SU0012991 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

E Analysis Background The subject parcel was created in 1973 as part of Division of Land Application No. DL-73-237, which subdivided a parcel into the subject 10-acre parcel and three 5-acre parcels. The zoning at the time of `division was GA-5, which permitted the creation of 5-acre parcels. In 1980, as part of Zone Reclassification No Z-8040, the property was rezoned AG-40, which requires a 40-acre minimum parcel size. The McAtees obtained the parcel in 1974. F , Reasons for Variance With the application, the applicant submitted a letter explaining the reasons for the Variance application. The applicant maintains that because the property owner, her father, purchased the property when the zoning was AG-5, he believed the rezoning to AG40 did not pertain to his property, and it was always his intent to subdivide the property and give each of his daughters a 5-acre parcel. The applicant also states that her father is in poor health, and the subdivision would allow her to build a home and relocate to an adjacent property to care for him. 4 The property was rezoned in 1980. As part of this Zone Reclassification, all affected parcel owners were notified. According to Community Development Department records, Mr. McAtee was notified of the I ending Reclassification and that his parcel was part of said Reclassification. The Development Title permits a second unit dwelling to be constructed on such parcels as the subject I arcel. The second unit provision is often used for the care of ailing parents. However, a second unit dwelling already exists and is occupied by the applicant's sister. Depth to Width Ratio Development Title Section 9-905.9{b} requires that parcels located in the AG zone have a depth to width ratio not to exceed 4:1. The depth to width ratio of Parcel 1 is 5:1. Parcel 2 also exceeds this ratio. Policy Considerations i In order to approve a Variance, three Findings must be made. In the Variance application, the applicant submitted explanations to support each Finding. Finding 1 states, "Because of special circumstances applicable to the property, including size, shape, topography; location, or surroundings, the strict application of the regulation deprives the property of h privileges enjoyed by other properties in the vicinity and under identical zone classification." I'n support of this Finding, the applicant states that the subject property is deprived privileges enjoyed by others properties in the vicinity because sixteen of the nineteen parcels along Davis Road in the vicinity of the project site are less than 5 acres in size. The applicant also maintains that an additional eleven parcels along Armstrong Road are under the zone minimum. Though there are actually more than thirty parcels along this portion of Davis Road, the Community Development Department agrees with the applicant that the majority of the parcels.are under the required parcel size. However, this is not relevant to Finding 1 in that it does not constitute special circumstances. There is nothing exceptional about the size, shape, topography, location, or surroundings of the parcel that represent special circumstances as contained in Finding 1. The Community Development San Joaquin County _gR VR-99-61McAtee Community Development F