HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - May 18, 2005 I-02 PHAGENDA ITEM 1" L
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Conduct a public hearing to consider the appeal from Lowe's HIW, Inc., regarding
the Planning Commission's decision of April 13, 2005, pertaining to the application
of design standards for Large Retail Establishments to their Lodi store.
MEETING DATE: May 18, 2405
PREPARED BY: Community Improvement Manager
RECOMME14DED ACTION: That the City Council deny the appeal and uphold the Planning
Commission's decision that the Design Standards for Large Retail
Establishments do apply to the design and review of all outdoor
storage and display of merchandise at the Lowe's store in Lodi.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: At the April 13, 2005 Planning Commission meeting, a public
hearing was conducted to review the outdoor storage/display
limitations for the new Lowe's store, located at 1389 S. Lower
Sacramento Road.
Review of Public Hearing of April 13, 2005
At the April 13th hearing, I presented the staff report that had been prepared by former Community
Development Director Konradt Bartlam before his departure. Mr. Bartlam had been the primary person in
contact with the Lowe's representatives throughout the course of this project, especially in the matter
pertaining to the approval of outdoor storage and display of merchandise, which is the crux of the issue
on appeal. Mr. Bartlam's report, which is attached and referenced as Exhibit A, outlined the full timeline
of this process which started with the Use Permit approval in May of 2003, through the Site Plan and
Architectural Review Committee's (SPARC) initial review later that same month and finally SPARC's
subsequent review of Lowe's proposed plan for outdoor storage and/or display of merchandise in
November 2004, some 16 months later.
It was during that 16 month period, specifically in May of 2004, that the Design Standards for Large Retail
Establishments that the City Council had approved and adopted went into effect. When Lowe's finally did
submit its plan for review in October of 2004, it was a plan that had come about through a great deal of
work between Staff and the Lowe's representatives. More importantly, it was a plan that met all of the
City's requirements, including those contained within the Design Standards for Large Retail
Establishments, which were in effect at the time that the Lowe's plan was submitted for SPARC review.
As noted in the staff report, at the November 2004 SPARC meeting, Lowe's representatives attempted to
amend the proposed plan for outdoor storage andlor display of merchandise. At that time, Mr. Bartlam
recommended that SPARC table the matter pending Lowe's submittal of a revised plan for Staff review
and comment, prior to reconsideration by SPARC.
APPROVED:
Blair Ki , City Manager
In my report to the Planning Commission, I reiterated that since the SPARC meeting of November 1,
2004, Lowe's has not submitted a revised plan for SPARC review. However, since November 1 st,
Lowe's has proceeded to store and display merchandise across the front of the store without having any
approved plan whatsoever.
During the public hearing, the Lowe's store manager confirmed that they currently have outdoor storage
and display and that they are considering expanding that to include the display of storage sheds out in
the parking lot area in front of the garden center.
In conjunction with my report to the Planning Commission, Deputy City Attorney Janice Magdich outlined
that the Planning Commission's determination must be based upon whether or not Lowe's had a vested
right which would allow it to submit plans regarding outdoor storage and display of merchandise that do
not require compliance with the design standards approved by the Council and effective as of May 7,
2004. Ms. Magdich went on to explain that the right to develop becomes vested when all discretionary
approvals for a project are obtained and only ministerial approvals remain, and that prior to that vesting
the City can make changes in standards, land use designations and fees that impact a project and with
which the developer must comply. Because Lowe's occupancy was conditioned upon obtaining SPARC
approval of plans for outdoor storage and that was not satisfied prior to the May 7, 2004 effective date of
the Design Standards for Large Retail Establishments, Lowe's did not have a vested right to proceed
under pre -May 7th design standards. Therefore, any plan submitted by Lowe's to SPARC for
consideration must comply with the standards now in effect.
Review of Issues on Ameal
Lowe's arguments at the public hearing, as stated by Jennifer Renk, attorney for Lowe's HIW, Inc., and in
her letter to the Planning Commission dated April 13, 2005, which is attached to and referenced in their
appeal, are as follows:
1. That the design standards do not apply retroactively to the Lowe's project;
2. That the outdoor display is part of the overall Lowe's project and is not a "new' project; and,
3. That Lowe's meets the spirit and intent of the design standards.
After conducting the public hearing, the Planning Commission voted to affirm that the Design Standards
for Large Retail Establishments applied to Lowe's Lodi store. Subsequent to that decision, Ms. Renk
filed an appeal on behalf of Lowe's HIW, Inc., seeking to overturn the decision of the Planning
Commission.
In their appeal, Ms. Renk asks that the City Council consider the same three arguments that were made
in Lowe's presentation to the Planning Commission. In response to the first two items, we refer to the
points made by Deputy City Attorney Magdich at that initial public hearing that Lowe's did not have any
vested right as they had not yet received all discretionary approvals for their project. In response to their
third argument, I can only say that as of this date, we have yet to receive any plan to review in order to
determine what Lowe's is or is not in compliance with.
