HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - January 4, 2006 K-03AGENDA ITEM K-- 03
A� CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
AGENDA TITLE: Receive update on Status of Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force and
provide input to staff regardingfuture direction of the Task Force.
MEETING DATE: January4,2006
PREPARED BY: Lynette Dias, Contract Planner
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Receive update on progression of Lodi Community
SeparatorlGreenbelt Task Force, provide direction for future
committee discussions, and authorize staff to seek additional
consultant services to form the Task Force's future work.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Since the late -1990's, the City has actively pursued the
establishment of a greenbelt separator between Lodi and its' surroundings. The process of establishing
a greenbelt separator began with creating the Lower Lodi Agricultural Land Conservation Program with a
grant from the Department of Conservation and Great Valley Center. Through this program, the 2x2x2
Greenbelt Committee was formed with two council member representatives each from the Cities of Lodi
and Stockton, and the San Joaquin County Board of Supervisors. Consensus regarding the direction of
the 2x2x2 efforts, however, broke -down in 2001, when the City of Stockton wanted to increase the study
area and expand the scope and participation of other agencies and groups in the greenbelt process.
Attachment 1 provides summary and chronology of greenbelt activities from 1999 through present.
Task Force - Finding it prudent to keep Lodi's greenbelt efforts moving forward, Council established the
19 -member Lodi Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force in December 2003 to "explore and
investigate the variety of models available, and as utilized in various cities, to accomplish the community
separation/open space goal, and make a recommendation to the City Council for the option that works
best for Lodi." Persons selected to participate on the Task Force are representative of the local
community, including residents, businesses, area landowners, the wine industry, agricultural/farming
industry, and building industry.
The Task Force has worked diligently over the past two years to accomplish its goal, meeting 16 times
since December 2003. After receiving a number of presentations about greenbelt programs in other
communities, the Task Force is now working on developing a program for a Community
SeparatorlGreen belt Program that can be supported by a majority of the Task Force and then forwarded
to the City Council for consideration. A preliminary draft program was presented to the Task Force by
City staff in 2004. The Task Force has been discussing the draft program at the last several meetings.
An outline of this program is provided below.
• Target Area -Program targets preservation of the area located east -to -west between Highway 99 and
Interstate with a focus on the area between Highway 99 and west of Lower Sacramento Road, and %2 -mile
north and south of Armstrong Road.
APPROVED:
Blair Kr , ity Manager
Continuation of Agricultural Uses - Provide for a program that allows a continuation of agricultural uses as
currently provided in the San Joaquin CountyZoning Ordinance. Additionally, allow the development of a
limited number of houses, as follows:
o One credit (i.e., unit) per 10 acres of ownership pro -rated to actual parcel size upon program adoption;
o One credit, as above, in 20 years;
o Credits must be used within the target area;
o Maximum size of a new housing unit parcel is 1 acre or V. acre (consensus on size not yet reached);
o Revise the City's Right -to -Farm Ordinance as recommended by the farming community;
o Provide for limited public improvements that promote the rural setting;
o Annex the entire target area, and provide sewer and water service along Armstrong Road. Other services
could be provided, as well;
o Property owners vote on the program.
In late -2004, owners of propertywho would be affected by the concepts under consideration in the draft
program, if implemented, voiced their opposition to it. In response, the Task Force requested that the
property owners organize and develop a program that would be acceptable to them, as long as it would
achieve the City's objective of establishing a greenbelt/community separator in the target area. It is
anticipated that the property owners will make a presentation to the Task Force perhaps on January 17,
2006.
At the November 2005 Task Force meeting, implementation scenarios of the preliminary drafl program
were presented graphically to the group (Attachment 2). Overall, Task Force members agreed that the
graphics provided were helpful in understanding the implications of the preliminary drafl program,
particularly in discerning the difference in agricultural/open space land preserved if I -acre lots are
allowed versus %-acre lots. Afler taking comments from the public, the Task Force concluded that it
would be difficult for them to proceed much further (i.e., develop a program that the majority of the
members would support) without further information related to the fiscal and economic effects of the
program. In particular, Task Force members were interested in understanding the monetary value of a
credit, the municipal cost implications of extending public sewer and water services to the Greenbelt
Target Area, and other alternative programs that could be explored (e.g., Memorandum of Understanding
between Lodi and Stockton, growth control initiatives, transfer of development credit programs).
Given the Task Force's interest in additional information, the Task Force requested that staff 1) update
the City Council on their progress to date including the preliminary draft program and the potential
implementation scenario exhibits that were presented to the Task Force; and 2) request that the Council
consider approving some consultant funding to provide the Task Force with further information related to
the fiscal and economic effects of the program. Given that the Council is also considering initiating a
comprehensive General Plan update at tonight's meeting, as well, it may be beneficial to ensure that this
Task Force's efforts are coordinated with the efforts of the consultant selected to update the General
Plan. Coordinating the southern greenbelt efforts with the Citywide General Plan update is particularly
important because the comprehensive update may provide for a greenbelt area that is larger than the
target area currently focusing on %2 -mile north and south of Armstrong Road.
