HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - September 6, 2006 L-02AGENDA ITEM L-02
CITY OF LOoI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA T#TLE: Ordinance No. 1784 Entitled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Lodi
Re -Classifying 220 Acres Located on the South Side of Harney Lane between
State Highway 99 and the Union Pacific Railroad to the West (Reynolds Ranch)
from San Joaquin County AG -40 (Agriculture, General, Minimum 40 Acres) Zone
to City of Lodi PD (Planned Development) Zone, Which Includes Designations
Specific to Housing, Commercial, Office, and Public/Quasi-Public (Zone Change
06-Z-02)"
MEETING DATE: September 6, 2006
PREPARED BY: City Clerk
RECOASIENVED ACTION: Motion waiving reading in full and (following reading by title)
adopting the attached Ordinance No. 1784.
BACKGMOUND INFORMATION: Ordinance No. 1784 entitled, "An Ordinance of the City Council of
the City of Lodi Re -Classifying 220 Acres Located on the South Side
of Harney Lane between State Highway 99 and the Union Pacific
Railroad to the West (Reynolds Ranch) from San Joaquin County
AG -40 (Agriculture, General, Minimum 40 Acres) Zone to City of Lodi PD (Planned Development) Zone,
Which Includes Designations Specific to Housing, Commercial, Office, and PublicJQuasi-Public (Zone
Change 06-Z-02)" was introduced at the special City Council meeting of August 30, 2006.
ADOPTION: With the exception of urgency ordinances, no ordinance may be passed within five days of
its introduction. Two readings are therefore required — one to introduce and a second to adopt the
ordinance. Ordinances may only be passed at a regular meeting or at an adjourned regular meeting;
except for urgency ordinances, ordinances may not be passed at a special meeting. Id. All ordinances
must be read in full either at the time of introduction or at the time of passage, unless a regular motion
waiving further reading is adopted by a majority of all council persons present. Cal. Gov't Code § 36934.
Ordinances take effect 30 days after their final passage. Cal. Gov't Code § 36937.
This ordinance has been approved as to form by the City Attorney.
FISCAL IMPACT: None.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: None required.
��
Jer&4ifer M. NSlin
Interim City Clerk
imp
Attachment
APPROVED:
Blair Cling, City Manager
counciVeouncom/Ordinance2.doc
ORDINANCE NO. 1784
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI
RE -CLASSI=FYING 220 ACRES LOCATED ON THE SOUTH SIDE OF
HARNEY LANE BETWEEN STATE HIGHWAY 99 AND THE UNION PACIFIC
RAILROAD TO THE WEST (REYNOLDS RANCH) FROM SAN JOAQUIN
COUNTY AG -40 (AGRICULTURE, GENERAL, MINIMUM 40 ACRES) ZONE
TO CITY OF LODI PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) ZONE WHICH
INCLUDES DESIGNATIONS SPECIFIC TO HOUSING, COMMERCIAL,
OFFICE, AND PUBLIC/QUASI-PUBLIC (ZONE CHANGE 06-Z-02)
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The properties subject to this zoning reclassification include the following:
220 acres located on the south side of Harney Lane between State Highway 99
and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPRR) to the west — Assessors Parcel Numbers
058-110-04, 058-110-05, 058-110-41, 058-130-02, 058-130-03, 058-130-05,
058-130-06, 058-130-07, 058-130-08, 058-130-09, 058-130-11, 058-130-15,
058-130-16, 058-130-17, 058-130-19, 058-130-21, 058-130-22, 058-130-24,
058-130-04, 058-130-10, 058-130-14, and 058-130-18.
SECTION 2. The applicant for the requested zoning reclassification is as follows:
San Joaquin Valley Land Company LLC.
SECTION 3. The requested zoning reclassification consists of the following:
Re-classification of the afore -described properties from San Joaquin County AG -
40 (Agriculture, General, Minimum 40 Acres) Zone to City of Lodi Planned
Development (PD) Zone. (Exhibit 1).
SECTION 4. The Planned Development (PD) Zone designation for the project area is
described as follows:
Planned Development (PD) Zone
The planned development district is designed to accommodate various
types of development such as neighborhood and community shopping
centers, grouped professional and administrative office areas, senior
citizens' centers, multiple housing developments, commercial service
centers, industrial parks or any other use or combination of uses which
can be made appropriately a part of a planned development. In a P -D
zone, any and all uses are permitted; provided, that such use or uses are
shown on the development plan for the particular P -D zone as approved
by the City Council. The residential density within the Planned Residential
Low Density zoning area shall not exceed seven units per gross acre.