In conclusion, Staff's position is that any plan for outdoor storage or display of merchandise submitted by
Lowe's after May 2004, is subject to the new Design Guidelines for Large Retail Establishments, and
furthermore, that this issue was communicated to the Lowe's representatives by Staff during the process
of working on a plan leading up to Lowe's submittal for SPARC review in November 2004. Therefore,
Staff respectfully requests that the Council deny the appeal.
As stated in my report to the Planning Commission for the April 13th public hearing, regardless of the
decision this evening, this issue still requires SPARC review. I firmly believe that if given the opportunity
to actually work with the Lowe's representatives through that process, staff can identify areas where
outdoor storage can be allowed in such a manner that Lowe's is able to adequately service its customers.
FISCAL IMPACT: No Fiscal Impact
FUNDING AVAILABLE: No Funding Required.
J,sephood
ommunity Improvem"Mnagaer
Attachments
cc: City Attorney
Planning Commission
Appellant
®MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Community Development
3
Department
To: Planning Commission
From: Community Development Director
Date- April 13, 2005
Subject: Review of outside storageldisplay limitations for the Lowe's stare located at
1389 S. Lower Sacramento Road.
At the March 23, 2005 Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner Mattheis requested
that the on-going issue regarding outdoor storage/display of merchandise at the recently
opened Lowe's be brought to the Planning Commission for interpretation of City
standards, This itern has been noticed in the typical manner, including the Lowe's Store
Manager.
As the Commission is aware, the processing of the Lowe's project tools some time and
was a challenge for staff to navigate between the folks at Lowe's and community
expectation. During that process, the representative from Lowe's, Jim Manion, made it
clear to staff that it was not his new company policy to display or store merchandise
outdoors. The Manning Commission approved the Use Permit for the center in May
20030 A condition of Haat approval, as a matter of City requirement, was that Site Plan
and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) approval of the site plan and building
elevations was required prior to issuance of a building permit.
The SPARC reviewed the plans for the project in May 2003 shortly after the Planning
Commission's approval. As the minutes from that meeting reflect, a fair amount of time
was spent on the issue of outdoor storage/display of merchandise. I would call your
attention to the discussion by Mr. Manion regarding the storage of building materials
such as blocks and fencing material. At the conclusion of the discussion, I recommended
a condition that both SPARC and Mr. Manion agreed upon. It reads -
"The storage and/or display of materials shall be
allowed in defined areas that are identified by
SPARC prior to the final occupancy of the
building."
It was the intent of this condition to allow Lowe's to have the time, during construction,
to dune specifically what and where they wanted to display or store merchandise.
Subsequent to the SPARC approval for the store, a building permit was issued by the City
in March 2004.
In May 2004, the City Council approved the Design Standards for Large Retail
Establishments. Keep in mind that at the time of this approval, Lowe's had not received
any approval to display or store merchandise outside of their building. In fact, it was
Exhibit A
toward the end of their construction in November that they finally brought the request
forward.
After weeks of working with Mr. Manion in November 2004, a plan for outdoor storage
and/or display of merchandise was presented to SPARC. This plan met all of the City's
requirements, including those contained within. the Design Standards for Large Retail
Establishments, which I contend must apply to this issue. At the SPARC meeting, Mr.
Manion attempted to change their request and have SPARC enlarge the areas they were
requesting approval. I recommended to SPARC that they table the matter so that Lowe's
could figure out what they wanted to do. Since November 1, 2004, no new plan has been
submitted for SPARC review.
In summary, a SPARC condition exists that requires Lowe's to submit a plan for any
outdoor display or storage of merchandise. Subsequent to that condition being approved,
the City enacted design criteria that sets forth a minimum 8 -foot -wide dimension for
sidewalks within this type of project. tt is my interpretation that those standards must
apply to the outdoor storage issue since Lowe's did not have approval for this activity
prior to the standard. The issue before the Commission is whether the large standards
apply and in particular the 8 -foot minimum sidewalk dimension. Regardless of the
Planning Commission action, Lowe's mast stili make application to SPARC for approval
of any outdoor storage or display. Prank)y, if Lowe's would have followed through with
the condition requirements in a timely manner, this discussion would be moot.
Respectfully Submitted,
Ronradt Bartlarn
Community Development Director
/lw
Attachments
Exhibit A
MINUTES FROM APRIL 13, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Review of outside storage/display limitations for the Lowe's store located at 1389 S.