Some potential alternative next steps for the Task Force include:
• End Task Force discussions and incorporate a Greenbelt program into the upcoming General Plan
update; or
• Suspend Task Force deliberations and direct staff to hire fiscal and economic consultantto prepare a
study on the cost implications of extending public services to the target area and the value of a credit.
Task Force deliberations would resume after the fiscal study was complete; or
• Continue Task Force deliberations, including establishing more detailed requirementsfor the
Greenbelt study area to be included in a Specific Plan for the target area, which could be
incorporated into the General Plan update.
Council direction related to the future direction of the Task Force will be relayed to its members at their
next scheduled meeting on January 17,2006.
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Not applicable. The committee's deliberations do not constitute
a "project" under Public Resources Code Section 21065 or CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 and,
therefore, are not subject to environmental review.
FISCAL IMPACT: The cost varies depending on which alternative next step is selected. Having a
consultant to determine fiscal and economic effects of the program S unknown at
this time. Proposals would have to be obtained.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: The source of funding would be identified when the cost proposals would be
solicited.
Ruby Paiste, Interim Finance Director
t•
Randy Ha"i
Community Development Director
Attachments: I • Chronology of Greenbelt Activities
2 - Draft Greenbelt Program Implementation Exercise Graphics
cc:
MEMORANDUM
DATE: December 21, 2005
TO: Honorable Mayor Hitchcock and Members of the City Council
FROM: Lynette Dias, Planning Consultant
SUWECT: Draft Greenbelt Program Implementation Scenarios
At its October 4, 2005, meeting, the Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force (Task Force)
requested that staff provide a few graphic scenarios indicating what their Draft Greenbelt Program
might look like, if implemented with 1/2 acre parcels and 1 -acre parcel residential lots. To respond to
this request, the following graphics were presented to the Task Force at their November 15, 2005,
meeting.
Exhibit 1 — Provides a vicinity map of the approximate six square mile greenbelt target area (shown in
green), as well as the existing and proposed City of Stockton Sphere's of Influence (shades of blue),
and the existing City of Lodi corporate limits and Sphere of Influence (shades of orange). The one
square mile implementation scenario study area is also identified, located around the intersection of
Armstrong Road and Ham Lane, west of West Lane.
Exhibit 2 — Provides the existing parcel configuration and associated acreages for the implementation
study scenario area.
Exhibit 3 through 8 — Provides six implementation scenarios of the Draft Greenbelt Program.
Assumptions for each scenario are provided, such as the number of units developed, size of parcels
allowed, and amount of area ultimately preserved as open space. Scenarios IA, 2A, 3, and 4 assume
that the area is Master Planned, meaning a coordinated planning effort occurred whereby some
existing parcels are merged to allow more efficient use of driveways, site layout, and extension of
public services/utilities (e.g., sewer, water, storm drainage, power) to the new residences. Scenarios
1B and 2B assume development within the area occurs within the existing parcel configurations.
Exhibit 9 — Provides an Acreage Area and Distance Guide to help visually understand how the one
square mile implementation study area could be subdivided into smaller parcel areas and distances.
Exhibit 1
SOURCE: CITY OF LODI, 2005; CITY OF STOCKTON, 2005; SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY LAFCO, 2005.
IMPLEMENTATION SCENARIOS
CITY OF STOCKTON
L..
STUDY AREA
CURRENT SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
0 1250 2500
GREENBELT TARGET AREA
PROPOSED EXTENSION OF CITY OF
Iv
STOCKTON SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
FEET
CITY OF LODI WHITE
CITY OF LODI
SLOUGH WATER POLLUTION
CONTROL FACILITY
CITY OF LODI SPHERE OF INFLUENCE
Lodi Greenbelt Task Force Committee
Target Area Vicinity Map
41
59
25
25
27 27
31 130 I 154 29 31 I I3
5
ARMSTRONG RO D 1
1
21
16 `1
V
39 5 58
SOURCE: CITY OF LODI
Implementation Study Area
0 350 700 1 -Square Mile Area
N 1 sq. inch = 10 acres (435,600 sq ft.)
FEET
Note: Acreage rounded to nearest whole number; acreage correct within f2 acres.
