My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SU0002453
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
A
>
AUSTIN
>
6600
>
2600 - Land Use Program
>
UP-88-13
>
SU0002453
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/18/2022 5:21:56 PM
Creation date
4/14/2020 11:41:19 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2600 - Land Use Program
RECORD_ID
SU0002453
PE
2626
FACILITY_NAME
UP-88-13
STREET_NUMBER
6600
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
AUSTIN
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
ENTERED_DATE
10/26/2001 12:00:00 AM
SITE_LOCATION
6600 S AUSTIN RD
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
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.
/
444
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
extensive operating schedule and storage of agricultural field wastes. <br /> An urban industrial zone could still be a reasonable location. <br /> Provision 2 relates to performance standard of development which <br /> would be confirmed as conditions of approval for the project. <br /> Regarding provision 3, the project site is removed from populated <br /> areas, but would be situated on soils deemed as "prime" (Class III with <br /> high productivity) by the SCS. Ordinarily, "prime" refers to soils with <br /> Class I or II characteristics, except in such instances where exceptional <br /> productivity of a Class III or IV soil provides justification for a prime <br /> listing. This factor may place the site at odds with the third criterion <br /> of the ordinance, since approximately 20 acres, or 35 percent of the site <br /> would be taken out of production. The Planning Commission would have to <br /> make a determination that the chosen location of the site does not have a <br /> significant impact on productive farmland. <br /> Section 9-4103 (h) of the ordinance contains other requirements <br /> that suggest land use consistency of the project in the GA-40 zone. The <br /> proposed use is agricultural in nature in that it recovers and processes <br /> agricultural material . The parallel oil recycling operation, while not <br /> agricultural by definition, is an integral part of the proposed biomass <br /> recovery. <br /> The proposed use is, on the balance, consistent with the intent of <br /> r . <br /> the zoning ordinance for uses in the GA zone from the standpoint of <br /> resource recovery definitions, site development and regulatory factors. <br /> Less clear is the project's consistency with the ordinance from a loca- <br /> tional standpoint. <br /> Mitigation Measure. It appears that a finding from the County <br /> Planning Commission would be needed for the proposed siting of the pro- <br /> ject, based on the locational criteria of the Zoning Ordinance, Section <br /> 9-4103 (g) . The applicant should thus demonstrate to the Commission the <br /> relative importance of the selected site and the unavailability of <br /> qualified alternatives with less productive soils. The Commission should <br /> also determine whether, in fact, the Class III soils of this location <br /> qualify as "Prime Farmland." <br /> 3-11 <br /> 104-3.R3 4/I0/89 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.