COMPLIANCE INFO_1981-2012 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

The owners want to 'create the 10 acre parcel because they are allowed to do this and may need to sell it in the future. They bought the property within the past 3 years. Another property owner in the area, Bill Klein, told him to tell the Commission he is also in favor of this request. Don Cross was present and said that in order to divide the parcel he has to put in another road to the east. He plans on using the existing road also. His land is presently growing oats. Several property owners from the area spoke in favor of the project. Among them were, Ervin Frisk, John Sizuela and Ted Price. Two letters were also submitted (from Everett Cutburth and John Sizuela). They stated that the land would be more appropriately used for residential development than for agriculture. OPPONENTS: Two property owners from the area spoke in opposition (Arthur Beckwith and Steve Sanguinetti). The reasons stated for opposition were that further residential development in this area would impact the environment and the existing cattle raising operations, would encourage the urbanization of an agricultural area, and the project is for speculation for monetary purposes. Milton Road is not adequate for additional traffic. This project represents leapfrog development and it is poor planning. If the area is to be residential, it should be planned for it rather than by piecemeal development. REBUTTAL: Mr. Wong said that the project meets the provisions of the ordinance. If the Commission is not in agreement with the ordinance, the ordinance should be changed. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED DISCUSSION: Comm. Morri said he can make all of the findings to approve this and he agrees with the staff report. Comm. Gillispie said he could not make Finding No. 1. He said he does not feel this project is consistent with the General Plan. He said this GA -40 area is primarily for cattle raising. Comm. Jungeblut asked that Condition No. 2(c) be revised to state that the existing driveway is to be removed. He said that if that driveway is not removed, there will be 3 parcels involved. He said the project meets the intent of the ordinance. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Morri-Jungeblut) to: 1. Approve the Negative Declaration; 2. Approve Minor Subdivision Application No. MS -92-217 with the Findings and Conditions of Approval given in the staff report and as modified below: PC MINUTES -6- JAN 7, 1993