Planned Residential Low Density shall be calculated based on acreage
designated Planned Residential Low Density and related zone necessary
to support the Planned Residential Low Density including parks, open
space, detention basins and streets. High Density Residential shall be
between 20 and 30 units per gross acre. Maximum height and bulk, and
minimum setback, yard and parking and loading requirements shall be
established for each P -D zone by the development plan as approved by
the City Council. , These development parameters would be consistent
with the General Plan designation for the sites.
ecti n . Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the City
Council of the City of Lodi hereby determines the following:
1. An Environmental Impact Report (06-EIR-01) for this project was certified by City
Council Resolution No. 2006-162.
2. The required public hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a
manner prescribed by law.
3. It is found that the requested rezoning does not conflict with adopted plans or
policies of the General Plan and will serve sound Planning practice.
4. It is further found that the parcels of the proposed rezoning are physically suitable for
the development of the proposed project.
5. The proposed design and improvement of the site is consistent with all applicable
standards adopted by the City in that the project, as conditioned, will conform to
adopted standards and improvements mandated by the City of Lodi Public Works
Department Standards and Specifications, Zoning Ordinance as well as all other
applicable standards.
6. The size, shape and topography of the site is physically suitable for the mixed-use
development proposed in that the site is generally flat and is not within an identified
natural hazard area.
7. The site is suitable for the density proposed by the project in that the site can be
served by all public utilities and creates design solutions for storm water, traffic and
air quality issues.
8. The design of the proposed project and the proposed improvements are not likely to
cause substantial environmental damage or injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
Potential biological -related environmental impacts identified in the EIR would not be
significant because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to
reduce any impacts to a level of less than significant.
9. The design of the proposed project and type of improvements are not likely to cause
serious public health problems in that all public improvements will be built per City
standards and all private improvements will be built per the Uniform Building Code.
10. The design of the proposed project and the type of improvements will not conflict
with easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of property
within the proposed project in that, as conditioned, the project will provide dedication
of adequate right-of-ways for Harney Lane, and other circulation and roadway
improvements required to serve the project.
11. The project is conditioned to construct improvements to Harney Lane and other
existing streets, create new streets, install new and upgrade existing intersections,
and provide improved access to and from State Route 99, thereby insuring that an
adequate Level of Service is maintained on the roadways within the area.
12. The loss of Prime Farmland located within the project area will be mitigated through
either: (a) the identification of agricultural acreage located in close proximity to the
project site to be maintained in perpetuity as agricultural use; or (b) the payment of
an Agricultural land Mitigation fee to the City of Lodi and/or the Central Valley Land
Trust (Central Valley Program) or other equivalent entity. The Lodi City Council,
within its legislative capacity and as a matter of policy, shall determine the sufficiency
of any fees paid to mitigate the loss of Prime Farmland.
13. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the Development Plan
approved by the City Council
SECTION 6. All conditions of approval of this reclassification are included as
Attachment A.
SECTION 7. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed
Insofar as such conflict may exist.
SECTION 8. 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 9. 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 10. This ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News•Sen*W " a
daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall
take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval.
Approved this 60 day
Attest: .
Ni4IFE M. PEHF'N
nt6r1m City Clerk
State of California
County of San Joaquin, ss.
1, Jennifer M. Perrin, Interim City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that
Ordinance No. 1784 was introduced at a special meeting of the City Council of the City
of Lodi held August 30, 2006, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print
at a regular meeting of said Council held September 6, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Beckman, Hansen, Johnson,
and Mayor Hitchcock
NOES; COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Mourne
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
I further certify that Ordinance No. 1784 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the
este of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law.
J IFER M ERRIN
Interim City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
ATTACHMENT A
CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
ZONE CHANGE WZ-02
1. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the mufti -family, office, and retail
components of the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Site Plan
and Architectural: Review Committee.
2. Prior to issuance of a building permit for the Blue Shield office building the applicant
shall seek to obtain LEED Certification for their office building on the 20 -acre
parcel.
3. Prior to the issuance of any residential building permit the applicant shall achieve a
minimum of 50 points, as verified by a GreenPoint Rater, in accordance with
GreenPoint Rated program procedures.
4. The Developer shall strive to incorporate New Urbanist principles as dictated by the
Congress of New Urbanism into the overall design and construction of the
Reynolds Ranch Project prior to issuance of Tentative Map by incorporating the
following thirteen (13) elements into their project specific development, to the
satisfaction of the Community Development Director. Said principles are as follows:
A. The neighborhood has a discernible center. This is often a square or a green
and sometimes a busy or memorable street corner. A transit stop would be
located at this center.
B. Most of the dwellings are within a five-minute walk of the center, an average of
roughly 2,000 feet.
C. There are a variety of dwelling types — usually houses, rowhouses and
apartments — so that younger and older people, singles and families, the poor
and the wealthy may find places to live.