139
111 1 1 2 11
13 11
10
11 W
10 J 38
� 1
= 2 2
1 1 2 z
28 U
14
1
11 3
13
coo
C*1
Exhibit 2
W
3.1
15
Lodi Greenbelt Task Force Committee
Implementation Development Study Area
7
2
15
7
1
1
17
10
9 12
18 3
6 4 11
0
a
0
z
a
41
59
25
25
27 27
31 130 I 154 29 31 I I3
5
ARMSTRONG RO D 1
1
21
16 `1
V
39 5 58
SOURCE: CITY OF LODI
Implementation Study Area
0 350 700 1 -Square Mile Area
N 1 sq. inch = 10 acres (435,600 sq ft.)
FEET
Note: Acreage rounded to nearest whole number; acreage correct within f2 acres.
139
111 1 1 2 11
13 11
10
11 W
10 J 38
� 1
= 2 2
1 1 2 z
28 U
14
1
11 3
13
coo
C*1
Exhibit 2
W
3.1
15
Lodi Greenbelt Task Force Committee
Implementation Development Study Area
Scenario 1A — Master Planned Development—Assumes One, 1 -acre Credit per 10 Acres
Implementation Scenario Study Area = 618 acres
Existing Small Parcels (i.e., 19 parcels) = 36 acres
Total Study Area = 654 acres
Assumptions
• Master Planned
• Existing Small Parcels developed with 1 SFR per parcel (i.e., 19 SFR's)
• Residential credits: One,1-acre lot per 10 acres of agriculture
• Agricultural buffer of 330 feet (i.e., 1/16 -mile) assumed along all roadways
• Goal — 90% Ag/Open Space Preserved; 10% Developed
Resulting Residential Credits
Residential Credits 57 acres 57 SFR's 9.3% Developed
Ag/Open Space 561 Acres 0 90.7% Preserved
Total 618 acres 57 SFR's 100% Goal Achieved
Existing Small Parcel Development
Developed
36 acres
19 SFR's
100%
Developed
Ag/Open Space
0 Acres
0
0%
Preserved
Total
36 acres
19 SFR's
100%
Goal Not Achieved
Total Study Area Development
Residential Credits 57 acres 57 SFR's 8.7% Developed
Small Parcels 36 acres 19 SFR's 5.5% Developed
Ag/Open Space 561 acres 0 85.8% Preserved
Total Study Area 654 acres 76 SFR's
LEGEND
Existing Small Parcels (-10 acres or less)
New, Residential Credit Parcels
_ AG/Open Space Area
100% Goal Not Achieved
_ AG/Open Space Buffer Area (From Roadway to Dashed Line)
_ Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal
Roadways
Exhibit 3
Scenario 1B — No Planned Development—Assumes One, 1 -acre Credit per 10 Acres
Implementation Scenario Study Area = 618 acres
Existing Small Parcels (i.e., 19 parcels) = 36 acres
Total Study Area = 654 acres
Assumptions
• Following existing parcelization (i.e., no master planning)
• Existing Small Parcels developed with 1 SFR per parcel (i.e., 19 SFR's)
• Residential credits: One, 1 -acre lot per 10 acres of agriculture
• No defined agricultural buffer; all residential development set back 100±
feet from roadway
• Goal — 90% Ag/Open Space Preserved; 10% Developed
Resulting Residential Credits
Residential Credits 54 acres 54 SFR's 8.7% Developed
Ag/Open Space 564 Acres 0 91.3% Preserved
Total 618 acres 54 SFR's 100% Goal Achieved
Existing Small Parcel Development
Developed
36 acres
19 SFR's
100%
Developed
Ag/Open Space
0 Acres
0
0%
Preserved
Total
36 acres
19 SFR's
100%
Goal Not Achieved
Total Study Area Development
Residential Credits
54 acres
54 SFR's
8.3%
Developed
Small Parcels
36 acres
19 SFR's
5.5%
Developed
Ag/Open Space
564 acres
0
86.2%
Preserved
Total Study Area
654 acres
76 SFR's
100%
Goal Not Achieved
LEGEND
Existing Small Parcels (-10 acres or less)
New, Residential Credit Parcels
_ AG/Open Space Area
Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal
Roadways
Exhibit 4
Scenario 2A — Master Planned Development—Assumes One, %-acre Credit per 10 Acres
Implementation Scenario Study Area = 618 acres
Existing Small Parcels (i.e., 19 parcels) = 36 acres
Total Study Area = 654 acres
Assumptions
• Master Planned
• Residential credit: One, '/2 -acre lot per 10 acres
• Existing Small Parcels developed with 1 SFR per parcel (i.e., 19 SFR's)
• Agricultural buffer of 330 feet (i.e., 1/16 -mile) assumed along all roadways
• Goal — 90% Ag/Open Space Preserved; 10% Developed
Resulting Residential Credits
Residential Credits 28.5 acres 57 SFR's 4.6% Developed
Ag/Open Space 589.5 Acres 0 95.4% Preserved
Total 618 acres 57 SFR's 100% Goal Achieved
Existing Small Parcel Development
Developed
36 acres
19 SFR's
100%
Developed
Ag/Open Space
0 Acres
0
0%
Preserved
Total
36 acres
19 SFR's
100%
Goal Not Achieved
Total Study Area Development
Residential Credits
28.5 acres
57 SFR's
4.4%
Developed
Small Parcels
36 acres
19 SFR's
5.5%
Developed
Ag/Open Space
589.5 acres
0
90.1 %
Preserved
Total Study Area
654 acres
76 SFR's
100%
Goal Achieved
LEGEND
Existing Small Parcels (-10 acres or less)
New, Residential Credit Parcels
_ AG/Open Space Area
_ AG/Open Space Buffer Area (From Roadway to Dashed Line)
_ Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal
Roadways
Exhibit 5
Scenario 2B — No Planned Development—Assumes One, '/z -acre Credit per 10 Acres
