Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Report - April 4, 2007 I-03 PH
AGENOAT AGENDAITEM I Of 65 . Negave Declaration OM3 for the General Plan iendment and.00. in Zoning for the Gini PrIect (expah.sioh Am rd 1 ti € C p9 at Gen i r tan Amen r� ent and change iin Zoning for the L di mail HosDitalProt (nem a in, 9 addition:and otter related f di i � 2, Arnend the Generai Plan designation for 1333 and 1.325 South Centrai Averve frorn', EastsiUe Residential to General Cornmercial (Gini. l r ject) and f r 120:1, 1139, 1133, `i1 7, 1,121, and 1115 . C,s dinal Street from Low Density Re idential to Office (Lodi Memorial Hospital r) t), I Rezone 133.3 and 1326. , Central Ave. frorn E-1, Single: Family Residentini :F it'ssd€ o C-2, G 3 er i Commercial, 4. Rezone 97156 999_ € 31 South i; € € nt; 1200 W, Vine Street;: 1201, 1:139 1133, 1. �, 1121, and. 1115 W, Cardinal Street front (R -C - P) i e ti l- C oM, m r ial •Professional Office and (R-2) Residence District t D) Planned Development and approve Dk)pme t Plea. Aprtj 4, 20W Cornm1unity Development Director ACTION 1. Approves fallowir� l t vDcl r ti r� ; Negative, Declaration M-0.3 fo� the General Plea Amendment. nd changeit for the Kiri r j (x an ion df' €t -r i t e businesses.), b, Approve Negative, Declaration 06«04 for the r3n r t lir: Amendment and chmige in Zoning for t nodi Membrial Ho it i Project (r southit d€ti€r rt other related f3itl 2. Amend the en r l Man destnation for 1333 and. 1325. ouch Central Avenue from t i e ti l to Gbnera(ommq-rrip; ;Gini Project). and for 1291, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1; 1, rid 1.115 W. C rdi Street from Low Density i nti l to offico (Lodi Memorial Hospita., prp�e t)o I Rezone 1333 and 1325 S. entr l:Ave. from RAE -1. Single Farrd.f Residential Eastside to � -2, General I.-Ornmemiat , Rezone 9755, 999, 1031 South i srM.Ont; 1200 W.Vine Street; 1201; 11139, 1el3 , 11 r , 1121, and 11.15 W. Cardinal Street fry? . (R -C - P) .ictii��riirf€1Office and (m) Re sidence D~ slri t to (n) Planned Developrnnt and approve DevelopmeW i' -Ian' APPROVED,P` n _.._ lir King, mar ager" . f ;. f_ ini •'r jet rid the Lodi Mr od H it i E €p n. n r ojeci€ two r p t similar in nature �deperidert of each Other. 7r 3mil rity is that both these projects ir€v lv requests to clo g .fin e i9r3 U 6 State la�iv MOWS only four Gri i° [ Pian Amendments a year, ztaff has oornbinea thee,, tft requests. € rto a singlis- General Man Amendment so as to use ch. ly one of our allowed ..r-riendments, "r r i no rear i- i in State law as to the number of separate changes (text or map) in' a. 30orarai Man Amendment, ppli(an .t € K th . Gini, is interested in expanding his auto service businesses onto property he ow na 40rcent to !his corm �)u.&Jns_ these adjacent pr p rti '1325 and 1333 South CentrW =even ey: ani c..0 �: rr ntl u, ed ,for residential use and have General Plan grid Zoning d ig tl r€ ft�r residential [nor r � for TC i' Project t proceed, the General Plan and Zoning d rr l igOns need to e ci•�anl 1, t" rr rill ;, fir (alt is pr p€�rti located t 1325 and 1333 South vitr l Ave ( s270- rr.' ` , respectively) by ii i€° DesignationEastside Zoning t e r t€c . �:af rrgl rrir; i r c , Eastside -1). "h change in onin t - M ll land Uses the subject Properties similar to th-- uses currently existing along Kettleman Lane and as '` pecifi i y pa -r tted by the City's Zoning Ordinances, di Memorial Hospit 1. in ivsponse to state mandated ;a9islation and growing €`€ of the c m ni. .. Wan to expand their € urr nt cilifi s and healthcare se. Anticipated population.growth l indi ted: :ea t x.nand:the hospital ftorn. torn.its Ci:€rren" 107 beds to over 150:10eds in the rear future, At the Same 16,n -)e, -: State e nact d a Hospital l aiismic SafeAY i gi t ti n i specified deadline's that impact the a € 0-1 T861€t'ra i i d feeds- available to the community, In order tomeet the community's need and to comply with h seismic legislation, tine Lodi Memorial Hospital is proposing t i¢ = r ph d p r i plan, The first phase willconsist f ddit€on to the: South Wing, ,. r. 3Is= uctron of a Centr l lit €rte Plant and a surface perking lot, The second .phase of the coi' trr€ tro Will 1..e lags r,neii and external pro; t t ��pp rl,'Murr cry € nits growth and seismic Fequiremerftr The iast the proposed rojert will include several additional major growth projects as mandated by the Ca ifo iia Hospital Seismic; Wety Act, which calls for all acute rfunctions.10 in buildings of hert:.,,mic p r'for roan-ve standard by 2030- `When the project is completed, it ifl have met the futur 1�e;MtM cardsf the 61y andit state mandated seismic standards, BACKOROUND INF ATS A, Gin€PTOJ.00 Mr. Gin appried <f for : n r € Plan Amendment to change the land use desiqnafion for 1325 and 1333 fid Resideal �3 o � ;tiv�r�2�d-; land Ct respective l Rrg i cirri F and Rezone from RE -1, Single Familyiidr�ce Efid o C'9_1 Commercial, The change in Gernr i Plan designation and Rezone will allow lard" asci ire the p:reperties:simflar:..tb the uses cuirrentlyi ti g. along Kettleman.Lane., The applicant pia€Wo 'n-'er e these two r -pro rbc' ' €th other properties, that he ownsthat front K tbema°l Lane and develop F@ a = rf f-�t Way first publicly heard by the Planning Commission on Dec.ember 13, 2006. -At at time, f ppll anV request rry used a request for consideration to amend the General Flan grid hir g desfgrr.��i � sfir,. 1 d2 � tip Central art (AM047-270o,10), �vf r h l o€� d b 1 tmeCo, r .p rt n s pr r � t l� i feet wide and has d p'th f 130 ft, Rith total area f o ,3 � i� r rr� t. T °11 dart€ci l � pop rty i currently being used as a drivew y to access both commercially zoned <pnrli illy t face Nettle€nae`€ Lane and residential prpr€ ti to the, north, At that hearing, the Planning s" "r1c z}n expressed oom4, m about tl proposed site pl r ,architectural d ig€ tutu €r b €l i€r err the site-, d teen b4dIn gra tr t on the property line It f t. residentia.1 use to the e They �,�SKE,I,d th ppli rpt tsubmit.site play° with eievations. Futt a r, the l nni g Cornirnission directed staff ;o ascerUHn how a change in;designation right affect 1323 Borah Centraf Avenueowned: by t r part treat was rnQluded A the Ori fi€rel requPIS.tr `l"ire own=er of this parcel had objected, Via mail, to the Mi [u��€lit"; __: `� property ini � or=trag request, A. tide P1wqfnGrnmission Meeting of February 14, 2007, the applicant submitted preliminary site plan' ; ;: the � ld"'€t ctural deign future, buildings, T he request for a General Plan Amendment and Rezone o,' I "2 3 couth Centml Avenue was dropped. After deliberation and pu k comment regarding the P- 'b e ass of two affordgble r id nti units Currently located at, 1333 and 1325 South Central r., , i ;Rnmrrtiirrvoted 5 to 0 (€rnriiir Heinitz & White wereabsent) :to ,e (fi d" f e-nd that the City is o c ii amend the General Plan ddst . nation for 1333 and 1325 SouthCentra" Averiie lrom Egistside ReAential _'ER) to General Commercial (CC) and Rezone from REA Single ii�� R , c tside `- , N tgh( rho d ."ornm r i , N tw q t r AS .part: oflhiS project and in artier to fulfill the 0 1€ rni E--rivironmentat Quality Act ( Q ). staff ret �redf�n rnitii St€Idr to raview and assessipt This project was found to have no impacts that trd be foond significant if i t rnitigaied via norm i conditions of devaiopment. Staff seat the. proposed Napjavve DeO.l r° fi rl ;to varlous ageanciesfor r kli ` r, and published, and posted our intent t to issue: Negative Del r tion for the. requii" d -day period, (from Tuesday October 1 t� through Wednesday N vera rh �, It 2006), Staff received comMents from San Joaquin Valf y Air Pollution Control i i trfct JVAPCDi t,ha.t will be 'ncor orated into the bulidinpermit process. In conclusion, staff finds that the ;. ooso PrOiect. rneets requirernents and is therefore exempt fr rn fiurther review under CEQA, Negative Deg..;?a, tray )6-03 adequately addresses pot ni i envir nment l impacts that could occur as result of fs °pr jecf. No signrrfirm ar t knbacts are anticipated and no mifig tion measures have been required, B, soli i ii T 1�e Sec nd part cif this request i y L di M t�rl l Hospital to snared the General Plan designation:.for `ft,jo, . f tine €t (existing.. r id Ua pr° rt£ j fr rn LDL, Low r��ltyResidential t l and Zoning s=ai n t€oris for the hospital (R -0-P) -P) and residential prop €tie (R-21, they own to PD, Planned evekn'ent, part ; Ih- pr t and in order to fulfill the lif rni Environmental tity Act yf r r[ rr lrt ,yla.prepared pfi ltud t nact . This project was found to have no rillpa As that scold b fund sigrrific;fit f not mitigated vi normal cor�dttloodevelopfit. �t f rEt 4.t proppsed NegafiVDeciaration to variousagencies for review and publishd, an posted our intent to S-Ue , Neg i Declaration for the required 30- lav period, (from Tuesday , u r`y E,�. 07 through r 4 rr� � ' t -7) . con lu ion, staff find � t the proposed project meets requirements and ,s € '('M exempt frorn further revise under CE2QA. Negative Declaration 06-44 i d : u t ly addresses ter�i, i ;-wr r° r rr t l impacts that could occur ae a result of this project. No i €if'ic rpt. impacts re and r i itkg ti f r-r� sir r r uir d. Staff r e ed comments from Sari l q in valley Ai', ;- o lubon, C ontroi .District r= J P ) and, California Transportation Department Diem t 10 l; ans" t rA rs .rns of the San Joaquin Valf y Air Pollution Control District (JVD) are ddr,,sysed vua n n i l }e=n uir ri tints of development. € altr n asked for rnore traffic information to t y � imp t to K ttle man Lan "State route 12). When this dditi r��l tr is information t i Bellt . ns,,it showed in rnol irnp ct to K ffl man .rye andCaltrans t l letter r witdra ih any .443yyMii with 1t 'fC project. th-- pia"w"ling CAM, rmwon,Meeting f February 28, 2007, the Commission. recommended to the !t rE appro=ve Negativiarafion 06-43 adequate environment l documentation for the ora ;t saal. Generafflan Amendment i i ris P!'6J.eat.inclodes.a request t , arnend the General Pl r, for a portion of the it : ( xr ti g residenfial ..�`!0pevtms-1 irom.l.DR Low Donsify Residential to Office.The change in General Plan designation .,ll �: � bie xt 4� applicant'. t e i d t current hospital faculties aril services. Because fl i ated ,jarking:tShortage in the shart t ran as a resutt of the art Wing Addition, the Hospital:proposes f wr r id r t i b6 ildino -it owns and use the lots for surface -parking_ The use of residential Icits for U14 c.4 v:., tk—ng' will aid traffic, floe, vehicular access points, and include landks ca modifications t ill te; safe, constructkm of the new facilities, At the Planning: Commission Meeting ofFebruary 2.8, s_.f _° iw ,,, o}�`°ir r mesion cons. r d tf= r u t t I_.r diMemorial Hospital to amend t General. Ptan ,e i i rr , After public input concerning traffic and potential parking prob.11m , the Pla ni g oi`rrmr von voted 3 to 0 or r issi n r White was absent and Commissioner Kiser had to recuse w ` say ue to, posaUe _ on 11ct of interest) to recommend that the City Council amend the General Plea i rE4 fm � (yl , I 139, 133, 1127; 1121, and 1115W.. Cardinal Street from Low Density l id l i to oft Ig Rezone appiicaM Lodi e r$ l Ho p t t, request.edto change 76oning designationslor the hospital - - i and resi edi l properfies, A-2) theyown t , Planned Development, The City of L di' r�i�t �.a r uiire a€i�;?'�t m of ter! acres i order to. t k h Planned c� i trite lr� this case, ihe :c ;rpror 17,5e r in area. The change in. rn drrtr€ +ltlallow,, t r:��, piican" Tf figs C'Ur�E t hal ilii €gid rv- their offer. h chan ire c irc from 3tiw`mf si nai l"ft e; (R -C- €) and Singie Family Resident € l (R-2) to PD will allow the use:of � tur4s m the pr l ct arca as specifically permitted in §17,33.040 Permifted ease of the city's �:. dina rxs. and the pr i'•;. f" the6 l pment Plan wili l theapplicant the flexibility t rop n- flheir owrF, development riter'l , which includes setbacks, heights, lot coverage a€ d' ether land use issues x c efit 1pd �r, ,i :33`l l; r ct lop r r t i tri ( M t the amity rdi n . } r r t w ll be c tr . d within the exisfing boundaries of the hospital property, There are. i ht g _° €,10 . p rcel loo t d on. the uth, side of C rdinal tro t that a� rap t the l� pit i pr e y, The f tai h purchased six of these houses and proposed to incorporate these. prp i into th proj t ar,,Mi:t.Wlizethe lard for additional parking and for a Wndscaped buff6r along Cardinal Street, The two 3 c ase M Owned y fn t� �pst' r =`��t putt �f r�� request r � i�pr t t la r �. The jUK13pos d expansion i planned t b c r6�pl t d in three phases, - he initial phase will consist of the ��dditi��, Central Utility it cr� Irking fit, f tnew u � lefour-story addifion to the existing hospital building is intended to rn.eet current seismic Ia da acid tha, growing healthcare reeds of the community, The existing hospital contains 147,34, quar A f et f b ildin area nd 107 -beds in three-story structure. The Phase. n xp r ior� MIad d MW wing that wiR .add 131,229 square feet of building area and aocammod 'ate 90 beds. Once o mwetd the s,0W will h ve total f 362,;182 square feet and 157 -beds, (The total r� i° r f beds 3 rp , The removal of 28 -beds ir`l tie existing great ho pit l wing due to seismic r quir rnent and. n addftonbl 12 beds lest elsewhere due to the remodeling). T h outh Wing addition consists of a major ., rv: ,dl, itiun[ , The first rl�, or f this addition Will providefor a new€ Em r y Department, Ur p t'r� ,yrs3°t-„r-t entry to_ entire Hospital. € rrrry ptr€rt prid for r aru[r ,,Mia; cairr-nont Consistent wM the exisflnoculentry- The rernaliming three floom will F f ofa. 30 bed lVedical Surgical Nursing Care Unit, The project ,101 also include the construction of q r - f t, two-story central pleat adjacent to the hospital that will house the mech ni 1 i tS 4 3 G€ , r tal;tt end other r a ppc rt.: qu pe rrt for the hospital, Th€ prep tr l l .tr'lity Plant will uNity needs of the new South Wng Addition and future development of the ca pu .in latter r c :�rtr C , t l t -st r `4 a q, fa. unmaned d utilitybuilding scheduled for Ery t ar, oyan,, g '100 , As tart of the first phase of the project, the hospital wRI also expand thOr 'u rf-Tn t h,; t Y remowna sig single -f r iiy residences and replacing them with parking and landscaping. �e �s of restdenfial lets for surface parking will id traffic fl d, vehicular c pouts, and include %<mdsc-ape, moctifications to CiRate the sate Construction of the new fad i - The ma'or° aspect of the arms �� : r�.t d �s 9.�ti u� t€� r i t ��r Ffi ur fi � f the tr fig fl ��F p ft r€ �. which of relocate the lir: vc h�i�:::,ula r access to the i1ospit l from South F irr nt Avenue r�u€� t a Lane. ref>the rttiir uii€ l� internal andtrri projects to support futrruEttF grc i Ti prdiifstrengthen th trudtu landnon-structural�l 3l� ,R Par'n nt r rt;l i{ the existirg. facilities. "These uipgrades are mandated by California law and must be Irl t ithirrp°f c iM frarne, Somey 2011 The irtr r al construction Willntitutexpansion dketar y suppoit f cilitses apa ft-- Pharmacy to support the growing patient reeds. The last t co ponent )ad pig i car �t � � ii�,�rs �f r`ki€� � tru,�tur . h k pliase of the:praposed p pje t vdlff be executed by 2030 and will include several additional motor =;-o,,� th grojects as roandayod by the California Hospital .i i Safety Act, whioh cavils for all acute Qaire r cf9s r to in buiUri o higher i i i ;Hospital p i� r� standard 2030, They r p t r pts d .,- is �t h -e e H pit l Expansion, Phase 2, which would relocate most other acute dare Mill s; t E € � hospital space, n0 str �ti n of Medical i �r�ti�lin ,eft€ � expected:�� r t U M cy��r m unity growth,and to. meet demands of niore servicesmoving to the outpa i nt setting, J ,nAefion7f an Adm, n`strafive Office Building,ri is needed to increas the serviceity of hta hos, os, Et i x t d that the n : da ini tr tiv Office ��i € � will f� �ti t� r�addition `t� a ?d`� pi r :nt of ,u§Trent ofte specs located in the Conrad Building, Finally, construction of ar ngq y W,n_�c[tur which �y5*ich expectedto provide d iti € l on-site parking other buildings growth =T� F§ i:;:A�::e !�-g8_d`ing Grange 41 zoning from, isidenbal Professional Office. ( - - ) and Single Family E id nt[ l (1 �) to 'I l' : rqr e Development provides rile flexibility, for applicants to designtheir own development'criteria, FTIJ5 mlud setbacks, heights, lot cOverage and other land use issues. The proposed building, in tl m' ane . Developmen, t are eery€r i%r to existing structures on the site. The i tl��i vl c Addqien i 4 - tai y structure m, pose 1 & 7 basic materials. They include fawn (r.oven) colored r . 'fawnbrown) cultured stonerr; Lee -Ivory colored textured finish metal panels, sea -green rJored.smooth finish metaipanels; sea green c I r corrugated metal panels; Cham.paign-.gold colored .,Y oo� i:Yrrsh metal panv�,and So.lex green colored (subtle green tint; low -e glasswith m ttni g ,�o ndrefl. glees. The ground, 'level uric have fawn `bro nj colored stucco wallswith fawn colored Stone 4= me,e, c.w, rlt ll near key entrains and Wong the lower eight feet of the exterior wall. Also on the g ouno f loo f;.,re new main 'Witry canopy will be clad in cha pin -gold smooth1inish metal paneis.. The :�econd.and tl €r d 3levels, thestela towers, d elevator towers be cladinlee-ivory coloredtextured ?ldy3€ I✓d e44parapet, &!1 be -.[ad 4n sea -green 4{d6^d4&pE[e, meta' 3 i ta [ oano.:ls fly, sur, -shades and other eater or rn tai elements, :including a corrugated metal mechan1c.ai 'rve o.ade d on ffie roof, 4111 also ! painted sea -green to match the sea -green ml panels. e Neve Lodi Memorial Central plant Building i -story Wucture cornposedof three, basic Materials, Ine are. fawn (; u n) colored stucco. sea -green colored smooth finish metal panels, and sea r =C it ie f d , F Tei ?a nelsil E a.. i t l ' 1 wive ha Rl rl ( f ; C�1 3rwall l ti tle ? r to door painted it.E; �t h the t�r� �c�. :`he gr nd leve; will i h � f� � 1 1 et <c k x n, a, coo l g tower sGr enenclosure with corrugated ted met panels over 1 supporting frame @gid m t l gated r exit stair. beth p int -gr n, The upper level � ' the building will be t r tl se a-gre.en co,lo°r d smooth fl sh metal panels and metal louvers also painted sea -green. Lastly, se ,:rneen painted corrugate Testa, fnech nical screen will be located on the roof. E anr caping plea is on i t t with the existing landscaper The las e plan n thesouthern part tt o ;rpus Wong .,C rdin i tree i provided t further separate residences t the south from the t �sOal ..4 he -gent sof der nin gall on C Crain l Street maintains a -foot t .k. rth r ands aping ss provided throl9hout the: campus to enhance its appearance, ry nsid r.;*th prt t g t r fort nti l actions, . NagWiv cla flo 6-03 for the General Asir Amendment and change in Zoning f r the Gini Proi t (expansion of auto-reJeated bas in , Approve. : eg 'ti Declaration 06- for the General Plan Amendment and h ng . in € ing l for the Lodi. einorl Hospital Project (n ti°t wing .addition and levier Y l t s Arnend the G n ray Plan designation fog' i X33 and 1325 South Central Avenin from EaMside 'Rei nti l to: General mr rcl i (Gini P€ ct) and for 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, t t. 1; and 1116 W. Gardinai Street fr ini Low Density Residential to Office Loi MemorW Hospital proj t), Stata,.Iaw allows omyfour General Plea Amendments a year. Since these two proje..cts. are similar rl n9sture andjnvoive.. r sit to char r' i Plan i �� ti r�� t � r� €� in � tern qtr; a i ne.ral.-i l n Amendment, There is no restrictionlig State hurt as to the n rn r of �r t h rr €t � f or map in a single Gene€ i Pian. Amendm nt, f zoin �. 3 and1325 C��tr i Ave, from '1 , Single Family Residential Eastside to -. Commercial 41, Rezone975, 91W 103ISouth Fairmont; _1200- W, Viae Street; 1201, 1 , 1,133, 1127, 1121, a € i 1 5 W Gard€nab Steeet from -C-) Resid e € tiakC Me r x Profession E Office and -; sidence District to (PU, Planr` e Development and approve Development Plea. I ' PACT: ./ U':t N/A Atch c€ntt Cit rtr At acl,m e44�:c )I: missi t, `,ta Re-pota5 INI PROJECT Location Map 1 V7 . : -P.,.'' TE# tfll ;6-4 # wry ) _ y \ § #a$ # $ . 2DAl;,�— &� Poj K . � . @ > mm� | ƒ � wJ;K ¥ � & 2 2 Existing General Plan Designations 1415 O 1438 1439 t4 1 142 l ddd q 1445 NS 4 v 1460 Elgin Ave, , 1501 1808 Elgin Ave. H , Y q� 1E12 ��yy R hi 1606 1604 1908 y� 1511 1513 1512 1511_ r 9LDR 5 1 8 ,5,7 �, 1518 �S "' Valley gAve. R 15ID 1519 15� }Q yy�� gg�� 1 9 µ 1521 -R" r' 105 1521 O 1S2i 1623 �i F8 J Beechwood Ct.1511 1921 1SA 1529 ,530 iSiB 1536 1533 d} 1536 17 w r'i 1511 1512n 1542 15m 1543 D� 1 1w1 BarringtDn Wy. Existing Zoning Ordinance Designations SITE P � 4�-a144R LN AP Pivject Area mm : II 1 I I � I , L_____ -_ ___ I I .... Lj Oft PIRo1Fjr , ego I r r 1j Aam, ------------ _ � I �____.�_��__���-moi• A --��-�-_._- � -__ ^� �_�,.� * 5 o-, , I I I i II 11 I I j� II , I li II „ J-J'a�d 14 rR� I� _ I i y•- , I , ego I r r 1j Aam, ------------ _ � I �____.�_��__���-moi• A --��-�-_._- � -__ ^� �_�,.� * 5 o-, , I I I i I I , dR y y,J -____---____' 11• imp iW.4m.w ■ , , 1, 7 ! ,fir I E------�, �--�•--- i!i ; +}'--�.�i-------1 J of FwICF —rlClf— T R f-- -----i Y i : 'aa Iv m a J a6ik 8�! 1' i s ; i I�� , P. f Y i , 1• /a A.? pa of op r + Au I , ego I r r 1j Aam, ------------ _ � I �____.�_��__���-moi• A --��-�-_._- � -__ ^� �_�,.� * 5 o-, , I I I i Site Plan | (y � 3& . &) � a � } � k South Elevation Building A North Elevation Building A �#OFiTN E�Wki East and West Elevations Building A WT E L E vAThON 1 ti i r L •J l 15• V no 9 L r•. rr 6;m .. _ rs_• EFZE - 7,�171��YW� 1�F1� 77 R77f7 T TTr - WT E L E vAThON _�. IRL..y 1 *BUB.. �- � Y' •1 • 1•,'Ih • ,�j l� 11 "Lk r7 �ti •• • { .: �'VLl �l5 •7Y '.�; rt 'Yr r'.•Yr ..y� . •ii —J•. ..+•. +iYiiiYYYiiLjY■Ti�" 1 cut 91 ,. Q{ � �}�,�r7'� r vr77��{�-1,:� ■ % .1. =1` j,�•� yti=rrJ Fri f}l�'15LVL 41 !C..ti1`..�; ti� T'1Y�_� y titi`=�iilir'r'��: '�'•+� _�- � i ti-• •.. .. ~. _ r•..y �1. 1. �.. r�v •. �■ ti i. ti 11 � .s � Y . 1 :r..ti.ti r.ti , vti:�rL 7■ ■. Oki • 1. LI .�. .. 1 S 1 . - • 1 �.. �rr1 . 11 5. .. fL �L1��1 �� South and North Elevations Building B wom mi�% SJTH ELZ%IIO J immm Prl PV&firlrj Building A Floor Plan if•6U-WRAW � IIMYiF HFF�1'� �t =r�a►w� W Building B Floor Plan INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 60-03 to] Kenneth Gini Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Request Applicant: Mr. Kenneth J. Gini 1325 S. Central Ave. Lodi, CA 95240 PREPARED BY: CITY OF LODI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P. O. BOX 3006 LODI, CA 95241 October 2006 NOTICE r OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE 4..: ; ,... DECLARATION Notice is herby given that The City of Lodi, Community Development Department, has c(oiri pfeted an in'itia' study and proposed negative declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for'the project described below. The initial study prepared by the City was undertaken for the purpose of determining whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of the initial study, Community Development Department staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore has prepared a proposed Negative Declaration. The initial study reflects the independent judgment of the City. File Number: 06-03 Project Title: Kenneth Gini Rezoning and General Plan A mecdment Reque_zt Project Description: The project site is located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin. The properties are located at 1323, 1325 and 1333 South Central Avenue. (APN 047-270-10), (APN 047-270-11) and (APN 047-10). The applicant is requesting a change in the General Plan (G.P.) and Zoning designation of the three properties from residential to commercial. The G.P. designation change requested is from ER, eastside residential to GC, general commercial. The zoning change requested is from RE -1, residential eastside single-family to C-2, general commercial. The applicant owns a total of 4 parcels adjacent at the corner of Central Ave, and Kettleman Lane. Two of the properties front on Kettleman lane and have a commercial zoning. One of these properties contains a single family house and one contains a small commercial building. The two subject properties that front on Central Ave. are zoned residential and contain a single-family residence and a duplex. The third property (1333 S. Central) included in this request is owned by another party and currently is used as a driveway serving several adjacent properties. Mr. Gini would like to have the 3 Central Ave. properties rezoned commercial so that he can incorporate them with his Kettleman Lane commercial properties to form a single larger commercial property. This will permit the property to be developed with a commercial building and allow sufficient room for parking and landscaping. Copies of the Initial Study and the proposed Negative Declaration are on file and available for review at the following locations: 1) Lodi City Hall, Community Development Department located at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240; 2) Lodi Public Library, 201 West Locust Street, Lodi, CA 95240; and 3)City of Lodi website at www.lodi.gov. The City will receive comment on the Initial Study and proposed Negative declaration for a 30 -day period, commencing on Tuesday, October 17`h, 2006 through Wednesday, November 11, 2006. Any person wishing to comment on the Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration must submit such comments in writing to the City of Lodi at the following address: Randy Hatch, Director of Community Development Community Development Department City of Lodi P. 0. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 The City will provide additional public notices when the public hearings have been scheduled to consider approval of the Negative Declaration. Randy Hatch, Director of Community Development October 17, 2006. NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice is herby given that The City of Lodi, Community Development Department, has completed an initial study and proposed negative declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the project described below. The initial study prepared by the City was undertaken for the purpose of determining whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of the initial study,. Community Development Department staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore has prepared a proposed Negative Declaration. The initial study reflects the independent judgment of the City. File Number: 06-03 Project Title: Kenneth Gini Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Request Project Description: The project site is located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin. The properties are located at 1323, 1325 and 1333 South Central Avenue. (APN 047-270-10), (APN 047-270-11) and (APN 047-10). The applicant is requesting a change in the General Plan (G.P.) and Zoning designation of the three properties from residential to commercial. The G.P. designation change requested is from ER, eastside residential to GC, general commercial. The zoning change requested is from RE -1, residential eastside single-family to C-2, general commercial. The applicant owns a total of 4 parcels adjacent at the corner of Central Ave. and Kettleman Lane. Two of the properties front on Kettleman lane and have a commercial zoning. One of these properties contains a single family house and one contains a small commercial building. The two subject properties that front on qqntral Ave. are zoned residential and contain a single-family residence and a duplex. The third property (133 S. Central) included in this request is owned by another party and currently is used as a driveway serving several adjacent properties. Mr. Gini would like to have the 3 Central Ave. properties rezoned commercial so that he can incorporate them with his Kettleman Lane commercial properties to form a single larger commercial property. This will permit the property to be developed with a commercial building and allow sufficient room for parking and landscaping. Copies of the Initial Study and the proposed Negative Declaration are on file and available for review at the following locations: 1) Lodi City Hall, Community Development Department located at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240; 2) Lodi Public Library, 201 West Locust Street, Lodi, CA 95240; and 3)City of Lodi website at www.lodi.;gov. The City will receive comment on the Initial Study and proposed Negative declaration for a 30 -day period, commencing on Tuesday, October 17`x', 2006 through Wednesday, November 11, 2006. Any person wishing to comment on the Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration must submit such comments in writing to the City of Lodi at the following address: Randy Hatch, Director of Community Development Community Development Department City of Lodi P. O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 The City will provide additional public notices when the public hearings have been scheduled to consider approval of the Negative Declaration. Randy Hatch, Director of Community Development October 17, 2006. City of Lodi Proposed Negative Declaration Prepared pursuant to City of Lodi Environmental Guidelines, §§ 1.7 (c), 5.5 File Number: 06-03 Project Title: Kenneth Gini Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Request Project Description: The applicant is requesting a change in the General Plan (G.P.) and Zoning designation of the three properties from residential to commercial. The G.P. designation change requested is from ER, eastside residential to GC, general commercial. The zoning change requested is from RE -1, residential eastside single-family to C-2, general commercial. The applicant owns a total of 4 parcels adjacent at the corner of Central Ave. and Kettleman Lane. Two of the properties front on Kettleman lane and have a commercial zoning. One of these properties contains a single family house and one contains a small commercial building. The two subject properties that front on Central. Ave. are zoned residential and contain a single- family residence and a duplex. The third property (1333 S. Central) included in this request is owned by another party and currently is used as a driveway serving several adjacent properties. Mr. Gini would like to have the 3 Central Ave. properties rezoned commercial so that he can incorporate them with his Kettleman Lane commercial properties to form a single larger commercial property. This will permit the property to be developed with a commercial building and allow sufficient room for parking and landscaping. Project Location: The subject properties are located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin. The properties are located at 1323, 1325 and 1333 South Central Avenue. (APN 047-270-10), (APN 047-270-11) and (APN 047-10). Name of Project Proponent/Applicant: Mr. Kenneth J. Gini A copy of the Initial Study ("Environmental Information Form" and "Environment Checklist") documenting the reasons to support the adoption of a Negative Declaration is available at the City of Lodi Community Development Department. Mitigation measures are O are not 0 included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects on the environment. The public review on the proposed Negative Declaration will end at 5:00 p.m. on November 11, 2006. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed negative declaration and the proposed project in Decemberl3, 2006. Director of Community Development ate INITIAL STUDY/NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 60-03 FOR Kenneth Gini Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Request Applicant: Mr. Kenneth J. Gini 1325 S. Central Ave. Lodi, CA 95240 PREPARED BY: CITY OF LODI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P. O. BOX 3006 LODI, CA 95241 October 2006 CERTIFICATE OF FEE EXEMPTION This is to attest that the City of Lodi, acting as the lead agency, has determined that the request by Mr. Kenneth Gini to Rezone and General Plan Amendment involves no potential for adverse effect on wildlife, and is therefore exempt under Fish & Game Section 711.4(c). PROJECT TITLE: Kenneth Gini Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Request PROJECT PROPONENT: Mr. Kenneth J. Gini 1325 S. Central Ave. Lodi, CA 95240 PROJECT DESCRIPTION: The project site is located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin. The properties are located at 1323, 1325 and 1333 South Central Avenue. (APN 047- 270-10), (APN 047-270-11) and (APN 047-10). The applicant is requesting a change in the General Plan (G.P.) and Zoning designation of the three properties from residential to commercial. The G.P. designation change- requested is from ER, eastside residential to GC, general commercial. The zoning change requested is from RE -1, residential eastside single- family to C-2, general commercial. The applicant owns a total of 4 parcels adjacent at the corner of Central Ave. and Kettleman Lane. Two of the properties front on Kettleman lane and have a commercial zoning. One of these properties contains a single family house and one contains a small commercial building. The two subject properties that front on Central Ave. are zoned residential and contain a single-family residence and a duplex. The third property (1333 S. Central) included in this request is owned by another party and currently is used as a driveway serving several adjacent properties. Mr. Gini would like to have the 3 Central Ave. properties rezoned commercial so that he can incorporate them with his Kettleman Lane commercial properties to form a single larger commercial property. This will permit the property to be developed with a commercial building and allow sufficient room for parking and landscaping. DECLARATION: The Community Development Department prepared an initial study to evaluate the potential for adverse environmental impacts. The initial study includes information rebutting the presumption of adverse effect on fish and wildlife or the habitat upon which the wildlife depends. Based on this initial study, Negative Declaration 06-03 was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Further, the City of Lodi Planning Commission and City council reviewed and approved the information as adequate environmental documentation for the project. Rafe y Hatch Director of Community Development Table of Contents SECTION PAGE PROJECT DESCRIPTION......................................................................... 1 LOCATION MAP.................................................................................... 3 SITEMAP.............................................................................................4 DETERMINATION................................................................................ . 5 INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM...............................6 1. 4. 61, Project Title: Kenneth Gini Rezoning and General Plan Amendment Request Lead Agency Name City of Lodi and Address: Department of Community Development 221 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 95240 Contact Person and Mr. Peter Pirnejad, Planning Manager Telephone Number: 209-333-6711 Project Location: The subject properties are located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin. The properties are located at 1323, 1325 and 1333 South Central Avenue. (APN 047-270-10), (APN 047- 270-11) and (APN 047-10). See location map. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Mr. Kenneth J. Gini 1325 S. Central Ave. Lodi, CA 95240 6. General Plan Designation and Zoning: The City of Lodi General Plan land use designation of the project site is ER, Eastside Residential. The zoning is RE -1, residential eastside-single family. Description of Project: The applicant is requesting a change in the General Plan and Zoning designation of the three properties from residential to commercial. The G.P. designation change requested is from ER, eastside residential to GC, general commercial. The zoning change requested is from RE -1, residential eastside single-family to C-2, general commercial. The applicant owns a total of 4 parcels adjacent at the corner of Central Ave. and Kettleman Lane. Two of the properties front on Kettleman lane and have a commercial zoning. One of these properties contains a single family house and one contains a small commercial building. The two subject properties that front on Central Ave. are zoned residential and contain a single-family residence and a duplex. The third property (1333 S. Central) included in this request is owned by another party and currently is used as a driveway serving several adjacent properties. Mr. Gini would like to have the 3 Central Ave. properties rezoned commercial so that he can incorporate them with his Kettleman Lane commercial properties to form a single larger commercial property. This JdCommunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) S will permit the property to be developed with a commercial building and allow sufficient room for parking and landscaping. The following environmental topics are addressed in this IS: A. Land Use, Agriculture and Planning Policy B. Traffic and Circulation C. Air Quality D. Noise E. Cultural and Paleontological Resources F. Geology, Soils and Seismicity G. Hydrology and Water Quality H. Biological Resources I. Hazards and Hazardous Materials J. Utilities K. Public Services L. Visual Resources M. Energy Significant Impacts Under CEQA, a significant impact on the environment is defined as: a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change in any of the physical conditions within the area affected by the project including land, air, water, minerals, flora, fauna, ambient noise and objects of historic or aesthetic significance. Implementation of the proposed project has no significantly adverse environmental impacts in the areas listed below. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) Location Map 1 �� 11 X111 Lill1.� Pmmmmm7. MEMEWSM, Location Map 1. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 13MOrt AlVa uofrvm SITE PLAN NAP I I I ' I 1 I I I 1 I I � I I � ..J ` ' 'lfAn1dam+1R1lYIYIOI PILUM 1 I I I I 1 1 I l 1 PMect Arrm........" I i '----- t---, .............� I I it I I� AR NNaan AReA.w.� I 1an W I r; II Aw 1 I II 1 1 1 1 1 1 !r J 1 M ! I If l `T ------ 1 I I I � I i I I h ilN M7 -0F77 ; i ; I I , ' k I , 1 I I I j�r I 1 I II l `T ------ 1 I I I � I i I I h ilN M7 -0F77 ; i ; I I , ' k I , 1 SITE PLAN MAP 2. JACommunity Develop=nt\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\ND 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) L1 t i � ..J ` ' 'lfAn1dam+1R1lYIYIOI PILUM w AAV I l 1 1! Y � 11 •------r1� I I I� it I I� I r; II i f 1 I II "-Li-- r ji� 1— Now 16 .....� 1� SITE PLAN MAP 2. JACommunity Develop=nt\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\ND 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. O Aesthetics O Agricultural Resources O Air Quality O Biological Resources O Cultural Resources O Geology/Soils O Hazards & Hazardous Materials O Hydrology/Water Quality O Land Use/Planning O Mineral Resources O Noise O Population/Housing O Public Services O Recreation O Transportation/Traffic O Utilities/Service Systems O Mandatory Findings of Significance Determination. On the basis of this initial evaluation: ❑x I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. O I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. O I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. O I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. O I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Printed Name JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) Date For Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑X b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not ❑X limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which ❑ ❑ ❑X ❑ would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The proposed project would not have adverse impact on the scenic vista. The area is already developed with a variety of urban structures structures. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? The proposed project would not damage any scenic resources, as the proposed project is not located within the vicinity of a state scenic highway and the site is developed with minimal scenic value. There would be no impact. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? The proposed project would not have an adverse effect on the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Future development will replace residential structures with commercial buildings. Any new project will be reviewed by the City's Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC). SPARC will address issues such as the appearance of the buildings, landscaping, fencing etc. to assure that the project is aesthetically appropriate for the neighborhood. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? The proposed project would have less than significant impact since lighting is subject to SPARC review and low level or shielded lightings for building and parking lot lighting will be required to assure that they will not shine on adjacent residential properties.. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 9 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, ❑ ❑ ❑X due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance(Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non-agricultural use? The current project site is not zoned for agricultural purposes and is currently developed with residential uses. The area is urbanized and not in agricultural use. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? The subject property is not zoned for agricultural use, nor is it under a Williamson Act contract. Therefore, no impact would occur as a result of the proposed project. c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? See checklist Items II a. and II b. above. The project site is not in agricultural land, nor is it located immediately adjacent to active agricultural land. Furthermore, the project site is surrounded by existing urban structures. Therefore, the proposed project would not involve changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to a non-agricultural use and no impact would result. ]dCmmnanity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 10 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable ❑ air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially ❑ to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any ❑ criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? *11 *11 ❑X d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ❑ ❑ ❑R ❑ concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number ❑ ❑ ❑X ❑ of people? a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The City of Lodi is within the jurisdiction of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD), which regulates air quality in the San Joaquin Valley. The SJVAPCD has prepared and implements specific plans to meet the applicable laws, regulations and programs, including the 1991 Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP). In addition, the SJVAPCD has developed the Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts (Guide) to help lead agencies in the evaluating the significance of air quality impacts. In formulating its compliance strategies, the SJVAPCD relies on planned land uses established by local general plans. When a project proposes to change planned uses assumed in an adopted plan by requesting a general plan amendment, the project may depart from the assumption used to formulate the plans of the SJVAPCD in such way that cumulative results of incremental change may hamper or prevent the SJVAPCD from achieving its goals. Land use patterns influence transportation needs, and motor vehicles are the primary source of air pollution. As stated in the Guide, projects proposed in jurisdictions with general plans that are consistent with the SJVAPCD's AQAP and projects that conform to those general plans would not create significant cumulative air quality impacts. The rezoning request will change the zoning from residential to commercial. This will permit the properties to be developed with commercial uses. The three subject properties only total ]dCmmnunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 11 18,300 square feet in size. Even when added to the applicant's two other properties, the total is less then an acre. Any commercial use of the property will be relatively small in size and will not generate a significant amount of air pollutants. Vehicular traffic entering or exiting the property would be the most likely source of additional air emissions. Based on a 10,000 square foot auto care facility, the property would generate less than 350 trips per day. This would be less than 1 % of the existing traffic volume on Kettleman Lane. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the applicable clean air plan. No impacts. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? The City of Lodi is within the jurisdiction of the SJVAPCD, which regulates air quality in the San Joaquin Valley. The EPA designated the entire San Joaquin Valley as non -attainment for two pollutants: ozone and particle matter. More recently, on April 24, 2004, the EPA reclassified the San Joaquin Valley ozone non -attainment area from its previous severe status to "extreme" at the request of the San Joaquin Air Pollution Control District Board. On December 17, 2004, EPA took action to designate attainment and non -attainment areas under the more protective national air quality standards for fine particles or PM2.5. Levels of PMio in the San Joaquin Valley currently exceed California Clean Air Act standards; therefore, the area is considered a non -attainment area for this pollutant relative to the State standards. PM10 levels monitored at the Stockton -Hazelton Street ambient air quality monitoring station, the closest monitoring station with PMio data, exceeded the State's standard at three times per year in 2003 and 2004. The standard was exceeded ten times in 2002. No exceedances of the State or federal CO standards have been recorded at any of the region's monitoring stations in the last three years. The San Joaquin Valley is currently considered a maintenance area for State and federal CO standards. The District adopted an Ozone Attainment Demonstration Plan (2004) and a PMio Attainment Demonstration Plan (2003). In addition, to meet California Clean Air Act requirements, the District adopted the California Clean Air Act Triennial Progress Report and Plan Revision 1997-1999, adopted in 2001 to address the California ozone standard. A broad range of actions to improve air quality are set forth in the adopted plans to reduce CO, 03 precursor emissions, and particulate matter. Generally, the State standards for these pollutants are more stringent than the national standards. Each district plan is to achieve a 5 percent annual reduction average 3 consecutive 3 -year periods, in district -wide emissions of each nonattainment pollutant or its precursors. Exceedances of air quality standards occur primarily during meteorological conditions conducive to high pollution levels, such as cold, windless winter nights or hot, sunny summer afternoons. The City will require the applicant to comply with dust and particulate reduction measures during construction or grading on the site. These standards (Regulation VIII, Fugitive PM 10 Prohibitions) are rules adopted by the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (District) and are designed to reduce air quality impacts during construction projects. They include various measures to reduce PM10 by utilizing best practices methods during the construction process. The City will require the applicant to adhere to these rules; therefore, less than significant impact. ]dCmmnunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 12 c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non -attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? See discussion under Check List Item III.a. and IIIb. above. For any project that does not individually have operational air quality impacts, the determination of a significant cumulative impact should be based on the evaluation of the project's consistency with the general plan and the general plan with regional air quality plan. Although the project will involve a General Plan change from residential to commercial, the project size is less than one acre and no significant air quality issues willresult. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The SJVAPCD defines sensitive receptors as facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals, schools, convalescent facilities, and residential areas are examples of sensitive receptors. However, due to the small size of the proposed project and the estimated amount of daily vehicle trips, it qualifies for what is known as a Small Project Analysis Level. No quantification of ozone precursor emissions is needed for such projects. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The rezoning project will not produce objectionable odors as identified by SJVAPCD. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ❑ ❑ ❑X through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat ❑X or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? ]dCmmnanity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 13 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected ❑X wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native ❑X resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ❑ ❑ ❑X biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ❑X Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The proposed project will not have adverse effect to the environment, nor will it affect any natural habitat. There are already structures built on the proposed site. Thus, rezoning it will not have an adverse environmental effect on any natural lands. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? According to San Joaquin county Multi -Species habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan, the subject property does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. No impact would result. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc) Through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? According to San Joaquin county Multi -Species habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan, the subject property does not contain any protected wetlands, vernal pools or waters regulated by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. No impact would result. ]dCmmnunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 14 d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) fi The subject properties are fully developed and surrounded by urbanized areas. Thus, no impact would occur. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The City of Lodi General Plan (Conservation Element) includes goals and policies intended to protect sensitive native vegetation and wildlife habitats. Goals E, Policy 2 in the General Plan Conservation element refers to the City of Lodi's regulation of "heritage tree" removal. The proposed project would not result in the removal of any heritage trees. Thus, no impact would result. Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? The SJCMSHCP was developed to minimize and mitigate impacts to plant and wildlife resulting from the loss of open space projected to occur in San Joaquin County between 2001 and 2051. The City of Lodi adopted the SJCMSHCP in 2001, and projects under the jurisdiction of the City can seek coverage under the plan. The proposed project would not conflict with the provisions adopted by the City since the structures are already in existence. Thus, no impact would result Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X of a historical resource as defined in ' 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 of an archaeological resource pursuant to ' 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 outside of formal cemeteries? ]dCmmnanity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 15 a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? This rezoning request does not posses significance necessary to be eligible for the California Register of Historical resources (CRHR) and the properties are currently developed with structures. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? As in check list above, this request for zoning will not change archaeological resources of the area. If during construction any archaeological objects are uncovered, work will be halted until a qualified expert can evaluate the objects and recommend mitigation measures. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No paleontological resource were previously recorded or observed on the subject property. If during construction any paleontological resources are uncovered, work will be halted until a qualified expert can examine the site and recommend mitigation measures. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries, were previously recorded or observed on the project site. If during construction, human remains are discovered, appropriate steps will be take to rebury the remains in an appropriate facility. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ X❑ ]dCmnnanity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 16 iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact ❑ ❑ X❑ ❑ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ p b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ p ❑ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1- ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42; ii)Strong seismic ground shaking; iii)Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction; iv)Landslides? I. According to the City of Lodi's General Plan, no earthquake faults underlie the City of Lodi. However, according to geographical survey prepared by Klienfelder in January 20061, the nearest Seismic source Type A fault is mapped greater than 9.32 miles from the project site and the nearest Seismic Source Type B fault it mapped greater than 6.21 miles from the project site. Therefore, the potential for fault rupture at the sites is negligible, and no portions of the sites are located within an Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zone. The closest known active faults to the project sites is the Clayton -Marsh Creek -Greenville fault, located approximately 36 miles to the southwest. The closest fault considered potentially capable of surface fault rupture is Segment 7 of the Great Valley fault located about 26 miles to the southwest of the project site. II. Ground shaking is a general term referring to all aspects of motion of the earth's surface resulting from an earthquake, and is normally the major cause of damage in seismic events. As with much of California, the City of Lodi is subject to earthquake damage. No faults are 1 . Geotechnical Services Report. ]dCmmnanity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 17 known to cross the GP area; however, ground shaking from an earthquake outside of the GP area may cause damage to structures. III. Liquefaction is the temporary transformation of loose, saturated granular sediments from a solid state to a liquefied state as a result of seismic ground shaking. In the process the soil undergoes a temporary loss of strength, which commonly causes ground displacement or ground failure to occur. Since saturated soils are a necessary condition for liquefaction, soil layers in areas where the groundwater table is near the surface have higher liquefaction potential than those in which the water table is located at greater depths. Based on the soil boring results, the project site would be suitable for implementation of the proposed project given its incorporation of specific project design and construction The potential for an earthquake with the capability of promoting liquefaction is a possibility during the design life of the project. However, since the subgrade soils encountered during soil boring are generally medium dense silts, sands and clays and groundwater is about 40 feet below the site grade, the potential for liquefaction is considered to be low. IV. The subject property, as well as the area surrounding the project site, is relatively flat. Furthermore, the project site is surrounded predominately by existing urban development. Due to the developed nature and topographic features of the site and surrounding area, the potential for landslides is considered remote. No impact would result from the implementation of the proposed project. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The proposed project merely seeks rezoning so as to permit the premises to be used for general commercial purposes. However, there is a possibility that any future construction that would require grading, excavation and trenching could possibly result in less than significant top soil erosion. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? Based on Checklist Item V a.III and VI a.IV, the project site is stable and suitable for the proposed project. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Expansive clay -rich swell when wet and shrink when dry, which can cause substantial damage to foundations, concrete slabs and pavement sections. Since there is already existing structures on the premises, the subject properties do not contain expansive soils. Thus, there would not be an impact. ]dCmmnunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 18 e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The proposed project would be served by the City of Lodi wastewater system. Therefore, there would be no related impact to septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑X environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ❑ ❑ ❑X environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? ]dCmnnanity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 19 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The proposed rezoning project would not result in the routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials. City of Lodi's General Plan (EIR) identifies the San Joaquin county Office of Emergency Services the responsible party for clean up. Though the City of Lodi participates in the identification and cleanup of some of the City's hazards, and the City Fire Department's Hazardous Materials Emergency Plan outlines procedures for handling hazardous material spills, the project would not be used as a disposal center. If, as a part of a future commercial business, hazardous waste is routinely generated, the business will be required to comply with all local and State requirements for the safe disposal of any hazardous waste. b) Create a significant hazard to thepublic or the environment through reasonablyforeseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? At present, it is not anticipated that the proposed project would use and/or contain hazardous materials that would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the release of hazardous materials. Any future use of the subject property will have to be consistent with the Uniform Building Code and is subject to zoning regulations. The City Fire Department and County agencies are trained to handle hazardous material incidents. Any hazardous material accident will be dealt with appropriately. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Though the subject property is located within one-quarter mile of an existing school, it is expected that future use would not emit hazardous emissions nor handle hazardous or acutely hazardous material. As stated in Check List VII c., above, future use will conform to local and State requirements for the use and storage of hazardous materials. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? According to the State Department of Toxic Substances Control's EnviroStor database and the State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database, the subject property is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites. As a result the proposed project would not create a JdCommunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 20 significant hazard to the public or the environment. There would be no impact associated with the project. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? fi g) The project site is not located within an airport land use plan, nor within two miles of a public airport. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazardous for people residing or working in the project area. There would be no impact. For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The project site is not located within the vicinity of an active private airstrip. There would be no impact. Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The City of Lodi's Emergency Plan is based on San Joaquin County's Emergency Plan. The City and County Plans represent a comprehensive disaster preparedness program for the area. The proposed project would not impair implementation of, nor physically interfere with the City or County's adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impact would result. h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? The project is located in a developed urban area and is not located adjacent to natural areas that would be subject to wildland fires. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the proj ect: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X requirements? ]dCmmnanity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 21 c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Currently, the City of Lodi draws fresh water from ground sources. Surface water is not currently used for human consumption in Lodi, but the City recently secured a long-term contract (40 years) for approximately 6,000 acre-feet of water per year from the Mokelumne River for municipal use. The City's water supply primarily comes from groundwater via 26 JdCommunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 22 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Currently, the City of Lodi draws fresh water from ground sources. Surface water is not currently used for human consumption in Lodi, but the City recently secured a long-term contract (40 years) for approximately 6,000 acre-feet of water per year from the Mokelumne River for municipal use. The City's water supply primarily comes from groundwater via 26 JdCommunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 22 municipal wells. Information related to municipal water use and the Water Supply Assessment is located in Section IV.J, Utilities. Due to the nature and location of the proposed project, the impacts associated with water quality standards and discharge would not be significant. