My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0002246
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
H
>
HARNEY
>
16450
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
UP-98-18
>
SU0002246
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2020 11:29:08 AM
Creation date
9/5/2019 11:00:01 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0002246
PE
2626
FACILITY_NAME
UP-98-18
STREET_NUMBER
16450
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
HARNEY
STREET_TYPE
LN
City
LODI
Zip
95240
ENTERED_DATE
10/26/2001 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
16450 E HARNEY LN
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\H\HARNEY\16450\UP-98-18\SU0002246\APPL.PDF \MIGRATIONS\H\HARNEY\16450\UP-98-18\SU0002246\CDD OK.PDF \MIGRATIONS\H\HARNEY\16450\UP-98-18\SU0002246\EH COND.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.
/
204
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
May 27,1999 <br /> David & Judy Head <br /> 13050 N. Tully Rd <br /> Lodi, CA 94240 <br /> S.J. County Community Development Dept. <br /> Attn.- Kerry Sullivan <br /> 1810 E. Hazelton Ave <br /> Stockton, CA 95205 <br /> RE- Opposition to Application #UP-98-18 <br /> Kerry Sullivan, <br /> In regards to above reference Use Permit #98-18. we oppose this project because of <br /> the size and the fact that it was denied by the-Board of-Supervisor when it went before <br /> them. With the sheer number of units needed to house the amount of bodies that is <br /> being proposed, it should not be applied for under a Agriculture Use Permit. It should <br /> be considered as a Residential and or Commercial venture. The number of structures <br /> that are-proposed should not be considered as "Ag Related" even if the residents are to <br /> be employed in Agriculture Related Employment. We do not disagree that there is a <br /> need for housing for laborers, it is the size of this housing that is in question. If Mr. <br /> Rios and his company think that they need a project of this magnitude, they should find <br /> an area-that is zoned specifically for residential development rather than using up our <br /> rapidly disappearing agriculture land. <br /> Below are a few points that should be address concerning this application. <br /> 1. What will the impact of a 400 man camp do to the already threatened water <br /> table? <br /> 2. If the Labor camp is such a good idea, why has a security plan been worked <br /> out? Are the owners expectft-trouble? Fro -where is he expecting4r-ouble? <br /> The inside or the outside? <br /> 3. The owners have stated that there is not a current plan for transporting his <br /> laborers to their wotkareas, that means at least 200 more vehicles on.the road <br /> at the busiest times of the day. It has also been stated that there is expected to <br /> be at least 200 visitors a day!! It sounds like the traffic impact will be very <br /> intense. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.