirements of the Garfield County Land Use and Development Code, as amended. RECOMMENDED CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL 1. All representations made by the Applicant in the application for the Kennel, Large shall be conditions of approval, unless specifically altered by the deciding authority. 2. The construction and operation of the Kennel, Large shall be done in accordance with all applicable Federal, State, and local regulations governing the operation of this type of facility. 3. The Veterinary Hospital uses approved under previous Special Use Permits shall maintain compliance with all applicable, previous conditions of approval. 4. The Kennel will maintain compliance with all applicable noise regulations as represented in the applicant’s supplemental sumbittals. 5. The OWTS components shall be marked, fenced, and/or trenched to be protected from animal and vehicular traffic or irrigation run-off. 6. All required ADA parking will be provided. 7. An updated site plan shall be provided that shows the location of all applicable features, including outdoor dog runs and any proposed sound mitigation walls. 8. The facility is limited to 120 dogs or the number of dogs allowed by state licensing regulations. File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 12 Exhibit 7 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 13 Exhibit 8 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 14 Exhibit 9 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 15 Exhibit 10 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 16 Exhibit 10 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 17 Exhibit 11 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 18 Exhibit 12 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 19 Exhibit 12 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 20 Exhibit 14 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 21 Exhibit 14 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 22 Exhibit 15 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 23 Exhibit 16 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 24 Exhibit 16 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 25 Exhibit 16 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 26 Exhibit 16 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 27 Exhibit 16 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 28 Exhibit 17 File No. MIPA-07-22-8908 Planning Commission Philip Berry, AICP 29 Exhibit 18