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ofpre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? Based on the limited size of the project, water consumption will not be significantly different from existing uses. c) Substantially alter the existing drainagepattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? The subject properties are connected to the City storm drain system. All runoff will flow into the City's system. Depending on the nature of the future development, an onsite sand and oil trap maybe required to filter onsite runoff. There would be no impact. d) Substantially alter the existing drainagepattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? The proposed project does not contain a stream or a river, nor is it located in proximity to a stream or river. The proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, nor would it substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site. The existing storm drainage in the area is adequate to handle the runoff from the project. There would be no impact. e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Due to the nature and size of the project, it will not create or contribute runoff water that will significantly impact the existing storm drain system. The existing system will have the capacity to accommodate development of the site. Thus, a less than significant impact would result. J) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? The quality of surface water and groundwater in the vicinity of the project site is affected by past and current land uses at the site and within the watershed and the composition of geologic materials in the vicinity. Water quality in surface and groundwater bodies is regulated by the California Department of Water Resources (DWR) and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB), which are charged with maintaining water quality and reducing potential impacts to water quality within the region. In addition, as discussed in Checklist Item VIII.a., the project is limited in scope. Thus, it would result in no impact. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 23 g) Place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? According to the most recent FEMA mapping, the project site is not located within the 100 -year flood hazard zone, and therefore, placement of housing or other structures in a flood hazard zone would not occur under the proposed project. In addition, due to the location of the proposed project, the impacts associated with seiches, tsunami, and extreme high tides or sea level change would be considered low. Thus, no impact would occur. h) Place within a 100 year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? The project is not located with in a 100 year flood hazard zone.. No impact would result. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? The project site is not located within the vicinity of a levee, dam, or a dam inundation area. As such, no impact would result. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? A seiche is the tide -like rise and drop of water in a closed body of water caused by earthquake - induced seismic shaking or strong winds. A tsunami is a series of large waves generated by a strong offshore earthquake or volcanic eruption. Given the substantial distance of the site from San Francisco Bay or the Pacific Ocean, seiche and tsunami waves would not be a threat to the site. The proposed project site is flat and does not have any steep slopes or hillsides that would be susceptible to mudflows or landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ❑X 71 regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ❑ ❑ ❑X natural community conservation plan? JdCommunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 24 a) Physically divide an established community? The project is adjacent to existing commercial development and will be compatible with neighboring residential properties. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The proposed project requires a General Plan amendment. However, given the existing commercial uses in the area the proposed change is not unreasonable and would be consistent with adjacent uses. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The City of Lodi adopted the SJCMSHCP in 2001. The conservation plan was developed to minimize and mitigate impacts to plant and wildlife habitat resulting from the loss of open space. Since the proposed project is in urbanized area, it will not have an effect on the City of Lodi habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Thus, no impact will occur. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? According to the City's General Plan, the subject property and surrounding area are not known to contain regionally and/or state valued mineral resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in an impact to mineral resources. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The subject property has not been historically used for mineral extraction. In addition, the City's General Plan does not identify the project site as a locally important mineral resource recovery site. There would be no impact. JdCommunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 25 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in 13 0 excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 13 13 Q ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise 13 13 0 levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient 13 13 0 13 noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 13 0 where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 13 0 would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a) Exposure ofpersons to or generation ofnoise levels in excess ofstandards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? It is not anticipated that the proposed project would include features that would result in the significant increase in noise levels. The City's General Plan Noise Element outlines many goals and policies regarding land use and associated noise standards. Although the proposed project could result in an incremental increase in noise, it would not exceed the 70 dB standard, nor would it be located near an identified sensitive receptor outlined in General Plan. In addition, the project will require compliance with the City of Lodi's noise regulations. When it is determined what type of commercial development will occur on the property, appropriate design measures will be incorporated into the project. This could include additional setbacks, solid screen fencing or reorientation of the buildings to face away from existing residences. The design measures would be implemented via the required Site Plan and Architectural Review of the project. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 26 b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Ground borne vibrations occur when a vibration source causes soil particles to move or vibrate. Sources of ground borne vibrations include natural events (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides, etc.) and human created events (explosions, operation of heavy machinery and heavy trucks, etc.). The proposed project would not involve any operations that would generate excessive ground borne vibrations or ground borne noise levels. Additionally, the area is already exposed to traffic related ground borne vibration from passing trucks and vehicles. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The project could result in an increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site when the property is developed with commercial uses. Currently the properties contain residences. Any commercial use will be required to comply with the City's Noise regulations. It is anticipated that the future use of the property will be commercial uses that will operate during daytime hours and be closed at night. During daytime hours, the area currently has a fairly high ambient noise level, primarily a result of passing vehicular traffic, particularly from Kettleman Lane. It is not anticipated that the proposed project will significantly add to the ambient noise level. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? There will be a temporary increase in noise levels during the construction phase of the project. The noise will be temporary in nature and will probably be over in six months or less. Construction activities will be required to comply with the City's Noise Ordinance which limits hours of construction and levels of noise permitted. There would be no significant impact. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. j9 For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? There are no active private airstrips within the City of Lodi. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 27 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ ❑X necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the ❑X construction of replacement housing elsewhere? a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure) ? The proposed project would not include the construction of residential units, nor require the extension of roads or other infrastructure that could directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth. No impact would result. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The proposed project seeks to rezone two residential properties into commercial zones. If developed with commercial uses, the existing residences will be removed. The removal of two residential units will not significantly impact the City's housing stock. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Refer to discussion in XII b. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 28 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical ❑ ❑ ❑X 13 impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: b) Fire protection? ❑ ❑ ❑X c) Police protection? ❑ ❑ ❑X d) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X e) Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X J) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: Fire protection, police protection, schools, parks, other public facilities? Due to the nature of the proposed project, future use of the site will not result in substantial adverse impacts relatively to governmental facilities. b) Fire protection? The City of Lodi Fire Department would provide fire service to the project site. The Fire Department has four fire stations located within the City. The City's fire protection and established service ratios are based on the full build -out of the City's General Plan. Given that the proposed project would be consistent with overall developed area within the General Plan, the project would not involve new or more impacts to fire protection services than those already projected by that document. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Police protection? JdCommunity Dcv 1op=nt\PlanningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 29 The City of Lodi Police Department would provide law enforcement services to the project site. Given that the proposed project already is served by the City of Lodi Police department, it would not need or involve new police protection. There will be no impact. d) Schools? The proposed project would require no school services, nor would create the need for new or expanded facilities. No impact would result. e) Parks? The proposed project would not contribute to the demand on existing parks, nor require the dedication of additional parkland. No impact would result. jJ Schools? The project is not residential and will not generate any school aged children. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XIV. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require ❑X the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantialphysical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The proposed rezoning project would not create additional demand for existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. No impact would result. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 30 b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project would not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, nor would it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation ❑ ❑ ❑X 71 to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X service standard established by the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either ❑X an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ❑X (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑X f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑X g) Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs ❑X supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? The intersection of Central Ave. and Kettleman Lane is controlled by a traffic signal. The intersection operates at an acceptable level of service. The 300 to 400 additional trips that the project might generate will not significantly impact the intersection or adjacent streets. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. ]dCmnnunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 31 b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways? San Joaquin County does not have a congestion management agency. Therefore, no county congestion management agency designated roads or highways would be affected by the proposed project. There would be no impact. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The proposed project would not have any impact on air traffic patterns since the project is not located near an airport. No related impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposed project does not call for any design change of the existing features. No related impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? The proposed project is already served by the City of Lodi Police and Fire Departments. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in any inadequate emergency access to the site. There would be no impact. f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? The City of Lodi regulates parking requirements. Any future use of the site would have to comply with City of Lodi parking requirements. No impact would result. g) Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The proposed project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation. No impact would result. Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proj ect: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 32 a) b) Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact b) Require or result in the construction of new water or ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project=s projected demand in addition to the provider=s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity ❑X to accommodate the project=s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X regulations related to solid waste? Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? The anticipated sewage discharge from the proposed project would not exceed wastewater treatment capacity at the City's wastewater treatment plant nor exceed any requirements of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. No impact would result. Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The project site is located in an urbanized area that contains existing water and wastewater infrastructure. The proposed project would not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities. No impact would result. Please refer to Checklist Items XVI d. and XVI e. for further details. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 33 c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The City of Lodi operates a variety of storm water facilities, including storm drain lines, pump stations, inlet catch basins and retention and detention facilities in the area surrounding the project site. The facilities are adequate to serve the subject site and any future development. Due to the size and nature of the project, there would be no impact. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? The City of Lodi Water Utility supplies and distributes potable water, as well as recycled water to the City and to some areas outside the City's jurisdiction. According to the City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City currently has a net surplus in water supply given the City's current water entitlements and current water demand. Due to the size and nature of the project, there would be no impact. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? The City of Lodi Public Works Department provides wastewater treatment for the City of Lodi. Wastewater in the City of Lodi is treated at the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility (WSWPCF). The facility has been expanded to a design capacity of 8.5 million gallons (mgd) per day. The proposed project would not increase, in any significant way, demand on wastewater treatment. jJ Be served by a landfill with sufficientpermitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? The proposed project would not require any new landfill capacity. No impact would occur. g) Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The proposed project would comply with federal, state, and local statutes related to solid waste. No solid waste regulatory impacts would occur as a result of the project. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 34 Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated Impact Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality ❑X 13 of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ❑X limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑X cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The proposed project would not have significant environmental effects that would cause direct or indirect adverse effects to human beings. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable " means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects ofpastprojects, the effects of other currentprojects, and the effects of probable future projects.) The proposed project concerns changing the General Plan designation and rezoning three parcels into a commercial zone. Incremental impacts associated with the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable. Impacts would be less than significant. JdCommunity Dc-1op=nt\P1anningWEGDECl2006WD 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 35 c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The proposed project would not have significant environmental effects that would cause direct or indirect adverse effects to human beings. JdCommunity Develop=nt\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\ND 06-03 Gini Initial Study.doc (3/30/2007) 36 LODI PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report MEETING DATE: February 14, 2007 APPLICATION NO: General Plan Amendment 06 -GPA -01 and Rezoning 06-Z-01 REQUEST: Recommend to the City Council the following actions: 1) Approve Negative Declaration 06-03 as adequate environmental documentation for the proposal; 2) Amend the General Plan designation for 1333, 1325, and 1323 South Central Avenue (APN: 047-270-12, 047-270-11, and 047-270-10) from Eastside Residential to General Commercial; and 3) Rezone these same three properties from RE -1, Single Family Residential Eastside to C-2, General Commercial. (Applicant, Kenneth J. Gini; File # 06 - GPA -01 and 06-Z-01). LOCATION: 1323, 1325 and 1333 South Central Avenue, at the northwest corner of the Central Avenue and Kettleman Lane intersection. APPLICANT: Kenneth J. Gini PROPERTY OWNERS: Kenneth J. Gini 335 E Kettleman Lane Lodi, CA 95240 (1333 and 1323 South Central Avenue, APN: 047-270-12 and APN: 047-270-11, respectively). B V K INVESTMENT CO 5405 N Pershing Ave. Suite C-1 Stockton, CA 95207 (1323 South Central Ave, APN: 047-270-10). RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council the following actions: 1) Approve Negative Declaration 06-03 as adequate environmental documentation for the proposal; 2) Amend the General Plan designation for 1333 and 1325 South Central Avenue (APN: 047-270-12 and 047-270-11) from Eastside Residential to General Commercial; 3) Rezone these same two properties from RE -1, Single Family Residential Eastside to C-2, General Commercial; and 4) Consider amending the General Plan and Zoning designation for 1323 South Central Avenue (047-270-10) to GC and C-2, respectively. PROJECT/AREA DESCRIPTION GENERAL PLAN: Eastside Residential (ER), General Commercial (GC). ZONING DESIGNATION: Residential -Single Family, Eastside (RE -1). PROPERTY SIZE: Three parcels totaling 18,330 square feet 2-14 06-Z-01 Gini staff rpt.doc Adjacent zoning and land use are as follows: North: Residential Single Family Eastside (RE -1). South: Commercial (C-2). The area is mostly general commercial with Single Family Residential (R-2) further south. West: Lodi Academy and General Commercial (C-2) further west. East: General Commercial (C-2) SUMMARY This is a request for a General Plan Amendment and Rezone by Mr. Kenneth J. Gini for two properties he owns and a consideration to amend the General Plan and Zoning designation for a property owned by a third party, all located near the intersection of Central Avenue and Kettleman Lane. This request includes three separate items. First is a request by the applicant for a General Plan Amendment to change the land use designation of the subject parcels from Eastside Residential (ER) to General Commercial (GC). The subject properties are 1325 South Central Ave (047-270-11) and 1333 South Central Ave (047-270-12). Second is a request by the applicant for a Rezone that changes the zoning designation from Single Family Eastside to General Commercial (RE -1 to C-2). Finally, the third item is a request for consideration to amend the General Plan and Zoning designations for 1323 South Central Avenue (APN: 047- 270-10), which is owned by BVK Investment Co. This property is approximately 10 feet wide and has a depth of 130 ft, with a total area of 1,300 square feet. This particular property is currently being used as a driveway to access commercially zoned properties that face Kettleman Lane and residential proprieties to the north. Given its size and current use, it would be an acceptable planning practice to consider amending the General Plan and zoning designations from ER to GC and RE -1 to C-2, respectively. Change in the General Plan and Zoning designation for this property establishes a clear and consistent boundary between subject commercial uses and residential uses in the north. The change in zoning would not restrict its current use and would not affect its tax base. Further, the zoning change would enable the applicant to construct commercial buildings up to this property line and avoid the 5 -foot setback that would otherwise be required to separate commercial uses from residentially zoned properties. BACKGROUND The project site is located at the norththwest corner of Central Avenue and Kettleman Lane. The neighborhood is fully developed with single family residences, residences converted to commerical uses, and conventional commerical uses. The project site is adjacent to commercial zoning to the east, west and south, and single-family eastside zoning to the north. The applicant requests to have his two Central Ave. properties rezoned to General Commercial so that he can incorporate them with his Kettleman Lane commercial properties to form a single larger commercial property. The request to add the adjoining BVK owned property to the General Plan Amendment and rezoning would make a clear boundary between commercial and residential uses. The last time this application was heard by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission requested the applicant to submit a site plan for its review, expressed concerns regarding changing a Zoning designation without consent of the owner, and aesthetics of any future development of the site. 2-14 06-Z-01 Gini staff rpt.doc 2 ANALYSIS The applicant requests a General Plan Amendment and rezoning for his two properties on Central Avenue. The change in zoning would allow him to merge his two Central Avenue properties with his two other properties that face Kettleman Lane, which would allow him to expand his existing commercial development. In order to make a clear boundary between different land use patterns, staff is suggesting that the Planning Commission consider a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning for an additional parcel at 1323 South Central Avenue, which is a total of 1,300 square foot in area. This parcel has a different owner. In response to staffs notification, the property owner, BVK Investment Co., has stated via fax that they oppose the inclusion of their property in this request to amend the General Plan and zoning designation. Staff has learned from the applicant that BVK Investment Co. and the applicant have been unable to reach a financial agreement for the sale and purchase of this property. However, Staff supports the General Plan Amendment and Rezoning for 1323 South Central Avenue because it will make it consistent with the existing General Plan and Zoning designation to the west and the proposed changes to the south. Adding the property to the proposed commercial rezoning to the south will also create a consistent and straight east -west boundary between commercial and residential uses on the north side of Kettleman Lane. Staff understands that adjoining properties and businesses currently uses this property as a driveway to access properties zoned General Commercial that face Kettleman Lane, and residential properties to the north. Staff and Mr. Gini understands that without the change in zoning and General Plan designation of 1323 South Central Avenue the strict application of the City Zoning Code will require the applicant to develop his property with a 5 -foot setback and a screening wall between his property and the driveway to the north. The change in zoning to C-2 will allow land uses in the subject properties similar to the uses currently existing along Kettleman Lane and as specifically permitted by the City's Zoning Ordinances. Given the property at 1323 South Central Avenue is actually being used as a driveway and is not likely to change in use, staff believes that the proposed zone change will have no affect on the value or use of the property. The last time this project was publicly heard by the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission directed staff to ascertain how a change in zone designation might affect 1323 South Central Avenue. The County Assessor's Office has indicated that the affects of any zone change will be negligible since the property is too small to build -on and its tax assessment will be based on the actual or potential use of the property, not the underlying zoning. It is important to note that the Planning Commission was concerned about site plan, architectural design of future buildings on the site and how buildings constructed on the property line would affect residential use to the north. As Mr. Gini indicates in his site plan and in the accompanying letter (attached), the applicant requests to amend General Plan and Zoning designations for 1323 South Central Avenue so that he won't be required to provide a landscaped 5 -foot buffer area. He contends that a 5 -foot setback reduces his overall buildable area and would make it difficult to provide the required parking spaces and create acceptable and adequate traffic flow. In order to ease the Planning Commission's concerns regarding potential graffiti problems, the applicant proposes to install 2-3 outside lights on his building to illuminate the area and improve security. Further, he proposes the northern wall of the building would feature a design of smooth and split face block to give it a pattern along its length, which he contends will enhance its architectural features and deter possible graffiti problems in the future. However, staff is of the opinion that the proposed fagade of buildings could be designed 2-14 06-Z-01 Gini staff rpt.doc better, the location of the refuse enclosure could potentially hamper traffic flow, the landscaping plan is inadequate and the overall parking layout could be designed to improve traffic flow. Mr. Gini has provided a site and preliminary landscape plan elevation of the proposed building. Staff is of the opinion that design of the two buildings are attractive and will be an asset to the area. The body of the building will be stucco in light grey color accented by burgundy colored decorative tiles. A wall cornice detail in a dark grey color is provided. Split face cornice block is as a bare trip in the front elevations and as a solid buffer wall on the north (residential facing) elevation on the largest building. The roof has peaked elements to break-up the flat roof. The site plan shows the main access (varying from 25' to 30.7' in width) along the building with parking in the center of the "L" shaped site. Modest landscaping with ground cover and trees is within the parking area. The parking stalls are 9' by 17.5' (using a 2' overhang into the planters). Given the size of the buildings and an auto service use, 29 parking spaces are required and 29 are provided. The trash enclosure is at the corner of the "L" in the parking area. Staff is of the opinion that the site is tight and developed at the maximum. The trash enclosure is awkwardly placed for pick-up and staff would expect there to be some difficulties in the servicing of the trash bins. Also, the parking spaces are tight 9'x17.5', requiring the use of overhand in the planters. Further, the site layout requires the building to be placed on the northern property line. This is why the applicant request a General Plan and Zoning change of the BVK property. There is simply not enough room in the layout for a 5' setback from the property line. While the site plan and layout appear to meet the minimum setbacks if the General Plan change and Rezoning are granted, the Planning Commission needs to evaluate whether this General Plan change and Rezoning for the BVK property is appropriate. It could be a conclusion that the site is being over developed and that scaling back the intensity of the proposed development may be appropriate. Staff has provided resolutions for approval as proposed. Any change derived by the Commission would require different resolution be prepared. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS: The California Environmental Quality Act requires that projects be reviewed for their potential to create environmental impacts. The process requires that potential areas of impact be identified and a level of significance assessed. Staff prepared an Initial Study to review and assess impacts. Staff sent the proposed Negative Declaration to various agencies for review, published, and posted our intent to issue a Negative Declaration for the required 30 -day period. This project was found to have no impacts that could be found significant if not mitigated via normal conditions of future development. In conclusion, Staff finds that the proposed project meets these requirements and is therefore exempt from further review under CEQA. A Negative Declaration, ND -06-03 adequately addresses potential environmental impacts that could occur as result of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures have been required. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: Legal Notice for the Use Permit was published on October 27, 2006. 51 public hearing notices were sent to all property owners of record within a 300 -foot radius of the subject property as required by California State Law §65091 (a) 3. Based on the information provided to staff, it was determined that there are no Planning Commission members who reside within 500 -foot radius of the project area. 2-14 06-Z-01 Gini staff rpt.doc 4 ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS: • Approve the Request with Alternate Conditions • Deny the Request • Continue the Request Respectfully Submitted, Concur, Immanuel Bereket Junior Planner ATTACHMENTS: Randy Hatch Community Development Director 1. Vicinity Map 2. General Plan Map 3. Zoning Map 4. Site Plan, Elevation and Renderings 5. Comment Letters 6. Draft Resolutions 2-14 06-Z-01 Gini staff rpt.doc LO I MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PROJECT molum I®imm®l■ PQP PQP 1� z J Projected Expansion by 2030 MASH FAIRMONT AVENUE North 21 z m m m 1 l ExIS�ING URGIF N' CARE I j i I I j EXIST IMG MEDCA, � euao�nc r'l J �r r^ 000000, —� 00 Lodi Moij Hospital �� �` :-jr M-�a -jr M�a Jw 4Ls.. r"rd .......... NO emonal fal Hospital P -i: Paw m1a �,N it I Mill IIIA � it !li Il�i�{�!!I'1111111 !! ��f, � � '; -44 f ,.," i .\ � 1 j! j {`{ kkI j[[I ..l-�. .a€l:.'?��'. 't'��. �—.3"`L •i P:Jy� "_r �: � �. ;y{ `�.+- S ��_;. '� �`I lf��l ��ii�`� _� j� .__�, � ���'�''`+C��yp'fh�• x � .y,2.f�!_ r �'� -s�-a--'.^hi-� t.--++�ylaw;'�7'=' y�.•w�;ru. by Y:� Fr. -- r. - .:•-��i11�{ '�. ^-•' •C �ttSAJ�'1"��';.. x 1:; } ..�+xa�' �. � . jGisr r �+ "�• Yr"�5_-s7k�.. :� � II r �_ ixr'e • 3`•F �;n}r:. � J•.P �:iX''�. - �� h+' .. �e tis "1'�r �� l '::'ctr'4' �•.5r. f � ? cpll= - 4 -� � ��`,, .�ti �.- ',:y .. . yam;.. .. • :. 1 II ..::11.'�CJ •?...:i�-' �� ��,s.�� `r'�'��.5 rp.4tti� M''' fY'.�'-,nr?o-'%+�-M1�6Lis� :^'r.��Y; V,�.:,. .. _... •� ����,X3� c•c...t �p� wf Exterior Finish Materials Cultured Stone Fawn Metal Panel Lee Ivory Exterior Stucco Saddle Brown Metal Panel Sea Green Glass Light Green t Metal Panel Sea Green INITIAL STUDYNEGATIVE DECLA4-- w0d4-(-/--4 NO. 06-04 FOR Lodi Memorial Hospital Addition Applicant: Lodi Memorial Hospital 975 South Fairmont Avenue Lodi, CA 95240 PREPARED BY: CITY OF LODI COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT P. 0. BOX 3006 LODI, CA 95241 January 2, 2007 NOTICE OF INTENT TO ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Notice is herby given that The City of Lodi, Community Development Department, has completed an initial study and proposed negative declaration pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act for the project described below. The initial study prepared by the City was undertaken for the purpose of determining whether the project may have a significant effect on the environment. On the basis of the initial study, Community Development Department staff has concluded that the project will not have a significant effect on the environment, and therefore has prepared a proposed Negative Declaration. The initial study reflects the independent judgment of the City. File Number: 06-04 Project Title: Lodi Memorial Hospital Addition Project Description: The project site is located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin. The subject property is located at 975 South Fairmont Avenue. The applicant, Lodi Memorial Hospital is proposing to build a new four-story addition to their existing hospital building. One of the main reasons for the expansion is the need to construct a modern hospital facility that will comply with current seismic standards. The existing hospital contains 147,347 square feet of building and 107 -beds in a three-story structure. The Phase One expansion will add a new south wing that will add 131,229 square feet of building and contain 90 beds. Once completed, the hospital will have a total of 362,082 square feet and 157 - beds. (The total number of beds reflects the removal of 28 -beds in the existing west hospital wing due to seismic requirements and additional rooms lost elsewhere due to the remodeling.) The project will also include the construction of a new 14,506 square -foot, two-story central plant adjacent to the hospital that will house the mechanical equipment, utilities and other support facilities for the hospital. As part of the expansion the hospital will also expand their parking lot by removing six single-family residences and replacing them with parking and landscaping. Copies of the Initial Study and the proposed Negative Declaration are on file and available for review at the following locations: 1) Lodi City Hall, Community Development Department located at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA 95240; 2) Lodi Public Library, 201 West Locust Street, Lodi, CA 95240; and 3)City of Lodi website at www.lodi. eov. The City will receive comment on the Initial Study and proposed Negative declaration for a 30 -day period, commencing on Tuesday January 2"d, 2007 through Monday, February 5, 2007. Any person wishing to comment on the Initial Study and proposed Negative Declaration must submit such comments in writing to the City of Lodi at the following address: Randy Hatch, Director of Community Development Community Development Department City of Lodi P. O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 Thq,qity will'p vide additional public notices when the public hearings have been scheduled to consider approval of the Ne'gativDeclaration. la/n�4"atcof Community Development January 2, 2007. 3 City of Lodi Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration Prepared pursuant to City of Lodi Environmental Guidelines, §§ 1.7 (c), 5.5 File Number: 06-04 Project Title: Lodi Memorial Hospital Addition Project Description: The applicant, Lodi Memorial Hospital is proposing to build a new four-story addition to their existing hospital building. One of the main reasons for the expansion is the need to construct a modern hospital facility that will comply with current seismic standards. The existing hospital contains 147,347 square feet ofbuilding and 107 -beds in a three-story structure. The Phase One expansion will add a new south wing that will add 131,229 square feet of building and contain 90 beds. Once completed, the hospital will have a total of 362,082 square feet and 157 -beds. (The total number of beds reflects the removal of 28 -beds in the existing west hospital wing due to seismic requirements and additional rooms lost elsewhere due to the remodeling.) The project will also include the construction of a new 14,506 square -foot, two-story central plant adjacent to the hospital that will house the mechanical equipment, utilities and other support facilities for the hospital. As part of the expansion the hospital will also expand their parking lot by removing six single-family residences and replacing them with parking and landscaping. Currently the property contains an existing three-story 147,347 square foot, 107 -bed hospital; a 48,000 square foot medical clinic; a 6,000 medical clinic and a 15,000 square foot office building. There is also associated employee and visitor parking scattered throughout the property, as well as a helicopter landing pad. The Lodi Memorial Hospital and their affiliated entities own a total of 17.56 acres at the project location, including six residential lots along Cardinal Street. Project Location: The subject property is located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin. The properties located at 975 South Fairmont Avenue, Lodi, CA 95240. Name of Project Proponent/Applicant: Lodi Memorial Hospital A copy of the Initial Study ("Environmental Information Form" and "Environment Checklist") documenting the reasons to support the adoption of a Negative Declaration is available at the City of Lodi Community Development Department. Mitigation measures are El are not Oincluded in the project to avoid potentially significant effects on the environment. The public review on the proposed Negative Declaration will end at 5:00 p.m. on Monday, February 5, 2007. The Planning Commission will hold a public hearing on the proposed negative declaration and the proposed project in February 14, 2006. /-,\7 Randy Date Director of Community Development 4 Project Title: Lodi Memorial Hospital Addition 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Lodi Community Development Department 221 West Pine Street P. O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: David Morimoto, Senior Planner Immanuel Bereket, Junior Planner Phone: (209)333-6711 4. Project Location: Lodi, California. Address Assessor's parcel number 975 South Fairmont Avenue 031-070-40 1200 W. Vine Street 999 S. Fairmont Ave. 975 S. Fairmont Ave. 1031 S. Fairmont Ave. 1201 W. Cardinal St. 1139 W. Cardinal St. 1133 W. Cardinal St. 1127 W. Cardinal St. 1121 W. Cardinal St. 1115 W. Cardinal St. 5. Project Sponsor's Name and Address: Lodi Memorial Hospital 975 South Fairmont Avenue Lodi, CA 95240 6. General Plan designation O, Office and LDR, Low Density Residential 031-070-37 031-070-45 031-070-44 031-070-46 031-080-02 031-080-03 030-080-04 031-080-05 031-080-06 031-080-07 7. Zoning: R -CP, Residential -Commercial Professional and R-2, Single-family residential 8. Description of Project: The applicant, Lodi Memorial Hospital is proposing to build a new four-story addition to their existing hospital building. One of the main reasons for the expansion is the need to construct a modern hospital facility that will comply with current seismic standards. The existing hospital contains 147,347 square feet of building area and 107 -beds in a three-story structure. The Phase One expansion will add a new south wing that will add 131,229 square feet of building area and accommodate 90 beds. Once completed, the hospital will have a total of 362,082 square feet and 157 -beds. (The total number of beds reflects the removal of 28 -beds in the existing west hospital wing due to seismic requirements and additional beds lost elsewhere due to the remodeling). The project will also include the construction of a new 14,506 square - foot, two-story central plant adjacent to the hospital that will house the mechanical equipment, utilities and W1 other support equipment for the hospital. As part of the project the hospital will also expand their parking lot by removing six single-family residences and replacing them with parking and landscaping. Currently the property contains an existing three-story 147,347 square foot, 107 -bed hospital; a 48,000 square foot medical clinic; a 6,000 square -foot medical clinic and a 15,000 square -foot office building. There is also associated employee and visitor parking scattered throughout the property, as well as a helicopter landing pad. The Lodi Memorial Hospital and their affiliated entities own a total of 17.56 acres at the project location, including six residential lots along Cardinal Street. 9. Surrounding Land Uses and Setting: Briefly describe the project's surroundings: The proposed project is located in a transitional area with medical and business offices to the north and east and residential uses to the south and west. The area north of the hospital is zoned RCP, residential commercial professional and is developed primarily with health care related offices and facilities. Fairmont Ave., which borders the hospital property on the east, and Ham Lane which borders the hospital property on the west, are the primary medical office areas in the City. South of the Hospital property the area is zoned residential and is primarily developed with single-family houses. There is a large school, Lodi Middle School, located east of the hospital, across Ham Lane. The project will be constructed with in the existing boundaries of the hospital property except for a small area on the south edge of the development. There are eight residential parcels located on the north side of Cardinal Street that backed up to the hospital property. The hospital has purchased six of these houses and proposes to incorporate these properties into the project and will utilize the land for additional parking and for a landscaped buffer along Cardinal Street. 10. Other agencies whose approval is required (e.g., permits, financing approval, or participation agreement.) City of Lodi; California Office of Statewide Health Planning and Development; San Joaquin Air Quality Management District and the California Department of Health Services. C9 PROJECT LOCATION FIGURE i H w. tj- � W. L041 Am- z w. Vine 5i< E York 5k. w Cardnal9t, W. IceWeman Ln, 1 5 E L6 LEGEND W. Century Blwaf_ . Proo Loca&m PROJECT LOCATION FIGURE i SITE PLAN WITH SOUTH VYING ADDITION FIGUREs Environmental Factors Potentially Affected: The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" as indicated by the checklist on the following pages. ❑x Aesthetics O Agricultural Resources ❑x Air Quality O Biological Resources O Cultural Resources O Geology/Soils ❑x Hazards & Hazardous Materials O Hydrology/Water Quality O Land Use/Planning O Mineral Resources O Recreation ❑x Population/Housing O Public Services ❑x Noise ❑x Transportation/Traffic O Utilities/Service Systems Determination On the basis of this initial evaluation: O I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. x❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in the project have been made by or agreed to by the project proponent. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. O I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. O I find that the proposed project MAY have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. O I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or NEGATIVE DECLARATION, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing further is required. Signature Printed Name Date M I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 O ❑x O b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not O O 0 ❑x limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality 0 0 ❑x 0 of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which 0 O ❑x O would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The area is fully developed with residential, commercial or institutional structures. There are no natural vistas beyond normal urban street views and urban landscaping. The project would temporarily change the appearance of the site during construction. There will be some disruption of the site as a result of grading; removal of existing landscaping and paved areas; storage of dirt and building materials; and other construction activities. The disruption of the site will only last as long as construction is taking place. Once completed, the site will be restored with new landscaping and parking areas. The addition itself will replace an area currently used for parking and driveways with a four-story structure. While the structure will be clearly visible from surrounding properties, it would not affect any scenic vistas. The existing hospital wing is a three story structure and there is another two story office building existing on the site. The proposed addition is designed to compliment the existing hospital and to be an attractive addition to the community. While taller than other structures in the neighborhood, the new hospital wing will not detract from the scenic views of the neighborhood. There will be a less than significant impact. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? The project would not damage any scenic resources, and is not located within the vicinity of a state scenic highway. There would be less than significant impact. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 10 Potentially Significant Potentiall Unless Less y Mitigation Than Significan Incorporate Significa No t Impact d nt Impact Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 O ❑x O b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not O O 0 ❑x limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality 0 0 ❑x 0 of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which 0 O ❑x O would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The area is fully developed with residential, commercial or institutional structures. There are no natural vistas beyond normal urban street views and urban landscaping. The project would temporarily change the appearance of the site during construction. There will be some disruption of the site as a result of grading; removal of existing landscaping and paved areas; storage of dirt and building materials; and other construction activities. The disruption of the site will only last as long as construction is taking place. Once completed, the site will be restored with new landscaping and parking areas. The addition itself will replace an area currently used for parking and driveways with a four-story structure. While the structure will be clearly visible from surrounding properties, it would not affect any scenic vistas. The existing hospital wing is a three story structure and there is another two story office building existing on the site. The proposed addition is designed to compliment the existing hospital and to be an attractive addition to the community. While taller than other structures in the neighborhood, the new hospital wing will not detract from the scenic views of the neighborhood. There will be a less than significant impact. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a State scenic highway? The project would not damage any scenic resources, and is not located within the vicinity of a state scenic highway. There would be less than significant impact. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 10 The project will involve the construction of a new four story hospital wing on the property. This will be an addition to an existing three story hospital building. While the addition will be clearly visible from the surrounding area, it is not anticipated that the addition will substantially degrade the visual character of the area. The building addition is designed to compliment the existing architecture of the hospital and to be visually attractive from the surrounding area. The project will be reviewed by the City's Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC). The Committee will review the project for architectural integrity and to assure that the addition will blend in with the existing structures on the site. They will also review the site design, including landscaping, to make sure that the project will be aesthetically attractive and will blend in with the surrounding neighborhood as much as possible. There will be landscaping around the entire perimeter of the property, including tall trees to help screen the buildings. The parking areas will also be landscaped to improve the visual quality of the site and to provide additional shading. The hospital is also proposing to construct a solid block wall parallel to Cardinal Street to screen the hospital property and the new parking lot expansion. There will also be a 20 -foot wide landscaped buffer between the block wall and the Cardinal St. sidewalk. This will provide a visual buffer between the project site and Cardinal Street and the properties to the south. There measures will reduce the potential visual impacts of the project to a less than significant level. Therefore, there will be less than significant impact. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime view in the area? The proposed Lodi Memorial Hospital expansion will create additional lighting on the subject property. The building itself will have both internal and external lighting. Additionally, the parking and driveway areas will have lighting for visibility and safety reasons. It is anticipated that at night, most of the patient rooms will have their lights turned off or their blinds drawn so the building will not be fully lit up on a 24-hour basis. External building lights will probably remain on at night for safety reasons. Except for the new building, the overall lighting scheme will be similar to what is already at this site. The existing hospital building has both interior and exterior lighting. The existing parking lot and hospital grounds have lighting and there are existing street lights along all perimeter streets. The hours of operation for the hospital or the way they operate will not change significantly. As part of the SPARC review, the Committee will review exterior lighting on the project and make sure that lights are low level or shielded lighting to minimize light spilling onto adjacent properties. The proposed buildings will be designed with non -reflective glass to reduce the possibility of additional glare on the surrounding area. The solid portions of the exterior wall will also be designed with a non -glare material like plaster or stone veneer and will be painted a color shade that will minimize reflective glare. These features plus the planting of trees and other landscaping will reduce the chance of added glare to a less than significant level. Therefore, there will be less than significant impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 11 b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a O O O x❑ Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, 0 13 O x❑ due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? The project site is designated by the City's General Plan and Zoning Code as RC -P and is not considered agricultural land, nor is it located immediately adjacent to active agricultural land. Furthermore, the project site is almost fully developed and is surrounded by existing urban development. The San Joaquin County Important Farmland Map of 2004 identifies the site and vicinity as urban and built-up land. Therefore, the proposed project would not involve changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to a non- agricultural use and no impact would result. Potentially Significant Unless Potentially Mitigation Significant Incorporate Impact d III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Less Than Significa No nt Impact Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable 0 x❑ O O air quality plan? 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 12 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Dept. of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of 0 O 13x❑ Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to a non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a O O O x❑ Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment which, 0 13 O x❑ due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? The project site is designated by the City's General Plan and Zoning Code as RC -P and is not considered agricultural land, nor is it located immediately adjacent to active agricultural land. Furthermore, the project site is almost fully developed and is surrounded by existing urban development. The San Joaquin County Important Farmland Map of 2004 identifies the site and vicinity as urban and built-up land. Therefore, the proposed project would not involve changes that could result in the conversion of farmland to a non- agricultural use and no impact would result. Potentially Significant Unless Potentially Mitigation Significant Incorporate Impact d III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: Less Than Significa No nt Impact Impact a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable 0 x❑ O O air quality plan? 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 12 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to 0 x❑ 0 0 an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any O x❑ O 0 criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant O 0 ❑x 0 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of 0 0 0 x❑ people? a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The proposed expansion to Lodi Memorial Hospital would be consistent with the City of Lodi General Plan and, as such, traffic volumes representing build -out of the project were used to develop projections in the Air Quality Attainment Plan (AQAP). Projects proposed in jurisdictions with general plans that are consistent with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) AQAP and projects that conform to those general plans would not create significant cumulative air quality impacts. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with the applicable clean air plan. Less than significant impacts would result. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? The San Joaquin Valley is considered a non -attainment area for ozone and PM 10 (fine particulate matter less than 10 microns in diameter). The Federal Clean Air Act (FCA) and the California Clean Air Act (CCA) require areas that are designated non -attainment to reduce emissions until air quality standards are met. The project does not propose operational features that would emit substances that would violate local or regional air quality standards. The project would create temporary air quality emissions during construction of the project. The project will involve grading, demolition and trenching work, as well as the use of various construction vehicles and equipment. The SJVAPCD has established thresholds for construction (short-term) and operational (long-term) emissions for air pollutants including reactive organic gases (ROG) and nitrogen oxide compounds (NOx), which are known ozone precursors, and PM 10. The following control measures shall be included in construction contracts and shall be shown on plans submitted for a grading or building permit: * All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 13 * All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. * All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut and fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking. * When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. * All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions. * Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. * Within urban areas, track -out shall be immediately removed when it exceeds 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday. Cleanup of carryout or track -out shall be accomplished by: - Manually sweeping and picking up; - Operating a rotary brush or broom accompanied or proceeded by sufficient wetting to limit Visual Dust Emission (VDE) to 20% opacity; - Operating a PM10-efficient street sweeper; and - Flushing with water, if curbs and gutters are not present and where the use of water will not result as a source of track -out material or result in adverse impacts on storm drain systems or violate National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit program. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or State ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? The entire APCD jurisdiction is considered a non -attainment area for ozone and PM10. The proposed expansion and anticipated vehicle trips will result in net increase of vehicle generated pollutants. Therefore, the project will exceed the thresholds for ozone PM 10. The proposed expansion of the hospital will increase traffic traveling to and from the site. The number of beds will increase by 47%, which will increase the number of employees, patients and visitors. Most of these people will travel by private vehicles or an ambulance. This increase in vehicular traffic will increase the amount of traffic related air pollutants generated by this project. Although the number of beds will increase by 47%, the projected number of vehicle trips is only projected to increase by 29%. This is because the hospital generates only a portion of the trips to the hospital grounds. More than half of the trips are generated by the medical office buildings on the property and these will not be expanded by this phase of the proj ect. On a regional basis the increase in traffic at this location will be somewhat off set by a possible reduction in vehicular trips between Lodi and Stockton, Sacramento or elsewhere. This is because the expansion of Lodi Memorial Hospital will provide additional beds and services to the Lodi area and the entire area served by the hospital. This increase in available services will mean that at least some potential patients or employees that currently travel to Stockton or Sacramento for medical services or employment may now be able to obtain their care or employment in Lodi. This will mean a shorter travel distance for patients, employees and visitors which could reduce the vehicle miles traveled on a regional basis and thus reduce the overall vehicle related emissions. While it is difficult to quantify the numbers, it seems reasonable to assume that if given the choice, most people in Lodi would choose to seek care in a Lodi facility if comparable services are available. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 14 The following control measures shall be included in construction contracts and shall be shown on plans submitted for a grading or building permit: • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructure that includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, direct pedestrian connections, street trees to shade sidewalks, pedestrian safety designs/infrastructure, street furniture and artwork, street lighting and or pedestrian signalization and signage. • Provide bicycle enhancing infrastructure that includes: bikeways/paths connecting to a bikeway system, secure bicycle parking. • Provide transit enhancing infrastructure that includes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street lighting, route signs and displays, and/or bus tumouts/bulbs. • Provide park and ride lots. The plans for each phase of the proposed project shall implement these measures to the extent feasible and appropriate. The implementation of an aggressive trip reduction program with the appropriate incentives for non - auto travel can reduce project impacts by approximately 10 to 15 percent. A reduction of this magnitude could reduce emissions; therefore, the project's regional air quality impacts would be potentially significant even with mitigation. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? The SJVAPCD Guide defines sensitive receptors as facilities that house or attract children, the elderly, and people with illnesses, or others who are especially sensitive to the effects of air pollutants. Hospitals fall in this category. According to the SJVAPCD criteria, due to the small size of the proposed project and the estimated amount of daily vehicle trips, it qualifies for what is referred to as a Small Project Analysis Level. No quantification of ozone precursor emissions is needed for such projects. With regard to dust during grading and construction, the proposed project may expose sensitive receptors to pollutant concentrations; however, impacts would be less than significant. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The SJVAPCD has determined some types of facilities that have been known to produce odors in San Joaquin County. Examples include wastewater treatment facilities, asphalt batch plants, chemical manufacturing facilities and feed lots/dairies. Hospitals are not identified by the SJVAPCD as a use that produces objectionable odors. As such, the proposed would not produce objectionable odors. There would be no impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 15 Potentially Significant Unless Potentially Mitigation Significant Incorporate Impact d IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through 0 habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or O other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected O wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) Through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native O resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting 0 biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? L Less Than Significa No nt Impact Impact LEI 0 0 0 0 ■ ■ 0 a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? According to the Biological Resources Evaluation prepared for the proposed project, the subject property does not contain any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural communities. No impact would result. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial HospiuLdoc (3/30/2007) 16 b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? No riparian habitat exists in the site. See Checklist IV.a. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? No wetlands exist on the site. See Checklist IV.a. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? The project is an infill project and the site is urbanized area and mostly by residential uses. The subject property does not link two or more large regional open space areas, is not part of a regional wildlife movement corridor, and is not located near a river, stream or lake. Therefore, the proposed project would not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. No impact would result. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The City of Lodi General Plan (Conservation Element) includes goals and policies intended to protect sensitive native vegetation and wildlife habitats. Goal E, Policy 2 in the General Plan Conservation Element refers to the City's regulation of "heritage tree" removal. The proposed project would result in the removal of a large Sycamore tree. However, Sycamore trees are not defined in the General Plan, and the City has not adopted a tree protection ordinance. Therefore, the proposed project would not conflict with any of the goals or policies outlined in the General Plan (including Conservation Element Goal E, Policy 2), or with any adopted ordinances protecting biological resources. There would be no impact. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan or other approved local, regional, or State habitat conservation plan? The project is an infill development in urbanized area, not subject to the County wide Habitat Conservation Plan. Therefore, no impact would result. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 17 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a O O O ❑x historical resource as defined in 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of O O O ❑x an archaeological resource pursuant to 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological O O O ❑x resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred O O O ❑x outside of formal cemeteries? a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in '15064.5? The project is an infill development in urbanized area. No historical resources exist on the site. Therefore, no impact would result. b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to '15064.5? No archaeological resources exist on the site. The project is an infill development in urbanized area. Therefore, no impact would result. c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? No paleontological resource exist on the site. The project is an infill development in urbanized area. Therefore, no impact would result. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? No human remains exist on the site. The project is an infill development in urbanized area. Therefore, no impact would result. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 18 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on O O O ❑x the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? O 13 ❑D O iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction? O O O ❑x iv) Landslides? O O O ❑x b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? O O O ❑x c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or 13 O O ❑D that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B O O O ❑x of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of O O O ❑x septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42; According to the City's General Plan, no earthquake faults underlie the City of Lodi. Given that recognized faults neither cross the site nor are adjacent to it, the potential for fault rupture is considered remote and a less than significant impact would result from the project. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 19 ii) Strong seismic ground shaking; The proposed construction is being built to meet earthquake standards as required by the Hospital Earthquake Safety Act and State and local Building Codes. iii) Seismic -related ground failure, including liquefaction; Based on the soil boring results, the project site will be required to be suitable for implementation of the proposed project given its incorporation of specific project design and construction recommendations provided in the Geotechnical Services Report, as well as its adherence to the State and local Building Codes. These requirements would ensure that impacts would be less than significant. iv) Landslides? The subject property, as well as the area surrounding the project site, is relatively flat. Furthermore, the project site is surrounded predominately by existing urban development. Due to the developed nature and topographic features of the site and surrounding area, the potential for landslides is considered remote. No impact would result from the implementation of the proposed project. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? The proposed construction is located in urbanized area. There will be no soil erosion or loss of topsoil. Thus, no impact would occur. c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? The proposed project site does not lie in a geologic unit or soil that is unstable. It is located in urbanized area. There will be no impact. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Expansive clay -rich soils swell when wet and shrink when dry, which can cause substantial damage to foundations, concrete slabs and pavement sections. The project's Geotechnical Services Report determined that the project site does not contain expansive soils. There would be no impact. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? The project proponents do not plan to add underground tanks. The proposed expansion will be fully served by municipal sewer and waste water systems. Therefore, No impact will occur due to the fact that the project site is in urbanized area. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 20 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment O O ❑x O through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment 0 0 ❑x 0 through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely O O ❑x O hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 0 O 0 ❑x hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 0 0 0 ❑D where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private 0 13 0 ❑D airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an O O 0 ❑x adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, O 13 0 ❑D injury or death involving wild land fires, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wild lands? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? Potential impacts from the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials such as fuels, solvents and gases during construction or operation of the proposed project are considered less than significant. This finding is due to the fact that the proposed project would involve very limited use of hazardous materials 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 21 and any such use would be regulated by existing federal and state requirements. However, due to the nature of the project, and its future use, there will be some transport of hazardous material common to hospitals. The proposed addition to the Lodi Hospital will necessitate the routine use, transport or disposal of hazardous materials. A number of pharmaceuticals and chemicals used by the hospital may be classified as hazardous by Federal and State agencies. The hospital also utilizes x-ray and radiation equipment that generates hazardous byproducts. Finally, the waste generated by routine medical procedures, gloves, needles, bandages, etc. can be classified as bio -hazardous waste which requires special handling and disposal. All these materials must be used, stored and disposed of in compliance with all local, State and Federal regulations. They must also be transported to and from the site according to specific procedures. In order to eliminate any potential adverse impacts, the project proponent must use meet state and federal standards for use, disposal and transfer of hazardous waste. The hospital is licensed by the State of California and must conform to strict guideline for the handling, storage and disposal of hazardous material. They must maintain strict records and undergo periodic inspections to assure compliance. Additionally, it should be noted that the hospital already operates as a full service facility and is currently meeting all applicable requirements for the handling of hazardous materials. The hospital addition will only expand their existing contracts to eliminate said wastes. Therefore, less than significant impact will occur. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? The potential for release of hazardous materials into the environment is negligible because the hospital follows strict protocols mandated by federal, state and local provisions. Therefore, it is not expected that an accident involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment would create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. There is the potential for an accidental release of fuel during construction equipment refueling, but the proposed project includes spill prevention measures and a resulting release of very small amounts of materials is not considered to have the potential to create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. If during the construction activity, asbestos is encountered, the removal and disposal of such material shall be done by a qualified contractor and work shall be done in compliance with all State and Federal regulations. Therefore, less than significant impact will result. c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? Even though the project site is within one-quarter mile of an existing school, potential impacts from the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials such as fuels, solvents and gases during construction or operation of the proposed project are considered less than significant. This finding is due to the fact that the proposed project would involve very limited use of hazardous materials and any such use would be regulated by existing federal and state requirements. The hospital is already in operation and does not emit any hazardous materials that will effect nearby schools. Therefore, there will be less than significant impact. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? According to the State Department of Toxic Substances Control's EnviroSource database and the State Water Resources Control Board GeoTracker database, the project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites. The project is an infill development. As a result, the proposed project would not 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 22 create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. There would be no impact associated with the prof ect. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. There would be no impact. f) For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? The project site is not located within the vicinity of an active private airstrip. Therefore, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. There would be no impact. g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? The City of Lodi's Emergency Plan is based on San Joaquin County's Emergency Plan. The City and County Plans represent a comprehensive disaster preparedness program for the area. The proposed prof ect would not impair implementation of, nor physically interfere with the City or County's adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. No impact would result. h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wild land fires, including where wild lands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wild lands? The project site is located in a developed urban area and is not located adjacent to natural areas that would be subject to wild land fires. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the proj ect: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge O O ❑x O requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere O O O ❑x substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 23 d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site O O O ❑x or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the O O O ❑x capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? O O O ❑x g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as O O O ❑x mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures O O O ❑x which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, O O O ❑x injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? O O O ❑x a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Due to the nature of the project, the hospital uses and generates certain wastes products that may require special disposal. The hospital will need to comply with all State and Federal requirements for disposal into the sanitary waste system. They will also be required to complete a wastewater survey so that the City can determine what they are proposing to discharge into the City's sewer system. Based on the survey, the City will determine what can be put into the City's wastewater system to make sure that discharge does not compromise the City's treatment facility or the treated wastewater water discharged from the facility. There will be a less than significant impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 24 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site O O O ❑D or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site O O O ❑x or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the O O O ❑x capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? O O O ❑x g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as O O O ❑x mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures O O O ❑x which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, O O O ❑x injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? O O O ❑x a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? Due to the nature of the project, the hospital uses and generates certain wastes products that may require special disposal. The hospital will need to comply with all State and Federal requirements for disposal into the sanitary waste system. They will also be required to complete a wastewater survey so that the City can determine what they are proposing to discharge into the City's sewer system. Based on the survey, the City will determine what can be put into the City's wastewater system to make sure that discharge does not compromise the City's treatment facility or the treated wastewater water discharged from the facility. There will be a less than significant impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 24 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? In and of itself, this project is negligible in its use of underground water. Most of the site is already covered by existing buildings or parking areas and the addition will not significantly increase the amount of impervious surface. The construction of additional hospital rooms will increase the amount of water used by the facility. However, The City has secured a source of surface water that will be used to supplement the City's well water supply. The City has two options; either treat the water and put it into the City's water system or use the water to recharge the City's underground aquifer. In either case, the additional water will improve the City's ability to provide water to its citizens with out further depleting the groundwater table. Beyond that, the City currently has sufficient water to serve the project. Therefore, the proposed project would not substantially deplete groundwater supplies, nor would it interfere with City's groundwater extraction. Therefore, there will be no impact. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? The project site does not contain a stream or river, nor is it located in proximity to a stream or river. Implementation of proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, nor would not alter the course of a stream or river resulting in substantial erosion or siltation. There would be no impact. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? The project site does not contain a stream or river, nor is it located in proximity to a stream or river. Therefore, the proposed project would not alter the existing drainage pattern of the area, nor would it alter the course of a stream or river resulting in substantial increase in the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner that would result in flooding. There would be no impact. e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? The proposed project will not significantly increase storm water runoff. The existing drainage system is designed to handle future development consistent with build -out of the City's General Plan; therefore, the existing storm drain system would have the capacity to accommodate the proposed project. Thus, there will occur no impact. f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? See discussion under Checklist Item VIII.a. No impact would result. g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? The project site is not located within an area mapped by the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) Flood Insurance Rate Maps (FIRM) as a 100 -year flood hazard area, nor does the project propose the construction of housing. Therefore, no impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 25 h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures which would impede or redirect flood flows? See Checklist Item VIII.g., above. No impact would result. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding of as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? The entire City of Lodi is located within an inundation dam area. The levee system along the Mokelumne River is of sufficient height to protect the City from 100 -year flood flow,; however, the majority of Central Valley would be inundated during 500 -year flood event. Since this is an infill project, it would not expose people or structures to any risk of flooding that would not affect any other part of the City. As such, no impact would result. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? A seiche is the tide -like rise and drop of water in a closed body of water caused by earthquake -induced seismic shaking or strong winds. A tsunami is a series of large waves generated by a strong offshore earthquake or volcanic eruption. Given the substantial distance of the site from San Francisco Bay or the Pacific Ocean, tsunami waves would not be a threat to the site. There is no large land of water on or within the vicinity of the site, resulting in no seiche hazard. The proposed project site is flat and does not have any steep slopes or hillsides that would be susceptible to mudflows or landslides. Therefore, no impact would occur. Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 ❑x 0 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 0 0 13x❑ regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or 0 O 13x❑ natural community conservation plan? a) Physically divide an established community? The proposed project would not physically divide an established community. It proposes to demolish 6 existing single-family dwellings and incorporate the land into the hospital campus for additional parking and landscaping. The houses back up to hospital grounds and incorporating them in the project will not affect pedestrian or vehicular circulation patterns in the neighborhood. There would be no impact associated with the project. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 26 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The proposed project would be consistent with the City's General Plan policies and Zoning Ordinance regulations, and would not conflict with any other land use plan, policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. No impact would result. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan? The City of Lodi adopted the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJCMSHCP) in 2001. The conservation plan was developed to mitigate impacts to plant and wildlife habitat resulting from the loss of open space. Pursuant to the SJCMSHCP, the proposed project would be subject to a Development Fee, which would pay for the preservation of lands used to mitigate the cumulative impacts related to new development, including but not limited to acquisition, enhancement, restoration, maintenance and/or operation of habitat/open space conservation lands. The payment of this fee would ensure the proposed project's compliance with the SJCMSHCP. No impact would result. Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral O O O ❑D resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important O O O ❑D mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the State? According to the City's General Plan, the subject property and surrounding area are not known to contain regionally and/or state valued mineral resources. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would not result in an impact to mineral resources. b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally -important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? The subject property has not been historically used for mineral extraction. In addition, the City's General Plan does not identify the project site as a locally important mineral resource recovery site. There would be no impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 27 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in O O ❑D O excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground O O O ❑x borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels O O ❑x O in the project vicinity above levels existing without the proj ect? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient O ❑x O O noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, O O O ❑x where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, O O O ❑x would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The proposed project will be the expansion of an existing hospital. Because hospitals are designed to treat and care for people with health problems on a 24-hour basis, they are aware of the need for low levels of noise, particularly at night. All equipment installed as a part of this project will be designed to meet strict standards for noise attenuation. Most of the large equipment like generators and chillers will be installed in a new central plant building behind the Hospital. The plant will be a fully enclosed building that will be designed to limit the amount of noise that will escape the building. Additionally, the hospital is buffered on all four sides by streets and non-residential uses, including offices, parking lots and schools. Noise levels in the completed project will not be any higher than levels produced by the existing hospital operation. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 28 b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? Ground borne vibrations occur when a vibration source causes soil particles to move or vibrate. Sources of ground borne vibrations include natural events (earthquakes, volcanic eruptions, sea waves, landslides, etc.) and human created events (explosions, operation of heavy machinery and heavy trucks, etc.). The proposed proj ect would not involve any permanent operations that would generate excessive ground borne vibrations or ground borne noise levels. There would no impact. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? Refer to Checklist Item, XI.a. above. The project will not result in a significant increase in noise levels and, therefore, would not create a permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the vicinity of the project site. Impacts would be less than significant. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? As stated in Checklist Item XI.a. and XI.c., the proposed project's operational features would not permanently generate or expose people to excessive amounts of noise or ground borne noise levels. However, short-term noise levels and ground borne vibrations created during the project's construction may create a temporary increase in noise levels to the neighboring properties. Construction noise will be temporary and will end once the project is completed. Most of the noise will be in the early phases of the project during site grading, demolition and framing of the exterior of the buildings. Construction related noise impacts may be significant without the implementation of mitigation measures. The proposed project's compliance with these mitigation measures would reduce potentially significant short-term noise impacts to a less than significant level. The following conditions are part of a normal building permit process. The City intends to impose the conditions are part of the building process. As such, there will occur no further impact. Conditions for obtaining a build permit will include, but are not limited to: During Construction: • Prior to the issuance of building and/or grading permits, the project sponsor shall demonstrate, to the satisfaction of the City of Lodi, that the project would comply with the following measures; • The project's construction activities including grading, excavation and trenching shall be limited to between the hours of 7:00 a.m. and 7:00 p.m. weekdays and Saturdays. No construction activities shall be permitted on Sundays or holidays unless prior approval is given by the City of Lodi Community Development Department. In addition, construction hours, allowable workdays, and the telephone number of the job superintendent shall be clearly posted at all construction entrances. • All construction equipment are properly muffled and maintained in proper working order. • The use of low-pressure steam blows or temporary blowouts silencers should be used whenever possible. • Construction traffic must be routed along arterial streets to the extent possible, not through residential or minor streets. • The project will be required to comply with all requirements of the City's Noise Ordinance. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 29 e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. No impact would result. f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? The project site is not located within an airport land use plan, or within two miles of a public airport or public use airport. No impact would result. XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the project: a) b) Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either O O O ❑x directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, O O ❑x O necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the 0 0 O ❑x construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Induce substantial population growth in an area, either directly (for example, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? The proposed project would not include the construction of residential units, nor require the extension of roads or other infrastructure that could directly or indirectly induce substantial population growth. The project would create approximately ten new jobs. However, the creation of ten new jobs would not induce a substantial population growth. No impact would result. Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Implementation of the proposed project would result in the demolition of 6 vacant single-family residences. However, the proposed demolition would not necessitate the construction of replacement housing 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 30 elsewhere because the houses were purchased from the previous owners and the residents have voluntarily relocated in the Lodi area. Therefore, impacts would be less than significant. c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? See discussion under Checklist Item XII.b., above. Although the proposed project would result in the demolition of 6 vacant single-family residences, it would not displace a significant number of people. There is a sufficient stock of available replacement housing in the Lodi area and the previous residents have relocated to other housing. No significant impact would result. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? The City of Lodi Fire Department would provide fire service to the project site. The Fire Department has four fire stations located within the City. The City's fire protection and established service ratios are based on the full build -out of the City's General Plan. Given that the proposed project is an infill development, the project would not involve new or more intensive impacts to fire protection services than those already projected by that document. No impact would occur. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 31 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: A) Fire protection? 0 0 0 ❑D B) Police protection? 0 0 0 ❑x C) Schools? O O 0 ❑x D) Parks? O O 0 ❑x E) Other public facilities? 0 0 0 ❑x a) Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? The City of Lodi Fire Department would provide fire service to the project site. The Fire Department has four fire stations located within the City. The City's fire protection and established service ratios are based on the full build -out of the City's General Plan. Given that the proposed project is an infill development, the project would not involve new or more intensive impacts to fire protection services than those already projected by that document. No impact would occur. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 31 b) Police protection? The City of Lodi Police Department would provide law enforcement services to the project site. The project site is located in the Heritage Patrol District, which encompasses many of the older residential neighborhoods in the City, as well as large business and industrial districts. The City's police departments established service ratios are based on the full build -out of the City's General Plan. Given that the proposed project is an infill development, the project would not involve new or more intensive impacts to police protection services than those already projected by that document. No impact would occur. c) Schools? The proposed project would require no school services, nor would create the need for new or expanded facilities as no new residential units are proposed. No impact would result. d) Parks The proposed project would not contribute to the demand on existing parks, nor require the dedication of additional parkland as no new residential units are proposed. No impact would result. e) Other public facilities? Issues related to the provision of other public services have not been identified. Therefore, no impact would result. Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact XIV. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the O 13 O x❑ construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? The proposed project would not create additional demand for existing neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities as no new residential units are proposed. No impact would result. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 32 b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? The proposed project would not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, nor would it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Therefore, no impact would occur. Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to 0 0 ❑D 0 the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of 0 O ❑D O service standard established by the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an 0 0 0 x❑ increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., 0 0 0x❑ sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? O O ❑D O f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 ❑x 0 g) Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs supporting O O 13 x❑ alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? a) Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? Fehr & Peers Transportation Consultants prepared a technical memorandum (see attached), which evaluated existing and future traffic conditions and level of trip generations at all hospital driveways inbound and out bound traffic. The main hospital driveway on Ham Lane was recounted on Wednesday May 3 and Thursday May 4, 2006. The findings were: Existing Hospital and School Driveways 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 33 Ham Lane borders the west side of the Lodi Memorial Hospital East campus with Vine Street to the north and Park Street to the South. A median lane is provided in Ham Lane along the project frontage of the hospital. The key driveways along Ham Lane are described below: Main Hospital Driveway is aligned directly across Park Street. This driveway handles inbound and outbound traffic to the main hospital parking area. Conrad building hospital driveway is located south of the Conrad building. School bus loop driveway operates as a one-way loop with the inbound driveway to the north and outbound driveway to the south. No parking stalls are provided in this area. Main school driveways provide access to the middle school parking lot. Angled parking stalls are provided in the lot and are primarily used by the school staff/faculty. A separate inbound and outbound driveway is provided and the driveways are located north of Park Street and the main hospital driveway. Level of service calculations were conducted to evaluate existing operations of the school exit driveway and at the hospital driveway on Ham Lane. The LOS calculations (see Attachment B) indicate that the outbound school driveway operates at an LOS F (>100 seconds/vehicles of delay) during all three peak hours. The hospital driveway on Ham Lane, opposite Park Street, operates at an LOS E during the AM peak hour, LOS F during the afternoon peak hour and LOS C during the PM peak hour. AM peak hours were 8:00 am to 9:00 am; midday peak hours constituted 12:00 p.m. to 1:00 p.m. and afternoon peak hours were 3 p.m., after school ends. Ham Lane Driveway Observations AM, afternoon, and PM peak period observations were conducted on Ham Lane to assess the current operations of the hospital and middle school. Based on observations conducted during the AM peak period, no excessive queues or delays were observed on Ham Lane. An observed queue of 1-3 vehicles in the median lane was noted for the northbound left -turn into the school. A max queue of 3 vehicles was observed for the southbound left turning movement (inbound to hospital) at the Park Street/Ham Lane intersection. Afternoon peak observations show that when school ends (3 pm) vehicles queue in the median lane to enter the school site. On average this queue is 5 vehicles long. This is sometimes caused by inadequate on-site storage of vehicles and drivers not wanting to pull forward so they can exit without circulating through the parking area. During the PM peak period no school traffic was observed and hospital traffic was generally lighter compared to the AM and afternoon peak periods. Based on the above discussion, the proposed project would cause a less than significant increase in traffic, in relation to existing traffic load and capacity of the street system. Implementation of the following suggested mitigation measure would further reduce traffic congestion to no impact level: With the proposed alignment of the new main hospital driveway and the existing school driveways, conflicts would occur during morning drop off and afternoon pick-up times when the median lane would be used to access the school and hospital at the same time. • To avoid these conflicts it is recommended that the two school driveways be consolidated into one driveway that would form the west leg of the Ham Lane/Main Hospital Driveway. This reconfigured school driveway would eliminate potential conflicts by providing ingress and egress at one driveway and provide a standard four leg intersection. Figure 4 presents the proposed configuration of the driveways. • Construct a possible layout for the school site that would provide more on-site storage for pick-ups and drop-offs and reduce the potential queuing on Ham Lane. A separate left and right -turn outbound lane is recommended. The new layout is expected to reduce congestion at the school driveway and provide a safer pedestrian environment by reducing the number of conflict points. In addition, we recommend that the 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 34 school staff direct vehicles during pick-up and drop-off periods to reduce potential conflicts. To minimize off-site queuing, the primary pickup/ drop-off area should be designated as far to the west as possible. Pedestrian crosswalks across Ham Lane would likely be installed if a traffic signal is provided at the new Ham Lane/Main Hospital Driveway. Increased pedestrian crossings across Ham Lane would result and the potential for parents to use the hospital lot to pick-up or drop-off children. The new site plan for the hospital includes an additional driveway on Ham Lane, south of Park Street. With the new driveway and the reconfigured parking layout, traffic circulation patterns onsite could change substantially from the existing patterns. We recommend that the new Ham Lane/Main Hospital Driveway be monitored annually for a 5 -year period after completion of the hospital expansion. This time period will allow for additional observations and verification of the projected volumes to determine the need for a traffic signal. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency or designated roads or highways? Refer to Checklist XIV.a. The proposed project would have a less than significant impact on LOS. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that result in substantial safety risks? The proposed project would not have any impact on air traffic patterns because the project site is not located near an airport. No related impacts would occur as a result of the proposed project. d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The proposed project would not have any impact as a result of design features. Thus, no impact would occur. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? Design plans for the proposed project indicate two access points for emergency vehicles. Therefore, the proposed project would provide adequate emergency access to the site. There would be no significant impact. f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? According to Chapter 17.60 (Off -Street Parking) of the City of Lodi Municipal Code, hospitals are required to provide one parking space for each three beds. In order to fulfill parking lot requirements, as part of the project the hospital will also expand their parking lot by removing six single-family residences and replacing them with parking and landscaping. Therefore, the proposed project would not result in inadequate parking capacity. No significant impact would result. g) Conflict with adopted polices, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The proposed project would not conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting alternative transportation. No impact would result. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 35 Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proj ect: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 0 0 ❑x 0 applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or O O ❑D O wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water 0 0 ❑x 0 drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project O O ❑x O from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment O O ❑x O provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project=s projected demand in addition to the provider=s existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to 0 0 ❑x 0 accommodate the project=s solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and O O O ❑x regulations related to solid waste? a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? The proposed project would utilize the City's White slough wastewater Treatment Facility. The increased flow from the new hospital additions would be minor and not exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. There will be less than significant impact. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The project site is located in an urbanized area that contains existing water and wastewater infrastructure. The proposed project would not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities because there is adequate capacity to serve the proposed the new addition portion of the hospital. There will be less than significant impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 36 c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The City of Lodi owns and maintains a variety of storm water facilities, including storm drain lines; pump stations, inlet catch basins, drainage ditches, and retention and detention facilities. City storm water is discharged to the Mokelumne River and the Woodbridge Irrigation Canal. The proposed project would connect to the existing storm water drainage system. The existing storm drain system has the capacity to accommodate the proposed project. Thus, the project would not require or result in the construction of new or expanded storm water drainage facilities and impacts would be less than significant. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? The City of Lodi Water Utility supplies and distributes potable water, as well as recycled water to the City and to some areas outside the City's jurisdiction. According to the City's Urban Water Management Plan (UWMP), the City currently has a net surplus in water supply given the City's current water entitlements and current water demand. In addition, year 2030 projections show the City with a net surplus in water supply. The UWMP analyzed future growth within the City based on land use assumptions depicted in the City's General Plan. The proposed project would not deviate from those land use assumptions; therefore, sufficient water supplies would be available and impacts would be less than significant. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? The City of Lodi Public Works Department provides wastewater treatment for the City of Lodi. Wastewater in the City of Lodi is treated at the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility (WSWPCF). The facility has been expanded to a design capacity of 8.5 million gallons (mgd) per day. However, the facility has permits to operate at 7.0 mgd per day. The WSWPCF currently treats approximately 6.2 mgd per day, which means the facility has a net surplus capacity of 0.8 mgd per day ("permitted" capacity). The facility's design capacity could accommodate an additional 2.3 mgd per day. The proposed project would result in a small increase in demand on wastewater treatment. However, given WSWPCF's capacity to treat additional wastewater flow, impacts would be less than significant. f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? Solid waste management and disposal within the City of Lodi is provided by the Central Valley Waste Services. Solid waste is transported to a Transfer Station and Buy -Back Recycling Center. Waste is then deposited at the North County Landfill, which is owned and operated by San Joaquin County. The North County Landfill is a Class III facility that is permitted to accept 825 tons of solid waste per day. On average, the landfill receives 400 tons per day, and has a remaining lifetime capacity of approximately 6.0 million tons, which would equate to approximately 30 years. The proposed project would generate an increase in the amount of solid waste. However, the North County Landfill has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project's solid waste needs. Therefore, implementation of the proposed project would result in a less than significant impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 37 g) Comply with federal, State, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? Some of the waste generated by the hospital is medical waste that can not be disposed of in a conventional solid waste facility. This material must be collected, stored, transported and disposed of separately and taken to a disposal facility licensed to handle this class of waste. The hospital currently handles the same type of waste and complies with all regulatory requirements. The proposed project will comply with federal, state, and local statutes related to solid waste. No solid waste regulatory impacts will occur as a result of the project. Potentially Significant Unless Less Potentially Mitigation Than Significant Incorporate Significa No Impact d nt Impact Impact XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality 0 13 O ❑D of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, O O ❑x O but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will 0 0 ❑x 0 cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? As documented in this Initial Study, the implementation of the proposed project would no significant impacts on biological and cultural resources since it is in -fill project. Implementation of the proposed project would not result in the loss of open space habitat (row and field crops) and associated wildlife; would not threaten a plant or animal community, would not reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. It is an in -fill project. Therefore, there will be no impact. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 38 b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) The proposed project would construct a new hospital wing onto the existing Lodi Memorial Hospital on a 17.56 -acre site. The project site is currently developed with a hospital, two medical office buildings and an Advanced Imaging Center, as well as related parking and landscaping. The site is located in an area that is fully developed with a variety of urban uses. Other than increasing the number of beds in the hospital, the project will not change the operational nature of the site. Therefore, incremental impacts associated with the proposed project would not be cumulatively considerable. Impacts would be less than significant. c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? As discussed in this Initial Study, temporary air quality and noise impacts from construction would be less than significant with the implementation of recommended mitigation measures. Therefore, the proposed project would not have permanent significant environmental effects that would cause direct or indirect adverse effects to human beings. 1X—raanity Development\Planning\NEGDEC\2006\06-04 Negative Declaration Lodi Memorial Hospital.doc (3/30/2007) 39 Attachment fp FEllR & PEERS INlN"altAIJON cahfokIAN13 MEMORANDUM Date: December 14, 2006 To: Paula Fernandez, City of Lodi Wally Sandelin, City of Lodi Copy To: Allen Taylor, HDR Nancy Reich, Lodi Memorial Hospital Tak Saito, Lodi Memorial Hospital From: Norman Wong, Fehr & Peers Alan Telford, Fehr & Peers Subject: Trip Generation Analysis and Assessment of Ham Lane Driveway Configuration for the Proposed Lodi Memorial Hospital Expansion SJ05-771 This memorandum summarizes future trip generation estimates for the proposed Lodi Memorial hospital expansion. An assessment of potential conflicts between the future hospital driveways and the existing Lodi Middle School driveways on Ham Lane was conducted. The results are discussed below. Figure 1 presents the project location. Hospital Trip Generation Data Collection Fehr & Peers retained Traffic Data Service, a traffic and parking count firm, to conduct 48-hour machine counts on Wednesday, April 26 and Thursday, April 27, 2006. These machine counts were conducted at all hospital driveways to measure inbound and outbound traffic. The main hospital driveway on Ham Lane was recounted on Wednesday, May 3 and Thursday, May 4, 2006 due to a malfunctioning machine count. The count data are contained in Appendix A. On Thursday, April 27, 2006, turning movement and pedestrian counts were conducted at the Ham Lane/Vine St. and Ham Lane/Park St. intersections during the AM (7-9), afternoon (2-4), and PM (4-6) peak periods. The afternoon peak coincided with dismissal of the Lodi Middle School (3pm). Turning movement counts were also conducted at all four school driveways and at the Conrad building driveway during all three peak periods. Peak period observations were conducted during multiple visits in April 2006. The turning movement and pedestrian counts are illustrated on Figure 2. Existino TriD Generation The results of the 48-hour machine counts were used to determine the trip generation for the entire campus. As shown in Table 1, the existing hospital and medical office buildings generate approximately 520 AM peak -hour trips, 620 afternoon peak -hour trips, and 480 PM peak -hour trips. 255 Market Street, #200, San Jose CA 95110 (408) 278-17110 Fax (408) 278-1717 www, feh rand pee rs. oom FEHP PE RS TRAM ORF RN-::6ldISYiATAZITS PFMDJGCT Jin G7. 20O6dC-"•-- 771 \GroPhics\figOl—pro_loc.dwg LEGEND - Turn Lane XX [YY] (ZZ) - AM [Mid Day] (PM) Peak Hour Traffic Volume a NOT TO SCALE Pedestrian Counts ui 10 [17] (0) a Vine 98 [1141 (2) N m Conrad Ndq. 5chool Dwv. # I 5chool Dwv. #2 E L 2 [2[ (0)n Main Park 5t. * t H05F TO [2] (0) c� �i n 1 I v o � LO w � V� w V C0 35 45J�l41-- k 61 94120) ltd 26 144 23 33) Vine 5t.I( 104 1 76 33] �(46 jr 1�33] 2346) 55$$ ))) gaff 1721 (15) 1 (�) Conrad N oC r m � 0 56,a6 Dwy. #I l o r � W v $ fal �(3;)I Ln AlM 5chool Dwv. #2 T ala- *- 10 58] (62) Park 5t. �l ^ ]�— 7 [ j (21) Marn 1t(w EN �—E a m �0 F E H R &- PEERS PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES - EXISTING CONDITIONS rrw °0FIGURE 2 w M L" I l v 1 11o.; N I Pod" �h�6apNe■�gOLphH een a.p 1 I o � w � V� a ui 38 j(36} (9 162 [65j (24� m n R N� N �q T ala- *- 10 58] (62) Park 5t. �l ^ ]�— 7 [ j (21) Marn 1t(w EN �—E a m �0 F E H R &- PEERS PEAK HOUR TRAFFIC VOLUMES - EXISTING CONDITIONS rrw °0FIGURE 2 w M L" I l v 1 11o.; N I Pod" �h�6apNe■�gOLphH een a.p Ms. Paula Fernandez and Mr. Wally Sandelin December 14, 2006 Page 4 of 11 FEHR & PEERS tGANSPOA7010X CONtULTANTS Table 1 Existing Lodi Hospital Campus Trip Generation Tabie 2 ITE Trip Generation Rates and Estimates ITE RateMstimate Calibrated Rate1istimate AM PM AM PM Peak Htffirs IN OUT TOTAL 7:45 — 8:45 AM 345 1.58 trips/bed 176 521 2:30 — 3:30 PM 313 310 623 4:00 — 5:00 PM 181 299 480 Notes: Average of machine counts conducted at ail driveways on April 26 and 27, 2006 121 139 216 ITE Trip Generation Rates Table 2 presents the trip generation rates for "Hospital" (ITE Land Use 610) and "Medical/Dental Office" (ITE Land Use 720) land uses from the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation, 71)' edition. These rates were applied to the existing campus size to determine the accuracy of the published rates compared to the count data. As shown in Table 2, the use of ITE rates results in lower estimates for the campus (292 AM peak -hour trips and 396 peak -hour PM trips) when compared to the driveway counts. Thus, the ITE rates were calibrated to match the count data. The resulting rates are 2.02 trips per bed in the AM and 1.58 trips ger bed in the PM for Hospital land use. The calibrated ITE rates for the Medical/Dental office land use are 4.42 trips per 1,000-s.f. (ksf) in the AM and 4,51 trips per ksf in the PM. Land Use (Units) Tabie 2 ITE Trip Generation Rates and Estimates ITE RateMstimate Calibrated Rate1istimate AM PM AM PM Rates Hospital (Bed) 1.13 trips/bed 1.30 trips/bed 2.02 tripslbed 1.58 trips/bed Medical/Dental Office (ksf) 2.48 tripslksf 3.72 tripslksf 4.42 trips/ksf 4.51 tripslksf Estimates Hospital (107 beds) 121 139 216 169 Medical Office (69 ksf) 171 257 305 311 Total 292 396 321 480 Source: Trip generation rates from Institute of Transportation Engineers' (ITE) Tnp Generation, 7th Edition. ksf= 1,000 s.f. Ms. Paula Fernandez and Mr. Wally Sandelin December 14, 2006 Page 5 of 11 Futu @ Trip Generation FF.HR & PEERS 19AWMA30% caMsuuAwrt The existing Lodi Memorial Hospital East campus currently provides 107 beds in two wings (28 beds in the 39,000-s.f. west wing and 79 beds in the 56,825-s.f. east wing) and a total of 69,000- s.f. of medical office space. The proposed expansion would provide a total of 188 beds. For the purposes of this analysis, it was assumed that the vacated space in the west wing (10,000-s.f.) would be used as medical office space. This is a conservative assumption because some or all of this space may be used for storage or other uses that do not generate a significant number of trips. The total medical office space is 79,000 s.f. (69,000 s.f. existing and 10,000-s.f. in the west wing). The projected timeframe for the proposed expansion is Year 2011. The calibrated ITE rates were applied to the size of the future campus. The future afternoon trips were estimated by applying the ratio of existing AM and PM trips to existing afternoon trips. As shown in Table 3, the expanded campus is expected to generate 209 AM, 237 afternoon trips, and 173 PM net new peak -hour trips. Table 3 Trip Generation Estimates for Lodi Hospital Campus Expansion Land Use (Units) Size AM Peak Hour Rates In Out Total PM Peak Hour Rates In T Out Total Proposed Use Hospital Bed 188 beds 2.02 251 129 380 1.58 113 i 184 297 Medical Office ks 79 ksf 4.42 231 119 350 4.51 135 221 356 Subtotal 482 248 730 24B 405 653 Existing Use 345 ! 176(521)--181 a 299 480 Net New Tris 137 72 209 67 106 173 Ham Lane Driveway Assessment Existing Hospital and School Driveways Configuration Ham Lane borders the west side of the Lodi Memorial Hospital East campus with Vine Street to the north and Park Street to the South. A continuous left tum lane is provided in Ham Lane along the project frontage of the hospital. The key driveways along Ham Lane are described below: Main Hospital Driveway is aligned directly across Park Street. This driveway handles inbound and outbound traffic to the main hospital parking area. Conrad building hospital driveway is located south of the Conrad building. School bus loop driveway operates as a one-way loop with the inbound driveway to the north and outbound driveway to the south. No parking stalls are provided in this area. Ms. Paula Fernandez and Mr. Wally Sandelin December 14, 2006 fp Page 6of11 FEHR & PEERS ll•yTautA110M Eds, tll 1.1}N F5 Main school driveways provide access to the middle school parking lot. Angled parking stalls are provided in the lot and are primarily used by the school staff/faculty. A separate inbound and outbound driveway is provided and the driveways are located north of Park Street and the main hospital driveway. Level of service calculations were conducted to evaluate existing operations of the school exit driveway and at the hospital driveway on Ham Lane. The LOS calculations (see Appendix B) indicate that the outbound school driveway operates at an LOS F (100 seconds/vehicles of delay) during all three peak hours. The hospital driveway on Ham Lane, opposite Park Street, operates at an LOS E during the AM peak hour, LOS F during the afternoon peak hour, and LOS C during the PM peak hour. Existing Ham Lane Driveway Observations AM, aftemoon, and PM peak period observations were conducted on Ham Lane to assess the current operations of the hospital and middle school. Based on observations conducted during the AM peak period, no excessive queues or delays were observed on Ham Lane. An observed queue of 1-3 vehicles in the continuous left tum lane was noted for the northbound left-turn into the school. A max queue of 3 vehicles was observed for the southbound left turning movement (inbound to hospital) at the Park Street/Ham Lane intersection. Afternoon peak observations show that when school ends (3 pm) vehicles queue in the continuous left turn lane to enter the school site. On average this queue is 5 vehicles long. This is sometimes caused by inadequate on-site storage of vehicies and drivers not wanting to pull forward so they can exit without circulating through the parking area. During the PM peak period no school traffic was observed and hospital traffic was generally lighter compared to the AM and afternoon peak periods. Future Main Hospital Driveway on Ham Lane Ham Lane Driveway Realignment The main hospital driveway will be relocated north to align with the main school outbound driveway as shown in Figure 3. The Conrad building hospital driveway will be relocated south of its existing location. A third driveway on Ham Lane is proposed to be provided just south of Park Street. To assess potential impacts between the school and the hospital with the new driveway locations, intersection turning movement counts were conducted at all driveways on Ham Lane. Figure 2 illustrates peak-hour volumes at the existing school and hospital driveways on Ham Lane. With the proposed alignment of the new main hospital driveway and the existing school driveways, conflicts would occur during morning drop off and afternoon pick-up times when the continuous left tum lane would be used to access the school and hospital at the same time. To avoid these conflicts it is recommended that the two school driveways be consolidated into one driveway that would form the west leg of the Ham Lane/Main Hospital Driveway. This reconfigured school driveway would eliminate potential conflicts by providing ingress and egress at one driveway and provide a standard four leg intersection. Figure 4 presents the proposed configuration of the driveways. rR E H R PEERS TRANSIOIIt#TION CpNiltIFANTS SITE PLAN WITH SOUTH WING ADDITION Dec la, 2004 MJC N'.\Projects\,=5-777 Lodi Mermrial Hospllal Parking Study\Graphica\f,903—sileplan—w—soulhwlog,dwg FIGURE 3 Ms. Paula Fernandez and Mr. Wally Sandelin December 14, 2006 Page 8 of 11 t FEI-JR & NtRS rihusfalwor cowlutUnl, Figure 4 also presents a possible layout for the school site that would provide more on-site storage for pick-ups Snd drop-offs and reduce the potential queuing on Ham Lane. A separate left and right -tum outbound lane is recommended. The new layout is expected to reduce congestion at the school driveway and provide a safer pedestrian environment by reducing the number of conflict points. In addition, we recommend that the school staff direct vehicles during pick-up and drop-off periods to reduce potential conflicts. To minimize off-site queuing, the primary pick- up/drop-off area should be designated as far to the west as possible. Future Ham Lane Driveway Volumes and Operations The operations of the proposed main Hospital Driveway -Reconfigured School Driveway/Ham Lane intersection were assessed to determine the appropriate traffic control (i.e. stop or signal control). The project trip generation estimates, as shown in Table 3, were assigned to the reconfigured Ham Lane driveway based on the existing driveway assignment. The volumes on the Lodi Hospital driveway approach reflect the estimated traffic entering and exiting the site when expansion is completed under Year 2011 Conditions. According to the Lodi Annexation EIR (LSA Associates, April 2006), future volumes on Harr Lane are estimated to increase by up to 230 vehicles in each direction on Ham Lane through Year 2030 Conditions with traffic from future projects. This future growth on Ham along with the future Lodi Hospital drivewiay volumes were added to the existing volumes to develop the future volumes as indicated on Figure 5. The results of the future level of service calculations, assuming the driveway approaches (from the Hospital and school) remain as a side street stop control, is LOS F (>100 seconds/vehicles of delay) during the AM and afternoon peak hours. The level of service calculations are contained in Appendix C, During the PM peak hour the operations of this intersection were calculated to be LOS E (38.0 secondsNehicle of delay) on the side street. The peak -hour signal warrant from the Manual on Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD) was evaluated for the Han Lane/Main Hospital Driveway intersection under future conditions to determine if a signal is warranted. The results of this analysis (see Appendix D) indicate that a signal is warranted during the AM and afternoon peak hour. However, the peak -hour warrant is not satisfied during the PM peak hour. If the school traffic was excluded from the signal warrant analysis, the peak -hour signal warrant is satisfied during the afternoon peak hour only. It should be noted that the MUTCD provides seven other warrants that should be considered when determining the need for a traffic signal. The peak -hour signal warrant analysis should not serve as the only basis for deciding whether and when to install a signal. To reach such a decision, the full set of warrants should be investigated based on a thorough study of traffic and roadway conditions. The decision to install a signal should not be based solely upon the warrants, since the installation of signals can lead to certain types of collisions. The City of Lodi shall make the final determination on the need for a signal. Pedestrian crosswalks across Ham Lane would likely be installed if a traffic signal is provided at the new Ham Lane/Main Hospital Driveway. Increased pedestrian crossings across Ham Lane would result and the potential for parents to use the hospital lot to pick-up or drop-off children could be increased. N f� FEHR &- PEERS jt&ftsPOftj_Al1ON CONSULTANTS _. ileo14, 1006 mic I1 \Projects\SJ05--771 Lodi M—r-.1 H-DA.1 Pork�ng Study\Grophl[s\(ig04_5chool_proposed.dwq ,New Driveway PROPOSED SCHOOL LAYOUT FIGURE 4 I> X A Alz OPTION �.xl.itl DrlveVr"ty -- ,Lurie lur Drcga-OIfs M 11ritai, l u -Way LLIt-Turn �• On I an q, N f� FEHR &- PEERS jt&ftsPOftj_Al1ON CONSULTANTS _. ileo14, 1006 mic I1 \Projects\SJ05--771 Lodi M—r-.1 H-DA.1 Pork�ng Study\Grophl[s\(ig04_5chool_proposed.dwq ,New Driveway PROPOSED SCHOOL LAYOUT FIGURE 4 ,n c m cn In m C3 "� ACRO g2� 12 211[ 76 40] �a (12) K 5]] Ham Ln. 30 [38] (17) 176 [51 ] (10 l+ ! 