Implementation Scenario Study Area = 618 acres
Existing Small Parcels (i.e., 19 parcels) = 36 acres
Total Study Area = 654 acres
Assumptions
• Follows existing parcelization (i.e., no master planning)
• Residential credits: One, '/2 -acre lot per 10 acres of agriculture
• Existing Small Parcels developed with 1 SFR per parcel (i.e., 19 SFR's)
• No defined agricultural buffer; all residential development set back 100±
feet from roadway
• Goal — 90% Ag/Open Space Preserved; 10% Developed
Resulting Residential Credits
Residential Credits 27 acres 54 SFR's 4.4% Developed
Ag/Open Space 591 Acres 0 95.6% Preserved
Total 618 acres 54 SFR's 100% Goal Achieved
Existing Small Parcel Development
Developed 36 acres 19 SFR's 100% Developed
Ag/Open Space 0 Acres 0 0% Preserved
Total 36 acres 19 SFR's 100% Goal Not Achieved
Total Study Area Development
Residential Credits
27 acres
54 SFR's
4.1 %
Developed
Small Parcels
36 acres
19 SFR's
5.5%
Developed
Ag/Open Space
591 acres
0
90.4%
Preserved
Total Study Area
654 acres
73 SFR's
100%
Goal Achieved
LEGEND
Existing Small Parcels (-10 acres or less)
New, Residential Credit Parcels
_ AG/Open Space Area
_ AG/Open Space Buffer Area (From Roadway to Dashed Line)
Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal
Roadways
Exhibit 6
Scenario 3 — Master Planned Development—Assumes Two, 1 -acre Credits per 10 Acres (after 20 years)
Implementation Scenario Study Area = 618 acres
Existing Small Parcels (i.e., 19 parcels) = 36 acres
Total Study Area = 654 acres
Assumptions
• Master Planned
• Residential credits: Two, 1 -acre lots per 10 acres of agriculture
• Existing Small Parcels developed with 1 SFR per parcel (i.e., 19 SFR's)
• Agricultural buffer of 330 feet (i.e., 1/16 -mile) assumed along all roadways
• Goal — 80% Ag/Open Space Preserved; 20% Developed
Resulting Residential Credits
Residential Credits 114 acres 114 SFR's 18.4% Developed
Ag/Open Space 504 Acres 0 81.6% Preserved
Total 618 acres 114 SFR's 100% Goal Achieved
Existing Small Parcel Development
Developed 36 acres 19 SFR's 100% Developed
Ag/Open Space 0 Acres 0 0% Preserved
Total 36 acres 19 SFR's 100% Goal Not Achieved
Total Study Area Development
Residential Credits
114 acres
114 SFR's
17.4%
Developed
Small Parcels
36 acres
19 SFR's
5.5%
Developed
Ag/Open Space
504 acres
0
77.1 %
Preserved
Total Study Area
654 acres
133 SFR's
100%
Goal Not Achieved
LEGEND
Existing Small Parcels (-10 acres or less)
New, Residential Credit Parcels
_ AG/Open Space Area
_ AG/Open Space Buffer Area (From Roadway to Dashed Line)
Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal
Roadways
Exhibit 7
Scenario 4 — Master Planned Development —Assumes Two, %-acre Credits per 10 Acres (after 20 years)
Implementation Scenario Study Area = 618 acres
Existing Small Parcels (i.e., 19 parcels) = 36 acres
Total Study Area = 654 acres
Assumptions
• Master Planned
• Residential credit: Two, '/2 -acre lots per 10 acres of agriculture
• Existing Small Parcels developed with 1 SFR per parcel (i.e., 19 SFR's)
• Agricultural buffer of 330 feet assumed along all roadways
• Goal — 80% Ag/Open Space Preserved; 20% Developed
Resulting Residential Credits
Residential Credits 57 acres 114 SFR's 9.3% Developed
Ag/Open Space 561 Acres 0 90.7% Preserved
Total 618 acres 114 SFR's 100% Goal Achieved
Existing Small Parcel Development
Developed 36 acres 19 SFR's 100% Developed
Ag/Open Space 0 Acres 0 0% Preserved
Total 36 acres 19 SFR's 100% Goal Not Achieved
Total Study Area Development
Residential Credits 57 acres 114 SFR's 8.7% Developed
Small Parcels 36 acres 19 SFR's 5.5% Developed
Ag/Open Space 561 acres 0 85.8% Preserved
Total Study Area 654 acres
LEGEND
133 SFR's 100% Goal Achieved
Existing Small Parcels (-10 acres or less)
New, Residential Credit Parcels
_ AG/Open Space Area
_ AG/Open Space Buffer Area (From Roadway to Dashed Line)
_ Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal
Roadways
Exhibit 8
1X2,0 ��
.405)
-
15p, 245n 1
Exhibit 9
DIS1A{ �i� GUIDE
• �vrfiS�� �� �p Xis
i r'
l e:�atAVOlIC-1-
saLJA4pv-,- M ktt- -- (040Ale.es
GREENBELT ACTIVITIES
SUMMARY AND CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS
SUMMARY
In 1999, the City of Lodi identified the establishment of an Open Space/Greenbelt policy as a major
City goal. It was envisioned that an Open Space/Greenbelt policy would protect agricultural and
viticultural resources, discourage premature development of agricultural land, and maintain adequate
separation between Lodi and its surroundings. This goal was to be implemented through a two-phase
process.
The first phase in achieving this objective was the creation of the Lower Lodi Agricultural Land
