My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0013439
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
COUNTYWIDE
>
0
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
TA-93-3
>
SU0013439
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/15/2020 8:36:40 AM
Creation date
6/12/2020 11:20:57 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0013439
PE
2600
FACILITY_NAME
TA-93-3
STREET_NUMBER
0
STREET_NAME
COUNTYWIDE
ENTERED_DATE
6/10/2020 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
0 COUNTYWIDE
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.
/
56
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
estate agent and people came to him requesting lot splits from <br /> their properties before the ordinance was changed. He said he did <br /> not see how it would be possible to monitor income from sons and <br /> daughters helping out on the farm in order for them to qualify for <br /> a lot split. He said the purchase of farm land for speculated <br /> development has driven up the price of this land. He said there <br /> are "developer-farmers" <br /> and then there are "farmers, " and it would <br /> be difficult for the Planning Commission to determine the differ- <br /> ence. Mr. Hesseltine said he could sympathize with a request from <br /> a legitimate farmer who wants to retire from his farm and stay in <br /> his home. He said he was also concerned about abuse of Williamson <br /> Act provisions. <br /> Bruce Blodgett, representing the San Joaquin Farm Bureau, spoke in <br /> support of the proposed Text Amendment. He read a letter from the <br /> Department of Conservation (addressed to him) , which he submitted <br /> into the record. The letter was in support of the Text Amendment. <br /> Norma Norton (30327 E. Highway 120, Escalon) objected to the Text <br /> Amendment. She said her husband passed away and she has had to <br /> continue the farming operation by herself. <br /> Roger Elissagary (7855 W. Valpico Rd. , Tracy) said that a homesite <br /> split should have a restriction of 10 years before it can be sold. <br /> Leroy Ornellas (20749 Lammers Rd. , Tracy) said he is a dairy farmer <br /> and he felt that legitimate farmers should be given the right to <br /> cut off a homesite. He objected to the Text Amendment. He said he <br /> is not in favor of the Farm Bureau recommendation. <br /> Jeff Harper (840 E. Mettler Rd. , Lodi) said that when a homesite is <br /> created for financing purposes only, it should be created only for <br /> a temporary period of time; and at the conclusion of that time <br /> period, the homesite parcel should be merged back with the parent <br /> parcel. <br /> John Eilers (21355 Walnut Drive, Linden) spoke in support of the <br /> proposed Text Amendment and commended the committee who worked on <br /> it. He said the provisions are simple and will help protect <br /> agriculture. He said there are now many houses on agricultural <br /> land and this doubles the price of agricultural land for those <br /> people who wish to get into farming. He said that some additional <br /> wording should be added to (a) (1) "except under provisions which <br /> provide the parcel should be above the zone minimum. " He said that <br /> when the farm land is protected, the farmer is also protected. <br /> Karen Cambra (205 Oleander, Manteca) said she has 29 acres and she <br /> would like to give a parcel each to her two daughters. <br /> Don Moyer (P.O. Box 207, Ripon) stated the following about the <br /> ordinance: <br /> • It does not allow retirement parcels. <br /> -3c- <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.