My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_2004-2019
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
Y
>
YOSEMITE
>
2072
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0505553
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_2004-2019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
8/13/2020 2:16:35 PM
Creation date
8/13/2020 12:19:52 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
2004-2019
RECORD_ID
PR0505553
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0006856
FACILITY_NAME
FRANKS FOOD MART
STREET_NUMBER
2072
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
YOSEMITE
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
MANTECA
Zip
94336
APN
22202001
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
2072 W YOSEMITE AVE
P_LOCATION
04
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
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.
/
294
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 10, 2005 <br /> SacraMento, and to date, no com taints have been ived re arding this operation with <br /> re ect o insu Iden on-si e par ing oris customers and emp oyees. parking area <br /> provided for the Sacramento operation is fifty (50% eyond the jurisdiction's <br /> parking requirement (1 s ee , which is the same as the City of Manteca's <br /> requirement). osed Manteca location does not provide any additional parking beyond <br /> the mini uirement noted above. <br /> Staff believes the information provided (with respec arking demand) is still <br /> insufficient to change the recommendation based on the following reason . <br /> • The documentation providedin perations does not <br /> substantiate e ' a a equate parking will be sufficient for the Manteca location. <br /> • Th is insufficient documentation to support the claim that several patients and employees <br /> use their own vehicles) to come to the site. <br /> Staff has to assume that patients and employees wou e dental office in their <br /> own vehicles. <br /> • Since a medical o i ed use at the propose oca ion, no condition can be <br /> impose project that would restrict the applicant from hiring additional employees or <br /> aulemore appointments per day other than what the applicant anticipates. As noted <br /> es would arrive to the dental office in <br /> their own vehicles. This may result with a:the <br /> ential o erflow into the east <br /> adjacent property, thereby negatively impactinparking area for adjace sinesses. <br /> Therefore, since there isfiat can be imposed to restrict the potential number of <br /> vehicles or rs employees to be on site at any one time, staff maintains the position <br /> t ental office use c otentially generate a high volume of vehicles, customers and <br /> em d on-site parking being unable to accommodate the <br /> demand, and thereby negatively impac in nd neighborhood. As <br /> such, staff recommends denial of t ^ f-__ <br /> Att <br /> Western Dental 7Office <br /> s (narrative)dated March <br /> Western Dental nformation dated April 27, 2005 <br /> Previous Staff Report dated January 14, 2005 for the January 25, 2005 Planning Commission meeting <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.