Conservation Program (LLALCP). The City applied for and received funding to develop the program
through both the Department of Conservation's Agricultural Land Stewardship Program (ALSP) and
the Great Valley Center's LEGACI Program. The objectives through Phase I of the LLALCP were to
conduct public surveys, hold public meetings, identify land suitable for preservation, and develop a
landowner database in the target area.
After funding approval for the LLALCP was complete, the 2x2x2 Greenbelt Committee was formed
in a multi jurisdictional effort by the cities of Lodi and Stockton and San Joaquin County to preserve
open space within the county, specifically between the city boundaries. The Committee consisted of
two representatives each from the Lodi and Stockton City Councils and two from the County Board
of Supervisors. This task force was charged with studying the feasibility of preserving a greenbelt
lying between I-5 and Highway 99 and between Eight Mile Road and Highway 12. After conducting
public outreach and through a series of meetings, the Committee developed recommendations to the
City Councils and Board of Supervisors as to the optimum approach for creating a greenbelt. This
(Phase I) of the program was completed and the Lodi City Council adopted the recommendations on
April 17, 2002. The end of Phase I concluded funding from the Department of Conservation.
Phase II of the LLALCP was renamed the "Lodi -Stockton Community Separator" and involved
financial support from each of the three jurisdictions. Phase 11 would have evaluated agricultural land
preservation tools according to the approved 2x2x2 Committee recommendations and updated the
City's policies for preserving agricultural lands. Implementation of the chosen method of
preservation was scheduled to commence on June 30, 2001. However, the Stockton City Council
passed a resolution requiring an increase in the study area and increased participation by several other
agencies and groups. Stockton's broadening of the scoping process was not acceptable to Lodi and
the County. As a result, this process essentially came to an end and Phase II was never initiated.
The City of Lodi Greenbelt Task Force was established in December 2003 by then Mayor Susan
Hitchcock. The goal of the Task Force is to: "Explore and investigate the variety of models
available, and as utilized in various cities, to accomplish the community separation/open space goal
and make a recommendation to the City Council for the option that works best for Lodi." The 19 -
member group met regularly from March to July 2004. At that point, the group took a hiatus in order
to deal with agricultural issues of some of the membership. Upon returning to the regular meeting
schedule in October, 2004, a draft program to accomplish the City's objectives of establishing a
greenbelt was presented to the Task Force.
1'\Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1.4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc
Draft Community Separator/Greenbelt Program Summar:
• Minimum target area: runs between HWY-99 and 1-5,1/2 mile north and south of Armstrong
Road
• Provide for a program that allows for a continuation of agricultural uses as currently provided
in the County Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, allow the development of a limited amount of
houses as follows:
o One credit (unit) per 10 acres of ownership pro -rated to actual parcel size upon
program adoption
o One credit as above in 20 years
o The use of a credit must take place within the target area
o The maximum size of a parcel for a housing unit is %2 to 1 acre
o Revise the Right -to -Farm Ordinance as recommended by the farming community
o Provide for limited public improvements that promote the rural setting
o Annex the entire target area and provide sewer and water service along Armstrong
Road
o Property Owner vote on the program
The Task Force met in November and December 2004 to discuss the draft program and try to reach
consensus on a recommendation to the City Council; however there was a group of affected property
owners who were not supportive of the program and as a result, consensus on a recommendation was
not reached. The Task Force requested that the property owners with concerns regarding the draft
program develop a recommendation for a program that would be acceptable to them and the Task
Force agreed to take a hiatus to allow the property owners time to develop their recommendation. The
Task Force reconvened in November 2005 to receive the alternative land plan for the target area from
the landowners. Unfortunately, the landowners were not yet prepared to present their plan to the
group.
