Laserfiche WebLink
GLA y�f' <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT <br /> ' 1810 E.HAZELTON AVE.,STOCKTON,CA 95205232 <br /> DEVELOPMENT SERVICES PHONE:(209)4683120 <br /> PLANNING PHONE:(209)4683120 <br /> NEILDINGGHBORHOOD <br /> PHONE:RES209� RVAT23 <br /> NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PHONE:(209)468.3021 <br /> December 18 , 1991 OEC 1191991 <br /> EI`4VPERM1IHEALTH <br /> I SERVICES <br /> .M E M O R A N D U M s <br /> _ - <br /> TO: Development Committee <br /> FROM: Steve ure, Associate Planner <br /> SUBJECT: GENERAL-PLAN-,AMENDMENT AND ZONE RECLASSIFICATION <br /> -APP CATID OS. GP-92-4 AND ZR-92-3 OF <br /> JAR tOli LL (C/O DILLON ENGINEERING) <br /> ---------------------------------------------------------------- <br /> This pre-application is for a General Plan Map Amendment and Zone <br /> Reclassification to change the General Plan designation on three <br /> parcels totalling 43 acres from Agriculture to Rural Residential <br /> and to rezone the property from AG-40 (General Agriculture, <br /> 40-acre minimum) to RR-44 (Rural Residential, 44 , 000 square foot <br /> minimum) . Although no underlying project has been submitted it <br /> will likely consist of a 37 lot major subdivision. <br /> A similar proposal was considered at this same location a few <br /> years ago. This earlier project involved a General Plan <br /> Amendment (GP-87-16) on six parcels totalling 67 acres from <br /> Agriculture to Rural Residential and a Zone Reclassification <br /> (ZR-87-35) to change the zoning from AG-40 to RR--65 (Rural <br /> Residential, 65, 000 square foot minimum) . The underlying project <br /> was .a 39 lot subdivision. An Environmental Impact Report was <br /> prepared that addressed the following impacts: Loss of <br /> agricultural land, land use conflicts, hazards and constraints to <br /> drainage and water quality, increased traffic and circulation <br /> conflicts, provision of services and utilities, and consistency <br /> with County planning policy. On March 17, 1988, the Planning <br /> Commission denied the earlier Morada Meadows project, citing the <br /> following reasons: <br /> 1. Loss of agricultural land; <br /> 2 . Land use conflicts between agricultural and residential <br /> uses; <br /> 3 . Growth inducements; and <br /> 4 . Cumulative impacts, particularly on schools and local <br /> roadways. <br /> I <br />