D. At the edge of the neighborhood, there are shops and offices of sufficiently
varied types to supply the weekly needs of a household.
E. A small ancillary building is permitted within the backyard of each house. It may
be used as a rental unit or place to work (e.g., office or craft workshop).
F. An elementary school is close enough so that most children can walk from their
home.
G. There are small playgrounds accessible to every dwelling -- not more than a
tenth of a mile away.
H. Streets within the neighborhood form a connected network, which disperses
traffic by providing a variety of pedestrian and vehicular routes to any
destination.
I. The streets are relatively narrow and shaded by rows of trees. This slows
traffic, creating an environment suitable for pedestrians and bicycles.
J. Buildings in the neighborhood center are placed close to the street, creating a
well-defined outdoor room.
K. Parking lots and garage doors rarely front the street. Parking is relegated to the
rear of buildings, usually accessed by alleys.
L. Certain prominent sites at the termination of street vistas or in the
neighborhood center are reserved for civic buildings, These provide sites for
community meetings, education, and religious or cultural activities.
M. The neighborhood is organized to be self-governing. A formal association
debates and decides matters of maintenance, security, and physical change.
Taxation is the responsibility of the larger community
5. The conditions of approval listed below are to be accomplished prior to deeming
complete the first Tentative Subdivision Map, unless noted otherwise:
A. Preparations of detailed master plans and supporting studies as listed below,
including engineering calculations, for all phases of the development. The
study area shall include all the area between Harney Lane, State Route 99
and Lower Sacramento Road or the Woodbridge Irrigation District canal as
appropriate. (The required master plans and supporting studies are
necessary to confirm the design of the proposed development and may affect
the number of growth management allocations that can ultimately be utilized.
The Developer agrees that the proposed project layout and number of growth
management allocations approved may be subject to revision based on the
results of the completed master plans and studies, the development or
growth management plan and accompanying growth management allocations
may be approved prior to completion and approval of the master plans and
supporting studies.)
1. Water master plan, including the following:
a. Surface water transmission and distribution facilities.
b. Identification of possible water well sites within the project area.
Developer shall coordinate test well drilling for determination of
actual well sites prior to mapping of adjacent lots.
2. Recycled water master plan, including the following:
a. Identification of areas to be irrigated.
b. Detailed summary of demand calculations. Include development
south of Harney Lane demands in calculations.
c. Detailed summary of pipe sizing calculations.
d. Provisions for future westerly extension.
3. Wastewater master plan.
4. Storm drainage master plan, including storm drainage basin dimensions
and details. Retention basins shall be designed as passive bypass
systems. Identify a single -facility designate to receive low flow and first
flush flows.
5. Streets/circulation plan, including the following:
a. Dimensions of street rights-of-way, including Harney Lane, Road
W, State Route 99 Frontage, and other circulation and roadway
improvements, bike/pedestrian/open space facilities and utility
corridors.
b. Traffic analysis of operations at critical intersections to determine
if supplemental right-of-way is required.
c. Typical cross-section diagrams showing proposed utility locations
and demonstrating that sufficient width has been provided to meet
separation requirements between pipes.
6. Transit study to identify new or modified routes to serve the area.
7. Topography and/or spot elevations for the entire study area to confirm
validity of water, wastewater and storm drain master plans.
8. Composite utility diagram to facilitate review of potential utility crossing
conflicts.
9. Modification of the Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan to include the
project area. All modifications to the bicycle master plan shall be to the
approval of the Public Works Department and Parks and Recreation
Department.
B. Phasing analysis to be approved by the City prior to submittal of the first
tentative map. The analysis shall include the following:
1. Phase boundaries and number of units to be constructed with each
phase.
2. Permanent and interim/temporary facilities required to implement each
phase based on the mitigation monitoring program and the above
mentioned master plans.
3. Master utility calculations for permanent and interim/temporary facilities to
be constructed with each phase.
6. Finance and Implementation Plan to identify funding for the required public
improvements and interim/temporary improvements for each phase of the project.
The Finance and Implementation Plan is dependent on the above mentioned
master plans and phasing analysis and shall be approved by the City prior to
submittal of the first tentative map.
7. All mitigation measures for the project, identified in the Final Environmental Impact
Report (FEIR), are hereby incorporated into this recommendation of approval.
8. Prior to the development of the Reynolds Ranch Project, the applicant/developer
shall file for a tentative subdivision map. Review and approval of the tentative
subdivision map is a discretionary action and additional conditions of approval may
be placed on the project at that time.
9. All applicable state statutes, and local ordinances, including all applicable Building
and Fire Code requirements for hazardous materials shall apply to the project.
10. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit construction
elevations, perspective elevations, precise landscape and irrigation plans, as well
as building materials for the review and approval of the Community Development
Director. Said plans shall indicate that all corner lots shall have architectural
treatments on both street facing elevations.
11. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit a walls and fencing
plan. Said plan shall show all proposed walls and fencing. Fencing visible to the
public right of way shall be constructed of treated wood or alternative material to
prevent premature deterioration. Furthermore, all fencing within the project site
shall be designed with steel posts, or a functional equivalent, to prevent premature
deterioration and collapse.
12. Any proposed public lanes shall incorporate stamped concrete, pavers or an
equivalent subject to approval by the Public Works Department and Community
Development Department.
13, The proposed project shall be subject to the San Joaquin County Air Pollution
Control District Rules.
14. The proposed project should incorporate as many energy conserving and emission
reducing features as possible, as outlined in correspondence from San Joaquin
County Air Pollution Control District, dated January 13, 2006 and kept on file in the
Community Development Department.
15. Prior to submittal of any further plan check or within 90 days of the approval of this
project, whichever occurs first, the applicant shall sign a notarized affidavit stating
that "I(we), , the owner(s) or the owner's representative have read,
understand, and agree to the conditions approving 06-Z-02." Immediately following
this statement will appear a signature block for the owner or the owner's
representative which shall be signed. Signature blocks for the City Community
Development Director and City Engineer shall also appear on this page. The
affidavit shall be approved by the City prior to any improvement plan or final map
submittal.
3
.Sdo�
d
a
r*
UA
UAccc
IX
o
4 .�
•a
b
cc
tMD
ps
c o
a
00
i
7
Page 1 of 2
Im4p Z + LID 3
JennUler Perrin
From: Jennifer Perrin
Sent: Wednesday, September 06, 200611:12 AM
To: 'Kathy Haring'; Susan Hitchcock; Bob Johnson; JoAnne Mounce; John Beckman; Larry Hansen
Cc: Blair King; Jim Krueger; Steve Schwabauer; Randy Hatch
Subjead: RE: Tonight's adoptkon of Reynolds Ranch ordinance
Dear Mls. Haring:
This reply is to confirm that your message was received by the City ClerKs Office and each member of the City
Council. In addition, by copy of this e-mail, we have forwarded your message to the following departments for
information, referral, or handling: 1) City Manager, 2) City Attorney, and 3) Community Development.
Is/ Jennifer M. Perrin, Interim City Clerk
-----Original Message -----
From: Kathy Haring [ma!Ito:KHaring@GHSD.K12.ca.us]
Soft Wednesday, SeWmber 06, 2006 11:08 AM
To: Jennifer Perrin; Susan Hitchcock; Bob Johnson; JoAnne Mounce; John Beckman; Larry Hansen
Subs Tonight's adoption of Reynolds Ranch ordinance
Dear Mayor and Council Members:
Please consider amending the Reynolds Ranch ordinance before adopting it in its entirety at tonighfs
meeting.
The Council approved the acceptance of the Development Plan at its last meeting to:
--annex the land into the city limits
--rezone the land as Planned Development
--accept the terms worked out to prevent a citizens' group lawsuit
I do not believe the Council wished to exempt this developer from the Growth Management Allocation
process.
However, the development plan does just this as written.
It gives San Joaquin Land Company 350 allocations IMMEDIATELY, despite the allocation process
began this May. City staff do not forsee other applicants receiving their allocations until December.
It is unknown to me whether Gillespie's company even complied with the need to apply for allocations
by May 31. If they are not part of this year's process, they should be waiting until 2007 to apply for
residential construction.
The drafted ordinance also guarantees the company at least 73 allocations a yearfor the next eight
years. Current practice allows developers to stagger development over three years. Surely, the
Council wants to revisit the allocations three years from now, to ascertain if the Reynolds Ranch
development is succeeding as intended.
Seven applicants followed the process outlined in the General Plan and Zoning Ordinance to apply in
good faith for allocations. This process was then interrupted for two months, while staff investigated
old language affecting the timeline. As one of those applicants, I asked why my project could not
receive allocations unused in prior years, and therefore held in reserve (I only needed 5 allocations).
was told by the senior planner that this was "impossible." Imagine my shock when 350 reserve
allocations were given to Reynolds Ranch, without any regard to the Growth Management process!!
I do not believe an amendment to the ordinance directing Reynolds Ranch to go through the growth
management allocation process, would be a "deal killer" Phase I requires the building of the Blue
9/6/2006
Page 2 of 2
Shield office and 350 Fomes. The homes could be built after December, when all applicants will
receive their allocations simultaneously.
By exempting one company from published and required procedures, the council would give an unfair
advantage to that company in the real estate market place. Such an action would probably be illegal.
Kathy Haring
552 Kirst Dr.
Woodbridge, CA 95258
(209) 369-3344
9/6/2006