Lower Sacramento Road, This item was presented to the Commission by Joseph
Wood, Community Improvement Manager. Mr. Wood explained that at the March 23��
Planning Commission meeting, Commissioner Mattheis requested that. the on-going issue
regarding outdoor storage and the display of merchandise at the recently opened Lowe's
be brought back to the Planning Commission for interpretation, Commissioners Hargan
and Heinitz stated that they had net with the store manager of Lowe's prior to the
meeting. Deputy City Attorney Magdich went through a timeline of events. On May 22,
2003 following approval of the project, the Site Plan and Architectural Review
Committee (SPARC) met and as a condition that was agreed to by Jim Manion, who
represented Lowe's, that storage and/or display of materials shall be allowed in defined
areas that would be identified by SPARC prior to ficial occupancy. On Marey 18, 2004
the building permit was issued for the Lowe's store, and was subject to the SPARC
condition regarding the outdoor display. On April 7, 2004 the barge Scale Retail Design
Standards were approved by the City Council and the Ordinance became effective on
May 7, 2004. On November 1, 2004 SPARC met and Lowe's presented a plan for the
outdoor storage and the display merchandise which met all City requirements including
the Large Scale Retail Design Standards that was approved by the City Council in ,April
2004. At that meeting, Mr. Manion proposed changing the plan and a motion was made
that the matter be tabled so that Lowe's could seek a Variance to the Large Scale Retail
Design Standards. To date there had been no plan submitted for the outdoor storage for
Lowe's that had been approved by SPARC and no request for a Variance has been filed.
She explained that the decision before the Commission was whether the design standards
applied or not to the Lowe's project.
Hearing Opened to the Public
Jennifer E. Rezak, Steefel Levitt & Weiss, One Embarcadero Center, 30`" Floor,
Sari Francisco, CA. Ms. Renk was present to represent the Lowe's store. She felt the
real crux of the issue was the characterization of the approval that SPARC rendered back
in May of 2003. She called the Commission's attention to the language of the condition
"The storage and/or display of materials shall be allowed in defined areas that are
identified by SPARC prior to the final occupancy of the building." She felt that the
condition fell within the doctrine of vested rights in that SPARC intended to allow
Lowe's to display items outside of the store. What it left for a later date was the actual
identification of where these displays were going to go. She argued that it did not open
up a discretionary approval that allows subsequent zoning rules to be applied
retroactively. She felt it was an unnecessary exercise that Lowe's was going through and
that Lowe's wanted to work with the City to make the display area work for both. Lowe's
and the City.
Erik Hajek, .Lowe's Store Manager. Mr, Hajek presented a packet to Commission with a
proposal for their outdoor display. He noted that currently everything comes in at night
and the outdoor display area was clean, neat, and swept each day. He was proposing to
display larger items (grills, riding tractors) in the front of store. He stated that the store
needed additional space (outdoors) to service his customers. He also shared his desire to
have outdoor sheds displayed in the front of the garden area which would take up to 8 to
9 parking spaces.
MINUTES FROM APRIL 13, 200.5 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Mr. Woad pointed out there had not been an outdoor display plan resubmitted for
approval and at the current time there should not be any outdoor storage or displays.
Pat Patrick, Lodi Chamber Commerce, 135 S. School Street. Mr. Patrick was present to
encourage the outdoor storage play for the Lowe's store. He felt that outdoor displays for
the store would not be too visible from the road since the store was located to the back of
the parcel. He noted that Lowe's customers wanted to see the outdoor displays so that
they could get a visual of the items they were interested in buying. He did not want to
put the Lowe's store at a competitive disadvantage.
Hearing Closed to the Public
Commissioner Heinitz stated that he appreciated the store manager's willingness to work
with City staff, He felt the store had enough room outside to display their items, He
asked to see a plan for the outdoor display and felt the store was subject to the new
Design Standards for Large Retail Establishments.
Commissioner Aguirre agreed with Commissioner Heinitz and noted that most of the
outdoor displays were only seasonal. He wanted to see an outdoor plan before the
commission moved forward.
Commissioner Haugan stated that Lowe's was a home improvement center and there
were expectations from the public to see plants, barbeques, and lawnmowers displayed in
front of the store. He wanted to create a win-win situation for both the City and Lowe's.
Commissioner Moran felt there was still a discretionary approval on the table, being
SPARC's review of the display and outdoor storage areas. She agreed that the
Commission needed to work with Lowe's to get the issue resolved. She supported the
idea that the new design standards do apply to Lowe's.
Hearing Reopened to the Public
Jennifer Renk, Steefel, Levitt & Weiss. Ms. Renk stated that Lowe's was still planning
on going back to SPARC for the approval of their outdoor storage display area. She felt
applying today's standards instead of past standards was not fair to Lowe's. Lowe's felt
the new standards were too restrictive and withdrew their plan at the November 1, 2004
meeting.
