Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - November 1, 2006 I-01 PHADA ITEM 1001, CITY off' Low COUNCIL COMMUNICATION TM AGENDA TITLE: Conduit a Public Hearing to consider: a) Certi0cation of the Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report (EIR). b) The $outhwest Gateway Project, which includes Annexation, Pre -zoning, Development Agreement, and an Amendment to the Bicycle Transport- ation Master Plan to incorporate 305 acres into the City of Lodi to allow construction of 1,300 dwelling units, 5 neighborhood 1 community parks, and a public elementary school, on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road, south of Kettleman Lane, north of Harney Lane (including 565 and 603 East Harney Lane). This includes a City initiated request for the "Other Annexation Areas" (48 acres) for Annexation, General Plan Amendment and Prezoning to avoid creation of a County island. c) the W*stslde Development Project, which includes Annexation, Pre - zoning, Development Agreement, and an Amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, and the Westside Facilities Master Plan to incorporate 151 acres into the City of Lodi to allow construction of 750 dwelting units, 3 neighborhood/community parks, and a public elementary school at 351 E. Sargent Road, 70 East Sargent Road, 212 East Sargent Road, and 402 East Sargent Road. MEETING DATE: November 1, 2006 PREPAWED BY: Lynette Dias and Charity Wagner, LSA Associates, Inc. RECOMMEND ACTION: The Planning Commission and staff recommend action for the EIR, and Staff recommends actions for the Southwest Gateway (SW Gateway) Project and the Westside Project and associated approvals as follows. EIR The Planing Commission recommends that the City Council certify the Lodi Annexations EIR (EIR- 05-01), agopt the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program with specific modifications to Mitigation Measures (LU -1, LU -2 and TRANS -1). Following the City Council's action to certify the EIR, Staff recommends that the City Council take the following actions related to the SW Gateway and Westside Projects: SOUTHWEST GATEWAY 1) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to adopt a resolution of intent to annex 305 acres (AX=04-01: 257 project acres and 48 contiguous acres, outside of the project area) and the request of two property owners on Harney Lane to annex 2 acres of land into the corporate limits of the City of Lodi. APPROVED: Blair Kin ry Manager JACommunity peve}opmentlCoundl Communications120€ I1-1 FCB report Final.doc 2) Approve the City initiated request for a General Plan Amendment for the "Other Annexation Areas" to be redesignated from PR (Planned Residential) to MDR (Medium Density Residential). 3) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Prezone (04-Z-01) to a Planned Development (PD) Zone for the entire SW Gateway site as well as, the request of two property owners on Harney Lane for a Prezone to PD and zoning designation change to Residential Medium Density (R -MD) for the "Other Annexation Areas." 4) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Development Agreement (05 -GM -001), setting the mutual entitlement obligations entered into between the City and the project applicant for the SW Gateway project. 5) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for an Amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Matter Pian. WESTSIDE 6) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to adopt a resolution of intent to annex 151 acres of lana (AX -04-02) into the corporate limits of the City of Lodi. 7) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Prezone (Z-04-03) to a Planned Development (PD) Zone for the entire Westside plan area. 8) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Development Agreement (GM -05-002), setting the mutual entitlement obligations entered into between the City and the project applicant for the Westside project. 9) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to Amend the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan of the Westside Facilities Master Plan. 10) Approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for an Amendment to the Bicycle Master Plan. Note: One of the parcels in the Westside plan area (212 East Sargent Road) is not part of FCB's 636 unit developrrrent area, but is part of the Annexation and Prezoning. FCB does have not ownership interest of the entire property, and the current land owners do not want to be subject to the financial obligations of the Development Agreement. SUMMARY The following provides a brief overview of the proposed projects followed by a summary of the Planning Commission's defberations on the projects. FCB Prc&ct Larl Uses SIN Gateway J:ICommunityDevelopmerttCouncil Communicationsl2i) W1-1 FCB reW Final.doc 2 Housingits Parks/ Low Medium High Density Density Density Basins &Trahs Schoob overall overall overall Totai Area Acres ur" Density units peneft uMia Units (Acres) (Acres) Wesiside 106 388 7 70 1 7.7 180 20 638 24 10 SW Gatevm s 257 770 4.3 160 9.4 300 21.4 1,230 31 14.5 Other Areas to be Annexed 48 - - - - - - 335 - - SIN Gateway J:ICommunityDevelopmerttCouncil Communicationsl2i) W1-1 FCB reW Final.doc 2 The SW Gateway project would annex 257 acres of land from San Joaquin County into the City of Lodi, which could accommodate development of up to 1,230 residential units, 31 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure. To implement the proposed project, the applicant has submitted applications for annexation, Prezone and growth management unit allocation. The growth management units will be allocated through the Development Agreement. An additional 48 acres identified as "Other Areas to be Annexed," which consists of property that is adjacent to the SW Gateway project, currently in San Joaquin County and within the City's Sphere of Influence is also proposed to be annexed into the City. The City has initiated annexation of these properties to avoid creation of a County island. There are also two property owners who have filed Annexation and Prezone applications for their properties on Harney Lane. These properties are contiguous to the SW Gateway project area and are located at 565 and 603 East Harney Lane. Currently there are no development plans identified for the "Other Areas to be Annexed" and the Harney Lane properties. Westside The Westside project would annex 151 acres of land from San Joaquin County into the City of Lodi, which could accommodate development of up to 638 residential units, 24.4 acres of parks/park basins and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure. To implement the proposed project, the applicant has submitted applications for Annexation, Prezoning and Growth Management Allocation units, and an Amendment to the land use plan within the Westside Facilities Master Plan and Bicycle Master Plan. The growth management units will be allocated through the Development Agreement. PLANNING COLI M111SSiON ACTIONS: On October 11, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public meeting to consider the certification of the Lodi Annexation EIR, and the multiple entitlements related to the SW Gateway and Westside land use plans. At this meeting, the Commission heard a staff report on these items; asked questions of staff, the applicant, and the general public; heard public testimony in support and in opposition to these items; closed the public hearing, and then continued these items for consideration on November 8, 2006. On October 12, the applicant submitted a letter requesting that the items be scheduled for hearing by the Commission on October 25, 2006 to allow for the applicant's counsel to be present at the meeting, and to maintain FCB's internal schedule, which requires that the proposed projects be considered by the City Council no later than November 1, 2006 (See Attachment). The Conxnission held a meeting to consider the EIR and the SW Gateway and Westside Project entitlements on October 25, 2006. For this meeting, Staff prepared a supplemental staff report to address the concerns and questions listed above (a copy of the supplemental staff report was provided to the City Council on Friday October 20, 2006). On October 25, 2006, staff presented responses to the Commission's concerns raised at the October 11 meeting. The Commission and the public posed several questions to staff related to agricultural mitigation, transportation impacts and review of subsequent approvals, which ultimately led to a recommendation to certify the EIR with modifications to specific Mitigation Measures that would: a) require that landscaping plans be submitted for homes adjacent to agricultural operations; b) preserve in perpetuity all 392 acres of Prime Farmland within the project areas (including the other annexation areas) with like -kind agricultural land at a 1:1 ratio; c) require that the Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan be reviewed and approved by City staff and the City Council prior to submittal of a Development Plan application (as opposed to submittal of the tentative map application); and d) require the applicant revise the plans to include a minimum 100 -feet open/space landscape buffer, prior to submitting for a tentative map. The Commission's recommended changes to the Impacts Mitigation Measures are detailed later in this report under detailed analysis. JACommunity DevelopmentGoundl Communkzdons12W6111-1 FCB report Final.doc 3 Fallowing the Commission's action to recommend the certification of the EIR, motions to recommend approval of the SW Gateway and the Westside were defeated on a 2:5 vote. The Commission did not consider any alternative motions, but indicated that the defeated motion represented their recomm- endation to deny the project. Modifications discussed by the Commission included delaying the Devel- opment Agreement until after the Prezoning was in place and Development Plans are submitted, requiring workshops with the Commission before finalizing development plans, requiring a residential green building measures plan, and allowing design review to be conducted by the Commission instead of the Site Plan and Architectural Committee (SPARC). Staff believes the SW Gateway and Westside Projects (and the associated entitlements) have merit and should be reviewed and approved by the City Council_ Following is a discussion of the proposed projects and related entitlements. DETAILED ANALYSIS PROPO4ED PROJECTS Pr*d fte Chafacteristics SW Gateway The SW Gateway project site is approximately 257 acres and is comprised of 11 parcels. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. The dominant use of the site is agriculture including, field crops, vineyards, and a cherry orchard. There are also several structures on the site including a cluster of multi -family housing, a single-family home, and a farm complex (used in association with the orchard) all of which are located off of Lower Sacramento Road. The "Other Annexation Areas" consist of 48 acres and are comprised of 12 parcels. There are also two properties on Harney Lane that are requesting annexation and Prezone as part of this request. This area is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. These parcels are developed with agricultural and residential uses. Westside The Westside project site is approximately 151 acres and is comprised of 4 parcels. The site is divided by Sargent Road (which would be renamed Lodi Avenue as part of this project). The project site consists of a triangular parcel north of Sargent Road and three rectangular parcels south of Sargent Road. The parcels south of Sargent Road are utilized as active vineyards. The triangular parcel on the north side of Sargent Road is a vacant unused field. It should be noted that one of the rectangular parcels is not part of the 638 unit development area, but is part of the Annexation and Prezoning. This parcel is identified as 212 East Sargent Road. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. SW Galttaoy Project Description The SW Gateway project is a master planned residential community that, if approved, could accommodate development of up to 1,230 new residential units, 31 acres of parks, trails and open space, a K-8 elementary school (14 acres), and related infrastructure. The proposed SW Gateway land use plan is intended to guide future development of the project area. Detailed plans for development within the project area (including proposed setbacks, height, and architectural design of the homes) would be subject to review by the Planning Commission via a development plan and tentative subdivision maps. The SW Gateway land use plan designates the project site for development as follows: JACommunity DevelopmentlCoundi Communications12 MI1-1 FCB report Final.doc 4 • 177.5 acres of low density, single-family, dwelling units (up to 7 units per acre); • 17 acres of mediure-density dwelling units (7.1 to 20 units per acre); • 14 acres of high-density dwelling units (20.1 to 30 units per acre); • 14.5 arras of ellem#ntary school; • 31 acres of parklart and open space (9 acres of upland park, 17 acres of park/basin, 3.74 acres of trays and 1.37 of general open space area); and 3 acres for a mini storage sibs. The othe ar►nexallion areas, consisting of 48 acres, could be developed with medium density land uses in the futere. The We ide project is a maser planned residential community that, if approved, could accommodate, developrtl#Ent of up to 638 new"rresidrentiel units, 24.4 acres of parks/park basins, trails and open spwm, a K-6 elementary school (10 acres), and related infrastructure. The proposed Westside land use plan is intended to guide future deve*pment of the project area. Detailed plans for development within the project a*a (including proposed setbacks, height, and architectural design of the homes) would be subject to review by the Plannthg Commission via a development plan and tentative subdivision maps. The Wesbide land use plan disignates the project site for development as follows: s 54 acres of low dermity, single-family, dwelling units (up to 7 units per acre); s 9 acres of medium:0ensity dwelNng units (7.1 to 20 units per acre); • 9 acres of high-density dwelling units (20.1 to 30 units per acre); • 10 acres of eelemertwy school; and 24 acres of parklar* (11.43 acres of upland park and 9.77 acres of basin area, 3.2 acres of tails}. CEQ►f lY llsl WAL A1OALYSIS Staff prepored one EIR to eva"te both of the proposed projects. On September 16, 2005, a Notice of Prepara (NOP) was circa,# notifyling responsible agencies and interested parties that an EIR would be: rea�red ipand indlcaft the environmental topics that were anticipated to be addressed in the EIR. A pudic ung session, which was noticed to all property owners located wRhin 500 feet of the projects, was held by the Plansing Commission on October 12, 2005. Comments received by the City and at the public scoping meeting were taken into consideration during preparation of the EIR. The DrafWIR was prepared, and was made available for public review on April 17, 2006. It was distributee to State and local agencies, posted at the County, and made available at the City Planning Offices al Public Library. The Draft EIR was distributed to the Planning Commissioners (and City Council n'fernbers) in April 2006. The Notice of Completion (NOC) was published on April 17, 2006. The 45-doy public comment period began on April 17, 2006 and dosed on May 26, 2006. Written responses to each comment receivers were prepared, and the comments and responses were packaged into a ReOponse to Comments -document. The DraftAlElR and the Respon*e to Comment document constitute the Final EIR, and the City Council must confider 1twanalysis and conclusions in these documents prior to taking action on the SW GatewayAnd Weetside applic4lions for Annexation, General Plan Amendment (for Other Annexation Areas or), Prezone, Development Agreement, Bicycle Master Plan Amendment and Westside Faciliffies Master P%n Amendment (We*side project only). The Final EIR was distributed to the City Council on October 5, 2106. J:1Community4&Y&Wpmen&CoLw)d1 Communicoons12OW11-1 FCB report Rnal.doc rj The Planning Commission considered certification of the Final EIR at meetings on October 11th and October 25th. The Commission's review of the document and their recommendations are described below. Scope of the EIR Based on concerns identified in the NOP and comments received during the public scoping meeting, the following topics were identified for evaluation within the EIR: • Land. Use, Agriculture and Planning Policy • Traffipc and Circulation • Air Quality Noise • Cultural and Paleontologic3al Resources • Geology, Soils and Seismicity Hydrology and Water Quality • Biological Resources • Hazards and Hazardous Materials Utilities Pubic Services Visual Resources Energy Impact* iidwAW*d in the Lodi Annexation EIR Under fQA, a significant impact on the environment is defined as: a substantial, or potentially substantial, adverse change ih 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. Impacts Mitigated to Less -than -Significant Levels. The Lodi Annexation EIR identified certain potentially significant effects on land use, air quality, noise, cultural and paleontological resources, geology soils and seismic0y, hydrology and wailer quality, biological resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and visual resources that could result from the project. However, the City finds that adoption of the mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR and incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Attachment 4) would reduce these significant or potentially significant effects to less -than -significant levels. Significant Unavoidable Impacts. The Draft EIR and Response to Comments document identify several impacts on land use, transportation circulation and parking, air quality, noise and visual resources that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level even though the City finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and adopted as part of the project. CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project acceptable when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable. The City has prepared a Statement of Overriding Considerations (see Attachment 4) that concludes that notwithstanding the disclosure of the significant unavoidable impacts, there are specific overriding economic, legal, social, and other reasons for approving this project. JACommunity 6evelopment\Coundl Communications12WMI1-1 FCB report Final.doc 8 Cumulative Impacts. The Lodi Annexation EIR analyzed development that is likely to occur under the buildout of the General Plan in addition to specific development projects throughout the City to determine cumulative impacts of the proposed project. The EIR found that the project would exacerbate nonattainment of air quality standards within the San Joaquin Valley. EIR Project Aftelmatives The EIR considered four alternatives to the proposed project: the No Project/No Build Alternative, the Agricultural Residential Alternative, the Reduced Density Alternative, and the Increased High Density Alternative. As required by CEQA, the EIR identified an environmentally superior alternative. The No Project/No Build alternative was identified as the environmentally superior alternative in the strict sense that the environmental impacts associated with its implementation would be the least of all the scenarios examined (including the proposed project). In cases like this where the No Project/No Build alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA requires that the second most environmentally superior alternative be identified. The Agricultural Residential alternative would be considered the second most environmentally superior alternative. Under this alternative, there would be a reduction in potential land use impacts as the majority of the site would remain in agricultural production. However, this alternative would not meet the project objectives of providing increased residential opportunities for the City of Lodi, as well as providing parks and public facilities. Response to Comments Document The Response to Comment (FITC) Document provides responses to comments on the Draft EIR and makes revisions to the Draft EIR, as necessary, in response to these comments or to amplify and clarify material in the Draft EIR. The following nine comment letters where submitted to the City of Lodi during the public review period: 1 Department of California Highway Patrol May 4, 2006 S.M. Coutts, Captain 2 Department of Conservation, May 26, 2006 Division of Land Resource Protection Dennis J. O'Bryant, Acting Assistant Director 3 Department of Transportation, May 25, 2006 Torn Dumas, Chief of Office of Intermodal Planning 4 Pacific Gas and Electric Company May 26, 2006 Cli#ord J. Gleicher 5 Public Utilities Commission April 26, 2006 Kevin Boles, Utilities Engineer 6 Sart Joaquin County Public Works May 24, 2006 Andrea Vallejo, Assistant Transportation Planner 7 Governor's Office of Planning and Research May 26, 2006 Std Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Terry Roberts, Director 8 Sara Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District May 4, 2006 Debbie Johnson, Air Quality Specialist 9 Willson, Robert G. May 23, 2006 Additionally, Staff received five EIR comment letters the week of October 9, 2006. The additional letters included a supplemental letter from Pack Gas and Electric Company, Adams Broadwell Joseph and Cardoza on behalf of Citizens for Open Government, Sierra Club, Campaign for Common Ground, and the Clements Residents. CEQA does not require written responses to these letters as they were not submitted during the public comment period; however staff provided responses to these letters for the Commission's consideration at their meeting on October 25, 2006 (see Attachment). J:1Community DevelopmenACoundl CommuniCations12 MI1-1 FCB report Final.doc 9 iW itlpti Nbm*Wft and ROpo WigPreg ram The Mit' tick Manuring andfteporting Program (MMRP) is included as Chapter I1/ of the Responsato Co r doa.rntient (Attachtimnt 3 of the Planning Commission steff report). The MMRP is in conViarte with Section 1509' of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires that the Lead Agency "adopt a progr-amilor monilloring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or arvoid significant environmental effects." The MMRP lists mitigation measure* recommended in the EIR and identifies mitigation monitoring requirements. The MMRP identif+esthe party responsibly for carrying out the required actions, the approximate timeframe for the oversight agency and the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented_ Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan effectively makes the mitigations part of the project. fid arA SWwwd of dim Cent The I_od Armexagm EIR stipr rtes that follower the adoption and implementation of t ie mitigation measura* recommended in the EIR, the proposed project would have significant unavoidable impacts on the enviOnment. Section 'WOO of the CEQA Guidelines, requires the Lead Agency, prior to approving a project, to cel that: The final €R has been c9mpkied in compliance with CEQA; • The final 011% was prese rood to the decision-making body of the lead agency, and that ftdec ision- mak�rg body-mviewed anil considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the ojed; and The final EIR reflects the Ilead agency's independent judgment and analysis. In addit` Section 15091 staff that no public agency shall approve or cant' out a project for which an EIR has,. eeetified which identifies one or more significant environmental efle * of the project unless the pubW agency makes one-�Or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied' by a brills wiplanation of the rstionale for each finding. The possible findings are: • Cha es or alterations halve been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or subrnly lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. • Such changes or alteratiolns are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not Oe agency matting the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. • Speplf'iceconomic, legal, Social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of em*yrnent opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or projort alternatives identdW in the final EIR. Section J 50103 also requires #* decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the ecorKxnic, let i, sodal, t cNxk)gical, or othee, benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental rills when dOiermining whether to.'approve the project. If the specific economic, legal, somal, tem, or other bereft of a proposed #rojed outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverswenvironmental effete may be considered "acceptable" if the jurisdiction states in writing the specific reasons to support itoi action used on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record. ©etailedfindings to support certification of the Final EIR and adoption of a statement of overriding considesetions are included herein as Attachment 4 of the Planning Commission staff report. J:rcomrrH r* Deu eflCouncW conmur*tionsr2 M11-1 Fes report Final.doc 10 Plaaniin an -0 t Row . The Planning Commission considered certification of the Fi I Eilk at meetings oA October 11 and October 25. Several concerns and questions regarding the EIR *re raised by the Commission and the public at the October 11 Commission meeting including: • The project's inconsistency with the Westside Facilities Infrastructure Master Plan is not adequately addres0ed. • The recommended -mitigation for buffering the adjacent agricultural land is inadequate (mon Measure LU -1). The Commission suggested that a buffer of 900 feet minimum be required. • The Irmpact and M11119ation Measure LU -2 related to the conversion of agricultural {and should include the 39 acreo of Prime farmland within the Other Annexation Areas, require a time period Jonger than 15 years, and include an option to require what is required under the San JoaqWn County program orae it's adopted. • Concern that the Tfaffic Mitigation Measures TRANS -1 and TRANS -2, which require the prepafation of a Trorl'fuc Improvement and Financing Plant that has to be approved by the City Council prior to the approval of a Tentative Map, is not adequate and inappropriately defiers n*gabon. • Dk cussion as to wether the recommended Air Quality Mitigation Measures are adequate anti whether some of tft measures included in the Adam's Broadwell letter should be included. • Concern regarding the water supply, source and timing. • Concern regarcln the ability to treat wastewater from the project. Growllh inducing irNpacds related to Century Boulevard. On October 25, 2006, staff pr$sented responses to the Commission's concerns raised at the October 11 meeting rhe Commission ano the public posed several questions to staff related ip agricultural mitigation, transportatibn impacts and feview of subsequent approvals. Following the discussion, the Planning�Comrnigsion passed (5/2) a motion recommending certification of the EIR with the modifications to some of the impacts and mitigation measures as detailed below. bfigeW re U-1: To reduce agriculturaUresidential land use incompatibilities, the following shall be required: a. The applicant shall inform and notify prospective buyers in writing, prior to purchase, about exist ng and on --going agricultural activities in the immediate area in tie form of disclosure #tatement. The notifications shall disclose that the residence is located in an agricultural=area subject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and early morning ori-tighttime farm operations which may create noise, dust, et cetera. The language and format of such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to recordation of final map(s). Each disclosure statement shall be acknowledged with the signature of each prospective owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of San Joaquin Right -to -Farm Ordinance. b. The conditiDns of approval for the tentative map(s) shall include requirements ensuring the approvsl of a suitable design and the installation of a landscaped open space buffer areas fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affected by the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non- residential uses, and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. J:\CornmunftUev6kVmeRW--ounCfl Commur*ationsXWO 117-1 FCB report Final.doc 11 c. Prior to recordation of the final map(s) for homes adjacent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping, wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department. d. Additionally, the applicant shall revise the plan prior to Tentative Map approval, to include an open s acellandsca a buffer with a minimum width of 100 feet. (LTS) impact LU -2: The proposed Westailde and SW Gateway rojects would result in the conversion of approximately 392 acres of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses, and the Other Areas to be Annexed would result in conversion of 39 acres of Prime FKMIN d whIS and if developed. Both the Westside and SW Gateway project sites are primarily used in agricultural production, and are currently designated as Prime Farmland. Development of the proposed project would result in the conversion of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses. Additiongily, when and if plans are proposed and approve_ d for development within the Other Areas to be Annexed, the development may result in the conversion of prime farmland. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. This impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with implementation of the following mitigation measure, which would minimize the impact but not to a less -than -significant level: Mdig@tion Measure LU -2: Prior to issuance of a building permit after the first quarter of the combined building permits for the Westside and SW Gateway proiects have been approved, or the approval of a pgrcel or Tentative Ma that would result in the conversion of prime farmland within the Other Areas to be Annexed, the applicant shall provide and undertake a phasing and financing plan (to be approved by the City Council) for one of the following mitigation measures: (1) Identify acreagg at a minimum ratio of 1:1 in kind Japproximately a total of 392 acres of prime farmland for the Westside and SW Gateway ro' cts and 39 acres for the Other Areas to be Annexed (currently not protected or within an easement) to protect in ituity as an agricultural use in a location as determined appropriate by the City of Lodi in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust, and pay a one time fee of $5000.00 to compensate City for monitoring cost/contingencies connected with management of the easements, or pay the monitoring costs as required by the Central Valley Land Trust; or (2) Pay a fee equal to the value of 392 aGFe6 as d8t9FMiRed by aR iFidependen qualified 6wisultant Fetained by the City 'A Gensultation with the Centital Valley Land ;_ 3 With 1he City Council's approval, comply with the requirements of the County Aariculturat Mtigation program, which is currently being developed, if it is adopted by_ the County prior to this mitigation measure being implemented. (SU) MitgatiQn Measure TRANS -1: Each of the following mitigation measures shall be implemented to reduce the project's impact on the identified 16 intersections: 1 a: Mitigation Measure AIR -2 identifies measures recommended by the SJVAPCD's "Guide for Assessing and Mitigating Air Qualify Impacts to reduce vehicle trips and associated air quafity impacts. Implementation of the same measures would also reduce associated traffic impacts. The following are considered to be feasible and effective in further reducing vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions from the project and shall be implemented to the extent feasible and desired by the City: J:ICommunity DevOopment\CouncH Communlcations120MI1-1 FCS report Rnal.doc 12 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 turnouts/bulbs. • Provide park and ride lots. 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. Such a reduction would help minimize the project's impact. 1b: The implementation of each of the improvements listed in Table IV.B-6 would reduce the impacts to the identified 16 intersections to a less -than -significant level. To mitigate these impacts, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.B-6 for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, how the improvement will be funded including a reimbursement program where appropriate; and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. The Plan may include an annual monitoring program of the intersections as a method for determining the schedule for implementing each improvement. The Plan shall take into account whether an improvement is already programmed and/or funded in a City or County program (i.e., Lodi Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program, San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee, Measure K (existing or renewal program), and San Joaquin Council of Governments Regional Transportation Improvement Program). If an improvement is included in one or more of these programs, the Pian needs to consider whether the programs schedule for the improvement will meet the needs of the project and if not identify alternatives. The Plan shall be submitted to City staff for review and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Deveio,pmwnt Plan application. Implementation of Measure TRANS -1 a and TRANS -1b, would mitigate the projects impact on existing condigons to a less -than -significant level. However, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some of the General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more significant long- term improvement is being planned (i.e., reconstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). As a result, the project's impact at some intersections may be significant and unavoidable if the City chooses not to implement the recommended mitigation measure. (Potentially SU) Staff is sWportive of the Commission's recommendations on certification of the EIR, with the exception of the amendment to Mitigation Measure LU -1 (item d) that requires the SW Gateway and Westside land use plans to be revised to include a 100 -foot minimum open space landscape buffer. Staff appreciates the concerns raised by the Commission and the public with respect to providing a buffer for agricultural uses. However, staff would caution the City Council's consideration of the recommended mitigation to provide a 100 -foot buffer. Staff firmly believes that such a buffer is not required to reduce agricultural/residential land use incompatibilities to a less -than -significant level. Several cities and counties in central and northern California (including Lodi) have similar agriculture and residential interfaces. Some cities require agricultural buffers (Brentwood and Gilroy) and some cities have J:1Community DevelopmentlCouncil CommunicationsTW6111-1 FCB report Final.doc 13 requirements that require agricultural uses to co -exist with residential uses by not allowing buffers (Livermore). If it is the desire of the City Council to have an open space buffer provided by the applicant when preparing detailed development plans, the City Council could input this requirement as a condition of approval into the PD Prezoning. As a condition of approval, the City could have the flexibility of considering the appropriateness of the buffer at the time the detailed development plans are submitted. As a Mitigation Measure, the applicant would be required to provide the buffer to mitigate the impact to a less -than -significant level unless a statement of overriding consideration is adopted. As discussed in detail above, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council certify the EIR with speck modifications. Staff concurs with the Planning Commission recommendation to certify the EI=R, but would nate that careful consideration should be given to the Commissions recommendation to modify Mitigation Measure LU -1 (d) to include a requirement for 100 -foot landscape buffer. SW GALWAY PROJECT ANALYSIS 1) Annexation The SW Gateway project area is located west of the current Lodi City Limit, on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road, within San Joaquin County. As part of the proposed project, the applicant intends to annex the 257 acre project area into the City of Lodi. Annexation of lands into the City requires review and approval by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). LAFCO will consider applications for annexation, upon a request of the City Council. Lands must be within the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI) in order to be annexed. A Sphere of Influence is a planning tool adopted and used by LAFCO to designate the future boundary and service area for a City. The SW Gateway project area is within the City of Lodi Sphere of Influence (adopted by LAFCO on August 24, 2004). The General Plan designates the project area as PR and the proposed development is consistent with the PR designation of the General Plan, which encourages a variety of housing densities (at an average density of less than 7 dwelling units per gross acre) and public uses within a cohesive development plan. The General Plan anticipated development of the areas designated PR within the lifetime of the current plan (by 2007). Additionally, the annexation of the SW Gateway project, necessitates annexation of 48 acres of "Other Areas to be Annexed" on the east side of Lower Sacramento Road, which would otherwise become a County island surrounded by City lands. There are also two property owners on Harney Lane requesting annexation as part of this application. These properties are also located within the SOI and are currently developed with multi- and single-family residences. No new development is currently proposed for these properties, but development of this area is anticipated in the future. The areas to be annexed are within the SOI, consistent with the General Plan designations, would avoid the creation of a County island, and would provide for contiguous urban growth, and a logical extension of public services; therefore, staff recommends that the City Council request LAFCO approval for the annexation of the SW Gateway project area, the "Other Areas to be Annexed", and the two parcels In Harney Lane (365 and 603 East Harney Lane). 2) Genual Plan Amendmenk The SW Gateway project (and two parcels on Harney Lane) would remain in the PR designation and would be developed according to the PR (Planned Residential) density provisions. However, the "Other Annexation Areas" would be redesignated from PR to MDR (Medium Density Residential). The MDR designation is consistent with surrounding land use designations, and would permit the future development of single-family and multi -family uses; therefore, staff recommends the City Council approve a General Plan Amendment from PR to MDR for the "Other Annexation Areas." 3) Prezoning. Properties must have a City zoning code designation prior to annexation. Upon annexation, the City of Lodi designation of Planned Development will supercede the County JACommun4y DevelopmerrhCouncil CommuniCationMM6111-1 FCB report Final.doc 14 designations, and development will be subject to the development standards and regulations of the City. The SW Gateway project includes a request for a pre -zoning designation to change the zone from a County zone of AU -20, Agriculure Urban Reserve with a minimum lot size of 20 acres, to a City zone of Planned Development, with underlying uses as indicated on the SW Gateway land use development plan. The two parcels on Harney Lane would also be Prezoned PD. The "Other Areas to be Annexed" would have a pre -zone designation of R -MD (Residential Medium -Density). In accordance with State law, zoning designations must be consistent with General Plan designations. The proposed PD Zone would be consistent with the existing General Plan designation of PR (Planned Residential) because the proposed density of 4.8 units per gross acre is within the PR density maximum of 7 dwel#ng units per gross acre. Additionally, the proposed zoning designation of R -MD for the "Other Areas to be Annexed" would be consistent with the proposed MDR General Plan designation. The applicant has submitted a preliminary Development Plan depicting the proposed layout of land uses within the SW Gateway project area. Final development plans would be subject to review by the Planning Commission prior to approval of any tentative subdivision maps, thereby allowing the Planning Commission to review final design details (architecture, setbacks, building height, landscaping, fencing, etc.) for each phase of the development. Residential uses would be the primary land use within the SW Gateway land use plan (occupying 200 of the 257 acre site). The densities of residential uses would be interspersed throughout the project, and the applicant intends to develop several different lots sizes and housing types throughout the project area. Again, final development plans will be subject to review by the Planning Commission; however, the applicant has provided sample elevations for each housing type (see Attachment. 3 of the Planning Commission report) and the following housing descriptions to provide context to the intent of the land use plan. Low Density. The applicant proposes development of 770 low density residential units within the SW Gateway plan area. Low density is defined in the General Plan as 0.1-7 dwelling units per gross acre. The standard lots for the units would range in size from 4,500 square feet to 7,350 square feet. Large lots up to 10,000 square feet would also be provided. Six different lot sizes are planned to address a broad range of housing types and needs in this category. Homes are expected to range from approximately 1,950 to over 4,000 square feet. All homes would be single- family detached units with two or more garage spaces. A variety of architectural styles would be incorporated into the project. Each unit would be a single-family detached home and be either one or two stories. Medium Density. The applicant proposes development of 160 medium density residential units whin the SW Gateway plan area. Medium density is defined in the General Plan as 7.1-20 dwelling units per gross acre. The medium -density housing would be detached single family units designed with three residential lot types. The first lot type would be approximately 3,600 square feet. The residential uNts on this lot type would range from approximately 1,500 to 2,100 square feet and include two -car garages. The second lot type is a cluster of four lots accessed by a common stub alley condition. This second lot type would average approximately 3,300 square feet and the residential units would range from 1,300 to 1,900 square feet. Each unit would have a two -car garage. The third lot type is a cluster designed for alley access to the garages. Each home on this type of lot would either front -on or side -on to the neighborhood street. In the instances where lot clusters side on to the street, the front of the homes face a common pedestrian access called a paseo. The lots in this neighborhood would be approximately 2,700 square feet excluding the landscaped paseos. The cluster products will have a two -car garage oriented to an alley. High Density. The applicant proposes development of 300 high density residential units within the SW Gateway plan area. High density is defined in the General Plan as 20.1-30 dwelling units per gross acre. The high density units would include townhome units and apartment units. The townhomes would range from approximately 1,100 to 1,800 square feet with two -car garages J1CommunityDevelopmentlCouncil CommunicabonsXXOG\11-1 FCB report Final. doc 15 under each unit. The townhome units would be attached and grouped in segments of five to seven in each building. The townhomes are intended to be for -sale units. The apartments would be a blend of one-, two- and three-bedroom units. The apartment buildings would be two- and three- story buildings. The applicant has also provided conceptual landscaping plans for the streets and pedestrian trails within the SW Gateway land use plan (see Attachment 4 of the Planning Commission staff report). Final street widths and landscaping plans will be subject to review and approval by the Public Works and Fire Departments to insure that: a) the streets are wide enough to serve as a utility corridor; b) the street width and design allow access by emergency vehicles; c) the landscaping does not interfere with underground utilities; d) adequate room is provided for any above -ground utilities; e) the streets are not too wide to inhibit a neighborhood feel and social interaction across the street; and f) the street width is not so wide as to promote speeding. The Council may wish to note that, since the Commission meeting, staff has added the following Condition of Approval to the Prezoning Ordinance: As part of Mitigation Measure LU -2 of the Lodi Annexations EIR (EIR-05-01) the developer has the option to pay fees consistent with the pending San Joaquin County Agricultural Mitigation program or preserve agricultural land in perpetuity to mitigate significant impacts associated with conversion of the 392 acres of Prime Farmland within the Westside, SW Gateway and Other Areas to be Annexed. If the developer proceeds with the mitigation to preserve land within an agricultural easement, and the City of the Lodi becomes party to said easement, the developer shall pay the City a one-time administration fee of five thousand dollars. Said fee shall be paid prior to approval of the first tentative subdivision map. The proposed PD zone would allow for the development of 1,230 new residential units, development of neighborhood{community parks, a school and related infrastructure as per the associated SW Gateway land use plan. The SW Gateway project would provide new housing within a unique and well designed neighborhood that would promote the General Plan goals of providing a mixture of housing types. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed Pre zoning to Planned Development with the Implementation of the SW Gateway land use plan, and subsequent final development plans to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. Additionally, staff recommends the City Council adoption of the R-pAD pre -zoning for the "Other Areas to be Annexed" and 116D Pre -zoning for the two parcels on Harney Lane. 4) Develbpment Agreement A Development Agreement (DA) is a private party agreement between an applicant and the City that, if approved by the City Council, becomes an ordinance of the City. City Staff has negotiated a draft Development Agreement with the project applicant, pursuant to which FCB has agreed to certain benefits to the City in exchange for a vested right to proceed with the development consistent with the development approvals (the Development Agreement is included as Attachment 5 of the Planning Commission staff report). The term of the Development Agreement is 15 years. The vested right the developer obtains is the ability to proceed with the development as approved and to avoid the imposition of new regulations on the subsequent discretionary approvals (i.e., vesting tentative maps) for the development. A discussion of its benefits to the City and the how the agreement would allocate growth management units is outlined below. A summary of the obligations and benefits included in the draft Development Agreement is provided below. J NCommunty Developmen"Counal Communications12008111-1 FCB report Final.doc 16 Develloownt Aareement Prosect Obiivatlons for FCB Westside and SW Gateway Protects ObIlgaticM Benefit Payment of $8,000.000 in installment payments for Creation of community asset - $8,000,000 design and construction of DeSenedetti Park (SMI contribution Gateway) Rehabilitate or pay the costs up to a total of $1,250,000 $1,250,000 of rehabilitating 25 single-family or multi -family residential units within a specilied area within the City estsid Pay $1254,000 for use by the City for economic $125,000 development actions including job creation, promoting retail sa* and/or wine industry tourism all as determir* b the Ci est Maintenmce of specified pub* Improvements, Developer to provide the maintenance or pay including park, median strip and other landscaping for the maintenance costs for two years after maintenance and repair costs on dedicated lands for a acceptance by City period of two yearsBoth Pro' cts Pay $2,300,000 to the City for use to aoquire additional $2,300,000 faciNties, equipment and apparatus for the Lodi Fire De rtmWt. eatside lnstallatW of public art within the project with a value $150,000 equal to $150,000; art subject to approval by the City estsida Pay $100,000 to the City for use to acquire equipment $100,000 for the Lodi Parks and Recreation and Public Works De rtmnts. (SNV Gateway) Commur ty Facillbes District formed to provide funding $600 per single family attached or detached for payment of police, fire, library, recreation, flood residential unit per year and $175 per multi - control services and specified public facilities (Both family rental unit per year Projects) Dedicate park land, design and complete construction Full cost paid by Developer of all the park improvements as described and set forth in the p1ject approvals Both Projects Offer to dedicate 5-acreuafc Center estside $200,000 per acre All development approved as part of the project will be Payment of development impact fees and subject to uniformly applied increases in existing impact water fees fee and to specified new fees as described herein. Both P eets Payment of a development fee for a proportionate share Cost of interchange funded, in part, by of the cost of the Highway 99 overpass at Harney Lane payment from Developer — Amount based on (Both Projects) proportionate share of demand for interchan e Payment of Agricultural Land Mitigation fee pursuant to Fees available for preservation of prime the ordinance and/or resolution to be adopted by the agricultural land based on ordinance adopted Ci Both Projects) is by. City Payment of Electric Capital Improvement Mitigation fee Fees available for electric capital facilities pursuant to the ordinance and/or resolution to be based on ordinance adopted by City adopted by the Ci Both Pr 'ects Payment of development fee for proportionate share of Cost of improvements funded, in part, by the costs of designing and constructing a water payment from Developer — Amount based on treatment system and/or percolation system for proportionate share of need created by the treatment of water acquired from Woodbridge Irrigation proposed development District pursuant to the ordinance an/or resolution to be adqpted,by the Ci Both P leets Payment of Utift Exit Fees(Both Projects) Developer pays full amount to PGE JAC-ommunity DevelopmentNCouncil Commurkations\"6111-1 FCB report Final. doc 17 Installation of Water Well on Westside Project site (Both Ensure appropriate water supply for project Projects Provide up to a maximum of $50,000 to partially fund $100,000 the City of Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study (Both Projects) All storm drain basins, facilities, controls interior to Full cost paid by Developer project (sth projects) Developer shall design, engineer and construct the Provide necessary infrastructure and improve following improvements or pay the City the Harney Lane and Highway 12 to meet City appropriate fee for the improvements: standards 1. Proportionate share for the surface water transmission main and storage tank (Both Projects); 2. All water, sewer, storm gain, recycled water pipes and related infrastructure in all streets within the project area (Both Projects) 3. Dedicate land necessary design, and install improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and larndsWpkg on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road between Lodi Shopping Center and Harney Lane (Both Projects); 4. Dedicate laird adjacent b the project's frontage which is necessary for the expansion of Harney Lane and improve Hamey Lane or pay into assessment district for improvements (SNV Gateway); 5. Dedicate land, design and install a transition roadvoey land adjacent to the property along Highway 12/Kiettiernen Larve (SIW Gateway); 6. Reconstruct Lodi Avenue west of Lower Sacramento Road to the vABstem project boundary (Westide); 7. Reconstruct the Tokay Avenue/Lower Sacrernemto Road intersection to accommodate wider street sections 8. Pay fair share for traffic mitigation measures in E I R that are not projects within theF Streets and Roads Fee Program, Both cis In exchange for these enhancements and for satisfying all of the conditions of approval and mitigation measurer associated with the development project, the developer is obtaining a vested right to build uta to 1,230 residential units. Additionally, the Development Agreement allows flexibility in complying with the density percentages of the General Plan, defers detailed review of project architecture and design until development plans are submitted and provides specific details on phasing and implementation. The applicant has submitted an application for 300 high density, 160 medium density and 770 low density growth management allocation units for the SW Gateway project. To date, there are 3,415 total allocations available: 1,772 high density, 278 medium density and 1,715 low density allocations (this includes the reserve allocations - units not previously granted). The table below shows a history of growth management allocation units including reserve allocations and units recently granted to the Reynolds Ranch project. J:1Communitypeve#opmen(%Counoil Communioa4ons12Wffil1-1 FCB report Final.doc 18 Growth Van"enwnt ADocatios History Den� AvalidMe Allocations Assumptions by year Based on 2% Growth Rate and 2.774 persiens All s r household AvalhMe Allocations 201 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2614 Scheduled Grardsd from from 1989,2 18 2065 Total Available Low 0.1- . 4,608 2,893 1,715 Medium (7.1-201 709 431 278 Hi h 20.'f�30 1,772 Oa 1,772 TOTAL f 206 7,088 3,324 3,765 a There ha" been high density allocations granted over the past 15 years; however they have expired or were withdtowm prior to issuance of building permits. Approval of the Development Agreement would grant FCB a total of 300 low density and 300 high density growth management ordinance allocations from the reserve account. It would also grant the developer a vested riot to receive between 58 and 134 residential growth allocations per year for the next eight years (see table below). The growth allocations granted through the Development Agreement are within the existing reserve of growth allocations and the projected future growth allocations issued on an annual basis. Notwithstanding the issuances of these growth allocations, there will still be sufficient growth allocations available for other developments within Lodi. Allocatiollls Assumptions through 2914 and Total Remaining Allocations T AvalidMe Allocations Assumptions by year Based on 2% Growth Rate and 2.774 persiens All s r household 201 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2614 Low Dens' _ 1,715 295 300 306 313 319 325 332 338 345 Medium Densi 276 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 High Densft 1,772 113 116 118 120 122 125 127 130 133 Total Allotiilrted Per Year 3,7 453 462 471 1 481 490 500 510 520 531 AlbcaOon per in accordance with Development Agreements Reynolds Ranch -- 150E 73L 73L 73L 73L I 73L I 73L 73L 73L 200H SW Gateway -- 300L 59L 59L 59L 59L 59L 59L 58L 58L 30QH 75M 29M 28M 28M Westside _- 200E D 70M 27L 27L 27L 27L 27L 27L 26L -- 180H Total Gratified per DA - 1,150 277 368 187 187 159 159 1 158 157 RernaininS Annual Allocation b --;3- 185 103 294 303 341 351 362 377 RemaininS Pre -2004 AI locationSt 3,745 2,615 2,615 2,615 2,615 2,615 2,615 2,615 2,615 2,615 Total Rerltaining Ailocabolraid 3,068 2,800 2,718 2,909 2,918 2,956 2,966 2,977 2,992 H=High Density, M --Medium Density and L=Low Density b ANocations granted for the year 2006 (the effective date of the development agreements) were all from the unused reserve allocations from previous years. Essentially none of the scheduled allocations for 2006 have been granted. The remaining allocations pre -2006 represents the amount of unused allocations up to 2005, minus the unused allocations that would be generated in the DAs (3765-1150=2,165). d Total remaining allocations represent the amount of unused allocations (2,615) plus annual allocations that would not be allocated by the DA. Sources: Reynolds Ranch Development Agreement, and Draft Development Agreements for SW Gateway and Westside Projects. If approved, the SW Gateway Development Agreement would grant FCB 300 low density and 300 high density units from the reserved allocations, and for eight years following the first year of allocations, the SW Gateway project would be guaranteed a specific number of allocations from the annual allocation distribution. Because the development stages allocations over a nine year period (2006 to 2014), thereby allowing ample allocations for other projects, and because the Development Agreements secures concessions from the applicant that would be of great benefit to the City, staff recommends that the City Council adept the SW Gateway Development Agreement. J.1Community Development\Coundl Communications12006111-1 FCB report Final.doc 19 5) Bike Pbn Arnandment. The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes Class I bike paths along the western edge of the SW Gateway project boundary and along Century Boulevard (between the western project boundary and Westgate Drive). The Master Plan also includes Class II bike paths on Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Century Boulevard (between Westgate Drive and Lower Sacramento Road). The SW Gateway project includes bike paths, specifically within the north/south trail, but this location does not conform to the location shown in the Master Plan. An amendment to the Bicycle Master Plan is required. Staff believes this amendment is consistent with the purposes of the Master Plan and would only be necessary to relocate the Class I bike path currently shown along the western edge, to the central location proposed within the north/south pedestrian trail in the SW Gateway land use plan. The applicant intends to provide the remaining bike paths as per the Master Plan. Prior to amending the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the requested amendment. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request by Tom Doucette, FCB, to amend the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. Planning Commission Review. The Planning Commission considered approval of the SW Gateway project at meetings on October 11 and October 25. Several concerns and questions were raised by the Commission and the public at the October 11 Commission meeting including: • Concern regarding the applicant initiating a request for an amendment to the Westside Facilities Master Plan. • Desire to include a minimum 100 -foot landscape buffer along the western edge of both the SW Gateway and Westside projects. • Concern related to the terminus of Century Boulevard. • Concerns related to the process and level of review of subsequent project approvals. Following, the Commission's action to recommend the certification of the EIR, motions to recommend approval of the SW Gateway and the Westside were defeated on a 2:5 vote. The Commission did not consider any alternative motions, but indicated that the defeated motion represented their recommaindation to deny the project. Modifications discussed by the Commission included: requiring a minimum 100 -foot wide buffer along the western edge, delaying the Development Agreement until after the Prezoning was in place, and Development Plans were submitted, requiring workshops with the Commission before finalizing development plans, requiring a green building measures plan and allowing design review to be conducted by the Commission instead of the Site Plan and Architectural Committee (SPARC). WESTSIDE PROJECT ANALYSIS 6) Annexation. The Westside project area is located west of the current Lodi City limit, on the west side of existing development along Lower Sacramento Road, and is within San Joaquin County. As part of the proposed project, the applicant intends to annex the 151 acre project area into the City of Lodi. The areas to be annexed are within the SOI, consistent with the General Plan designations, and would provide for contiguous urban growth, and a logical extension of public services, therefore, staff recommends the City Council request LAFCO annexation approval of the Westside project area. 7) Prezoning. Properties must have a City zoning code designation prior to annexation. Upon annexation, the proposed City of Lodi designation of Planned Development would supersede the County designations, and development will be subject to the development standards and regulations of the City. The Westside project includes a request for a pre -zoning designation to change the zone from the J:ICommunity DevetopmentlCouncil Comm unieationsM06111-1 FCB report Final.doc 20 County zone of AU -20, Agriculure Urban Reserve with a minimum lot size of 20 acres, to a City zone of Planned Development (PD), with underlying uses as indicated on the Westside land use plan. In accordance with State law, zoning designations must be consistent with General Plan designations. The proposed PD Zone would be consistent with the existing General Plan designation of PR (Planned Residential) because the proposed density of 6 units per gross acre is within the PR density maximum of 7 dwelling units per gross acre. The appkcant has submitted a Development Plan depicting the proposed layout of land uses within the project area. Final development plans will be subject to review by the Planning Commission prior to approval of any tentative subdivision maps, thereby allowing the Planning Commission to review final design details (architecture, setbacks, building height, landscaping, fencing, etc.) for each phase of the development. ResidenWI uses would be the primary land use within the Westside development plan (occupying 72 of the 106 acre site). The different densities of residential uses would be interspersed throughout the project, and the applicant intends to develop several different lot sizes and housing types throughout the project area. Again, final development plans will be subject to review by the Planning Commission; however, the applicant has provided sample elevations for each housing type (see Attachment 3 of the Planning Commission staff report) and the following housing descriptions to provide context to the intent of the conceptual development plan. Low Density. The applicant proposes development of 388 low density residential units within the Westside plan area. Low density is defined in the General Plan as 0.1-7 dwelling units per gross acre. The low-density housing would be detached single-family units. The majority of lots for these units would be 5,500 to 6,000 square feet. However, there would be some large lots of up to 9,000 square feet. The units would be a mix of one and two stories and would range from 2,000 to 3,000 square feet and include a two -car garage. Medium Density. The applicant proposes development of 70 medium density residential units wtthin the Westside plan area. Medium density is defined in the General Plan as 7.1-20 dwelling units per gross acre. The medium density housing units would be detached single family homes designed for two residential lot types. The first lot type is designed at approximately 3,825 square feet with dimensions of 45 x 85 feet. On this type of lot, residential units would range from approximately 1,500 to 2,200 square feet with two -car garages. The second lot type is a cluster of four lots accessed by a common stub alley condition. This second lot type results in each lot size of approximately 3,300 square feet. The residential units would range from 1,300 to 1,800 square feet. Each unit would include a two -car garage. High Density. The appicant proposes development of 180 high density residential units within the Wiestside plan area. High density is defined in the General Plan as 20.1-30 dwelling units per gross acre. The high density units would consist of townhome units that would range from approximately 1,100 to 1,700 square feet with two -car garages under each unit. The attached townhome units are grouped in segments of five to seven in each building. The appifcant has also provided conceptual landscaping plans for the streets and pedestrian trails within the Westside plan area (see Attachment 4 of the Planning Commission staff report). Final street widths and landscaping plans will be subject to review and approval by the Public Works and Fire Departments to insure that: a) the streets are wide enough to serve as a utility corridor; b) the street width and design are accessible for emergency vehicles; c) the landscaping does not interfere with underground utilities; and d) adequate room is provided for any above -ground utilities; e) the streets are not too wide to inhibit a neighborhood feel and social interaction across the street; and f) the street width is not so wide as to promote speeding. J.ICommunity Development\Council Communications12006111-1 FCB report Final.doc 21 The Council may wish to note that, since the Commission meeting, staff has added the following Condition of Approval to the Prezoning Ordinance: As part of Mitigation Measure LU -2 of the Lodi Annexations EIR (EIR-05-01) the developer has the option to pay fees consistent with the pending San Joaquin County Agricultural Mitigation program or preserve agricultural land in perpetuity to mitigate significant impacts associated with conversion of the 392 acres of Prime Farmland within the Westside, SW Gateway and Other Areas to be Annexed. If the developer proceeds with the mitigation to preserve land within an agricultural easement, and the City of the Lodi becomes party to said easement, the developer shall pay the City a one-time administration fee of five thousand dollars. Said fee shall be paid prior to approval of the first tentative subdivision map. The proposed PD zone would allow for the development of 638 new residential units, development of neighborhood/community park, a school and related infrastructure as per the Westside development plan. The Westside project would provide a unique and well designed neighborhood that would promote the General Plan goals of providing a mixture of housing types. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed prezoning to Planned Development with the implementation of the Westside land use plan, and subsequent final development plans to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 8) Devellopment Agreement. An approval of a Development Agreement (DA) is also being requested for the Westside project. Please see the discussion under the SW Gateway project regarding the background and a table of the obligations and benefits. In exchange for these benefits the City would gain from approval of the Development Agreement and for satisfying all of the conditions of approval and mitigation measures associated with the development project, the developer is requesting the City to grant a vested right to build up to 638 residential units in association with the Westside project. Additionally, the Development Agreement allows flexibility in complying with the density percentages of the General Plan, defers detailed review of project architecture and design until development plans are submitted and provides specific details on phasing and implementation. The appilcant has submitted an application for 388 low density, 70 medium density and 180 high density growth management allocation units for the Westside project. If approved, the Westside Development Agreement would grant FCB a total of 200 low density units from the reserved allocations, a vested right to receive between 22 and 180 residential growth allocations per year for the next eight years (see Table above). The growth allocations provided through the Development Agreement are within the existing reserve of growth allocations and the projected future growth allocations issued on an annual basis. Notwithstanding the issuances of these growth allocations, there will still be sufficient growth allocations available for other developments within Lodi. If approved, the Westside Development Agreement would allocate 200 low density units from the reserved allocations, and for eight years following the first year of allocations, the Westside project would be guaranteed a specific number of allocations from the annual allocation distribution. Because the development stages allocations over nine years (2006 to 2014), thereby allowing ample allocations for other projects, and because the development agreement secures concessions from the applicant that would be of great benefit to the City, staff` recommends that the City Council adopt the Westsidiv development agreement. 