Laserfiche WebLink
arae'" SAN JOAQUIN ( NTY <br /> COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT <br /> 1810 E HAZELTON AVE.STOCKTON.CA 93203-8232 <br /> C'• � ?HONE MW488-3120 Fax:`MA68-3163 <br /> �Ci�ode+ <br /> March 11, 1994 <br /> Board of Supervisors <br /> Courthouse <br /> Stockton, CA 95202 <br /> Dear Board Members: <br /> APPEAL BY ERNEST BEZLEY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S <br /> INACTION OF A REQUEST TO MODIFY MINOR SUBDIVISION <br /> APPLICATION NO. MS-93-105 OF ERNEST BEZLEY <br /> (C/O MONTE SEIBEL) (DISTRICT 4) <br /> R IS RECOMMENDED: <br /> That the Board of Supervisors deny the request to modify Minor Subdivision Application No. MS-93-105 <br /> to file a Major Subdivision application pursuant to the Development Title regulations which were in effect <br /> when the Minor Subdivision was submitted. <br /> REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION: <br /> On October 28, 1993, Mr. Bezley submitted Minor Subdivision Application No. MS-93-105 to create four <br /> 5-acre lots and a remainder of 206 acres. This was submitted pursuant to Development Title Section No. <br /> 9-610.3 for the creation of homesites in AG zoned areas. The number of hemesites that could have been <br /> created under that section was limited by the General Plan Density of one dwelling per 20 acres. (e.g. a <br /> 1 CO acre parcel could support four homesites and a remainder.) However, TA-93-3, which applies to <br /> applications for hcmesite parcels filed after 5:00 p.m., November 9, 1993, (Ordinance 3761, section 3) <br /> revised that section to permit only one homesite per parcel. Homesite parcels created from an existing <br /> parcel since July 29, 1992, the date of adoption of the General Plan, shall be counted. Therefore, Mr. <br /> Bezley's proposal, for up to 11 hcmesites, could have been processed pursuant to the old requirements, <br /> but cannot be processed pursuant to the current hcmesite requirements. <br /> On February 17, 1994, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on Mincr Subdivision Application <br /> No. MS-93-105 of Ernest Bezley. The applicant requested that he be allowed to add lots, making this <br /> application a Major Subdivision. A motion to deny this request died due to the lack of a second. No <br /> alternative motion was made. Thus, the request died due to the lack of a motion, and in effect Mr. <br /> Sezley's request was denied. On March 3, 1994, Ernest Sezley appealed the Planning Commission's <br /> inaction regarding that request to the Board of Supervisors. <br /> Acceal Statement <br /> The appellant offered no statement other than an appeal of the Planning Commission's inaction. <br /> '1)- <br />