Eric Hajek, Lowe's Store Manager. Mr. Hajek stated that he attended the November 1,
2004 meeting and the main question at that meeting was whether the new standards
applied to the project or not. Mr. Bartlam. and Mr. Manion went back and forth on the
matter. Ile claimed that Mr. Bartlam. was the person who tabled the matter and stated that
the item would need to go before the Planning COMMission and walked out of the room.
He further stated that if the new guidelines were applied, he would not be able to do the
outdoor storage to be able to service his customers. He requested that they be allowed to
go by the old design standards.
MINUTES FROM APRIL 13, 2005 PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Marr Meissner, Associate Planner, went on record stating that he was present at the
SPARC meeting of November 1, 2004. The plan that was presented at that meeting was
purposely designed to meet the new design standards and that the decision was made at
that meeting that they weren't happy with the plan that they (Lowe's) had brought in.
Hearing Closed to the Public
The Planning Commission on motion of Commissioner Heinitz, Moran second, voted
that Lowe's was under the new resign Standards for Large Retail Establishments by the
following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Ileinitz, Moran, and White
NOES-
Commissioners,
Aguirre and Haugan
ABSENT.
Commissioners:
Maitheis and Phillips
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners
PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2016.5 C.C.C.P.)
STATE OF CALIFORNIA
:ounty of San Joaquin
am a citizen of the United States and a resident
►f the County aforesaid: I am over the age of
,ighteen years and not a party to or interested
n the above entitled matter. I am the principal
,jerk of the printer of the Lodi News -Sentinel, a
wwspaper of general circulation, printed and
>mblished daily except Sundays and holidays, in
he City of Lodi, California, County of San Joaquin
End which newspaper had been adjudicated a
iewspaper of general drrculaation by the Superior
;curt, Department 3, of the County of Sen Joaquin,
hate of California, under the date of May 26th,
1963. Case Number 6599o; that the notice of which
he annexed is a printed copy (set in type not
smaller than non -parte) has been published in
:ach regular and entire issue of said newspaper
and not in any supplement thereto on the following
lates to -wit:
Aay 7th
.................................................................................
ill in the year 2005.
certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury
hat the foregoing is true and correct.
)aced at Lodi, 'forma, this 7th day of
stay, 2Q°5.... .. ... .. ..
REMYED
This space is fort 2 Cgt k' . Aamp
Proof of Publication of
iotice of Public Hearing
CITY CLLRL":
CITY OF LOO}
Signature I 85ot768
CITY OF LODI
Carnegie Forum
305 West Pine Street, Lodi
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date: May 18, 2005
Time: 7:00 p.m.
For information regarding this notice please contact:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Telephone: (209) 333-6702
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, May 18, 2005 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a Public Hearing at the Camegie Forum,
305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following matter:
a) the appeal from Lowe's HIW, Inc„ regarding the Planning Commission's decision of April 13, 2005,
pertaining to the application of design standards for Large Retail Establishments to their Lodi store.
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community Development Department,
221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested persons are invited to present their views and
comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the hearing
scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the Public Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the Public Hearing.
By Order of the Lodi City Council:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Doled: May 4, 2005
Approved as to form:
D. Stephen Schwabauer
Cky Attomey
JACmrCLRMFORM MWtWa.doc Wft
Pleive immediately confirm receipt
of this fax by cai iag 333-6702
CITY OF LODI
P. O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS
SUBJECT: SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 18, 2005, TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL FROM
LOWE'S HIW, INC., REGARDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION
OF APRIL 13, 2005, PERTAINING TO THE APPLICATION OF DESIGN
STANDARDS FOR LARGE RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS TO THEIR LODI STORE
PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, MAY 7, 2005
TEAR SHEETS WANTED: Three (3) please
SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: SUSAN BLACKSTON, CITY CLERK
City of Lodi
P.O. Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
DATED: THURSDAY, MAY 5, 2005
ORDERED BY:
JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
J
KARI J. C DWICK
ADMINISIMATIVE CLERK
JENNIFER M. PERRIN, CMC
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Pked. to the Sentinel at 369-1084 at (time) an ( to ( ?
