SU0000956 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

the Williamson Act Contract. Attorney Jerry Sperry (1818 Grand Canal Boulevard, Stockton) was present to represent Patrick Riddle. He said he did not believe this application violated the Williamson Act Contract. He said this particular project could have been approved at the staff level, but because of the drainage question, it was referred to the Planning Commission. Chief Deputy County Counsel Mike McGrew pointed out that the parcel is in an agricultural zone. He stated that the Legislature allows property under Williamson Act to be divided into 10-acre parcels and still meet the intent of the Williamson Act. 6.d. MS-92-190: Monte Seibel was present to represent Michael Tax. He said that terminal drainage is available to this parcel. He will work with the Department of Public works to meet require- ments. PUBLIC HEARING CLOSED Comm. Gillispie asked Public Works if the circulation pattern in the area had been reviewed. Senior Civil Engineer Chuck Kelley, representing the Department of Public Works, said that the projects are fairly small and did not present a circulation problem. Comms. Gillispie and Jungeblut expressed concern over the access road. DISCUSSION/ACTION: 6.a. MS-92-209 : Comm. Gillispie said this project meets the zoning and other criteria. Comms. Jungeblut and Carter said that there should be a drainage plan. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Gillispie-Morri) and carried by a vote of 4-2 to: 1. Approve the Negative Declaration; and 2 . Approve Minor Subdivision Application No. MS-92-209 with the Findings and Conditions of Approval given in the staff report. VOTE: AYES- GILLISPIE, HOLLY, ROJAS, MORRI NOES- JUNGEBLUT, CARTER ABSENT- BOZZANO 6.b. MS-92-208 : Comm. Gillispie noted the two flag lots. MOTION: Moved, seconded (Holly-Rojas) to: -4-