SU0004362 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

2 Appeal of Staff Action from Bili and Ruth Brown a Mueller,Aasocia#e Planner) Attachment to Application-Appeal of Staff Action{Leann Planning Application PA-02-12 of Daniel Kills-Approved Februray 21.2002 N.Kennifidc,Acampo,Ca.95220 Apn:017-140-42;20350 Books and records shout be opened for review and inspection of the entitites doing business on the premises to confirm"that the use has ban for farm equipment repair only. It le believed and alleged that there is no repair on the premises, just manufacturing. This change and process is not to expand a current u , i# is a ruse to continue a non- se conforming use: manfacturing in an agricultural zone.The county has failed to correct the viloatioes tinder the prior Use Permit 76-719 and-are approving this expansion to avoid future enforcement action. This is wrong,and does an injustice to the entire concept of zoning. In general.this Approval is objected to on the further grounds that the current use has been in violation of the conditions and`zoning,and the County has refused to enforce the coda. The appli ants havebeen a geSerarl maaufactar+er, without limits. Equity is not servo im EXpANDING use for persons who'have not been in complaince with the prior nage, The.granting of this Application wi8'increase the problems and violations. The Appwnts have a clear history of nen-compgzuce. The operation is currently in violation of sewing, and no ezpaasian should. be allowed. until the prior U76-71 conditions are row. To allow this Application would encoorgse tt#nnad.vialation of conditions and codes as these Applicants now know the County Code Enfrocement will do nothing, has dope nothing. Whowill police these known violators? Call, letter writing, and problem for tk* three years. How will there gantings.have done nothing to correct p l? be any""mace se that the awill be Agricultml related custon.manufacturing, and not general full blown manufacturing as is currently occurring? The known issues and p roblems are not addressed in any condition, and regrettably the County has choos theoto Ignore complaints regardi nuisance asr defined by the San Joaquinhistory of zoning violations onthe CountyertyPlanning property and use is a n Commission. Farther objection h made in that the original U76-71 was improperly granted. Development Title Section 9-605.6 (b) requires that the nee stied only be estbliahed where the proposed >tse m" ification project has direct:access to Collector or nhwas aer wn finding rasidway. Kenneilek Road does not carry such a roaddeognation, y made to that effect. Kenner Road'`is beaeluate to Carry the .type of trucks that are needed to supply this use or to transport the maoesfictared equip®ent. There is Inadequate study or information on the traffic impact. No use can or should be granted wrlehaut the correct roadway sari and designation. In addition,the,length of time for the satisfaction of conditions is appealed. As the mere expansion of an'existing use many of The conditionswere rignired/mandated under the prior me. This is simply a bak.door way to avto oid code enforcement theme detrimentL Is y the surrounding neighbors. This is an #mproper us'e of the Application p this Application was only started as a means.to Avold a enforcement action,which is a mase of the process as noted above. All condit#aus do not require 18 months to satisfy. Those In which a shorter time would be proper WI be noted in the comments to each particular item. We feel that the Conditions can all be sathified in nine months. In as much as there has been active code enforcement corrections ordered since April,e frame of018 many items were noted as problems with a 60 day period to correct. r