My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0009195 (3)
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
T
>
TADDEI
>
151
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
PA-1200063
>
SU0009195 (3)
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2020 11:33:53 AM
Creation date
9/9/2019 10:33:17 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0009195
PE
2656
FACILITY_NAME
PA-1200063
STREET_NUMBER
151
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
TADDEI
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
ACAMPO
APN
00317010 54
ENTERED_DATE
5/21/2012 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
151 W TADDEI RD
RECEIVED_DATE
5/18/2012 12:00:00 AM
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\T\TADDEI\151\PA-1200063\SU0009195\REV EH COND 2.PDF \MIGRATIONS\T\TADDEI\151\PA-1200063\SU0009195\CDD OK.PDF \MIGRATIONS\T\TADDEI\151\PA-1200063\SU0009195\APPEAL.PDF \MIGRATIONS\T\TADDEI\151\PA-1200063\SU0009195\MISC.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.
/
84
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
u <br /> The finding reads: "This finding can be made because [. . . 3] The nearest residence <br /> is located 115 feet away from the project site on the parcel to the south." <br /> Facts This portion of Finding 5 is wrong because these setbacks are not allowed <br /> under similar circumstances elsewhere in the County. <br /> The findings logic: <br /> 1) Because "The nearest residence is located 115 feet away from the project <br /> site on the parcel to the south,"therefore <br /> 2) "This finding can be made" <br /> Argument: Simply being located 115 feet away from a residence is not legal <br /> justification for allowing what is proposed. <br /> Because this "marketing event" activity and its necessarily associated impacts are <br /> not allowed elsewhere in the county under similar circumstances, they should not be <br /> allowed under these circumstances, for the same reasons of concem. <br /> Conclusion: The proposed use is not compatible with the Isolas' adjoining <br /> residential land use, simply because it is "located 115 feet away from the project site." In <br /> fact, it is precisely because the proposed use is only 115 feet away from the Isolas' home <br /> that the use is not compatible. <br /> D. 5. Reason#4 Why Finding 5 is Wrong: Staff Report Improperly <br /> Employs Presumptive Correctness <br /> The finding reads: "This finding can be made because [. . . 4] As an ordinance <br /> requirement, marketing events shall end by 10:00 p.m." <br /> The finding's logic: This finding is based on an assumed premise, as follows: <br /> 1) "because [. . .] As an ordinance requirement,marketing events shall end by <br /> 10:00 p.m.", therefore <br /> 2) "This finding can be made" <br /> Argument: The assumption is that by simply ending at 10.00 p.m., the proposed <br /> use is somehow "compatible" with the neighbors' land uses. That makes no sense in real <br /> life. The impacts are there to the neighbors no matter when the impact is required to cease <br /> being an impact. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.