The Task Force last met in December 2005 to receive a presentation on six potential implementation
scenarios of their Draft Program with lot sizes ranging from'/2-acre to 1 -acre in size. After receiving
the presentation, the Task Force decided they now needed detailed financial information to
understand if the program they have developed is fiscally feasible for the City to implement,
including how much it would cost to extend and maintain public services to the target area, and what
the value of a credit might be included in the Draft Program.
City of Lodi Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force Members:
Cliff Bradshaw, Dentist
Patrick Johnston, Former State Senator
Ann Cemey, Attorney
Robin Knowlton, Environmentalist
Mark Chandler, Wine Industry
Bob Lauchland, Farmer/Landowner
Jasbir Gill, Doctor/Landowner
Robert Matthius, Retire Bishop ELCA
Pete Hetzner, Optometrist
Pat Patrick, Chamber of Commerce
Susan Hitchcock, Councilmember/Educator
Randy Snider, Real Estate
Kevin Sharrar, Building Industry Association
Bill Cummins, Pastor
Carl Fink, Landowner
Bruce Fry, Farmer/Landowner
Gina Moran, Planning Commissioner (replaced former Planning Commissioner, David Phillips)
Changes to the Task Force membership since December 7, 2004 meeting:
• Christina Cross, Health Services — Resigned.
• David Phillips, Planning Commission representative — Resigned. Replaced with Planning
Commissioner, Gina Moran.
• Katelin Grant, Student — Resigned.
19Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1.4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc 2
Associated Activities:
In addition to the Greenbelt Task Force, there are a number of associated activities and discussions
occurring throughout the County. The Sierra Club has been active in challenging large scale
development in the south County and has been discussing Sphere of Influence actions with the City of
Stockton. Joe Peterson, formerly of the Farm Bureau, has introduced a dialogue regarding a "Farm
Belt" concept. The Centrally Valley Land Trust was recently formed through mergers of Merced,
Stanislaus, and Sacramento County land trusts. The Land Trust's mission is to protect agricultural
and other open space uses.
2x2x2 Committee Members:
• City of Lodi: Mayor Alan Nakanishi and Councilmember Susan Hitchcock
• City of Stockton: Councilmembers Ann Johnston and Frank Ruhstaller
• San Joaquin County: Supervisors Victor Mow and Jack Sieglock
CHRONOLOGY OF GREENBELT ACTIVITIES
February 3, 1999
Lodi Resolution No. 99-21
• Council approves filing of application for Planning Grant with Department of Conservation
October 25, 1999
2x2x2 Greenbelt Committee Meeting (1st)
• Approve the formation of the Task Force
• Agree that County will be the lead
• Discussion of what area to focus on, steps to take
December 13, 1999
2x2x2 Greenbelt Committee Meeting (2nd)
• an agreement was needed between all three jurisdictions to guarantee the endurance of
conservation efforts
some task force members expressed the feeling that development was a right and others felt it was
a privilege
• discussion of a moratorium on growth in the focus area until a decision could be reached — no
consensus on this idea
January 24, 2000
2x2x2 Greenbelt Committee Meeting (3rd)
• County presents the Community Separator concept — the concept would mark the beginning of an
effort to provide separation between other cities in the county — while separate and distinct from
the efforts of the task force, community separators would be a countywide open space effort
1'\Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1.4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc
March 1, 2000
Lodi Resolution No. 2000-31
Approval of consultant contract (Moore, Iacafano, and Goltsman) for conducting Community
Separator study
April 26, 2000
Staff Meeting
• Mapping of timeline for future meetings, community forums, and approach to presenting the
formalized idea of open space/farmland preservation to the community and property owners
June 30, 2000
Staff Planning Meeting with Greenbelt Consultant
• Formalization of study area, data products including vegetation and habitat maps, property
ownership, and Williamson Act lands were prepared — decided what data products were needed
for 2x2x2 Committee meetings
July 27, 2000
2x2x2 Greenbelt Committee Meeting (4th)
• Open to the public, 30 audience persons were present
• Background information was presented; task force members and the public expressed their views
on growth in the area, and what, if anything, should be done about it.
