Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - March 29, 2006 D-04 SMAGENDA ITEM D"q AdSh CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA TITLE: Provide direction with regard to a request by Council Member Beckman regarding amending the general plan to include a greenbelt area MEETING DATE: March 29,2006 PREPARED BY: Randy Hatch, Community Development Director RECOMMENDEDACTION: Provide direction to Beckman regarding greenbelt area staff with regard to a request by Council Member an amendment the General Plan to designate a BAC KGROUNDIN FORMATION: Since the mid 1980's the City has been exploring the concept of a greenbelt beyond the south boundaries of the City for both agriculture protection and as a community separator. Efforts since 1999 involve the formation of a Task Force involving the City of Lodi, Stockton, and the County. Due to lack of inter jurisdictional progress, the City established a separate Lodi Greenbelt Task Force in December 2003 and held at least 14 meetings. In fall 2004 a draft program to establish a greenbelt was presented. Draft Program Summa[y: • Minimum target area: runs between Highway 99 and 15, %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 Y2 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 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. APPROVED: 7 Blair ing, City Manager In October and November 2005 the Task Force met to re -group and review a draft exercise as to how the draft program could be implemented. The Task Force also inquired as to the status of the property owner's alternative land plan. At the January 2006 meeting, a representative from the property owners indicated that progress had been made but the property owners didn't have a proposal to release. It should be noted that the inter -jurisdictional 2X2X2 Committee did meet in October 2005 to review the current status of greenbelt activities. No further meetings of that group were scheduled. Finally, in January 2006 the Council did ask staff to explore obtaining an economic analysis of land value and how the draft Task Force program could financially work. Final authorization to conduct such an economic analysis would comeback to the Council for approval. Staff has preliminarily determined that such an economic analysis would cost approximately $50,000. While useful the economic analysis would not move the greenbelt concept material lyforward. POSSIBLE ACTION: Staff has developed an option to move the greenbelt concept forward. The City could consider an amendment to the City's General Plan Diagram now which could designate the land '/z mile north of Armstrong Road from Planned Residential Reserve to Greenbelt/Agriculture. At he the same time, the City could expand our General Plan area %2 mile south of Armstrong Road within the same east and west limits and designate this area for GreenbelttAgriculture. This would be consistent with the area as proposed by the Greenbelt Task Force in their Draft Program and would show commitment by the City for the Greenbelt. This action could be taken by the City with no request or concurrence by the property owners. The City, under State law, has the power to designate lands outside of City limits to a general plan designation which further the needs of the City and its goals and policies. The City could follow this general plan designation with a request to San Joaquin County Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for inclusion of this area within the Lodi Sphere of Influence. Again, no approval by the property owners is required, only possible annexation requires an affirmativevote of the propertyowners or registered voters. Such an amendment to the General Plan would be subject to California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and an environmental document would need to be prepared. Such a documentwould be relatively simply since the general plan action (and potential Sphere of Influence inclusion) would not change any current rights or legal entitlementof the property. The current zoning for agriculture would be retained. FISCAL IMPACT: The costs of a consultantto preparethe General Plan Amendment and CEQA document (Initial Study and Negative Declaration)would be approximately $12,000. The cost to prepare an application to LAFCO for a Sphere of Influence Amendment is more variable and could range from approximately $30,000. to $55,000. The costs for staff to prepare the General Plan Amendment would be less in dollar terms, approximately $2,000. for the General Plan Amendment and an estimated additional $5,000. for LAFCO application fees and required mapping costs for the Sphere of Influence Amendment. FUNDING AVAILABLE: There is no funding source currently in the Community Development Department budget to cover the projected costs for either a consultant or for direct costs if staff prepared. While possible, having staff perform the work would affect our current workload and would result in noticeable delays to normal current planning work, include general customer service at the planning counter and on the telephone. Ruby Pai�, Interim Finance Director Rand ch Com unity Development Director J:Zommunity DevelopmenflCouncil Communications1200G 29 greenbelt amend w general plan-1.doc