9) Ameodment b the Westside Facilities Master Plan. The Westside Facilities Master Plan (WFMP) was approved by the City Council on February 21, 2001. As stated in the City Council resolution of approval (2001-47), "The Westside Facilities Master Plan is intended to identify and plan for neighborhood and community parks, circulation and storm drainage improvements necessary to support 375 acres of existing and planned growth. The Plan serves as the basis for formulating and implementing capital improvement plans for public facilities within the plan area to meet the needs of growth projected by the City's General Plan. The Plan considered both existing and project growth in the plan area, as well as outside the plan area." The WFMP includes a land use and circulation plan (Figure 3, Shown on page JACommunity DevelopmentlCoundl Comm unkations12006111-1 FCB report Final.doc 22 9 of the WFMP) that designates land within the plan area for specific land uses. As shown on the concept land use plan, the WFIIAP intended for a greenbelt corridor along the western edge of the land use plan. The WFW states that the greenbelt was intended to be 200 to 300 feet in width to act as an "urban - agriculture interface" and that As benefits should be maximized by integrating storm management facilities, ecological balance and bio -diversity. Along with the land use plan, the WFMP also includes standards for street design and park and recreation uses. The Westside project incorporates the land uses within the WFMP including the elementary school site, aquatic enter site, neighborhood park adjacent to the aquatic center site, and residential uses in accordance with the PR land use designation. However, the Westside plan does not include the 200 to 300 foot greenbelt corridor on the western edge; therefore an amendment to the WFMP is required. The applicant's justification for this amendment is included in this report as Attachment 11. The W FMIP intended for the greenbelt corridor to be a dual use public area with parks and storm management faciNties. After approval of the WFMP, the City commissioned a study to determine the viability of the greenbelt buffer to act as the storm water maintenance facility for the development of uses within the WFMP. Said study (completed by Nolte Associates) determined that the WFMP concept of an open space corridor along the westerly edge to be used as storm water management would require excavation of 9 feet for approximately 70 percent of the corridor, if it was to be 250 feet wide, and 6 to 1 slopes on each side of the corridor resulting in approximately 102 feet of width at the bottom of a 250 -foot corridor. The study further concluded that active uses, such as ball fields, would be constrained and this design would only allow for passive uses, such as picnic areas and pedestrian walkways. City staff had some concerns regarding whether the linear storm drainage system would best serve the City's somewhat evolving objectives. Some of the issues discussed amongst staff included the need for more active recreation uses (e.g., bail fields) and the possibility that City growth may continue west under the next General Plan. When working with City staff during the early development of FCB's Westside Plan, FCB considered pursuing a development that was more consistent with the concept of the WFMP land use plan. However, based on input from the former Community Development Director and Parks and Recreation Department staff, and FCB's objectives for development, FCB decided to pursue alternatives to the plan included in the WFMP. One alternative included a series of lakes throughout the development and the other a more traditional basin/park plan with a linear trail/park system throughout the center of the project. Staff was generally supportive of both alternatives, but had concerns about the lakes plan due to the growing concerns over water supply. FCB's Westside plan proposes a 50 -foot wide (at minimum) open space spine within the center of the project area. The open space spine would include a meandering 10 -foot, 6 -inch wide pedestrian trail that would link pedestrians and cydists to neighborhoods, schools and parks with the project. Drainage facilities for the Westside plan would be accommodated by dual use detention basins and parks, a common practice within the City. The WFMP also intended for the greenbelt area to act as an open space buffer between agriculture and urban uses. The Westside plan would accommodate a buffer between the proposed residential uses and existing agricultural uses by installing a landscape open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls along the western edge of the project site to minimize conflicts between future residents of the Westside project area and adjacent agricultural use. This design criterion is required as a Mitigation Measure of the EIR for this project (Mitigation Measure LU -1). The Commission should note that the City Council has directed staff to consider extending the City's planning areas to the west beyond the area of the WFMP as part of the General Plan update process, which would negate the need for a permanent urban/agricultural interface in this location, moving it further to the west as determined by the updated General Plan. Staff believes that the proposed Westside land use plan would meet the intent of the WFMP by: a) providing a continuous, active open space feature through the project, which could connect to future projects to the south; b) providing storm drainage facilities to manage the drainage within the project area; c) including the round -about street design feature on Lodi Avenue; d) including an upland park site that could be utilized for an aquatic center and adjacent neighborhood park; e) providing an elementary school site; and f) providing for development of residential uses in accordance with the PR land use J:ICommunity DevelopmentlCounoll Communications12MN11-1 FCB report Final.doc 23 designations. The proposed amendment allows for more active recreational uses than envisioned by the WFMP and a central trail spine that provides a bicycle and pedestrian link to schools, parks and neighborhoods within the project area. The proposed amendment essentially moves the pedestrian linkages envisioned within the buffer of the WFMP to a central location within the project area to provide a desirable open space amenity within the project area. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the request to amend the Westside Facilities Master Plan Conceptual Land Use and Circulation Plan to reflect the land uses within the Westalde plan. 10) Bike Plan Amendment. The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes Class I bike paths along the western edge of the project. The Master Plan also includes Class II bike paths on Lodi Avenue Lane, and a Class II or III bike path on Vine Street. The Westside project includes bike paths, specifically within the north/south trail, but this location does not conform to the location shown in the Master Plan. An amendment to the Bicycle Master Plan is required. Staff believes this amendment is consistent with the purposes of the Master Plan and would only be necessary to relocate the Class I bike path currently shown along the western edge, to the central location proposed within the north/south pedestrian trail in the Westside plan. However, the north/south trail does not extend north of Sargent Road; therefore, a bike path connection between the WID canal and Sargent Road would have to be accommodated on a local street within the proposed development. The applicant intends to provide the remaining bike paths as per the Master Plan. Prior to amending the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the requested amendment. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request by Tom Doucette, FCB, to amend the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. Planning Commission Review. The Planning Commission considered approval of the Westside project at meetings on October 11 and October 25. Several concerns and questions were raised by the Commission and the public at the October 11 Commission meeting including: • Concern regarding the applicant initiating a request for an amendment to the Westside Facilities Master Plan. to Desire to include a minimum 100 -foot landscape buffer along the western edge of both the SW Gateway and Westside projects. • Concern related to the terminus of Century Boulevard. • Concerns related to the process and level of review of subsequent project approvals. Following, the Commission's action to recommend the certification of the EIR, motions to recommend approval of the SW Gateway and the Westside were defeated on a 2:5 vote. The Commission did not consider any alternative motions, but indicated that the defeated motion represented their recommendation to deny the project. Modifications discussed by the Commission included: requiring a minimum of a 100 -foot wide buffer along the western edge, delaying the Development Agreement until after the Prezoning was in place, and Development Plans were submitted, requiring workshops with Commission before finalizing development plans, requiring a green building measures plan, and allowing design review to take be conducted by the Commission instead of the Site Plan and Architectural Committee (SPARC). J_1Community DeveiopmenINCoundl CommunicaUonst2006111-1 FCB report Final.doc 24 COUMOL OSIS Following-certific0on of the Ldi Annexations EIR the Counci4 may: • (int proud approval for the SW Gateway a„Ed Wei Projects; • ( ant projoct approval s eller the SW Gateway or Westside Projects; • Diary Happe ivol for the Gateway Westside Projects; or wry ep val for eitheIr the SW Gateway or Westside Projects. IFISCALdev T The The de pclp' wd be requirec% via implementation of the SW Gateway and Westside Development Agreerne ts, to pordelpate in 4 Community Facilities District (CFD) for each project. Participation in this CFD is aoticipateO to offset public services costs associated with the development. No negative fiscal impact is nddpa$ed as a restOt of the proposed projects. IFUNOOO: None ndy HoOr Community Development Director MM)RHlkc Attadhmentrw Su rt%M P�nnirpS`bf� Report 10-25-2006 (prodded under mparpte cover} l dNer hoo FCgre4urs3-WO sps 1 ipeetsflp of the CartwtrkWw on 10-25.2006, dated 10-12-2006 P*v*q.Camn*sianSReport 10-11-2006 JACorWnunity $)ems CommunWpWnskZMk11.-1 FCB roped F rial.doc 25 Lodi Annexation Supplemental Staff Report CITY OF LODI PLANNING COMMISSION S ppiemental Staff Report vA kd in t ' e rww==Z1fyr the October 11, 2006 ewe MZETING DATE: October 25, 2006 APPLICATION NOS: EIR Environmental Impact Report 05-01 SW Gateway Annexation AX -04-01 General Plan Amendment GPA05-001 (for Other Annexation Areas) Prezone Z-04-01 Development Agreement GM -05-001 Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment Westside Annexation AX -04-02 Prezone Z-04-03 Development Agreement GM -05-002 Westside Facilities Master Plan Amendment Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment RIDQUEST: The request of Frontiers Community Builders, Inc. (FCB) for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council to certify the Lodi Annexation EIR and to approve the SW Gateway and Westside projects. LOCATION: The SW Gateway and Westside project areas are located in an unincorporated area of San Joaquin County, immediately west of the Lodi City boundary, and within the City's Sphere of Influence. APPLICANT: Tom Doucette, FCB Homes 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219 PWPERTY OWNER: Multiple Owners RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the Planning Commission consider the information within this supplemental staff report, resume their discussions, and then make a recommendation to the City Council for their review and consideration of the Lodi Annexation EIR, SW Gateway Project and Westside Project, which the Council has scheduled for their meeting on November 1, 2006. 1:'C'omrunily S7evciop�ertlPlasming�SY�R9'S"3�6�10-25-o6sraul9A PC 7a77� rev5.8oc 1►I CKG)1> UND On October 11, 2006, tho Planning Conunission held a public meeting to consider the cftfic tion of the Lodi Anexation EIA, and multiple entitlements related to the SW Gateway and Westside land use pl*s. At this meeting, the Commission heard a staff report on these items; asked questions of staff, ibe applicant, and the general public; heard public testimony in support and in opposition to these items; closed the public hearing, and then continued these items for consideration on November 8, 2005. Ofe October 12, 2006, the�plicant submitted a written request to bring these items back to the Cissian on October $5, 2006, before the original continuance date of November 8th, indicating that it is imperStive that they maintain the schedule for review and consideration by the City Council on November 1st. PUilic hearing notices f9r the October 25, 2006 meeting were sent to all property owners of reford witldn a 300 -foot radius of the Westside and SW Gateway projects (for a total of 300 notices) on October 12, 1006. The notice was also posted at City Hall on October 13, 2006, a lelal notice was publislied in the Lodi News Sentinel on October 14, 2006 and a special advertisement was ineludod on page 2 of the October 17, 2006 issue of the Lodi News Sentinel. ANALYSIS Tie purpose of this supp4mental staff report (provided in addition to the staff reports prepared f6tthe October 11th meet g) is to provide the Planning Commission with additional information arWor clarification in response to the questions and concerns raised by the Commission and/or the public at the October l Ith Planning Commission meeting. According to staff's notes, the key paints raised by the Planning Commission and/or the public included: • The project's inconsistency with the Westside Facilities infrastructure Master Plan is not adequately► addressed. • The rcconunapded mitigation for buffering the adjacent agricultural land is inadequate (tigation Measure LU -1). The Commission suggested that a buffer of 100 feet minis ium be required. • The Impact a4d Mitigation Measure LU -2 related to the conversion of agricultural land should i*dude the 39 acres of Prime farmland within the Other Armexation Areas, require a time period longer than 15 years, and include an option to require what is required under the San Joaquin County program once it's adopted. • Concern that tee Traffic Mitigation Measures TRANS -1 and TRANS -2, which require the pvgwation of a Traffic Improvement and Financing Plan that has to be approved by t1ke City Council prior to the approval of a Tentative Map, is not adequate and inappropriately defers the mitigation_ • Discussion as to whether the recommended Air Quality mitigation measures are adequate and whether some of the suggestions included in the Adam's Broadwell letter should hie included. • Concern regaling the water supply, source and timing. 7:IC°y�"pY Da'1b�m�itla�ia�51'APFR7P2oD65t�Z3Jld.ui� rc �o-��� �s,poc 2 • Concern regarding the ability to treat wastewater from the project. • Growth inducing impacts related to Century Boulevard. �. • Concern regwding the applicant initiating a request for an amendment to the Westside Fadhties Matter Plan. Desire to ine le a minimum lWfoot landscape buffer along the western edge of both the SW Oateway and Westside projects. • Concern rela4ed to the terminus of Century Boulevard. • Concerns reld to the process and level of review of subsequent project approvals. L A Associates bas also Prepared detailed responses to the late comment letters received during thO week of October 9th, 2006 (see attached). E t ADEQUACY ISSiAES I van"My WM City Jkkxs Md PoHMS Tie Westside project inches a request to amend the Westside Facilities Master Pion (WFMP), a9Jthe proposed luid use plan is not entirely consistent with the land uses provided in the Master Pion. Since the roquested*mendment is part of the proposed project, CEQA requires the EIR to evaluate the envitonmentdllphysical adverse effects that would occur if the amendment is irolernented. The EIR amlysis does this as it evaluates the land use plan proposed by FCB which would be crosistent with the amendments proposed to the WFMP as detailed in the October 11 Slaff Report. The one rel4ted physical adverse effect that is identified in the EIR is Impact LU -1 and its associated mitigation measures which address the potential conflict between agricultural and residential uses. Staff understands that the Planning Commission has some concerns as to whether the proposed mitigation measure would adequately address the potential impact. Staff believes it would; however, we do recommend amending the mitigation to include a landscape plan in item c of the mitigation. If the Commission does not feel that additional language will be adaquate mitigation, they could recommend amending the mitigation measure to include a 100 - foot buffer. The text to implement such recommendations is included in the attached list of Potential Planning Commission Supplemental Recommendations (see la and lb). Apicaftn I Mftaden T1W Plannirg Commissios discussed several concerns about Impact LU -2 and Mitigation 1Vsure LU -2, which rele to the conversion of Prime Agricultural land, including: • The exclusion of the Other Areas to be Annexed acreage (39 acres) from the Impact and Mitigation Measure. 1'he inclusion of a 15 -year preservation term for the agricultural easement versus in peWtuity. • . The desire to include on option that would require mitigation consistent with the County's program if it is adoptod prior to project implementation. l'�Ca�uaity b¢WopPM[lPlsinaLil'AFFRFT2W6110�25A6SR PC 1&ll-06 iev5.doc To address the first and third concern, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend that Impact LU -2 and Mitigation Measure LU -2 be revised to include the 39 acres of the Other Areas to be Annexed and an option to comply with the County's program if it's adopted. The text to implement this recommendation is included in the attached list of Potential Planning Commission Supplemental Recommendations (see 2a). The Planning Commission may also want to recommend that the suggested minimum of 15 years for agricultural land conservation easement be amended to require the easement to be recorded in perpetuity. This revision would be consistent with the Mitigation Measure included in the Reynolds Ranch EIR. See item 2b of the Supplemental Recommendations. Ttrtffic and Transportadrn Impacts The Lodi Annexation Final EIR identified 15 intersections that would be significantly impacted under the Existing Plus Project Scenario and 19 intersections that would be significantly impacted under the Cumulative Scenario (see Table IV.B-6). A detailed discussion of the projected level of impact and the improvements necessary to mitigate the projects' impacts for each individual intersection is provided on pages 137 to 142 of the Draft EIR for the Existing Plus Project Scenario and on pages 154 to 157 for the Cumulative Scenario. A summary of this discussion is provided below. This listing identifies whether the impact would occur under the Existing Plus Project Conditions or under the Cumulative Conditions, or both. The intersections are identified by number and a graphic attached has been provided to showing the numbered intersections. Mitigation Measures TRANS -1 and TRANS -2 would require the applicant to prepare a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details: who will be responsible for the implementing each of the improvements Iisted in Table IV.B-6; how the improvement will be funded; what the applicants fair share of the improvement; and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction. The requirement for such a plan does not defer the determination of the physical impacts or implementation of the physical improvements necessary to mitigate the physical impacts it simply provides a tool for managing the financing and implementation of the physical improvements. Staff felt it would be too unmanageable to list each of the intersections and recommended improvements as separate impacts and mitigation measures and feels that the identified mitigation measures will ensure that the necessary improvements are implemented unless the City decides to adopt a statement of overriding consideration for some of the impacts. This plan would be submitted to City staff for review and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Tentative Subdivision Map application. Intersection 1: Turner RoadUwer Sacramento Road — Woodhaven Lane (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Installation of a second westbound left -tum lane (signal retiming would not enhance the signal's performance to LOS Q. Intersection 1: Turner Road/Lower Sacramento Road — Woodhaven Lane (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Adding of a second westbound, northbound and southbound left -turn lane. Intersection 2: Turner Road/SR 99 SB Ramps (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Installation of a traffic signal. Intersection 2: Turner Rood/SR 99 SB Ramps (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Ingtallation of a traffic signal. 1: CorwunayLlcee]ogmea�PSaai�g�.SiAASRM'��61W 15x6 su�5mea�ah 3R PC 10-11 06- w$ d., 4 Intersection 3: Turner Road/SR 99 NB Ramps (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: histallation of a traffic signal. Intersection 3: Turner Raoad/SR 99 NB Ramps (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Installation of a traffic signal. Intersection 4: Elm Street/Lower Sacramento Road (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Adding of a second westbound left -turn lane and retiming of signal to a 115.0 -second cycle length. Intersection 5: Lodi Avenue — Sargent Road/Lower Sacramento Road (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Retiming of signal to a 110.0 -second cycle length Ijdersectitm 5: Lodi Avenue — Sargent Road/Lower Sacramento Road (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Adding second left -turn lane in the eastbound and westbound directions and retiming of signal to a 110.0 -second cycle length Intersection 6: Lodi Avenue/Ham Lane (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Retiming of signal to an $0.0 -second cycle length. Intersection 6: Lodi Avenue/Ham Lane (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: In the PM peak hour, retiming signal to a 90.0 -second cycle length resulting in 39.2 seconds of average delay Neste: Kettleman Lane widening is included in Measure K renewal. The Financing and Implementation Plan may include fair share of financial contribution in lieu of specific mitigation. Inllerseetion 10: Kettleman Lane/Davis (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Installation of a traffic signal. The County and Caltrans are currently planning for a signal at this location. In4ersection 10: Kettleman Lane/Davis (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Installation of a traffic signal and an additional westbound and eastbound through lane. Insersection 15: Kettleman Lane/Ham Lane (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Adjust the amount of time given to each signal phase during the PM peak hour and improve intersection coordination offset to better fit traffic conditions. InUrsection 15: Kettleman Lane/Ham Lane (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Adding a second northbound left -turn lane. Intersection 18: Kettleman Lane/Church Street (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Adjust the southbound lane geometries to a left -turn lane and a shared through -right lane. Intersection 18: Kettleman Lane/Church Street (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Adding a westbound and eastbound second left turn lanes. Intersection 19: Kettlemars Lane/Stockton Street (Existing Plus Project Condition) 1.`•Compw�iiy Develop llplaunipg157ppFRP712dW,10.25 6s�ylmelul SR_ PC 10 IEL6_m5.&C 5 Improvement: Adjust signal phasing splits during the AM peak hour. Intersection 19: Kettlennan Lane/Stockton Street (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Adding a northbound second left -turn lane, Intersection 21: Kettlernan Lane/Cherokee Lane (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Adding a second northbound and southbound left -tum lane. Intersection 24: Harney Lane/Lower Sacramento Road (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Traffic signal is under construction by the county. Intersection 24: Harney LanefLower Sacramento Road (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: A traffic signal is under construction by the county. Nate: The traffic signal construction at Harney Lane/Lower Sacramento is complete. Intersection 25: Harney Lane/Ham Lane (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Installation of a Traffic signal. Intersection 25: Harney Lane/Ham Lane (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Installation of a Traffic signal and a westbound right -turn lane. Intersection 26: Harney Lane/Hutchins Street — West Lane (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Adding an eastbound and westbound second through lane and dedicated right -turn lane. Intersection 26: Harney Lane/Hutchins Street -- West Lane (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Adding second eastbound and westbound through lane in the directions; a second northbound, southbound, and westbound leftturn lane. Intersection 27: Harney Lane/Stockton (Cumulative Condition) Improvements Adding eastbound and westbound second through lane. Intersection 28: Harney Lane/SR 99 SB Ramps (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Installation of a traffic signal. In#ersection 28: Harney Lane/SR 99 SB Ramps (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Installation of a traffic signal and a eastbound left -turn lane and a westbound second through lane. Inbrsection 29: Harney Lane/SR 99 NB Ramps (Existing Plus Project Condition) Improvement: Installations of a traffic signal. Intersection 29: Harney Lane/SR 99 NB Ramps (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Ttafffic signal shall be installed and westbound left -turn lane and a eastbound right -turn lane and modify the northbound approach lane configuration to a left -turn lane and a shared through -right lane. Intersections 31: Armstrong Road/Lower Sacramento Road (Cumulative Condition) Improvement: Retime signal to a 60.0 -second cycle length. 1.C.�hy De dopm Ulyn i.ZZTAFFRYMOO6t1625-% supplmdW W_PC 10.11 1b n 5.doc 6 Air Quality Mitigation The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District considers that PMt() emissions are reduced to levels considered less -than -significant through compliance with the District's Regulation VIII (Fugitive PM10 Emissions) rules. If construction activity is especially intense, or sensitive receptors are nearby, the District recommends applying the enhanced PMI() control measures listed in the Guide for Assessing and Mitigation Air Quality Impacts (GAMAQI)." Mitigation Measures AIR -1a and AIR. -lb include the measures outlined in the District's Regulation VIII rules as well as the enhanced PMio control measures. Additionally, it should be noted that the proposed project would be subject to San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District Rule 9510. This rule would require the project to reduce ozone precursor emissions and particulate matter. The project would have to mitigate: 20 percent of construction equipment exhaust nitrogen oxides (NOX); • 45 percent of construction equipment exhaust PM10; • 33 percent of operational NOX over 10 years; and • 50 percent of operation PM 10 over 10 years. In accordance with Mitigation Measure AIR -2, the project applicant would be required to work with the District to incorporate on-site mitigation measures into the design of the project to meet the required emission reductions. These reductions are required of the project and if the on-site mitigation measures selected by the developer don't achieve the required baseline emission reductions, the developer will mitigate the difference by paying an off-site fee to the District. The fee formula is structured to encourage on-site mitigation measures. This fee reduces emissions by helping to fund clean air projects, such as paving unpaved roads, retiring polluting vehicles, upgrading dirty engines to cleaner models, and other projects. Staff does not believe any revisions to the proposed mitigation measures are warranted. Water The Water Supply Assessment (adopted by City Council in July 2006) concluded that there is adequate water supply to serve the SW Gateway and Westside projects. Water supply for the projects would consist of ground water and water from the WID contract. The Woodbridge Irrigation District contracted supply of 6,000 acre-feet per year is not currently being utilized. However the contract provides that the City, which is paying for the water, can "bank" the water and take an additional amount of water in subsequent years as available. The "bank" currently totals 18,000 acre feet and the District has approved an additional four year window to bank additional water, which would increase the "bank" to 42,000 acre feet. The City anticipates utilizing the bank at an average of 2,000 acre feet per year above the annual amount of 6,000 acre feet. The proposed projects total annual water demand at build out is approximately 887 acre feet. Over four years, the total is 3,548 acre feet. The City estimates that the project will build in phases and cumulatively use approximately 215 acre feet over the next few years, which will be pumped from the groundwater. The City intends to utilize banked water, over the 6,000 acre -ft. annual allotment, and reduce groundwater pumping in future years. The amount of banked water will be adequate to offset the amount of groundwater pumped during development of the project until the City fully utilizes the WID supply. J.,Ceiar Jy De ebpmrn VqP inoTAFFRPM006.10.25-06 sopplW Lal SR_PC 10-11-06_r 5 din 7 As part of the approval process for the Utility Master Plan, approval of the water hookups, and approval and review of water needs, the applicant would be required to show that the proposed phase of the development would not be in excess of the safe ground water yield. To ensure the Planning Commission's concerns are addressed, staff recommends adding a condition of approval to the PD approval_ See item 3 in the Supplemental Recommendations. Wastewater Based on the current estimated dry weather flow of 6.4 million gallons per day (mgd), the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility (WSWPCi1) has a remaining design treatment capacity of 2.1 mgd and a RWCQCB remaining permitted capacity of 600,000 gpd. The City discharge permit is presently being updated by the RWQCB and the City has submitted a Waste Discharge Report requesting the permitted capacity be increased to the existing design capacity of 8.5 mgd. The White Slough Treatment facility has the capacity to treat the additional wastewater generated by the proposed project. Based on this data, the Draft EIR concludes that there is adequate capacity to treat wastewater generated by the proposed project (pages 278 and 279). Extension of Century Boulevard The EIR acknowledges that the extension of Century Boulevard along with other streets and utility infrastructure could be growth inducing. The second paragraph on page 322 of the Draft EIR states the following: The development of the project area was contemplated in the City of Lodi General Plan, adopted in 1991, and discussed in the Housing Element of the General Plan. The proposed project would bring utilities infrastructure into an area where it currently does not exist, which could ultimately facilitate development west of the project area, which is currently outside the City's Sphere of Influence. The local street system is being designed to facilitate some future growth to the west in the event the City determines that it will expand its Sphere of Influence to the west as part of the General Plan update. This would he considered a potentially significant and unavoidable growth -inducing impact. PROJECT MERITS Applieant's initiation of 4o amendment to the WFMP The Planning Commission expressed some concern about the appropriateness of the applicant requesting an amendment to the WFMP, particularly given the amount of public involvement that went into the preparation of the IATMP. It is the charge of the Commission to determine whether the requested amendment has merit and should be recommended for approval. Staff appreciates the Commission's concern and as presented in the October 1 I Staff Report, staff believes the requested amendments have merit and is recommending approval. If the Planning Commission does not agree, one option to consider (if the primary concern is the buffer along the westem edge) is to recommend approval of the amendments with the condition that a 100 -foot buffer be maintained along the western edge. See additional discussion below. J:'C-ftm n ,y D-d-pme;MPI ..i-OTAFFRPR2DOMW25-06 SWpbn t.] SR PC 1411-06 —5-d. offer Aloog Western Plrojeet Boundaries Much of the discussion at the October 1 lth Planning Commission meeting was focused on the lack of a buffer between the Westside project area and the agricultural uses to the west. The proposed Westside land use plan does not include a landscape buffer along the western project boundary, as included in the WFMP, and therefore an amendment to this plan is required to implement the proposed Westside project. The Commission (and the public) raised concerns over the fact that much time and effort by the City and the community was spent on creating the Westside Facilities Master Plan, and that it should be adhered to with the development of the Westside project. Additionally, the Commission indicated that a buffer should also be included in the SW Gateway land use plan. The Commission concluded the meeting with the request that the applicant revise the Westside and SW Gateway land use plans to accommodate a buffer, of at least 100 feet in width, for landscaping and active or passive open space to protect the existing agricultural uses to the west, and be consistent with the intent of the Westside Facilities Master Plan. The applicant has not provided revised plans to demonstrate how a buffer could be accommodated into the proposed land use plans, and the request to amend the Westside Facilities Master Pian remains the same. As indicated by the applicant at the October 11th meeting, a revision of land use plans would modify the units proposed, which would impact the terms of the Development Agreements. Renegotiating the terms of the Development Agreements based on revised land use plans would take several weeks. As stipulated in the letter to the Planning Commission Chairman, the applicant's contractual commitments require that the City Council consider the projects by November 1, 2006. The Commission may wish to consider a recommendation to the City Council to include a modification in the land use plans requiring an agricultural buffer/transition area. For the Commission's information and reference, staff has confirmed that the agricultural buffers for the recently approved Reynolds Ranch project include a 75 -foot landscape buffer with a pedestrian trail along the southern project boundary between existing agricultural uses and the new residential uses. Additionally, staff has researched details about other jurisdictions polices and requirements for agricultural buffers. Soine jurisdictions, including Sonoma and Santa Cruz Counties, and the City of Davis and City of Petaluma, have implemented agricultural buffers ranging from 100 to 300 feet; while other jurisdictions like San Luis Obispo have implemented agricultural buffers as wide as 800 feet. These buffers are largely open space, landscaped areas with the specific design and restrictions dependent upon the sensitivity of surrounding land uses and the wind pattern. More specifically, staff found that the City of Gilroy adopted an agricultural mitigation policy in May 20(14. Amongst many other requirements, Gilroy's policy requires that all new developments adjacent to designated agricultural areas be required to provide a minimum of 150 foot agricultural buffer/transition area to minimize potential conflicts between agricultural and non- agricultural uses. The first 100 feet adjacent to the agricultural uses is restricted to native plants, hedges, drainage channels, storm water retention ponds, and other utilities. The adjacent 50 feet of the buffer is permitted to have similar utility uses, as well as bike paths, benches and lighting. Lastly, the City of Brentwood has a provision in the General flan and other planning documents to support the implementation of agricultural buffers. Brentwood does not have specific standards for development and use of agricultural buffers, but in practice the buffers they have implemented have ranged from 100 to 300 feet. J:IC-9w.ky SR_PC lal I -06_m5.&. 9 Staff also found multiple cities that do not currently have established standards or regulations for agricultural buffers or transition areas. The City of Dublin does have a Wildfire Management Policy that provides for a buffer between residential and open space areas; however, new development adjacent to agricultural land is not subject to agricultural buffer requirements. The City of Ceres has General Plan policies that indicate when development is proposed adjacent to agricultural areas, the City should consider provisions for a greenbelt to limit uses and seek long- term protection of the area through dedication of easements or similar means; however, the specifics of the greenbelt (i.e., width, permitted uses, landscaping) are not defined. In Lathrop, most of the new development is planned via a specific plan, and the City does not have provisions for these plans to include buffers or transition areas for new development adjacent to agricultural uses. Lastly, the City of Livermore's South Livermore Valley Specific Plan (SLVSP) successfully implemented a mix residential units (as well as boutique commercial uses) within active vineyards. Because the vineyards and wineries are so important to the City, as an alternate to providing a transition area or buffer for the two uses, the City adopted a right to farm ordinance that requires a detailed disclosure statement be included in every property title in South Livermore, so that residents the agriculture operations. Additionally, the SLVP does include specific "clear zones" as follows: when vineyard rows are perpendicular to a new right-of-way or development line, a minimum clear zone of 35' shall be maintained from the edge of the development or roadway to the first vine; and where vineyard rows are parallel to a new right-of- way or development line, the clear zone shall be 1$' minimum. Century Boulevard Century Boulevard runs in an east -west direction through the SW Gateway land use plan providing access from Lower Sacramento Road to the proposed central park, school site and residences within the plan area. The Commission expressed concern with the proposed alignment as it "dead ends" into the western project boundary. With regard to design, the edge treatment of Century Boulevard at the western project boundary could include landscaping and a soft edge treatment. The final design of this edge treatment would be reviewed by the Planning Commission in connection with the subdivision map for that portion of the SW Gateway plan area. See discussion above regarding growth inducing impacts. Additionally, Public Works staff cautions street design that would permanently terminate a street at an arbitrary boundary in the absence of a major topographical feature (i.e., railroad or permanent conservation casement), and with the potential for future land use changes it is recommended designing arterials for future connection. Designing arterials with arbitrary terminations would likely have serious, adverse traffic impacts on adjacent arterials and adjacent residents. Sraisequent Project Approvals The Commission (and the public) expressed concern regarding to the level of analysis in the EIR and how it relates to the project approvals. The projects before the Commission at this time are land use plans that would guide future development of the Westside and SW Gateway project areas, and the level of analysis in the EIR is consistent with the level of approvals sought by the applicant. Specific development plans will be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. Discretionary Approvals Each of the approvals listed below would be subject to CEQA and staff will have to review each request to determine whether the request was adequately analyzed in the Lodi Annexation EIR. If it is determined that the proposed development plans would result in new or more intense impacts that were not previously analyzed in the Lodi Annexation EIR; and if new or more intense impacts would result or additional mitigation measures may be necessary, staff will have to complete some supplemental CEQA review and documentation. Staff will also review the ; COm fury Mlct p..*4'1-ieg1STAFFRP7,2006IW25-06 supplmr W SP, PC 10.11-06 rev5.doc 10 proposal to confirm that all applicable mitigation measures from the Lodi Annexation EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been addressed. • Development Plans Detailed Development Plans (required by the PD Zone) showing the lot configuration, street layout and design, and development standards for each lot type (including architecture, colors and materials) within the project area would be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission and City Council. • Tentative Subdivision Maps Subdivision maps are subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. • Design Review Detailed architectural plans for multiple -family uses within the project area are subject to review and approval by the Site Plan and Architecture Review Committee, prior to issuance of building permits. NtnisWial Approvals (itut subject to CEQA) These approvals will not be subject to subsequent CEQA review. Financing and Implementation Plan The Financing and Improvement Plan (required per Conditions of Approval in the PD Zone Change Resolution) would identify funding for the required public improvements and interini/temporary improvements for each phase of the project. The Financing and Improvement Plan is subject to review by the City Council prior to submittal of the first tentative map. • Utilities Master Plan Detailed master plans and supporting studies, including engineering calculations, are required for all phases of the development. These plans are reviewed and approved by the Public Works Department. • Grading Permits Grading permits are subject to review and approval by the Lodi Public Works Department and the Community Development Department (Building Division). • Building Permits Building permits are subject to review and approval by the Lodi Community Development Department (Planning and Building Divisions). CONCLUSION & RECOMMENDATION Consistent with the recomonendation on October 11, 2006 (see resolutions attached to this report), staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Recommend City Council certify the Lodi Annexations EIR (SCH42005092096). Following the Planning Commission's action to recommend certification of the EIR Staff recommends that the Planning Commission the following actions related to the SW Gateway and Westside Projects: 1_PC 10.I]-06_rer5.doc 11 Ste' Gateway 1) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to adopt a resolution of intent to annex 305.55 acres (AX -04-01: 257.76 project acres and 47.79 contiguous acres, outside of the project area) and the request of two property owners on Harney Lane to annex 2 acres of land into the corporate limits of the City of Lodi. 2) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Prezone (04-Z- 01) to a Planned Development (PD) Zone for the entire SW Gateway site, the request of two property owners on Harney Lane for a Prezone to PD and change to Residential Medium Density (R -MD) for the "Other Annexation Areas." 3) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Development Agreement (05 -GM -001), setting the mutual entitlement obligations entered into between the City and the project applicant for the Southwest Gateway project. 4) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for an Amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. 5) Recommend the City Council approve the City initiated request for a General Plan Amendment for the "Other Annexation Areas" to be redesignated from PR (Planned Residential) to MDR (Medium Density Residential). W"tside 1) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to adopt a resolution of intent to annex 151 acres of land (AX -04-02) into the corporate limits of the City of Lodi. 2) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Prezone (Z-04- 03) to a Planned Development Zone for the entire Westside plan area. 3) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Development Agreement (GM -05-002), setting the mutual entitlement obligations entered into between the City and the project applicant for the Westside project. 4) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to amend the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan of the Westside Facilities Master Plan. 5) Recommend that the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB for an amendment to the Bicycle Master Plan. The Commission may abo: Recommend certification and project approval with specific modifications and conditions (see attached list of Potential Planning Commission Supplemental Recommendations); or Deny the request. J:1C.mm ,ty D el pm..MP o kng'STAFFRPT%2oo6%W7$-06 soppl WMI S PC 10.11 rw5.doc 12 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTIONS RECOMMENDING: Certification of the EIR Approval of the Other Annexation Areas GPA Approval of the SW Gateway PD Prezone Approval to initiate the SW Gateway Annexation Adoption of the SW Gateway Development Agreement Approval to amend the Bicycle Master Plan for SW Gateway Approval of the Westside PD Prezone Approval to initiate the Westside Annexation Adoption of the Westside Development Agreement Approval of the Westside Facilities Master Plan Amendment Approval to amend the Bicycle Master Plan for the Westside PLANING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-37 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING THE LODI CITY COUNCIL CERTIFY THE FINAL LODI ANNEXATION EIR (EIR-05-01) AND ADOPT THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM, FINDINGS, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public meeting, as required by law, to consider the Final EIR (EIR-05-01); and WHEREAS, the subject properties included in the evaluation are described as follows: APN OWNER 058-030-09 252 E. St. Route 12 Highway Carolyn Reichmuth 058-030-03 14509 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-04 14499 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-05 14433 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-06 14195 North Lower Sacramento Road Howard Investments, LLC 058-040-01 14101 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-02 13837 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-04 13537 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-05 13589 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-14 No site address Joey Tamura Trust 058-230-04 13786 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsugio Kubota 058-140-13 14320 North Lower Sacramento Road M_ Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-14 14620 North Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 058-140-06 800 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058440-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 058-140-05 865 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 968 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-10 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F, Amigable Etal 029-380-05 351 E. Sargent Rd. Georgia Perlegos Eta] 027-040-0I 70 E. Sargent Rd. Manna Trust 027-04-020 212 E. Sargent Rd. DHKS Development 027-04-030 402 E. Sargent Rd. Noble D. Fore Jr. I1 VEREAS, on September 15, 2005, a Notice of Preparation was circulated notifying responsible agencies and interested parties that an EIR would be prepared, indicating the environmental topics that were anticipated to be addressed; and J_�comw�ar D. dopmsiPUnai�a%]tESO .orraoo6JCmo(,a7 ilk aa 1 �F"AS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (File No. EIR-05-01) was prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided Dere under; and iIMAS, a Notice of Completion for the Draft EIR was published in the Lodi News Sentinel and was posted at City Hall on April 17, 2006; and Z EAS, the Notice of Completion and copies of the Draft Environmental Impact Report were sent to Responsible Agencies and the State Office of Planning & Research (State Clearinghouse) on April 17, 2006; and VIIEAS, a copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report was kept on file for public review witi in the Community Development Department at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA and the public library and posted on the City's website for a 45 -day comment period commencing on April 17, 2006 and ending on May 26, 2006; and NWFJWAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission received comments and testimony on the Draft EIR f -mn the followolg individuals on October 12, 2005 at 7:00 pm at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Fine Street, Lodi, CA: and • Rick Gerlac k • Chairman Rudy Heinitz • Cormnissio*r Doug Kuehn • Cozmriissio*r Bill Cummins • Connnissioter Gina Moran • Comtnissio*r Bill Cummins V*RWAIS, the City rVoeived nine (9) comment letters in response to the Notice of Completion from the following aoncies/persons: and • Department of Califortda Highway Patrol • Department of Conservation • Department of Transportation • Pacific Gas agd Electric Company • Public Utilitic$ Commission • San Joaquin Clounty Public Works • Governor's Office of Planning and Research May 4, 2006 May 26, 2006 May 25, 2006 May 26, 2006 April 26, 2006 May 24, 2006 May 26, 2006 JCoj000ity DevdMMMlHar WAMLUM006MM 0617 RMd« 2 • San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District May 4, 2006 Robert G. Nilson May 23, 2006 1"AtE S, a Resporfe to Comments Document was prepared in accordance with CEQA which responds to eommerns received on the Draft EIR included herein as Attachment A; and IDEAS, individual responses to the comments received on the Draft EIR were mailed to each commenting agency 10 days prior to the Planning Commission recommendation for City Council certification of the Final EIR; and VWMEAS, a Mitigates Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared in accordance with CEQA which lists mitigation measures recommended in the EIR; identifies mitigation monitoring requirements; identifies the party responsible for carrying out the required actions, the approximate timefra*ie for the oversight agency; and identifies the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the witigation measure is implemented is included herein as Attachment B; and NMIMAS, adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, included herein as Attachment B, effectively makes the mitigations part of the Westside and Southwest Gateway projects. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file, the Planning Commission of the City oflodi makes the CEQ#, Findings as describes in Attachment B and recommends adoption of a Sgtenent of Overriding Considerations, included in Attachment B and the Mitigation Monitoring an# Reporting Program included in Attachment B; Thr Phmnwg Commissian has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final Lodi Annexation EIR and finds that: 1. The Final EIR has befn completed in compliance with CEQA. 2. The Final EIR was Presented to the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council, the decision# -making body of the lead agency, and that the Planning Commission reviewed and consAred the information contained in the final EIR prior to recommending adoption to the City Council. 3. The Fiml Elft repropents the independent judgment of the City. NOW, TWAXFORNO BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the P*nmg Commission of ft City of Lodi hereby recommends certification of Environmental Impact Report (E1R-05-01) by thn City Council of the City of Lodi. PcOWMit, 0&37 Moa 3 Dated: October 25, 2006 I hereby certify that Resolution No. PC 06-37 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission J.tC,dmnay DevdopnuePPWwlag'&E50LUTh2W*4CM w37 EER.dm 4 ATTACHMENT A RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT ATTACHMENT B ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATION PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-38 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI WCOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY INITIATED REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO REDESIGNATE THE OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS TO MDR (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL); AND THE REQUEST OF 2 PROPERTY OWNERS ON HARNEY LANE FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO REDESIGNATE 565 AND 603 AND EAST HARNEY LANE TO PR (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Other Annexation Areas (comprising 47.79 acres) and two properties on Harney Lane (comprising 2 acres) and are described as follows: and A N Site Address Pr2pLrity Owner 058-230-04 13786 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsu io Kubota 058-140-13 14320 No Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 Nortj Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 1158-14044 14620 No Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 058-140-06 800 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 458-140-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 058-140-05 865 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-10 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Ami abtc Etal. 058-040-11 565 East Homey Lane Robert and Letha Pinnell 058-040-12 603 East Rymy Lane Frank Hall WHEREAS, the City has initiated this request for a General Plan Amendment in connection with the request to annex the Other Annexation Areas and avoid creation of a County island; WHEREAS, the property owners for parcels located at 565 and 603 East Harney Lane have filed applications for General Plan Amendment with the City of Lodi Community Development Department in connection with the request to annex their properties, which are contiguous to the SW Gateway annexation request; VAIEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use Map designates the Other Annexation Area parcel as PIanned Residential (PR); and 1. -%Com ITY De dopm"MPIan isB�kESOLUTT120D6,PCmb06.38 011ier Ae Areo_C.PA (2) doe WHEREAS, the request is to change the General Pian Land Use Map to Medium Density Residential (MDR) for the Other Annexation Areas and Planned Residential (PR) for 565 and 603 East Harney Lane; and WHEREAS, the proposed designations of MDR and PR would be compatible with the existing uses developed on the site, and would also allow for the development of future residential uses; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (06-EIR-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. It is found that the requested General Plan amendment does not conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound Planning practice. 4. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the future residential development. 1S4)W, THEREFORE, REFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the General Plan amendments to the City Council of the City of Lodi shown below: The General Plan Land Use Map shall be revised as shown on Exhibit A hereto. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-38 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Conunissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission ].'C.npp�nly De dopnw. aminBAMLVTB2006TCm 06-38 Od-,'.-. A—GPA (2).d. 2 EXHIBIT A REVISED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-39 A RESOLUTION OF THE ]PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR A PRE -ZONING TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) ON 257.76 ACRES (SW GATEWAY PROTECT) AND TWO PARCELS ON HARNEY LANE (565 AND 603 EAST HARNEY LANE); AND PRE -ZONING TO R -MD ON 47.79 ACRES (OTHER AREAS TO BE ANNEXED) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested rezoning/development plan in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the SW Gateway Project .Area and Other Areas to be Annexed (totaling 305.55 acres); and two parcels on Harney Lane (comprising 2 acres) and are described as follows: ... APN Site Address I Property Owner 058-030-09 252 E. St. Route 12 Hi hwa Carolyn Reichmuth 058-030-03 14509 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-04 1 14499 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-05 14433 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-05 14195 North Lower Sacramento Road Howard Investments, LLC 058-040-01 1 14101 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-02 13837 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-04 13537 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-05 13589 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-14 No site address for I Joey Tamura Trust 058-040-13 641 East Harney Lane I Schumacher Trust 058-230-04 1 13786 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsu -o Kubota 058-140-13 1 14320 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-14 1 14620 North Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 058-140-06 $00 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058-140-07 944 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 #90 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 058-140-05 865 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-10 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Ami able Etal 058-040-11 565 East Barney Lane Robert and Letha Pinnell 058-040-12 603 East Harney Lane Frank Hall WHEREAS, the applicant represents property owners of the parcels within the SW Gateway project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this zone change; and WHEREAS, the City has initiated the request for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for properties referred to as "Other Annexation Areas;" and WHEREAS, the property ow=s of two parcels contiguous to the SW Gateway project area (565 and 603 last Harney Lane) have submitted Prezone applications; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and 1:1Cam iq DmelopaWi' laeaimgiRESOLUTP20061 m 06-39 Sw Gal y_ pre-mne (2).doe WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend approval of an Environmental Impact Report (06-EIR-01) and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City must designate a "pre -zone" zoning designation prior to requesting annexation of lands from the County; and WHEREAS, the property is currently zoned San Joaquin County Zoning: AU -20 (Agriculture, Urban Reserve, Minimum 20 Acres); and WHEREAS, the request is to change the zoning of the property to City of Lodi Zone: PD (Planned Development); and WHEREAS, final development plans demonstrating the height, setbacks, lot coverage, and other development standards, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.33.090, will be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map; and WHEREAS, as required by the Planned Development Zoning Designation, the multi -family units with the SW Gateway project shall be reviewed and approved by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of a building permit; and WHEREAS, the SW Gateway development plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community for the future development of 1,230 residential units, 31 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR--05-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 06-37, 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission 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 are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. 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 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. JXon—Any tx-wpebmi PLWv ngut SO LLITY200"'Cm 06-39 sw Gas ,_pm�c i21.dw 2 9. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the SW Gateway land use plan ultimately approved by the City Council. NOW, 'THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the re -zone of the entire 257.76 acres of the SW Gateway acres to PD (Planned Development), which includes designations specific to housing, and public/quasi-public uses all as shown on the attached map (Exhibit A), and approval of the re -zone of the Other Annexation Areas to R -MD (Residential Medium Density), which would allow for future development of residential uses subject to the following conditions of approval: Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final development plans shall be subject to review and approval by Planning Commission. The development plan shall include development standards for proposed residential units (i.e., building height, setbacks, lot coverage and permitted accessory uses). 2. Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final park plans shall be subject to review and approval by Parks and Recreation Department. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the multi -family components of the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. 4. Development of the parcels identified as Other Annexation Areas shall be subject to the zoning standards of the R -MD zoning district. 5. Prior to the development of any portion of the SW Gateway 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. 6. The conditions of approval listed below are to be accomplished prior to deeming complete the first Tentative Subdivision Map, unless noted otherwise: A. Preparation 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 Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and WID Canal and shall be coordinated with the master plans for the Southwest Gateway Project south of Kettleman Lane. a. Water master plan, including the following: i. Surface water transmission and distribution facilities. ii. 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. b. Recycled water master plan, including the following: i. Identification of areas to be irrigated. ii. Detailed summary of demand calculations. Include Southwest Gateway project demands in calculations, iii. Detailed summary of pipe sizing calculations. iv. Provisions for future westerly extension in Lodi Avenue and Vine Street. J:1Commaity Dmdop�1%Plym+ag%RESOLUTr20%Wres 0439 SW GaL w y_q�(Z).doc V. As an alternative to i) through iv) above, Developer may provide a one-time payment, not to exceed $50,000, to partially fund the Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study. C. Wastewater master plan. d. 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. e. Streets/circulation plan, including the following: i. Dimensions of street rights-of-way, including Kettleman Lane and Lower Sacramento Road, bike/pedestrian/open space corridor and utility corridors. ii. Traffic analysis of operations at critical intersections to determine if supplemental right-of-way is required. iii. Typical cross-section diagrams showing proposed utility locations and demonstrating that sufficient width has been provided to meet separation requirements between pipes. iv. Traffic round -about in Lodi Avenue. V. Traffic calming features at cross intersections, along long, straight streets and at other locations as required by the Public Works Director. f Transit study to identify new or modified routes to serve the area. g. Topography for the entire study area to confirm validity of water, wastewater and storm drain master plans. h. Composite utility diagram to facilitate review of potential utility crossing conflicts. i. Modification of the Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. The current master plan includes a Class I bike path along the westerly project boundary that would be part of the City-wide recreational trail in conformance with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. This bike trail can be incorporated into the proposed north -south bicycle/pedestrian corridor. The bicycle master plan also includes a Class Il or III bike boulevard extending north -south from the WID canal north of Lodi Avenue to Harney Lane and east -west along the extension of Vine Street and Class II bike lanes along Lodi Avenue. All modifications to the bicycle master plan shall be to the approval of the City Council. j. Parks and Recreation master plan. Wator, recycled water, wastewater and storm drain master plans for the project have been submitted and first check Public Works Department comments on the plans were issued on June 26, 2006. The plans require revision. In addition, on July 21, 2006, City staff forwarded information to the developer's engineer regarding existing utility crossings, preferred utility alignments, existing easements and design requirements to be used in establishing utility alignments for the project. The project improvements must respect the preferred alignments and existing easements. For example, new pipes along Westgate Drive south of the project site need to be on the west side of the street which will require dedication of additional land to provide a utility corridor. The required master plans and supporting studies are necessary to confirm the design of the proposed development and will affect the number of growth management allocations that can ultimately be utilized. If the Developer agrees that the proposed project layout and number of k CI -04 Dwtiopee ['PtalmgtREsoeuin D"o PCm 04-39 sw GaW"Y_ Kee (z).mc 4 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. Completion and approval of the master plans and studies must then be accomplished prior to submittal of the first tentative map for the project. B. Phasing analysis to be approved by the City prior to submittal of the first tentative map. The analysis shall include the following: a. Phase boundaries and number of units to be constructed with each phase. b. Permanent and interim/temporary facilities required to implement each phase based on the mitigation monitoring program and the above mentioned master plans. C. Master utility calculations for permanent and interim/temporary facilities to be constructed with each phase. C. Preparation of a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.B- 6 of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2 in the EIR), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, how the improvement will be funded, including a reimbursement program where appropriate, and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. D. 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. All applicable state statutes, and local ordinances, including all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements for hazardous materials shall apply to the project. 9. 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 and Public Works Director. Said plans shall indicate that all corner lots shall have architectural treatments on both street facing elevations. 10. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit a walls and fencing plan. Said plan shall show all proposed wails 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. DC.—.* Developm .m PI...i.�RESOLUTR2oa61-C— 06-34 SW Gateway_ {le- (2).dm 11. 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 Z-04-01." 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. I hereby certify that Resolution No. PC 06-39 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission J:C..