Laserfiche WebLink
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 />