752 V%] (05) '� 493 [7U2] (606 —s � V ra A O a LD n O N O pp O A -4 V O) A 07 6 191 (5) 76419M] W) 759 [985] (847[ je— 1 [41 (1) 9 161 (2) 535 [7931 (694) --► 542 [8051 (699) 7 [121 (5) 33 f 480 39 39 [77�6�26]] 1 29) m1 Cn 662 19111 82) 35138] ( CNDmN I Ms. Paula Fernandez and Mr. Wally Sandelin December 14, 2006 fp Page 11 of 11 FEIIR& PEERS 1iAlISPCi 11T 16M L4 MSV 11AM 1S The new site plan for the hospital includes an additional driveway on Ham Lane, south of Park Street. With the new driveway and the reconfigured parking layout, traffic circulation patterns on- site could change substantially from the existing pattems. We recommend that the new Ham Lane/Main Hospital Driveway be monitored annually for a 5- year period after coopietion of the hospital expansion. This time period will allow for additional observations and verification of the projected volumes to determine the need for a traffic signal. Conclusion It is recommended that the Lodi School driveway to the parking lot be reconfigured to provide one inbound and outbourid driveway and align with the main hospital driveway. The on-site circulation layout should be conAgured as shown on Figure 4 to improve on-site pick-up/drop-off operations for the school. It is also recommended that the Ham Lane/Main Hospital Driveway be monitored annually for 5 years after completion of the hospital expansion to determine if the projected volumes would materialize thus requiring the need for a traffic signal. CITY OF LODI PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report MEETING DATE: APPLICATION NO: February 28, 2007 Use Permit: 07-U-02 REQUEST: Request for a Use Permit to convert six residential parcels located at 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1121, 1115 Cardinal Street (APN: 031-080-02, 031-080-03, 031-080-04, 031- 080-05, 031-080-06, 031-080-07, respectively), to parking and to be incorporated into the surface parking lot for Lodi Memorial Hospital. (Applicant: Lodi Memorial Hospital. File Number: 07-U-02). LOCATION: 975 South Fairmont Street Lodi, CA 95241 (APN: 031-070-40) APPLICANT: PROPERTY OWNER: Lodi Memorial Hospital Lodi Memorial Hospital 975 South Fairmont Avenue Lodi, CA 95240 RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission approve the request of Lodi Memorial Hospital for a Use Permit to allow the hospital to remove six single-family houses and replace them with an expanded hospital parking lot. PROJECT/AREA DESCRIPTION General Plan Designation: O —Office and LDR - Low Density Residential. Zoning Designation: RCP, Residential -Commercial Professional and R-2, Single Family Residential. PROPERTY SIZE: 17.56 acres The adjacent zoning and land use are as follows: North: R -C -P, Residential, Commercial and Professional. South: R -C -P, Residential, Commercial and Professional. West: PUB, Lodi Unified School District. East: R-1 and R-2, Single Family Residential. SUMMARY The applicant, Lodi Memorial Hospital, is requesting a Use Permit to allow the removal of six single-family residences in order to expand their a parking lot, landscaping and a block wall. The six residential parcels are adjacent to the south side of the hospital's 07-U-02 USE PERMIT staff rpt.doc existing parking lot. The hospital is planning to construct a major addition to the Lodi Memorial Hospital that would take-up some of their existing parking areas. In order for the hospital to maintain their required number of parking spaces, they must add additional parking somewhere else on the site. They have purchased the six residential parcels adjacent to their property with the intent of utilizing them to expand the parking area. The Hospital is requesting this Use Permit in conjunction with their application for a rezoning request to Planned Development, PD (File# 07-Z-01) and a Development Plan approval that will permit the hospital expansion. The proposed hospital expansion is planned to be completed in three phases. The initial phase will consist of the construction of the new South Wing Addition, Central Utility Plant and parking and site improvements. The proposed construction of the expanded parking lot will be part of the first phase of construction. The expanded parking project will be constructed on hospital property. Over the past year or so, the hospital has purchased the six residential properties. They are proposing to sell and move the houses to other locations. Once the parcels are cleared, an existing wall that separates the properties from the existing hospital grounds will be removed and the land incorporated into the existing hospital parking layout. A new wall will be south of the new parking area, parallel to Cardinal Street. The 20 -foot deep setback area between the wall and the Cardinal Street sidewalk will then be landscaped to provide a green buffer between the street and the hospital complex. BACKGROUND The proposed project area is located in a transitional area with medical and business offices to the north and east and residential uses to the south and west. The area north of the hospital is zoned RCP, residential commercial professional and is developed primarily with health care related offices and facilities. Fairmont Ave., which borders the hospital property on the east, and Ham Lane which borders the hospital property on the west, are the primary medical office areas in the City. South of the Hospital property the area is zoned residential and is primarily developed with single-family houses. There is a large school, Lodi Middle School, located west of the hospital, across Ham Lane. The Lodi Memorial Hospital and their affiliated entities own a total of 17.56 acres at the project location, including the six residential lots along Cardinal Street, which the hospital proposes to incorporate into their project and will utilize the land for additional parking and for a landscaped buffer along Cardinal Street. The Hospital would like a separate Use Permit to demolish the 6 residential units and expand their surface parking because of time constraints. It is understood the Hospital would like to prepare the Campus for construction in order to ensure continuous operation of the Hospital. The process of obtaining the requested rezoning to Planned Development and approval of the Development Plan for the entire hospital addition requires City Council action. That action is by ordinance which requires 2 Council meetings and a 30 day waiting period to be finaled. The entire process would delay when the 6 residential units could be removed and the parking expanded. ANALYSIS The applicant, Lodi Memorial Hospital is proposing to build a new four-story addition to their existing hospital building. One of the main reasons for the expansion is the need to construct a modern hospital facility that will comply with current seismic standards. The existing hospital contains 147,347 square feet of building area and 107 -beds in a three - 07 -U-02 USE PERMIT staff rpt.doc story structure. The Phase One expansion will add a new south wing that will add 131,229 square feet of building area and accommodate 90 beds. Once completed, the hospital will have a total of 362,082 square feet and 157 -beds. (The total number of beds reflects the removal of 28 -beds in the existing west hospital wing due to seismic requirements and additional beds lost elsewhere due to the remodeling). The project will also include the construction of a new 14,506 square -foot, two-story central plant adjacent to the hospital that will house the mechanical equipment, utilities and other support equipment for the hospital. The proposed surface parking will be constructed within the existing boundaries of the hospital property except for a small area on the south edge of the development. There are eight residential parcels located on the north side of Cardinal Street that back up to the hospital property. The hospital has purchased six of these houses and proposes to incorporate these properties into the project and will utilize the land for additional parking and for a landscaped buffer along Cardinal Street. As part of this Use Permit, the hospital would like to cover all works related to traffic circulation including, but not limited to, a new Ham Lane entrance, new driveways on Fairmont Ave. and modifications to on- site traffic flow. Staff finds that issuance of a Use Permit for this particular project benefits the community since this project will ensure continuous operation of the Hospital. The Use Permit will allow the Hospital to remove the 6 residential units on Cardinal Street, along with the existing screening wall and the residential landscaping. The Hospital proposes to incorporate those 6 lots into the hospital campus, replacing the houses with parking and landscaping. As part of the project, the Hospital will also build a new 6 -foot high solid screening wall between the parking lot and Cardinal Street. The wall will be setback 20 feet from the Cardinal St. property line and the setback area will be landscaped to further screen the Hospital campus from the neighboring residences to the south. The Hospital is requesting a separate Use Permit in advance of their request to amend the Zoning designation due to time constraints since it will take an additional 10 -weeks after this Planning Commission hearing for the Rezone to take affect. The delay would significantly affect their construction schedule. Staff is aware that the Hospital wishes to start working on the surface parking and traffic flow during summer time when Lodi Middle School will be out for the summer. Granting of a separate Use Permit would allow for smoother construction of surface parking and would not interfere with the school schedule. Staff supports this application for a Use Permit because it will provide parking spaces for the Hospital. Part of the Hospital expansion will remove existing parking spaces adjacent to the hospital. The conversion of these residential lots into new surface parking serves the interest of the Hospital, their patients and the neighbors by providing adequate replacement parking until the proposed parking structures are built sometime in the future. It serves the interests of the neighborhood by providing adequate parking on the Hospital grounds, reducing the necessity for patients or employees to park on the neighboring streets. For these reasons, staff supports this application for a Use Permit. 07-U-02 USE PERMIT staff rpt.doc ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS: The project is found to be categorically exempt according to the California Environmental Quality Act, Article 19 §15332, Class 32. The project is exempted by CEQA as an "In -Fill Development Project". The project is consistent with the applicable General Plan designation and all applicable General Plan policies as well as with applicable Zoning designation and regulations. The proposed development occurs within City limits on a project site of no more than five acres substantially surrounded by urban uses. The project site has no value as habitat for endangered, rare or threatened species. Approval of the project would not result in any significant effects relating to traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality. The site can be adequately served by all required utilities and public services. No significant impacts are anticipated and no mitigation measures have been required. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE: Legal Notice for the Use Permit was published on February 28, 2007. A total of 90 notices were sent to all property owners of record within a 300 -foot radius of the subject property. Based on the information provided to staff, it was determined that there is one Planning Commission member, Mr. Wendel Kiser, who resides within a 500 -foot radius of the project area. ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS: • Approve the Use Permit with Alternate Conditions • Deny the Use Permit • Continue the Request Respectfully Submitted, Concur, Immanuel Bereket Junior Planner ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. General Plan Map 3. Zoning Map 4. Site Plan 5. Draft Resolution Randy Hatch Community Development Director 07-U-02 USE PERMIT staff rpt.doc 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2007-61 WTtO N OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL N(3AT1 DEChAITKI 0t3 AS i1� tTAL DOCUL*WATK* FOR TME r&NO i FLAW Allw i ' AND IREZO NE t HER*AS, clic hearings were hold by the PlannhV Conwftsion and City C-owd on Dgcembm$r 13, 206&February 14, 2007 and April 4, 2007, rospectiv*, on lihe erg described General Plan amendment and rezone: a) Gen oval Plan- arnendtrrent to redeeignale 1325 South Central Avenue (AP10 047,270-11) and 1333 South Central Avenue (APN 047-270-12) frorrtEastkder Residents to General Cwronercrial. b) Rea$ne 1326 South Comtral Avenue (APN 047-270-11) and 1333 South Cental Av+erwe (APN 047-270-12) from Single Family Eastlside (RE -1) to Gbnetel Commercial (C-2). WHEREAS, I is the Manning Corr�nission reoonwendation that City C uracil sppwe ite finding Out Neptive Declaration No. 06-03 is adequate erMronrfventel station. NOW, TFIER FORE, BE IT RESOLVED th* the Lodi City Council has reviowod oil deownent0ion arlld hweby approves NegOve DeclarMioan No. 0& ea ewe onyberwimatal docu*entation for the above -mer *wwd General Plan amefWmw t and oezene. $)aftd: ",4,2007 --^-amen---=.--�t�------ I hereby oertr that Resolution No. 2007-61 ww passed and adopted by thea City Cowx* of the City . Lodi in a regular rrree#ing hell Aprl# 4, 2007, by the follovAng mate: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Kaneen, Hihc wk, Ketzekian, Mounce, and Mayor Johnson NOE& COUNCIL M94BE RS — None ABMT: COUNCIL MEK110 S — Novae ABSTAIN: COIL MEMKIRS — None f4ESOLUTION NO..2007-82 ESWITION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL 0MW* NIE-GATIVE TW" 0"4 AS WE CNWR0NMENTAL CSI M11111 IA►TION THE LODI SIAL HOWffAL PRWECT NEAR PLAN AMENDMENT AND REZ61IE WHEREAS, is hearings were hold by the PWn% Co wnWsilxn and City Couwil an February $6, 2007 and April 4, 2007, respectively, on the following desorted Item Plan arnond0ont and rezone: a) Geneswal Ilan amendment to rodaskiraft 1201, 113 , 1133, 1127, 112 t and 1115 West Cardinal Street (APN 031-060-0, 031 -SSD -03, 0314004, 0314X�, 031-080-06, and 031-0W7) from Low Oerwity Residential to Office. b) Rez a 975, 899, and 1031 South Fakrnont Avenue (APN 031-070-44, 031.070-46, and 031-070-46); 1200 WeM Vine Sboot (APIJ 031-070-37); and 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1121; and 1115 Wee Cardinal Street (APN 0314x84-02, 031-080-03, 031-080-04, 03148)-06, 031-0W-06, and 031-000-07) from Residerdiel- CoreXmerclal-Professional Office (RCP) and Residence District (R-2) to Plarewd Developrnent (PD) Zone. WHEREAS, I is the Planning Corrin moon recommer-mladon that City Council rave its finding khat Negative Declaration No. 06-04 is adequate envlronereerrtal mon. NOW, THER ORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City C.ounoll has revkm d all docurnoWabm and bereby approves Negs#e Declaration No. 0604 as adequate anvironreentail docuOwdWon for the above-mentioned General Plan amendment and rezone. lDa*d: April 4, 2007 I hereby cer* that Rewhition No. 2007-0 w 2 ww paand ad*tod by the City il of the City Lodli in a regular rrwwding hold April 4, 2007, by the follwing vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Hansen, Hhdxmk, Katzakian, aniI Mounae WX& COUNCIL MEWERS - None IMT: fUNCIL QRS - None ABSTAIN: t 9UNCIL ACRS - Mayes JOHL Cl#y Clerk RESOLUTION NO. 200743 A FUESIPLUTl(3N OF THE LODI CITY COU14CIL AMENDING THE LAND USE ISE IT OF -,n* LOMI GENERAL PLAN BY REIDESIGNATING 1333D A 1325' OUTH C RAL AVENUE FROM EASTS RESIDENTIAL TO GENERAL COMMMIAL1 PROJECT); AND FURTHER REDESIGNATING 1201, 1139, 1138, 1127, 1121, AND 1115 WEST CARDINAL STREET FROM LOW DE NSITY RESIDEN1NAL TO OFFICE (LODI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PROJECT) WKEREAS, Negative Declarations ND -06-03 and ND -06-04 have been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelirms provided der®under. Further, the Planning Commission has reviewed and eonaidered the information contained in said Negative Declarations with refect to the proms identified in its Resolution Nos. P.C. 06-55 through P.C. 06-57 and Nos. P.C. 07-03 1hrough P.C. 07-07 and recommend approval of said Negative Declarations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lodi City Council has review d all docs tion and hereby approves Negative Declaration ND -06-03 as adequate envkomiental docurnWatlan for the Gini Project; and BE IT FURT*R RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lotti that the Land Ise Ekrment of the Lodi General Plan is hereby amended by redesigrAktIng 1333 and 1325 Sou* Cw&al Avenue (APN 047-270-11 and 047-270-12) from Eastside Oteskkwdal to Genera Commercial. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Hansen, Hit hoock, Katzakien, Mounce, and Mayor Johnson NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ASSENT: 0OU1N MEMBERS - None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None �u n PROEM NOW, TH£REPORE, BE IT RESOLVED tlW the Lodi C3iy Councll has ovwomdafi d0on and hereby approves Negmve Declara ND -06-04 as *dem envitonme documentation for the Lodi Memorial Hospital Project; and BE IT FURTHIER RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Lodi that the Land Use EW n:Nent of the Lodi General Plan is hereby amrnded by radesowding 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1121, and 1115 West Ordinal Street (APN 031-080-02,. 031-06"3, 031-080x04, 031-080-05, 031-080-06, and 031-060-07) from Low Density ftesidenftl to Office. AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Hansen, Hitchcock, Katzakian, and M once NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ASSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - Mayor Jdwww dated: April *, 2007 I hereby oertthat flssoludon No. 2407-63 was Passed and adopted by the Lodi City Councs in a rogu r mestino hell April 4, 2007, by.**,re votes: City Clerk 2007-63 ORDINANCE NO. AN UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE OFFICIAL DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF LODI AND THEREBY REZONING 1325 AND 1333 SOUTH CENTRAL AVENUE (APN 047-270-11 AND 047-270-12) FROM SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL EASTSIDE (RE -1) TO GENERAL COMMERCIAL (C-2) (GINI PROJECT) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. P.C. 06-57 approving the request of Kenneth J. Gini, Property Owner, on behalf of the Gini Project at its meeting of February 14, 2007; and WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration (#ND -06-03) has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided hereunder. Further, fie Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with respect to the project identified in its Resolution No. P.C. 06-55, and recommended approval at its meeting of February 14, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi recommends approval of the request of Kenneth J. Gini on behalf of the Gini Project for a zone change (06-Z-01) from Single Family Residential Eastside (RE -1) to General Commercial (C-2) to the City Council of the City of Lodi. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Lodi City Council hereby approves the request of Kenneth J. Gini, 1325 S. Central Avenue, Lodi, CA 95240, on behalf of the Gini Project, for a zone change (06-Z-01) from Single Family Residential Eastside (RE -1) to General Commercial (C-2). Section 2. The Official District Map of the City of Lodi adopted by Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: 1325 and 1333 South Central Avenue (APN #047-270-11 and #047-270-12) are hereby rezoned from Single Family Residential Eastside (RE -1) to General Commercial (C-2) (Gini Project), as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Section 3. No Mandatory Duty of Care. This ordinance is not intended to and shall not be construed or given effect in a manner which imposes upon the City, or any officer or employee thereof, a mandatory duty of care towards persons or property within the City or outside of the City so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as otherwise imposed by law. Section 4. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof. Section 5. The alterations, changes, and amendments of said Official District Map of the City of Lodi herein set forth have been approved by the City Planning Commission and by the City Council of this City after public hearings held in conformance with provisions of Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code and the laws of the State of California applicable thereto. Section 6. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. Section 7. This ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News -Sentinel," a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval. Approved this day of , 2007. BOBJOHNSON Mayor Attest: RAND JOHL City Clerk State of California County of San Joaquin, ss. I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held April 4, 2007, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting CF said Council held , 2007, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — I further certify that Ordinance No. was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. Approved as to Form: D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER City Attorney W RAND JOHL City Clerk ORDINANCE NO. AN UNCODIFIED ORDINANCE OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE OFFICIAL DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF LODI AND THEREBY REZONING 975, 999, 1031 SOUTH FAIRMONT; 1200 W. VINE STREET; 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1121, AND 1115 W. CARDINAL STREET FROM (R -C -P), RESIDENTIAL - COMMERCIAL -PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND (R-2) RESIDENCE DISTRICT TO PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT, FOR THE LODI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PROJECT --------------------------------------------------------------------- --------------------------------------------------------------------- WHEREAS, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. P.C. 07-07 approving the request of Lodi Memorial Hospital for the Planned Development Project at its meeting of February 28, 2007; and WHEREAS, a Negative Declaration (ND -06-04) has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided hereunder. Further, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with respect to the project identified in its Resolution No. P.C. 07-03, and recommended approval at its meeting of February 28, 2007; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi recommends approval of the request of Lodi Memorial Hospital for a zone change (07-Z-01) from R-2, Single Family residence and RCP, Residential Commercial Professional Office, to PD, Planned Development, (file 07-Z-01) to the City Council of the City of Lodi. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Lodi City Council hereby approves the Negative Declaration (ND -06-04) as identified in Planning Commission Resolution No. P.C. 07-03. Section 2. The Lodi City Council hereby approves the request of Lodi Memorial Hospital for a zone change (07-Z-01) from R-2, Single Family Residence and RCP, Residential Commercial Professional Office, to PD, Planned Development. Section 3. The Official District Map of the City of Lodi adopted by Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: 975, 999, 1031 South Fairmont Atenue (APN #031-070-44, 031-070-45, and 031-070-46); 1200 W. Vine Street (APN #031-070-37); 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1121, and 1115 W. Cardinal Street ((APN 031-080-02, 031-080-03, 031-080-04, 031-080-05, 031-080-06, and 031-080-07), are hereby rezoned from (R -C -P) Residential -Commercial -Professional Office and (R-2) Residence District to (PD) Planned Development, as shown on Exhibit "A" attached hereto. Section 4. No Mandatory Duty of Care. This ordinance is not intended to and shall not be construed or given effect in a manner which imposes upon the City, or any officer or employee thereof, a mandatory duty of care towards persons or property within the City or outside of the City so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as otherwise imposed by law. Section 5. Severability. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable. The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof. Section 6. The alterations, changes, and amendments of said Official District Map of the City of Lodi herein set forth have been approved by the City Planning Commission and by the City Council of this City after public hearings held in conformance with provisions of Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code and the laws of the State of California applicable thereto. Section 7. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. Section 8. This ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News -Sentinel," a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval. Attest: RANDI JOHL City Clerk State of California County of San Joaquin, ss. Approved this day of , 2007. BOBJOHNSON Mayor I, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No. was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held April 4, 2007, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting (f said Council held , 20077 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - I further certify that Ordinance No. was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. Approved as to Form: D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER City Attorney W RANDI JOHL City Clerk RESC)LUTtON NO. -64 NOW, THE OiRE, BE IT RESOLVED #t to Lodi City Cowl hweby pmmtw Lodi M � Proect Dem Ian, on fle mite ofte d the ityClet�c, to the and oor tions as rec�omrrterided by Plar g Comrr on No. P.C. -07. aced: April 4, 20D7 I hem that amort No. 2007-64 wu pWAd and by the fly itotsWil Of t wC In a regular meeft held App 4, 2007, by I affioWngvete: AYES: CbUNCIL MEMBERS - Hansen, F ► x)ck, Katzakian, and Mom ISS: GIDUNCIL MEMBERS - None A NSTAI N: SIL MEMBERS - Mr or Jolwwon 2007-64 SUBJECT: Please immediately corer rec t of this fax by calling 333-6702 CITY OF LODI P. O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE GINI AND LODI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PROJECTS PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, MARCH 24, 2007 TEAR SHEETS WANTED: One (1) please SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: DATED: THURSDAY, MARCH 22, 2007 ORDERED BY: RANDI JOWL CITY CLERK JE FER M. ERRIN, CMC DEPUTY CITY CLERK RANDI JOHL, CITY CLERK City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1 91 0 DANA CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK Faxedlo°the Sentiri0f at M16 466 aton '(doW) (paw) .NS Ph000d to.c i* MOW of all pages at (UIQ _JLCFt0;_ jmP ',(initials) formsladvins.doc ©ECL ATQN „QF, POSTING NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE GINI AND LODI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PROJECTS On Friday, March 23, 2007, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public Hearing to consider approval of the Gini and Lodi Memorial Hospital Projects (attached and marked as Exhibit A) was posted at the following 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 March 23, 2007, at Lodi, California. JONIFER PERRI N, CMC DEPUTY CITY CLERK N:1AduainistratianlCLERK\FormsIDECPOSTCD.DOC ORDERED BY: RANDIJOHL CITY CLERK DANA R. CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK y NOTICE OF PLMLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF THE (SII AND LODI MEMORIAL HOSPITAL PROJECTS On March 23, 2007, 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 of Public Hearing to consider approval of the Gini and Lodi Memorial Hospital Projects, attached hereto Marked Exhibit A. The mailing list for said matter is attached hereto, marked Exhibit B. 