—ity D-10pre06-39 SW 0.1-y– peen (2).d- 6 EXHIBIT A SOUTHWEST GATEWAY LAND USE PLAN ! Caamiunity Dwdopm 4lmNn,\itESOLUTA2M%PCm o -W SW Gme y_p-(2).dm PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-40 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FCB HOMES, FOR AN ANNEXATION 305.55 ACRES (257.76 PROJECT ACRES AND 47.79 CONTIGUOUS ACRES, OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT AREA) AND THE REQUEST OF TWO PROPERTY OWNERS ON HARNEY LANE TO ANNEX 2 ACRES OF LAND OF LAND INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF LODI (SW GATEWAY, OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS AND 565 AND 643 EAST HARNEY LANE) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested annexation in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the SW Gateway Project Area and Other Areas to be Annexed totaling 305.55 acres and two properties on Harney Lane are described as follows: APN Site Address P Owner 058-030-09 252 E. St. Route 12 Highway Carolyn Reichmuth 058-030-03 14509 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-04 14499 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058.030-05 14433 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-06 14195 North Lower Sacramento Road Howard Investments, LLC 058-040-01 14101 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-02 13837 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-04 13537 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-05 13589 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-14 No site address for Joey Tamura Trust 058-040-13 641 East Hame Lane Schumacher Trust 058-230-04 13786 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsu io Kubota 058-140-13 14320 North Lower Sacramento Road M- Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-14 14620 North Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 058-140-06 800 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058-140-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 058-140-05 865 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-10 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Ami able Etal 058-040-11 565 East Harney Lane Robert and Letha Pinnell 058-040-12 603 East Harney Lane Frank Hall WHEREAS, the applicant represents property owners of the parcels within the SW Gateway project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this annexation; and WHEREAS, the City has initiated annexation of the properties referred to as "Other Armexation Areas" so as not to create a County island; and WHEREAS, the property owners of 565 and. 603 East Harney Lane have submitted applications for Annexation of their properties in connection with this annexation application; and .1:1Comrm,mt, D-1.pmm"L..i..ek RSOLUM0061PC— 0640 SW Cae"y A-- (z) d- WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend City Council certification of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the SW Gateway Development Plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community consisting of 1,230 residential units, 31 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) for this project was recommended for certification by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. 4. It is found that the requested annexation does not conflict with adopted and proposed plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 5. It is further found that the parcels in the area proposed to be annexed are physically suitable for the development of the proposed project. 6. 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. 7. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. S. The site is suitable for the density proposed by the project in that the density is compliant with the PR General Plan designation and the site can be served by all public utilities and creates design solutions for storm water, traffic and air quality issues. Potential environmental impacts related to utilities were identified in the EIR and found not be significant because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce any impacts to a level of less than significant. 9. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the SW Gateway land use plan submitted by Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219. NOW, THEREFORE, 1W IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of this annexation, to the City Council. r'.''Ca sky Dwd,pm tma min¢ SOLUTMW61PC- 0640 Sw fntc y Annaa (2).d 2 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-40 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission J .cawemni y DardapmftVP4a--g&HS0LUTA2006WP 0646 SW Gue y A.. (z).dm PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-41 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY INITIATED REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO REDESIGNATE THE OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS TO MDR (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Other Annexation Areas comprising 47.79 acres and are described as follows: and APIA Site Address Property Owner 058-230-04 13786 Nzb Lower Sacramento Road Tsu 'o Kubota 058-140-13 14320 N Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 Nctrth Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-14 14620 Nmth Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East ©live Avenue Zane Grever Trust 058-140-06 800 East ©live Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058-140-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santis o and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 058-140-05 865 East ©live Avenue Santia o and Ramona Del Rio 058-040-11 565 East Ramey Lane J Robert and Letha Pinnell WHEREAS, this amendment is a City initiated request; and WHEREAS, the City has initiated this request for a General Plan Amendment in connection with the request to annex the Other Annexation Areas and avoid creation of a County island; WHEREAS, the Plaiming Commission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use Map designates the Other Annexation Area parcel as Planned Residential (PR); and WHEREAS, the request is to change the General Plan Land Use Map to Medium Density Residential (MDR); and WHEREAS, the proposed designation of MDR would be compatible with the existing uses developed on the site, and would also allow for the development of future residential uses; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (06-EIR-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. It is found that the requested General Plan amendment does not conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound Planning practice. 4. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the future residential development. NOW, THEREFOR, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the General Plan amendments to the City Council of the City of Lodi shown below: I . The General Plan Land Use Map shall be revised as shown on Exhibit A hereto. I hereby certify that resolution No. 06-38 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission Imo' ,1-1 DEVISED GENERAL PLAN LAND USE MAP PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-42 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THE SW GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Master Plan Amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the Planning Conunission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes a Class 1 bike path along the western edge of SW Gateway project area boundary; and WHEREAS, the request is to change the location of the Class 1 bike path shown of the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan to reflect the proposed location within the bike and pedestrian trail centrally located within the SW Gateway Development plan; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. It is found that the requested Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment does not conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 4. The SW Gateway project would comply with the other bike path locations shown on with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan including a Class I bike path on Century Boulevard (between the western edge of the SW Gateway project boundary and Westgate Drive), a Class II bike path on Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Century Boulevard (between Westgate Drive and Lower Sacramento Road). Lodi Avenue and a Class II or III bike path on Vine Street. 5. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the residential development proposed. DCo—Wty Ve dupmnh\P3ann6q� ESOLr1Tr%2u61pcm 0642 SW Gu ay_B&cpLm Ammdmee(2)_dm 1 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the General Plan amendments to the City Council of the City of Lodi shown below: 1. The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan is hereby amended to modify the location of the Class I bike path from the western edge of the SW Gateway plan area to be centrally located within the plan area. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-42 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission ):IZ'orsununiry Devdo�arn�IPUnninglRESOLllTC20�b1PCtts oba2 Sw L'mtexay_BAepi- A.—d—t (2).d- 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 0643 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LOBI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR PRE -ZONING TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) ON 151 ACRES (WESTSIDE PROJECT). WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested rezoning/development plan in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Westside Project totaling 151 acres and are described as follows: A Site Address Propenq ProOwner 029-3$).05 351 East Sargent Rd. Georgia Perlegos Eta] 027 -OV -01 70 East Sargent Rd. Manna Trust 027-04.020 212 East Sargent Rd. DHK5 Development 027-04030 1 402 East Sar ent Rd. Noble D. Fore Jr. II WHEMEAS, the applicant represents property owners of the parcels within the Westside project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this zone change; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEIIEAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City must designate a "pre -zone" zoning designation prior to requesting annexation of lands from the County; and WHEREAS, the property is currently zoned San Joaquin County Zoning: AU -20 (Agriculture, Urban Reserve, Minimum 20 Acres); and WHEWAS, the request is to change the zoning of the property to City of Lodi Zone: PD (Planned Development); and WHEREAS, final development plans demonstrating the height, setbacks, lot coverage, and other development standards will be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map; and WHEIIEAS, as required by the Planned Development Zoning Designation, the multi -family units with the Westside project shall be reviewed and approved by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of a building permit; and WHEWAS, the Westside development plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community for the future development of 638 residential units, 24.7 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred. J-Coommairy DcVdcpm \PLn daSWES0LUTF2W\PCxc 0643 Walside_ — change (2).doc Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planting Commission Resolution No. PC 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission 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 are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. 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. S. 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. 9. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the Westside land use plan ultimately approved by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the re -zone of the entire 151 acres of the Westside Project to PD (Planned Development), which includes designations specific to housing, and public/quasi-public uses all as shown on the attached map (Exhibit A), subject to the following conditions of approval: 1. Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final development plans shall be subject to review and approval by Planning Commission. The development plan shall include development standards for proposed residential units (i.e., building height, setbacks, lot coverage and permitted accessory uses). 2. Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final park plans shall be subject to review and approval by Parks and Recreation Department. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the multi -family components of the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. 4. Prior to the development of any portion of the Westside 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. J. %con—unify D16,, TJLu n7ng%KM0LurP,'*ft M 06-01 Wr ide_ m anile Rl dx 2 The conditions of approval listed below are to be accomplished prior to deeming complete the first Tentative Subdivision Map, unless noted otherwise: A. Preparation 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 Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and WID Canal and shall be coordinated with the master plans for the Southwest Gateway Project south of Kettleman Lane. a. Water master plan, including the following: i. Surface water transmission and distribution facilities. ii. 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. b. Recycled water master plan, including the following: i. Identification of areas to be irrigated. ii. Detailed summary of demand calculations. Include Southwest Gateway project demands in calculations. iii. Detailed summary of pipe sizing calculations. iv. Provisions for future westerly extension in Lodi Avenue and Vine Street. V. As an alternative to i) through iv) above, Developer may provide a one-time payment, not to exceed $50,000, to partially fund the Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study. C. Wastewater master plan. d. 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. e. Streets/circulation plan, including the following: i. Dimensions of street rights-of-way, including Kettleman Lane and Lower Sacramento Road, bike/pedestrian/open space corridor and utility corridors. ii. Traffic analysis of operations at critical intersections to determine if supplemental right-of-way is required. iii. Typical cross-section diagrams showing proposed utility locations and demonstrating that sufficient width has been provided to meet separation requirements between pipes. iv. Traffic round -about in Lodi Avenue. V. Traffic calming features at cross intersections, along long, straight streets and at other locations as required by the Public Works Director. f. Transit study to identify new or modified routes to serve the area. g. Topography for the entire study area to confirm validity of water, wastewater and storm drain master plans. h. Composite utility diagram to facilitate review of potential utility crossing conflicts. Modification of the Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. The current master plan includes a Class I bike path along the westerly project boundary that would be part of the City-wide recreational trail in conformance with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. This bike trail can be incorporated into the proposed north -south bicycle/pedestrian corridor. The bicycle master plan also includes a Class lI or III bike boulevard extending north -south from the WID canal north of S.-{'ommunity De d.pm tP&—.ga 5OLUT112(1 TC— 06-43 We id._ mrt a -p (2).d— Lodi Avenue to Harney Lane and east -west along the extension of Vine Street and Class II bike lanes along Lodi Avenue. All modifications to the bicycle master plan shall be to the approval of the City Council. Parks and Recreation master pian. Water, recycled water, wastewater and storm drain master plans for the project have been submitted and first check Public Works Department comments on the plans were issued on June 26, 2006. The plans require revision. In addition, on July 21, 2006, City staff forwarded information to the developer's engineer regarding existing utility crossings, preferred utility alignments, existing easements and design requirements to be used in establishing utility alignments for the project. The project improvements must respect the preferred alignments and existing easements. For example, new pipes along Westgate Drive south of the project site need to be on the west side of the street which will require dedication of additional land to provide a utility corridor. The required master plans and supporting studies are necessary to confirm the design of the proposed development and will affect the number of growth management allocations that can ultimately be utilized. If 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. Completion and approval of the master plans and studies must then be accomplished prior to submittal of the first tentative map for the project. B. Phasing analysis to be approved by the City prior to submittal of the first tentative map. The analysis shall include the following: a. Phase boundaries and number of units to be constructed with each phase. b. Permanent and interim/temporary facilities required to implement each phase based on the mitigation monitoring program and the above mentioned master plans. C. Master utility calculations for permanent and interim/temporary facilities to be constructed with each phase. C. Preparation of a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.B- 6 of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2 in the EIR), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, how the improvement will be funded, including a reimbursement program where appropriate, and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. D. 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. J C,mm mit„ De dopmenHnl i lg\RESOLurf%200PPoses 0643 wm�iae_ -a* gc (x).ea 4 6. All mitigation measures for the project, identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), are hereby incorporated into this recommendation of approval. 7. All applicable state statutes, and local ordinances, including all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements for hazardous materials shall apply to the project. 8. 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 and Public Works Director. Said plans shall indicate that all corner lots shall have architectural treatments on both street facing elevations. 9. 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. 10. 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 Z-04-03." 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. I hereby certify that Resolution No. PC 06-43 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission J. ro®nnity Dl %dopmailPla ingkiIESOLUT QW6Ta s 0643 Wmeidc_ m e ch=p (2).doc 5 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-44 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APIPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FCB HOMES, FOR AN ANNEXATION OF 151 ACRES OF LAND OF LAND INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF LODI (WESTSIDE PROJECT) WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested annexation in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Westside Project Area totaling 151 acres and are described as follows: AP* Site Address Property Owner 029-38#1-05 351 East Sargent Rd. Georgia Perlegos Etal 027-040-01 70 East Sargent Rd. Manna Trust 027-04-020 212 East Sargent Rd. DHKS Development 027-04-030 402 East Sar ent Rd. Noble D. Fore Jr. 11 WHEREAS, the applicant represents property owners of the parcels within the Westside project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this annexation; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental Impact Report (E1R-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Westside development plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community consisting of 638 residential units, 24.7 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. 4. It is found that the requested annexation does not conflict with adopted and proposed plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound Planning practice. 5. It is further found that the parcels in the area proposed to be annexed are physically suitable for the development of the proposed project. TCon tyIMvclopmentAmmgaBSOLUTrn2006WCles 0&" Wa ide A—(2).do 6. 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. 7. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. 8. The site is suitable for the density proposed by the project in that the density is compliant with the PR General Plan designation and the site can be served by all public utilities and creates design solutions for storm water, traffic and air quality issues. Potential environmental impacts related to utilities were identified in the EIR and found not be significant because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce any impacts to a level of less than significant. 9. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the Westside land use plan submitted by Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of this annexation, to the City Council. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-44 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission J:',Com nify Doelo,mmfJUl \RMi.tJ P20WPCr 0&"Wftuke Ann 01dm 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-45 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA) TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AT THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE WESTSIDE PROJECT WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Development Agreement (DA) in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Westside Project totaling 151 acres and are described as follows: AM Site Address Property Owner 029-38(1-05 351 East Sargent Rd. Georgia Perlegos Etal 027-00-01 70 East Sargent Rd. Manna Trust 027-04020 212 East Sargent Rd. DHKS Development 027-04-030 402 East Sar ent Rd. Noble D. Fore Jr. 1I WHIIMAS, the applicant represents property owners of the Westside project site and these property owners have provided consent to the project proponent and applicant for approval of this Development Agreement (DA) request; and WHOMAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi has entered into a Development Agreement (DA) with the project applicants, the purpose of which is to describe the mutual entitlement obligations entered into between the City and the project applicants for the Westside Project; and WHEREAS, the Development Agreement will vest certain rights of development including issuance of growth management allocations and will impose certain obligations all as specified in the Development Agreement; and WHUREAS, the Westside development plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community consisting of 750 residential units, 24.7 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHURLEAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (06-EIR-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. PC 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. J!iCnm IOYDweiopmeaI'Mmsi,gLESDLUTR2006TCres 0415 wesMWC DA(2)Ao 3. It is found that the requested Development Agreement 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 subject to the provisions of the Development Agreement 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 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. 8. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the Westside project land use plan ultimately approved by the City Council. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the Development Agreement (GM -05-001) to the City Council of the City of Lodi. I hereby certify that Resolution No. PC 06-45 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission VC—by De,, lop—tPUy.isg1RP50LU7it2006TC,. 0615 Wevsde bA(2).d- 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-46 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR AN AMENDMENT T40 THE CONCEPTUAL LAND USEICIRCULATION PLAN OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Westside Facilities Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents property owners within the Westside Project area, which is encompassed by the Westside Facilities Master Plan, and these property owners have provided consent to the project proponent and applicant for this General Plan amendment request; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental InVact Report (EIR-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan of the Westside Facilities Master Plan contains a greenbelt buffer along western edge of the plan area; and WHEREAS, the request is to change the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan of the Westside Facilities Master Plan to reflect the proposed Westside Project Land Use Plan defined herein as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, specific text amendments related to the change in the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan are defined here as Exhibits B through G; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. It is found that the requested Westside Facilities Master Plan Amendment does not conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 4. 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 PSC—adiy Dndop�MP ingWSOLU7F200CPC� 06-6 WwWde_WFMP Ameed—tda 1 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. 5. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the residential development proposed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the General Plan amendments to the City Council of the City of Lodi shown below: 1. The Westside Facilities Master Plan Land Use/Circulation Plan (page 9) shall be revised as shown on Exhibit A hereto. 2. Figures 7 and 8 shall be removed and text in the List of Exhibits (page ii) shall be revised as shown on Exhibit B hereto. 3. Page 14 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit C hereto. 4. Page 16 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit D hereto. 5. Page 17, Figure 6, shall be revised as shown on Exhibit E hereto. 6. Page 18 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit F hereto. 7. Page 31 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit G hereto. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-46 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission J.0--ity D—.I —,Ml—i g\AE50L[JT]12DG6NPC— 0646 WeA.WW11MP A—b—d- 2 EXHIBIT A REVISED FIGURE 3: LAND USE/CIRCULATION PLAN FOR THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN !.' o—ok DwvlvwrstlPla 6,*ESOCUTI',21f*bWm 0646 Weatide_WFMP Ammdm tdm EXHIBIT B REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE ii OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan List of Exhibits 'saes TABLE 1 Land Use Distributions............................................................. 8 TABLE 2 K-6 Elementary School Facility Needs .................................... . ..... 11 TABLE 3 Parkland Needs .................................................................... 13 Figures FIGURE 1 Location Map................................................................2 FIGURE 2 Existing Land Use Map....................................................4 FIGURE 3 Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan ..................................9 FIGURE 4 Electric Substation Concept..............................................12 FIGURE 5 Westside Park and Aquatic Center.......................................15 FIGURE 6 emelt Open Space Corridor Detail..................................17 FIGURE 7 ReefeatiewA bwens. Reserved .........................................19 FIGURE 8 Nakff-a4 Lftee sP4werved ...............................................19 FIGURE 9 Master Plan Circulation Concept........................................21 FIGURE 10 Kettlemen Lane /Highway 12 Concept................................23 FIGURE 11 Lower Sacramento Road.................................................24 FIGURE 12 Lodi Avenue Concept...................................................25 FIGURE 13 Lodi Avenue Round-a-Bout............................................26 FIGURE 14 Minor Collector Concept................................................27 FIGURE 15 Road A Concept..........................................................28 FIGURE 16 Minor Residential Road Concept......................................29 FIGURE 17 Bike Lane Concept......................................................30 FIGURE 18 Bike and Pedestrian Path Concept....................................31 TABLE OF CONTENTS P'Com—sity Develgaen 1P�,jnosgl(1e50LUTf.2FbbIPC.0.e 0646 WetoAe_WFMP Am d—Ldx 5 EXHIBIT C REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 14 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan Community parks are primarily for active uses and structured recreation. Community park facilities should be designed for organized activities and sports. Community parks may also provide specialized community wide interest facilities. Where neighborhood parks are absent, community parks can serve their function. 3.1 Westside Park Westside Park, a 17 -acre Neighborhood Park and aquatic center, is consistent with the Lodi Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan's, Cochran Park concept. As shown in figure 5, this park is intended to be the central focal element of the Plan Area. Westside Park forms, distinguishes, and gives character to the Plan Area residential neighborhoods creating a community image. Westside park will be contiguous to the proposed elementary school site and the 6reettieh ORO S ace Corridor. The park is designed to provide a variety of active play areas, especially focused on the needs of children_ The adjaeent Cfeenbek Oven Space Corridor will provide access to surrounding neighborhoods. As illustrated in figure 5, the proposed park uses around the lake include two children's playgrounds, picnic areas, a paved bicycle and pedestrian pathway system, a soccer filed, tennis courts, and a multi -use basketball/roller blade/hockey court. The Lodi Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan recommends that an aquatic center be located in Westside Park. The aquatic center should be designed to adequately serve the Westside of Lodi. To enhance revenue opportunities for operation and maintenance of the aquatic center, the center should consider slides and other water related features in addition to a 25-yard/50-meter multi- purpose pool as proposed in the Master Plan. 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Revised 2006) 14 EXHIBIT D PCo­ky DrdopmrnMP inB\RESOLUTIaD065pC-0646 Wesui6e WFMF Am Wo tdo N--KIMY . Y. ROOM"-wpm AM As illustrated in figure 5, the proposed park uses around the lake include two children's playgrounds, picnic areas, a paved bicycle and pedestrian pathway system, a soccer filed, tennis courts, and a multi -use basketball/roller blade/hockey court. The Lodi Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan recommends that an aquatic center be located in Westside Park. The aquatic center should be designed to adequately serve the Westside of Lodi. To enhance revenue opportunities for operation and maintenance of the aquatic center, the center should consider slides and other water related features in addition to a 25-yard/50-meter multi- purpose pool as proposed in the Master Plan. 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Revised 2006) 14 EXHIBIT D PCo­ky DrdopmrnMP inB\RESOLUTIaD065pC-0646 Wesui6e WFMF Am Wo tdo REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 16 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan The three -acre aquatic center in located at the east end of the park, adjacent to the proposed Elementary School site. The aquatic center illustrated in Figure 5 includes a water park, a multi- purpose pool, a dive poen, and an office/restroom facility. The aquatic's center restroom will be accessible from the park. The water park site is capable of maintaining two water slides, a zero depth pool, water spray features for children and a sand area to give users a feeling of being at the beach. This center will have the capability to serve high schools and the Lodi Swim Club. Parking for the aquatic center will be served by a single parking lot located adjacent to planned collector streets. The parking lot will be served by two entries, each with access/egress ability. The parking lot will accommodate automobiles as well as buses. While parking is available, a substantial number of residences will access the Westside Park via a pedestrian/bicycle trail system. 3.2 Greeshe Oven Swe Corridor Lodi has a well-defined edge that divides its urban uses from abutting agricultural uses, a value cherished by many residents. However, the proximity of agricultural operations to urban uses also creates conflicts affecting both farmers and residents. Conflicts relating to farming at the urban - agriculture interface can be minimized by " a4 the edge of 101 -me eemt its iustaHadoMkof a landnaged open space buffer area fences and/or wa as a transition from agricultitre to urban. To maximize the benefits use of ant" Oven Space !Corridor stefm managoment the O n S ace corridor skouFd be located central to the proiect area and its facilities Rheintegrated within agree b& -the Corridor should k treated as a public asset, maintained for use as a bie divefsity, community benefit. The C*eesboh Open Srnce Corridor shown in Figure 3, is a community facility that extends beyond the Plan Area. According to the Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan. The Corridor will extend north to Turner Road and south the Harney Lane. The corridor is central to the Plan Area , and establishes a bu central open space ine to provick pedeWan connections to parks and schoah wilhin the Plan Area. between The width of the Qff e 4"_pen Space Corridor should range from 30 tvk 50 feet. The 6reembelt Open SgUe Corridor apse serves as a passive recreational facility with a 12 -foot meandering bike and pedestrian path . Widiin the Plan Area, the 40 aer-e Coeenbelt GeFr-ideF would be eemposed of 20 30 aei- eeneested The bicycle and pedestrian path will serve the community needs. The path should be designed to meander thfough the Open Space Corridor.-areund4he Detail.lagoon detention basins' Bridges should be plaeod at adequeAe leeafiens to pr-oAde safe ffoss4fp The bicycle and pedestrian path should provide links to the residential neighborhoods, Westside Park and to bike and pedestrian path that connects to the Elementary School. 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE ffievised 2006) 16 7X—MY Ddar rn( is b%v RUSOLUTFZWTCm 06-6 Wc9Wde WIMP Ammdm tdx 7 EXHIBIT E REVISED FIGURE 6: OPEN SPACE CORRIDOR DETAIL 1Mom w*D—lop�Nka m4kRBSOLUT1Q00CT[yes 06." wag"o_WPMP AuxJWu Ldo EXHIBIT F REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 18 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan Landscaping along the Open Space Cfeenbelt Corridor should provide a natural open space atmosphere. Canopy trees should be grouped together along the corridor. Landscaping such as broad shade trees, accent trees, shrubs and native species should be encouraged within the open space area. The bieyck and pedestrian trail within the open space corridor shall meander *rough the corridor lind consist of a paved walking and biking_ tram and a decomposed gZaalte trall for runners. > > RIM 9111. Recognizing the importance of the open space gmeabel corridor as a major open space and recreational amenity to Plan Area and community, it is important that the corridor provide and environment that is safe and accessible. Paralleling the oomn spaEe greenbelt corridor with residential streets would provide safe and convenient access to the recreational opportunities along the Open Space greenbelt corridor. As a recreational and open space amenity to the Plan Area and the community, a parallel street would result in an attractive and aesthetically pleasing streetscape that would promote individual neighborhood and overall community identity. Homes adjacent to the open sgfeenbelt corridor should be oriented to encourage maximizing the aesthetic value of the open space greenbelt corridor and create and inviting community edge. Preferably, homes adjacent to the open space greenbelt corridor should be oriented with the front yard and entry of the home directly facing the open space gfeepbe corridor. Orientation of residences toward the open space gr-eenbelt corridor would provide visual access into the corridor and discourage neighborhood policing of the o ems, n s )Se gr-eefibelt corridor. Homes adjacent to the open space gm&abel corridor may be oriented with the side yard facing the open space gFeexbelt corridor. However, this type of orientation should be provided only under limited conditions. Under no circumstance should homes adjacent to the open space gree>belt corridor be oriented with the rear yard facing the corridor r emg the ^^mae_ 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Revised 2006) 18 IX—miry D—h*m fMamisgVRESOLUTI`M"'C— 0"6 WemWe_WFMP Ame.&m t&c 10 REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 31 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan 4.4.2 Bicycle Path A Bicycle Path or Class I Bikeway that is separated from a street or road. According to the Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, the preferable bike path is 12 feet wide. This allows for a two way bike path and pedestrian facility, as shown in Figure 18. 1z IVMin. PS BP PS 50%&L Notes • Bikc and Pedesttian Path May Nfeander within Planting Strip BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH CONCEPT FIGURE 18 As a regional facility, the Greenbelt Omen Space Corridor would ultimately extend beyond the Plan Area. A bicycle path should adhere within the 64eenbelt Open Space Corridor, meandering ibrtygh the corridor woimd the lagafm detemiEm basins within the Plan Area, and may continue north and south to the extents of the proposed ffeenbeh Open Space Corridor, as shown in Figure 6, Ffreerbelt 02gII Space Corridor Detail. The path would be used for bicyclists and pedestrians. The path would link the Plan Area neighborhoods through other pathways. 4.5 Pedestrian Facilities The key pedestrian path should be located along the GMeabelt Own Space Corridor to provide alternative modes of transportation within the Lodi Westside Plan Area, as shown in Figure 6 -, &eeebeh Opera Space Corridor Detail. The path may be combined with a bicycle path, which has the capability of connecting the north side of the Plan Area to the southern portion of the area with links to residential areas, the Westside Park and Aquatic Center, the elementary school and to commercial areas. The pedestrian path may also continue north and south to the extents of the proposed C--eenbelt ORja Space Corridor. 4.0 CIRCULATION (Revised 2006) 31 �icom�:tyQ�. �ei�...evEso�urrz�osvc��oe w�;e� wMa,mml�.da 11 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 06-47 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL OF THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THE WESTSIDE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Master Plan Amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission did consider and recommend approval of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adoption of Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes a Class 1 bike path along the western edge of Westside project area boundary; and WHEREAS, the request is to change the location of the Class 1 bike path shown of the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan to reflect the proposed location within the bike and pedestrian trail centrally located within the Westside Development plan and a portion of the path (north of Sargent Road and south of the WID Canal) to be accommodated on a local street within the residential development; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred. Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. An Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) for this project was recommended for approval by the City Council by Planning Commission Resolution No. 06-37. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. It is found that the requested Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment does not conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 4. The Westside project would comply with the other bike path locations shown on with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan including a Class II bike path on Lodi Avenue and a Class II or III bike path on Vine Street. 5. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the residential development proposed. J'uConumnity W—oide_6ikept. Amm4t(7}6o NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, DETERMINED, AND ORDERED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of the General Plan amendments to the City Council of the City of Lodi shown below: 1. The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan is hereby amended to modify the location of the Class I bike path from the western edge of the Westside plan area to be centrally located within the plan area. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 06-47 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on October 25, 2006, by the fallowing vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Secretary, Planning Commission f,Cn-kyD-dop ennn nn*�Re50LUTL2000JC-0641 wekidc Bli pL-Am "-1(2)d- 2 ATTACHMENT B PO'T'ENTIAL PLANNING COMMISSION BtECOMMENDATIONS Potential Planning Commission Supplemental Recommendations ❑ 1 a. Amend Mitigation Measure LU -1 as follows: ❑ lb. Mitigation Measure LU -1: To reduce agricultural/residential land use incompatibilities, the following shall be required: a. The applicant shall inform and notify prospective buyers in writing, prior to purchase, about existing and on-going agricultural activities in the immediate area in the form of a disclosure statement. The notifications shall disclose that the residence is located in an agricultural area subject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and early morning or nighttime farm operations which may create noise, dust, et cetera. The language and format of such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to recordation of final map(s). Each disclosure statement shall be acknowledged with the signature of each prospective owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of San Joaquin Right -to - Farm Ordinance. b. The conditions of approval for the tentative map(s) shall include requirements ensuring the approval of a suitable design and the installation of a landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affected by the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non-residential uses, and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. c. Prior to recordation of the final map(s) for homes adjacent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscpj im& wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department.(LTS) Amend Mitigation Measure LU -1 to also include: 11 2a. Amend Impact and Mitigation Measure LU -2 as follows: Impast LU -2: The proposed Westside amd SW Gateway projects would result in the conversion of approximately 392 acres of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses, and the Other Areas to be Annexed would result in convegjon of 39 acres of Prime Farmland when and if developed. Both the Westside and SW Gateway project sites are primarily used in agricultural production, and are currently designated as Prime Farmland. Development of the proposed project would result in the conversion of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses. Additionally, when and if plans are proposed and approved for development within the Other Areas to be Annexed the development may result in the conversion of Lnme farmland. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. This impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with implementation of the following mitigation measure, which would minimize the impact but not to a less -than -significant level: Mitigation Measure LU -2: Prior to issuance of a building permit after the first quarter of the combined building permits for the Westside and SW Gateway projects have been approved, or the approval of a parcel or Tentative Map that would result in the conversion of prime farmland within the Other Areas to be Annexcd, the applicant shall provide and undertake a phasing and financing plan (to be approved by the City Council) for one of the following mitigation measures: (1) Identify acreage at a minimum ratio of 1:1 (approximately a total of 392 acres of prime farmland for the Westside and SW Gateway projects an 39 acres for the Other Areas to be Annexed)(currently not protected or within an easement) to protect for a period of time to be determined (but not less than 15 years) as an agricultural use in a location as determined appropriate by the City of Lodi in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust; or (2) Pay a fee equal to the value of 392 acres as determined by an independent qualified consultant retained by the City in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust. The City will determine to whom the fee shall be paid; or (3) _ With the City Council's approval, comply with the requirements of the Coin Agricultural Mtigation program, which is currently being developed, if it is adopted by the Count�1Lnor to this mitigation measure being implemented. (SU) 2 ATTACHMENT C SUPPLEMENTAL RESPONSE TO COMMENTS MEMORANDUM DATE. October 18, 2006 'M, City of Lodi FROM. Lynette Dias and Amy Paulsen, LSA Associates Inc. OWL Response to the Clements Residents Concerned About Growth Letter, dated October 10, 2006 Katina Conn, with the Clements Residents Concerned About Growth, has provided a letter regarding approval of the Lodi Annexation/FCB Project. This letter was not received during the public review process, which ended May 26, 2006. This comment letter does not relate to the adequacy of the analysis or information within the Draft EIR; no further response is required. CLEMENTS RESIDENTS CONCERNED ABOUT GROWTH P.O. BOX 687 CLEMENTS, CA 95227 October 10, 2006 The Honorable Susan Hitchcock and Lodi City Council c/o City Hall P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241 Honorable Council members, OCT it So much of Lodi's current beauty and quality of life has come from the City's W hurrying in the past to approve growth projects without careful consideration. The only way to sustain San Joaquin County's balance of agriculture and homes is through measured, intelligent consideration of all the ramifications this project and all other proposed annexations may have. We urge you to respect your city's general plan and the laws of this State by denying approval of the Lodi Amexation(FCB Project. Sincerely, K.atina Conn ClerneW Residents Concerned About Growth cc: Ann Cerney MEMORANDUM DATE. October 18, 2006 To, City of Lodi now. LynetUe Dias and Amy Paulsen, LSA Associates Inc. suDiwr. Response to the Delta -Sierra Group Mother Lode Chapter of the Sierra Club letter, dated October 11, 2006 Dale E. Stocking with the Delta -Sierra Group Mother Lode Chapter of the Sierra Club has provided a letter regarding approval of the Lodi Annexation Draft EIR. This letter was not received during the public review process, which ended May 26, 2006. The comments below correspond to the numbers within the right hand margin of the attached letter. Responses to the letters cited in the comment have been provided to the City of Lodi Planning Commission and the City Council. Please see those responses which address the concerns raised in those letters. 2. Within this comment, the commentor makes an assertion that several topics were not addressed adequately in the Draft EK but provides no additional analysis or information to support this claim. These items are described below. Conversion of agricultural land is discussed on page 93 of the Draft EIR. Even with implementation of Mitigation Measure LU -2, this impact would still be considered significant and unavoidable. Cumulative impacts of the project are discussed in Chapter VI of the Draft EIR. Water supply and impacts to groundwater are discussed in the Section IV J of the Draft EIR. The Draft EIR did not identify any significant impacts related to utilities. Transportation impacts are discussed in Section IV.B of the Draft EIR. Under the Existing Plus Project conditions, 15 intersections would be impacted, and under the Cumulative Condition, 19 intersections would be impacted. Mitigation measures are presented that could reduce all identified traffic impacts to a less -than -significant level. Air Quality impacts are discussed in Section IV.0 of the Draft EIR. It is unclear what environmental impacts would be covered under the bullet of "open space and community separators." The conversion of agricultural land is described in Section tV.A of the Draft MR. The provision of park space is described in Chapter III, Project Description, and the potential impact of the project to park service ratio is described in Section IV.K, Public Services. 3. The comment regarding groundwater quality issues and study near the City's White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility cites a newspaper article as the source of information. The study, in its entirety, is posted on the City's website. The study describes both local and regional water quality issues, and demonstrates there is a regional nitrate problem in the area, as it states: "The available information demonstrates that additional controls may be appropriate for reducing the potential for nitrate impacts associated with the City's facilities and land application practices. However, the City's WPCF facilities and land application practices are not likely to be causing groundwater degradation with respect to EC, sodium, and chloride. In fact, these facilities and practices may actually be improving underlying groundwater quality for these constituents." The City's White Slough Phase 3 Improvement Project, 2007, for which design is nearly complete, will include improvements that will reduce nitrate in the City's effluent. The City is working with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, who regulates the White Slough Facility, on appropriate work and time frames. The additional wastewater from the Project will have only a marginal impact on the Facility. 4. As is discussed on page 278 and 279 of the Draft ETR, there is adequate capacity to treat wastewater generated by the proposed project. Based on the current estimated dry weather flow of 6.4 mgd, the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility (WSWPCF) has a remaining design treatment capacity of 2.1 mgd and a RWCQCB remaining permitted capacity of 600,000 gpd. The City discharge permit is presently being updated by the RWQCB and the City has submitted a Waste Discharge Report requesting the permitted capacity be increased to the existing design capacity of 8.5 mgd. The White Slough Treatment facility has the capacity to treat the additional wastewater generated by the proposed project. The discussion of alternatives is included in Chapter V of the Draft EIR Four alternatives are described in this section: the No Project/No Build alternative; the Agricultural Residential alternative; the Reduced Density alternative; and the Increased High Density Mix alternative. CEQA does not require that every possible alternative be evaluate, but that a reasonable range of alternatives is presented, as has been included in Chapter V of the Draft EIR. The EIR identified the No Project(No Build alternative as the environmentally superior alternative, with the Agricultural Residential alternative considered the second most environmentally superior alternative. 6. The commenilor's opinion that the EIR should not be certified is noted. 2 URRik B POU DED 1892 OOkAW 11, 2W Am: Pwa Pimejad L" P*w" Coni ion City 1AAdi 221 W PMC 1ht Lodi, CA 95242 Delta --Sierra. Group Mother Lode Chapter P.O B= 91 8, Stockan CA 952M Re: Lodi Awwxstio l'CP Project Ewvirameawl Review Dw for ion M**M: T#re 9" Club has' about No 1 sad the impea h wiH have on the Loi am as wA as $r J*Wn Coudy. uft by of mw *a Oc Mew 9,200 WOW by Ams *o4vdl 3oovh A Cad{o:so and t1w OjWba 10,X906 kAwr by C=pWp for Comman O=nd and epee that the � MovAng anus an nit adegnatdy adkeaed or mitered in the >IwA"Xw=W t Resort MEn: • Conversion ofagricuitural lard • Omwative b4pwm Of *0 project • Watat supply on VauDd wear • Teaailpartdiirnpaats . • Air Quality 4pects Affests oa opla spore and co city sepseat m The MR amdysis ofttcr 4pal* wA wok wow impacts is dadloiW bora m it oo"itasno inkesethm wdY:rx d wee* mvdsOws by a cas t oflhe w&W � isms rel2od to Am thetr"UnW lines in On vicinity of dw per, Awadwith (seco 'Rita � arms water quality cwld Uk ycsrs," Lodi Nkws-Scodacl, t kt W 4, 2006)e now that "It cold Ww several yeraa for Lodi to fmd a viable sob*on for V"DdwaterarRs � trcub nW pWk soe of which have been Inked m a pipcHw t�liapse cU60 year. At an irarmal Lodi City Co=d r xw=g Tuck* morning, Public Works D izedor Ricbkd Prima prasmted %c remb of a yea -loft gro mdwates shady, A&I revealed an mmeased level ofhitrates in dor water surmunding the White SloWgh wastewater t valmemt plemt " 3 The ffiR fails to provide ackquate justification for the single steftmmt from a City slafi member dmt ^The White Slough Treatment twility has the capacity to tri the additional wastevrater gencMW by 4 the pwposW inject-" Lodi Aenc7at OWYCP Project EnvimweWal Rtview Octobw 11, 2006 kge 2 of 2 The EiR also fails to provide an adequate range of alternatives. In particular, the alternatives fail to include an agricultural bluffer that would help to mitigate impacts of urban development directly adjacent to productive filamland, and no alternative includes a comprehensive smart growth► design that seeks to reduce low density subdivisions, increase podestnm and transit trips, and provide additional public amenities. The Increased High Density Mix alternative fails to include a full range of smart growth, neo -traditional, or transit -oriented development lands use and infrastructure strategies. It only simplistically deletes medium density midential units. The Sierra Club believes that the EIR does not meet the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines and should *X be certified at this time. Yours truly, '")"' 5 A-"-�AaC Dale E. Stocking Delta -Surra Group Comervation Chair cc: Azar Cerney Cidzens $or ©pen (iovarnrrtant Campaip for Cosunon Ground MEMORANDUM nAre. October 18, 2006 City of Lodi !ROBE, Lynette Dias and Amy Paulsen, LSA Associates Inc. BuBiwr, Response to the Campaign for Common Ground letter, dated October 10, 2006 Rosemary Moon Atkinson with the Campaign for Common Ground has provided a letter regarding approval of the Lodi Ar#nexation Draft EIR. This letter was not received during the public review process, which ended May 26, 2006. The comments below correspond to the numbers within the right hand margin of the attached letter. The Draft EIR notes that the proposed project could have growth inducing impacts to the west, as is discussed in Section VI.B, Growth -Inducing Impacts. The commentor's concern that it would promote growth south of Harney Lane is noted. There are currently residential and other types of development immediately south of Harney lane, so it is unclear how this project would be considered growth inducing south of Harney Lane as there is already utility service and development in this area. A 1:1 mitigation for each acre of prime farmland that is converted is identified as a mitigation measure for the project. The commentor's opinion that the project does not meet the Smart Growth Principles promoted by *e Campaign for Common Ground is noted. This comment does not related to the adequacy of the information or analysis within the Draft EIR; no further response is required. 4. Potential Air Quality Impacts are discussed in Section IV.0 of the Draft EIR. The commentor's opinion that new development in the San Joaquin County should be designed and constructed to reduce future air quality impacts are noted. The Woodbridge Irrigation District contracted supply of 6,000 acre-feet per year is not currently being utilized. However the contract provides that the City, which is paying for the water, can "bank" the water and take an additional amount of water in subsequent years as available. The "bank" currently totals 18,000 acre feet and the District has approved an additional four year window to bank additional water, which would increase the "bank" to 42,000 acre feet. The City anticipates utilizing the bank at an average of 2,000 acre feet per year above the annual amount of 6,000 acre feet. The proposed projects total annual water demand at buildout is approximately 887 acre feet. Over four years, the total is 3,548 acre feet. The City estimates that the project will build in phases and cumulatively use approximately 215 acre feet over the next few years, which will be pumped from the groundwater. The City intends to utilize banked water, over the 6,000 acre -ft. annual allotment, and reduce groundwater pumping in future years. The amount of banked water will be adequate to offset the amount of groundwater pumped during development of the project until the City fully utilizes the WID supply. 6. The comment regarding groundwater quality issues and study near the City's White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility cites a newspaper article as the source of information. The study, in its entirety, is posted on the City's website. The study describes both local and regional water quality issues, and demonstrates there is a regional nitrate problem in the area, as it states: "The available information demonstrates that additional controls may be appropriate for reducing the potential for nitrate impacts associated with the City's facilities and land application practices. However, the City's WPCF facilities and land application practices are not likely to be causing groundwater degradation with respect to EC, sodium, and chloride. In fact, these facilities and practices may actually be improving underlying groundwater quality for these constituents." The City's White Slough Phase 3 Improvement Project, 2007, for which design is nearly complete, will include improvements that will reduce nitrate in the City's effluent. The City is working with the Regional Water Quality Control Board, who regulates the White Slough Facility, on appropriate work and time frames. The additional wastewater from the Project will have only a marginal impact on the Facility. 7. As is discussed on page 278 and 279 of the Draft EIR, there is adequate capacity to treat wastewater generated by the proposed project. Based on the current estimated dry weather flow of 6.4 mgd, the White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility (WSWPCF) has a remaining design treatment capacity of 2.1 mgd and a RWCQCB remaining permitted capacity of 600,000 gpd. The City discharge permit is presently being updated by the RWQCB and the City has submitted a Waste Discharge Report requesting the permitted capacity be increased to the existing design capacity of 8.5 mgd. The White Slough Treatment facility has the capacity to treat the additional wastewater generated by the proposed project. 8. The discussion of alternatives is included in Chapter V of the Draft EIR. Four alternatives are described in this section: the No Project/No Build alternative; the Agricultural Residential alternative; the Reduced Density alternative; and the Increased High Density Mix alternative. CEQA Guidelines do not require that every possible alternative be evaluate, but that a reasonable range of alternatives is presented, as has been included in Chapter V of the Draft EIR. The EIR identified the No Project/No Build alternative as the environmentally superior alternative, with the Agricultural Residential alternative considered the second most environmentally superior alternative. The commentaor's opinion that the EIR should not be certified is noted. FA p.O. Sax 693545 Stockton, CA 95269 Oatobar 10, 2006 To: Lodi Planning Commissiat Ams: Peter Pinw F ; Campsigtt for Common Ground COSAIn for Conti (around is a oaatntywide chime WOW drat promota Sheat Growth pthacsples to improve Ia quality of Wk in Sus Joaquin Coady. *ww. i app d.ore.) COMP611P fOr Cat3 MMU Gtw=d also spWaored Measure Q on the Stoi don 2004 ballot to place an urban aM-u--- r betwet a Lodi and Saocloon. We arc still active in encouraging a Stockton General Plan d+at will provide for land prcmrvation between the two cities. We are aonmned about the proposed approval of the Lodi AnnthadiONTrontiers Ct amurilty . 13uildes Prot for *vend reaatras. TIN Southwmt Gataws►y portion of the project will proanaba I � growth south of Nay lane, into the area that Amid rennin w aoci hue to separate Lodi and Srockwn. Adegtate-*dtigation for the farmland conversion impacts of the Project is not mandmod. The mitiption measure docs not require l :1 midpdon for each acre of ooavertcd Z 0rctn1s 4 and the coteervation easements oved only last for 15 years. The: Pwject does not meet I the Smart Growth Pdwiples promoud by Campaign for Common Owund. (See 3 New development in San Joaquin Cou* should 14 be deAped and eon4*=wd in s manner that will reduce fiture environmental impacts especWly those related to air duality. It does ,not appear dist the Project bee an adequate water supply. Campaign for Common Around objects to new projects that wpdnm to rely on the now � J over -dratted grounOmer basin. ftrthef support for tlit:ae claims: The DER analysis o(wat r quality and wastewater impacts is dafickat bode it oontat u no k1brrsation and sme leis of tin mod revelations by a coawitsm of the wum gUjily is;nes related to leakage from the wastewater ueabmnt lines in the vicinity of the plant. end resulting containinado i with nk arca (sec "Solution to Wlgitc Slougls area "On quality could takeyears," Lodi News_Sentitul, October 4) 2006). The aaticle nates flier "lt WUW takeseveral veral years.for Dodi to find a viable soltition for groundwater problems near its wastewater tnatme t plant, some of which have been linked to a pipeline collapse earlier finis year. At an in%rmal Lotti City Council meeting Tuesday momiing, Public Works Direcmr Rielmd friars presented the r*mshs of a year. lotsg groundwater study, .Which MV0111e4 an increased level of nitrates in the water surrounding the White Slough wastewater treatment plant." b The DEIR fails to provide adequaue justifkadon for the single stakwaent from R City staff metstber that "Tina Kusa SIOVO Ties MNA facility bus the CSpadty w trot the asiditioW ! wasurwww gencraaod by the proposed project." nu DIM also fails to p"M& an Wo wee rastge of akenwtives. In OW11cul6r, the west fill to inchtds a "agricultural buffer• that would WP to mbigate i 4mas of urban devciopsaetu &Wdy adja M to productive h rmlaad, and no altxrative inetudeh a compTehtrakvt "srwwt gran+rth" ticalgo to stacks to reduce law density subdivisions, inarow pedestrian amd trstwk trips, and provide additiond public amenities. The 8 Increased Hide Dwsity Mix alternative fails to inafude a full raW of smart growth, "neo- traditional," or "trysit-oriented developmew" lands use and infrastructure strategim u only simplistically deleiea medium density residential units. For then reasons, we Vitt t}sa Planning Commission not to r*WW ttnd ca d iohtlan of the ER � 9 and approval of the Ptajem rfor Conurtan L�Sotmd Rommy Moon AWnsort Trevor Atkinson part Johnston Eric Parfrsy Joh* Edeas Lao Fennell ATTACHMENT D GRAPHIC SNOWING STUDY INTERSECTIONS CITY OF LODI PLANKING COMMISSION t Rrt - MEETING DATE: October 11, 2006 APPLICATION NOS: Environmental Impact Report 05-01 ]REQUEST: The request of Frontiers Community Builders, Inc. (FCB) for the Planning Commission to make a recommendation to the City Council to certify the Lodi Annexation EIR (SCH#2005092096). LOCATION: The project area is located in an unincorporated area of San Joaquin County, immediately west of the Lodi City boundary, and within the City's Sphere of Influence. APPLICANT: Tom Doucette, FCB Homes 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219 PROPERTY OWNER: Multiple Owners RECOMMENDATION 1) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council certification of the Lodi Annexations EIR (SCH#2005092096). ]BACKGROUND Tom Doucette, President of Frontiers Community Builders (FCB Homes) submitted applications for Annexation and General Plan amendments for the Westside and Southwest (SW) Gateway Project areas in January 2004. Following these applications, the applicant submitted applications for Planned Development Rezone, and Growth Management allocations in May 2005. It was the City's original intent to prepare a Mitigated Negative Declaration for these projects, but upon further review of the proposed development applications, the City determined that an Environrnental Impact Report (EIR) would be the appropriate CEQA analysis for this project. Based on the City's understanding that the proposed Projects would have Significant Unavoidable impacts related to: a) loss of Prime Farmland and conflicts with existing Williamson Act contracts; b) degradation of visual character; c) air quality; and d) potential growth inducing impacts associated with the Project's potential to facilitate development to the west of the City if it decides it wants to grow west, the City determined that an EIR would need to be prepared to provide adequate CEQA evaluation of the proposed Projects. Individual staff reports have been prepared for the Planning Commission's review and consideration of the SW Gateway and Westside applications for Annexation, General Plan Amendment (for Other Annexation Areas only), Prezone, Development Agreement, Bicycle Master Plan Amendment and Westside Facilities Master Plan Amendment (Westside project only). J Commoaity SW_WS_Othee_EJR_ maRreponAm Staff prepared one EIR for to evaluate both of the proposed projects (Draft EIR included herein as Attachment 3). On September 16, 2005, a Notice of Preparation (NOP) was circulated notifying responsible agencies and interested parties that an EIR would be prepared, indicating the environmental topics that were anticipated to be addressed in the EIR. A public scoping session, which was noticed to all property owners located within 500 feet of the projects, was held by the Planning Commission on October 12, 2005. Minutes from the public scoping session are attached herein as Attachment 2. Comments received by the City and at the public scoping meeting were taken into consideration during preparation of the EIR. The Draft EIR was prepared, and was made available for public review on April 17, 2006. It was distributed to State and local agencies, posted at the County, and made available at the City Planning Offices and Public Library. The Draft EIR was distributed to the Planning Commissioners (and City Council members) in April 2006. The Notice of Completion (NOC) was published on April 17, 2006. The 45 -day public comment period began on April 17, 2006 and closed on May 26, 2006. Written responses to each comment received were prepared, and the comments and responses were packaged into a Response to Comments document. The Draft EIR and the Response to Comment document constitute the Final EIR, and the Planning Commission will consider the analysis and conclusions in these documents prior to taking action on the SW Gateway and Westside applications for Annexation, General Plan Amendment (for Other Annexation Areas only), Prezone, Development Agreement, Bicycle Diaster Plan Amendment and Westside Facilities Master Plan Amendment (Westside project only). The Final EIR (Draft EIR and Response to Comments document) is attached herein as Attachment 3 and will be presented to the City Council for certification, prior to the Council taking action on these actions. SCOPE OF THE LORI ANNEXATION EIR The Lodi Annexations EIR was prepared to evaluate the environmental impacts of the proposed annexation and development of the Westside project, SW Gateway project, and annexation of 12 additional parcels (described herein as "Other Annexation Areas"). A brief description of each project is provided below. Westside Project This project would develop a 151 -acre site with a maximum of 750 units, which would include 500 low-density dwelling units, 70 medium -density dwelling units, and 180 high-density dwelling units. The Westside project land use plan also includes the following amenities at the proposed acreages: a 10.6 -acre school site, a 4.7 acre aquatic center site, and approximately 20 acres of parks and park basins. SW Gateway Project. This project would develop a 257.76 -acre site with a maximum of 1,300 units, which would include 875 low-density dwelling units, 125 medium -density dwelling units, 300 high-density dwelling units. The SW Gateway land use plan includes the following amenities at the proposed acreages: a 14 -acre school site, and approximately 31 acres of parks, park basins and trails. Other Areas to be Annexed The EIR will also included an analysis of the annexation of approximately 12 parcels adjacent to the SW Gateway Project area. While no specific development plans have been proposed for the development of these parcels, it was assumed that parcels will be developed with residential units. Based on the policies of the existing The analysis in this EIR assumes the development of approximately 335 units based on seven units per gross acre. 1:1C-ity Devtdopolem?lamtiWTAFFRPr2806\10-11-06 SW_WS_Othe. 81R_ staffrWrt.doc 2 Based on concerns identified in the NOP and comments received during the public scoping meeting, the following topics were identified for evaluation within the EIR: • Land Use, Agriculture and Planning Policy • Traffic and Circulation • Air Quality • Noise • Cultural and Paleontological Resources • Geology, Soils and Seismicity • Hydrology and Water Quality • Biological Resources • Hazards and Hazardous Materials • Utilities • Public Services • Visual Resources • Energy IMPACTS IDENTIFIED IN THE LODI ANNEXATION EIR 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. Impacts Mitigated to Less -than -Significant Levels. The Lodi Annexation EIR identified certain potentially significant effects on land use, air quality, noise, cultural and paleontological resources, geology soils and seismicity, hydrology and water quality, biological resources, hazards and hazardous materials, and visual resources that could result from the project. However, the City finds that adoption of the mitigation measures identified in the Draft EIR and incorporated in the Mitigation Monitoring Plan (Attachment 4) would reduce these significant or potentially significant effects to less -than -significant levels. Significant Unavoidable Impacts. The Draft EIR and Response to Comments document identify several impacts on land use, transportation circulation and parking, air quality, noise and visual resources that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level even though the City finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and adopted as part of the project. CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project accep- table when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable. The City has prepared a Statement of Overriding Considerations (see Attachment 4) that concludes that notwithstanding the disclosure of the significant unavoidable impacts, there are specific overriding economic, legal, social, and other reasons for approving this project. Cumulative Impacts. The Lodi Annexation EIR utilized development that is likely to occur under the buildout of the General Plan in addition to specific development projects throughout the J:.WommueiryDe dopmaTlamineSTAFFRPTQW6110-1[4*SW WS Other_HIR_ mfrrepw&c 3 City to determine cumulative impacts of the proposed project. The EIR found that the project would exacerbate nonatt~ainment of air quality standards within the San Joaquin Valley. !"91tOJECT ALTERNATIVES The EIR considered four alternatives to the proposed project: the No Project/No Build Altemative, the Agriculkiral Residential Alternative, the Reduced Density Alternative, and the Increased High Density Alternative. As required by CEQA, the EIR identified an environmentally superior alternative. The No Project/No Build alternative was identified as the environmentally superior alternative in the strict sense that the environmental impacts associated with its implementation would be the least of all the scenarios examined (including the proposed project). In cases like this where the No Project/No Build alternative is the environmentally superior alternative, CEQA requires that the second most environmentally superior alternative be identified. The Agricultural Residential alternative would be considered the second most environmentally superior alternative. Under this alternative, there would be a reduction in potential land use impacts as the majority of the site would remain in agricultural production. However, this alternative would not meet the project objectives of providing increased residential opportunities for the City of Lodi, as well as providing parks and public facilities. RESPONSES TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT The Response to Comment (RTC) Document provides responses to comments on the Draft EIR and makes revisions to the Draft EIR, as necessary, in response to these comments or to amplify and clarify material in the Draft EIR. The RTC Document is attached herein as Attachment 3. The following 9 comment letters where submitted to the City of Lodi during the public review period: 1 Department of California Highway Patrol May 4, 2006 S.M. Coutts, Captain 2 Department of Conservation, May 26, 2006 Division of Land Resource Protection Dennis J. O'Bryant, Acting Assistant Director 3 Department of Transportation, May 25, 2006 Tom Dumas, Chief of Office of Intermodal Planning 4 Pacific Gas and Electric Company May 26, 2006 Clifford J. Gleicher 5 Public Utilities Commission April 26, 2006 Kevin Boles, Utilities Engineer 6 San Joaquin County Public Works May 24, 2006 Andrea Vallejo, Assistant Transportation Planner 7 Governor's Office of Planning and Research May 26, 2006 State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit Terry Roberts,.Director 8 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District May 4, 2006 Debbie Johnson, Air Quality Specialist 9 Wilson, Robert G. May 23, 2006 LITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) is included as Chapter IV of the Response to Comments document (Attachment 3). The MMRP is in compliance with Section 15097 of the CEQA Guidelines, which requires that the Lead Agency "adopt a program for monitoring or reporting on the revisions which it has required in the project and the measures it has imposed to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects." The MM" lists mitigation measures recommended in the EIR and identifies mitigation monitoring requirements. The l.C--hyl),dopt t�M—i.gLSTAFFRPr2OW]0.11-06SW WS_Od.r_EIR smff,q n.doc 4 MMRP identifies the party responsible for carrying out the required actions, the approximate timeframe for the oversight agency and the party ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is in0plemented. Adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring Plan effectively makes the mitigations part of the project. 