Laserfiche WebLink
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT <br /> 1810 E.HAZELTON AVE.,STOCKTON,CA 95205-8232 <br /> PHONE:209/488.3121 FAX:209/488-3183 <br /> May 15, 2006 lVLA ,<' Ir <br /> MEMORANDUM <br /> TO: Development Co mittee <br /> FROM: Karla Kuhl, ssociate Planner <br /> SUBJECT: VARIANCE APPLICATION PA-0600208 OF RONALD & SUSAN <br /> ROBINSON (C/O MICHAELHAKEEM) (APN: 025-060-03) (ADDRESS: <br /> 11453 W. STATE ROUTE 12, LODI) <br /> The applicant has submitted the above referenced Variance application for an exemption <br /> to Development Title Section 9-1150.15 (d) with regards to improving a private right-of- <br /> way to San Joaquin County improvement standards for public roads when a maximum of <br /> six (6) existing and/or potential lots may be serviced by the private right-of-way. <br /> The project site is located on an access easement on the north side of State Route 12, <br /> 1.3 miles west of Guard Road, Lodi. <br /> The property has a General Plan designation of A/G (General Agriculture) and OS/RC <br /> (Resource Conservation) and is zoned AG-40 (General Agriculture, 40-acre minimum). <br /> Background <br /> In August 2004, the applicant applied for Minor Subdivision No. PA-0400488 to subdivide <br /> a 275-acre parcel into six parcels ranging in size from 40 acres to 53.9 acres. The <br /> Department of Public Works' recommended condition number four states that: <br /> The unnamed access road shall be named in accordance with the County <br /> standards and shall be constructed in conformance with the standards for a fifty <br /> (50) foot right-of-way rural residential street. <br /> Development Title Section 9-1150.15(d) states that a maximum of six (6) existing and/or <br /> potential lots may be served by the private right-of-way or the private right-of-way shall be <br /> improved to San Joaquin County Improvement Standards for public roads. The <br /> Department of Public Works determined that although the applicant's project consisted of <br /> only 6 lots, that the potential existed for more that 6 lots to be served by the street in the <br /> future. Because of this, the applicant has not been able to proceed with the Minor <br /> 1 <br />