Laserfiche WebLink
Neumiller & Beardslee <br /> A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION <br /> MA'LING ADDRESS <br /> ROBERT L BEARDSLEE JAC. S JOHA, <br /> THOMAS J SMEPHARD.SR MICHAEL J DYER ATTORNEYS AND COLTN SELORS PG DRAWER 20 <br /> STOCKTO N, CALIFORNIA 9520--3020 <br /> DUNCAN P MCPHERSON PAUL N SALESTRACCI - <br /> RUDY V BILAWSKI STEVEN D CRABTREE FIFTH FLOOR WATERFRONT OFFICE TOWER II <br /> ROBERT C MORRISON JEANNE ZOLEZZ' 509 WEST WEBER AVENUE <br /> JAMES P DYKE THOMAS E JEFFRY JR REFER TO FILE NO <br /> JAMES A ASKEW GERALD C BENITO STOCKTON. CALIFORNIA 95203-3165 <br /> JOHN W STOVALL DOUGLAS P WINTER (209) 948-8200 <br /> STEVEN A MERUM PAUL 5 MUDRICH <br /> RICHARD M ARCHBOLD LORENZO G FORMOSO T E L E C O P I E R 12 09) 94 B-49 1 0 <br /> MICHELLE P G TURNER <br /> SUSAN M MURRAY <br /> October 4 , 1988 <br /> RECEIVED <br /> HAND DELIVERED <br /> OCT 0 4 1988 <br /> sN.�� i0ar�ul�! COUN <br /> r!ANINING IIIi:IS101\1 <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> Planning Commission <br /> c/o Mr. Chester O. Davisson <br /> Director of Planning <br /> and Building <br /> 1810 E. Hazelton <br /> Stockton , California 95202 <br /> Re: F & W Cattle Co. <br /> Dear Members of the <br /> Planning Commission: <br /> This office represents F & W Cattle Co. with respect to <br /> a Use Permit Application. The application was denied on <br /> September 16 , 1988 by the Planning Commission. <br /> Unfortunately due to a miscommunication by and between <br /> the undersigned and the applicant' s engineer, an appeal was <br /> not filed within the time allowed under the County Ordi- <br /> nance. This miscommunication was aggravated due to the fact <br /> that I was out of the State during a portion of the appeal <br /> period time. <br /> The landowner is the innocent party in this <br /> miscommunication and should not be deprived of his right to <br /> have the matter considered on the merits by the Board of <br /> Supervisors. To allow this , we respectfully ask the Commis- <br /> sion, pursuant to Section 9-1113 , to waive the "one year" <br /> rule so that the application may be considered and rejected <br /> by the Commission and then appealed to the Board. <br /> In consultation with your planning staff , this request <br /> appears to be the most efficient means to allow the Board of <br />