01014CLUSION The Lodi Annexation E$K stipulates that following the adoption and implementation of the iontipbon measures reommended in the EIR, the proposed project would have significant onavoidable impacts on -the environment. Section 15090 of the CIJQA Guidelines, requires the Lead Agency, prior to approving a project, to certify that: The Final EIR has been vornpleted in compliance with CEQA; 'fie Final EIR was pres#nted to the decision-making body of the lead agency, and that the 4ecision-making body roviewed and considered the information contained in the Final EIR prior to approving the project and the Final EIR reflects the lead agency's independent judgment and analysis. It addition Section 15091 states that no public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR his been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of tie project unless the p*4ic agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accolnpanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The Oossible findings are: • Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. • Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the 4gency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can�and should be adopted by such other agency. • Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employmerit opporNinities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or projectalternatives identified in the final EIR. Section 15093 also req>tres the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, regal, social, technologiW, or other benefits of a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks whin determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic, %gal, soul, technolo*al, or other benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental Offects, the adverse environmental effects may be considered "acceptable" if the jurisdiction states in writing the specific reasons to support its action based on the Final EIR and/or other informatiois in the record. Detailed findings to su ort certification of the Final EIR and adoption of a statement of overriding consideratio#s are included herein as Attachment 4. Staff concurs with the conclusion of the EIR, and recoirn *nds its certification. 1 C KEARING 110TICE The public hearing nottes that were posted at City Hall on September 2, 2006; published in the Lodi Nevis Sentinel on September 2, 2006; and sent to all property owners of record within a mo.mmMrkvdWmmnr isrAerxrnt0ww-n.o6sw_ws od.,,._eiR_suffepmtaa 5 300 -foot radius of the Westside and SW Gateway projects and to persons who have expressed interest in the SW Gateway project via the FCB Cormunity Meeting in 2005 (160 notices total) included notice of the Planning Commission to consider recommendation to the City Council for certification of the Lodi Annexation EIR. Respectfully Submitted, Concurred by: Charity Wagner & Lynette Dias Randy Hatch Contract Planners, LSA Associates, Inc. Community Development Director Attachments I . Draft Resolution Recommending City Council Certification of the EIR 2. Minutes from the public scoping session, October 12, 2005 3. Draft Environmental Impact Report & Response to Comments 4. CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Consideration RH/pp/dm/kc 3,1C--iy Dmckq enAPl agl$TAFFRP'R20p6110-I1-06 SW WS_Oih _ER_s ffrepw.dw CITY OF LODI ]PLANNING COMMISSION Stag' Report MEETING DATE: October 11, 2006 APPLICATION NOS: Annexation AX -04-01 General Plan Amendment GPA -05-001 (for Other Annexation Areas) Prezone Z-04-01 Development Agreement GM -05-001 Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment REQUEST: The request of Frontiers Community Builders Inc. (FCB), for approval of the SW Gateway Development Project, which includes a Annexation (AX -04-01); Prezoning (Z-04-01); Amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; and Development Agreement (GM -05-001); to incorporate 305.55 acres into the City of Lodi (257.76 acres within the Southwest Gateway project area and 47.79 contiguous acres, outside of the project) to allow construction of 1,230 dwelling units, 5 neighborhood/ community parks, and a public elementary school on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road, south of Kettleman Lane and north of Harney Lane. This item also includes a City initiated request for annexation, General Plan amendment (GPA -05-01) for the "Other Annexation Areas (47.79 acres)" from a General Plan designation of PR (Planned Residential) to MDR (Medium Density Residential), and Prezoning of R -MD (Residential Medium Density) to avoid creation of a County island. Additionally, two property owners on Harney Lane are requesting Annexation into the City. LOCATION: Parcel information for the project area is provided in Table A. APPLICANT: Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219 PROPERTY OWNERS: See Table A below. Table A: Project Locotion ADDRESS APN PROPERTY OWNER 252 E. ST. ROUTE 12 058-030-09 CAROLYN REICHMUTH GHWAY 145" NORTH LOWER 058-030-03 VAN RUITEN RANCH, LTD C NTO ROAD 14499 NORTH LOWER 058-030-04 VAN RUITEN RANCH, LTD SAqMWNTOROAD 14433 NORTH LOWER 058-030-05 VAN RUITEN RANCH, LTD SACRAWNTO ROAD 14195 NORTH LOWER 058-030-06 HOWARD INVESTMENTS, LLC JACO—dty 1-06 sw Fu y_mffrepon.6oc ADDRESS APN PROPERTY OWNER SACRAMENTO ROAD 058-140-08 FRANK HALL 14101 NORTH LOWER 058-040-01 SCHUMACHER TRUST S,ACRAM ENTO ROAD 058-140-09 SANTIAGO AND RAMONA DEL RIO 13837 NORTH LOWER 058-040-02 SCHUMACHER TRUST SACRAMENTO ROAD 058-040-11 ROBERT AND LETHA PINNELL 13537 NORTH LOWER 0584040-04 SCHUMACHER TRUST CRAMINTO ROAD 13589 NORTH LOWER 058-040-05 SCHUMACHER TRUST SACRAMENTO ROAD T HARNEY LANE I 058-040-13 1 SCHUMACHER TRUST 137$6 NORTH LOWER 058-230-04 TSUGIO KUBOTA SACRAMENTO ROAD 14320 NORTH LOWER 058-140-13 M. BILL PETERSON SACRAMENTO ROAD 14500 NORTH LOWER 058-140-12 M. BILL PETERSON NORTH LOWER 1 058-140-14 1 RUTH SUSAN PETERSON SAC2R NATOLOWER ROAD 058-140-04 DEAN AND SHARON FRAME TRUST 777 EAST OLIVE AVET4UE 058-140-11 ZANE GREVER TRUST 160 EAST OLIVE AVENUE 058-140-06 VERNET AND CHARLENE $44 EAST OLIVE AVENUE 058-140-07 SANTIAGO AND RAMONA DEL RIO R0 EAST OLIVE AVENUE 058-140-08 FRANK HALL 805 EAST OLIVE AVENUE 058-140-05 SANTIAGO AND RAMONA DEL RIO 969 EAST OLIVE AVENUE 058-140-09 SANTIAGO AND RAMONA DEL RIO 430 EAST OLIVE AVENUE 058-140-10 LETICIA F. AMIGABLE ETAL 365 EAST HARNEY LANE 058-040-11 ROBERT AND LETHA PINNELL 603 EAST HARNEY LANE 058-040-12 FRANK HALL a This annexation request includes parcels on the cast side of Lower Sacramento Road to avoid creation of an incorporated island, and two properties on Harney Cane. These parcels are not part of the FCB Homes development area. Source: City of Lodi RECOMMENDATION Following the Planning Commission's action to recommend certification of the EIR (see separate staff report) Staff reconvnends that the Planning Commission: 1) Recommends the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to adopt a resolution of intent to annex 305.55 acres (AX -04-01: 257.76 project acres and 47.79 contiguous acres, outside of the project area) and the request of two property owners on Harney Lane to annex 2 acres of land into the corporate limits of the City of Lodi per the attached resolution (Attachment 6). 2) Recommends the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Prezone (04- Z-01) to a Planned Development (PD) Zone for the entire SW Gateway site, the request of two property owners on Harney Lane for a Prezone to PD and change to Residential Medium Density (R -MD) for the "Other Annexation Areas." JAC-ity De clgmnaa�SFIa im,4STAFFRYC2"40-11-06 SW aate y_ %affrepMdm 2 3) Recommends the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Development Agreement (05 -GM -001), setting the mutual entitlement obligations entered into between the City and the project applicant for the Southwest Gateway project per the attached resolution (Attachment 8). 4) Recommends the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for an Amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan per the attached resolution (Attachment 10). 5) Recommends the City Council approve the City initiated request for a General Pian Amendment for the "Other Annexation Areas" to be redesignated from PR (Planned Residential) to MDR (Medium Density Residential) per the attached resolution (Attachment 9). SUMMARY As part of the FCB project, the SW Gateway project would annex 257.76 acres of land from San Joaquin County into the City of Lodi, which could accommodate development of up to 1,230 residential units, 31 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure. A breakdown of the project is provided in Table B and the land use plan is included as Attachment 2. To implement the proposed project, the applicant has submitted applications for annexation, Prezone and growth management unit allocation. The growth management units will be allocated through the Development Agreement (see Attachment 5). Table B: FCB Protect. Land Uses Note: Conceptual Development Plans have been refined (showing slight modifications to dwelling units) since publication of the Draft EIR. An additional 47.79 acres identified as "Other Areas to be Annexed," which consists of property that is adjacent to the SW Gateway project, currently in San Joaquin County and within the City's Sphere of Influence is also proposed to be annexed into the City. The City has initiated annexation of these properties to avoid creation of a County island. There are also two property owners who have filed Annexation and Prezone applications for their properties on Harney Lane. These properties are contiguous to the SW Gateway project area and are located at 565 and 603 East Harney Lane. Currently there are no development plans identified for the "Other Area to be Annexed" and the Harney Lane properties. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EiR) was prepared for this project (see separate staff report). PROJECT/AREA DESCRIPTION General Plan Designation PR, Planned Residential Zoning Designation. AU -20, Agricultural -Urban Reserve, minimum of 20 acres. This is a County zoning designation that is intended to retain in agriculture those areas planned for future urban development in Momm®dy Dmdqp�nlP6wdng\$TAFFRPP,2bm%io-i i -m Sw GAmy_s ffrepmdm HousingUnits Parks/ Low Medium High Density Density Density Basics &Trails Schools Overall Overall Overall Area Acres Units D*nsity Units Dendty Units Dendw Total (Acres) (Acres) Westside 106 388 7 70 7.7 180 20 638 24 10 W Gateways 257 770 4.3 160 9.4 300 21.4 1,230 31 14.5 Other Arep to be Annexed 48 — — — — — — 335 — Note: Conceptual Development Plans have been refined (showing slight modifications to dwelling units) since publication of the Draft EIR. An additional 47.79 acres identified as "Other Areas to be Annexed," which consists of property that is adjacent to the SW Gateway project, currently in San Joaquin County and within the City's Sphere of Influence is also proposed to be annexed into the City. The City has initiated annexation of these properties to avoid creation of a County island. There are also two property owners who have filed Annexation and Prezone applications for their properties on Harney Lane. These properties are contiguous to the SW Gateway project area and are located at 565 and 603 East Harney Lane. Currently there are no development plans identified for the "Other Area to be Annexed" and the Harney Lane properties. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an Environmental Impact Report (EiR) was prepared for this project (see separate staff report). PROJECT/AREA DESCRIPTION General Plan Designation PR, Planned Residential Zoning Designation. AU -20, Agricultural -Urban Reserve, minimum of 20 acres. This is a County zoning designation that is intended to retain in agriculture those areas planned for future urban development in Momm®dy Dmdqp�nlP6wdng\$TAFFRPP,2bm%io-i i -m Sw GAmy_s ffrepmdm order to facilitate compact, orderly growth and to assure the proper timing and economical provision of services and utilities. Project Size. 257.76 acres plus 47.49 acres (contiguous for annexation and Prezone only) The adjacent zoning designations and land uses are as follows: North: C -S, Shopping Center; PUB, Public; and AU -20, General Agriculture (County zoning designation). Highway 12 borders the northern most part of the SW Gateway site. Agriculture, commercial and single-family uses are located north of Highway 12, and commercial uses, and the site of a future utility station, are located in the northeastern "notch" that is formed by the SW Gateway site. South: AG -20, General Agriculture (County designation). Harney Lane borders the southern most part of the SW Gateway site, and single-family homes are located south of Harney Lane. Additionally, single-family uses are located in the southeastern "notch" formed by the SW Gateway site. Existing homes along Hamey Lane are within the County. West: AG -40, General Agriculture (County designation). Agricultural uses are located west of the SW Gateway site. East: AU -20, General Agriculture (County designation); PUB, Public; and R -LD. Lower Sacramento Road borders the site to the east. Single-family, multi- farrrily, and the site of a future community park are located east of the project site across Lower Sacramento Road. ]PROJECT SITE CRARACTERISTICS The SW Gateway project site is approximately 257.76 acres and is comprised of 1 I parcels. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. The dominant use of the site is agriculture including field crops, vineyards, and a cherry orchard. There are also several structures on the site including a cluster of multi -family housing, a single-family home, and a farm complex (used in association with the orchard) all of which is located off of Lower Sacramento Road. The "Other Annexation Areas" consist of 47.79 acres and is comprised of 12 parcels. There are also two properties on Harney Lane that are requesting annexation and Prezone as part of this request. This area is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. These parcels are developed with agricultural and residential uses. ]PROJECT DESCRIP'T'ION The SW Gateway project is a master planned residential community that, if approved, could accommodate development of up to 1,230 new residential units, 31 acres of parks, trails and open space, a K-8 elementary school (14 acres), and related infrastructure. The proposed SW Gateway land use plan (see Attachment 2) is intended to guide future development of the project area. Detailed plans for development within the project area (including proposed setbacks, height, and architectural design of the homes) would be subject to review by the Planning Commission via a development plan and tentative subdivision maps. Below is a discussion of the elements of the SW Gateway concept plan. )Xom ity 1)"dopmrrMaimmgLSTAFFRP'P.29[i lO1 21-06 SW Gateway_ m fmpoa.dw 4 Proposed Residential Land Uses. The SW Gateway project would allow development of up to 1,230 residential units varying in density with 63% low density, 13% medium density and 24% high density. These units would consist of 770 Low Density (0.1-7 du/acre), 160 Medium Density (7.1-20 du/acre), and 300 High Density Residential units (20.1-30 du/acre). The average gross density would be 4.8 du/acre. Development of these units was anticipated in the analysis of the Lodi Annexations EIR. Precise architectural styles, exact lot layouts/configurations, and lot sizes are not determined at this time. These details would be subject to review by the Planning Commission as the applicant proceeds with precise development plans within the project area. However, conceptual elevations for the different housing types were included as figures in the EIR, and are attached to this report as Attachment 3. Proposed Parks. The SW Gateway project includes construction and maintenance (for 2 years) of 26 acres of parks within the project area. The proposed parks are designed throughout the project area to maximize accessibility to the residences, with one large central park in the middle of the project area. Most of the parks within the project area double as detention basins, but all parks provide upland area for use throughout the year. Of the total 26 acres of parkland, 17 is dual park and detention basin and 9 acres is upland park. Proposed Trails. The SW Gateway project is designed with open space spine and trail system. A meandering bike and pedestrian trail would be constructed within the open space corridor. The trails would be 10 feet and 6 inches wide with 8 feet of pavement for bikes and pedestrians, a 2 foot decomposed granite path for running and jogging, and a 6 -inch concrete curb. The trail is designed to provide pedestrians connections to the neighborhoods, parks and adjacent neighborhood serving uses. The trails runs in a north south direction from Highway 12, along Westgate Drive, to the west of "Central Park" and along "Road A south of Central Park" to Harney Lane. Conceptual trail details are shown within the conceptual landscape plans within Attachment 4. Proposed Elementary School. At the direction of the Lodi Unified School District, the SW Gateway land use plan includes a 14 -acre site for development of a K-8 elementary school. The school site would have the capacity for approximately 900 students. Proposed Mini Storage. The SW Gateway land use plan includes a 3 -acre site for use as mini storage on Kettleman Lane. The intent of the mini storage is provide for a buffer between the proposed high density land uses and the future utility substation. Proposed Infrastructure, The SW Gateway land use plan includes a proposed street network and detention basin system to accommodate development of the proposed uses. At this stage of the project, the street network and basin design of the SW Gateway plan reflects the City standards and the direction that has been provided by City Engineering staff. The Public Works Department has reviewed the plans, and recommends that an Infrastructure Master Plan be prepared by the applicant prior to approval of final development plans. Other Areas to Be Annexed. To avoid creating an island of unincorporated County land, the City is proposing to annex approximately 47.79 acres (12 parcels) in addition to the annexation proposed by FCB. No specific development is proposed on any of these parcels at this time. However, as part of annexing them into the City, each parcel must be given a General Plan land use designation and Prezoned. The City is proposing a Medium -Density General Plan land use designation and a Prezoning of Residential Medium -Density (R -MD) for these parcels. Development at this density could result in up to 335 additional residential units. ).1C.—Hy DedapmeintP—kgLSTAFFAPT200600.11-06 SW Cale—y_s Mp.,W_ BACKGROUND Project a"licadon Revkw and Submittal. The Community Development Department originally received an application for annexation and general plan amendment for the SW Gateway project area in January 2004. Following these applications, the applicant submitted applications for Planned Development Prezone, and Growth Management allocations in May 2005. Upon review of the proposed development applications, the City determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be the appropriate CEQA analysis for this project, and that action on the development applications (annexation, general plan amendment, planned development rezone, and growth management allocations) would all be subject to simultaneous review by the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. This is a different approach from past years, when the Community Development Department would process all the applications for Residential Growth allocations simultaneously and present all the requests in one staff report to the Planning Commission and City Council. Due to the complexity of this project, and the time needed to prepare and EIR, the City Council on July 6, 2005, agreed to process this application separate from the other Growth Management Allocation applications received for 2005. Community Meeting on the SW Gateway Project. On September 29, 2005, FCB Homes hosted a community meeting for the project. The meeting was an "open house" gathering with a display of diagrams and plans of the proposed project and representatives from the applicant's team of architects, land planners, and engineers available for questions from the general public. The applicant sent invitations to property owners with a 500 -foot radius of the project area and posted a notice in the Lodi News Sentinel. FCB Horses General Plan Amendment Request — Withdrawn. The applicant's request for a general plan amendment is no longer required. Staff originally directed the applicant to apply for an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map to redesignate the project site from PR to a mixture of Low Density, Medium Density, High Density, and Public land uses. Until recently amended by the City Council, the PR designation was intended for properties outside of the City, and once annexed, the property would be redesignated to a different designation. On August 30 2006, the City Council amended the language of the PR designation to allow it serve as a multi- use land use designation for properties within the City. The SW Gateway site blends a variety of housing types (at less than 7 dwelling units per gross acre) and public facilities are proposed within the project area. Therefore, the SW Gateway project site can maintain the current General Plan land use designation of PR. ANALYSIS 1) Annemden The SW Gateway project area is located west of the current Lodi City limit, on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road, within San Joaquin County. As part of the proposed project, the applicant intends to annex the 257.76 acre project area into the City of Lodi. Annexation of lands into the City requires review and approval by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). LAFCO will consider applications for annexation, upon a request of the City Council. Lands must be within the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI) in order to be annexed. A Sphere of Influence is a planning tool adopted and used by LAFCO to designate the future boundary and service area for a City. The SW Gateway project area is within the City of Lodi Sphere of Influence (adopted by LAFCO on August 24, 2004). The General Plan designates the project area as PR and the proposed development is consistent with the PR designation of the General Plan, which encourages a variety of housing densities (at an average density of less than 7 dwelling S:1Cammmuy Dev Wpmm'Ba-isgLSTAFFRPT]D06\10-11-%S W r,.w.ey_ suftegwrt.Aoc 7 units per gross acre) and public uses within a cohesive development plan. The General Plan anticipated development of the areas designated PR within the lifetime of the current plan, by 2007. Additionally, the annexation of the SW Gateway project, necessitates annexation of 47.79 acres of "Other Areas to be Annexed" on the cast side of Lower Sacramento Road, which would otherwise become a County island surrounded by City lands. There are also two property owners on Harney Lane requesting annexation as part of this application. These properties, also located within the SOI, and currently developed with multi- and single-family residences. No new development is currently proposed for these properties, but development of this area is anticipated in the future. The areas to be annexed are within the SOI, consistent with the General Plan designations, would avoid the creation of a County island, and would provide for contiguous urban growth, and a logical extension of public services; therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council request LAFCO approval of the SW Gateway project area, the "Other Areas to be Annexed", and the three parcels in Harney Lane (565 and 603 East Harney Lane). 2) Generai Plan AmenAment The SW Gateway project (and two parcels on Harney Lane) would remain in the PR designation, and developed according to the PR (Planned Residential) density provisions. However, the "Other Annexation Areas" would be redesignated from PR to MDR (Medium Density Residential). The MDR designation is consistent with surrounding land use designations, and would permit the future development of single-family and multi -family uses; therefore, staff recommends the Plamting Commission recommend that the City Council approve a General Plan Amendment from PR to MDR for the "Other Annexation Areas." 3) Prezoniug Properties must have a City zoning code designation prior to annexation. Upon annexation, the City of Lodi designation of Planned Development will supercede the County designations, and development will be subject to the development standards and regulations of the City. The SW Gateway project includes a request for a pre -zoning designation to change the zone from a County zone of AU -20, Agriculture Urban Reserve with a minimum lot size of 20 acres, to a City zone of Planned Development, with underlying uses as indicated on the SW Gateway land use development plan. The two parcels on Harney Lane would also be Prezoned PD. The "Other Areas to be Annexed" would have a pre -zone designation of R -MD (Residential Medium - Density). In accordance with State law, zoning designations must be consistent with General Plan designations. The proposed PD Zone would be consistent with the existing General Plan designation of PR (Planned Residential) because the proposed density of 4.8 units per gross acre is within the PR density maximum of 7 dwelling units per gross acre. Additionally, the proposed zoning designation of R -MD for the "Other Areas to be Annexed" would be consistent with the proposed MDR General Plan designation. Intent and Requirements for a PD Zone A PD zone is intended to allow deviations from standard zoning requirements in an effort to create a development pattern specifically designed for a project site that allows a more desirable and efficient use of land. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.33, a PD zone is l:Cem ky Devd0P. \PtVvdn TAPPRFf 200.6510-1 I-06 SWGateRY_ s ffrWort-dor intended to accommod#te various types of development, including residential developments, pUbW, quasi -public, cofimercial, retail, office, schools, and open space. Prior to the approval of atay PD zone, a Development Plan must be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. Cance approved, the project site must be developed in accordance with the Development Plan. 41senwimm of Propose4 Deveiep+inent Plan The applicant has subn#tted a preliminary Development Plan depicting the proposed layout of Wd uses within the S* Gateway project area. Final development plans would be subject to review by the Planning Comnussion prior to approval of any tentative subdivision maps, thereby owing the Planning C bmmission to review final design details (architecture, setbacks, building b eight, landscaping fencing, etc.) for each phase of the development. The concept development plan designates the project site for development as follows: • 177.5 acres of low density, single-family, dwelling units (up to 7 units per acre); • 17 acres of medium -density dwelling units (7.1 to 20 units per acre); • 14 acres of $igh-density dwelling units (20.1 to 30 units per acre); • 14.5 acres of elementary school; • 31 acres of Varkland and open space (9 acres of upland park, 17 acres of parklbasin, 3.74 acres of trails and 1.37 of general open space area); and • 3 acres of n ini storage site The other annexation meas consist of 47.79 acres could be developed with medium density land Ws in the future. lOesidential uses would be the primary land use within the SW Gateway land use plan (occupying 200 of the 257.76 acre Oite). The densities of residential uses would be interspersed throughout the project, and the applicant intends to develop several different lots sizes and housing types throughout the project area. Again, final development plans will be subject to review by the Panning Commission; however, the applicant has provided sample elevations for each housing type (see Attachment 3) and the following housing descriptions to provide context to the intent of the land use plan. Low Density. The applicant proposes development of 770 low density residential units within the SW Gateway plan area. Low density is defined in the General Pian as 0.1-7 dwelling units pier gross acre. The standard lots for the units would range in size from 4,500 square feet to 7,350 square feet. Large lots up to 10,000 square feet would also be provided. Six dilterent lot sizes are planned to address a broad range of housing types and needs in this category. Homes are expected to range from approximately 1,950 to over 4, 000 square feet. All homes would be single-family detached units with two or more garage spaces. A variety of architectural styles would be incorporated into the project. Each unit would'be a single -fancily detached home and be either one or two stories. Medium Density. The applicant proposes development of 160 medium density residential units within the SW Gateway plan area. Medium density is defined in the General Plan as 7.1-20 dwelling units per gross acre. The medium -density housing would be detached single family un*s designed with three residential lot types. The first lot type would be approximately 300 square feet. The residential units on this lot type would range from approximately 1,500 to 2,100 square feet and include two -car garages. The second lot type is a cluster of four lots accessed by a common stub alley condition. This second lot type would average approximately 3,300 square feet and the residential units would range 1'iC i y sw C, M y_ =ffnp nAw 9 from 1,300 to 1,900 square feet. Each unit would have a two -car garage. The third lot type is a cluster designed for alley access to the garages. Each home on this type of lot would either front or side on to the neighborhood street. In the instances where lot clusters side on to the street, the front of the homes face a common pedestrian access called a paseo. The lots in this neighborhood would be approximately 2,700 square feet excluding the landscaped paseos. The cluster products will have a two -car garage oriented to an alley. High Density. The applicant proposes development of 300 high density residential units within the SW Gateway plan area. High density is defined in the General Plan as 20.1-30 dwelling units per gross acre. The high density units would include townhome units and apartment units. The townhomes would range from approximately 1,100 to 1,800 square feet with two -car garages under each unit. The townhome units would be attached and grouped in segments of five to seven in each building. The townhomes are intended to be for -sale units. The apartments would be a blend of one, two and three bedroom units. The apartment buildings would be two- and three-story buildings. The applicant has also provided conceptual landscaping plans for the streets and pedestrian trails within the SW Gateway land use plan (see Attachment 4). Final street widths and landscaping plans will be subject to review and approval by the Public Works and Fire Departments to insure that: a) the streets are wide enough to serve as a utility corridor; b) the street width and design are accessible for emergency vehicles; c) the landscaping does not interfere with underground utilities; d) adequate room is provided for any above -ground utilities; e) the streets are not too wide to inhibit a neighborhood feel and social interaction across the street; and f) the street width is not so wide as to promote speeding. Prezone Recommendation The proposed PD zone would allow for the development of 1,230 new residential units, development of neighborhood/community parks, a school and related infrastructure as per the associated SW Gateway land use plan. The SW Gateway project would provide new housing within a unique and well designed neighborhood that would promote the General Plan goals of providing a mixture of housing types. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed Pre -zoning to Planned Development with the implementation of the SW Gateway land use plan, and subsequent final development plans to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission, Additionally, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend City Council adoption of the R -MD pre -zoning for the "Other Areas to be Annexed" and PD Pre -zoning for the two parcels on Varney Lane. 4) Development Agreement A Development Agreement (DA) is a private party agreement between an applicant and the City that, if approved by the City Council, becomes an ordinance of the City. City Staff has negotiated a draft Development Agreement with the project applicant, FCB pursuant to which FCB agrees to provide certain benefits to the City in exchange for a vested right to proceed with the development consistent with the development approvals. The term of the Development Agreement is 15 years. The vested right the developer obtains is the ability to proceed with the development as approved and to avoid the imposition of new regulations on the subsequent discretionary approvals (i.e., vesting tentative maps) for the development. The Development 1:kom fty De of pnmmtlilanai OTAFFRPT200610.1146 SW Gateray_=ffreWtdo 10 Agreement is included in this report as Attachment 5 and a discussion of its benefits to the City and the how the agreement would allocate growth management units is outlined below. Benefla to the City The draft Development Agreement requires that the developer provide the following items at the tithes for performance specified in the Development Agreement. These items include: 1. The Development Agreement requires the developer to pay the City $8,000,000 for the design, engineering and construction of DeBenedetti Park. Payment of said fee shall be made within eight years of the effective date of the Southwest Gateway Development Agreement through a series of installment payments. Z. The Development Agreement requires the developer to dedicate and complete construction of parks and improvements thereon as specified in the proposed plans. Consistent with State law, the agreement does provide a credit for the developer for improvements and equipment that it provides to the parks. This credit would apply against any park- in -lieu fees the developer might otherwise be obligated to pay. 3. The Development Agreement obligates the developer to pay for or provide maintenance for certain public areas such as parks and landscaped medians for two years after acceptance by the City. 4. In addition to construction of parks within the plan area, the developer is obligated to pay $100,000 to the City for use to acquire equipment for the Lodi Parks and Recreation and Public Works Departments. 5. The Development Agreement requires the developer to agree to the creation of a community facilities district that would provide the City with up to $600 per year per single-family attached or detached residential unit and $175 per year for each attached multiple -family rental unit for the payment of police and fire services, maintenance services, park services, library services, flood and storm protection services and construction costs for certain public improvements that will serve the project. 6. The Developer shall pay is proportionate share of the costs of designing and constructing a water treatment system and/or percolation system for treatment of water acquired by the City from the Woodbridge Irrigation District. The Developer shall pay costs of the capitol improvements necessary to extend utility services to the property. 8. The Developer shall either design, engineer and construct the following improvements or pay the City the appropriate fee for the design, engineering and construction of said improvements: surface water transmission main and storage tank (proportionate share of the total design, engineering and construction costs); one new water well to cover proposed development with the SW Gateway and Westside projects; all water pipes and related infrastructure in all streets within the project area and any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director; all sewer pipes and related infrastructure in all streets and any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director; all recycled water pipes and related infrastructure for irrigation systems located in or on streets, public and private schools sites, places of assembly including by not limited to religious facilities, high density residential site and commercial sites; provide up to a maximum of $50,000 to 7 -:+Ce mnniey De dopomMmmingWAFFPPT'3o4mjn.11-o65W Gge y_ stallrepon.doe 11 partially fund the City of Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study; all storm drain pipes and related infrastructure in all streets and basins; all storm water detention basins, control structures, pumping facilities, and appurtenant piping and controls and any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director; design and construct all streets within the project boundary; dedicate land necessary design, and install improvements including curb, gutter, sidewalk and landscaping on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road between Lodi Shopping Center and Harney Lane; dedicate land adjacent to the project's frontage which is necessary for the expansion of Harney Lane; dedicate land design and install a transition roadway land adjacent to the property along Highway 12/Kettlemen Lane; and pay fair share for traffic mitigation measures that are not projects within the Streets and Roads Fee Program. The developn-wnt agreement requires the developer to pay any exit fee that may be charged by PG&E as a result of the provision of service to the development by Lodi Electric Utility. 10. The developer agrees to the application of three potential City fees, notwithstanding the vesting provided in the agreement, for an agricultural land mitigation fee, an electric Capital Improvement fee, and for a Transportation Improvement fee to partially fund an interchange improvement at Highway 99 and Harney Lane. In addition, the developer agrees to pay a fee related to its proportionate cost of a water treatment system or percolation system related to water obtained from Woodbridge Irrigation District and used for the project. In exchange for these enhancements and for satisfying all of the conditions of approval and mitigation measures associated with the development project, the developer is and obtaining a vested right to build up to 1,230 residential units Additionally, the Development Agreement allows flexibility in complying with the density percentages of the General Plan, defers detailed review of project architecture and design until development plans are submitted and provides specific details on phasing and implementation. The developer is obtaining a total of 300 low density and 300 high density growth management ordinance allocations from the reserve account. The developer is also obtaining a vested right to receive between 58 and 134 residential growth allocations per year for the next eight years (see Table D below). The growth allocations provided through the Development Agreement are within the existing reserve of growth allocations and the projected future growth allocations issued on an annual basis. Notwithstanding the issuances of these growth allocations, there will still be sufficient growth allocations available for other developments within Lodi. 64rowth ManagementAtocation The Growth Management Allocation Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on September 18, 1991 to regulate the growth, location, amount and timing of residential development in the City. The Growth Management system limits the number of residential units to two percent of the City's population, compounded annually. Once the amount of allocation units is figured, the City requires that the allocation units be distributed among housing types as follows; 65 percent low density, 10 percent medium density and 25 percent high density. Since the Growth Management Ordinance was adopted in 1991, the City has never granted the full 2% allocation. This leaves a large amount of allocations in reserve. IION ky Develops tUgnai.eS7.4FFRF'r200F10-11-06 SW Gat y_"ffrepottd- 12 The applicant has submitted an application for 300 high density, 160 medium density and 770 low density growth management allocation units for the SW Gateway project. To date, there are 3,415 total allocations available: 1,772 high density, 278 medium density and 1,715 low density allocations (this includes the reserve allocations - units not previously granted). Table C shows a history of growth management allocation units including reserve allocations and units recently granted to the Reynolds Ranch project. Table C: Growth MweelHent Allocation History a There have been high density allocations granted over the past 15 years; however they have expired or withdrawn prior to issuance of building permits. If approved, the SW Gateway Development Agreement would allocate 300 low density and 300 high density units from the reserved allocations, and for eight years following the first year of allocations, the SW Gateway project would be guaranteed a specific number of allocations from the annual allocation distribution (see Exhibit E of Attachment 5). Table D demonstrates an estimate of how many allocations would be available through 2014, assuming the SW Gateway and Westside Development Agreements are both approved by the City Council and FCB requests all of the allocation to which the Development Agreement entitles them to request. Because the development stages allocations over a nine year period (2006 to 2014), thereby allowing ample allocations for other projects, and because the Development Agreements secures concessions from the applicant that would be of great benefit to the City, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the SW Gateway Development Agreement. J. C�%qI-065W Gateway_ flaR[Gpo am 13 Available Allocations Deni' S;heduled from 1989- 2004 Granted from 1%9-2904 Remaining from 1989- 2084 Scheduled for 29®5 Previously Granted for 2005 Total Ava2ft Low 0.1-7 41317 2,893 1,424 291 0 1,715 Medium 7.1-20 664 366 298 45 65 278 High 20.1-30 1,660 Oa 1,660 112 0 1,772 TOTAL for 2905 6,641 3 259 3M2 448 65 3,765 Welds Ranch 350 1 3,415 a There have been high density allocations granted over the past 15 years; however they have expired or withdrawn prior to issuance of building permits. If approved, the SW Gateway Development Agreement would allocate 300 low density and 300 high density units from the reserved allocations, and for eight years following the first year of allocations, the SW Gateway project would be guaranteed a specific number of allocations from the annual allocation distribution (see Exhibit E of Attachment 5). Table D demonstrates an estimate of how many allocations would be available through 2014, assuming the SW Gateway and Westside Development Agreements are both approved by the City Council and FCB requests all of the allocation to which the Development Agreement entitles them to request. Because the development stages allocations over a nine year period (2006 to 2014), thereby allowing ample allocations for other projects, and because the Development Agreements secures concessions from the applicant that would be of great benefit to the City, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the SW Gateway Development Agreement. J. C�%qI-065W Gateway_ flaR[Gpo am 13 Table D: Allocations Assumptions through 2014 Type Allocations Assumptions by year Based on 2% Growth Rate and 2.774 persons per household 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 L,ow Densit 295 300 306 313 319 325 332 338 345 Medium Density 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 It h Density 113 116 118 120 122 125 127 130 133 'notal 453 462 471 481 490 500 510 520 531 A tion_per project in accordance with Development A reements Reynolds Ranch 1500 Z00H 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L SW Gateway 3000 59L 59L 59L 59L 59L 59L 58L 38L 3WN 75M I 29M 28M 28M Westside 200E 70M 27L 27L 27L 27L 27L 27L 26L 'l l Granted r DA 1150 277 ±103 187 187 159 159 158 157 r 453 185 294 303 1 341 351 362 377 H—High Density, M=Medium Density and L=Low Density Allocations granted for the year 2006 (the effective date of the development agreements) were all from the unused reserve allocations from previous years. Essentially none of the scheduled allocations for 2006 have been granted. Sources: Reynolds Ranch Development Agreement, and Draft Development Agreements for SW Gateway and Westside Projects. 5) Project Consistency with City Plans and Policies City staff (namely the Planning, Engineering, and Parks divisions) have been working with the applicant over the last two years to assure that the SW Gateway project is consistent with City policies related to new development. A discussion of policy consistency is provided below. Consistency with the General Plan The Lodi General Plan designates the SW Gateway project area as PR, Planned Residential. The PR designation, as recently amended, reads as follows: This designation provides for single family detached and attached homes, secondary residential units, multifamily residential units, parks, open space, detention basins, public and quasi public uses, and similar and compatible uses. All development under this designation shall be approved pursuant to a development plan, master plan, or specific plan. New residential units within planned residential areas will strive to be developed according to a general policy goal of maintaining the following mix of residential densities: 65 percent low density, 10 percent medium density; and 25 percent high density. The development plan and zoning far Planned Residential shall specify the allowable densityfar residential development within any area designated Planned Residential. The average residential density of a development plan, master plan, or specific plan will generally not exceed 7.0 units per gross acre. This designation assumes an average of 2.60 persons per household. The SW Gateway project is a planned development residential community, with parks and open space uses to service the proposed neighborhood, and benefit the City as a whole. According to the General Plan, the low-density residential designation has a density range of 0.1 to 7.0 units per gross acre; the mediurn-density residential designation has a density range of 7.1 to 20.0 units per gross acre; and the high-density residential designation has a density range of 20.1 to 30 units per gross acre. With a total of 1,230 units, the SW Gateway project complies with the intent and restriction of the PR land use designation by providing the following mix of residential densities: 63 percent low J-'remomni[y De daymmt�MwinUWAFFRPTIOWIOA I-06 SW Gateway_ 9 f�tyon.dw 14 density, 13 percent medium density, and 24 percent high density. The overall project density is 4.8 dwelling units per acre. Though the project complies with the PR land use designation of the General PIan, there are other distinct topics of the General Plan that apply to development of the PR designated areas including: conversion of agricultural land; inclusion of an affordable housing component; inclusion of a Greenbelt element; providing school sites in conjunction with the Lodi Unified School District objectives; maintaining adequate circulation as per the City's level of service standards; providing adequate water supply; and providing parks and recreation amenities. The SW Gateway project's consistency with these General Plan topics is evaluated below. Agriculture conversion. The proposed project includes the conversion of agricultural land, and the EIR prepared for this project includes mitigation measures (LU -2 and LU -3) to reduce the impacts related to loss of agriculture. Additionally, the Commission should note that while the General Plan includes statements of support for agriculture use, the SW Gateway site is designated as Planned Residential (PR), which indicates that the City has planned for these properties to be converted to residential uses. Affordable housing. Build -out of the SW Gateway project would assist the City in meeting its regional housing needs as described in the City's Housing Element, by providing a variety of housing products available to a variety of income ranges. By developing a community with a mixture of housing types consistent with the goals of the Planned Residential designation (63% low density, 13 % medium density and 24% high density) the SW Gateway will provide opportunities for affordable housing within the project area. Greenbelt. The General Plan has several policies regarding the establishment of a greenbelt. The City's Greenbelt Task Force is currently discussing implementation plans for a greenbelt along the southern edge of the City's Sphere of Influence. There are currently no specific plans for a greenbelt within or adjacent to the proposed project area. To the contrary, the City Council has directed staff to study the expansion of the planning area to the west, beyond the boundary of the SW Gateway project area as part of the General Plan update process. Schools. The SW Gateway project includes a 14 -acre site for the future development of an elementary school. The size and location of the proposed school site reflects the recommendation of the Lodi Unified School District. Circulation. Main access points to the SW Gateway project would be provided by extending Westgate Drive south across Kettleman Lame (just east of the future utility substation site), extending Central Parkway and Kristen Court west across Lower Sacramento Road, and introducing and new street off of Harney Lane. Internal neighborhood streets would provide access to parks, the future school site and within the proposed neighborhoods. The final width and design of these internal streets will be subject to approval by the public works department prior to approval of any tentative subdivision maps. The EIR for this project analyzed the concept development plan and determined that the project would have impacts to the Level of Service at 16 existing intersections, and recommended mitigation measures to reduce these impacts (TRANS -1 and TRANS -2). Water. As required by State law, a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was conducted for this project. The WSA, adopted by City Council on July 19, 2006, determined that the project (together with the Westside project) would demand 887 acre-feet of water per year and that adequate water supply is available to serve the project. I lCo-ity ihvelem+ti %l ingVSTAFFRPTi2000IO-17-06 SW Gateway_ s ffTVPM doc 15 Perks. The General Plan encourages the development of parks and open spaces based on two park to resident ratios: • 8 stcres of neighborhood and community parks (including basins and schoolparks) per 1,000 residents; And • 3.9 acres of ne4foorhood and community parks (excluding basins and school parks). The PR designation anticipates 2.6 persons per household; therefore, it is estimated that the peoposed project would 0esult in 3,198 residents. Based on 3,198 new residents, the proposed pFoject requires 26 acres of parkland including school parks and basins and 12.4 acres of parkland excluding school parks *%d basins. The SW Gateway would provide 26 acres of parkland including basins and 9 acres of parkland excluding basins and parks. The proposed 26 acres of pork does not include the "school park" acreage, because the amount of school park acreage cm -not be detenrnined at this time. The Development Agreement for this project obligates the applicant to construct and maintain (for 2 years) all parks within the project area and to fund 8 nullion dollars for the design, engineering and construction of DeBenedetti Park. Of note, the City's current park inventory is 335.62 acres for existing and approved parks (including basins and school parks). With a population of 62,467 residents this represents a ratio of 5.37 acres of park land per resident. llpsed on the discussion above, staff believes that with the adoption of the Development Agreement and implerrtation of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, the SW Gateway project is consi6tent with the General Plan. c6n*Aemy wi* the mbusin Element Ike lousing Element is Part of the General Plan, but is sometimes discussed separately from the ciher elements of the General Plan, as it is updated more frequently and deals directly with the establishment of policies. for providing housing units for the citizens of Lodi. As discussed above, t* SW Gateway project would combine a mixture of housing types consistent with the City's housing goals of providing 65 percent low density, 10 percent medium density and 25 percent h*h density (770 low depsity units = 63%,160 medium density units = 13% and 300 high density units = 24%). The SW Gateway plan is designed to inter -mix the different housing types, so as not to segregate the high density townhorne/apartment units, medium density cluster units, and traditional single-family units from one another. The SW Gateway project does not include art affordable housing component that meets the States formal definition of income verified "affordable housing." 146wever, the wide range of housing products would provide for units that am more affordable to a larger range of Lodi residents. The approach is to provide the medium and higher density units such that they can provide "market rate" affordable housing. For these reasons, staff believes the SW Gateway project is consistent with the housing element. Conshteney with the Pis and Recreation Master Plan TU Park and Recreation"aster Plan denotes a "proposed park (Southwest Park)" in the sapthwest corner of the Gateway project site. According to the Master Plan, "Southwest P*k" was intended to be=a 25 acre park with only 1 acre reserved for recreation use, the rest deigned for passive park uses because DeBenedetti Park Community Park is located nearby. The SSV Gateway project does not include one large park in the corner of the project area, rather the pmject provides for five parks throughout the development area. The Master Plan denoted the location of "Southwest Pbrk" to coincide with a large detention basin. The SW Gateway plan also provides parks within the basin areas, which is a common park planning practice for the City because the weather pen -flits use of the basins as park land in the dry months. The Final design and uses within the parks are not known at this time, but final park design would be subject to review and recommendation by the Parks and Recreation Department prior to the approval of a 1:tQ�munipy IM+'�4ir��*.$SrAFFAFI'.27�15-06 SVf C:rteiny_ m4E1�0oc 16 tentative subdivision map, which includes said park land. In addition to construction of the parks within the SW Gateway project area, per the Development Agreement, the applicant is obligated to fund 8 million dollars for the design, engineering and construction of DeBenedetti Park. Consistency with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes Class I bike paths along the western edge of the SW Gateway project boundary and along Century Boulevard (between the western project boundary and Westgate Drive). The Master Plan also includes Class II bike paths on Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Century Boulevard (between Westgate Drive and Lower Sacramento Road). The SW Gateway project includes bike paths, specifically within the north/south trail, but this location does not conform to the location shown in the Master Plan. An amendment to the Bicycle Master Plan is required. Staff' believes this amendment is consistent with the purposes of the Master Plan and would only be necessary to relocate the Class I bike path currently shown along the western edge, to the central location proposed within the north/south pedestrian trail in the SW Gateway land use plan. The applicant intends to provide the remaining bike paths as per the Master Plan. Prior to amending the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the requested amendment. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request by Tom Doucette, FCB, to amend the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESMENT The City prepared one EIR for the SW Gateway, Westside projects and Other Areas to be Annexed. The Draft FIR was circulated for public review between April 11, 2005 and May 25, 2006. After considering and responding to comments on the DEIR, the City prepared the Response to Comment document, which was made available for public review on August 31, 2006. The Response to Comments together with the Draft EIR constitutes the Final EIR. The EIR identified certain potentially significant effects that could result from the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measure identified in the EIR would reduce some, but not all, of the significant impacts to a less than significant level. Impacts that could not be mitigated to less than significant are considered significant unavoidable impacts. City staff prepared the CEQA findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations to address the significant unavoidable impacts. The FIR is summarized within a separate staff report and draft resolutions were prepared for action as a separate item preceding this request on the Planning Commission agenda. PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE Ninety-three public hearing notices were sent to all property owners of record within a 300 -foot radius of the subject property, and persons who have expressed interest in the SW Gateway project via the FCB Community Meeting in 2005. Additionally, a newspaper notice of this hearing was published in the Lodi News Sentinel and was posted at City Hall on September 2, 2006. Because this agenda had been continued multiple times since the original public hearing notice, the City resent notices and re -published the hearing date for this meeting of October 11, 2006, in the Lodi News Sentinel. CONCLUSION The City Council has final action on the requests for Annexation, General Plan Amendment, Zone Change, Development Agreement; and the Bicycle Master Plan Amendment; however, these requests must first be reviewed by the Planning Commission with a recommendation forwarded to the City Council. Therefore, staff recommends that unless additional or contrary information is received during the public hearing and, based upon its review and consideration of q Tob ity N,d pmpntM] i,S%STAFFRMoo6,W1 I o6 SW Gn ay_ s fTrepaA.dm 17 time EiR and the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this stuff report, and oral #nd written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Commission take the following actions: • Recommend that the City Council request Annexation of the subject properties, including the SW Gatewa* Plan area, two properties on Harney Lane and the "Other Annexation Areas"; • Recommend thaf the City Council adopt a Prezoning to Planned Development for the SW Gateway Plan Area and two properties on Harney Lane and Prezoning to Residential Medium Density for the "Other Annexation Areas.", • Recommend that the City Council approve the Development Agreement by and between the City of Lodi end Frontier Community Builders, Inc. for the SW Gateway Project; Recommend that the City Council approve the General Plan Amendment for the Other Annexation Areals from PR (Planned Residential) to MDR (Medium Density Reside- ntial); and • Recommend that the City Council approve the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Anrendnwnt AURNATIVE PLA)MMG COMMISSION ACTIONS • Recommend ApprovS1 of the Request(s) with Alternate Conditions • Recommnend Denial cif the Request • Coritinve the Request Reppectfuliy Submitted, Clarity Wainer & Lynet* Dias COMraet Pltl mrs, LSA 1 sociates, Inc. Concurred by: Randy Hatch Community Development Director AlWeliswnts 1. Vicinity Map 2. SW Gateway land use plan 3. SW Gateway conceptual housing elevations 4. SW Gateway conceptual landscape plans 5. SW Gateway Development Agreement 6. Drab Resolution for General Plan Amendment (pertains to Other Annexation Areas only) 7. Draft Resolution for Zone Change to PD (Planned Development) 8. Draft Resolution for Annexation of SW Gateway & Other Annexation Areas 9. Draft Resolution for Development Agreement 10. Draft Resolution for Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment Rlppklm/kc 1.*Mwity Devd0P._0PL rMANFRM0061*-11-% 5W Cmewq_ 1MffrWW kC 18 CITY OF LODI PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING DATE: October 11, 2006 APPLICATION NOS: Annexation AX -04-02 Prezone Z-04-03 Development Agreement GM -05-002 Westside Facilities Master Plan Amendment Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment REQUEST: The request of Frontiers Community Builders inc.(FCB), for the PROPERTY OWNER Westside Development project, which includes Annexation 029-390-05 (AX -04-02); Prezoning (Z-04-03); Development Agreement E. SARGENT RD. (GM -05-002); and an Amendment to the Westside Facilities MANNA TRUST Master Plan and the Bicycle Master Plan to incorporate 151 027-04-020 acres into the City of Lodi to allow construction of 638 dwelling .02 E. SARGENT RD. units, 3 neighborhood and community parks, and a public NOBLE D. FORE JR. H elementary school at 351 East Sargent Road, 70 East Sargent Road, 212 East Sargent Road, and 402 East Sargent Road (Westside Project). LOCATION: Parcel information for the project area is provided in Table A. APPLICANT: Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, Inc. 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219 PROPERTY OWNERS: See Table A below. Table A: Project Logon ADDRESS APN PROPERTY OWNER I E. SARGENT RD. 029-390-05 GEORGIA PERLEGOS ETAL E. SARGENT RD. 027-040-01 MANNA TRUST 2 E. SARGENT RD. 027-04-020 DHKS DEVELOPMENT .02 E. SARGENT RD. 027-1i�-030 NOBLE D. FORE JR. H Source: City of Lodi RECOMMENDATION Following the Planning Commission's action to recommend certification of the EIR (see separate staff report) Staff recommends that the Planning Commission: 1) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to adopt a resolution of intent to annex 151 acres of land (AX -04-02) into the corporate limits of the City of Lodi per the attached resolution (Attachment 7). J:1C.—m yD-dnpoc.iAn-.mH�STAAPRPr2WbD 1411-04W.m.idr—ffrVrf,d- 2) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Prezone (Z-04- 03) to a Planned Development Zone for the entire Westside plan area per the attached resolution (Attachment 6). 3) Recommend the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, for a Development Agreement (GM -05-002), setting the mutual entitlement obligations entered into between the City and the project applicant for the Westside project area included within the Development Agreement per the attached resolution (Attachment 8). 4) Recommends the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB, to amend the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan of the Westside Facilities Master Plan per the attached resolution (Attachment 9). 