LNS Phoned to coniitm rObof all paW at (fimi?) J ' KJC _Jer}
N:1AdministrationlCLERKTJCIAdvins l .doc
DECLARATION OF POST!NG
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 18, 2005, TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL FROM
LOWE'S HIW, INC., REGARDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF
APRIL 13, 2005, PERTAINING TO THE APPLICATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS
FOR LARGE RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS TO THEIR LODI STORE
On Friday, May 6, 2005, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a copy of
a Notice of Public Hearing to consider the appeal from Lowe's HIW, Inc., regarding
the Planning Commission's decision of April 13, 2005, pertaining to the application of
design standards for Large Retail Establishments to their Lodi store,
(attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A"), was posted at the following four locations:
Lodi Public Library
Lodi City Clerk's Office
Lodi City Hall Lobby
Lodi Carnegie Forum
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on May 6, 2005, at Lodi, California
n dwiek
Admitt tine Clerk
N:1Administration\CLERKTJCIDECPOST2.DOC
ORDERED BY:
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
CITY CLERK
Jacqueline L. Taylor, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
Jennifer M. Perrin, CMC
Deputy City Clerk
DECLARATION OF MAILING
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 18, 2005, TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL FROM
LOWE'S HIW, INC., REGARDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION OF
APRIL 13, 2005, PERTAINING TO THE APPLICATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
LARGE RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS TO THEIR LODI STORE
On May 6, 2005, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in the
United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing a notice
to set public hearing for May 18, 2005, to consider the appeal from Lowe's HIW, Inc.,
regarding the Planning Commission's decision of April 13, 2005, pertaining to the
application of design standards for Large Retail Establishments to their Lodi store, marked
Exhibit "A"; said envelopes were addressed as is more particularly shown on Exhibit "B"
attached hereto.
There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi, California, and the
places to which said envelopes were addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on May 6, 2005, at Lodi, California.
ORDERED BY:
JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
t
I J. ADWICK
ADMINI RATIVE CLERK
Forms/dwmailldm
ORDERED BY:
SUSAN SLACKSTON
CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI
JENNIFER M. PERRIN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL; 221 W, PINE ST,
P. O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241 -1 91 0
SET PUBLIC HEARING FOR MAY 18, 2005, TO CONSIDER THE APPEAL FROM LOWE'S
HIW, INC., REGARDING THE PLANNING COMIIrIJUMN'S DECISION OF APRIL 13,2w,
PERTAINING TO THE APPLICATION OF DESIGN STANDARDS FOR LARGE RETAIL
ESTABLISHMENTS TO THEIR LODI STORE
Jennifer E. Renk
C/o Steefel Levit & Weiss
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3719
1(4h��n5
Member(
Eddie Aguirre
Dennis Haugan
Randy Heinitz
Tim Mattheis
Gina Moran
David Phillips
Dennis White
06W Y -n 1- S S L Grn
Pat Patrick
c/o Chamber of Commerce
35 S. School Street
Lodi, CA 95240
Lowe's Home Improvement Store
Attn: Erik Haiek
1389 S. Lower Sacramento Road
Lodi, CA 95242
CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL, 221 W. PINE ST.
R O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1810
Notice o
Public Hearing
CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL, 221 W. PINE ST.
P. O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
Notice of
Public Nearing
CERTIFIED MAk.
7003 3110 0091 9935 9364
Steefel, Levitt & Weiss.
Jennifer E. Renis
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3719
Steefel, Levitt & Weiss
Jennifer E. Renk
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3719
CITY COUNCIL
JOHN BECKMAN, Mayor CITY OF T ODI BLAIR KING, City Manager
SUSAN HITCHCOCK, CITY 1 L SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
Mayor Pro Tempore CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET City Clerk
LARRY D. HANSEN P.Q. BOX 3006
D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER
BOB JOHNSON LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 City Attorney
JOANNE MOUNCE (209) 333-6702
FAX (209) 333-6807
cityclrk@lodi.gov
May 0, 2005 MAILED CERTIFIED MAIL
AND REGULAR U.S. POSTAL DELIVERY
Steefel, Levitt & Weiss
Jennifer E. Renk
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3719
NOTICE OF CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING — May 18, 2005
This letter is to notify you that a public hearing will be held by the City Council on
Wednesday, May 18, 2005, at 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter can be
heard, at the Carnegie Forum, 305 W. Pine Street, Lodi.
This hearing is being held to consider your appeal of the Planning Commission decision
on April 13, 2005 pertaining to the application of Design Standards for Large Retail
Establishments to the Lodi Lowe's store.
If you challenge the proposed action in court, you may be limited to raising only those
issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in
written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing.
Note: Written correspondence for the City Council may be mailed in c/o the City Clerk's
Office, P. O. Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241-1910, or delivered to the City Clerk at 221 West
Pine Street, Lodi, California.
Should you have any questions, please contact my office or the Community Development
Department at (209) 333-6711.
Sincerely,
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
cc: Community Development Department
Page 1 of ]
Susan Blacks+� r,-\ oop�
Blackston,�
From: Susan Blackston
Sent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 3:58 PM
To: 'Scott Davis'
Cc: City Council; Blair King; Steve Schwabauer; Joseph
Subject: RE: Lowes
Dear Mr. Davis:
This reply is to confirm that your message was received by the City Clerk's Office and each member of the City
Council. In addition, by copy of this e-mail, we have forwarded your message to the following departments for
informational purposes:
1) City Manager, 2) City Attorney, and 3) Community Development.
