SU0000241 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

p°u,iN SAN JOAOUIN COUNTY )Q �.00 r. % DEPARTMENT OF PLANNING AND BUILDING INSPECTION 1810 E. HAZELTON AVE.. STOCKTON, CA 95205 CHET DAVISSON FOR�•p PLANNING PHONE: 209/468-3120 Director BUILDING PHONE: 209/468-3123 JERRY HERZICK NEIGHBORHOOD PRESERVATION PHONE: 209/468-3021 July 26 , 1988 Deputy Director RENE JACKSON D }1 Deputy DirectorU TOM WALKLK ER Board of Supervisors Deputy Director Courthouse I�.j Stockton, CA "'�- Dear Board Members : ENIHEALTH ERMIT/SERV CES E APPEAL BY ROBERT CELUM FOR THE LI vDEA! FIRST BAPTIST CHURCH OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION ' S DENIAL OF USE PERMIT APPLICATION NO. UP-88-31 (DISTRICT 4 IT IS RECOMMENDED: That the Board of Supervisors: Deny the appeal and uphold the action of the Planning Commission based on the analysis of the appeal given below. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION: The applicant submitted a Use Perr_ilt application for a 250-seat church to be located on a proposed five-acre parcel on the south side of State Route 26, approximately one-fifth of a mile west of Duncan Road, approximately 1 . 2 miles west of Linden. In the analysis of this pro- ject, staff had recommended to the applicant that , at a minimum, the five-acre church parcel be relocated to the southwest corner of State Route 26 and Duncan Road. Locating the church there would help to minimize land use con-flicts, be less intrusive int6 agricultural land, and enhance traffic safety by allowing all access to be off of Duncan Road rather than directly onto the State Highway. The applicant , however, did not wish to relocate the church parcel to this site. Bob Celum and Dick Sanders spoke in favor of the Use Permit. John Eilers, representing the People ' s Organization for Land Preservation (POLP) , spoke in opposition to the proposal . Mr . Eilers stated that this project is growth inducing and involves the conversion of prime farm land. Because of these impacts, he believes that relocating the church to the corner of State Route 26 and Duncan Road, as staff had suggested, would not adequately mitigate the potentially significant impacts noted in the Initial Study. Based on this, Mr. Eilers stated that an Environmental Impact Report should be prepared for this project . John Fugazi, owner of an adjacent orchard, was present and stated that he was not opposed to the project but canted it known that he would continue his agricultural operations. The Planning Commission heard this matter at its meeting of June 16 , 1988 . After considering all written and oral testimony, a motion was made and seconded to approve the Use Perr--It . The Commission voted 3-3 , and the project was therefore don.:".ed because of the tie vote. •'"--"T^ n T -- .