5) Recommend that the City Council approve the request of Tom Doucette, FCB for an amendment to the Bicycle Master Plan attached resolution (Attachment 10). SUMMARY The proposed project would annex 151 acres of land from San Joaquin County into the City of Lodi, which could accommodate development of up to 638 residential units, 24.4 acres of parks/park basins and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure. A breakdown of the project is provided in Table B and the land use plan is included as Attachment 2. To implement the proposed project, the applicant has submitted applications for Annexation, Prezoning and Growth Management Allocation units, and an amendment to the land use plan within the Westside Facilities Master Plan and Bicycle Master Plan. The growth management units will be allocated through the Development Agreement (see Attachment 5). Table B: FCB Project Land Uses Area Acres Housint Units Parks/ Basins &Trails (Acres) Schools (Acres) Low Medium High Density Density I3ensi Overall Overall Overact Units Density Lia! Deaal Units I Dematy Total Westside 106 388 7 70 7.7 180 20 638 24 to SW Gateways 257 770 4.3 160 9.4 300 21.4 1,230 31 14.5 Other Areas to be Annexed 48 — — — — — -- 335 — — Note: Conceptual Development Plans have been refined (showing slight modifications to dwelling units) since publication of the Draft EIR. In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an environmental impact report (EIR) was prepared for this project (see separate staff report). PROJECT/AREA DESCRIPTION General Plan Designation PR, Planned Residential Zoning Designation. AU -20, Agricultural -Urban Reserve, minimum of 20 acres. This is a County zoning designation that is intended to retain in agriculture those areas planned for future urban development in order to facilitate compact, orderly growth and to assure the proper timing and economical provision of services and utilities. Project Size. 151 acres I Community DcvdoNw1tiPWwi4STAFFRPr,0W10-ti-N WmLnid,_a frmpn,da 2 The adjacent zoning designations and land uses are as follows: Porth: R-1, Single -Family, and PD -29, Planned Development. The Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) Canal borders the northern most part of the Westside site. Single-family residential uses are located north of WID. South: AG -20, General Agriculture (County designation). Wine Street forms the southern border of the project site. Lands south of Vine Street are within the County and are developed with agricultural uses. West: AG -40, General Agriculture (County designation). Agricultural uses are located west of the Westside site. East: PD, Planned Development; C -S, Shopping Center; R-1, Single -Family; and R -CP, Professional Offices. Lands to the east of the Westside site are developed with a shopping center, mini -storage facility, Temple Baptist Church, and a high school. PROJECT SITE CHARACTERISTICS The Westside project site is approximately 151 acres and is comprised of 4 parcels. The site is divided by Sargent Road (which would be renamed Lodi Avenue as part of this project). The project site consists of a triangular parcel north of Sargent Road and three rectangular parcels south of Sargent Road. The parcels south of Sargent Road are utilized as active vineyards. The triangular parcel on the north side of Sargent Road is a vacant, unused field. It should be noted that one of the rectangular parcels is not part of the 638 unit development area, but it is part of the annexation and prezoning. This parcel is identified as 212 East Sargent Road. This parcel is expected to be developed consistent with the conceptual land use plan. The timing of the FCB development and this parcel will be concurrent. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Westside project is a master planned residential community that, if approved, could accommodate developrnent of up to 638 new residential units, 24.4 acres of parks/park basins, trails and open space, a K-6 elementary school (10 acres), and related infrastructure. The proposed Westside Iand use plan is intended to guide future development of the project area (see Attachment 2). Detailed plans for development within the project area (including proposed setbacks, height, and architectural design of the homes) would be subject to review by the Planning Commission via a development plan and tentative subdivision maps. Below is a discussion of the elements of the Westside concept plan. Proposed Residential Land Uses. The FCB Westside project would allow development of up to 638 residential units varying in density with 61% low density, 11% medium density and 28% high density. These units would consist of 388 Low Density (0.1-7 du/acre), 70 Medium Density (7.1-20 du/acre), and 180 High Density Residential units (20.1-30 du/acre). The average gross density would be 6 du/acre (638 units/106 acres of project area). Development of these units was anticipated in the analysis of the Lodi Annexations EIR. Precise architectural styles, exact lot layouts/configurations, and lot sizes are not determined at this time. These details would be subject to review by the Planning Commission as the applicant proceeds with precise development plans within the project area. However, conceptual elevations for the different housing types were included as figures in the EIR, and are attached to this report as Attachment 3. 1 ',Coy ..ity D-dopeomtTU king%TAFFRPF2OOF10.1 I-06 Wewide_m ffrepo .d- Proposed Parks. The Westside project includes construction and maintenance (for 2 years) of 24.4 acres of parks/park basins within the project area. The proposed parks are designed throughout the project area to maximize accessibility to the residences, with one larger park at the southern end of the project site, adjacent to the City -planned aquatics center site. Most of the parks within the project area double as detention basins, but all parks provide upland area for use throughout the year. Of the total 24.4 acres of parkland, 9.77 acres are dual park and detention basin and 11.43 acres are upland park. Ptnoposed Trails. The Westside project is designed with an open space spine and trail. The open space trail corridor would be 50 feet wide at its narrowest point. A meandering bike and pedestrian trail would be constructed within the open space corridor. The trails would be 10 feet and 6 inches wide with 8 feet of pavement for bikes and pedestrians, a 2 foot decomposed granite path for running, and jogging, and a 6 -inch concrete curb. The trail is designed to provide pedestrians connections to the neighborhoods, parks and adjacent neighborhood serving uses. The trail corridor runs in a north/south direction from Lodi Avenue, through the project site, to Vine Street. Conceptual linear park and trail details are shown within the conceptual landscape plans (Sheet L.05) within Attachment 4. Pre posed Elementary School. At the direction of the Lodi Unified School District, the Westside concept plan includes a 10 -acre site for development of a K-6 elementary school. The school site would have the capacity for approximately 800 to 875 students. Pr vposed Infrastructure. The Westside land use plan includes a proposed street network and detention basin system to accommodate development of the proposed uses. At this stage of the project, the street network and basin design of the Westside plan reflects the City standards and the direction that has been provided by City Engineering staff. The Public Works Department has reviewed the plans, and recommends that an Infrastructure Master Plan (Water, Recycled Water, Sewer, Transit and Circulation) be prepared by the applicant prior to approval of final development plans. BACKGROUND Project application Review and Submittal. The Community Development Department originally received an application for annexation and general plan amendment for the Westside project area in January 2004. Following these applications, the applicant submitted applications for Planned Development Prezone, and Growth Management allocations in May 2005. Upon review of the proposed development applications, the City determined that an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) would be the appropriate CEQA analysis for this project, and that action on the development applications (annexation, general plan amendment, planned development rezone, and growth management allocations) would all be subject to simultaneous review by the Planning Commission for recommendation to the City Council. This is a different approach from past years, when the Community Development Department would process all the applications for Residential Growth allocations simultaneously and present all the requests in one staff report to the Planning Commission and City Council. Due to the complexity of this project, and the time needed to prepare and EIR, the City Council on July 6, 2005, agreed to process this application separate from the other Growth Management Allocation applications received for 2005. Community Meeting on the Westside Project. On September 29, 2005, FCB Homes hosted a community meeting for the project. The meeting was an "open house" gathering with a display of diagrams and plans of the proposed project and representatives from the applicant's team of architects, land planners, and engineers available for questions from the general public. The PC.q ,ity Develop..*Tlmm*R .S7AFPRPM006110-11 AX Westside_ stati,syondaa 4 applicant sent invitations to property owners with a 500 -foot radius of the project area and posted a notice in the Lodi News Sentinel. FCB Homes General Plox Amendment Request — Withdrawn. The applicant's request for a general plan amendment is no longer required. Staff originally directed the applicant to apply for an amendment to the General Plan Land Use Map to redesignate the project site from PR to a mixture of Low Density, Medium Density, High Density, and Public land uses. Until recently amended by the City Council, the PR designation was intended for properties outside of the City, and once annexed, the property would be redesignated to a different designation. On August 30, 2006, the City Council amended the language of the PR designation to allow it serve as a multi- use land use designation for properties within the City. The Westside site blends a variety of housing types (at less than 7 dwelling units per gross acre) and public facilities are proposed within the project area. Therefore, the Westside project site can maintain the current General Plan land use designation of PR. ANALYSIS I) Annexadox The Westside project area is located west of the current Lodi City limit, on the west side of existing development along Lower Sacramento Road, and is within San Joaquin County. As part of the proposed project, the applicant intends to annex the 151 acre project area into the City of Lodi. Annexation of lands into the City requires review and approval by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO). LAFCO will consider applications for annexation, upon a request of the City Council. Lands must be within the City's Sphere of Influence (SOI) in order to be annexed. A Sphere of Influence is a planning tool adopted and used by LAFCO to designate the future boundary and service area for a City. The Westside project area is within the City of Lodi Sphere of Influence (adopted by LAFCO on August 24, 2004). The General Plan designates the project area as PR and the proposed development is consistent with the PR designation of the General Plan, which encourages a variety of housing densities (at a density less than 7 dwelling units per acre) and public uses within a cohesive development plan. The General Plan anticipated development of the areas designated PR within the lifetime of the current plan, by 2007. The areas to be annexed are within the SOI, consistent with the General Plan designations, and would provide for contiguous urban growth, and a logical extension of public services; therefore, staff recommends the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council request LAFCO approval of the Westside project area. 2) Prezoning Properties must have a City zoning code designation prior to annexation. Upon annexation, the proposed City of Lodi designation of Planned Development would supercede the County designations, and development will be subject to the development standards and regulations of the City. The Westside project includes a request for a pre -zoning designation to change the zone from the County zone of AU -20, Agriculture Urban Reserve with a minimum lot size of 20 acres, to a City zone of Planned Development (PD), with underlying uses as indicated on the Westside land use plan. 1'.-.Coo�nnitY DevdogmaA�Plannu�6U^TAFFRPCt20�lM-ll-06 W ts¢tide_ sla f septi A A- 6 In accordance with Stpte law, zoning designations must be consistent with General Plan (*signations. The prol*sed PD Zone would be consistent with the existing General Plan drtsignation of PR (Planned Residential) because the proposed density of 6 units per gross acre is Aithin the PR density maximum of 7 dwelling units per gross acre. Joest ani Requirerners for a PD Zone A PD zorw is intendedto allow deviations from standard zoning requirements in an effort to eluate a development prn specifically designed for a project site that allows a more desirable aad efficient use of land. In accordance with Municipal Code Section 17.33, a PD zone is it ended to accommod4te various types of development, including residential developments, public, quasi public, corrnercial, retail, office, schools, and open space. Prior to the approval of any PD zone, a development plan must be reviewed and recommended for approval by the Planning Commission. Chace approved, the project site must be developed in accordance with the development plan. UWwides of Proposed ievelepwent Plan TV applicant has subn*tted a Development Plan depicting the proposed layout of Iand uses v*hin the project area;. Final development plans will be subject to review by the Planning Commissi€�n prior to apfroval of any tentative subdivision maps, thereby allowing the Planning Cflmmission to review Anal design details (architecture, setbacks, building height, landscaping foocing, etc.) for each plase of the development. Tike FCB Westside land rise plan designates the project site for development as follows: • 54 acres of I*w density, single-family, dwelling units (up to 7 units per acre); • 9 acres of mium-dewity dwelling units (7.1 to 20 units per acre); • 9 acres of h h -density dwelling units (20.1 to 30 units per acre); • 10 ages of e0ernentary school; and • 24 acres of #arkland (11.43 acres of upland park and 9.77 acres of basin area, 3.2 acres of trails) Rosidcnfial,uses would bn the primitry laud use within the Westside development plan (occupying 72 of the 106 acre site). The different densities of residential uses would be interspersed t4oughout the project, and the applicant intends to develop several different lots sizes and housing types throughout the project area. Again, final development plans will be subject to review by the Planning Commission; however, the applicant has provided sample elevations for each housing type (see Attachment 3) and the following housing descriptions to provide context to the intent of the conceptual development plan. Low Dewlty. The applicant proposes development of 388 low density residential units within the Westsi le plan area. Low density is defined in the General Pian as 0.1-7 dwelling units pet, gross acre. The low-density housing would be detached single-family units, The majority of lots for these units would be 5,500 to 6,000 square feet. However, there would be some large lots of up to 9,000 square feet. The units would be a mix of one and two stories and would range from 2,000 to 3,000 square feet and include a two - car garage. Merbiam Density, The applicant proposes development of 70 medium density residential units within the Westside plan area. Medium density is defined in the General Plan as 7.1- 20 dwelling unitsper gross acre. The medium density housing units would be detached single family homes designed for two residential lot types. The first lot type is designed at i'Camw*y wmW e_ Haff rgmLdm 7 approximately 33,825 square feet with dimensions of 45 x 85 feet. On this type of lot, residential units would range from approximately 1,500 to 2,200 square feet with two -car garages. The second lot type is a cluster of four lots accessed by a common stub alley condition. This second lot type results in each lot size of approximately 3,300 square feet. The residential units would range from 1,300 to 1,800 square feet. Each unit would include a two -car garage. High Density. The applicant proposes development of 180 high density residential units within the Westside pian area. High density is defined in the General Plan as 20.1-30 dwelling units per gross acre. The high density units would consist of townhome units that would range from approximately 1,100 to I,700 square feet with two -car garages under each unit. The attached townhome units are grouped in segments of five to seven in each building. The applicant has also provided conceptual landscaping plans for the streets and pedestrian trails within the Westside plan area (see Attachment 4). Final street widths and landscaping plans will be subject to review and approval by the Public Works and Fire Departments to insure that: a) the streets are wide enough to serve as a utility corridor; b) the street width and design are accessible for emergency vehicles; c) the landscaping does not interfere with underground utilities; and d) adequate room is provided for any above -ground utilities; e) the streets are not too wide to inhibit a neighborhood feel and social interaction across the street; and f) the street width is not so wide as to promote speeding. Prezone Change Recommendation The proposed PD zone would allow for the development of 638 new residential units, development of neighborhood/community park, a school and related infrastructure as per the Westside development pian. The Westside project would provide a unique and well designed neighborhood that would promote the General Plan goals of providing a mixture of housing types. For these reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed prezoning to Planned Development with the implementation of the Westside land use plan, and subsequent final development plans to be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission. 3) development Agreemant A Development Agreement (DA) is a private party agreement between an applicant and the City that, if approved by the City Council, becomes an ordinance of the City. City Staff has negotiated a draft development agreement with the project applicant, FCB pursuant to which FCB agrees to provide certain, benefits to the City in exchange for a vested right to proceed with the development consistent with the development approvals. The term of the Development Agreement is 15 years. The vested right the developer obtains is the ability to proceed with the development as approved and to avoid the imposition of new regulations and fees on the subsequent discretionary approvals (i.e., vesting tentative maps) for the development except as set forth in the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement is included in this report as Attachment 5 and a discussion of its benefits to the City and the how the agreement would allocate growth management units is outlined below. The Development Agreement applies to all parcels within the development with the exception of APN No. 027-04-020 (212 East Sargent Road, the DHKS parcel). FCB has a partial ownership interest in that parcel and once FCB has sole ownership of their partial interest, that portion of parcel APN No. 027-04-020 may be added to the development agreement through an administrative amendment to the development agreement as provided in the development agreement. l�Com lily D-vdgmew"lL mgSTMFRKn2006�W11,06WeWde_ suff.epo dx Aeneftts to the City The draft Development Agreement requires that the developer provide the following items at the tithes for performance specified in the Development Agreement. These items include: 1. The development agreement requires the developer to rehabilitate or pay the costs (for a total value of $1,250,000) for rehabilitating twenty-five (25) residential units within the area bounded by the Union Pacific railroad tracks, Cherokee Lane, Kettleman Lane and Lockeford Street. The rehabilitation actions include landscaping, painting, roof repair, replacement of broken windows, sidewalk repairs, non-structural architectural improvements, and demolition and reconstruction of residential units. The developer may satisfy this obligation through improvements to properties it owns within the specified area or on property owned by others within the specified area. If the developer does not satisfy this obligation within ten (10) years of the effective date of the Development Agreement, the developer is obligated to pay the City $50,000 per residential unit for each unit of the twenty-five (25) that has not yet been rehabilitated. 2. The development agreement requires the developer to dedicate and complete construction of parks and improvements thereon as specified in the proposed plans. The development agreement acknowledges that the dedication and improvement of the parks will satisfy the developer's Quimby Act park -in -lieu obligations. The development agreement also provides a process pursuant to which the developer may receive a partial reimbursement via the developer of the property south of Vine Street if that developer is provided credit for park development that occurred as part of the Westside project that exceeds the City's park requirements. 3. The development agreement obligates the developer to pay for or provide maintenance for certain public areas such as parks and landscaped medians for two years after acceptance by the City. 4. In addition to development impact fees for fire services, the developer shall pay $2,300,000 to the City for use to acquire additional facilities, equipment and apparatus for the Lodi Fire Department. 5. The developer is obligated to obtain City approval for and installation of public art within the project. The value of the public art shall be equal to $150,000 inclusive of design and installation costs (which together cannot exceed $10,000). 6. The development agreement requires the developer to agree to the creation of a community facilities district that would provide the City with up to $600 per year per single-family attached or detached residential unit and $175 per year for each attached multiple -family rental unit for the payment of police and fire services, maintenance services, park services, library services, flood and storm protection services and construction costs for certain public improvements that will serve the project. To assist the City's effort to maintain a balance between employment and housing, the landowner shall pay $125,000 for use by the City for economic development actions including job creation, promoting retail sales and/or wine industry tourism all as determined by the City. 8. The Developer shall pay is proportionate share of the costs of designing and constructing a water treatment system and/or percolation system for treatment of water acquired by the City from the Woodbridge Irrigation District. I Co unityMvdopmmTLminoTAFFRP'[l2ouGtt0.11-06Weride_gaffrepoMdo 9 9. The Developer shall pay costs of the capitol improvements necessary to extend utility services to the property. 10. The Developer shall either design, engineer and construct the following improvements or pay the City the appropriate fee for the design, engineering and construction of said improvements: surface water transmission main and storage tank (proportionate share of the total design, engineering and construction costs); one new water well to cover proposed development with the SW Gateway and Westside projects; all water pipes and related infrastructure in all streets within the project area and any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director; all sewer pipes and related infrastructure in all streets and any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director; all recycled water pipes and related infrastructure for irrigation systems located in or on streets, public and private schools sites, places of assembly including by not limited to religious facilities, high density residential site and commercial sites; provide up to a maximum of $50,000 to partially fund the City of Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study; all storm drain pipes and related infrastructure in all streets and basins; all storm water detention basins, control structures, pumping facilities, and appurtenant piping and controls and any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director; design and construct all streets within the project boundary; reconstruct Lodi Avenue west of Lower Sacramento Road to the western project boundary; reconstruct the Tokay Avenue/Lower Sacramento Road intersection to accommodate wider street sections; and pay fair share for traffic mitigation measures as required by the EIR but that are not projects within the Streets and Roads Fee Program. 11. The development agreement requires the developer to pay any exit fee that may be charged by PG&E as a result of the provision of service to the development by Lodi Electric Utility. 12. The developer agrees to the application of three potential City fees, notwithstanding the vesting provided in the agreement, for an agricultural land mitigation fee, an electric Capital Improvement fee, and for a Transportation Improvement fee to partially fund an interchange improvement at Highway 99 and Harney Lane. In addition, the developer agrees to pay a fee related to its proportionate cost of a water treatment system or percolation system related to water obtained from Woodbridge Irrigation District and used for the project. In exchange for these enhancements and for satisfying all of the conditions of approval and mitigation measures associated with the development project, the developer is requesting the City to grant a vested right to build up to 638 residential units. Additionally, the Development Agreement allows flexibility in complying with the density percentages of the General Plan, defers detailed review of project architecture and design until development plans are submitted and provides specific details on phasing and implementation. The developer is obtaining a total of 200 low density growth management ordinance allocations from the reserve account. The developer is also obtaining a vested right to receive between 26 and 180 residential growth allocations per year for the next eight years (see Table D below). The growth allocations provided through the Development Agreement are within the existing reserve of growth allocations and the projected future growth allocations issued on an annual basis. Notwithstanding the issuances of these growth allocations, there will still be sufficient growth allocations available for other developments within Lodi. 3"%.CDOMun yD-d-P--i%Plann;nyLSTAFFRPr2U bbl* -11-06 wee & s ffn rt.do 10 Growth Management ANiocadon The Growth Management Allocation Ordinance was adopted by the City Council on September 18, 1991 to regulate the growth, location, amount and timing of residential development in the City. The Growth Management system limits the number of residential units to two percent of the City's population, compounded annually. Once the amount of allocation units is figured, the City anticipates that the allocation units be distributed among housing types as follows; 65 percent low density, 10 percent medium density and 25 percent high density, Since the Growth Management Ordinance was adopted in 1991, the City has never granted the full 2% allocation. This leaves a large amount of allocations in reserve. The applicant has submitted an application for 388 low density, 70 medium density and 180 high density growth management allocation units for the Westside project. To date, there are 3,415 total allocations available: 1,772 high density, 278 medium density and 1,365 low density allocations (this includes the reserve allocations - units not previously granted). Table C shows a history of growth management allocation units including reserve allocations recently granted to the Reynolds Ranch project. Table C: Growth Ma> ement Allocation History There have been high density allocations granted over the past 15 years; however they have expired or withdrawn prior to issuance of building permits. If approved, the Westside Development Agreement would allocate 200 low density units from the reserved allocations, and for eight years following the first year of allocations, the Westside project would be guaranteed a specific number of allocations from the annual allocation distribution (see Exhibit E of Attachment 5). Table D demonstrates an estimate of how many allocations would be available through 2014, assuming the SW Gateway and Westside development agreements are adopted. Because the development stages allocations over nine years (2006 to 2014), thereby allowing ample allocations for other projects, and because the development agreements secures concessions from the applicant that would be of great benefit to the City, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the Westside development agreement. 1�1Co�unay Devebpm�t4pFanem�STAFFRP'152006110-1IA6 Westode_ sgfl'repon.doc 1 1 Available Allocations Density 5c5edtled from f989- 22M Granted from 1989- 2004 Remaining from 1989-2004 Scheduled far 2005 Previously Granted for 245 Total Available Low 0.1-7 4,317 2,893 1,424 291 0 1,715 Medium 7.1-20 664 366 298 45 65 278 High 20.1-30 1,660 01 1,660 112 0 1.772 TOTAL for 2005 6,641 3,382 448 65 J 3,765 Holds Rgncb __1259 350 1 3,415 There have been high density allocations granted over the past 15 years; however they have expired or withdrawn prior to issuance of building permits. If approved, the Westside Development Agreement would allocate 200 low density units from the reserved allocations, and for eight years following the first year of allocations, the Westside project would be guaranteed a specific number of allocations from the annual allocation distribution (see Exhibit E of Attachment 5). Table D demonstrates an estimate of how many allocations would be available through 2014, assuming the SW Gateway and Westside development agreements are adopted. Because the development stages allocations over nine years (2006 to 2014), thereby allowing ample allocations for other projects, and because the development agreements secures concessions from the applicant that would be of great benefit to the City, staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council adopt the Westside development agreement. 1�1Co�unay Devebpm�t4pFanem�STAFFRP'152006110-1IA6 Westode_ sgfl'repon.doc 1 1 Table D: Allocations Assumptions through 2014 Type Allocations Assumptions by Year based on 2% Growth Rate and 2.774 persons per household W6 2907 2008 1 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 Low Densi 295 300 306 313 319 325 332 338 345 Medium Density 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 Its h Density 113 116 118 120 122 125 127 130 133 Total 453 1 462 471 481 490 500 510 520 531 Aliecatiaa per project in accordance with Develo meat AjXregiments a Reynolds Ranch1500 2OOH 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L 73L — SW SW Gateway 300L 59L 75M 59L 29M 59L 28M 59L 28M 59L 59L 58L 58E Westside 2000 70M 27L 180H 27L 27L 27L 27L 27L 26L Total Granted per DA 11150 277 368 187 187 I59 159 158 157 NLwallwder1 4't'S3b 185 103 294 303 1 341 1 351 362 377 ' H=High Density, M-Mediirn Density and L -Low Density b A]locations granted for the year 2006 (the effective date of the development agreements) were all from the unused reserve allocations from previous years. Essentially none of the scheduled allocations for 2006 have been granted. Sources: LSA Associates Inc. 2006, Reynolds Ranch Development Agreement, and Draft Development Agreements for SW Gateway and Westside Projects. 4) Project Consistency listh City Plans and Policies City staff (namely the Planning, Engineering, and Parks divisions) have been working with the applicant over the last two years to assure that the Westside project is consistent with City policies related to new development. A discussion of Westside project's consistency with the General Plan, Housing Element, Westside Facilities Master Plan, Parks and Recreation Master Plan and the Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is provided below. Consistency with the General Plan The Lodi General Plan designates the Westside project area as PR, Planned Residential. The PR designation, as recently amended, reads as follows: This designation provides for single family detached and attached homes, secondary residential units, multifamily residential units, parks, open space, detention basins, public and quasi public uses, and similar and compatible uses. All development under this designation shall be approved pursuant to a development plan, master plan, or specific plan. New residential units within planned residential areas will strive to be developed according to a general policy goal of maintaining the following mix of residential densities: 65 percent low density; 10 percent medium density; and 25 percent high density. The development plan and zoning for Planned Residential shall specify the allowable densityfor residential development within any area designated Planned Residential. The average residential density of a development plan, master plan, or specific plan will generally not exceed 7.0 units per gross acre. This designation assumes an average of 2.60 persons per household. The Westside project is a planned development residential community, with parks and open space uses to service the proposed neighborhood, and benefit the City as a whole. According to the General Plan, the low-density residential designation has a density range of 0.1 to 7.0 units per gross acre; the medium -density residential designation has a density range of 7.1 to 20.0 units per gross acre; and the high-density residential designation has a density range of 20.1 to 30 units per gross acre. 1.'CbwCunily UevdopmerSPlaieoingLSTP.PFRP7120oti�10-7 k-06 N'Wade_ AU flgp n.da 12 With a total of 638 units, the Westside project complies with the intent and restriction of the PR land use designation by providing the following mix of residential densities: 61 % low density, 11 % medium density, and 28% high density. The overall project density is 5.8 dwelling units per acre. Though the project complies with the PR land use designation of the General Plan, there are other distinct topics of the General Plan that apply to new development within the City: including conversion of agricultural land; inclusion of an affordable housing component; inclusion of a Greenbelt element; providing school sites in conjunction with the Lodi Unified School District objectives; maintaining adequate circulation as per the City's level of service standards; providing adequate water supply; and providing parks and recreation amenities. The Westside project's consistency with these General Plan topics is evaluated below. Agriculture coiwersion. The proposed project includes the conversion of agricultural land, and the ETR prepared for this project includes mitigation measures (LU -2 and LU -3) to reduce the impacts related to loss of agriculture. Additionally, the Commission should note that while the General Plan includes statements of support for agriculture use, the Westside site is designated as Planned Residential (PR), which indicates that the City has planned for these properties to be converted to residential uses. Affordable houdag. Build -out of the Westside project would assist the City in meeting its regional housing needs as described in the City's Housing Element, by providing a variety of housing products available to a variety of income ranges. By developing a community with a mixture of housing types consistent with the goals of the Planned Residential designation (61% low density, 11% medium density and 28% high density) the Westside project will provide opportunities for affordable housing within the project area. In addition, the Development Agreement requires the developer to rehabilitate twenty-five (25) residential units in the Eastside area. The developer may satisfy this obligation through improvements to properties it rents or owns within the specified area or on property owned by others. if the developer does not satisfy this obligation within eight (8) years from the effective date of Development Agreement, the developer is obligated to pay the City $25,000 per residential unit for each unit of the 25 units that has not yet been rehabilitated. Greenbelt. The General Plan has several policies regarding the establishment of a greenbelt. The City's Greenbelt Task Force is currently discussing implementation plans for a greenbelt along the southern edge of the City's Sphere of Influence. There are currently no specific plans for a greenbelt within or adjacent to the proposed project area. To the contrary, the City Council has directed staff to study the expansion of the planning area to the west, beyond the boundary of the Westside project area as part of the General Plan update process. Discussion of the greenbelt area shown in the Westside Facilities Master Plan is provided below. Schools. The Westside project includes a 10 -acre site for the future development of an elementary school. The size and location of the proposed school site reflects the recommendation of the Lodi Unified School District. Circulation. Main access points to the Westside project would be provided by new streets located off Lodi Avenue and Vine Street. Internal neighborhood streets would provide access to parks, the future school site and within the proposed neighborhoods. The final width and design of these internal streets will be subject to approval by the public works department prior to approval of any tentative subdivision maps. The EIR for this project analyzed the land use plan and determined that the project would have impacts to the Level of Service at 16 existing JiCoMnnrty D1 dOPfflad na=mglSTAFFRMD",W11-06 K'�MWr_ mffmpoll,dp 13 itersections, and recommended mitigation -measures to reduce these impacts (TRANS -1 and 'MANS -2). VVater. As requ4red by State law, a Water Supply Assessment (WSA) was conducted for this project. The WSA, tempted by City Council on July 19, 2006, determined that this -project (I►gether with the SW (A teway project) would demand 887 acre-feet of water per year and that ai equate water supply is available to serve the project. Parra. The Genaral Plan encourages the development of parks and open spaces based on two park land to resident ratios: • 8 acres of neighlorhood and community parks (including basins and school parks) per 1,600 residents; and • 3.9 acres of neighborhood and community parks (excluding basins and school parks). Ike PR designation antigapates 2.6 persons per household; therefore, it is estimated that the peaposed project would fesult in 1,659 residents. Based on 1,659 new residents, the proposed project requires 13.2 acrros of parkland including school parks and basins and 6.5 acres of parkland excluding school parks and basins. The Westside project would provide 24.4 acres of parkland including basins and 11.43 acres of parkland excluding basins and parks. The proposed 24.4 acres of park does not include the "school park" acreage, because the amount of school park acreage cannot be determined at this time. It should also be noted that the development agreement for this project obligates the applicant to construct and maintain (for 2 years) all parks within the project area, Of note, the City's current park inventory is 335.62 acres for existing and approved parks (including basins and school parks). With a population of 62,467 residents this represents a ratio of 5.37 acres of part land per resident. Based on the discussion above, staff believes that with the adoption of the Development A lreement and itmplerneotation of the mitigation measures recommended in the EIR, the Vftstside project is consA tent with the General Plan. C#nsl nq with the 11"sing Eiament T* Housing Element is #W of the General Plan, but is sometimes discussed seely from the oer elements of the General Plan, as it is updated more frequently and deals directly with the eskblishmant of policies for providing housing units for the citizens of Lodi. As discussed above, the Westside project would combine a mixture of housing types consistent with the City's housing goals of providi* 65 percent low density, 10 percent medium density and 25 percent high density (388 low density units = 61% 70 medium density units = I I% and 184 high density uts = 2811,4). The Westside plan is designed to inter -mix the different housing types, so as not to segregate the high density town home units, medium density cluster units, and traditional single- family units from one another. The Westside project does not include a regulated a#%rdable housing component that meets the States formal definition of "affordable housing." However, the wide range of housing products would provide for units that are more affordable to a larger range of Lodi residents. The approach is to provide the medium and high density units, such that they can provide "market rate" affordable housing. For these reasons, staff believes the Westside project is consistent with the housing element. C40sistemT with Wests* Fw ides Master PUn Tl# Westside Facilities li ter Plan (WFMP) was approved by the City Council on February 21, 2001. As stated in the Citj Council resolution of approval (2001-47), "The Westside Facilities Muster Plan is intended to identify and plan for neighborhood and community parks, circulation ,:Cayn0"k9mu0—.igW"aM.1I-ftWmW_.fr.p,,.a. 14 and storm drainage improvements necessary to support 375 acres of existing and planned growth. The Plan serves as the basis for formulating and implementing capital improvement plans for public facilities within the plan area to meet the needs of growth projected by the City's General Plan. The PIan considered both existing and project growth in the plan area, as well as outside the plan area." The WFMP includes a land use and circulation plan (Figure 3, Shown on page 9 of the WFMP) that designates land within the plan area for specific land uses. As shown on the concept land use plan, the WFMP intended for a greenbelt corridor along the western edge of the land use plan. The WFMP states that the greenbelt was intended to be 200 to 300 feet in width to act as an "urban -agriculture interface" and that its benefits should be maximized by integrating storm management facilities, ecological balance and bio -diversity. Along with the land use plan, the WFMP also includes standards for street design and park and recreation uses. The Westside project incorporates the land uses within the WFMP including the elementary school site, aquatic center site, neighborhood park adjacent to the aquatic center site, and residential uses in accordance with the Pit land use designation. However, the Westside plan does not include the 200 to 300 foot greenbelt corridor on the western edge; therefore an amendment to the WFMP is required. The applicant's justification for this amendment is included in this report as Attachment 11. The WFMP intended for the greenbelt corridor to be a dual use public area with parks and storm management facilities. After approval of the WFMP, the City commissioned a study to determine the viability of the greenbelt buffer to act as the storm water maintenance facility for the development of uses within the WFMP. Said study (completed by Nolte Associates) determined that the WFMP concept of an open space corridor along the westerly edge to be used as storm water management would require excavation of 9 feet for approximately 70 percent of the corridor, if it was to be 250 feet wide, and 6 to 1 slopes on each side of the corridor resulting in approximately 102 feet of width at the bottom of a 250 corridor. The study further concluded that active uses, such as ball fields, would be constrained and this design would only allow for passive uses, such as picnic areas and pedestrian walkways. PCB approached the City to discuss potential development in the area and proposed to do development differing from the WFMP. Parks and Recreation and Planning staff were open to this possibility. Some of the issues discussed amongst staff included the need for more active recreation uses (e.g., ball fields) and the possibility that City growth may continue west under the next General Plan_ Based on input from the former Community Development Director and Parks and Recreation Department staff, and FCB's objectives for development, FCB decided to pursue alternatives to the plan included in the WFMP. One alternative included a series of lakes throughout the development and the other a more traditional basin/park plan with a linear trail/park system throughout the center of the project. Staff was generally supportive of both alternatives, but had concerns about the lakes plan due to the growing concerns over water supply. FCB 's Westside plan proposes a 50 -foot wide (at minimum) open space spine within the center of the project area. The open space spine would include a meandering 10 -foot, 6 -inch wide pedestrian trail that would link pedestrians and cyclists to neighborhoods, schools and parks with the project. Drainage facilities for the Westside plan would be accommodated by dual use detention basins and parks, a common practice within the City. The WFMP also intended for the greenbelt area to act as an open space buffer between agriculture and urban uses. The Westside plan would accommodate a buffer between the proposed residential uses and existing agricultural uses by installing a landscape open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls along the western edge of the project site to minimize conflicts between future residents of the Westside project area and adjacent agricultural use. This design criterion is required as a Mitigation Measure of the EIR for this project (Mitigation Measure LU -1). The Commission should note that the City Council has 3,`.L wxunily Dcelopm Tlm. igLSTAFFRM00648-iF46 WeAwide_ smff.epondx 15 ti directed staff to consider extending the City's planning areas to the west beyond the area of the WFMP as part of the General Plan update process, which would negate the need for a permanent urban/agricultural interface in this location, moving it further to the west as determined by the updated General Plan. Staff believes that the proposed Westside land use plan would meet the intent of the WFMP by. a) providing a continuous, active open space feature through the project, which could connect to future projects to the south; b) providing storm drainage facilities to manage the drainage within the project area, c) including the round -about street design feature on Lodi Avenue; d) including an upland park site that could be utilized for an aquatic center and adjacent neighborhood park; e) providing an elementary school site; and f) providing for development of residential uses in accordance with the PR land use designations. The proposed amendment allows for more active recreational uses than envisioned by the WFMP and a central trail spine that provides a bicycle and pedestrian link to schools, parks and neighborhoods within the project area. The proposed amendment essentially moves the pedestrian linkages envisioned within the buffer of the WFMP to a central location within the project area to provide a desirable open space amenity within the project area. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the request to amend the Westside Facilities Master Plan Conceptual Land Use and Circulation Plan to reflect the land uses within the Westside plan. Staff's specific recommendations for amendments are included as Attachment 9. Consistency with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan The Park and Recreation Master Plan does not propose future parks within the Westside plan area. The Westside project does include neighborhood and community parks and also designates a site for the future development of the city -planned aquatics center. The aquatics center is not denoted on the Park and Recreation Master Plan, rather within the Westside Facilities Master Plan, as discussed above. The parks within the Westside land use plan are designed as dual use parks and with basins, which is a common park planning practice for the City because the weather permits use of the basins as park land in the dry months. The Final design and uses within the parks are not known at this time, but final park design would be subject to review and recommeridation by the Parks and Recreation Department prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map, which includes said park land. Consistency with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes Class I bike paths along the western edge of the project. The Master Plan also includes Class II bike paths on Lodi Avenue Lane, and a Class II or III bike path on Vine Street. The Westside project includes bike paths, specifically within the north/south trail, but this location does not conform to the location shown in the Master Plan. An amendment to the Bicycle Master Plan is required. Staff believes this amendment is consistent with the purposes of the Master Plan and would only be necessary to relocate the Class I bike path currently shown along the western edge, to the central location proposed within the north/south pedestrian trail in the Westside plan. However, the north/south trail does not extend north of Sargent Road; therefore, a bike path connection between the WID canal and Sargent Road would have to be accommodated on a local street within the proposed development. The applicant intends to provide the remaining bike paths as per the Master Plan. Prior to amending the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, the Planning Commission shall make a recommendation to the City Council regarding the requested amendment. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval of the request by Tom Doucette, FCB, to amend the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. 7.lCo-I.andy Uevdope—ATI.mcLg�STAFFAPT2006�lQ1[{i5W.Mide a flep.nd- 17 XIINVMONMENTAIL ASSES1VENT "lobe City prepared one% EIR for the SW Gateway and Westside projects. The Draft EIR was *cuWed for public review between April 11, 2006 and May 26, 2006. After considering and t*sponding to cornmentS on the DEIR, the City prepared the Response to Comment document, which was made availa0c for public review on August 31, 2006. The Response to Comments together with the Draft EIR constitutes the Final EIR. The EIR identified certain potentially significant effects that could result from the project. Implementation of Mitigation Measures identified in the EIR vmuld reduce some, but not all, of the significant impacts to a less than significant level_ impacts that could not be mitigated to less than significant are considered significant unavoidable impacts. City staff prepared the CEQA findings and a Statement of Overriding Consideratiorks to address the significant unavoidable impacts. ]KALIC IMAWN(i NOTICE 80venty-raven (77) pubbie hewing notices were sent to all property owners of record within a 300-#r)ot radius of the sect property, and persons who have expressed interest in the Westside peoject via the FCB Coununity Meeting in 2005. Additionally, a newspaper notice of this hearing was published is the Lodi News Sentinel and was posted at City Hall on September 2, 2006. Because this agenda had been continued multiple times since the original public hearing notice, the City resent notices and re -published the hearing date for this meeting of October 11, 2006, in the Lodi News Sentinel. C PCLUSION 19ie City Council has f*al action on the requests for Annexation, Zone Change, Development regiment, and the Bicycle Master Plan arnendntent, and the Westside Facilities Master Plan A*iendtnent; however, terse requests must first be reviewed by the Planning Commission with a ratornmendation forwar0ed to the City Council. Therefore, staff recommends that unless additional or contrary i0orxmation is received during the public hearing and, based upon its review and consideration -of the EIR and the evidence submitted to the Commission, including the evidence presented in this staff report, and oral and written evidence presented at the public hearing, the Planning Coonmission take the following actions: • Recommend thatthe City Council request Annexation of the subject properties, including the Westside Plan area; • Reaornmend that4he City Council adopt a Prezoning to Planned Development; + Recommend that -the City Council approve the Development Agreement by and between the City of Lodi *td Frontier Community Builders, Inc. for the Westside Project; • Recommend that the City Council approve the Westside Facilities Master Plan Anundment to attend the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan within the Westside Facilities Master Flan; and • Recommend mnend that the City Council approve the Bicycle Master Plan amendment. A16TSUNATIVE PLAT ING COMMISSION ACTIONS • Reoonnmend Approval of the Raquest(s) with Alternate Conditions 1'W-^^K3'�B�TAFPRPT2W651'll-0d WeAilc_�f[repmtdoc • Recontmnd Deniabof the Request s Continue the Request 11*spectfuly Submitted,. Marity W*gner & Lyn*e Dias QDnt ct Pets, LSA Associates, Inc. Concurred by: Randy Hatch Community Developmetrt Director Attachments l . Vicinity Map Z. Westside land use plan 3. Westside conceptual housing elevations 4. Westside conceptual landscape plans 5. Westside Development Agreement 6. Drain Resolution for Zone Change to PD (Planned Development) 7. Draft Resolution for Annexation of Westside project area 8. Draft Resolution for Development Agreement 9. Draft Resolution for Westside Facilities Master Pian Amendment 10. Draft Resolution for Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment i. Applicant's justification for Amendment to the Westside Facilities Master Plan Wpp/drwkc ,:momDevvk..wWkF�6M., f1-06WemWc_all/frgmOAw 19 4 *P RESOLUTION NO. 2006P * 4 4? - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI CERTIFYING THE FINAL LODI ANNEXATION EIR (EIR-05-01), ADOPTING FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS, AND ADOPTING THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR THE SOUTHWEST GATEWAY ANNEXATION PROJECT AND THE WESTSIDE ANNEXATION PROJECT. WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public meeting, as rewired by law, to consider the Final EIR (EIR-05-01); and WHEREAS, the subject properties included in the evaluation are described as follows: APN OWNER ADDRESS SSV G ew* , oJedt 058-030-09 252 E. St. Route 12 Highway Carolyn Reichmuth 058-030-03 14509 North Lower Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD Sacramento Road 058-030-04 14499 North Lower Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD Sacramento Road 058-030-05 14433 North Lower Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD Sacramento Road 058-030-06 14195 North Lower Howard Investments, LLC Sacramento Road 058-040-01 14101 North Lower Schumacher Trust Sacramento Road 058-040-02 13837 North Lower Schumacher Trust Sacramento Road 058-040-04 13537 North Lower Schumacher Trust Sacramento Road 058-040-05 13589 North Lower Schumacher Trust Sacramento Road 058-040-14 No site address Joey Tamura Trust Ckher �kree s t I :fie- Y xed 058-230-04 13786 North Lower Tsugio Kubota Sacramento Road 058-140-13 14320 North Lower M. Bill Peterson Sacramento Road 058-140-12 14500 North Lower M. Bill Peterson Sacramento Road 058-140-14 14620 North Lower Ruth Susan Peterson Sacramento Road 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Dean and Sharon Frame Sacramento Road Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 058-140-06 800 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058-140-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del I TkCr MAES4tm 2(X)6U-02-EIR.d- WHEREAS, on September 16, 2005, a Notice of Preparation was circulated notifying aesponsible agencies and interested parties that an EIR would be prepared, indicating the environmental topics that were anticipated to be addressed; and WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (File No. EIR-05-01) was prepared ire compilence with t* California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Ouids#ines provided there under; and WHEREAS, aiNotice of Completion for the Draft EIR was published in the Lodi News Sentinel and was po#sd at City Rall on April 17, 2006; and WHEREAS, tl)ie Notice of Completion and copies of the Draft Environmentst impact Report were sent to. Responsible Agencies and the State OfIlce of Planning 8 Research 5tabe Clearinghouse$ on April 17, 2006; and WHEREAS, q copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report vols kept on file for pubkc review within tis Community Development Department at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA and the public Ii6rary and posted on the City's website for a 45 -day comment period 4omrnencing on April 17, 2006 and ending on May 26, 2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission received comments and testimony on the Dr* EIR from the following individuals on May 10, 2006 at 7:00 pm at the arnegi* Forum, 304 Nest Pine Street, Lodi, CA: and • Rick Gettrck • Chairmae Randy Heinitz • Commis#oner Daug Kuehne • Commis4ioner Gina Doran Commissioner Bi Cummins WHEREAS, City received nine (9) comment letters in response to the Olotios of Compton from the f ollowing agencieslpersons: and k1CAICPPY}R65W/ 20WJ412mMd- 2 Rio qj 140-08 '890 Eas Olive Avenue Frank Hall t058-140-05 X65 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Dei Rio 068-140-10 %930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Amigable Etal yooftow 029-380-05 351 E. Sargent Rd. Georgia Perlegos Etal 027-040-01 70 E. Sar ent Rd. Manna Trust 027-04-020 212 E. Sargent Rd. DHKS Development 027-04-030 402 E. Sargent Rd. Noble D. Fore Jr. it WHEREAS, on September 16, 2005, a Notice of Preparation was circulated notifying aesponsible agencies and interested parties that an EIR would be prepared, indicating the environmental topics that were anticipated to be addressed; and WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report (File No. EIR-05-01) was prepared ire compilence with t* California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Ouids#ines provided there under; and WHEREAS, aiNotice of Completion for the Draft EIR was published in the Lodi News Sentinel and was po#sd at City Rall on April 17, 2006; and WHEREAS, tl)ie Notice of Completion and copies of the Draft Environmentst impact Report were sent to. Responsible Agencies and the State OfIlce of Planning 8 Research 5tabe Clearinghouse$ on April 17, 2006; and WHEREAS, q copy of the Draft Environmental Impact Report vols kept on file for pubkc review within tis Community Development Department at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, CA and the public Ii6rary and posted on the City's website for a 45 -day comment period 4omrnencing on April 17, 2006 and ending on May 26, 2006; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission received comments and testimony on the Dr* EIR from the following individuals on May 10, 2006 at 7:00 pm at the arnegi* Forum, 304 Nest Pine Street, Lodi, CA: and • Rick Gettrck • Chairmae Randy Heinitz • Commis#oner Daug Kuehne • Commis4ioner Gina Doran Commissioner Bi Cummins WHEREAS, City received nine (9) comment letters in response to the Olotios of Compton from the f ollowing agencieslpersons: and k1CAICPPY}R65W/ 20WJ412mMd- 2 • Departme0t of California Highway Patrol May 4, 2006 • DepartmeOt of Conservation May 26, 2006 • Deapartmeat of Transportation May 25, 2006 • Pacific Gap and Electric Company May 26, 2006 • Pudic Utioies Cornmission April 26, 2006 • San Joagi#n County Public Works May 24, 2006 • Governor's Office of Planning and Research May 26, 2006 • San Joaquin Vey Air Pollution Control District May 4, 2006 • Robert G. Wilson May 23, 2006 V10iEREAS, & Response to Comments Document was prepared in accordance with ECQA which responds to comments received on the Draft EIR included herein as Attachment A; and Vii1HERFEAS, irldividual responses to the comments received on the Draft EIR were ailed to each cco"menting agency 10 days prior to the Planning Commission 4canmondation for dityy Council certification of the final EIR; and VtIHEREAS, wMitigetion Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared in acxordance. *th CEQA which lisps mitigabon measures recommended in the EIR; identifies mitigation Monitoring requirements; identifies the party responsible for carrying out the required mctions, the approximate timeframe for the oversight agency; and identifies the party uuitimately responsibko for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented is included herein as Attachment --B; and VVHEREAS, tike City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the Ocommrnda#ion to tl* City Council on the adequacy of the EIR on Ocbber 11, 2006 and ctober 25, 2006 and made the following recommendations to the City Council: t . Miogadana ALU -1: To reduce agricultural/residential land use incom tibilitles. the following shall be required: a. Tho applicant shall inform and notify prospective buyers in writing, prior to pugohass, about existing and on-going agricultural activities in the immediate area in the form of a disclosure statement. The notifications shAl disclose that the residence is located in an agricultural area subject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and early morning or nighttime farm operations which may create noise, dust, et cetera. The lanjpuage and format of such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to recordation of final map(s). Each disclosure statement shall be acknowledged with the signature of each prospective owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of San Joaquin Right -to -farm Ordinance. b. The conditions of approval for the tentative map(s) shall include requirements ensuring the approval of a suitable design and the installation of a landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affected by the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non- residential uses, and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. c. Prior to recordation of the final map(s) for homes adjacent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed landscaping, wail and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department. d. AdALonally, the al2plicant shall revi t lan prior -to Tent@ ' e May TS) Impact U-2_ The proposed W_qgtside and SW Gateweprojects would result in the Conversion of approximately 392 acres of Prime Farmland to non- agricultural uses, and the Other Areas to be Annexed would result in conversion of 39 acres of Prime Farmland when and if developed. Both the Westside and SW Gateway project sites are primarily used in agricultural production, and are currently designated as Prime Farmland. Development of the proposed project would result in the conversion of Prime Farmland to non-agricultural uses. Additionally,when and if plans are proposes and approved for development within the Other Areas to be Ann_exad, the development may result in the conversion of prime farmland. There are no feasible mitigation measures that would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. This impact would be considered significant and unavoidable even with implementation of the following mitigation measure, which would minimize the impact but not to a less -than -significant level: Miti ati n Measure LU -2: Prior to issuance of a building permit after the first quarter of the combined building permits for the Westside and SW Gateway rp of-ects have been approved, or the approval of a parcel or Tentative Map that wgMId result_ in the conversion ofriiimme farmland within the Other Areas to be Annexed,, the applicant shall provide and undertake a phasing and financing plan (to be approved by the City Council) for one of the following mitigation measures: (1) Identify acreage at a minimum ratio of 1:1 in kin approximately a tot of 392 acres of prime farmland for the Westside and SW G tew roi cts and 39 acres for the Other Areas to be Annexed (currently not protected or within an easement) to protect in gerpituity-fer-a--peFied-e€ as an agricultural use in a location as determined appropriate by the City of Lodi in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust; or TAWI,YUtEsaft2MMV)2-Md� 4 3. M WWJB6W 1: Each of the following mitigation measures shall be implementef to reduce the project's impact on the identified 16 intersections: 1a: Wig tion Measure AIR -2 identifies measures recommended by the SJVAP's "Guide lbr Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts to reduce vehicle tips and associated air quality impacts. Implementation of the same measuras would also reduce associated traffic impacts. The following are considered to be feasible and effective in further reducing vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions from the project and shall be implemented to the e4ont feasible and desired by the City: w Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructure that includes: sidewalks and pedeWian paths, direct pedestrian connections, street trees to shade side- walk, pedestrian safety designsrnfrastructure, street furniture and artwork, street lighting and or pedestrian signalization and signage. • Provide bicycle enhancing infrastructure that includes: bikeways/poths 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 turnouts/bulbs. Provide park and ride lots. The in mentation of an aggressive trip reduction program with the approproie incentives for non -auto travel can reduce project impacts by approxirately 10 to 15 percent. Such a reduction would help minimize the project'& impact. jP: The implementation of each of the improvements listed in Table IV.B-6 would r4duce the impacts to the identified 16 intersections to a lees-than- significt level. To mitigate these impacts, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic %gation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.13-6 f*r both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, how the improvement will be funded including a reimbursement program where appropriate; and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. The Plan may include an annual monitoring program of the intersections as a method for determining the schedule for implementing each improvement. The Plan shall take into account whether an improvement is already programmed and/or funded in a City or County program (i.e., Lodi Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program, San Joaquin County Regional Transpartation Impact Pee, Measure K (existing or renewal program), and San Joaquin Council of Governments Regional Transportation Improvement Program). If an improvement is included in one or more of these programs, the Plan needs to consider whether the programs schedule for the improvement J.,WA%Cr rk 1RESWw 2("Id4j2•EIRAd will meet the needs of the project and if not identify alternatives. The Plan shall be submitted to City staff for review and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Dev#lonment Plan Tentative SubdivisieR Map application. Implementation of Measure TRANS -1a and TRANS -1b, would mitigate the project's impact on existing conditions to a fess -than -significant level. However, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some of the General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more significant long-term improvement is being planned (i.e., reconstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). As a result, the project's impact at some intersections may be significant and unavoidable if the City chooses not to implement the recommended mitigation measure. (Potentially SU); and WHEREAS, adoption of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, included herein as Attachment B, effectively makes the mitigations part of the Westside and Southwest Gateway projects. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the City Council has reviewed and considered the information contained in the Final Lodi Annexation EIR and finds that: 1. The Final EIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA. 2. The Final EIR was presented to the City Council, the decision-making body of the lead agency, and that the City Council reviewed and considered the information contained in the final EIR prior bD recommending adoption to the City Council. 3. The Final EIR represents the independent judgment of the City. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that, based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file, the City Council of the Cly of Lodi makes the CEQA Findings as described in Attachment A adopts a Statement of Overriding Considerations, included in Attachment A and hereby certifies Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01). NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi the hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program included in Attachment B. Dated: November 1, 2006 I TAICITYV{ SWV 2006ll-02-EIK4- 6 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006- was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on November 1, 2006, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS -- NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS -- ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS -- ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS-- RANDI JOHL City Clerk 9 J.VVCITYIRES'Rm 2(K%V(12-EIR.dm 7 lq4ackl-ncek,;� .14 LODI ANNEXATION EIR CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Pursuant to Sections 15091 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines and Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code The Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) prepared by the City of Lodi (City) for the Westside Project, Southwest (SW) Gateway Project, and Additional Areas to be Annexed (project) consists of the Draft EIR (Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report, April 2006) and Responses to Comments Document (Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report Response to Comments Document, July 2006). The Final EIR identifies significant environmental impacts that will result from implementation of the project. However, the City finds that the inclusion of certain mitigation measures as part of project approval will reduce the majority of potentially significant impacts to less - than -significant levels. The impacts which are not reduced to less -than -significant levels are identified and overridden due to specific considerations that are described below. As required by CEQA, the City, in adopting these CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, also adopts a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the project. The City finds that the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, which is incorporated by reference and made a part of these findings included as Attachment A, meets the requirements of Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 by providing for the implementation and monitoring of measures intended to mitigate potentially significant effects of the project. In accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City adopts these findings as part of the certification of the Final EIR for the projects. Pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21082.1(c)(3), the City also finds that the Final EIR reflects the City's independent judgment as the lead agency for the project. (.10w—a and SedwoIpaUa l S u nsMonpamt Immo FikeNnLKM dmp frAl,dx(1Of27tSx*J LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 20116 LOOT ANNEXATION EIR TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1 SECTION 2: TIME LODI ANNEXATION AREAS................................................................. 2 SECTION 3: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS -THAN - SIGNIFICANTLEVELS.................................................................................... 4 SECTION 4: SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS THAT MAY NOT BE MITIGATED TO A LESS -THAN -SIGNIFICANT LEVEL.............................................................. 22 SECTION 5: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR NOTSIGNIFICANT......................................................................................... 27 SECTION 6: SIGNIFICANT CUMULATIVE EFFECTS ..................................................... 27 SECTION 7: FEASIBILITY OF PROJECT ALTERNATIVES ............................................ 31 SECTION 8: STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ................................ 34 Attachment A: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program C OwumcM and SaWags4mlacal &ttingalTonppary ]nWawt K W10I.E Tmdmp_fiwl.dm ( It1 WNaW) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION FIR SECTION 1: INTRODUCTION 1.1 Statutory Requirements for Findings Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines states that: (a) No public agency shall approve or carry out a project for which an EIR has been certified which identifies one or more significant environmental effects of the project unless the public agency makes one or more written findings for each of those significant effects, accompanied by a brief explanation of the rationale for each finding. The possible findings are: (1) Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR. (2) Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency. (3) Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the final EIR. In short, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where feasible, to avoid or mitigate significant environmental impacts that will otherwise occur with implementation of the project. Project mitigation or alternatives are not required, however, where they are infeasible or where the responsibility for modifying the project lies with another agency.' For those significant effects that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level, the public agency is required to find that specific overriding economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of the project outweigh the significant effects on the environment.2 The CEQA Guidelines state in section 15093 that: "If the specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other benefits of a prapos[ed] project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environ- mental effects may be considered `acceptable. "' 1.2 Record of Proceedings For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth herein, the record of proceedings for the City's decision on the project consists of, a) matters of common knowledge to the City, including, but not limited to, federal, State and local laws and regulations; and b) the following documents which are in the custody of the City: 1 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15091 (a), (b). 2 Public Resources Code Section 21081(b). C:WmunWrft sed 9ering1"%1 [ Sa1irW%TMkpM7* Inknid FHWOLK3Tindinp fuul.dw (II)I2712006) 4SA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS 6CTOBER 2806 LORI ANNEXATION EIR • Notice of Preparati#n and other public notices issued by the City in conjunction with the project (see Appendix A of the Draft EIR for the Notice of Preparation); • The ltblic Review Draft Elk dated April 2006; All written comme$ts submitted by agencies and members of the public during the public comment period ort the Draft EIR and responses to those comments (see Lodi Annexation EIR Response to Comth*nts Document); The Mitigation Mopttoring and Reporting Program (Attachment A); All findings, state nits of overriding consideration, and resolutions adopted by the City in connfttion with thi project, and all documents cited or referred therein; 6 All foal reports, st*dies, memoranda, maps, correspondence, and all planning documents pre- pared by the City of the consultants, or responsible or trustee agencies with respect to: a) the City's compliance with CEQA; b) development of the project site; or c) the City's action on the project; and 6 All documents subipitted to the City by agencies or members of the public in connection with development oftho project. 1.3 O ni=tioe/F* mat of Findings Secdon 2 of these findi f gs contains a summary description of the project, sets forth the objectives of Iie pro and provides related background information. Section 3 identifies the potentially Agnificant effects of th# project that were determined to be mitigated to a less -them -significant level. All numbored references identifying specific mitigation measures refer to numbered mitigation measures found in the Draft EIR. Section 4 identifies the significant impacts that cannot be mitigated tD a less-than-significatslt level even though all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and incorporated into the project. Section 5 identifies the project's potential environmental effects that were determined not to be significant, and do not require mitigation. Cumulative effects are discussed in Section 6. Section 7 discusses the feasibility of project alternatives and Section 8 includes the City's Statement of Overriding Considerations. These findings summarize the impacts and mitigation measures from the Dra* EIR and Responses to Comments document. Full descriptions and analyses are contained in the original document. SECTION 2: TH&LODI ANNEXATION AREAS The objectives for the Westside project, the SW Gateway project, and the Other Areas to be Annexed, are listed below. 1. Wat" Projekt +i• Develop a diversity of high quality housing types to meet housing needs witWn the City of Lodi. • Provide affordable Lousing options within the City of Lodi. • ProvWe park areas W recreational uses that help meet parte standards within the City of Lodi. • Develop a school site that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other Lodi residents. Yw«,sews m,e aem,�l�pouerl�+Tr Imp Pilelalx�lF��lnp thua.aac (Iwr»rn�w� 2 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. C£QA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OtTOSER 2086 LODI ANNEXATION SIR • Deveiep an "open pedestriaalbicycle spine" within the project site that ooneects to recreational and p an amenities fiuiher south of the project site. • Provide a site that could accommodate future development of an aquatic center. 0. Provide adequate b*in capacity for storm water detention. Z Sc►mAhweet Gate"y Project • Develop a diversity;of high quality housing types to meet housing needs within the City of Lodi. +; Provide affordable Sousing options within the City of Lodi. « Provide park areas and recreational uses that help to meet park standards within the City of Lodi. Develop a school sire that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other Lodi residents. Develop an "open space pedestrian/bicycle spine" within the project site that connects to recreational and pe4lestrian amenities further south of the project site. Provide adequate b4sin capacity for storm water detention. Other Areas to Im Arweved Easu m orderly devoiopment pursuant to LAFCO standards. • Avoid creation of aCounty island. * Facilitate fixture resIdential davelopment of these parcels within the City's jurisdiction. &2 Pict D"criPtoa The proposed project i1rJudes three primary components. The FCB portion of the. project includes Loth the Westside and W Gateway projects. The Other Areas to be Annexed component is being kitioWd by the City to avoid creation of County islands. This project could result in the ultimte annexation of approximately 457 acres into the City of Lodi; the development of up to 2,090 resi- 4ential units (approxirr*tely 1,110 low-density units, 445 medium -density units, and 535 high-density Units); two elementary school sites; approximately 55 acres of parks (including upland, basin and pedestrian trail and open space areas and a site for the aquatic center); and associated roadway and infrastructure improvements. The Other Areas to be Annexed project would result in the subject properties being incorporated into ie City limits and destnated/zoned for residential development. Consistent with Housing Element policies, the analysis in this EIR assumes that these properties would develop at a density of approxi- mately seven units per gross acre, resulting in up to 335 additional residential units. A breakdown of the proposed land uses and buildout assumptions is shown in Table III -5 of the Draft EIR. 1.3 Alt4wrratives Based on the project oridelines, ctives and anticipated environmental consequences, wA pursuant to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA the following project alternatives were selected for analysis: £:1DoCMMNU ad *8MnpN nVA"L SeniMATCWpMW lM fM FfLCMRK3%Fie1FnPJUWAoc (I(W27fX") 3 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR • The No Project/No Build alternative, which assumes the Westside and SW Gateway projects would not be annexed by the City and would not be developed. The agricultural use of the project site would continue, and no development would occur on the project site. • The Agricultural residential alternative, which assumes that the agricultural character of the project site would continue, and would provide one unit per 20 acres, which would allow 20 units. A density bonus would be granted which would allow I additional unit per 10 acres, which would result in a total of 60 units on the Westside and SW Gateway sites. No schools would be developed under this alternative. The aquatic center and some park area would be incorporated into the project site. • The Reduced Density alternative, which assumes that the Westside site would be developed as is proposed under the project, and that the SW Gateway site would have an average of three units per gross acre. This would result in a total of 1,441 units. The SW Gateway site would not include a school site. • The increased Higb Density Mix alternative, which assumes that the high density development would have an average density of 25 dwelling units per acre, and the low density designation would have a density of three dwelling units per acre. This would result in a total of 2,317 units. Under this alternative, there would be no medium density residential units. A more detailed description of these alternatives, and required findings, are set forth in Section 7: Feasibility of Project Alternatives. SECTION 3: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE MITIGATED TO LESS -THAN - SIGNIFICANT LEVELS The Draft EIR identified certain potentially significant effects that could result from the project. However, the City finds for each of the significant or potentially significant impacts identified in this section (Section 3) that based upon substantial evidence in the record, changes or alterations have been required or incorporated into the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant effects as identified in the Final E1W and, thus, that adoption of the mitigation measures set forth below will reduce these significant or potentially significant effects to less -than -significant levels. Adoption of the recommended mitigation measures will effectively make the mitigation measures part of the project. 3.1 Land Use bnoact LU -1: The proposed projects could result in a land use conflict with surrounding land uses. Mitiption Measure LU -1: To reduce agricultural/residential land use incompatibilities, the following shall be required: a. The applicant shall inform and notify prospective buyers in writing, prior to purchase, about existing and on-going agricultural activities in the immediate area in the form of a disclosure statement. The notifications shall disclose that the residence is located in an agricultural area 3 CEQ,4 Guidelines, Section 15091. CIA� m and Sdtmgalpnl. l Selthv\Tevlporaip lmenW Fi1d0LK3TrPAn final.doc (1W7r2W,) 4 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR subject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and early morning or nighttime farm operations which may create noise, dust, etcetera. The language and format of such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to recordation of final map(s). Each disclosure statement shall be recorded at the County Recorder's Office and acknowledged with the signature of each prospective owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of San Joaquin Right -to -Farm Ordinances. b. The conditions of approval for the tentative map(s) shall include requirements ensuring the approval of a suitable design and the installation of a landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affected by the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non-residential uses, and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. c. Prior to recordation of the final map(s) for homes adjacent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development Department. Findings for Imiact LU -1_: Mitigation Measure LU -1, which requires notification of potential home buyers that they would be located adjacent to agricultural uses, and incorporation of buffers into project design, will reduce the potential incompatibilities between the residential land use and adjacent agricultural uses. The mitigation measures presented in Mitigation Measure LU -1 are feasible and effective measures to reduce the potential land use conflicts. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure LU -I will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact LU -1 to a less -than -significant level. 3.2 Air Quality kppact Al.ffi1: Demolition and construction period activities could generate significant dust, exhaust, and organic emissions. Miti tg is on Measure AIR -la: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PMIo Prohibitions of the SJVAPCD, the following controls are required to be implemented at all construction sites and as specifications for the project. • All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construc- tion 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. • 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. • With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the build- ing shall be wetted during demolition. C:0acu is aW Se•ing.lpnll. l SNe)ngff.. op In—W F11 DLK3T r4ngs_f1mi[.dm (UV2712(a6) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOHER 1.06 LODI ANNEXATION EIR • When material$ are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dint emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. • All operations $hall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adja- cent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited exctFt where preceded or accompanied by sufficient wetting to limit the visible dust emissions.. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.) • Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of out- door storage pijes, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emission utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. • Within urban meas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday. • Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Additional Co& a res: Construction of the project requires the implementation of control measures set forth finder Regulation VIII. The following additional control measures would further reduce construction emissions and should be implemented with the project: • Lim -it traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways froth sites withla slope greater than 1 percent; • Install wheel vashers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment lemming the site; Install wind brqaks at windward side(s) of construction area; • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20 mph (regardless of wind - speed, an own*/operator must comply with Regulation All's 20 percent opacity limitation); • Limit area excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one time; • Install baserock at entryways for all exiting trucks, and wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment in designated areas before leaving the site; and • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 mph. Mitig tion Measurj AIR -Ib: The following construction equipment mitigation measures are to be impltnnented at cotruction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions: • Use electric egvipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equip- ment; • Properly and routinely mountain all construction equipment, as recommended by the manu- facturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions; • Shut down equIpment when not in use for extended periods of time to reduce emissions asso- ciated with idlikg emissions; • Limit tate hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use; and OTKMIm Md 4"fiW*%MW SmeoTe 4=y hd-n etc (iWVraa06) 6 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR • Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollutant concentrations; this may include ceasing of construction activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways, and "Spare The Air Days" declared by the District. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce construction period air quality impacts to a less -than -significant level Findings for Impact_AIR-1: Mitigation Measure AIR -i, which requires the implementation of construction period dust -and exhaust -control measures, will substantially lessen the project's short-term emissions of dust and exhaust. The short-term air quality measures listed in Mitigation Measure AIR -1 are feasible and are considered by air quality experts, including the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District, to be effective measures in reducing the short-term air quality impacts of construction projects. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure AIR -1 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact AIR -1 to a less -than -significant level. 13 Noise %fit 1 QIS&l: On-site construction activities would potentially result in short-term noise impacts on adjacent residential uses. Mitigi tion Measure NOI-I a: Construction activities would need authorization under City issu- ance of construction permits before any work could commence on-site. Construction activities shall be limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through Sunday, consistent with the City's Ordinance. Mitigigion Measur NOI-1 b: All stationary noise generating construction equipment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, shall be located as far as practical from existing residences. By meeting the hours of construction timeframe and minimizing noise from stationary construction equipment, the project will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels. Find' for Im ct NOISE- 1: Mitigation Measures NOI-1 a and NOT -I b requires the implementation of measures to control construction noise and will substantially lessen the adverse construction -period noise of the project. These mitigations comprise noise -control actions that have been successfully used by the City of Lodi, as well as municipalities throughout the State to substantially reduce construction period noise levels. Similar measures are incorporated into the conditions of approval for development projects throughout California, and are easily monitored during the actual construction period. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure NOI-la and NOI-1 b will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact NOI-1 to a less -than -significant level. CADocomn aid Saling4mp La l ScuingsiTepnory Ink—A FilesOLY31 Wi-gs_f.W d- (I012712006) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 3.4 Cultural and Paleontological Resources *yAd CULT -l: Ground -disturbing activities in a portion of the Westside project area could adversely impact a historic archaeological resource. Mitigation MeasureCULT-1: Implementation of either Mitigation Measure CULT -la or CULT - 1 b would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. In order to avoid possible work stoppage and project delays at the location of the resource, implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT-I(a) is the recommended alternative. The mitigation measure selected, however, shall be determined by the lead agency. 1 a. Prior to the initiation of any project ground disturbance or any construction activities within 50 feet of archaeological site LAN -i, it shall be recorded on the appropriate State of Cali- fornia Department of Parks and Recreation DPR 523 forms. Prior to ground disturbance at this location, a qualified historical archaeologist shall evaluate the site for its eligibility for listing in the California Register. An evaluation shall include archival research and subsurface archaeological testing. If the site is determined to not be eligible for listing in the California Register, no further study or mitigation of the site is required. Shall the site or intact features within the site be found to be a historic or unique archaeological resource as defined under CEQA, project related impacts to the site shall be mitigated. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to data recovery excavation. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work. A report of findings shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) §I5126.4(b)(3)(C)). This approach would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. lb. Prior to any project activities within 50 feet of archaeological site LAN -1, it shall be recorded on the appropriate State of California Department of Parks and Recreation DPR523 forms. A qualified archaeologist shall monitor ground disturbing activities within 50 feet of LAN -1 in the Westside project area. Project activity shall cease in the immediate vicinity of a subsurface find and the discovery evaluated and appropriate treatment options developed. Archaeological monitors shall be empowered to halt construction activities at the location of the discovery to review possible archaeological material and to protect the resource while the finds are being evaluated. Monitoring shall continue until, in the archaeologist's judgment, cultural resources are not likely to be encountered. If subsurface historic archaeological deposits, e.g., wells, privies, and foundations, are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redi- rected until the archaeological monitor can evaluate the finds and make recommendations. It is recommended that adverse effects to archaeological discoveries be avoided by project activities. if such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing on the California Register (i.e., it shall be determined whether they qualify as his- torical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA). If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared (7,0mnmotta and SdnngR gIwU eal Scttit*Tuwfo Interna FilesULK3Wi dmga_final.dm (I0)211211K) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work. A report of findings shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) § 15126.4(b)(3)(C)). It is anticipated that this approach will reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. Findiggs for IpWact CULT -1: Mitigation Measures CULT -la or CULT -lb requires that a qualified archaeologist to either evaluate the project site for its eligibility for listing on the California Register, or to monitor during major ground -disturbing activities. The archaeologist shall be empowered to halt construction activities in the vicinity of archaeological materials to avoid damage to unidentified archaeological resources should they be discovered. Either Mitigation Measure CULT -la or CULT -1b will ensure that the resource remains intact until its significance is determined, and a plan is prepared for the protection of the resource, if necessary. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -1 a and CULT -lb will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -1 to a less -than -significant level. Ipmet CULT -2: Ground disturbing activities at the Westside and SW Gateway project areas and Other Areas to be Annexed could adversely impact archaeological resources. Mitigation Measure CULT -2: If prehistoric or historic archaeological materials are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected and a quali- fied archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and make recommendations. It is recommended that adverse effects to such deposits be avoided by project activities. If such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing on the California Register (i.e., it shall be determined whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA). If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, thorough recording on Department of Parks and Recreation form 523 records (DPR 523) or data recovery excavation. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to FCB, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) § I5126.4(b)(3)(C)). Findings for Impact CULT -2: Mitigation Measures CULT -2 requires construction activity, within 25 feet of a prehistoric or historic archaeological materials find, to be diverted and a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the finds and make recommendations. Mitigation Measure CULT -2 will ensure that the resource remains intact until its significance is determined, and a plan is prepared for the protection of the resource, if necessary. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -2 to a less -than -significant level. Impact ULT -3: Future development projects at the Other Areas to be Annexed could adversely impact cultural resources. Mitigation Measure CULT -3: Prior to the implementation of any future discretionary project within the Other Areas to be Annexed, a cultural resources field survey shall be conducted. If C:LL7a:uttie3M8 ad SMflg04 LL. l SemngffeMp m ],m File OLKMFi]dings_firaAm (IO MA*6) 9 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR cultural resources are identified in the additional annexation parcels, it is recommended that such resources be documented on the appropriate DPR 523 forms and that adverse effects to such resources be avoided by project activities. If impacts to cultural resources cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing in the California Register (i.e., it shall be determined whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA). If the resource(s) is not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the resource(s) is eligible, adverse effects shall be avoided, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, Historic American Buildings Survey (HABS) documentation for built environment resources and data recovery excavation for archaeological sites. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) § 15126.4(b)(3)(C)). Findings for Impact CULT -3: Mitigation Measures CULT -3 requires evaluation of potential cultural resources in the Others Areas to be Annexed prior to future implementation of any discretionary projects within the area. Mitigation Measure CULT -3 will ensure that the resource remains intact until its significance is determined, and a plan is prepared for the protection of the resource, if necessary. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15041(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -3 to a less -than -significant level. 1w2Mt CULT4: Ground -disturbing activities associated with the project could disturb human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries. Mitigation Measure CULT -4: If human remains are encountered, work within 25 feet of the discovery will be redirected and the County Coroner notified immediately. At the same time, an archaeologist will be contacted to assess the situation. If the human remains are of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant (MLD) to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results, and provide recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center. It is anticipated that implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT -4 will reduce impacts to human remains to less -than -significant levels. 1~ipdiggs for ImpapA CULT -4: Mitigation Measure CULT -4, which requires the developer to adhere to existing law and professional standards regarding the treatment of human remains, will substantially lessen the potential effects of the project on human remains, including Native American remains. Implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT -4 will ensure that human remains are evaluated for their cultural and archaeological importance and are protected from C ID-ts aid SMngs"4,oW SdtirwlTempKmy Imenid FL1esT"71FiMngs 6nd.dw (IQC7/YXK) 10 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION FIR additional disturbance. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -4 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -4 to a less -than -significant level. *pad CULT& Ground disturbing activities within the project area could adversely impact paleontological resources. M- Aigaion,Measure CULT -5: If ground disturbing activity is anticipated below the project area soil layer, the initial ground disturbance below that depth in geologic units shall be monitored by a qualified paleontologist. Subsequent to monitoring this initial ground disturbance, the qualified paleontologist will make recommendations regarding further monitoring based on the initial findings. This can include, but is not limited to, continued monitoring, periodic reviews of ground disturbance below project area soil layers, or no further monitoring. Pre -field monitoring preparation by a qualified paleontologist shall take into account specific details of project construction plans as well as information from available paleontological, geological, and geotechnical studies. Limited subsurface investigations may be appropriate for defining areas of paleontological sensitivity prior to ground disturbance. If paleontological resources are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until the paleontological monitor has evaluated the resources, prepared a fossil locality form documenting them, and made recommendations regarding their treatment. If paleontological resources are identified, it is recommended that such resources be avoided by project activities. Paleontological monitors must be empowered to halt construction activities within 25 feet of the discovery to review the possible paleontological material and to protect the resource while it is being evaluated. If avoidance is not feasible, adverse effects to such resources shall be mitigated. Mitigation can include data recovery and analysis, preparation of a report and the accession of fossil material recovered to an accredited paleontological repository, such as the University of California Museum of Paleontology, Berkeley (UCMP). Monitoring shall continue until, in the paleontologist's judgment, paleontological resources are no longer likely to be encountered. Upon project completion, a report shall be prepared docu- menting the methods and results of monitoring. Copies of this report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi Planning Department, and to the repository where fossils are accessioned. Finding for Impact CULT -5: Mitigation Measure CULT -5, which sets protocol for the identification and protection of unidentified paleontological resources, will avoid the project's adverse effects to paleontological resources. Requiring a qualified paleontological monitor be present during ground disturbing activities below the soil layer will ensure that adequate measures are taken to protect unidentified resources. Requiring construction to halt if paleontological resources are found will allow such resources to be analyzed and protected (if necessary) without additional disturbance. The presence of a paleontological resources monitor can be easily verified in the field by the City. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure CULT -5 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact CULT -5 to a less -than -significant level. C,%Dhcu nls and Sdd.Ws pn4Lo l SMhngsWT PD1R, InWemo Fil.IOLKITindings_finald- (W/1717(MM) I I LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 3.5 Geology, Soils and Seismicity hoMt O-1: Seismically -induced ground shaking at the project area could result in risk of loss of property, injury, or death. Mitigation Measure GEO-1 a: Each project's conditions of approval shall require the project be designed according to the most recent CBC and UBC Seismic Zone 3 requirements, applicable local codes, and be in accordance with the generally accepted standard for geotechnical practice for seismic design in Northern California, Mitigation Measure, GEO-1 b: Prior to the approval of grading plans, the project applicant shall perform design -level geotechnical investigations and incorporate all recommendations into the project construction documents and grading plans. Findipgs for Impact GEO-1: Requiring the project to be designed in accordance with the applicable Uniform Building Code and all applicable local codes is feasible, and will minimize hazards associated with ground shaking within the project site. These measures are commonly imposed on development projects in California and are considered to minimize the effect of earthquakes on new structures. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures GEO- l a and GEO-1 b will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact GEO-1 to a less -than -significant level. 1 Wank GEO-Z: The project area contains soils that are moderately corrosive to buried metal objects. Mitiggion Measure GEO-2: If the project includes buried metal components, a corrosion engi- neer shall be retained to design corrosion protection systems appropriate for the project sites to be approved by the Community Development Department. Findbys for Impact,GEO-2: The incorporation of a corrosion protection system into the proposed project will help ensure buried components of the proposed project are able to tolerate moderately corrosive soils at the project sites. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure GEO-2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact GEO-2 to a less -than -significant level. 1ppact GEO-3: The SW Gateway site contains undocumented fills which could potentially result in clifferential compaction. Mitiion Measure GEO-3: Prior to issuance of a building permit for the SW Gateway site, the project applicant shall include the over -excavation and replacement of the undocumented fills in accordance with the earthwork, grading, filling and compaction recommendations of the Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation of the Gateway Residential Development in Lodi, pre- formed by Lowney Associates, November 12, 2004. C^Omu wW and Se711Wg mU=W SeninoTenipawy lnlc a Fik&%("3TindhW_fuud_doc(10270"0 12 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODE ANNEXATION Elk Findings for lmpact_GEO-3: The City finds that requiring the replacement of undocumented fill will minimize hazards associated with differential compaction at the project site. The implementation this measure will mitigate the potential effects on the proposed buildings and site improvements. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures GEO-3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact GEO-3 to a less -than -significant level. 3.6 Hydrology and Water Quality lope& HYD -1: Increased runoff volume resulting from creation of new impervious surfaces could peltentially exceed the capacity of downstream storm water conveyance structures, resulting in localized ponding and flooding. [Mitigation Measure EYD-1: Implementation of the following two-part mitigation measure would reduce potential impacts associated with increased peak runoff volumes to a less -than - significant level: I a: As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the projects, the Public Works department shall verify that the Master Utility Plan for the Westside and SW Gateway sites will comply with the City's stormwater requirements. 1 b: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the SW Gateway and Westside projects and any subsequent development applications that may be proposed for the Other Areas to be Annexed, a hydraulic analysis shall be provided to the Public Works Department for verification that implementation of the proposed drainage plans would comply with the City's storm water requirements. Findings for Impact HYD -1: The City finds that requiring compliance with stormwater requirements and a hydraulic analysis of the proposed project would help to ensure that new runoff from the site would not exceed the capacity of existing conveyance structures. The implementation this measure will mitigate the potential effects of new impervious surfaces. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures HYD - 1 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HYD -1 to a less -than -significant level. lapact HYD -2: Construction activities could result in degradation of water quality of storm water runoff and ground water quality in the Project area_ Mitiaabon Measure -HYD -2: The project proponent for each development project shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface water quality through the construction period of the project. The SWPPP must be maintained on- site and made available to City inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize the contact of construction materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhesives) with storm water. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed centralized storage areas that keep these materials out of the rain. C.lDMII.= and Selliryldpn4l.on1 Seff. kT—Vp wy Im —t FiW0LK3Windin9i_final,doc (I0R7MM) 13 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR An important component of the storm water quality protection effort is the knowledge of the site supervisors and workers. To educate on-site personnel and maintain awareness of the importance of storm water quality protection, site supervisors shall conduct regular tailgate meetings to discuss pollution prevention. The frequency of the meetings and required personnel attendance list shall be specified in the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be implemented by the construction site supervisor, which must include both dry and wet weather inspections. In addition, in accordance with State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2001-046, monitoring would be required during the construction period for pollutants that may be present in the runoff that are "not visually detectable in runoff." RWQCB and/or City personnel, who may make unannounced site inspections, are empowered to levy considerable fines if it is determined that the SWPPP has not been properly prepared and implemented. BMPs designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil sta- bilization controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of hay bales, and sediment basins. The potential for erosion is generally increased if grading is performed during the rainy season as disturbed soil can be exposed to rainfall and storm runoff. If grading must be conducted during the rainy season, the primary BMPs selected shall focus on erosion control; that is, keeping sediment on the site. End -of -pipe sediment control measures (e.g., basins and traps) shall be used only as secondary measures. If hydroseeding is selected as the primary soil stabilization method, then these areas shall be seeded by September 1 and irrigated as necessary to ensure that adequate root development has occurred prior to October 1. Entry and egress from the construction site shall be carefully controlled to minimize off-site tracking of sediment. Vehicle and equipment wash -down facilities shall be designed to be accessible and functional during both dry and wet conditions. The City Public Works Department shall review and approve the SWPPP and drainage plan prior to approval of the grading plan. City staff may require more stringent storm water treatment measures, at their discretion. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the level of significance of this impact to a less -than -significant level. Finding for Impact HYD -2: Mitigation Measure HYD -2, which requires the preparation and implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) with both construction and operation -period Best Management Practices (BMPs), will substantially lessen the effects of the project on stormwater quality. A SWPPP is considered by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to be an effective way to reduce the contamination of stormwater on a project site resulting from erosion and chemical contamination on impervious surfaces. The adequacy of the SWPPP (including associated BMPs) will be verified by the City prior to the initiation of ground -disturbing activities. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HYD -2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HYD -2 to a less -than -significant level. Immet HYD -3: Dewatering may contain contaminants and if not properly managed could be detrimental to construction workers and the environment. C-0- moau aW Seoinpspn41 Sming,iTcagormy 1n0em0 Filea40LK3\Finetings_fmaLdac (Iuf17AMM) 14 91 (WAILUO[]4—WI ke.d—S1A-t�5 Vr&W-*FftWAS4�aSw�nx�'.� aq llugs airs loofoid oql SuiXdn000 s1mo 2uimounq (l £ f. enuur g2noigl l ragrrraldoS) uoseas 2uipaa.rq-u0u oql guimp airs agl uo slum 2uimo.Lmq 4guopr s, owns uoilorulsu000ld 041 JI : I '(5661 `DJUD) simo tuimoung uo lrodo-d jjsIS s,9,4QD ipm aouepioone ui polonpuoo aq Hugs S,CaAanS [ld -poSanrnsa.i aq jlerls alts agl `sXaA.ms uoilanrlsuoaaid ls!;tut agl iagu sAiap p£ uEgl aroru .ioi papuadsns ro paXelap are satlrnilos WUIginlsip punoBjj -slmo Wuimo.ianq ro3 sXanans lonpuoa ilsgs lst olotq par tistrb s `satltnilos ;lutgrnlsip punorg Aue of load sXup OE usgl arour oig :u -sptwl podolanapun Jo uotsraAuoo JOJ `nalurls u0IlV rasuoo dDSMS agl gl!*( aouep.r000s ui `903fS of saa alst rdoxdde aql :Ced llsrls luauodord loaiosd agl `suujd Su}psA jo ltnordde of rood :111 -lana) iuuogtugrs uegx ssal a of Amo Burmomnq uralsam of sloudun aonpar lltm samsuaur asagi jo uoileluarualdurl :1-OIg rnseaW uotl !i!W -uorlonusuoo jo laeis aril of rotrd airs paxouud aq of sewV iaglp .io salts loofo.rd aptsisaM io ,Cvma}eE) IAS aril saidn000 saraads sryl�c lmo �uinnormq uralsam loudurt pjnoo laafo3d agl�o uo!lsivartraidurI :� � � - saa.rNosag 18313010i9 LT 'lanai lus3j j j"Is-uegl-ssai u of £-QAH Ioudrul aonpaa jinn puu `jsnojdds jo suoiltpuoo sl A loa ford aql olut pale.rodroour aq il!m £-QAH arnsuoW uopsop!W isgi spug f1!D aqi `(i (u)1605 I uoiloaS sauplappnD -VogD of iuensrnd •satlrntlas 5uigan4stp-punojS Jo uoile!l!ul agl of rorad )4!D aql Xq parUuaA aq Ipm suoisinoid 2upolumap dddANS agljo Aaunbapu agZ •ilui immap poind-uopotinsuoop luawoft w radord aql lo3 suotstnord apnlout (dd&*S) ueld uotluanard uotlnllod iapIA urrolS aql iegi sartnbar E-QAH arnseaW uotluSipW : C-Gxff los url Joj Timpug -lanai l@us0g!U21S-us1p-ssal e of losdun stgl aonpar pinom anoge pagposap arnsuaur uorludil!ut arll jo uoilsluauraldun radord 'jojumpunoa pus l!os arorj slueutumuoo jo suoilsrluaouoo snopruzug uroij simpom uotlon4suoo3o f4ajus agl omsuo pinom ate-ZHH PUB `Pb-ZVH `ob-ZHH `gb-ZVH `stb-7VH arnsuaW uotlu2!i!W3o uorlsluauralduq alts oql aoj (dSH) Uvid 4aJUS Puu glluaH Puu (dd2I) uuld uotlad rrorletpaura-d agi 3o uoissmsjp a sopniout )Ilg stgl jo `slepolmW snopsumn pus sp vzuH `I• Al uotloaS 'urals.(s a2uursrp mems oql olut a2 egosip Oupolumap Xus 3o assalar aql of roiid g:)OAk-d aql wog (s)ltmjad alut.rdoiddu oql winboe llsgs luouodord loaf -oad agl 'gut sol leotlAluue aql jo sllnsaa oql uo posug -Aiegosip of crotid slusinllod paloadsns agl .ro3 /(.rolsroqui pa[pl.rao-olslS s Xq pazAirm, aq llsgs jalempunoB `(parrn000 anuq of paloadsns so umou3i ars sosualaa leoiwago a.ragm salts ruau ao llg �q uppapun `•a•i) uoiluutureluoo ralsmpunor2 paloadsns jo suaau ul -alelidordde ss `malsrCs saunas rC.relluss ao ru W aT of pa'Bjsgastp sr .slum mato Xluo lsgl ainsua of ,Gmssaoou31 `parallg puu `Ino oluas of luawipos aql molls of o2sugosip of roud paupnuoo og hugs Suualumap lis `wnruturur ltl •5upalsmap potaad-uotlon,gsuoo jo luaura$sumw radord aqj ioj suotstnord apnloui llggs ddd/AS gong :£-QAH s -05W uotl !I!W 'a IH N011VXHNNV IUO'i 900Z H3901J0 SN0IIVH3UISN0J BNIUIHH3AO 10 1N3N31V1S ONV S9NIQNId V03J 'JNI 'S31VIDOSSY VS1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR evicted from the project site by passive relocation as described in the CDFG's Staff Report on Burrowing Owls (CDFG, 1995). Id: If the preconstruction surveys identify burrowing owls on the site during the breeding season (February 1 through August 31) occupied burrows shall not be disturbed and shall be provided with a 75 meter (250 -foot) protective buffer until and unless the SJMSCP Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), with the concurrence of CDFG representatives on the TAC; or unless a qualified biologist approved by CDFG verifies through non-invasive means that either: 1) the birds have not begun egg laying, or 2) juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Once the fledglings are capable of independent survival, the burrow(s) can be destroyed. Findings for ImpUt BIO -1: The City finds that conducting surveys for the western burrowing owl, and adhering to the protocol set forth in Mitigation Measures BIO -la, BIO -lb, BIO -1 c, and BIO -1 d is feasible and will adequately protect the species should it occur within the project site. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures BIO -1 a,1310-1 b, BIO -1 c, and BIO -1 d will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact BIO -1 to a less -than -significant level. lknwKt IMO -2: Implementation of the project could impact nesting Swainson hawk or other nesting raptors if these species are present on the SW Gateway or Westside sites or Other Areas to be Annexed site prior to the start of construction. Mitigation Measurpa BIO -2: Implementation of these measures will reduce impacts to nesting Swainson's hawk and other nesting raptors to a less -than -significant level. 2a: Prior to approval of grading plans, the project proponent shall pay the appropriate fees to SJCOG, in accordance with the SJMSCP conservation strategy, for conversion of undeveloped lands. 2b: Removal of suitable nest trees shall be completed during the non -nesting season (when the nests are unoccupied), between September 1 and February 15. 2c: If suitable nest trees will be retained and ground disturbing activities will commence during the nesting season (February 16 through August 31), all suitable nest trees on the site will be surveyed by a qualified biologist prior to initiating construction -related activities. Surveys will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of work. If an active nest is discovered, a 100 -foot buffer shall be established around the nest tree and delineated using orange construction fence or equivalent. The buffer shall be maintained in place until the end of the breeding season or until the young have fledged, as determined by a qualified biologist. In some instances, CDFG may approve decreasing the specified buffers with implementation of other avoidance and minimization measures (e.g., having a qualified biologist on-site during construction activities during the nesting season to monitor nesting activity). If no nesting is discovered, construction can begin as planned. Construction beginning during the non -nesting season and continuing into the nesting season shall not be subject to these measures. C:uk.auoenls and SMng3ynU,0c4 SdbnOTaVprmy Inke Fdes10LKYFi1XiWfit al.dm(1M712(MIE) 16 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 2d: If future development of the Other Areas to be Annexed will result in the removal of suitable nest trees for Swainson's hawk or other raptors, Mitigation Measures BIO -3a through BIO -3c shall be implemented. Findings for Impar$ BIO -2: The City finds that surveying for nesting Swainson hawk or other nesting raptors, and adhering to the protocol set forth in Mitigation Measures BI0-2a, 13I0 -2b, 13I0 -2c, and BIO -2d is feasible and will adequately protect the these species may occur within the project site. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measures 1310-2a, BI0-2b, 13I0 -2c, and 13I0 -2d will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact BIO -2 to a less -than -significant level. acct O-3: The project will impact one area of vernal marsh (seasonal wetland). Mitigation Measure 1310-3: Implementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce impacts to wetlands (i.e., vernal marsh) to less -than -significant levels. 3a: Wetlands permanently impacted during construction (approximately 0.02 acres) shall be mitigated through preservation, creation and/or restoration of the impacted resources at a minimum ratio of 1:1. If permits are required by ACOE and/or RWQCB, specific mitigation requirements, if different than described above, shall also become a condition(s) of project approval. 3b: Prior to approval of grading plans, the applicant shall obtain any regulatory permits required from the ACOS and/or RWQCB. 3c: Prior to development of the Other Areas to be Annexed, a formal delineation shall be conducted in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Routine Method). If wetlands or other jurisdictional waters are identified on the site and will be affected by development, Mitigation Measures BIO -3a and BIO -3b shall be implemented. Findings for Impact 13I0-3 : The City finds that preservation, creation, or restoration of wetlands permanently impacted during construction, as well as obtaining all necessary regulatory permits, is feasible and will reduce impacts to wetlands within the project site to a less -than -significant level. These measures are considered adequate means of mitigation. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure BIO -3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact 1310-3 to a less - than -significant level. 3.8 Hazards and Hiazardous Materials Ilmraict RA&I: Improper use, storage, or disposal of hazardous materials during construction activities could result in releases affecting construction workers, the public, and the environment. Mitigation Measurt HAZ-1: Preparation and implementation of the required SWPPP (see Miti- gation Measures H"-2 and HYD -3) would reduce the potential impacts of hazardous materials releases during construction to a less -than -significant level. No additional mitigation is required. C:OiQO Ms mW SoMnpVnUL 1 Smnp6 T"mpawy Inkrnel F,1my 0L.K1%Fu.4nV_hnP1 Ecc (101271HMM) 17 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS LODI ANNEXATION EIR Findiap-s for Impact HAZ-1: A SWPPP is considered to minimize environmental effects associated with the leakage or spill of hazardous materials used during the construction period. The City finds that a SWPPP is a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with the use of hazardous materials during the construction period to a less -than -significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-I will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-1 to a less -than -significant level. Jmget UM -1: The pesticide storage buildings at APN 058-030-04 contained pesticide stained asphalt and concrete floors. Mitig tion MeasuES HAZ-2: As a condition of approval for grading plans for SW Gateway project site, the applicant shall be required to test the soils beneath the stained asphalt floor of the older storage building and complete any clean-up necessary to remediate any identified contamination to an acceptable level. Findings for Impaq HAZ-2: Testing of soils under a stained asphalt floor, in addition to remediation of contamination to an acceptable level, reduces the impact associated with potential soil contamination. The City finds this a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with potential soil contamination. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-2 to a less -than -significant level. Ungct JW -3: Future development of any portion of the Other Areas to be Annexed site could be associated with hazards. Mitiggtion MeasurS HAZ-3: Prior to the approval of any specific development projects on the Other Areas to be Annexed, the project applicant shall provide the City with an environmental investigation, as necessary, to ensure that soils, groundwater, and buildings affected by hazardous material releases from prior land uses, and lead and asbestos potentially present in building materials, would not have potential to affect the environment or health and safety of future property owners or users. Findings for ImpaQt HAZ-3: Additional environmental investigation associated with specific development projects on the Other Areas to be Annexed would identify potential hazardous materials as well as remediation actions. The City finds this a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with potential soil or water contamination. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-3 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-3 to a less - than -significant level. Impoct HAZ-4: Implementation of the SW Gateway project could expose construction workers and/or the public to hazardous materials from contaminants in soils during and following construction activities. Mitigation Measurg HAZ-4: Implementation of the following five-part mitigation measure would reduce these risks to less -than -significant levels. C:0eppnents and Sdbng;"U anal Setfinp�Tedpmery Interne[ File ZLK71FIndngs_timl.dx (I(1l27rBXX,) is LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR 4a: Prior to the issuance of any demolition or building permits for the project site, a Risk Man- agement Plan (RMP) shall be prepared for the project site. At a minimum, the RMP shall establish soil mitigation and control specifications for grading and construction activities at the site, including health and safety provisions for monitoring exposure to construction workers, procedures to be undertaken in the event that previously unreported contamination is discovered, and emergency procedures and responsible personnel. The RMP shall also include procedures for managing soils removed from the site to ensure that any excavated soils with contaminants are stored, managed, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations and permits. The RMP shall also include an Operations and Maintenance Pian component, to ensure that health and safety measures required for future construction and maintenance at the project site shall be enforced in perpetuity. The RMP shall include the following Mitigation Measures. 4b: Prior the approval of a building permit, soil sampling and boring shall be done in the historic circular depression area in the western portion of APN 058-040-02 in order to determine the quality of the fill and to determine if hazardous materials are present below the surface. If the soils investigation determines that hazardous materials are present, they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. 4c: The soil samples collected from the equipment storage areas (and near the pesticide dis- pensers) were analyzed for Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TRPH). Oil and grease were detected at elevated concentrations in both samples collected from the equipment storage areas; 12,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the 55 -gallon waste oil drums east of the equipment storage buildings on APN 058-030-04 and at 38,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the waste oil drums in the southern portion of APN 058-030-04, Both concentrations detected are above the CVRWQCB threshold concentrations based on protection of ground water quality. The stained area is approximately 10 feet in diameter. Prior to the approval of the building permit, oil and grease stained soil in this area shall be removed and disposed in accordance with the recommendations of the Phase 1/11. 4d: Six areas of APN 058-030-04 contain old equipment and various piles of debris and garbage, which can potentially leave lead based paint and other hazardous materials residue in the soils beneath the piles. No obvious soil staining was noticed beneath the piles of debris and garbage; however, soil beneath the piles could potentially contain lead based paint and other hazardous materials. As a condition of approval for a demolition permit for the buildings located on APN 058-030-04, the trash and debris shall be removed. Soils beneath the debris piles shall be tested for lead based paint residues and other possible hazardous materials. If it is determined that lead based paint or other hazardous materials are present in the soils beneath the piles, these soils shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordance with existing hazardous waste regulations. 4e: The truck scale observed on the eastside of APN 058-030-04 could have soils contaminated with hydraulic fluid, which may contain PCBs. Truck scales often used hydraulic fluid, which can contain PCBs, which can be released during spills and leaks. As a condition of approval for grading plans permit for the SW Gateway site, the soils shall be observed when the scales are removed to determine if there are indications of leakage. If it is determined that leakage C.SDWI--ts and SetdegsSp.U..ocal &ni.OTe poesy 1..m Fiks10LICIVind.W -i_d. (tnaVAM76) 19 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION FIR has occurred, soils samples shall be collected for laboratory analysis. If it is determined that the soils are contaminated at levels beyond established threshold levels, the contaminated soils shall be removed in accordance with all applicable regulations. Findings for Impact HAZ-4: A RMP is considered to minimize environmental effects associated with the leakage or spill of hazardous materials used during the construction period. The City finds that a RMP, as well as the specified actions listed in Mitigation Measures .HAZ-4a, HAZ- 4b, HAZ-4c, HAZ-4d, and HAZ-4e are feasible mitigation measures that will reduce risks associated with the use of hazardous materials during the construction period to a less -than - significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the County finds that Mitigation Measures HAZ-4a, HAZ-4b, HAZ-4c, 14AZ-4d, and HAZ-4e will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-4 to a less -than -significant level. llm„„ t HAZ-5: Many of the parcels within the project area contain hazardous materials that may be harmful to the public and the environment. Mitigation Measur HAZ-5 : Prior to approval of any demolition or construction permits, ASTs, pesticides, waste oil, equipment maintenance chemicals, discarded trash and debris shall be removed from the individual project site and disposed in accordance with applicable regulations. Findings for Impact HAZ-5: The City finds removal of hazardous materials in accordance with applicable regulations as a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated the hazardous materials that may be on the project sites. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-5 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-5 to a less -than -significant level. 1myAtt HA,Z-6: The septic tanks and wells on the Westside and SW Gateway sites could potentially create a significant hazard to the public or the environment. Mitigation Measure HAZ-6: Prior to approval of any grading plans or construction permits for each individual project, the wells and septic system shall be properly abandoned in accordance with applicable regulations. Findings for Impact HAZ-6: The City finds removal of septic tanks and wells in accordance with applicable regulations as a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce risks associated with septic systems and wells. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure HAZ-6 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact HAZ-6 to a less -than -significant level. t�t HAZ-7: The reported presence of a possible underground storage tank (UST) within the SW Gateway site could potentially impact construction workers and the environment. Mitigation Measure HAZ-7: Prior to approval of any demolition or construction permits for the project site, a geophysical survey shall be performed locate the possible UST. Drilling and soil sampling shall be conducted to determine if this UST may have contained petroleum hydrocar- bons that may have leaked and affected soil and ground water. Should the sampling indicate a C?Dacu 15 andSemnpa MU -o Sctl WTemynnuylnlCnlelFile5C9X3T1rAinga_fmal."c(lOn7nOn6) 20 lz 190(vLvo0 a mus�ftmuucwlm-m =wl (e[a Keay s&e4las iam-n ums Pa su—LT, 'StAPIA awtll49tu pup Xpp $uilaagp anl? pup Iq`di13o aamos peau le aleaaa pinom laafoid pasodoid agjL :�- saO-InosaldITSRSKA WE [anal lupar;tats -upgl-ssal p of g-ZVH loudwl aonpaa ll!M pup `[EAoiddr jo sumppuoo etA loafosd oql olut paluaodloaur aq ll!m gg-ZNH Pup eg-Zb'H sainseaW uogv5i)!W 1pgJ spug ,4!D aql `(1)(p)i60S [ uoilooS sauijaptnD Vi3gj of luensmd -alts loo fold agljo sjawolsna xo saPXoldwa aminj ao saa3lrom uo[lorulsuoa of 1paigl glleag p asod lou IlinA s[upaluw asagl `luzwalequ tiressoom Cue iagd -saauulsgns osagl jo aouasaad aql wo.q 2uillnsa3 s3lstj glleag aril uossal Aliviluplsgns ll!m pup uoililowap of aoiad salts loafosd aql uigllm pea[ pup solsogse jo luawaluqu pup uotlp5ilsanui 0141 amnbaa qg-ZdH Pup pg-ZdH saanseay�I uoilp�iliLli :8-ZyH lap wl ao� purl -la nsiQ loaluoD Algrno .ud ANTMA urnbpof upS agl jo sluauraunbaj uoiluogrlou pup suoiluin2ai aql glint aouppi000u III aolor4wo luawapagp solsagsu paggm u ,Cq paluqu oq liugs s[uiaalpw oql `luasaid aq of paumualap an slplaalpw 2uiurpluoo-solsagsp jl •palanpuoa aq llpgs sa.rnlonals 03lepnsgns jo uallp;lllsaAu[ solsagsp up `sails loafosd oql .roj suuld Suipur2 JOJ [$Aoiddu jo uotlipuoa u sd :qg •suorlulnOaa alsem snop tzeq Sur;sixa igi!m aoueploaap ui jo pasodsip pup iolopaluoo luawalpgp peal pogilunb u Aq panowa.r aq llugs Aagl `pagiluop! axe luted paspq-peal 2ugaad so asool jI -sarliA[lop uoilt[owap 10 UOIIUAOuad Suunp pomolloj aq llugs suorlulaa.r .Clajus pup glleag la3liom uoilonilsuoa alielS pup 1piapa3 uagl `pagiluapi sap slutud paspq-peal 3I 'la[alsla [o.rluoj {Itlpno jtd KQIIUA utnbuof upS agl jo sluawaambaa uorlpogtlou pup suotlulaw aql gl!m aouppmoae ui .rolae.raum luarualuqu solsogsp pagilaao p Xq palpgp aq llugs slpiaalm aql `luaswd aq of paumialap alp slptaalpw 2utumuoa-so4sagsu 31 •pauuo3aad aq llegs Xmins luted paspq-peal pup solsagse uu `sBuipllnq alis loafosd oql soj liuuad uoililowap p JO 1pnoaddp jo uoilipuoo p sd :pg •larval lueagtu2js-uugl-ssa[ p o; laudwl sigl aonpar p[nom a.msuaw uoilu2iliw:ppd-omq Suimolioj aql jo uoilpluawaldwI :g-ZyH mseayq uoil ilrl�I •otlgnd aql pup saa3liom uoilon4suoo loagu Xrm goigm `saloilapd solsagsp pup peal auro%qu osea[al p[noa sodid uorlp2riii 2wurplum solsagsu 3o Ipnowaa ag; pup slepalpw 2utplinq Sututpluoo-solsagse pup luipd paspq-peal liumipluoo sSuiplinq jo uoililowa(l: -z ; w -lanai lue3t31u2rs-uegl-ssa[ p of L-ZVH lapdwl aonpaa I[inn pup `Ipno.rddu jo suotlrpuoo UTA loafosd aql olui palviodaoow aq lPm L-ZVH aansePW uoilpgrlM lugl spug fq'D 0141'00) 16091 uoiloaS sauijaprn!) vago of lupnsand •[anal lupagiars-upgl-ssal p 01 papzpq sigl gliM paletaossp laudwi [pilualod agl ampai p[nom .LSfI [pilualod Qqj JO IpnawaJ pup `jSfI aq) JO slualuoo aq; aoj lluilsal `.LSf1 u3o spodaa ui uoilOpsanut ioqurg spun i4iD aql :L-ZHH MOM .TOS .Pui3 -luowdolanap alis of .rot rd [lrj paiaouTNuo glrnn pallg3laeg PUB PaAouzar aq llpgs li `luasard St ZSfl agljI 'aansolo asps of .rotad QHg 1(4unoD uinbpof upS Xq pannba r aq Aeru uoilpipawaa pup uoileoilsanut 1puoilippp `pa unaoo seq 31w1 agl woa3 asealai NIH N011vxxNNV IQO'i 9001 N8801:)O SN011V88QISNOa `JMIUIRRHAO 30 IN31N'aivis aNY sDAium i tla3a ".)Ni 's3lvlaossv V39 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2005 LODI ANNEXATION E!R Mitigation Measure VIS -2: Outdoor lighting shall be designed to minimize glare and spillover to surrounding properties. The proposed project shall incorporate non -mirrored glass to minimize daylight glare. Findings for Impact VIS -2: The City finds that designing outdoor lighting to minimize glare and spillover light and requiring non -mirrored glass in construction of the housing is a feasible mitigation measure and will reduce impacts associated with light and glare to a less -than - significant level. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15091(a)(1), the City finds that Mitigation Measure VIS -2 will be incorporated into the project via conditions of approval, and will reduce Impact VIS -2 to a less -than -significant level. SECTION 4: SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS THAT MAY NOT BE MITIGATED TO A LESS -THAN -SIGNIFICANT LEVEL The Draft EIR and Response to Comments document identify several impacts that cannot be mitigated to a less -than -significant level even though the City finds that all feasible mitigation measures have been identified and adopted as part of the project. The significant unavoidable impacts are discussed below. 