My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0012885
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CANEPA
>
8721
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
SU-92-15
>
SU0012885
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/14/2020 4:51:22 PM
Creation date
9/4/2019 10:53:22 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0012885
PE
2611
FACILITY_NAME
SU-92-15
STREET_NUMBER
8721
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
CANEPA
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95212-
APN
08640008
ENTERED_DATE
1/14/2020 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
8721 N CANEPA RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\C\CANEPA\8721\SU-92-15_SU-87-21\MISC.PDF
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
451
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
Robert W. Hammon <br /> 6257 E. Foppiano Lane <br /> Stockton, CA 95212 <br /> (209) 931-3816 <br /> January 12, 1999 <br /> Mr. Chandler Martin <br /> San Joaquin County Community Development Department <br /> Development Services Division <br /> 181 0 East Havelton Avenue <br /> Stockton, CA 95205 <br /> VIA FAX 468-3144 <br /> Ike: Application Number SU-92-15 <br /> I <br /> Dear Mr. Martin. <br /> k <br /> This letter is in support ofd*time extension and ultimate development of this project. This- <br /> project <br /> hisproject has been properly submitted, considered and approved;however, it has been frequently <br /> blocked at public hearings. <br /> There is a small, but vocal group in Morada who do not want any more development. The most <br /> vocal tend to be owners of individual lots for sale in Morada. There arse others who simply do <br /> not want any development nearby. The reality is that this ama will grow and develop. <br /> This is a quality project that has been well thought out and well planned. The planned housing is <br /> consistent with that in the are ia. It should be allowed to proceed. <br /> 1 believe that the best way to preserve the quality of our rural residential area over the long run is <br /> to slowly,and with careful planning and consideration,bring on developments that provide a <br /> quality,rural r+csidential neighborhood. This is exactly what the proposed project does. The <br /> alternative is that, in the not too distant future a large developer will come along and develop a <br /> large block of land with much higher density housing. <br /> I have no financial or other in: in this or any other development. I am just a homeowner <br /> and resident of Morada who cares about its future. <br /> We must plan for quality gro j+vth,not ignore our future. I recommend that this proj eel be <br /> allowed to move forward. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> M <br /> Robert W. Hammon <br /> 1 � <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.