My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0013350
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
H
>
HAMMER
>
3939
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
VR-86-5
>
SU0013350
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/27/2020 9:45:34 AM
Creation date
5/27/2020 8:37:39 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0013350
PE
2600
FACILITY_NAME
VR-86-5
STREET_NUMBER
3939
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
HAMMER
STREET_TYPE
LN
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95212-
APN
09209018
ENTERED_DATE
5/21/2020 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
3939 E HAMMER LN
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\gmartinez
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
116
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
UP-86-6 and VR-86-5 page 2 <br /> The County Planning Division' s project recommendation will follow <br /> the recommendation submitted by the City of Stockton. The reasons <br /> for this are as follows: <br /> 1 . By requesting that Measure F be placed on the City ballot, <br /> the applicant indicated a willingness to develop its project <br /> under the City ' s jurisdiction; <br /> 2 . Measure F, which included the Auto Center expansion site was <br /> approved by City voters in November 1986 ; <br /> 3 . The Christian Life Center site is located across the street <br /> from the Auto Center expansion site; and <br /> 4 . The Auto Center project is in the process of completing the <br /> Environmental Impact Report for annexation to, and development <br /> within, the City of Stockton. <br /> The Planning Division will recommend that the Planning Commission <br /> deny UP-86-6 and VR-86-5 , based upon the considerations noted <br /> below. <br /> CITY AND COUNTY GENERAL PLANS <br /> The City comment letter expresses strong opposition to the project, <br /> citing conflicts with the urban growth and development goals and <br /> policies of the City of Stockton' s General Plan. <br /> With regard to the requirement of public services for sewage dis- <br /> posal, water supply, and storm drainage the City letter notes: <br /> "Any development which occurs adjacent to the City' s urban in- <br /> frastructure system should be required to tie into that system, <br /> however, since the project site is not designated for a specific <br /> land use on the City' s General Plan no city urban services can <br /> be extended to the site. In addition, any future expansion <br /> of the City ' s infrastructure system into this area or to the <br /> surrounding area would be significantly constrained and sub- <br /> stantially less cost effective if extended after development <br /> occurs rather than at the time of development. " <br /> It may be inferred from this comment that the project is premature. <br /> The City of Stockton Public Works Department recommends that: <br /> "consideration of this use permit be postponed until the North <br /> Stockton Traffic Study is complete and this area is considered <br /> for annexation to the City. This will allow the City, as the <br /> agency responsible for providing services to the site, to appro- <br /> priately analyze and mitigate the site ' s potential impact. " <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.