4.1 Land use IMU t LU -2: The proposed projects would result in the conversion of approximately 392 acres of 'rime Farmland to non-agricultural uses. Mitigation Measure LU -2: Prior to issuance of a building permit after the first quarter of the combined building permits for the Westside and SW Gateway have been approved, the applicant shall provide and undertake a phasing and financing plan (to be approved by the City Council) for one of the following mitigation measures: (1) Identify approximately 392 acres of prime farmland (currently not protected or within an easement) to protect for a period of time to be determined (but not less than 15 years) as an agricultural use in a location as determined appropriate by the City of Lodi in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust; or (2) Pay a fee equal to the value of 392 acres as determined by an independent qualified consultant retained by the City in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust. The City will determine to whom the fee shall be paid. Findings for Imps LU -2: The proposed project would convert approximately 392 acres of prime farmland. While the mitigation measures would result in other farmland being preserved, the impact would remain significant and unavoidable. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. 1mgMt LU -3: The proposed projects would result in a conflict with existing Agricultural Use and Williamson Act Contracts. C:1ba. Cnts and geltmgslpnUAcal SenilW%Temp [nrcmd FikcC�l.K7lFindin�_fuul.doc ( ](27/20)6) 22 JoSA ASSOCJATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2005 LODI ANNEXATION EIR f itiWtion Measu A LU -3: The applicant shall pay all fees associated with terminating a Wil- liamson Act Contrict. Find " fir Ir�ad LU -3: The proposed project would conflict with existing Williamson Act Contracts. While t* applicant would pay all required fees associated with terminating a Williamson Act C(*tract, the proposed project would still result in significant impact. However, pursuant to Section 21091(aX3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. *2 Transpertation Cieculaton and ParWag As is noted in the Final IR, the City has the capacity to reduce to a less -than -significant level the petted intersections lo the project -related and cumulative conditions. However, as is noted in the IR, the City may deci4e not to implement the identified improvement in order to further other City 0eneral Plan goals. As luch, the potential transportation impacts is less -than -significant, but would be significant and unavoidi*ble if the City decides not to implement selected improvements. JWVKt T NS -1: Implomentation of the proposed project would significantly impact the level of wrviee at 16 intersections under the Existing with Project scenario. M*afiol Mcasury TRAN§-1: Each of the following mitigation measures shall be imPlemerKed to r duce the project's impact on the identified 16 intersections: La: Mitigation Measure AIR -2 identifies measures recommended by the S.TIIAPCD's "Guide fair Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts to reduce vehicle trips and associated air quality impacts. Implementation of the same measures would also reduce associated traffic impacts. The following are considered to be feasible and effective in further reducing vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions from the project and shall be implemented to the extent feasible and desired by the City: • Provi* 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. • Provi* transit enhancing infrastructure that includes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street lighting, route signs and displays, and/or bus turnouts/bulbs. • Provide park and ride lots. The implementation of an aggressive trip reduction program with the appropride incentives for non -auto travel can reduce project impacts by approximately 10 to 15 percent. Such a reduction would help minimize the project's impact. ib: The irlplementation of each of the improvements listed in Table IV.B-6 would reduce the impacts to the identified 16 intersections to a less -than -significant level. To C:*e ... awd Seiftpp.Y xA SwinoTemp..�y 1m-0 I10417nWN 23 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR mitigate these impacts, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.13-6 for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, the applicant's fair share contribution towards the improvement, how the improvement will be funded including a reimbursement program where appropriate; and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. The Plan may include an annual monitoring program of the intersections as a method for determining the schedule for implementing each improvement. The Plan shall take into account whether an improvement is already programmed and/or funded in a City or County program (i.e., Lodi Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program, San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee, Measure K (existing or renewal program), and San Joaquin Council of Governments Regional Transportation Improvement Program). If an improvement is included in one or more of these programs, the Plan needs to consider whether the programs schedule for the improvement will meet the needs of the project and if not identify alternatives. The Plan shall be submitted to City staff for review and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Tentative Subdivision Map application. Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and TRANS -1 b, would mitigate the project's impact on existing conditions to a less -than -significant level. However, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some of the General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more significant long-term improvement is being planned (i.e., reconstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). As a result, the project's impact at some intersections may be significant and unavoidable if the City chooses not to implement the recommended mitigation measure. Findings for Irn act TRANS -1: The proposed project would significantly impact 16 intersections. While the mitigation measures are available to reduce potential impacts to a less - than -significant level, the City may decide to not implement measures so as to not conflict with some policies of the General Plan, thus resulting in a significant impact. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section S below. IMput TRANS -2: Implementation of the proposed project would significantly impact the LOS at 21 intersections under the 2030 Cumulative scenario. Nfitigation Measure TRANS -2: Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and TRANS -lb, would mitigate the project's contribution to Cumulative condition to a less -than -significant level at the 21 intersections that would be significantly impacted in the 2030 Cumulative condition. For the intersections that could be mitigated to a less -than significant level, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some of the General Plan policies that C'lponiimms and 5elCngsTnU.o SelhnpUempawy snwm hks101. 3TLndwgs:ioa1.dw(Ion709wK) 24 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 3006 LORI ANNEXATION EiR ernplrosize pedestr*a scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more significant loo& -team improvement is being planned (ix., reconstruction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). FiDdivas far ImpgA TRANS -2: The proposed project would significantly impact 21 intersections in the cumulative scenario. While the mitigation measures are available to reduce potential impacts to a less -then -significant level, the City may decided to not implement measures so as to not conflict with same policies identified in the General Plan. However, pursuant to Section 21091(ax3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. 4.3 Air QuaUty Project -related regional emissions would exceed the SJVAPCD thresholds of iignfficai.e for ozone Precursors. Mitigton Measure AIR -2: The &IVAPCD's "Guide far Assessing and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts " identifiealpotential mitigation measures for various types of projects. The Guide identifies a number of measures to further reducing vehicle trip generation and resulting emissions. The foliDwing measures shall be implemented to the extent feasible (it is noted that many of these features are already incorporated into the project). "� • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructure that includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, direct pedestlian 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, roue signs and displays, and/or bus turnouts/bulbs. • Provide parkand ride lots. The plana for ea4h phase of the proposed project shall implement these measures to the extent feasible and appMpriate. The implementation of an aggressive trip reduction program with tate appropriate incentives for non -auto travel can reduce project impacts by approximately 10 to 15 percent. A reduction of this magnitude could reduce emissions, however, ozone precursors would still exceed the significance thresholds. There is no mitigation available with currently feasible technology to reduce the project's regional air quality impact by an additional 50 percent to a less-4han-significant level. Therefore, the project's regional air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Finding for ImMgJ, RR -2: Implementation of trip reduction measures, such as providing transit facilities, sidewalks, and bicycle enhancing infrastructure, would reduce vehicle emissions by approximately 10 to 15 percent. However, this reduction would not be sufficient to reduce ozone precursors to below the significance threshold. Only substantially restricting private vehicle use in and around Lodi would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. However, such MM1 Maas amu Wk d i+1lei4MX3Tim•n0_ftndAw (kI1ViTM06) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR draconian measures are not socially or politically feasible. There are no other feasible measures that would reduce vehicle emissions from the project to below the S.IVAPCD threshold. Pursuant to Section 21081(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on the specific overriding considerations found in Section 8 below. 4.4 Noise As is noted in the Final EIR, the City has the capacity to reduce to a less -than -significant level the impacted intersections in the project -related and cumulative conditions. However, as is noted in the EIR, the City may decide not to implement the identified improvement in order to further other City General Plan goals. As such, the potential transportation impacts is less -than -significant, but would be significant and unavoidable if the City decides not to implement selected improvements. Itnpact NQI-2: Local traffic would generate long-term noise levels exceeding Normally Acceptable and Conditionally Acceptable noise levels on the project site. Mitigation Measur@ NOI-2a- A 6 -foot -high sound wall shall be constructed along the rear prop- erty line of all lots adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. Mitiggtion MeasurgNOI-2b: Mechanical ventilation (such as air conditioning) shall be installed in the proposed residential units adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Har- ney Lane so that the windows can remain closed for prolonged periods of time. Mitigation Measure N0I-2c: Windows with a minimum STC rating of STC -32 shall be installed in all units directly exposed to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. Mitigation Measure NOI-2d: A sound barrier with a minimum height of S feet is recommended for all upper floor outdoor use areas directly adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. Should the City determine that sound wall and sound barriers are not appropriate or feasible for the proposed project, the impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. Findiggs for Im pats ct NOI-2: Local traffic would generate long-term noise levels exceeding Normally Acceptable and Conditionally Acceptable noise levels on the project site. While the mitigation measures are available to reduce potential impacts to a less -than -significant level, the City may decide to not implement measures so as to created walled communities, thus resulting in a significant impact. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below_ 4.5 Visual Resources Laut VIS -1: The proposed project would degrade the existing visual character. C:1Dae W& ad se kW4nWm a setirqLffee,pa„y Itfl—I Filcx MK3%FindiW_fi,ui.dw WV27/2(M) 26 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEOA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION MR Mitiption Measure VIS -1: No mitigation is available to reduce this significant and unavoidable impact. Findiggs for Impact VIS -1: The proposed project would result in the conversion of farmland, which would degrade the existing visual character; there are no mitigation measures available to reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. 4.6 Growth Inducement knowt f"WTH-1: Potential growth -inducing impacts associated with the project's ability to facilitate development to the west if the City decides it wants to grow west. Mitigation Measure GROWTH -1: No mitigation was identified to reduce this potentially significant and unavoidable impact. Findings for 1mpaclGROWTH- 1: The proposed project could result in the growth -inducing impacts by facilitating development to the west if the City should decide that it wants to grow to the west. However, pursuant to Section 21091(a)(3) of the Public Resources Code, as described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, the City has determined that this impact is acceptable based on specific overriding considerations found herein in Section 8 below. SECTION 5: EFFECTS DETERMINED TO BE LESS THAN SIGNIFICANT OR NOT SIGNIFICANT The City finds that, based upon substantial evidence in the record, as discussed below, the following impacts associated with the project are not significant or less than significant. &I Mineral Resources The City of Lodi General Plan does not identify the project sites as mineral resources. Additionally, the San Joaquin County General Plan does not identify the project sites as significant sand and gravel aggregate resource areas or as generalized aggregate extraction sites. The project sites do not contain known mineral resources, and the majority of the project sites are in active agricultural uses. 5.2 Population, Employment and Housing The City of Lodi Housing Element was adopted by the City in 2004. The Housing; Element anticipated the development of the Westside and SW Gateway sites. As such, housing and population impacts were addressed within this Element, and the environmental impacts associated with Population and Housing were addressed in the EIR that was completed for the Housing Element. SECTION 6: SIGNIFICANT CUMULATIVE EFFECTS The cumulative analysis in the Draft EIR utilizes development that is likely to occur under the buildout of the General Plan in addition to specific development projects listed on page 324 of the Draft EIR. C:V)M111esestls snd SMhW'pnU1 I Sd1i-93\Te PWffY [-av ] F0e,l0LK3 Fi.,k gs_fiPW A_ f I(V27MOS) 27 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION FIR 6.1 Land Use and Planning Policy The proposed project includes the development of the Westside and SW Gateways project sites, as well as the annexation of other parcels within the City's Sphere of Influence. While no development has been proposed for the additional annexation areas, it is assumed that these sites would be developed in the future at an average density of approximately 7 units per acre. While the proposed project would develop land that is currently in agricultural production, this land is designated as "Planned Residential" within the City's General Plan. Additionally, the Housing Ele- ment of the General Plan identifies these sites as areas to be developed. As such, the project would not contribute to any significant cumulative land use impacts. 6,2 Transportation, Circulation and Parking As noted in the Draft EER, 21 intersections would be significantly impacted by the proposed project. However, all the intersection impacts could be reduced to a less than significant level with implementation of the identified mitigation measures discussed in Section IV.B of the Draft EIR. However, the City may choose not to implement some of these mitigation measures so as to further certain goals within the General Plan. 6.3 Air Quality A number of individual projects in the City of Lodi may be under construction simultaneously with the proposed project (see list above). Depending on construction schedules and actual implementation of projects in the area, generation of fugitive dust and pollutant emissions during construction may result in short-term air pollutants, which would contribute to short-term cumulative air quality impacts. However, each individual project would be subject to SJVAPCD rules, regulations, and other mitigation requirements during construction. Currently, the San Joaquin Valley is in non -attainment for ozone, PM10 and PM2.5 standards. Con- struction of the proposed projects, in conjunction with other planned developments within the study area, would contribute to the non -attainment status. Thus, the proposed projects would exacerbate nonattainment of air quality standards within the San Joaquin Valley. Section IV.C, Air Quality, of the Draft EIR, includes a discussion of cumulative and future conditions related to air quality. 6.4 Noise Implementation of the proposed project and cumulative projects would result in noise increase in the City of Lodi due to construction -period activity and increased traffic on City streets. However, noise increases associated with construction of the proposed project would be reduced to a less -than - significant level through the implementation of Mitigation Measure NOISE -1, which would restrict construction activities to daytime hours, reduce unnecessary idling of construction equipment, and require muffling of combustion engines. It is anticipated that cumulative projects in Lodi would incorporate these standard noise -reduction measures and that the project construction would not result in substantial adverse cumulative noise impacts. Cumulative traffic noise is discussed in Section IV.D, Noise, of the Draft EIR. Implementation of the proposed project would not be anticipated to significantly change noise levels. C','d7e MCVs and SdtiWlpnq QCM S"dA9elTempunny Internet FIWOLOK Findieas_rn IAM 1 Infx7l2t ) 28 6Z ('IINIZ/LZ1fY1)�P'l��-sPmpuii\t7PlOisail3 lausaiul �Lmpduta])sBullW$ I�T+�sNu�S Wesn�wnxwQt'.� aqj uj sloafoad aagjo 142nogjjs `Kguanbasuo3 •julvgj its uegj ssal 13Aa1 s of sj3sdwl aonpai ll}n, will uotjsSIptu pasodoad aqj puu `alts joafoad agl uo spuejlann lsuosuas alt gltne pajsroossu anjsA lgjtgsg Hoot aqj `paloajjg ease jlsws aqj of anp aoutw aq Ipm sptmljann leuoseas of sjoudwt loafoad jetjualod •sa[oods paaan03 d)SWfS of sloudwt antjsjnwna jueag!uBts ui llnsaa jou ll!m joafoad aqj `aajeus uotjeAjosuoa dDSWfS oql jo uotjujuawaldw[ gjtm `Sjjuanbasuo:) -aoleals uotjuAiasuoa IDSWfS aqj juawaldwt of Xla)itl oslu aau sooanosaa luoiSolotq of sloeduat .tejtwls ql!m ease aqj ut sloafoad aagjo `uotjtppe uj sa}cads pasano3 d�SY1lfS of sj3sdu[t aA[j$jnLun3 oz[wtuiw of padojanap suns sngj pus `SjunoD utnbso f usS ut llnnoa2 pajoafold jo uotjwaptsuo3 w padolanap Senn ABalt,ajs uolleA.[asuoa dDSWfS a4,1• •)Wajsals uotjeA.tasuoo'jos WfS alp jo uotjuluawajdu[t s,fqtD aqj qSno.tgl losjjo aq lltnn uotlsluawaldwl 13ofoad woaj 3ulllnsas soomosai Ivolsolo[g of slaudw[ `spuellann leuosuas of sjosdwt letlualod aqj aoj jdwxg -spuupam juuoseas puu `luj[guq 2ut1sau s�lnneq syosutsnnS `luno 5utnnoaanq of slo-odwt juiluolod puu `satoads snpls jutaads jsaanas aoj jel[ge4 gut8eao; aptnoad gotgnn `puslsssa2 an[jsuuou pus (spjugoio pus sdoaa nnoa) spuel lumljnotvft, ssol jo kjlsetucxd lslsuoo pinonn 13afoad pasodoad aql woaj szzmosat jsai2ojolq of spiodull saalnosag 18313010M 6"9 •,'4jjunb sajuA of sloudwt assanps aAtlsjnwn3 ut llnsas jou pinom pus sasnseaw a3ueuajuteat i4tlenb solum awes aqj oilnpun of pwinbaa aq pinonn tpoZ ut sjaafoad 3Ailslnwno .taglo legj pajsdtatluu st lj -alts loofoad agl uo iajenn[uaojs,(aAuoa pus utuluoo of ,,ltjiqu sloafoad aqj molts pus saanjeaj u2isap aluaodioow lsnw lusotjdds joafoad aq,p -saanj3najs 30Me anuoo 30 14joudvo aqj paooxa p1no3 `salts sagjo gjtnA uoquutgwoo ut `salts laafoad aqj wo[j jjouna aql -dddMS aql jo uotlujuawaldu[t gSnoagl paztwtutw aq pjnom laofoad pasodoad gj•lo uotlejuawaldwt woaj llnsw pinonn lugj aalummiols of sloudun lieuotluaado pus uotjanajsuoo -salts joafoad aqj uo paluaaua9 aalunn utaols jo junoux aqj ut asuaaout us pus ease ooLgins snotAzadu[t ut aw wou[ ue ui llnsaa pluonn jaafosd pasodoad aqj f4jjvnj)as;gam Pug A3010.1PAH L'9 -joudun 3t�Iojoa5 antjejnuzn3 jus31Jtugts e of u01ingt4juo3 ajgssaptsuoa L, alsw jou pjnonn joafoad aqj jo uo[luluawaldwt pus `alis lao fond all uo juasaad jou asu saouelswna.no asaq j uotjsool alts Flo uu 3o X2o[oa2 aqj l3ajju pjnoa loofoad aqj woa3 sloaga juawdojaAap aqj aaagAi ao `saae aA[suajxa us jams jgBtw (aptispusj antsssw `auoz jlnuj -21-a) aanjeaj aiSojoa2 maul u asagna an000 pinonn uo[leztluaauaB stgl of uotldooxa aql -uotltpuoo jasdwi aA[jujmmno antsualxa ue ajuaa3 of autgwoo jou op pus suotleool jetleds alaaostp of pauguoa axe slosdwt jeot8ojoa5 aauts `sauepunog ssj3afoad t, puoAaq au3 puajxa ,fljsaaua2 jou scop X2oloaS aoj josdw[ antjs[numo lsgualod aU f4la1w5las PON s1j0S `LU100-9 9'9 •joudwt saaanosaa luoi2olojuoojvd puu luanlln3 antjujnwno luuogtuOts Xuu of aingtajuoo lou pinonn loafosd alts -laeduti alquptoAuun pus juuatjtu2ts ,Sue ut ljt+saa jou pjnom slaafosd pasodoad aqj Isasnsuaw uotjegtltw pasodoad agl jo uotjeluawaldwt gl!M •satltloglnu aadoad aqj of palaodaa si su[ewaa uswng JO faaAooaa aqj jugj Sutansua puu suasu uotjanalsuo3 jo 2utaoguoui agl apnjout pinom uatls$tjiw ganS •sa3anosaa ls3t2o[oluoalud put, juanllna paUquaptun joajojd of pa)ajsap saanseaw uotjs2tjtw antsuajxa of joafgns aq pinom slaofosd aAtjejnwn3 all `sjoafoad pasodoad aql a3itl `aanamO jj •sutewaa uswnq pue `saaanosaa luot2ololuoolud puu juot2ojoaugoJu pa>jiluaptun of sloedwt juuoIjtu2ts ut llnsaa pjnoa slaafoad antlslnwno pus joafoad pasodoad aqj gltnn polstoosse satltA[l3e u0113nalSu03 saaanosaH lvaivololuoalid Pura lninMna 5•9 aI� NOIlVX7NNV IgD7 soot a390110 SNOI.LVa3GISNOJ ONIOIaBRAO 10 i11I3WaIV.IS (INV SONIUNIII VO'dJ 'JNI 'S31V1,70SSV VS1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION KIR area could result in impacts to similar wetlands, the project will not result in significant cumulative affect to seasonal wetlands. 6.10 Hazards and Hazardous Materials As two of several residential developments within the City of Lodi, the project would contribute to increase in the generation of household hazardous wastes in the City. Implementation of the proposed projects would help to ensure that existing hazardous materials contamination on the project site is remediated. Given the residential nature of the proposed projects, it is unlikely that the project would involve the use or storage of large quantities of hazardous materials or waste. The proposed project would not result in significant cumulative hazardous materials impact. 6.11 Utilities Development of the proposed project, in addition to other future development in the area would cumulatively increase the demand on utility providers and infrastructures in the project area. None of the various public services or utilities analyzed would experience significant impacts that could not be mitigated to a less -than -significant level. As such, no significant cumulative impact would result. A water analysis has determined that there is enough water to serve the proposed projects. Additionally, there is enough capacity within the City's wastewater system to serve the project site. The proposed project would require the construction of connections to the water system, wastewater system, and storm drainage facilities. The project applicant would be required to pay its fair share to construct any improvements needed to serve the project, and would therefore not contribute to a cumulative impact. 6.12 Public Services Development of the proposed project, in conjunction with planned future area development would cumulatively increase the demand on public services in the project area. None of the public services analyzed would experience significant unavoidable impacts with the implementation of mitigation measures. The proposed project includes a potential site for a future fire station and the City will fund additional fire department staff via the General Fund and other available revenue from the project. The project would result in need for additional police staff to meet service ratios. However, the police department currently does not meet service ratios, and the need for additional staff would result in a fiscal impact, not as a significant environmental impact. In addition to paying applicable school impact fees, acreage is provided within the Westside and SW Gateway sites for school facilities. It is assumed that other cumulative projects would be required to pay school mitigation fees, which would reduce the cumulative impact to school services to a less -than -significant level. 6.13 "Visual Resources The proposed project would transform an area that is currently land in agricultural use to residential and public uses. This development would be considered similar in type and density to development immediately adjacent to the west. Removing land in agricultural production and replacing it with residential development would result in a significant and unavoidable visual impact. However, the City of Lodi General Plan identifies the project sites as areas to be developed. As such, the project site would not result in a significant cumulative visual impact. CM-119NU and Seraagslp %LL [ SettingslT—pomy IWDe FflalOLKY&indings_ftnat.dac (I6aMMM) 30 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. C@QA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LORI ANNEXATI4314 FIR 6.13 Energy hnplementation of the proposed project would result in an increase in energy consumption. Demolition and construction activities associated with the project would result in the nonreversible use of energy resources such as fuel and bound energy in the form of construction materials. The installation of the new electrical substation, located on a parcel adjacent to the north portion of the SW Gateway site and south of Kettleman Lane, would be designed to accommodate the additional electrical demand of the proposed project. Energy conservation standards contained in the California Code of Regulations (Title 24) for new residential and commercial development would ensure that the new development would be designed to reduce wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary use of electricity. Energy consumed for transportation would be subject to the fuel efficiency standards for vehicles in California, which are designed to reduce wasteful and inefficient energy use in private vehicles. The project would include pedestrian and bicycle design elements to further reduce the consumption of energy for transportation. The inclusion of parks and schools within walkable distances from the resi- dential areas within the project sites would reduce vehicle miles traveled associated with the imple- mentation of the proposed project. The proposed project would result in an increase in demand for energy, but established State and fed- eral standards are in place to curtail wasteful, inefficient and unnecessary use of energy. SECTION 7: FEASIBILITY OF PROTECT ALTERNATIVES 7.1 Project Alternatives The Draft EIR included four alternatives: the No Project/No Build Alternative, the Agricultural Residential Alternative, the Reduced Density Alternative, and the Increased High Density Alternative. Each of these alternatives discusses on the development of the Westside and SW Gateway project sites; it is assumed for each of these alternatives that the Other Areas to be Annexed would not be developed at this time. The City Council hereby concludes that the Draft EIR sets forth a reasonable range of alternatives to the Westside Project and SW Gateway Project so as to foster informed public participation and informed decision making. The City Council finds that the alternatives identified and described in the Draft EIR were considered and further finds them to be infeasible for the specific economic, social, or other considerations set forth below pursuant to CEQA section 21081(c). 7.1.1 No Project/No Band Alternative. The No Project/No Build alternative assumes that the project sites would generally remain in their existing conditions and would not be subject to develop- ment. Under this alternative, the project sites would not be incorporated into the City of Lodi, and existing agricultural use of the project site would continue. There would be no structures constructed on the project sites, and all existing structures would remain. The schools, aquatic center, parks, and park basins would not be built. Findinas. The No Project/No Build alternative would not achieve any of the objectives for the Westside and SW Gateway projects. This alternative would not result in the significant unavoidable environmental impact related to implementation of the project. However, the No ProjectlNo Build gad �pn�Lmal Solin'p7empunry [AI—xi F 1c0LK3Tinding5_fina1.&o u(V27aX 6) 31 ZE (9MULTAM-PMW0sgpu53lE7PlO-ff3 PW41ul 4wjDd a,LlsWLnVn Mhnd1 s8 WS Pm'�wu��uoQ�;� anllt,uualld lt,lluapisag [t,u�lnolj2'b' aql sloafa� 1!0 aql `alojaaaq L -salllPot,j Iguoligaa301 jo;unozug auras aql uo saes loogos aplAoid jou pinom aAliguaal[t, STIR `,C[[t,uolllpPV 'SOMloT Tuuollt,anau pug sl!un Buisnog nmaj Xlluuorglu2islo uorlgau3 agl ul l[nsau p[noM aAllguualTV MU •uolluaiap aa;em uruols aoj Xllot,dt,o ulsuq ait,nbape aplAozd • -ails l3afwd aqi jo glnos iagmj saliluatuv ut,ralsapad put, lt,uollt,aaow o; sl3auu03 lt,gl alls Toa food aql unpin ,auids a[oXorq�ubn.4sapod meds undo„ ut, do[anaG • •SivaPlsaa 1po-T J0glo su llam se i3afoid pasodoad aq;3o sjuap!saa aangnj anaas pinom jugj aj!s 100435 s do[anaQ • •!po-I3o Alli aql ulgl!m suolldo 2uisnoq ajgVPJ0JJR ap!Aoud • Vol ,lo fq!D aql ulgl!m spaau 5ulsnoq laaur of s --d,!4 gulsnoq c4!lunb O!q jo 4isuanlp u dolanaQ • •loa•oud emopl) lsoMpnoS -uopualap ualem uuols ioj fq!oudt,o urseq apnbapu ap!Aoad • aaivao olit,nbt, ut, Jo luarudolanap aunlnj aiepowwonog Pln03 lggl alls u aprnoJd • -ails loafoud aql jo q;nos aaglurrj sallruaum ut,ulsopad pug lt,uollgauoau of sloauuoa it,gl alis loofoud aql ulgj!m ,,aulds [g.quao ajoXolq/ut,!.rlsopod aoeds undo„ ut, dojanaQ • -sluaplsau 1po7 uaglo su Ilam su laafozd pasodwd aql jo sluaplsar oinlytj aAjas pinom lugl alis loogas u dolanaQ • •lpo-1 to f4lD aql urgllm suolldo Suisnoq ajgepuajlt, aplAoud • '!Poll jo f4!3 aql ulgllm spaau [lulsnoq laaw of sodfil ilulsnoq X4111enb gglq So gsaantp t, dolanaU • •13a.oud aplslsaM :p3 foud pasodoid atll jo saAlloafgo Suimollo3 oql analg3e lou p[nom anlleuuollt, Tglluoplsa-d I-eiminoiffV aq j urpuld -salts loafoad aql uo papn[oui aq p1nom sumggwd ou `.ranannopl -ails laa fond aqi olu! pait,uoduooul aq p[nom t,art, 31.tud amos pue ialuao agv be aq,l, -alis loafoud aql uo sloogos Cue jo uollanalsuoa aql apnlau! lou pinom aAget ualle slgd, ,lpo-Ilo �I!D aql Xq paxauup aq pinom salts ,�umalug MS Put, aplslsaM oql grog -shun 09 aql alepotumooae of su os paonpai aq p[nom a2niot, aql lnq `al!s looford oql uo in000 l[!ls pinom Sam [Ean;lnaiaV -ails Xvmaltg MS aql uo s;tun 0V pue alis ap!slsaM aql uo shun 0Z Xialguzlxozddg ta!M `silun 0930 lt,lol t, ul ilnsaa pinom siLU -sarou 0l uad Thin Tt,uolllPPe T Molt, Plnom g3rgne palut,a2 oq pinom snuoq X4lsuop d •saim 0Z jad Thin I Jo Alsuap t, it, Sulsnoq luguoplsw ap!Aozc[ pinom put, `alis 13ofoad aqi jo jsjoereg3 lumllnolag ata uimau p[nom anrlmallu [uguoprsa-d lgar4jnorfdy aqd, •aAgetuallX lsyuappag lgrnpn;)U3V -aAllt,uaallg P[!ng oNA39f61d ON aql si3afau,(llD aql aaojaiQgjL Sall![l3u3 TBuoligajaw ao Ouisnoq ,Cut, 3o uollonulsuoo aql u! Tina lou p[nom anlleivagr 2118 NOI.LVXBNNv IGGI 9002 U3901Jo SNOfiV118(iLSNDJ 9NlalVa'aA0 AD 1N31Ai8,LV1S aNV S`JNIaNIA VOa3 ':]N[ 'S9LLvIjO5Sv VS1 L$A ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION BIR 11:1.3 The Redaced Da$aity Altmma#ve. The Reduced Density alternative would reduce the density of the SW Gateway project and develop the Westside project site as the proposed project woald. The Westside project would include 370 low density units, 195 medium density units, and 175 high density units. In additiom, the Westside project would include the aquatic center, 20 acres of parks and park/basins, and 10.6 acres school site. The SW Gateway site would have approximately 681 low density homes, which would average three units per gross acre. The SW Gateway site would include approximately 30 acres of parks and parklbasins, but would not include a school site. 11DdingE. The Reduced Vensity Alternative would achieve all of the objectives for the Westside project. However, the project would not achieve the following objectives for the SW Gateway project: • Develop a diversity of high quality housing types to meet housing needs within the City of Lodi. • Provide affordable busing options within the City of Lodi. • Develop a school side that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other Lodi residents. • Provide adequate ba$in capacity for storm water detention. Wen compared to the ptoposed project, the Reduced Density alternative would result in a reduction 4. the nun*er of units a4d number of school sites. Therefore, the City rejects the Reduced Density erive. 74.4 >laeeeaset! Him aati ky Aberve. This alternative would change the mix of housing units os both the Westside and Gateway sites. These sites would have low density units at a density of 3 4welling units per acre, and high density units at a density of 25 dwelling units per acre. This would rebult in 717 low density units and 1,600 high density units, for a total of 2,317 units. There would be no medium density units incorporated into the project sites. The Westside project site would include the following components: 258 low density units (86 acres); 600 high density units (24 acres); one school site; one aquatic center; one site for a future fire station; and 20 acres of parks and park/basins. The SW Gateway site would include the following components: 459 low density units (153 acres); 1,000 high density units (40 acres); one school site; and 30 acres of parks and park/basins. Fedi. The Increased High -Density alternative would meet all the objectives and would result in a t*l of 2,317 units. Howtver, this alternative would not provide any medium density housing options. The Housing Element discusses the desire for a mixed of residential land uses, which this alternative would not provide. Therefore, the City rejects the Increased High -Density alternative. 73 Enviroamentally$uperior Alternative CISQA requires the idenWication of the environmentally superior alternative in an )SIR. Of the four a*rnadves analyzed abo0ve, the No Project/No Build alternative is considered the environmentally serior alternative in the strict sense that the environmental impacts associated with its implementa- tion would be the least of all the scenarios examined (including the proposed project). While this alternative would be environmentally superior in the technical sense that contribution to these afore- mentioned impacts would not occur, this alternative would not meet many of the project objectives. C ulpli..,a t sae pn i SawoptrempmV inwm Fiwz KW mmAs_ nnat.d. (lwnrm)61 33 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION EIR In cases like this where the No Project/No Build alternative is the environmentally superior alterna- tive, CEQA requires that the second most environmentally superior alternative be identified. The Agricultural Residential alternative would be considered the second most environmentally superior alternative. Under this alternative, there would be a reduction in potential land use impacts as the majority of the site would remain in agricultural production. This alternative would result in signifi- cantly fewer trips, and associated air quality emission, than compare to the proposed project. As there would be limited development on the site, the potential impact to biological resources and water quality would be reduced. Additionally, this alternative would create significantly reduced demand on public services and utilities than the proposed project. However, this project would not meet the pro- ject objectives of providing increased residential opportunities is the City of Lodi, as well as provid- ing parks and public facilities. Finding. The City finds that the Agricultural Residential alternative would be environmentally superior to the project, but would not provide increased residential opportunities in the City of Lodi or provide parks and public facilities. Additionally, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make this alternative infeasible. Therefore, the City rejects these alternatives, and further adopts the specific overriding considerations found in Section S. SECTION 8: STA'T'EMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, Iegal, social, technological, or other benefits of a project against its unavoidable risks when determining whether to approve a project. If the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of the project outweigh the unavoidable adverse environmental effects, those effects may be considered acceptable. CEQA requires the agency to support, in writing, the specific reasons for considering a project accep- table when significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened. Those reasons must be based on substantial evidence in the EIR or elsewhere in the administrative records In accordance with the requirements of CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines, the City finds that the mitigation measures identified in the Final EIR and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, when implemented, avoid or substantially lessen many of the significant effects identified in the Draft and Final EIR. To the extent any mitigation measures recommended in the EIR and/or proposed project could not be incorporated, such mitigation measures are infeasible because they would impose restrictions on the project and would prohibit realization of specific economic, social, and other benefits that this City Council finds outweigh the unmitigated impacts. The City Council further finds that except for the proposed project, all other alternatives set forth in the EIR are infeasible because they would prohibit the realization of project objectives and/or of specific economic, social and other benefits the City Council finds outweigh any environmental benefits of the alternatives. 4 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093(a) 5 CEQA Guidelines, Section 15093(b) C.lDppamo and 5eltluts4pnVi M 9dth %T=pom? Irm—t Fi1mfALKAPindWgs_0W] dx (IS127fNg1fi} 34 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. CEQA FINDINGS AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS OCTOBER 2006 LODI ANNEXATION Elk Nonetheless, several significant impacts of the project are unavoidable even after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. The significant unavoidable impacts are identified and discussed in Section 4 of these Findings. The City further specifically finds that notwithstanding the disclosure of the significant unavoidable impact, there are specific overriding economic, legal, social, and other reasons for approving this project. Those reasons are as follows: a. The project will develop a diversity of high quality housing types to meet housing needs within the City of Lodi. b. The project will provide affordable housing options within the City of Lodi c. The project will provide park areas and recreational uses that help meet park standards within the City of Lodi. d. The project will develop school sites that would serve future residents of the proposed project as well as other Lodi residents. e. The project will develop an "open space pedestrian/bicycle spine" within the project sites that connects to potential recreational and pedestrian amenities further south of the project site. f. The project will provide a site that could accommodate future development of an aquatic center. g. The project will provide a potential site for a future fire station. h. The project will provide adequate basin capacity for storm water detention. i. The project will ensure orderly development pursuant to LAF'CO standards. j. The project will avoid creation of a County island. k. The project will facilitate future residential development of these parcels within the City's jurisdiction. 1. The project will generate revenue for the City. The City finds that property taxes from residential areas are important to the City's revenues in order to maintain and provide services to the community. In addition, the Community Facilities District (CFD) created for this project would insure that the City is not overburdened by public services associated with this project. On balance, the City finds that there are specific considerations associated with the project that serve to override and outweigh the project's significant unavoidable effects. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093(b), the adverse effects of the project are considered acceptable. C.n SmWps Mu," 5cni.Wy Te pop y i ni oLxltF��a;��_r�ai,aa (IOR11206) 35 ATTACHMENT ,6 MI'T'IGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM This Mitigation and Monitoring Reporting Program (MMRP) lists the mitigation measures recommended in the Lodi Annexation EIR for the proposed projects and identifies monitoring schedule, mitigation responsibility, and monitoring procedures. Monitoring and reporting details are only provided for mitiga- tion measures necessary to avoid or reduce significant impacts of the project. Table I presents the mitigation measures identified for the project. Each mitigation measure is numbered with a symbol indicating the topical section to which it pertains, a hyphen, and the impact number. For exanWle, CULT -3 is the third mitigation measure identified in the Cultural and Paleontological Resources analysis. The Hirst column of Table l provides the mitigation measure(s) as identified in Chapter IV of the Draft EIR for the proposed project. The second column identifies the monitoring schedule. The third column, "Mitigation Responsibility," identifies the party(ies) responsible for carrying out the required action(s). The fourth column, "Monitoring Procedures," identifies the party(ics) ultimately responsible for ensuring that the mitigation measure is implemented. (` V)anu vM WW SOAmo paUcW 6eTuWkTm wmy lm —t Fik0d0LK30nal_MWMP,dw (IOMPOU6) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2906 Table 1: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Mitigation Measures Monitoring Midwition Schedule Rmnansihili A. LAND USE, AGRICULTURE AND PLANNING POLICY LU -1: To reduce agricultural/residential land use incompah- Prior to awoval of Applicant bilities, the following shall be required: I Tentative Map(s) and a. The applicant shall inform and notify prospective buyers in writing, prior to purchase, about existing and on-going agricultural activities in the immediate area in the form of a disclosure statement. The notifications shall disclose that the residence is located in an agricultural area sub- ject to ground and aerial applications of chemical and early morning or nighttime farm operations which may create noise, dust, et cetera. The language and format of such notification shall be reviewed and approved by the City Community Development Department prior to rec- ordation of final map(s). Each disclosure statement shall be recorded at the County Recorder's Office and ac- knowledged with the signature of each prospective owner. Additionally, each prospective owner shall also be notified of the City of Lodi and the County of San Joaquin Right -to -Farm Ordinances. b. The conditions of approval for the tentative map(s) shall include requirements ensuring the approval of a suitable design and the installation of a landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls around the perimeter of the project site affected by the potential conflicts in land use to minimize conflicts between project residents, non- residential uses, and adjacent agricultural uses prior to occupancy of adjacent houses. c. Prior to recordation of the final map(s) for homes adja- cent to existing agricultural operations, the applicant shall submit a detailed wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Development Depart- ment. C:'Dxc ,is wed Sdw,p n La l S tti.9ff npx ry 2w—a Fi1.0LK3%AuI_MMU doe t [ V2712W6) MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EER Monitoring Procedure The project applicant shall pre- pare: recordation of the Final a) A disclosure notification Map(s) regarding the existing agri- cultural activities which must be reviewed and approved by the Community Development Department and signed by each prospective owner; b) Tentative maps that show suitable design and instal- lation of a landscaped open space buffer area, fences, and/or walls that minimize conflicts between residential uses and existing agricultural operations; and c) A detailed wall and fencing plan for review and approval by the Community Devel- opment Department. Comments Datel Initials LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 1006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNExATION E1R C.0—mis acid Satinjpga Lo J Satinp%Taapa y Inrema Fila%OLV%Final_MMRP.dw (10x272906) 1411 tlan Maoitorin Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures ScbWWW p Initials LU -2: Prior to issuance of a building permit after the first Prior to issuance of a Applicant The applicant shall either: quarter of the combined building permits for the Westside building permit after I ) Identify 392 acres of prime and SW Gateway have been approved, the applicant shall the first quarter of the farmland to protect for at provide and undertake a phasing and financing plan (to be combined Westside and least 15 years that is deter - approved by the City Council) for one of the following miti- SW Gateway building mined appropriate by the gation measures: permits have been City of Lodi, or approved. (1) Identify approximately 392 acres of prime farmland 2) Pay a fee equal to the value (currently not protected or within an easement) to protect of 392 acres to the Central for a period of time to be determined (but not less than Valley Land Trust 15 years) as an agricultural use in a location as deter- J mined appropriate by the City of Lodi in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust; or (2) Pay a fee equal to the value of 392 acres as determined by an independent qualified consultant retained by the City in consultation with the Central Valley Land Trust. The City will determine to whom the fee shall be paid, LU -3: The applicant shall pay all fees associated with termi- Prior to issuance of Applicant The applicant shall pay all fees nating a Williamson Act Contract. building permits for associated with terminating a structures on parcels Williamson Act contract with active Williamson Act Contracts B. TRAFFIC AND CIRCULATION TRANS -1: Each of the following mitigation measures shall Prior to Tentative Applicant The project applicant shall: be implemented to reduce the project's impact on the identi- Subdivision Map 1) Implement the identified fied 16 intersections: approval vehicle trip generation and La: Mitigation Measure AIR -2 identifies measures recom- resulting emission desired by mended by the S VAPCD's "Guide for Assessing and the City; and Mitigating Air Quality Impacts to reduce vehicle trips 2) Prepare a Traffic Mitigation and associated air quality impacts. Implementation of Implementation and Financ- the same measures would also reduce associated traffic ing Plan (for review and impacts. The following are considered to be feasible and approval by the City/City effective in further reducing vehicle trip generation and Council) and implement the resulting emissions from the project and shall be imple- identified improvements, mented to the extent feasible and desired by the City: C.0—mis acid Satinjpga Lo J Satinp%Taapa y Inrema Fila%OLV%Final_MMRP.dw (10x272906) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC'. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR C.-'�i3acume¢ts end SRnnEs'po\Locy,l Septuq,4�Taago�a'y lotcmet Fila�Qii:3lFxia4_MI+B{P.doc 11N27f7006Y MauitorinE hCopdga Maafteiing Procedure Com131AW. s Raw M meow" %ftws • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructure dW includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, dkect pedestrian connections, street trees to shade side- walks, pedestrian safety designs/infrastructure, street furniture and artwork, street lighting and or pedestrian sigrtalfzatioti and sign*. • Provide bicycle enhancing infrastructure thatin- cludes: bikeways/patbs connecting to a bikeway system, secure bicycle parking. • Provide transit enhancing infrastructure that in- cludes: transit shelters, benches, etc., street light- ing, route signs and displays, and/or bus turn- outs/bulbs. • Provide park and ride lots. 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. Such a reduction would help minimize the project's impact. Ib: The implementation of each of the improvements listed in Table IV.13-6 would reduce the impacts to the iden- tified l6 intersections to a less -than -significant level. To mitigate these impacts, the project applicant shall prepare a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table W." for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, the applicant's fair share contribution towards this boprove- ment, how the improvement will be funded including a reimbursement program where appropriate; and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing con- struction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. The Plan may inchAe an Dual monitoring program of the intersections as a tnAhod for C.-'�i3acume¢ts end SRnnEs'po\Locy,l Septuq,4�Taago�a'y lotcmet Fila�Qii:3lFxia4_MI+B{P.doc 11N27f7006Y LSA AssortATEs INc OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LOOT ANNEXATION EIR C.'�Docummis aoe$nungs'wn'Local Snl�gs�Tcmporary Inland Files?OLK31FYml MMRP.doc (10f27'ZOp6} M flon Monitoring Monitoring Mitigation Monitoring Procedure Comments Datel Mitigation Me=Ures Stlirdok lk""adbffityInitials determining the schedule for implementing each im- provement. The Plan shall take into account whether an improvement is already programmed and/or funded in a City or County program (i.e., Lodi Development Impact Mitigation Fee Program, San Joaquin County Regional ' Transportation Impact Fee, Measure K (existing or re- newal program), and San Joaquin Council of Govern- ments Regional Transportation Improvement Program). If an improvement is included in one or more of these programs, the Plan needs to consider whether the pro- grams schedule for the improvement will meet the needs of the project and if not identify alternatives. The Plan shall be submitted to City staff for Teview and City Council approval prior to submittal of a Tentative Subdi- vision Map application. Implementation of Measure TRANS -1 a and TRANS -lb, would mitigate the project's impact on existing conditions to a less -than -significant level. However, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to the automobile, which would conflict with some of the General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. Additionally some of the improvements identified are short-term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more signif- icant long-term improvement is being planned (i.e., recon- struction of the Kettleman Lane/SR 99 interchange). As a result, the project's impact at some intersections may be significant and unavoidable if the City chooses not to imple- ment the recommended mitigation measure. TRANS -2: Implementation of Measure TRANS -la and Prior to Tentative Applicant The project applicant shall: TRANS -Ib, would mitigate the project's contribution to Subdivision Map 1) Implement the identified Cumulative condition to a less -than -significant level at the approval vehicle trip generation and 21 intersections that would be significantly impacted in the resulting emission desired by 2030 Cumulative condition. For the intersections that could the City; and be mitigated to a less -than significant level, the City may decide to not implement select improvements in order to 2) Prepare a Traffic Mitigation avoid trending towards a community that is too orientated to Implementation and Financ- in Plan for review and C.'�Docummis aoe$nungs'wn'Local Snl�gs�Tcmporary Inland Files?OLK31FYml MMRP.doc (10f27'ZOp6} LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM OCTOBER 2006 40n1 ANRiXAT101Y FIR C.`. mummts and SenwRsptV.ocal Sertivps Tempua* interna Fd%0LK3Tinal_M W.dm (10/27120") L MeaiteNng Procedure C®mmtwts DoW li ithds the automobile, which would conflict with some of the appmv d by tate CityfiCity General Plan policies that emphasize pedestrian scale. ) md iv�t the Additionally some of the improvements identified are short- identified improvements. term solutions that the City may not choose to implement if a more significant long-term improvement is being planned ,i [i&, n"mouckm-ofd-K*Wwraa LwWW9W ' chane . C. AIS QUALITY AIR -la: Consistent with Regulation VIII, Fugitive PMIo During demolition, Construction City of Lodi BWWW Division Pmhil"ovs of the SNAPCD, the following controls are grading and construc- Manager staff, as appropriate, shall peri - required to be implemented at all construction sites and as tion Odkaily con" with cons1ruction specifications for the project. representatives to ensure they e All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not coitally with this requirement. 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. ♦ 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. • With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during demolition. * When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effeLlivety wetted to limit vilti * dat emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. C.`. mummts and SenwRsptV.ocal Sertivps Tempua* interna Fd%0LK3Tinal_M W.dm (10/27120") L LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 1006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LORI ANNEXATION 1G11k C.'�➢oewnems a�Se�69��S.ac�Seninge\Temporaryiornoa P$d!OS]t3ff� MMRY.doc (1N27)20➢d} SAW" Mas#+at'� Pr®ee�ure Cells ilN�trl law • All operations shall limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt tion ad}acertt pubhe sheets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accom- pamW by suffwwat w O, liter fit , �ripl t Yk,er - Bions. Use of blower devices is expressly forbidden.) • Following the addition of nmterials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emis- sion utilizing sufficient water or chemical stabi- lizer/suppressant. • Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday. • Any site with 150 or more vehicle trips ;ler day shall prevent carryout and trackout. Additional Control Measures: Construction of the project requires the implementation of control measures set forth under Regulation VIII. The following additional control measures would further reduce construction emissions and should be implemented with the project: • Limit traffic speeds on unpaved roads to 15 mph; • Install sandbags or other erosion control measures to prevent silt runoff to public roadways from sites with a slope greater than I percent; • Install wheel washers for all exiting trucks, or wash off all trucks and equipment leaving the site; • Install wind breaks at windward side(s) of construction area; • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds exceed 20 mph (regardless of windspeed, an owner/operator must comply with Reguhdon VHI's 20 percent opacity limitation); C.'�➢oewnems a�Se�69��S.ac�Seninge\Temporaryiornoa P$d!OS]t3ff� MMRY.doc (1N27)20➢d} LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2084 MITIGATION AND MONITORING RRlORTING PROGRAM LOD1 ANNEXATION EIR C:IDow -r­d SwW$9*eV. W s®oW1%Temp..y ku w KW01x.3Find_M W doc IO'2W20M) Moamrwg me&* *" ProceiRm Comumb Due/ • Limit arca excavation, grading, and other construction activity at any one tune; • Install baserock at entryways for all exiting trucks, and wash off the tires or tracks of all trucks and equipment in da�prd�eieee�iile; � • Suspend excavation and grading activity when winds (instantaneous gusts) exceed 20 mph. AIR -]b: The following construction equipment mitigation mennues are to be mrkirmded at conseuction sites to reduce construction exhaust emissions: • Use electric equipment for construction whenever possible in lieu of fossil fuel -fired equipment; • Properly and routinely maintain all construction equip- ment, as recommended by the manufacturer manuals, to control exhaust emissions; • Shut down equipment when not in use for extended peri- ods of time to reduce emissions associated with idling emissions; • Limit the hours of operation of heavy duty equipment and/or the amount of equipment in use; and • Curtail construction during periods of high ambient pollut- ant conceomhom; this may include cemng of construc- tion activity during the peak -hour of vehicular traffic on adjacent roadways, and "Spare The Air Days" declared by the District. Implementation of these mitigation measures would reduce construction period air quality impacts to a leas4wi, 0i level. C:IDow -r­d SwW$9*eV. W s®oW1%Temp..y ku w KW01x.3Find_M W doc IO'2W20M) LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 3686 MITIGATION AND MON ITORING.JMFORTANG PROGRAM LODI ANIItXATION t1R C��acnmuna amd Sctlin��pd�Loc�1 Sauo�T�panry latanel Fi1c101.1[3�Pioy1_1NMRY.doc [I6'27lZN76) moshaileg Meahwft art COtHts D&W AIR -2: 'the SNAPCD's "Guide for Assessing and Prior to tentative map Applicant City staff verifies that reduced Mitigating Air Quality Impacts" identifies potential awr Ml vehicle htip generation measures mitigation measures for various types of projects. The Guide have been incorporated into the identifies a number of measures to further reducing vehicle Tentative Map. trip paeraWn ate reWWA&, =Woes? IU AW400 measures shall be implemented to the extent feasirble (it is noted that many of these features are already incorporated into the project). • Provide pedestrian enhancing infrastructure that includes: sidewalks and pedestrian paths, direct pedestrian connec- tions, street trees to Shade sidewalks, pedestrian safely 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, ctc., 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, however, ozone precursors would still exceed the significance thresholds. There is no mitigation available with currently feasible technology to reduce the project's regi air quality impact by an additional 54 percent to a less-tbau- significant level. Therefore, the project's regional air quality impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. C��acnmuna amd Sctlin��pd�Loc�1 Sauo�T�panry latanel Fi1c101.1[3�Pioy1_1NMRY.doc [I6'27lZN76) I.SA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION FIR C.lUocu to and SNImgsTnq. [ SeuinvTengaracy 1n*_ [ Fil.\OLUTiail_MM" d- (1Q21AO06i 10 mithwoon MOnitorin Ort1B Monitoring Monitoring Procedure Comments _ _ Date/ Mitigation Measures ScheduleResponslbili Initials A. NOISE NOI-la: Construction activities would need authorization During demolition, Construction City staff verifies that construc- under City issuance of construction permits before any work grading and con- Manager tion activities occur during the could commence on-site. Construction activities shall be struction allowed hours of construction limited to the hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. May activities. through Sunday, consistent with the City's Ordinance. NOI-lb: All stationary noise generating construction equip- ment, such as air compressors and portable power generators, shall be located as far as practical from existing residences. By meeting the hours of construction timeframe and mini- mizing noise from stationary construction equipment, the project will not result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels. N0I-2a: A 6 -foot -high sound wall shall be constructed along Prior to issuance of a Construction City staff shall verify that identi- the rear property line of all lots adjacent to Kettleman Lane, certificate of occupancy Manager fieri mitigation measures have Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. been incorporated into the project plans. N0I-2b: Mechanical ventilation (such as air conditioning) shall be installed in the proposed residential units adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane so that the windows can remain closed for prolonged periods of time. NOI-2c: Windows with a minimum STC rating of STC -32 shall be installed in all units directly exposed to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Harney Lane. N01 -2d: A sound barrier with a minimum height of 5 feet is recommended for all upper floor outdoor use areas directly adjacent to Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento ]toad and Harney Lane. Should the City determine that sound wall and sound barriers are not appropriate or feasible for the proposed project, the impact would be considered significant and unavoidable. C.lUocu to and SNImgsTnq. [ SeuinvTengaracy 1n*_ [ Fil.\OLUTiail_MM" d- (1Q21AO06i 10 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR C.1Dmmm(s and SdtiugslWlV l Scllmgs!Tmpmry Inl— Pi1es!0LK35FiFW SOARPAm ( WIrr2006) 1 1 m tion mosit®-ez til Monitoring NW4pAm Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsiblilty Initials E. CULTURAL AND PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES CULT -L Implementation of either Mitigation Measure Prior to ground distur- Project City staff shall verify that proper CULT -la or CULT -lb would reduce this impact to a less- than -significant level. In order to avoid possible work stop- bance or construction activities Archaeologist documentation and monitoring of the identified archaeological site. page and project delays at the location of the resource, imple- mentation of Mitigation Measure CULT -1(a) is the recom- mended alternative. The mitigation measure selected, how- ever, shall be determined by the lead agency. 1 a. Prior to the initiation of any project ground disturbance or any construction activities within 50 feet of archaeo- logical site LAN -1, it shall be recorded on the appropri- ate State of California Department of Parks and Recrea- tion DPR 523 forms. Prior to ground disturbance at this location, a qualified historical archaeologist shall evalu- ate the site for its eligibility for listing in the California Register. An evaluation shall include archival research and subsurface archaeological testing. If the site is deter- mined to not be eligible for listing in the California Reg- ister, no further study or mitigation of the site is required. Shall the site or intact features within the site be found to be a historic or unique archaeological resource as defined under CEQA, project related impacts to the site shall be mitigated. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasi- ble, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to data recovery exca- vation. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan pre- pared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work. A report of findings shall be submitted to the pro- ject applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central Cali- fornia Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) § 15126.4(b)(3)(C)). This approach would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. 1 b. Prior to any project activities within 50 feet of archaeo- logical site LAN -1, it shall be recorded on the appropri- ate State of California Department of Parks and Recrea- C.1Dmmm(s and SdtiugslWlV l Scllmgs!Tmpmry Inl— Pi1es!0LK35FiFW SOARPAm ( WIrr2006) 1 1 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LORI ANNEXATION EIR C%Dpnumm%and Sdtinp TnJ­1 SeuinVe Tmporary Imi—t Fi[�lDLKY Final MMRPAM (10.2772006) 12 mitkation M IterintR Monitoring MW440" Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule ResDonsibilltv Initials tion DPR523 forms. A qualified archaeologist shall monitor ground disturbing activities within 54 feet of LAN -1 in the Westside project area. Project activity shall cease in the immediate vicinity of a subsurface find and the discovery evaluated and appropriate treat op- tions developed. Archaeological monitors shall be empowered to halt con- struction activities at the location of the discovery to review possible archaeological material and to protect the resource while the finds are being evaluated. Monitoring shall continue until, in the archaeologist's judgment, cultural resources are not likely to be encountered. If subsurface historic archaeological deposits, e.g., wells, privies, and foundations, are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until the archaeological monitor can evalu- ate the finds and make recommendations. It is recom- mended that adverse effects to archaeological discoveries be avoided by project activities. If such deposits cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing on the California Register (i.e., it shall be deter- mined whether they qualify as historical or unique ar- chaeological resources under CEQA). If the deposits are not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan pre- pared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work. A report of findings shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central Cali- fornia Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) §IS12b.4(b)(3)(C)). It is anticipated that this approach will reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. CULT -2: If prehistoric or historic archaeological materials During demolition, Construction City staff shall visit the site and are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 grading, and construe- Manager review findings should prehis- feet of the discovery shall be redirected and a qualified tion toric or historic archaeological C%Dpnumm%and Sdtinp TnJ­1 SeuinVe Tmporary Imi—t Fi[�lDLKY Final MMRPAM (10.2772006) 12 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 . ............ ....... ........ ............ MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LOBI ANNEXATION E1R CAD....M and Seningslpnll.onl Stttinp%T—p..y Internet F',J.10LK71Fina1_MMRP.dx (10/7712006) 13 Nuotim Moaftai Ortin Monitoring MW4UW* Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials archaeologist contacted to evaluate the finds and make rec- materials be identified onsite. ommendations. It is recommended that adverse effects to such deposits be avoided by project activities. if such depos- its cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligi- bilit for listing on the California Register (i.e., it shall be deter- mined whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeo- logical resources under CEQA). If the deposits are not eligi- ble, avoidance is not necessary. If the deposits are eligible, they shall be avoided by adverse effects, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be mitigated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, thorough re- cording on Department of Parks and Recreation form 523 records (DPR 523) or data recovery excavation. If data recovery excavation is appropriate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to FCB, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center (CCR Title 14(3) 15126.4 3 C . CULT -3: Prior to the implementation of any future discre- Prior to any discre- Project City staff shall review field sur- tionary project within the Other Areas to be Annexed, a tionary project within Applicant vey results and shall verify proper cultural resources field survey shall be conducted. If cultural the Other Area to be documentation and action should resources are identified in the additional annexation parcels, Annexed cultural resources be identified. it is recommended that such resources be documented on the appropriate DPR 523 forms and that adverse effects to such resources be avoided by project activities. If impacts to cultural resources cannot be avoided, they shall be evaluated for their eligibility for listing in the California Register (i.e., it shall be determined whether they qualify as historical or unique archaeological resources under CEQA). If the resource(s) is not eligible, avoidance is not necessary. If the resource(s) is eligible, adverse effects shall be avoided, or, if avoidance is not feasible, the adverse effects shall be miti- gated. Mitigation may include, but is not limited to, Historic American Buildings Survey (HAGS) documentation for built environment resources and data recovery excavation for CAD....M and Seningslpnll.onl Stttinp%T—p..y Internet F',J.10LK71Fina1_MMRP.dx (10/7712006) 13 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LOD1 ANNEXATION EIA C.'