Thank you for expressing your views.
Isl Susan J. Blackston, City Clerk
-----Original Message-----
Fronn Scott Davis [mai]to:shagman@comcast.net]
Stent: Wednesday, May 18, 2005 3:55 PM
To: Susan Blackston; Susan Hitchcock; Bob Johnson; JoAnne Mounce; John Beckman; Larry Hansen
Subject: Lowes
Members of the City Council,
I hope you have all decided to allow Lowes to display merchandise in front of their store. Customers
expect to see stuff out front and the store sits far enough back from Lower Sacramento Road so that
there is zero sight blight. Not allowing the display of merchandise is an injustice to Lowes and their
customers. Thanks very much.
Scott Davis
809 Laver Court
Lodi, CA 95242
5/18/2005
REEG
2RI5 M,
CIT
,IT OF LODI
STEEFEL, LEVITT & WEISS
A Pmfessbnal Qwpombw
May 17, 2005
Vu FACsamE AND EL crlRomc MAm
John Bmkman, Mayor
And Members of the City Council
City of Lodi
221 W. Pine Street
Lodi, CA 95242
r+ems r- z
X CC
SCM
�` SR
7'CA
LIB
ETCD
�PR
EUD
PD
`FIN
_PW
� FD :::COM
19132
Re: Lowe's appeal regarding the Planning Commission's decision
pertaining to the application of Design Standards for Large Retail
Establishments to the Lodi store
Dear Mayor Beclanan and City Councilmembers:
We represent Lowe's MW, Inc. in connection with the appeal of the Planning
Commission's determination on April 13th that the City of Lodi's (City) Design Standards for
Large Retail Establishments (Design Standards) apply to the fully entitled Lowe's store.
As you are aware, the Lowe's store is open and fully operational. Therefore, the
City's attempt to apply Design Standards adopted after the store was entitled will, in effect,
operate as an outright prohibition of outdoor displays because Lowe's did not enjoy the
opportunity to design its store in accordance with the requirements enacted after the fact. In
other words, the City would be unfairly imposing a prohibition onto the Lowe's store that does
not extend to any other existing retail establishment in the City. Such an imposition is
tantamount to subjecting Target, for example, which has been operating in Lodi for years, to
suddenly scale back its outdoor displays because new design guidelines have been enacted. As
such, in the interest of equity and fairness, the City should allow Lowe's to proceed to the Site
Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) unfettered by these Design Guidelines so
that reasonable accommodations may be made for its outdoor display needs.
Accordingly, for this reason and the reasons stated to the Planning Commission
below, we urge the City Council to overturn the Planning Commission's decision and find that
such retroactive application of these Design Standards is not only inappropriate and unfair, but
unnecessary in light of Lowe's ongoing efforts to work with the City to find an acceptable
solution to its outdoor display and storage needs.
Ow FinbemadF m CentK 90th Flaw; San Fiancaco, Womb 94114-3719 - ?hone. (415) 788-0900 • Fac t415) 788-2019
San ftneism, CA Los "Ws, CA SWW, CT www.ate".cam
May 17,s of the City Council �I-eew May 17,2005
Page Two S1 ILff al Im
I. Ltndnction
By way of background, the Vintner's Square Shopping Center was approved by
the Planning Commission on May 14, 2003. On May 22, 2003, SPARC held a special meeting
in order to consider the Lowe's proposal to build a 161,234 square foot commercial home
improvement center within the Vintner's Square Shopping Center. Based on staffs
recommendation, SPARC approved the site plan with conditions based on findings that it
provided the elements for a well designed shopping center, was consistent with the project
analyzed in the Environmental Impact Report, and complied with all applicable provisions of the
Commercial Shopping (C -S) zoning district.
Although staff had recommended that SPARC add a condition that would prohibit
all outdoor storage and displays, ager much deliberation, SPARC unanimously passed a motion
with a modified condition that read: "The storage and/or display of materials shall be
allowed in defined areas that are identified by SPARC prior to the final occupancy of the
bufidin." The minutes reflect that SPARC contemplated allowing up to at least seven (7)
months after the building was constructed for this outdoor area to be defined in order to provide
for input from store management. Lowe's willingly accepted this condition.
In March 2004, Lowe's pulled its building permit in order to begin construction.
At the end of October 2004, the City issued its Certificate of Occupancy and the Lowe's store
opened on November 3, 2004. Directly prior to the store's opening, Lowe's submitted its
outdoor storage plan to SPARC and a hearing was held on November 1, 2004. At this hearing,
staff recommended a plan allowing for limited outdoor display and storage with the following
three conditions:
• A minimum 8 -foot wide sidewalk must be maintained in front of the store
pursuant to the requirements of the Large -Scale Design Requirements adopted
earlier this year.
