My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0008455 SSNL
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
G
>
GRANT LINE
>
16215
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
PA-1000217
>
SU0008455 SSNL
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2020 11:33:31 AM
Creation date
9/5/2019 10:43:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
FileName_PostFix
SSNL
RECORD_ID
SU0008455
PE
2626
FACILITY_NAME
PA-1000217
STREET_NUMBER
16215
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
GRANT LINE
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95304
APN
20919033
ENTERED_DATE
9/23/2010 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
16215 W GRANT LINE RD
RECEIVED_DATE
9/23/2010 12:00:00 AM
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\G\GRANT LINE\16215\PA-1000217\SU0008455\NL & LIQ PLN CK.PDF
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
82
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
9 <br /> D. Finding 5 is Wrong <br /> D. 1. Finding 5 Reads: <br /> "5. The use is compatible with adjoining land uses. <br /> • This finding can be made because [11 the proposed use will not <br /> interfere with nor alter the current land uses on adjacent properties. <br /> [21 The properties surrounding the project site are zoned AG-40 and <br /> are being used for agricultural purposes with scattered residences. [31 <br /> The nearest residence is located 115 feet away from the project site on <br /> the parcel to the south. [41 As an ordinance requirement, marketing <br /> events shall end by 10:00 p.m." <br /> D. 2. Reason # 1 Why Finding 5 Is Wrong: the "Proposed Use" Has Already <br /> Interfered With, and Will Continue to Interfere With, the Current <br /> Land Uses on Adjacent Isola Property <br /> The fmdin rg eads: "This finding can be made because [1] the proposed use will not <br /> interfere with nor alter the current land uses on adjacent properties." <br /> This portion of Finding 5 is wrong because the so-called"proposed" use <br /> a) Has already in fact`interfered with the current land uses on the adjacent <br /> Isola property; and, <br /> b) Will in fact continue to `interfere with the current land uses on the adjacent <br /> Isola property. <br /> Facts: The Isolas' land use is residential. Their home is located 115 feet from the <br /> wine garden/amphitheater from which amplified music (a) has already been played illegally <br /> many times for many months, and(b) is now"proposed." <br /> As stated eloquently by the neighborhood residents speaking in opposition at the <br /> Planning Commission hearing on September 20'', the numbers of nearby residents--their <br /> locations and proximity to the proposed expansion project, the density of their clustered <br /> housing, the community cohesion which exists among these stable home-owning residents, <br /> and more, are all testament to the idea that the proposed project is out of place despite any <br /> General Plan, zoning or Code allowances. It bears repeating here that, despite the <br /> repeated appearance of the term "scattered housing" in the CDD staff reports, the <br /> neighborhood is not one of"scattered housing,"but rather is a tight-knit, sub-division-style <br /> neighborhood one can find in any city and in many communities in San Joaquin County, <br /> their"agricultural"zoning designation notwithstanding. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.