My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0000973
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
M
>
MOBLEY
>
6142
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
MS-92-169
>
SU0000973
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/7/2020 11:28:08 AM
Creation date
9/6/2019 10:14:11 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0000973
PE
2622
FACILITY_NAME
MS-92-169
STREET_NUMBER
6142
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
MOBLEY
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
ENTERED_DATE
10/10/2001 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
6142 S MOBLEY RD
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\M\MOBLEY\6142\MS-92-169\SU0000973\APPL.PDF \MIGRATIONS\M\MOBLEY\6142\MS-92-169\SU0000973\CDD OK.PDF \MIGRATIONS\M\MOBLEY\6142\MS-92-169\SU0000973\EH COND.PDF \MIGRATIONS\M\MOBLEY\6142\MS-92-169\SU0000973\MISC.PDF
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
122
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
6601 S. Stanley Road <br /> Stockton, Calif. 95215 <br /> August 20, 1992 <br /> Chandler T. Mann <br /> San Joaquin County UG ' 1 1992 <br /> Dept of Planning &Building Inspection i;0 ►yIUIVIT" ` <br /> 1810 E. Hazelton ' Ut,�i_;�,;;_ <br /> Stockton, California 95205 P14NNING DIVISION <br /> Dear Mr. Chandler: <br /> I would like to voice my strong objectic.: to the proposed two parcel subdivision of Assessor <br /> Parcel No. - °7-070-23. I am the owner/operator of the adjoining property. <br /> First I must state that I do not disagree with the need for agricultural homesites as described in <br /> Section 9-4005(b) or Section 9-4104(b) of the Planning Title in that they are adopted for: <br /> 1. The purpose of enhancing the agricultural productivity of farm land, and <br /> 2. that homesite parcels created by the owner/operator are not under this provision, intended <br /> for sale or transfer to other parties. <br /> My specific disagreements with this proposed action are as follows: <br /> 1. The proposed split will not enhance agricultural productivity over the current parcel size. <br /> I might add, no evidence or opinion has been advanced at to this point. Also, the "new" <br /> parcel has no independent agricultural water source. <br /> 2. This property has been for sale as evidenced by an active exclusive saies contract for most <br /> of the time since purchased over two years ago. Only in the last month has it not been <br /> offered for sale. <br /> 3. The current owner is not an owner/operator. The property has not been farmed since its <br /> purchase by the current owner. "Farmed" is defined as risking capital for return in farm <br /> commodities. <br /> No farm receipts have resulted since purchase by the current owner. The lack of <br /> significant inputs and no returns in commodities indicate the current owner in not the <br /> REQUIRED OWNER/OPERATOR. <br /> —17— <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.