Laserfiche WebLink
i <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT <br /> Development Services Division <br /> Attention: Chandler Martin <br /> Re: Application No. OU-92--15 <br /> January 13 , 1999 <br /> Page 2 <br /> 2 . The. Morada MAC was not noticed of this <br /> application referral. I- would note that the <br /> Morada MAC has been having troubles for the <br /> last two years of getting notices from the <br /> Community Development Department and has <br /> called continually to try and get these <br /> notices. For some reason, the notices are not <br /> delivered to them. <br /> The reasons for the extension given are also inadequate. The <br /> first reason given is that "the project cannot move forward during <br /> the period of litigation" . That specific reason was the subject of <br /> an appeal and hearing before the Board of Supervisors where the <br /> applicant specifically requested 497 days for the time that this <br /> matter was covered in litigation. On May 15, 1997 , the Board of <br /> Supervisors denied the request for additional time during the <br /> pendency of this litigation. Accordingly, that request has already <br /> been ruled on by the Board and the issue is res judicata. The <br /> second reason given is that the "design and funding have taken <br /> longer than anticipated" . That reason is so generic that it is <br /> impossible to counter except to note that the design was completed <br /> over four years ago and that there has been no legal impediment to <br /> the developers from starting and completing the project in the last <br /> four years. These reasons are legally and factually insufficient <br /> to allow a time extension. <br /> Also, the initial study is completed on an old 1991 form and <br /> the new form, a 1998 form, that has been suggested by the <br /> Governor's office has not been used. That farm is much more <br /> complete and covers additional areas which are not addressed in the <br /> initial study which will be addressed below but the initial study <br /> should be redone with the new form. <br /> Further, the initial study and proposed negative declaration <br /> failed to examine the prior record that has been placed before the <br /> Board of Supervisors or the Community Development Department of the <br /> numerous hearings regarding this project. Specifically, the report <br /> of Questa Engineering Corporation, dated March 19, 1987, attached <br /> hereto, which indicates that the development will cause a "serious <br />