• No display or storage of materials will be allowed in parking, drive or loading
areas as depicted on the approved site plan.
• A minimum 4 -foot wide sidewalk is required around the building for ADA
and emergency access.
After further consideration, Lowe's determined that the imposition of the first
condition was tori restrictive for the space in front of its store and asked that it be able to
withdraw and revise the plan. Specifically, Lowe's realized that the 8 -foot wide sidewalk
requirement stemming fi-om the Design Standards was too onerous for its display needs. Lowe's
also objected to the City's application of the Design Guidelines to its project that had been
approved well before the City adopted the Design Standards. SPARC then tabled the item and
staff subsequently requested that the Planning Commission agendize an item to discuss and
Members of the City Council
May 17, 2005
Pape Three
determine the applicability of the Design Standards to the Lowe's outdoor storage and display
issue.
On April 13, 2005, the Planning Commission voted 3-2, with 2 absent, for a
motion that the Design Standards for Large Retail Establishments apply to the Lowe's store.
This appeal followed.
II. Applicability of Design Standards for Large Retail Establishments
For the reasons set forth below, we believe that these Design Standards should not
be applied to the Lowe's outdoor storage/display plan.
• Design Standards do not apply retroactively to the Lowe's project.
In May 2003, SPARC approved the Lowe's project and the City issued a building
permit in March 2004. On April 7, 2004, almost one year after the City's approval of the
Lowe's project, the Lodi City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1746, Design Standards for Large
Retail Establishments, effective thirty days thereafter on May 7, 2004. The Lowe's project was
approved and permitted months before the Design Standards became effective and at no time did
SPARC ever discuss their applicability to the Lowe's project.
Furthermore, by the City's own tam, the language of the ordinance clearly
indicates that these Design Standards apply only to future large-scale retail projects and not to
those that have already been approved. Here, Lowe's is not only approved, but constructed and
open. Therefore, under the terms of its own ordinance, the Design Standards do not apply, and a
retroactive application is not permissible.
• Outdoor display is part of the overall Lowe's project and is not a "new"
project.
SPARC adopted a condition of approval providing for outdoor display and
storage during its original consideration of the Lowe's project. The outdoor display plan is not a
"new" project for purposes of applying the subsequent Design Standards. The outdoor display is
incidental to, and part of, the original Lowe's project and is therefore not subject to the Design
Standards.
Moreover, the Design Standards would not even apply to the outdoor/display
question here because the area in question does not meet the ordinance's 25,000 square foot
threshold. For example, assuming for the sake of argument that the Design Standards did apply
to the Lowe's store, the portion of the project still susceptible to "discretionary review" by
SPARC measures no more than 5,000 square feet in front of the existing store—well below the
ordinance's 25,000 square foot threshold. Therefore, on its face, the applicability of the Design
Standards to this isolated square footage is impermissible on this basis alone.
Members of the City Council
May 17, 2005
Page Four
• Lowe's mks the spirit and intent of the Design Standards.
When Lowe's prepared its site plan for approval, it relied upon the requirements
in place at the time. If the City had an 8 -foot minimum sidewalk requirement in place prior to
Lowe's approval, Lowe's would have designed its site plan to accommodate the outdoor display
areas in such a way that would comply while meeting its display needs. Now, however, in
fairness to Lowe's, it would be inappropriate to apply these Design Standards after the fact.
Therefore, Lowe's asks that it be allowed to work with SPARC and staff to resolve the outdoor
display/storage absent the Design Standards but in keeping with the City's vision for large scale
remail development.
III. conclusion
In light of the foregoing, Lowe's asks that the City Council reverse the Planning
Commission's determination that the Design Standards are applicable to the Lowe's outdoor
storageldisplay plan. More importantly, however, Lowe's would like to stress its commitment to
working with staff to arrive at a mutually acceptable solution that conforms to the spirit and
intent of the City's Design Standards for Large Retail Establishments. Lowe's has enjoyed a
productive relationship with the City thus far and looks forward to continuing in this vein.
Thank you for your consideration
Sincerely,
Jennifer E. Renk
cc: John Beckman, Mayor
Members of the City Council
D. Stephen Schwabauer, City Attorney
19132:64"M.1
April 13, 2005
Planning Commission Meeting
April 13, 2005
Proposal For Outdoor Display
The following packet of pictures and site plans is meant as a proposal for
outdoor storage and display areas. The packet contains the site plans for the
store front with some pictures of what the actual proposal might look like
when completed and is broken down into four sections for easy review. The
last picture is meant as an alternative to the proposed request for outdoor
shed displays should the original request not be considered.
Thank you for your consideration on this matter.