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 March 23, 2007, at Lodi, California. gNIFER mill. PERRIN, CMC PUTY CITY CLERK Fams/decmail.doc ORDERED BY: RAND JOHL CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI DANA R. CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK CITY OF LODI Carnegie Forum (D-305 West Pine Street, Lodi LDatte: ICE OF PUBLIC HEARING April 4,2007 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Rendi Johl City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 NOTICE OF PUDLIC HKAM6 JEXHIBIT A NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, April 4, 2007, 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 Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider approval of the following items: a) Approve Negative Declaration 06-03 for the General Plan amendment and change in zoning for the Gini Project (expansion of auto -related businesses) and approve Negative Declaration 06-04 for the General Plan amendment and change in zoning for the Lodi Memorial Hospital Project (new south wing addition and other related facilities) b) Amend the General Plan designation for 1333 and 1325 South Central Avenue from Eastside Residential to General Commercial (Gini Project) and for 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1121, and 1115 West Cardinal Street from Low Density Residential to Office (Lodi Memorial Hospital Project) c) Rezone 1333 and 1325 South Central Avenue from RE -1, Single Family Residential Eastside, to C-2, General Commercial (Gini Project) d) Rezone 1201, 1139, 1133, 1127, 1121, and 1115 West Cardinal Street from Low Density Residential to Office and approve Development Plan (Lodi Memorial Hospital Project) Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Community Development Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6711. All interested persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk, City Hail, 221 West Pine Street, 2"d Floor, Lodi, 95240, 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 Cleric, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing. By Order of the Lodi City Council: 4��Johl City Clerk Igated: March 21, 2007 D. Stephen Schwabauer City Attorney CLEA"u8HEAFRN0TICES\N0TCDD.00C 302IG7 EXHIP!T B APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP 03104002 LODI UNIFIED, 00000 SCHOOL DIST 03106010 BURGOS, 1321 PARK ST LODI CA 95242 ALBERT E 03106011 SCOGGINS, 1315 W PARK LODI CA 95240 DANIEL B ST 03106012 BECERRA, 1309 W PARK LODI CA 95240 ESAUL & MARIA ST 03106013 CROSS, 750 LOUIE LODI CA 95240 GREGORY B & AVE NANCY A 03106014 SIEGLOCK, 1702 LODI CA 95242 JACK A & TIMBERLAKE BRENDA LEE CIR 03106015 MUHLBEIER, 4279 LODI CA 95240 TIMOTHY F & SCOTTSDALE KATHRYN RD 03106016 TAMURA, KAY 1308 PARK ST LODI CA 95240 YOSHIE 03106017 WOODRUFF, 9043 STOCKTON CA 95212 TERRY R & HILDRETH LN CINDY A 03106016 METTLER, 1314 PARK ST LODI CA 95242 KEITH H & J 03106019 JAMES, BRIAN 1315 LODI CA 95242 J & MELISSA A CARDINAL ST 03106020 LINN, THOMAS 1320 W PARK LODI CA 95240 W ST 03106021 SHUMAN, STEVE 1321 LODI CA 95242 M CARDINAL ST 03107037 LODI MEMORIAL PO BOX 3004 LODI CA 95241 HOSPITAL ASSN 03107040 LODI MEMORIAL PO BOX 3004 LODI CA 95241 HOSPITAL ASSN 03107044 LODI MEMORIAL 6653 STOCKTON CA 95219 HOSPITAL ASSN EMBARCADERO DR STE M 03107045 LODI MEMORIAL 6653 STOCKTON CA 95219 HOSPITAL ASSN EMBARCADERO DR #M 03107046 LODI MEMORIAL 1121 W VINE LODI CA 95240 HOSPITAL ASSN ST #16 03108001 PERINE, 1122 S HAM LODI CA 95240 BARBARA J LN 03108002 LODI MEMORIAL 975 S LODI CA 95240 HOSPITAL FAIRMONT AVE 03108003 LODI MEMORIAL PO BOX 3004 LODI CA 95241 HOSPI'T'AL ASSN IN 03108004 LODI MEMORIAL 975 S LODI CA 95240 HOSPITAL ASSN FAIRMONT AVE IN 03108005 LODI MEMORIAL 975 S LODI CA 95240 HOSPITAL FAIRMONT AVE 03108006 LODI PO BOX 3004 1 LODI CA 95241 MEMORIAL, HOSPITAL ASSN 03108007 LODI CALL BOX LODI CA 95241 MEMORIAL, 3004 HOSPITAL ASSN 03108008 BONNET, ROSE 1109 LODI CA 95240 B CARDINAL ST 03108009 LODI MEMORIAL CALL BOX LODI CA 95241 HOSPITAL ASSN 3004 03108010 THOMPSON, 3360 CHEWELAH WA 99109 MELVIN & OFFERDAHL RD CAROL TR 03108011 KOYAMA, ASA & 23090 N ACAMPO CA 95220 SHIGEKO KENEFICK RD 03108012 HANNAH, JEAN 1126 LODI CA 95240 PAUL & SHELLI GLENHURST DR K 03108013 LOY, MILTON H 1127 S LODI CA 95240 & BETTY L TR FAIRMONT AVE 03108014 PENA, MARIA A 1132 LODI CA 95240 ETAL GLENHURST DR 03108040 COOK, LYLE & 1127 LODI CA 95240 LA VERA GLENHURST DR 03108041 GAIL, JOHN R 1456 ARUNDEL LODI CA 95242 TR ETAL CT 03108042 GEARHART, 1121 LODI CA 95240 LOWELL D & GLENHURST DR LORRAINE 03108043 BRUHN, ERVIN 1120 S LODI CA 95240 M TR SUNSET DR 03108044 TSUTAOKA, 1115 LODI CA 95240 JANET K GLENHURST DR 03108045 PORTER, 5900 BYRON CA 94514 ROBERT J & STARBOARD DR DARLENE F 03108046 GARCIA, 1210 LODI CA 95240 MARGARITA CARDINAL ST 03108047 BRODEHL, ARLO 815 WOODROW LODI CA 95240 H ST 03108048 BARRIGA, 1127 S LODI CA 95240 DANIEL & SUNSET DR VICTORIA 03111001 PRIDMORE, 1110 W PINE LODI CA 95240 ALOHA R ST TRUSTEE 03111002 PRIDMORE, 1110 W PINE LODI CA 95240 ALOHA R ST TRUSTEE 03111009 GUENTHER, 1000 LODI CA 95240 ROLAND E & LA CARDINAL ST VERA T 03112001 CANEPA, CAROL 131 S ORANGE LODI CA 95240 J TR AVE 03112002 THORNESBERRY, 1000 YORK ST LODI CA 95240 CARLYNE J TR 03112003 WILCOX, JANET 1007 S LODI CA 95240 A TR ORANGE AVE 03112004 MOSO, JOHN A 1013 S LODI CA 95240 TR ORANGE AVE 03112005 MERCURIO, PAT 1019 S LODI CA 95240 & DIANA TR. ORANGE AVE 03112007 BORGES, 1025 S LODI CA 95240 STEVEN & GWEN ORANGE AVE 03112008 MCMILLEN, 930 W PARK LODI CA 95240 CHARLIE ST TRUSTEE 03112024 FERVIA, JOHN 22027 SW TUALATIN OR 97062 JR & LORRAINE 107TH AVE M T 03112025 KNOEFLER, 1007 W LORI CA 95240 LUCY C CARDINAL ST 03112026 LINN, JOHN S 1011 LODI CA 95240 & SHARON G CARDINAL ST 03112027 WEAVER, JOAN 1031 W LODI CA 95240 C CARDINAL ST 03112032 CANEPA, CAROL 131 S ORANGE LODI CA 95240 J TR AVE 03112033 CANEPA, CAROL 131 S ORANGE LODI CA 95240 J TR AVE 03112034 CANEPA, CAROL 131 S ORANGE LODI CA 95240 J TR AVE 03112054 NEAL, DAVID A 455 W TURNER LODI CA 95242 & BETH A TR RD 03112055 SOROUR FAMILY 1343 LODI CA 95240 LLC RIVERGATE DR 03112056 SOROUR FAMILY 1343 LODI CA 95240 LLC RIVERGATE DR 03113004 900 S 900 S LODI CA 95240 FAIRMONT, FAIRMONT AVE BUILDING PTP 03113005 ANGOCO, 930 W VINE LODI CA 95240 JOHNNY C & ST DEBORAH MAR 031.13020 0 SHEA, 931 WINDSOR LODI CA 95240 TIMOTHY JOE DR 03113023 KRAUSE, MARY 1000 W LODI CA 95240 A WINDSOR DR 03113024 WELCH, JOHN 930 WINDSOR LODI CA 95246 ALBERT TR DR 03113039 JORDAN, 931 YORK ST LODI CA 95240 JOSEPH T & FLORENCE E 03113090 FAIRMONT PO BOX ALTAMONTE FL 32716 HEALTH REALTY 160488 SPRGS HOLDING 03113041 WILLIAMS, 1607 LODI CA 95240 GEORGE & SCARSBOROUGH BETTY TR ET DR 03113042 900 S 900 S LODI CA 95240 FAIRMONT FAIRMONT AVE BUILDING PTP 03113043 MCKENZIE, 851 TILDEN LODI CA 95242 THOMAS P & DR MARGARET 03113044 CAREY, NANCY 2507 ALDER LODI CA 95242 J TR GLEN DR 03304011 FILLPPINI, 833 S HAM LN LODI CA 95242 DELMO R TR 03304012 PUERTA, JULIO 839 S HAM LN LODI CA 95242 E 03304013 MITCHELL, LEA 845 S HAM LN LODI CA 95242 TR 03307123 KHAN, YOUSAF 838 CORTEZ LODI CA 95242 ETAL WAY 03307124 SCANNAVINO, 5463 STOCKTON CA 95215 GARY & LEANNE CHEROKEE RD TR E 03307125 TRIOLO, 1827 LODI CA 952.40 RUSSELL & EDGEWOOD DR HELEN G TR 03308021 HAYES 1217 W TOKAY LODI CA 95240 INVESTMENTS ST SUITE #D 03308045 FdRTIER, 120 S ORANGE LODI CA 95240 JANET M TR AVE 03315042 SCHMIDT, 825 S ORANGE LODI CA 95240 DAGOBERT & AVE MAGDALENE 03315044 WESTGATE, 628 WILLOW LODI CA 95240. JAMES A & D M GLEN DR 03315049 ROSENAU, 15625 N LODI CA 95242 LELAND A & D DAVIS RD ARLENE R 03315050 PANAGOPOULOS, 1920 APRICOT BRENTWOOD CA 94513 JIM & DEBRA WAY 03331025 BRECKENRIDGE, 845 S LODI CA 95240 C R & S TR FAIRMONT #1 ETAL APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP SITUS ADDRESS 04726022 SCOTT, 1301 S LODI CA 95240 ANTONIA M CENTRAL AVE 04726023 GONZALEZ, 1305 S LODI CA 95240 MIGUEL & CENTRAL MARIA AVE 04726024 MCPHERSON, 350 ACACIA LODI CA 95240 VIOLET R ST TR 04726025 REICH, 801 S LODI CA 95240 Resident GLENN C & CHURCH ST 348 ACACIA ST, BETTE J TR Lodi, CA 95240 04726027 KADIR, 318 ACACIA LODI CA 95240 ABDUL & C ST ETAL 04726028 LOPEZ, 322 E LODI CA 95240 RAMON & ACACIA ST VERONICA 04726029 KOLB, 303 ACACIA LODI CA 95240 Resident LESLIE R & ST 320 ACACIA ST. C M Lodi, CA 95240 04726035 REICH, 801 S LODI CA 95240 GLENN C & CHURCH ST BETTE J TR 0472'3005 KHAN, 224 ACACIA LODI CA 95240 Resident YAQUB ETAL ST 1321 S. CENTRAL AVE. Lodi, CA 95240 04727006 KHAN, 1319 S LODI CA 95240 KAUSAR CENTRAL AVE 04727007 KHAN, QIAS 1319 S LODI CA 95240 CENTRAL AVE 04727010 B V K 5405 N STOCKTON CA 95207 Resident INVESTMENT PERSHING 1323 S. CENTRAL AVE. CO AVE SUITE Lodi, CA 95240 C-1 04727011 GINI, 325 E LODI CA 95240 Resident KENNETH J KETTLEMAN 1325 S. CENTRAL AVE TR ETAL LN I Lodi, CA 95240 04727012 GINI, 10899 E ACAMPO CA 95220 Resident. KENNETH J WOODBRIDGE 1333 S. CENTRAL AVE. TR ETAL RD Lodi, CA 95240 04727013 ADAMEK, 80155 BOZEMAN MT 59715 Resident DON & GALLATIN 1341 S. CENTRAL AVE. JUDIE RD lLodi, CA 95240 04727014 GINI, 10899 E ACAMPO CA 95220 Resident KENNETH J WOODBRIDGE 335 E. KETTLEMAN LN. & KARRIE M RD Lodi, CA 95240 TR 04727015 GINI, 10899 E ACAMPO CA 95220 Resident KENNETH 3 WOODBRIDGE 331 E. KETTLEMAN LN. & KARRIE M RD Lodi, CA 95240 TR 04727016 MARCHICK, 3832 N STOCKTON CA 95219 Resident ALAN H & J MONITOR 325 E. KETTLEMAN LN. TRS CIR Lodi, CA 95240 04727017 PIETROS'S 317 E LODI CA 95240 Resident PIZZA KETTLEMAN 321 E. KETTLEMAN LN. PARLORS LN Lodi, CA 95240 INC 04727018 PIETRO'S 317 E LODI CA 95240 PIZZA KETTLEMAN PARLORS INC 04727028 KHAN, AYUB 157 LODI CA 95240 Resident & HUSSAN A MULBERRY 1321 S. CENTRAL AVE. TR CIR Lodi, CA 95240 04727029 DELIMA, 1848 VIA SAN CA 94580 Resident KEN & HERMANA LORENZO 1317 S. CENTRAL AVE BEVERLY TR Lodi, CA 95240 04727032 GIBSON, 1316 S LODI CA 95240 MICHAEL WASHINGTON ST 04727033 MIRANDA, 416 EDEN LODI CA 95240 Resident DAVID & ST 1318 S. WASHINGTON ST. AMY jLodi, CA 95240 04728001 NO CAL 1230 S LODI CA 95240 CONF 7TH CENTRAL DAY AVE ADVENTISTS 06206007 MID CAL 3200 BENICIA CA 94510 Resident PROPERTIES BAYSHORE 326 E. KETTLEMAN LN. LLC RD UNIT 3 1 Lodi, CA 95240 06206010 JOHN & PO BOX B19 LODI CA 95241 Resident VARENE 350 E. KETTLEMAN LN. TERESI Lodi, CA 95240 FAMILY LP 06206052 TAYLOR, 1912 E LODI CA 95242 Resident JOSEPH A & METTLER RD 330 E. KETTLEMAN LN. MERALYNNE Lodi, CA 95240 T 06206053 TAYLOR, 1912 E LODI CA 95242 Resident JOSEPH A & METTLER RD 332 E. KETTLEMAN LN. MERALYNNE Lodi, CA 95240 J 975 S. fairot Are. • 9A. 8oe 3444 • Lodi, U 95241 • 249/334.3411 • W/3W3745 (lo) • www.lodimeitiM w Joseph P. Harrington January 2W7 =rs 0a *amen buchlerr, Lodi owl F<Pital Is a, acccare hospital, owned by 0-m l Iror#all iiaital Win. ASSOc' n membershfp is opeq to anyorne for a one-time, lifetime lee of $100. Mleml*rs p0rtidpate in the annual eiecti of board members whttdirect the hospital. For 55 years the hospital's mission has beeiV to provide quality rnedi case, education and snort services tomembers'the community; and to improve community members' ceJality of life. The hsl ital is licensed for 178 ute-care beds. Two hospital campuses and seven satellite clirdccs are used to providd a variety of inpatientoutpatient services. The hospital employs 1,250 individuals, about one-third of which #re menses. There are � physicians on the active medical staff. Nkmoohl SP N !"as Servi _ in le 24 -hoer eme , matemity, nursery, pediatric, intensive care, acme-phocal rehabillillation, transi al, surgical and med re. iinme-twolth care and durable -metal equipment We also avallaNe. The hospitlf operates an urgent -cant clinic, three primary-care clinics, a prenatal clinic, a pediatric clinic, an occupatjonal� medi dWk and a fiiiee dinic or the uninsured. T=hese i Iborartoty, cardiac -catheterization laboratory, ultra sound, Cr scan, nuclear n*dW%rwk x-rayse�y, pharmacy ai d cry servioes. Trey 2%=1,speech,pulmonary and cardiac rehabilitation are among ouqmberit-Weabnent programs. ilk Adulty ,ire-sd ool ca ' a commtoty-fitness center, free physician refewal, peris�urse prog s and a freedlnic ttit un urec$ area the hajlpital's community servlet. Lod MenWal ill aleo proYMN fn * heald cravings at a vaddy 'uW events throughout the year and offs speakers to community groups upon reque. Educznail. pxWams. include variety of specializations from mateTW/gild ciasses for maMers, fathers and sibNnyi to di eeedt tion for diab Cs, their family members and professkxW staff. ContinuededWation is available fort RNs, s, CNAK, horve-healtf addes, phodans, medkal technologists and other professionals. Forums are rffei!ed to corsonunity members on wetwss, injury prevention and treatment. Medical and health -education libraries are open tip staff and community roembers alike. Total � "I* - $124 228,oD0 f_xpe s - $li$y774, il0a Reverijie ower ennses - $7,44,000 Salaries and Lefts - $7 (3<3PM Capital creeds - $5 9Wj" South -Wing Project - $195,OWAM x LODI MEMORIAL HOSMAL SourH Wm PRWLT A NEW CHALLENGE FOR A NEW CENTURY BUIL T OYV PRIDE OF PLA CE, SPIRUTAND VMN LMH .STOR2 In 195-3 farmers,houswives, teachers and other local residents built a community hospital lihr residents of Lodi and th surrounding areas. Si*e that time, Lodi Memorial Hospital has remail private, non-profit and independent — highly anusual ij the world of hospitals today. One of the reasons it has remind so is the tremendous loyalty of community members and the link to that initial notion that self-determination is a critical compos ent to a well-run hospital — one that can evolve to meet residents' needs. LMH Wow The vi. nary skit which lead#o the conception and construction of this hospital is still very mch with Lodi Memo4al key. Since Logi ll orial opened its doors in 1952, the community has grown, and the hospital has added programs and servic* to meet the increasingly complex medical and social needs of residents. With commaity support, the hospitstl has managed to keep pace with the: - Growth and the aging of its community by adding a unit for stroke and joint-replecement patients at its West facility, an 461t -day -cue center, a home -health agency and a durable -medical -equipment service; - Spiraliag costs of meekal and information technology and the tech -savvy employees needed to operate that sophisticated eq ment; - Myriad — and often c4ittly — load, state and federal regulations, such as nurse -to -pa tient-stag ratios, seismic upgrades of existing buildings, patient -privacy rules, and emergency -medical treatment for the uninsured; - Challeoges imposed by the need to recruit and retain the best possible physicians, nurses and cue givers in a competitive marl6t where wages are skyrocketing and supply is diminishing; and - Nil to tighten security efforts in the wake of September 11, and to prepare for the all-too- uafortonate-but-real possibility of a weapons -of -mass -destruction event. CURRINT E"ANMN NEEDS Yet today keeping pace has rea0ed its most challenging stage ever. The need to significantly expand cau no longer -be postponed. Growth and factors often beyond the hospital's control impact Lodi Memorial's ability to meet the coaununity's medical Peds. There is: As acute shottage ofOritical-cam beds in hospitals in this area and beyond that impedes the amity of Lodi Memorial Hospifial to admit new patients and treat patients waiting its emergency room because the emergency room is often full with critical -care patients waiting for beds; and A shortage of medical, surgical and maternity beds and adequate space that will allow the hospital to expand existing progiams to serve a growing community's needs. The jacts are dear: Unparagrowth in Lodi and the surrounding areas is expected and unstoppole. Tk hospital and its talented stntare truly wp to the challenge of meeting the community's medicat needs, but curl t and predicted space ihalkinhibit and will continue to inhibit the ability of Lodi Memo 1's care gives to do what they do beat. That is why it is time to build again. Soil H WmG FAcTs AT A Gi#NCE The lLodi. MesioriatHospit4 Board ofDirectors, the Lodi Memorial Hospital Foundation Berard of Mors anc tlw sex have arked +ikon a campaign to develop and cmtrtet critically needed space. A plan has l eea*vellaped to constti t roemsfor more that 90 new patient bei and a new emeogenoy departmeaL In all,136111 Osquarefeet muij be added, and a renovatiou of the existing space must be unilertsken to expand services in they bi g center, diapostic-imaging, medical -ambulatory -care, materials inaWement and food• serve areas. Co*s AND FuNDm Ye e d'ci ruckio at up small price: $195 miflion. Tte.bospkalwill bco.rowinexecs x'$150; mi n of NK amount and ' 1 also sk tyre cmu*utkm of loeal philaaithr piste, , phyei m and otl*s to of ively serve 4mmmunity. The consequences of not building are immeasurable. BEYpND HosriTAL WALLS In di to providing ho#kh care, Lodi Memorial Hospital is integral to the economis fawc of its coOnumity. The l pital's 7 cuing budget is $124 million. Each. dotlar of that budget is judiciously spent to bring the best posle care, technology, pharmacology, clinical -care givers and comforts to those Lodi Memorial is privileged to serve. And with 1,250 employees — most who live and spend locally — more than half of oke hospital's budget is a ocated to salaries and benefits. There are also 219 physicim on staff at the ho*itai. Their specialties am the gamut from pediatric, to oncology and cardiac care. Proudly, Lodi Memorial is It nationally recognized center for orthopedic surgery. Pati®t-satisfaciinn levels are an ng a tot in the natio. In surveys conducted by an independent research firm, an overwhelming number of Lodi Mettmrial patients iodicate tiny would be very likely to use the hospital again ifneed be. In internal surveys hospital employees sonsistently report they are proud to work at Lodi Memorial. Lodi Memorial physicians report that the ]cimpital's nursing staff is extraordinary, and physicians marvel at their responsiveness to their patients. For the vital role it plays in its community, Lodi Memorial Hospital las been recognized by loc*l cities, school districts, non-profit agencies, San Joaquin County, former Governor Gray Davis and Praidat George W. Bush. Tl year alone Lodi Memorial expects to deliver more than 1,440 newborns, care for more than 7,500 inpatients and treat more *n 42,000 emergency -room and urgent -care patients. Quality clinical care is erected in a hospital, and"i Memorial excels in this arena. But it also excels at treating patients, their faOily members, pbysiciant and employees in an extremely personal, dignified way. It was the mandate of our fognders and will always bo so. owl . Mn 4,0000, x s � g THE HOSPITAL Lodi Memorial Hospital began 2005 with the first of three successful accreditation surveys. Yet much of 2005 was spent implementing new technologies and further developing the existing Lodi Regional Health Systems, Irtc., (LB -HS), to accommodate the management of several Lodi primary -care -physician practices. The latter occurred after a regional medical -services organization purchased the assets of Lodi Primary Medical Associates, Inc., and assumed the management of many physician practices in that group. Some physicians chose not to affiliate with the new medical -services organization, and the hospital, as a result, expanded the scope of LRHS to assist these primary-care physicians. On the technology front, improved patient care resulted from many initiatives, including new telemetry systems for patients in the ICU and emergency room; a new patient - monitoring system for the ICU; and bar coding for patient identification, testing and medication administration. Self -scheduling for the nursing staffalso became a reality this year thanks to acquired technology. Patient care at LMH benefited from a new, hospital -wide, rapid -response team of interdisciplinary clinicians helping to recognize and treat critical medical needs more rapidly and comprehensively. Additionally, LMH became the regional leader in the treatment and recovery for stroke patients when it implemented its Stroke Intervention and Management Support, (SIMS), program—another interdisciplinary group of clinicians who provide rapid treatment and secondary prevention of ischemic strokes. Also, the hospital reduced clinical -registry costs by $1.4 million with aggressive recruitment of nurses nationally; and developed a comprehensive program for student nurses to help them transition from the classroom to the patient bedside. Memorial Home Med-Equip opened a satellite store in Galt to better assist that community's residents with their medical -equipment needs. THE MEDICAL STAFF Long-time Lodi physician Russell Steele, MD, was selected by hospital and medical - staff members as the LMH Physician of the Year; and a welcomed addition, Felicia Workeneh, MD, joined the staff at the LMH Pediatric Clinic, Surgeons Cathleen Ligman, MD, and Gordon Fahey, MD, were credentialed to practice at the hospital, as were radiation oncologist Travers McLoughlin, MD, 4B/Gyn Rubina Khilnani, MD, oral and maxillofacial surgeon Jeffrey Payne, MD, and anesthesiologist Audrey Payne, MD. The hospital's new moms and babies alike are the beneficiaries of a blanket and fluid warmer that was a gift to LMH from Carol Nakashima, MD. THE FOUNDATION The LMH Foundation's two annual fund raisers, the "Walk for the Health of It" and "Summerfest," along with donations and bequests, allowed the foundation board to approve and direct nearly $129,000 to the hospital for patient equipment, adult -day- care scholarships and the LMH/Salvation Army Clinic. At year's end, another generous bequest was received from the estate of Sydney Wortley. That $2 million came on top of $1.5 million received from the Wortley bequest the previous year. THE VOLUNTEERS Sixty youth and 142 adult volunteers donated 15,334 hours of their talent and time in 2005. Those hours are up 20 percent from 2004. From stocking medications to sewing items for the surgery department, Lodi Memorial Hospital is grateful to the generous individuals who make these contributions, The Gift Branch, run uniquely by volunteers, contributed $50,000 from its proceeds to the Main Auxiliary for the purchase of items to improve patient care. A spring luncheon at the hospital saluted Margaret Cocda, with 16,500 life -time volunteer hours; Alice Hammer, with 4,500; Janice McGill, with 3,000, and Helen Goetz with 2,500. The four were among the 22 volunteers earning milestone service pins. THE AUXILIARY Six branch auxiliaries directed their dues and fund -raising -event proceeds to the Main Auxiliary, their governing body, which in turn directed'$46,239 to the hospital for the purchase of EKG and cardiac -stress -test machines along with a patient -lift device. The branch and main auxiliaries have been lending their support since the LMH Association was newly formed in 1945. TO 2006 Technology is taking center stage in many patient -care activities. As the hospital transitions myriad record-keeping functions from paper.to electronic charts, the clinical staff will begin working from electronic -patient records. The accuracy and safety of medication administration will be improved with the use of multiple technology-based programs. A wireless -phone system will allow patient -care providers. to communicate with each other more readily. New patient beds with many safety features and greater Comforts will await patients. Cardiac patients will benefit from a new, cardiac-catheterization.4.boratory with a Off -slice CT scanner. A wound -care center Should open by year's end to help those many patients in Lodland beyond whom need long-term wound care, As an extension of its network of clinics in Lodi, Galt and Ione, LMH will begin construction of a 40,000 square -foot medical -office building at I-5 and Eight -Mile Road in Stockton. Space at LMH's west campus will be remodeled to allow consolidation of the hospital-based, primary-care clinics. Plans for the four-story, south -wing addition will be submitted to the state for approval. With growth a constant for LMH and its service area, LMH will continue to explore ways to best expand inpatient bed capacity and, as always, to improve patient care. LODI MEMORIAL 2005 REVENUES Lodi Memorial charged this amount for providing patient services in 2005 ................$ 600,125,000 Because Medicare and Medi -Cal programs do not cover the full cost of service, and due to adjustments for insurance contracts, Lodi Memorial deducted this amount ............. $ 475,534,000 Because of our services to the uninsured and underinsured in our community, and because Of uncompensated charity care, Lodi Memorial additionally deducted this amount ....... $ 24,175,000 Revenue from other operating ventures, interest income and investments in non-operating, health-related ventures allowed Lodi Memorial to add............ .. .....$ 5,356,000 Contributions added from donations..................................................... ....... ......................... $2,000,000 As a result Lodi Memorial's total 2005 revenues were .... ............ .................. ................ $ 107,772,000 ' .LODI MEMORIAL 2005 EXPENSES In providing services, our expenses for salaries, benefits, supplief; purchased services, insurance and other requirements totaled.....................................::.:....................................$ 96,451,000 Note: The above calculations consider bad -debt expense a deduction from revenue rather than an oper'aong expense. REINVESTMENTS IN OUR COMMUNITY Because resources were managed effectively and efficiently, and because Lodi Memorial Hospital is a non-profit, independent, community-based hospital, it can reinvest this amount to enbance future patient care and services.....................................................$ 11,321,000 Prepared from audited financial statement. PERFORMANCE RrPORT Board members, hospital staff, medical staff and volunteers work to support the hospital's mission of improving community health by providing quality care while maintaining the financial viability of Lodi Memo6al. Tracking the performance of several indicators in 2005 helped measure the effectiveness the hospital's efforts, Performance initiatives undertaken on a hospital -wide basis included: CUSTOMER SATISFACTIOW Improve patient -satisfaction -survey percent -excellent scores Reduce employee -turnover rate Improve employee satisfaction QUALITY OF CARE Reduce inpatient falls Reduce infection rate Patients reporting feeling of safety FINANCIAL Budgeted net excess from operations Reduce monthly registry costs Decrease accounts -receivable days COMMUNITY HEALTH Physician recruitment New construction plans to State for approval Provide stop -smoking materials to inpatients who smoke RISK MANAGEMENT Reduce employee injuries per $100K payroll Reduce workers' -compensation costs per $100K of payroll Limit number of lawsuits Goat Actual 50% 52% 10% 12% 78% 80% Goal Actual I11 142 1.5% 1.9% 92% 92% Goal Actual 6.7% 73% $122,000 $94,000 S8 54 Goal Actual 6 3 10/05 02/06 90% 70% Goal Actual 1% 02% $325 $75 3 5 SERVICE HIGHLIGHTS BECOME AN OWNER OF LODI MEMORIAL, HOSPITAL The Lodi Memorial Hospital Association, Inc., is the legal owner of Lodi Memorial Hospital. Membership is open to anyone for a one-time, lifetime fee of $100. Members are entitled to participate in the annual election of its board of directors and discounts on select hospital services. Contact the 4*�r Lodi Memorial Hospital Community Development Department for a membership application. 1_1111.11 Memorial Hospital 2005 2004 Patient beds 170 170 Admissions 7,455 7,587 Average length of acute stays (days) 4.3 3.8 Emergency patients 21,320 19,866 Urgent -care patients 21,183 20,630 Newborns 1,303 1,313 Surgeries 3,834 3,982 Laboratory tests 400,390 374,466 Diagnostic -imaging procedures 28,926 29,039 CT scans 10,056 9,926 Respiratory treatments 189,114 189,729 EKGs 9,683 9,412 Physical -therapy visits 17434 IZ96S Fitness therapy 46,268 43,8S0 Medical -ambulatory -care visits 4,928 5,036 Home -health visits 12,635 14,363 Adult -day-care visits S,186 5325 OB -clinic visits 9,867 9,790 Pediatric -clinic visits 22,920 22,094 Primary -care -clinic visits, West 13,269 10,910 Primary -care -clinic visits, Ham Lane 6,741 5,053 Galt Medical Services visits 13,462 13,917 PrimeMed-clinic visits, Ione 8,373 10,193 Occupational -health -clinic visits 51818 5,449 Salvation Army Clinic visits 939 844 Camp Hutchins children visits 13,709 I4,390 Employees 1,289 I,119 Active -medical staff 133 137 Volunteers 204 207 BECOME AN OWNER OF LODI MEMORIAL, HOSPITAL The Lodi Memorial Hospital Association, Inc., is the legal owner of Lodi Memorial Hospital. Membership is open to anyone for a one-time, lifetime fee of $100. Members are entitled to participate in the annual election of its board of directors and discounts on select hospital services. Contact the 4*�r Lodi Memorial Hospital Community Development Department for a membership application. 1_1111.11 Memorial Hospital Among special recognitions in 2005, LMH was honored as a four-star provider of customer service for its inpatient and outpatient -surgery care by Professional Research Corporation, a parient-satisfacrion-survey agent for hundreds of US hospitals. Additionally LMH was named one of the top providers in the state for end -of -life care by the Dartmouth Atlas Project, The San Joaquin Council of Governments awarded LMH with its Regional Excellence Award for providing free medical care for the working poor without access to insurance ar the LMH clinic in the Salvation Army headquarters. In January hospital staff selected Joanne Augusto as the winner of the Ted Holmstrom Heart Award, given annually to the employee who best practices the hospital's mission, vision and values. At year's end hospital staff raised $10,000 via its annual golf tournament to assist LMH employees in crisis. Given the tragedies of Katrina, the staff thoughtfully directed those funds instead to Louisiana, Mississippi and Alabama hospital employees who were personally affected by the destruction of the hurricane and floods. BEYOND THE HOSPITAL WALLS In addition to their work at the hospital, LMH staff members continue to volunteer and assist community groups and service organizations working to help the needy and improve the community's quality of life and economic future. More than 2,000 hours of time were donated in 2005. Additionally hospital staff continues its outreach with activiries suc' as low-cost, community flu -shot clinics; free medical care to the working poor at the LMH/Salvation Army Clinic in Lodi; a safe house for battered women and their children, operated by the. Women's Center of San Joaquin County in a property donated by the hospital; the Adult Day Care Center, operated by the hospital at Hutchins Street Square, provides respite for care givers and socializarion and care for their relatives; and the LMH operation of Camp Hutchins continues to provide affordable child care for working families. 2005 LEADERSHIP Lodi Memorial Hospital Board of Directors EXECUTIVE COMMITTEE Cecil Dillon, chair Annette Murdaca, vice chair Calvin Suess, secretary/treasurer Steven Crabtree, member -at -large Phillip Felde, member -at -large Robert McCaffrey, EdD, member -at -large Harvey Hashimoto, MD, chief of staff Joseph Harrington, president and CEO DIRECTORS Roscoe Brownfield Param Gill, MD Paul Gross Paul Haley Taj Khan Janet Keeter Debbie Olson Bruce Sasaki Thomas Sorbera, MD Medical Staff Executive Committee Harvey Hashimoto, MD, chief of staff Karen Buchler, MD, chief -of -staff elect Mani Mandyoon, MD, secretary/treasurer Tareq Ali, MD, member -at -large Darius Noori, MD, member -at -large Gary Nahl, MD, medicine chair James Ahern, MD, OB -GYN chair James Hoff, MD, credentials chair Todd Primack, DO, anesthesia chair Karen Buchler, MD, pediatrics chair AnnieMarie Santos, MD, family -practice chair Andrew Limb, MD, surgery chair al X L Lodi Memorial Hospital Foundation, Inc. OFFICERS Joe Handel, president Randy Snider, vice president Jan Chandler, secretary Ron Slate, chief -financial officer Donna Shaw, executive director DIRECTORS John Barkley Steve Coldani Steve Crabtree Steve Diede Torn Doucette Peggy Fry Julia Gillespie Joseph Harrington H.E. Hoff, MD Jerry Hugo Charlene Lange Laurence Littleton Ronald Mettler John Metz AnnieMarie Santos, MD Frank Sasaki, Jr. Nancy Watts Tracy Williams Lodi Memorial Hospital Main Auxiliary Officers Helen Welch, president Margaret Corda, vice president Gerry Schook, secretary Edna Mae Knecht, treasurer Lodi Memorial Hospital Community Advisory Board Jerry Adams Liz Aguire Stacy Beintema Don Bennett Scott Evans, DOM, LAc Christeen Ferree Jack Gardelius Aman Khan Taj Khan Bill Mitchell Pat Patrick Gerry Schook Roberta Williams, RN 975 South Fairmont Avenue • Lodi, California 95240 (209) 334-3411 . ($00) 323-3360 . www.lodihealtli.org