November 13, 2000
Lodi Community Forum
• 80 attendees
• Intended to gauge public interest in the idea of farmland preservation
• Presentation, small discussion groups facilitated by consultant staff, presentation of group
sentiments to whole body
• Results: desire to see agriculture and the agricultural way of life preserved, farming and
agriculture have value and should be protected — however, any kind of preservation (i.e. purchase
of property, or purchase of development rights) should be done equitably and with respect to the
"rights" of property owners; there seemed to be some confusion about the distinction between
rights and privileges when it come to development.
November 16, 2000
Stockton Community Forum
• 40 attendees
• Intended to gauge public interest in the idea of farmland preservation
• Presentation, small discussion groups facilitated by consultant staff, presentation of group
sentiments to whole body
• Results: desire to see agriculture and the agricultural way of life preserved, farming and
agriculture have value and should be protected — however, any kind of preservation (i.e. purchase
of property, or purchase of development rights) should be done equitably and with respect to the
"rights" of property owners; there seemed to be some confusion about the distinction between
rights and privileges when it come to development.
15Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1.4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc 4
March 14, 2001
Community Separator Task Force Meeting'
• The Task Force recommended to the 2x2x2 Committee to continue with the Community
Separator study
Principles of the Community Separator program:
o Voluntary Participation, Flexibility, Agricultural preservation, compatible land uses,
certainty, and landowner trust
Task Force Recommendations:
o Investigate land trusts, funding mechanisms, explore feasibility of establishing an Urban
Growth Boundary, and ensure full involvement (Phase II)
March 29, 2001
2x2x2 Greenbelt Committee Meeting (5th)
Presentation by consultant of information gathered at Lodi and Stockton community forums
Summary of concerns and interests, remaining question is "Where do we go from here?"
Recommendations of the Task Force are passed (see above Task Force meeting); conclusion of
Phase I
May 3, 2001
Lodi City Council Resolution No. 2001-103
Council approves recommendations passed by the Task Force as Phase II
May 29, 2001
Stockton City Council Resolution No. 01-0269
• Stockton adopts resolution to support Community Separator Study
March 25, 2002
2x2x2 Greenbelt Task Force Meeting (6th)
Task Force decides to proceed with Phase II of the Community Separator Study, which would
require each governing body to contribute to 1/3 of the consultants costs
April 17, 2002
Lodi City Council Resolution No. 2002-82
• Adoption of 2x2x2 Greenbelt Task Force recommendations and agrees to participate and fund
(1/3) Phase II of the community separator planning process
' There seems to be some distinction between the "Task Force" and the "2x2x2 Committee," however at times they seem to
be used interchangeably
15Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1-4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc
April 23, 2002
Stockton City Council Resolution No. 02-0219
• Council determines that prior to Stockton's further participation in the Community Separator
Study, the 2x2x2 Greenbelt Task Force will be expanded to include representatives of other cities,
LAFCO, SCOG, Caltrans, developers etc.
Further, before continued participation, the study will be expanded to include potential impacts to
growth policies in surrounding counties... these conditions would follow the format of the multi -
species task force
December 17, 2002
Farm Bureau
Formed a steering committee for an agricultural land trust that would be farmer based —
discussion at meeting below that this land trust could hold easements
January 7, 2003
Informal Information Session of the City Council
• A scope of work involving recommendations for: a farmland trust program, agricultural
mitigation fee, and urban growth line community separator program was developed by the
consultant - Lodi and the County approved it, however Stockton asked that many untenable
conditions be met prior to its approval
• Stockton developing a General Plan heavily slanted toward northern expansion
• Mentioned that it would not be necessary to control all of the land to create a greenbelt, selection
of key pieces of land would be effective — such as control of Eight Mile Road properties
• Discussed possibility of creating an agricultural zone
• Overall feeling is that Lodi should take an aggressive approach to the greenbelt issue — through
past actions it is apparent that Stockton does not recognize that agricultural character is important
to Lodi
December 2003
City of 19 -member Lodi Establishes Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force
Participants included: Cliff Bradshaw, Dentist; Ann Cerney, Attorney, Mark Chandler, Wine
Industry; Bill Cummins, Pastor; Carl Fink, Landowner; Bruce Fry, Farmer/Landowner; Jasbir
Gill, Doctor/Landowner; Pete Hetzner, Optometrist; Susan Hitchcock, Councilmember/Educator;
Patrick Johnston, Former State Senator; Robin Knowlton, Environrnentalist; Bob Lauchland,
Farmer/Landowner; Robert Matthius, Retire Bishop ELCA; Pat Patrick, Chamber of Commerce;
David Phillips, Planning Commissioner (since replaced with Commissioner, Gina Moran); Kevin
Sharrar, Building Industry Association; Randy Snider, Real Estate.
