Laserfiche WebLink
-J <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> a44 < <br /> 5 .y COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT <br /> • 1810 E.HAZELTON AVE.,STOCKTON.CA 85205.8232 <br /> PHONE:2091488-9121 FAX:208/468-3183 �+ <br /> May 7, 2009 <br /> MEMORANDUM <br /> TO: Planning Commission <br /> FROM: Kerry Sullivan, Director <br /> SUBJECT: PA-0800304 of Katherine and Roger Towers <br /> (Item 1) <br /> Prior to the Planning Commission meeting of February 5, 2009, Roger Towers submitted <br /> documents to each of the Planning Commissioners without submitting a copy to the <br /> Community Development Department. The Planning Commission continued this item to <br /> March 5, 2009 and asked Mr. Towers to submit the materials to the Community <br /> Development Department so that the Department could read the materials and distribute <br /> them to the Planning Commission. Mr. Towers submitted the materials on February 5, <br /> 2009, and the Community Development Department distributed those materials to the <br /> Planning Commission, County Counsel, Public Works, Environmental Health, and Mike <br /> Hakeem (representing the Vernalis Producers) on February 6, 2009. <br /> Project Description and Traffic <br /> The first page of the materials includes a discussion of the project description and <br /> operations, and traffic. There is no request for a change in the project description or a <br /> change in conditions of approval. Pages 2 and 3 show miles traveled for various truck <br /> trips. Again, Mr. Towers is not asking for a change in conditions. Because no change is <br /> being requested in either the project description or the conditions of approval, the <br /> Community Development Department offers no analysis of the first three pages. <br /> Findings <br /> The next seven pages include five pages of findings and two graphics. Mr. Towers <br /> provides potential findings for approval of the residence and the temporary corporation <br /> yard. It is not unusual for an applicant to suggest findings for the Planning Commission <br /> to consider when the Community Development Department is recommending denial and <br /> indicating that the findings cannot be made. It is unusual for an applicant to suggest <br /> new findings when the Community Development Department has already recommended <br /> that the findings can be made, as in the case of the temporary corporation yard. <br /> Unusual or not, if the Planning Commission chooses to approve the proposed residence <br /> and/or the temporary corporation yard, with some or all of the findings proposed by Mr. <br /> Towers, the Planning Commission may do so. <br /> U <br />