Erik Hajek
Store Manager Lowes HIW
u-,
a
7
W
w
1
A
A
N
N
in
O
ti
n
O
ti
v
LW = N e�cr Ot
as WC,
BULK LUMBER STACKOUT
OF LODI, CA 1706
Ito
eI I L-NAr
ry
V
r
! O p
-
4 0 B 7 i
!VIA
Ate' i
0
�Olq
g
pi
M�
Ll
LW = N e�cr Ot
as WC,
BULK LUMBER STACKOUT
OF LODI, CA 1706
06 M6. w
w it 0 u OWL
IFr-1 < < 1��
ir
LU W LN
Ln
1-1
REE S'�IIUTS 23
LLJ 4 V-144 07-144 21
tp-
►� -
UK
LLJ
El
U
x-78 22 �
P+mt IAI oR
M� on
R
0
OF LODI, CA 1
4'
l"
DISPLAY AR
# sp
N
n
/
\
ti
P+mt IAI oR
M� on
R
0
OF LODI, CA 1
4'
l"
DISPLAY AR
Ln
a
LU
w
oc
LU
is
ca
r
cm
N
ultO
c
ti
v
r
M
D
i
LA
O
O
N
0
t
a•.T
-..-�-
,m
t
Lawn Mower Display Area.JPG
DRIVE THRU CANOPY.JPG
I
tt
RONT OF GARDEN CENTER.JPG
REGISTER FRONT OF GARDEN.JPG
SOUTH SIDE OF GARDEN.JPG
CITY COUNCIL
,JOHN BECKMAN, Mayor
SUSAN HITCHCOCK,
Mayor Pro Tempore
LARRY D. HANSEN
BOBJOHNSON
JOANNE MOUNCE
CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET
P.O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
(209)333-6702
FAX (209) 333-6807
cityclrk@lodi.gov
May 19, 2005
Steefel, Levitt & Weiss
Attention: Jennifer E. Renk
One Embarcadero Center, 30th Floor
San Francisco, CA 94111-3719
BLAIR KING, City Manager
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER
City Attorney
RE: Resolution Granting the Appeal of Lowe's HIW, Inc., Thereby
Rescinding the Planning Commission's Decision of April 13, 2005
The Lodi City Council, at its meeting of May 18, 2005, adopted the enclosed
resolution granting the appeal of Lowe's HIW, Inc., thereby rescinding the
Planning Commission's decision of April 13, 2005, that the design standards for
Large Retail Establishments apply to the design and review of all outdoor storage
and display of merchandise at the Lowe's store in Lodi.
Further, the Lodi City Council referred this matter to the Site Plan and
Architectural Review Committee for review. Please contact the Community
Development Department at (209) 333-6711 if you have any questions.
Should you require further information or have any questions, please feel free to
contact my office.
Sincerely,
Susan J. Blacksto
City Clerk
SJB/JMP
Enclosure
cc: Community Development Department
fotlowupllTransmittal.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2005-101
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL GRANTING THE APPEAL
OF LOWE'S HIW, INC., RESCINDING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S
DECISION OF APRIL 13, 2005, THAT THE DESIGN STANDARDS FOR
LARGE RETAIL ESTABLISHMENTS APPLY TO THE DESIGN AND REVIEW
OF ALL OUTDOOR STORAGE AND DISPLAY OF MERCHANDISE
WHEREAS, on April 13, 2005, the Lodi Planning Commission held a public hearing to
review the outdoor storageldispiay limitations for the new Lowe's store located at 1389 S. Lower
Sacramento Road; and
WHEREAS, the Lodi Planning Commission voted that Lowe's was under the new
Design Standards for Large Retail Establishments; and
WHEREAS, an appeal of the Planning Commission decision was filed with the City
Clerk's office on April 18, 2005, by Steefel, Levitt & Weiss on behalf of Lowe's HIW, Inc.
seeking to overturn the decision of the Planning Commission, stating in part the following:
1. That the design standards do not apply retroactively to the Lowe's project;
2. That the outdoor display is part of the overall Lowe's project and is not a "new"
project; and
3. That Lowe's meets the spirit and intent of the design standards.
WHEREAS, at its meeting held May 18, 2005, the Lodi City Council conducted a public
hearing to consider the appeal from Lowe's HIW, Inc., regarding the Planning Commission's
decision of April 13, 2005, pertaining to the application of design standards for Large Retail
Establishments to its Lodi store.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lodi City Council does hereby grant
the appeal of Lowe's HIW, Inc., thereby rescinding the Planning Commission's decision of April
13, 2005, that the Design Standards for Large Retail Establishments apply to the design and
review of ail outdoor storage and display of merchandise at the Lowe's store in Lodi, and
hereby refers the matter to the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee for review.
Dated. May 18, 2005
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2005-101 was passed and adopted by the City
Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held May 18, 2005, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Hansen, Johnson, Mounce, and Mayor Beckman
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Hitchcock
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
2005-101