March 9, 2004 — December 7, 2004
Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force Meetings (14 meetings)
• Greenbelt Task Force met for several months in order to formulate a recommendation to the Lodi
City Council regarding a program to preserve separation between Lodi and Stockton
• The Task Force formulated a draft program, with the purpose of providing economic benefits to
property owners while maintaining the focus of agricultural land use in the area.
• Program Summar3L
o Target area: runs between HWY-99 and I-5, '/2 mile north and south of Armstrong Road
19Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1.4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc 6
o Provide for a program that allows for a continuation of agricultural uses as currently provided
in the County Zoning Ordinance. Additionally, allow the development of a limited amount of
houses as follows:
One credit (unit) per 10 acres of ownership pro -rated to actual parcel size upon program
adoption
One credit as above in 20 years
The use of a credit must take place within the target area
The maximum size of a parcel for a housing unit is '/2 acre
Revise the Right -to -Farm Ordinance as recommended by the farming community
Provide for limited public improvements that promote the rural setting
Annex the entire target area and provide sewer and water service along Armstrong Road
and other service could be provided,
Property Owner vote on the program
The majority of regularly scheduled meetings in 2005 were cancelled in order to allow target area
property owners the opportunity to formally respond to the program concept developed by the
Task Force (see below for two additional meetings).
November 2004 Election
Measure Q: Urban Growth Boundary Measure — Passed
• Measure amends the Stockton General Plan to establish an Urban Growth Boundary, which
would coincide with the City's current Urban Services boundary.
• This measure did not establish a greenbelt, but limited normally allowable development and land
uses outside the UGB to open space uses, until June 30, 2024 approval of other development and
land uses outside the UGB would require approval by the vote of the electorate
• This measure also amends the General Plan to encourage the County and Lodi to adopt policies to
support an UGB and maintain a community separator
Measure T: Stockton Greenbelt Measure — Failed
• Greenbelt Master Plan would prohibit the City from approving retail, industrial, commercial,
and/or residential land uses within the designated greenbelt, and provide that agricultural uses and
non-commercial recreational land uses not conflict with surrounding agricultural operation
allowed.
• Would prepare and certify an EIR for the Plan prior to adoption or submit to the voters a
Financing Implementation Plan to justly compensate farmers and property owners adversely
affected.
• Would take precedence over Measure Q in the event that both measures passed.
November 2005
2x2x2 Greenbelt Committee Meeting
• Committee reconvened to update on status of individual greenbelt efforts. San Joaquin County
stated they felt the development of a greenbelt/community separator is primarily a City issue.
The area the two Cities were discussing is already agriculturally designated under the County
Code (with a 40 acre minimum), therefore making the greenbelt unnecessary while under County
jurisdiction.
• The Stockton Draft General Plan update was provided, including the extension of its Sphere of
Influence to abut the southern edge of the Lodi greenbelt target area. It was noted that Stockton's
Draft General Plan also identified and allowed for the Lodi Greenbelt target area as a community
separator between Lodi and Stockton. �7
1'\Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1.4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc /
November 14, 2005
Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force Meeting
Task Force reconvened to receive alternative proposal from target area landowners. Area
landowners were not yet at a point to present their plan to the Task Force.
• Task Force requested Planning Consultant, Lynette Dias (LSA Associates, Inc.), to prepare a few
graphic implementation scenarios of the Draft Program so the group could understand more fully
the implications of the preliminary draft plan being considered.
December 15, 2005
Community Separator/Greenbelt Task Force Meeting
• Task Force received six graphic scenarios of Draft Program, which the group found helpful in
discerning what development in the target area may look like if 1 -acre lots are allowed versus '/z -
acre lots.
• Task Force agreed that fiscal information was now needed to understand if the preliminary draft
program was feasible, how much it would cost to extend public services to the target area, and
what the monetary value of a credit (i.e., unit) was estimated to be under their Draft Program.
• Task Force request Council update on their progress, including the preliminary draft program,
and then provide direction for future Task Force greenbelt deliberations.
15Community Development\Council Communications\2006\1.4 Greenbelt Clnonology.doc
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-09
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AUTHORIZING
THE CITY MANAGER TO PREPARE A REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL
REGARDING THE COMMUNITY SEPARATOWGREENBELT
PROGRAMAND FURTHER APPROPRIATING FUNDS
FOR THE PROJECT
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lodi City Council does hereby
authorize the City Manager to prepare a Request for Proposal for the purpose of
obtaining further information related to the fiscal and economic effects of the Community
Separator/Greenbelt Program; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that funds in an amount up to $50,000 be
appropriated for this project from funding earmarked for the preparation of an updated
General Plan.
Dated: January4,2006
hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006-09 was passed and adopted by the Lodi
City Council in a regular meeting held January 4, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Beckman, Hansen, Johnson, Mounce, and
Mayor Hitchcock
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
SUSAN J. BLAC STON
City Clerk
2006-09