.Dmummits and SeuinpVn%a I Sddnp\T=pauy Wmet Fi1dgLUTInal_MM".&c (10/77/1006) 14 atie"R itorint Re ertia Monitoring Schedule Midlation Responsibility Monitoring Procedure Comments _ Date/ Initials Mitigation Measures archaeological sites. If data recovery excavation is appro- priate, the excavation must be guided by a data recovery plan prepared and adopted prior to beginning the data recovery work, and a report of findings shall be submitted to the pro- ject applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central C liforaia Information Center CCR Title 14 (3) 15126.4 3 C . CULT -4: If human remains are encountered, work within 25 During demolition, Construction City staff shall review and verify feet of the discovery will be redirected and the County Coro- grading and construc- Manager that proper documentation and ner notified immediately. At the same time, an archaeologist tion actions should human remains be will be contacted to assess the situation. If the human re- identified. mains are of Native American origin, the Coroner must notify the Native American Heritage Commission within 24 hours of this identification. The Native American Heritage Commission will identify a Most Likely Descendant {MLD} to inspect the site and provide recommendations for the proper treatment of the remains and associated grave goods. Upon completion of the assessment, the archaeologist shall prepare a report documenting the methods and results, and provide recommendations for the treatment of the human remains and any associated cultural materials, as appropriate and in coordination with the recommendations of the MLD. The report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi, and the Central California Information Center. It is anticipated that implementation of Mitigation Measure CULT4 will reduce impacts to human remains to less -than - significant levels. CULT -5: If ground disturbing activity is anticipated below During ground dis- Project Pale- City staff shall verify that pre - the project area soil layer, the initial ground disturbance turbing activities below ontologist field monitoring preparation has below that depth in geologic units shall be monitored by a the project area soil occurred and that the recorn- qualified paleontologist. Subsequent to monitoring this initial layer mendations have been incorpo- ground disturbance, the qualified paleontologist will make rated into the proposed project. recommendations regarding further monitoring based on the initial findings. This can include, but is not limited to, continued monitoring, periodic reviews of ground disturbance below project area soil layers, or no further monitoring. C.'.Dmummits and SeuinpVn%a I Sddnp\T=pauy Wmet Fi1dgLUTInal_MM".&c (10/77/1006) 14 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIB C"Doc m N smd Sddagsl wlL cal Sett ngstia Wuy lut d Filus OLV Fim1_MMRP,doc (10V27120%) 15 M111120tadlemn M itorin R ortkn Monitoring mids"M Monitoring Procedure Comments Date) Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials Pre -field monitoring preparation by a qualified paleontolo- gist shall take into account specific details of project construction plans as well as information from available paleontological, geological, and geotechnical studies. Limited subsurface investigations maybe appropriate for defining areas of paleontological sensitivity prior to ground disturbance. If paleontological resources are encountered during project activities, all work within 25 feet of the discovery shall be redirected until the paleontological monitor has evaluated the resources, prepared a fossil locality form documenting them, and made recommendations regarding their treatment. If paleontological resources are identified, it is recommended that such resources be avoided by project activities. Paleontological monitors must be empowered to halt construction activities within 25 feet of the discovery to review the possible paleontological material and to protect the resource while it is being evaluated. If avoidance is not feasible, adverse effects to such resources shall be mitigated. Mitigation can include data recovery and analysis, prepara- tion of a report and the accession of fossil material recovered to an accredited paleontological repository, such as the UCMP. Monitoring shall continue until, in the paleontologist's judgment, paleontological resources are no longer likely to be encountered. Upon project completion, a report shall be prepared documenting the methods and results of monitor- ing. Copies of this report shall be submitted to the project applicant, the City of Lodi Planning Department, and to the reposiLoa where fossils are accessioned. C"Doc m N smd Sddagsl wlL cal Sett ngstia Wuy lut d Filus OLV Fim1_MMRP,doc (10V27120%) 15 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION E1R Mideadon Monitorin Re ortin Comments Date/ Monitoring M"ptWu Monitoring Procedure Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility Initials F. GEOLOGY SOILS AND SEISMICITY GEO- I a: Each project's conditions of approval shall require Prior to approval of Project The City staff shall verify that the the project be designed according to the most recent CBC i grading plans Architect) project meets the most recent and UBC Seismic Zone 3 requirements, applicable local Engineer CBC and UBC Seismic 3 re - codes, and be in accordance with the generally accepted quirements, and that the design - standard for geotechnical practice for seismic design in level geotechnical investigation Northern California. recommendations are incorpo- rated into the construction and grading pians GEO-Ib: Prior to the approval of grading plans, the project applicant shall perform design -level geotechnical investiga- tions and incorporate all recommendations into the project construction documents and grading plans. GEO-2: If the project includes buried metal components, a Prior to issuance of a Project City staff shall verify that a corrosion engineer shall be retained to design corrosion building permit Engineer design corrosion protections protection systems appropriate for the project sites to be system has been incorporated into approved by the Corrununity Development D ent. the proposed project, if required. GEO-3: Prior to issuance of a building permit for the SW Prior to issuance of a Construction Prior to issuance of a building Gateway site, the project applicant shall include the over- building permit for the Manager/ permit, City staff shall verify that excavation and replacement of the undocumented fills in SW Gateway Project Project undocumented fill has been accordance with the earthwork, grading, filling and compac- Engineer removed from the project site in tion recommendations of the Preliminary Geotechnical accordance with the recom- Investigation of the Gateway Residential Development in mendations of the Preliminary Lodi, preformed by Lowney Associates, November 12, 2004. Geotechnical Investigation of the Gateway Residential Devel- opment in Lodi, preformed by Lowney Associates, November 12, 2004. C Dwm s -d saa.W*.now sa/pp�Tr ,wy I—e e;I. ar_I Ti-I_MM"e . (I WM006) 16 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR C.0 -is and Sd imps n'l. of 5ddngs�Tmpasary E.I mel Ale 0LK3Tim1_MM".dM (10127/2006) 17 Miftsdon Mentor' rd Monitoring Nj#gWWg Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule R onsibili initials G. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY HYD -1: Implementation of the following two-part mitiga- Prior to approval of Project Appli- City staff shall verify that the tion measure would reduce potential impacts associated with final grading and drain- i cant/Project Master Utility Plan complies with increased peak runoff volumes to a less -than -significant age plans z Engineer the City's storm water require- leveL ments la: As a condition of approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the projects, the Public Works depart- ment shall verify that the Master Utility Plan for the Westside and SW Gateway sites will comply with the City's stormwater requirements. lb: Prior to the approval of the final grading and drainage plans for the SW Gateway and Westside projects and any subsequent development applications that may be proposed for the Other Areas to be Annexed, a hydrau- lic analysis shall be provided to the Public Works De- partment for verification that implementation of the proposed drainage plans would comply with the City's storm water requirements. HYD -2: The project proponent for each development project Prior to Construction Project Appli- The City Public Works Depart - shall prepare a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan cant/Project ment shall review and approve (SWPPP) designed to reduce potential impacts to surface Engineer the SWPPP and drainage plan water quality through the construction period of the project. prior to approval of the grading The SWPPP must be maintained on-site and made available plan. to City inspectors and/or RWQCB staff upon request. The SWPPP shall include specific and detailed BMPs designed to mitigate construction -related pollutants. At minimum, BMPs shall include practices to minimize the contact of construc- tion materials, equipment, and maintenance supplies (e.g., fuels, lubricants, paints, solvents, adhesives) with storm water. The SWPPP shall specify properly designed central- ized storage areas that keep these materials out of the rain. C.0 -is and Sd imps n'l. of 5ddngs�Tmpasary E.I mel Ale 0LK3Tim1_MM".dM (10127/2006) 17 LSA ASSOCIATES. INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION FIR C. D- ­u and SWingsVnUa al Swmgs'.T—po..y ]meas Files OLK37iml_MMU.doe (LO/2712D%) 18 NNA"don Monkerim Rtmird Monitoring mi"Po" Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Rgsponsibility Initials An important component of the storm water quality protec- tion effort is the knowledge of the site supervisors and work- ers. To educate on-site personnel and maintain awareness of the importance of storm water quality protection, site super- visors shall conduct regular tailgate meetings to dieem pollution prevention. The frequency of the meetings and required personnel attendance list shall be specified in the SWPPP. The SWPPP shall specify a monitoring program to be imple- mented by the construction site supervisor, which must include both dry and wet weather inspections. In addition, in accordance with State Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 2061-046, monitoring would be required during the construction period for pollutants that may be present in the runoff that are "not visually detectable in run- off." RWQCB and/or City personnel, who may make unan- nounced site inspections, are empowered to levy consid- erable fines if it is determined that the SWPPP has not been properly prepared and implemented. BMPs designed to reduce erosion of exposed soil may include, but are not limited to: soil stabilization controls, watering for dust control, perimeter silt fences, placement of hay bales, and sediment basins. The potential for erosion is generally increased if grading is performed during the rainy season as disturbed soil can be exposed to rainfall and storm runoff. If grading must be conducted during the rainy season, the primary BMPs selected shall focus on erosion control; that is, keeping sediment on the site. End -of -pipe sediment control measures (e.g., basins and traps) shall be used only as secondary measures. If hydroseeding is selected as the pri- mary soil stabilization method, then these areas shall be seeded by September 1 and irrigated as necessary to ensure that adequate root development has occurred prior to October 1. Entry and egress from the construction site shall be care- fully controlled to minimize off-site tracking of sediment. Vehicle and equipment wash -down facilities shall be designed to be accessible and functional during both dry and wet conditions. C. D- ­u and SWingsVnUa al Swmgs'.T—po..y ]meas Files OLK37iml_MMU.doe (LO/2712D%) 18 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION ETR C.'Docume and Sd ings'Vid. J SwmVg T®pmwy Inxmo FiW0LK3Tim1_MMU.dm (10,2712006) 19 _ Miti tion MssitoriftorEio Monitoring MIN041" Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ W Mitigation Measures Schedule Res oility Initials The City Public Works Departntent shall review and approve the SWPPP and drainage plan prior to approval of the grad- ing plan. City staff may require more stringent storm water treatment measures, at their discretion. Implementation of this mitigation would reduce the level of significance of this impact to a less -than -significant level. HYD -3: Each SWPPP shall include provisions for the proper Prior to construction Project The City Public Works Depart - management of construction -period dewatering. At mini- Engineer ment shall review and approve mum, all dewatering shall be contained prior to discharge to the SWPPP to ensure proper allow the sediment to settle out, and filtered, if necessary to provisions for dewatering, and ensure that only clear water is discharged to the storm or that protocol for dewatering is sanitary sewer system as appropriate. In areas of suspected followed. groundwater contamination (i.e., underlain by fill or near sites where chemical releases are known or suspected to have occurred), groundwater shall be analyzed by a State -certified laboratory for the suspected pollutants prior to discharge. Based on the results of the analytical testing, the project proponent shall acquire the appropriate permit(s) from the RWQCB prior to the release of any dewatering discharge into the storm drainage system. Section IV.I, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of this EIR, includes a discussion of the Remediation Action Plan (RAP) and Health and Safety Plan (HSP) for the site. Implementation of Mitigation Measure HAZ-4a, HA24B, HAZ-4c, HAZ-4d, and HAZ4e would ensure the safety of construction workers from hazardous concentrations of contaminants from soil and groundwater. Proper implementation of the mitigation measure described above would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant level. H. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES RIO -I: Implementation of these measures will reduce Prior to approval of Project Appli- City staff shall verify the pay - impacts to western burrowing owl to a less than significant grading plans and prior cant/ Project ment of appropriate fees by the level. to ground disturbing Biologist project applicants. City of Lodi La: Prior to approval of grading plans, the project proponent activities staff, as well as a qualified biolo- st shall review pr9ject con- C.'Docume and Sd ings'Vid. J SwmVg T®pmwy Inxmo FiW0LK3Tim1_MMU.dm (10,2712006) 19 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LOD1 ANNEXATION ETR U\Da mints and S#AilgsVnWa t SglimgatTnoporary In— R&0LX3Tio J_MM".dw (10 n712t106) 20 �— mitlastion ring R Monitoring MWWAW Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures Schedule Responsibility lmitials shall pay the appropriate fees to SJCOG, in accordance struction activities and periodi- with the SJMSCP conservation strategy, for conversion cally consult with construction of undeveloped lands. representatives to ensure they lb: No more than 30 days prior to any ground disturbing comply with this requirement. activities, a quatift d biologist shall conduct sm veys fvr burrowing owls. If ground disturbing activities are de- Cay of Lodi WAff them uwdaet ke additional coordination with the layed or suspended for more than 30 days after the initial CDFG, if necessary. preconstruction surveys, the site shall be resurveyed. All surveys shall be conducted in accordance with CDFG's Staff Report on Burrowing Owls (CDFG, 1995). 1 c: If the preconstruction surveys identify burrowing owls on the site during the non -breeding season (September 1 through January 3 1 ) burrowing owls occupying the pro- ject site shall be evicted from the project site by passive relocation as described in the CDFG's Staff Report on Burrowing Owls CDFG, 1995). 1 d: If the preconstruction surveys identify burrowing owls on the site during the breeding season (February 1 through August 3 1 ) occupied burrows shall not be dis- turbed and shall be provided with a 75 meter (250 -foot) protective buffer until and unless the SJMSCP Technical Advisory Committee (TAC), with the concurrence of CDFG representatives on the TAC; or unless a qualified biologist approved by CDFG verifies through non-inva- sive means that either: 1) the birds have not begun egg laying, or 2) juveniles from the occupied burrows are foraging independently and are capable of independent survival. Once the fledglings are capable of independent survival the burrow(s) can be destro U\Da mints and S#AilgsVnWa t SglimgatTnoporary In— R&0LX3Tio J_MM".dw (10 n712t106) 20 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC:. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING RCIORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR C:%Dncu u and SeninpVWLo 1 Smi pIT-p—y lm—e Fil sIOLKIIFinal_Mk0 FAw (IOf27r2OW 21 _ M Monitorift R Monitoring NU*pgw Monitoring Procedure Com>Ialats Date) Mitigation Measures Schedule ResDowbility Initials B10-2: Implementation of these measures will reduce im- Prior to approval of Project Appli- City staff shall verify the pay - pacts to nesting Swainson's hawk and other nesting raptors grading plans cant/ Project ment of appropriate fees by the to a less -than -significant level. Biologist project applicants. City of Lodi 2a: Prior to approval of grading plans, the project proponent staff, as well as a qualified biolo- shall pay the appropriate fees to SJCOG, in accordance Eat, *0 review pvt*t am - with the SJMSCP conservation strategy, for conversion struction activities and periodi- of undeveloped lands. tally consult with construction 2b: Removal of suitable nest trees shall be completed during representatives to ensure they the non -nesting season (when the nests are unoccupied), comply with this rOquiremerlt. between September 1 and February 15. City of Lodi staff shall undertake 2c: If suitable nest trees will be retained and ground dis- additional coordination with the turbing activities will commence during the nesting sea- CDFG, if necessary. son (February 16 through August 31), all suitable nest trees on the site will be surveyed by a qualified biologist prior to initiating construction -related activities. Surveys will be conducted no more than 14 days prior to the start of work. If an active nest is discovered, a 100 -foot buffer shall be established around the nest tree and delineated using orange construction fence or equivalent. The buffer shall be maintained in place until the end of the breeding season or until the young have fledged, as determined by a qualified biologist. In some instances, CDFG may approve decreasing the specified buffers with implementation of other avoidance and minimization measures (e.g., having a qualified bi- ologist on-site during construction activities during the nesting season to monitor nesting activity). If no nesting is discovered, construction can begin as planned. Con- struction beginning during the non -nesting season and continuing into the nesting season shall not be subject to these measures. 2d: If future development of the Other Areas to be Annexed will result in the removal of suitable nest trees for Swain - son's hawk or other raptors, Mitigation Measures BIO -3a through BIO -3c shall be implemented. C:%Dncu u and SeninpVWLo 1 Smi pIT-p—y lm—e Fil sIOLKIIFinal_Mk0 FAw (IOf27r2OW 21 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR C.}Docummis mid SN1ings+p qV A Suuwgs4Temporxy lns a Fil s.OLK3ThW_MM".doc (1Q!2W2W6) 22 M tin Moniturin iRtelpmorflinit Monitoring MW60d" Monitoring Procedure Comments Date) Mitigation Measures Schedule onsi Initials 13I0-3: Implementation of the following mitigation measures Prior to construction Project Appli- City staff shall verify that wet - will reduce impacts to wetlands (i.e., vernal marsh) to less- cant/ Project land impacts of been mitigated, than -significant levels. Biologist and that the applicant has 3a: Wetlands permanently impacted during construction acquired the appropriate regula- (approximately 0.02 acres) shalt be mitigated through tory pemnts- preservation, creation and/or restoration of the impacted resources at a minimum ratio of 1:1. If permits are re- quired by ACOE and/or RWQCB, specific mitigation requirernents, if different than described above, shall also become a condition(s) of project approval. 3b: Prior to approval of grading plans, the applicant shall obtain any regulatory permits required from the ACOE and/or RWQCB. 3c: Prior to development of the Other Areas to be Annexed, a formal delineation shall be conducted in accordance with the 1987 Corps of Engineers Wetland Delineation Manual (Routine Method). If wetlands or other jurisdic- tional waters are identified on the site and will be af- fected by development, Mitigation Measures BI0-3a and BIO -3b shall be implemented. I. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS HAZ-1: Preparation and implementation of the required Prior to approval of Project Appli- City staff shall verify that an SWPPP (see Mitigation Measures HYD -2 and HYD -3) final grading and drain- cant/Project SWPPP has been prepared and would reduce the potential impacts of hazardous materials age plans Engineer implemented. releases during construction to a less -than -significant level. No additional mitigation is r uired. HAZ-2: As a condition of approval for grading plans for SW Prior to approval Of Project City staff shall verify that specific Gateway project site, the applicant shall be required to test grading Plans far the Engineer soil sampling and remediation the soils beneath the stained asphalt floor of the older storage SW Gateway project has occurred. building and complete any clean-up necessary to remediate site Lny identified contamination to an acceptable level. C.}Docummis mid SN1ings+p qV A Suuwgs4Temporxy lns a Fil s.OLK3ThW_MM".doc (1Q!2W2W6) 22 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING Re PORTINC PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR C.lUocum b d Sdtiop%pn1b—J S.KiWg T—po y 1.�. Fil.) jLK31fi.pI MMRP. . (1087/2006) 23 MWESUSEMoniterh� Oi til! Monitoring MW*O" _ Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Mitigation Measures S&edale Responsibility initials HAZ-3: Prior to the approval of any specific development Prior to approval of Applicant/ City staff shall verify that the projects on the Other Areas to be Annexed, the project appli- development projects Project appropriate environmental inves- cant shall provide the City with an environmental invcsti- on Other Areas to be Engineer tigations and remediation has gation, as necessary, to ensure that soils, groundwater, and Annexed occurred. buiktmgs affected by hazardous material reteases ftmrt prior land uses, and lead and asbestos potentially present in build- ing materials, would not have potential to affect the envi- ronment or health and safety of future property owners or users. HAZ-4: Implementation of the following five-part mitigation Prior to issuance of Applicant/ City staff shall verify that an measure would reduce these risks to less -than -significant demolition or building Project RMP has been prepared and levels. permits Engineer implemented. 4a: Prior to the issuance of any demolition or building per- mits for the project site, a Risk Management Plan (RMP) shall be prepared for the project site. At a minimum, the RMP shall establish soil mitigation and control specifi- cations for grading and construction activities at the site, including health and safety provisions for monitoring exposure to construction workers, procedures to be undertaken in the event that previously unreported con- tamination is discovered, and emergency procedures and responsible personnel. The RMP shall also include pro- cedures for managing soils removed from the site to ensure that any excavated soils with contaminants are stored, managed, and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations and permits. The RMP shall also include an Operations and Maintenance Plan component, to ensure that health and safety measures required for future construction and maintenance at the project site shall be enforced in perpetuity. The RMP shall include the following Mitigation Measures. C.lUocum b d Sdtiop%pn1b—J S.KiWg T—po y 1.�. Fil.) jLK31fi.pI MMRP. . (1087/2006) 23 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATEON EIR C,SDo =mB mtd Solings'4)nU+cal SatingslT=pmwy int=ct FilmOLK3`.Fi�l MMRP,dm (10.'2712006) 24 AlkwimptionMeaitsriu R Monitoring midwAlon Monitoring Procedure Comments DAW Mitigation Measures Schedule Res usibli Initials 4b: Prior the approval of a building permit, soil sampling and boring shall be done in the historic circular depression area in the western portion of APN 058-040-02 in order to determine the quality of the 511 and to determine if hazardous materials are present below the surfwe. if the soils investigation determines that hazardous materials are present, they shall be removed and disposed of in accordance with applicable regulations. 4c: The soil samples collected from the equipment storage areas (and near the pesticide dispensers) were analyzed for Total Recoverable Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TRPH). Oil and grease were detected at elevated concentrations in both samples collected from the equipment storage areas; 12,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the 55 -gallon waste oil drums east of the equipment stor- age buildings on APN 058-030-04 and at 38,000 ppm of oil and grease were detected near the waste oil drums in the southern portion of APN 058-030-04. Both concen- trations detected are above the CVP WQCB threshold concentrations based on protection of ground water quality. The stained area is approximately 10 feet in diameter. Prior to the approval of the building permit, oil and grease stained soil in this area shall be removed and disposed in accordance with the recommendations of the Phase I/11. 4d: Six areas of APN 058-030-04 contain old equipment and various piles of debris and garbage, which can poten- tially leave lead based paint and other hazardous materi- als residue in the soils beneath the piles. No obvious soil staining was noticed beneath the piles of debris and gar- bage; however, soil beneath the piles could potentially contain lead based paint and other hazardous materials. C,SDo =mB mtd Solings'4)nU+cal SatingslT=pmwy int=ct FilmOLK3`.Fi�l MMRP,dm (10.'2712006) 24 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION FIR C:',Docuutents and Senings�pnlLocal Settings?Temporary Internet Files'+OLK3iFinal_MMRP.da (14/27126) 25 MWntation Monitoring Re ortle Monitoring Schedule Mitigation Responsibility Monitoring Procedure Comments Date/ Initials Mitigation Measures As a condition of approval for a demolition permit for the buildings located on APN 058-030-04, the trash and debris shall be removed. Soils beneath the debris piles shall be tested for lead based paint residues and other possible hazardous materials. if it is determined that lead based paint or other hazardous materials are present in the soils beneath the piles, these soils shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordance with existing hazardous waste regulations. 4c: The truck scale observed on the eastside of APN 058- 030-04 could have soils contaminated with hydraulic fluid, which may contain PCBs. Truck scales often used hydraulic fluid, which can contain PCBs, which can be released during spills and leaks. As a condition of ap- proval for grading plans permit for the SW Gateway site, the soils shall be observed when the scales are removed to determine if there are indications of leakage. If it is determined that leakage has occurred, soils samples shall be collected for laboratory analysis. If it is determined that the soils are contaminated at levels beyond estab- lished threshold levels, the contaminated soils shall be removed in accordance with all applicable regulations. HAZ-5: Prior to approval of any demolition or construction Prior to approval of any Construction City staff shall verify that appro- permits, ASTs, pesticides, waste oil, equipment maintenance demolition or construc- Manager priate disposal of waste and chemicals, discarded trash and debris shall be removed from tion permits debris has occurred. the individual project site and disposed in accordance with applicable regulations. HAZ-6: Prior to approval of any grading plans or construc- Prior to approval of Project City staff shall verify that wells tion permits for each individual project, the wells and septic demolition or construc- Engineer and septic systems have been system shall be properly abandoned in accordance with tion permits properly abandoned. applicable re Iations. HAZ-7: Prior to approval of any demolition or construction Prior to approval of Project City staff shall verify that geo- permits for the project site, a geophysical survey shall be demolition or construc- Engineer physical survey has occurred and performed locate the possible UST. Drilling and soil sam- tion permits that the necessary sampling and pling shall be conducted to determine if this UST may have removal for USTs has occurred. contained petroleum hydrocarbons that may have leaked and C:',Docuutents and Senings�pnlLocal Settings?Temporary Internet Files'+OLK3iFinal_MMRP.da (14/27126) 25 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR _ C.%Dwummts and SgpngsVauaal Sdting0mipmwy ln�a Fil %0Ll[31Fina1_MURP.da (IlNzP2006) 26 Midnation MPieri R9rtl! Monitoring gyp _ Monitoring Procedure Comments Date! Mitigation Measures Schedule Responr011ilyInitials affected soil and ground water. Should the sampling indicate a release from the tank has occurred, additional investigation and remediation may be required by San Joaquin County MID prior to case closure. If the UST is present, it shall be removed and backfilled with engineered fill prior to site development. HAZ-8: Implementation of the following two-part mitigation Prior to issuance of a Project Appli- City staff shall verify that an measure would reduce this impact to a less -than -significant demolition permit cant/ Project asbestos and lead-based paint level. Engineer survey has occurred and that the 8a: As a condition of approval for a demolition permit for the materials have been abated per project site buildings, an asbestos and lead-based paint applicable regulations. survey shall be performed. If asbestos -containing materi- als are determined to be present, the materials shall be abated by a certified asbestos abatement contractor in accordance with the regulations and notification re- quirements of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Con- trol District. If lead-based paints are identified, then fed- eral and State construction worker health and safety regulations shall be followed during renovation or demo- lition activities. If loose or peeling lead-based paint are identified, they shall be removed by a qualified lead abatement contractor and disposed of in accordance with existing hazardous waste regulations. 8b: As a condition of approval for grading plans for the project sites, an asbestos investigation of subsurface structures shall be conducted. If asbestos -containing materials are determined to be present, the materials shall be abated by a certified asbestos abatement contractor in accordance with the regulations and notification require- ments of the San Joaquin Valley Air Quality Control District. J. UTILITIES There are no significant utility impacts. K PUBLIC SERVICES There are no signiftcanl public services impacts. C.%Dwummts and SgpngsVauaal Sdting0mipmwy ln�a Fil %0Ll[31Fina1_MURP.da (IlNzP2006) 26 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCTOBER 2006 MITIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTING PROGRAM LODI ANNEXATION EIR Source: LSA Associates, Inc., 2006. C:�Dxvmmts aid Satiolgs�pnU.acal SatingsSTanpxay Inland Fi]at�OLX311:tnal MMRP.doc (10/77'2006) 27 mealboriat Reporting Modoring � Monitoring Procedure Comments Date) Mitt anon Measures Schedule Res onslbtli Initials L.. VISUAL RESOURCES VIS -l: No mitigation is available to reduce this significant and unavoidable i t. ja$- : Owdttar 14hung "I be des4pod to minimize glare ' Prior to issuance of Project City stats shall verify that non - and spillover to surrounding properties. The proposed project building permits Architect mirrored glass is used in the shall incorporate non -mirrored glass to minimize daylight construction of the proposed are. buildings. Source: LSA Associates, Inc., 2006. C:�Dxvmmts aid Satiolgs�pnU.acal SatingsSTanpxay Inland Fi]at�OLX311:tnal MMRP.doc (10/77'2006) 27 LSA ASSOCIATES, INC. OCT002A 3sed MITIGATION AND MONITORING l%GpDRTI![G 1•YO4;RAM LODI ANNEXATION tilt C:00-- -d-%—Plpu o d SoiLPITuwmry F mmd AIeoOr rrw-a_mmR1 dK (tw27rn%) 28 CITYN COU CIL RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING AND FORWARDING TO SAN JOAQUIN LOCAL AREA FORMATION COMMISSION FOR ACTION THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FCB HOMES, FOR AN ANNEXATION OF THE 257.76 PROJECT ACRES, THE CITY -INITIATED ANNEXATION FOR 47.79 CONTIGUOUS ACRES, OUTSIDE OF THE PROJECT AREA, AND THE REQUEST OF TWO PROPERTY OWNERS ON HARNEY LANE TO ANNEX 2 ACRES OF LAND OF LAND INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF LODI (SW GATEWAY, OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS, AND 565 AND 603 EAST HARNEY LANE) WHEREAS, City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duty noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested annexation in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the SW Gateway Project Area and Other Areas to be Annexed totaling 305.55 acres and two properties on Harney Lane are described as follows: APN Site Address Property Owner O'w a 058-030-09 252 E. St. Route 12 Highway Carolyn Reichmuth 058-030-03 14509 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-04 14499 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-05 14433 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-06 14195 North Lower Sacramento Road Howard Investments, LLC 058-040-01 14101 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-02 13837 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-04 13537 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust - 058-040-05 13589 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-14 No site address for Joey Tamura Trust 058-040-13 641 East Harney Lane Schumacher Trust {liar Annex , n Areas 058-230-04 13786 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsugio Kubota 058-140-13 14320 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 North Lower M. Bill Peterson k%CAICIIi'RES1Rm 2(«)61141I -SW Gateway Ant—Am WHEREAS, the applicant, Tom Doucette for Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219, represents property owners of the parcels within the SW Gateway project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this annexation; and WHEREAS, the City has initiated annexation of the properties referred to as "Other Annexation Areas" so as not to create a County island; and WHEREAS, the property owners of 565 and 603 East Harney Lane have submitted applications for Annexation of their properties in connection with this annexation application; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the proposed annexation on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006 and their motion to recommendation approval to the City Council was defeated on a 2:4 vote; and WHEREAS, the SW Gateway Development Plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community consisting of 1,230 residential units, 31 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHEREAS, the City Council did certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the City Council of the City of Loch makes the following findings: J,%CAICT[Yt MP' 2(ftd-02-SW Gateway Mmx.d- 2 Sacramento Road 058-140-14 14620 North Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 058-140-06 800 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058-140-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 038-140-05 865 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-10 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Ami able Et al 058-040-11 U!"1116-0 CU,4-0_. _... ....._.E. , ._.:: . 565 East Harney Lane Robert and Letha Pinnell 058-040-12 603 East Harney Lane Frank Hall WHEREAS, the applicant, Tom Doucette for Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219, represents property owners of the parcels within the SW Gateway project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this annexation; and WHEREAS, the City has initiated annexation of the properties referred to as "Other Annexation Areas" so as not to create a County island; and WHEREAS, the property owners of 565 and 603 East Harney Lane have submitted applications for Annexation of their properties in connection with this annexation application; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the proposed annexation on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006 and their motion to recommendation approval to the City Council was defeated on a 2:4 vote; and WHEREAS, the SW Gateway Development Plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community consisting of 1,230 residential units, 31 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHEREAS, the City Council did certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the City Council of the City of Loch makes the following findings: J,%CAICT[Yt MP' 2(ftd-02-SW Gateway Mmx.d- 2 1. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. 2006- and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEtA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2006- 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The required public hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 4. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan desionates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. 5. ft is found that the requested annexation does not conflict with adopted and proposed plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 6. It is further found that the parcels in the area proposed to be annexed are physically suitable for the development of the proposed project. 7. 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. 8. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. 9. The site is suitable for the density proposed by the project in that the density is compliant with the PR General Plan designation and the site can be served by all public utilities and creates design solutions for storm water, traffic and air quality issues. Potential environmental impacts related to utilities were identified in the EIR and found not be significant because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce any impacts to a level of less than significant. 10. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the SW Gateway land use plan submitted by Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby approves and forwards this annexation to the San Joaquin Local Area Formation Commission for action. Dated: November 1, 2006 J:kATMPRESM. 2006U-02«SW G.W-Y A.. d. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006- was passed and adopted by the Lodi City Council in an adjourned regular meeting held November 1, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — RAND JOHL City Clerk 2006- T, CA%CnYA?S\P-2(WJ-0MW Gal w y Anw.d. 4 RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE CITY INITIATED REQUEST FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO REDESIGNATE THE OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS TO MDR (MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL); AND THE REQUEST OF 2 PROPERTY OWNERS ON HARNEY LANE FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE GENERAL PLAN TO REDESIGNATE 565 AND 603 AND EAST HARNEY'LANE TO PR (PLANNED RESIDENTIAL). WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, Amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Other Annexation Areas (comprising 47.79 acres) and two properties on Harney Lane (comprising 2 acres) and are described as follows: and APN Site Address ProDertv Owner 058-230- 13716 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsugio Kubota 04 058-140- E 14320 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 13 058-140- 14500 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 12 058-140- 14620 North Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 14 058-140- 14752 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon 04 Frame Trust 058-140- 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 11 058-140- 800 East Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene 06 Herrmann Trust 058-140- 844 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona 07 Del Rio 058-140- 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 08 058-140- 865 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona 05 Del Rio 058-140- 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona 09 Del Rio 058-140- 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Amigable Et 10 al. 058-040- 565 East Harney Lane Robert and Letha 11 Pinnell 058-040- 603 East Harney Lane Frank Hall 12 WHEREAS, the City has initiated a request for a General Plan Amendment in connection with the request to annex the Other Annexation Areas to avoid creation of a County island; WHEREAS, the property owners for parcels located at 565 and 603 East Harney Lane have filed applications for General Plan Amendment with the City of Lodi Community Development Department in connection with the request to annex their properties, which are contiguous to the SW Gateway Development Project (initiated by Frontiers Community Builders Inc.) which includes an annexation request (AX -04-01) and; WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the the proposed General Plan amendments on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006 and their motion to recommendation approval to the City Council was defeated on a 2:4 vote; and WHEREAS, the General Plan Land Use Diagram designates the Other Annexation Area parcel as Planned Residential (PR); and WHEREAS, the request is to change the General Plan Land Use Diagram to Medium Density Residential (MDR) for the Other Annexation Areas and Planned Residential (PR) for 565 and 603 East Harney Lane as shown on Exhibit A to this Resolution; and WHEREAS, the proposed designations of MDR and PR would be compatible with the existing uses developed on the site, and would also allow for the development of future residential uses; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this General Plan Amendment have occurred; and WHEREAS, the City Council did certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR- 05-01), and adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. 2006- and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2006- 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and Held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The required public hearing held by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 4. The requested General Plan amendment does not conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 5. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for future residential development consistent with the new land use designations. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FURTHER FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby approves the amendments to the General Plan Land Use Diagram as shown on Exhibit A hereto. Dated: November 1, 2006 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006- was passed and adopted by the Lodi City Council in a regular meeting held November 1, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — RANDI JOHL City Clerk 2006- EXHIBIT A AMENDMENTS TO THE GENERAL PLAN LAND USE DIAGRAM T- 1 ORDINANCE NO. . AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR PRE -ZONING TO PD (PLANNED DEVELOP- MENT) OF 257.76 ACRES (SW GATEWAY PROJECT) AND TWO PARCELS ON HARNEY LANE (565 AND 603 EAST HARNEY LANE); AND PRE -ZONING TO R -MD ON 47.79 ACRES (OTHER AREAS TO BE ANNEXED) BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The properties subject to this pre -coning include properties located within the SW Gateway project area, the Other Areas to be Annexed (totaling 305.55 acres); and the two parcels on Hamey lane (comprising 2 acres) and are described as follows: APN Site Address Pro Owner 058-030-09 2521E. St. Route 12 Highway Carolyn Reichmuth 058-030-03 14R9 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-04 144 9 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-05 14433 North Lower Sacramento Road Van Ruiten Ranch, LTD 058-030-06 1 14185 North Lower Sacramento Road Howard Investments, LLC 058-040-01 14101 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-02 13837 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-04 13537 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-05 13549 North Lower Sacramento Road Schumacher Trust 058-040-14 No site address assigned Joey Tamura Trust 058-040-13 641 East Harney Lane Schumacher Trust r- 058-230-04 13786 North Lower Sacramento Road Tsu io Kubota 058-140-13 14320 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-12 14500 North Lower Sacramento Road M. Bill Peterson 058-140-14 14612 North Lower Sacramento Road Ruth Susan Peterson 058-140-04 14762 North Lower Sacramento Road Dean and Sharon Frame Trust 058-140-11 777 East Olive Avenue Zane Grever Trust 0588-140-06 800 f=ast Olive Avenue Vernet and Charlene Herrmann Trust 058-140-07 844 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-08 890 East Olive Avenue Frank Hall 058-140-05 865 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-09 908 East Olive Avenue Santiago and Ramona Del Rio 058-140-10 930 East Olive Avenue Leticia F. Am ► able Et al . �_ _ 058-040-11 565 East Harney Lane Robert and Letha Pinnell 058-040-12 603 East Hartley Lane Frank Hall I "1CTTf":0l0...-A-02 I SW Daae y- pro --d. SECTION 2: The applicants for the requested pre -zoning are as follows: For the SW Gateway Pro'ect Area: Tom Doucette for Frontiers Community Builders For the Other Ani-exation Areas: The City of Lodi. For the two parcels on Hamey Lane: Robert and Letha Pinnell, and Frank Hall. SECTION 3: The requested pre -zonings consist of the following: For the SW Gatsway_P[gject Area: Reclassification from San Joaquin County AU -20 (Agriculture, Urban Reserve, Minimum 20 Acres) to City of Lodi Planned Development (PD) Zone. For the. Other Agne_xation Areas: Reclassification from San Joaquin County AU -20 (Agriculture, Urban Reserve, Minimum 20 Acres) to City of Lodi Medium Density Multifamily Residence (R -MD) Zone. For the two Raroels on Hamey_Lane: Reclassification from San Joaquin County R -VL Zone (Very Low Density Residential) to City of Lodi Planned Development (PD) Zone. SECTION 4: The pre -zone designations for the three areas are described as follows: Planted Development (P -D) Zone The planned development zone 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 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. 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. Medlurn Density Multif*nily Residence (R -MD) Zone The Medium Density Multifamily Residence Zone is designed to accommodate medium density residential development. In the R -MD zone, one -family, two-family, multifamily and group dwellings are permitted; and parks, schools, children's nurseries and nursery schools, playgrounds, community centers, rest and convalescent homes, churches, museums, public utilities services buildings, automobile parking when adjacent to a commercial zone, and golf courses and similar noncommercial recreational uses are conditionally permitted. The development standards are as follows: maximum height is two -stories, not to exceed 35 feet; density is 5,000 square feet for a one -family dwelling; 6,000 square feet for a two-family dwelling; and 4,000 square feet for the first unit and 2,000 square feet for each additional units for a multifamily or group dwelling; and a sufficient parcel size to provide the necessary yard areas and parking spaces required for other types of buildings; and the required yards are a minimum of 20 feet for front yards, no minimum required side yards except adjacent to a residential zone when the minimum setback is 5 feet, corner side yards are a minimum of 10 feet, and rear yards are minimum of 10 feet, except for reduced yard requirements for specified circumstances. These development parameters would be consistent with the General Plan designation for the sites. I CACITY-Ohhaw ,d.02 l SW 611M - pre -z e.dw SEC ;ION 5: Based upon the evidence in the staff report and project file the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby determines the following: 1. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. 2006 and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2006- 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The required public hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 4. The applicant, Tom Doucette for Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; represents property owners of the parcels within the SW Gateway project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this zone change. 5. The City has initiated the request for a General Plan Amendment and Zone Change for properties referred to as "Other Annexation Areas." 6. The property owners of two parcels contiguous to the SW Gateway project area (565 and 603 East Harney Lane) have submitted applications for pre -zoning. 7. The City must approve "pre -zone" zoning designations prior to requesting approval of the annexation of the lands into the City from the San Joaquin Local Area Formation Commission. 8. 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. 9. It is further found that the parcels of the proposed pre -zonings are physically suitable for the development of the proposed project. 10. 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. 11. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. 12. 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. 13. The design of the proposed project and type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public hea#h problems in that all public improvements will be built per City standards and all private improvements will be built per the Uniform Building Code. 14. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the SW Gateway land use plan ultimately approved by the City Council. 15. Final development plans demonstrating the height, setbacks, lot coverage, and other development standards, pursuant to Municipal Code Section 17.33.090, will be submitted for review and approval by the Planning Commission prior to the approval of a tentative subdivision map. J',CA.CITVi0TdinWCE4-621 SW GgMay- pre-edx 3 16. As required by the Planned Development Zoning Designation, the mufti -family units with the SW Gateway project shall be reviewed and approved by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee prior to the issuance of a building permit. 17. The SW Gateway development plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community for the future development of 1,230 residential units, 31 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure. SECTION 6: All conditions of approval for this pre -zoning are included as Attachment A. SECTION 7: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith will be repealed insofer as such conflict may exist upon the completion of the annexation of the subject properties into the City of Lodi. 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. SECIION 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 shall 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 -Sentinel, "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 day of , 2006 SUSAN HITCHCOCK Mayor Attest: RANDI JOHL City Clerk 1:''iCA%CITTArdinwed-02 I SW Gmewq-pre-r C.d« 4 State of California County of San Joaquin, ss. 1, Randi Johl, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do herby certify that Ordinance No. was introduced at a regullar meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held November 1, 2006, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting of said Council held , 2006, 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 Magor on the date of its passage and the safne has been published pursuant to law. RANDI JOHL City Clerk Approved as to Form: D. STEPHEN SCHWABAVER City Attorney J.CAIUTYC 0,dt.p .,J-02 I SW Gateway-pre-zonc.da EXHIBIT "A" TO CITY OF LODI ORDINANCE NO. The pre -zone of the entire 257.76 acres of the SW Gateway acres to PD (Planned Development), which includes designations specific to housing, and public/quasi-public uses all as shown on the attached map (Exhibit B), and approval of the pre -zone of the Other Annexation Areas to R -MD (Residential Medium Density), which would allow for future development of residential uses, are subject to the following conditions of approval. : Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final development plans shall be subject to review and approval by Planning Commission. The development plan shall include development standards for proposed residential units (i.e., building height, setbacks, lot coverage and permitted accessory uses). 2. Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final park plans shall be subject to review and approval by Parks and Recreation Department. 3. Prior to the issuance of a building permit the multi -family components of the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. 4. Development of the parcels identified as Other Annexation Areas shall be subject to the zoning standards of the R -MD zoning district. 5. Prior to the development of any portion of the SW Gateway 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. 6. The conditions of approval listed below are to be accomplished prior to deeming complete the first Tentative Subdivision Map, unless noted otherwise: A. Preparation 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 Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and WID Canal and shall be coordinated with the master plans for the Southwest Gateway Project south of Kettleman Lane. a. Water master plan, including the following: i. Surface water transmission and distribution facilities. ii. 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. b. Recycled water master plan, including the following: i. Identification of areas to be irrigated. ii. Detailed summary of demand calculations. Include Southwest Gateway project demands in calculations. Detailed summary of pipe sizing calculations. iv. Provisions for future westerly extension in Lodi Avenue and Vine Street. V. As an alternative to i) through iv) above, Developer may provide a one-time payment, not to exceed $50,000, to partially fund the Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study. C. Wastewater master plan. 1 %CA4' WO'dinan-q-02 i SW GUe Y - pre .e.d. 6 d. 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. e. Streets/circulation plan, including the following: i. Dimensions of street rights-of-way, including Kettleman Lane and Lower Sacramento Road, bike/pedestrian/open space corridor and utility corridors. ii. Traffic analysis of operations at critical intersections to determine if supplemental right-of-way is required. iii. Typical cross-section diagrams showing proposed utility locations and demonstrating that sufficient width has been provided to meet separation requirements between pipes. iv. Traffic round -about in Lodi Avenue. V. Traffic calming features at cross intersections, along long, straight streets and at other locations as required by the Public Works Director. f. Transit study to identify new or modified routes to serve the area. g. Topography for the entire study area to confirm validity of water, wastewater and storm drain master plans. h. Composite utility diagram to facilitate review of potential utility crossing conflicts. i. Modification of the Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. The current master plan includes a Class I bike path along the westerly project boundary that would be part of the City-wide recreational trail in conformance with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. This bike trail can be incorporated into the proposed north -south bicyclelpedestrian corridor. The bicycle master plan also includes a Class II or Ill bike boulevard extending north -south from the WID canal north of Lodi Avenue to Harney Lane and east -west along the extension of Vine Street and Class It bike lanes along Lodi Avenue. All modifications to the bicycle master plan shall be to the approval of the City Council. j. Parks and Recreation master plan. Water, recycled water, wastewater and storm drain master plans for the project have been submitted and first check Public Works Department comments on the plans were issued on June 26, 2006. The plans require revision. In addition, on July 21, 2006, City staff forwarded information to the developer's engineer regarding existing utility crossings, preferred utility alignments, existing easements and design requirements to be used in establishing utility alignments for the project. The project improvements must respect the preferred alignments and existing easements. For example, new pipes along Westgate Drive south of the project site need to be on the west side of the street which will require dedication of additional land to provide a utility corridor. The required master plans and supporting studies are necessary to confirm the design of the proposed development and will affect the number of growth management allocations that can ultimately be utilized. If 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 iL'CACITY ,O,di...&1-02 I SW Gwe yry a-ro e.d- prior to completion and approval of the master plans and supporting studies. Completion and approval of the master plans and studies must then be accomplished prior to submittal of the first tentative map for the project. B. Phasing analysis to be approved by the City prior to submittal of the first tentative map. The analysis shall include the following: a. Phase boundaries and number of units to be constructed with each phase. b. Permanent and interim/temporary facilities required to implement each phase based on the mitigation monitoring program and the above mentioned master plans. C. Master utility calculations for permanent and interim/temporary facilities to be constructed with each phase. C. Preparation of a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.B-6 of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2 in the EIR), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, how the improvement will be funded, including a reimbursement program where appropriate, and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. D. Finance and Implementation Plan to identify funding for the required public improvements and interim/temporary improvements for each phase of the project. The Finances 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), and set out in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are hereby incorporated into this approval. 8. All applicable state statutes, and local ordinances, including all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements for hazardous materials shall apply to the project. 9. 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 and Public Works Director. Said plans shall indicate that all comer lots shall have architectural treatments on both street facing elevations. 10. Prior to submittal of building permits, the applicant shall submit a wails 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. 11. Within 90 days of the approval of this project, whichever occurs first, the applicant shalt 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 Z-04-01." J- CA'CITYOrdi—CeU-01 l SW Gateway-pre-mne.dx 8 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. 12. As part of Mitigation Measure LU -2 of the Lodi Annexations EIR (EIR-05-01) the developer has the option to pay fees consistent with the pending San Joaquin County Agricultural Mitigation program or preserve agricultural land in perpetuity to mitigate significant impacts associated with conversion of the 392 acres of Prime Farmland within the Westside, SW Gateway and Other Areas to be Annexed. If the developer proceeds with the mitigation to preserve land within an agricultural easement, and the City of the Lodi becomes party to said easement, the developer shall pay the City a one-time administration fee of five thousand dollars. Said fee shall be paid prior to approval of the first tentative subdivision map. JACAtCITYYIedina J -02I SW Gateway -pe -cone da 9 EXHMIT S SOUTHWEST GATEWAY LAND USE PLAN J kMCI rY%kdinan CI -02 I SW Gateway- Wr mne,da 10 I-1 ORDINANCE NO. Q?,A AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI ADOPTING A [DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA) PERTAINING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF 257.76 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD BETWEEN HIGHWAY 12-KETTLEMAN LANE AND HARVEY LANE (SOUTHWEST GATEWAY) (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT GM -05-001) BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The properties subject to this Development Agreement include the following: 257.76 acres located on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road between Highway 12-Kettleman Lane and Harney Lane — Assessors Parcel Numbers 058- 030-09, 058-030-03, 058-030-04, 058-030-05, 058-030-06, 058-040-01, 058- 040-02, 058-040-04, 058-040-05 and 058-040-14. SECTION 2. The applicant for the requested Development Agreement is as follows: Frontiers Community Builders SECIJION_3. The requested Development Agreement is summarized as follows: Development Agreement GM -05-001 is an agreement between the City and the developer in which the developer agrees to provide certain benefits to the City in exchange for a vested right to proceed with the development consistent with the development approvals. The term of the Development Agreement is 15 years. The vested right the developer obtains is the ability to proceed with the development as approved and to avoid the imposition of new regulations on subsequent discretionary approvals (i.e. vesting tentative maps) for the development. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan land use designation and the zoning for the proposed Development. SEEU, ION 5. The City Council, by Resolution No. 2006- , has certified the Lodi Annexations Envi onmental Impact Report for the proposed project. SECTION 6. The City Council hereby adopts Ordinance No. approving the Development Agreement by and between the City of Lodi and Frontiers Community Builders. SECTION 77. 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 for 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. SECON 88. 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. SE_ ON 10. 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 take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval. Approved this day of , 2006 SUSAN HITCHCOCK Mayor Attest: RAMI JOHL City 0lerk Stater of California County of Sart Joaquin, ss. 1, 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 November 1, 2006, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting of said Council held , 2006, 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. RANDI JOHL City Clerk Approved as to Form: D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER City Attorney 2 OFFICIAL BUSINESS DocuMeryt enWed to free recording Goveonment Code Section 8103 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN I40ECORDED MAIL TO: City of Lodi P.O. Sox 3008 Lodi, CA €5241-1910 Attn: City Clerk (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED RECORDER'S USE) DRAFT DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LODI AND FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. FOR FCB SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS RECITALS.................................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Authorization...................,...............................................................................................................3 2. Property..........................................................................................................................................3 3. Project............................................................................................................................................3 4. Public Hearing............................................•................................................................................... 3 5. Environmental Review.................................................................................................................... 3 6. Project Approvals...........................................................................................................................3 7. Need for Services and Facilities.....................................................................................................4 8. Contribution to Costs of Facilities and Services............................................................................. 4 9. Development Agreement Resolution Compliance........................................................................ 5 10. Consistency with General and Specific Plan.................................................................................. 5 11. Creation of Career -Oriented Employment Opportunities AGRCIEMENT............................................................................................................................................... 5 1. Incorporation of Recitals ................................................................................................................. 5 2. Description of Property................................................................................................................... 5 3. Interest of Landowner..................................................................................................................... 5 4. Relationship of City and Landowner.............................................................................................. 5 5. Effective Date and Term................................................................................................................. 6 5.1. Effective Date..........................................................................................................................6 5.2. Term........................................................................................................................................ 6 5.3. Automatic Termination Upon Completion and Sale of Residential Lot ................................... 6 6. Use of Property.............................................................................................................................. 6 6.1. Right to Develop......................................................................................................................6 6.2. ses:....................................................................................................................... Permitted Uses: ....................................................................................................................... 8 6.3. Moratorium, Quotas, Restrictions or Other Growth Limitations .............................................. 8 6.4. Additional Conditions............................................................................................................ 11 6.5 Annexation 7. Applicable Rules, Regulations, Fees and Official Policies...........................................................18 7.1. Rules RegardAg Permitted Uses.......................................................................................... 18 7.2. Rules Regardimg Design and Construction........................................................................... 18 7.3. Changes in Stste or Federal Law.........................................................................................18 7.4. Uniform Codes ApplicabW....................................................................................................18 8. Existing Fees, Subsequently Enacted Fees, Dedications, Assessments and Taxes .................. 19 8.1. Processing Fess and Charges.............................................................................................. 19 8.2. Existing Fees, Exactions and Dedications............................................................................ 20 8.3 Subsequent Development Impact Fees, Exactions and Dedications 9. Community Facilities District...................................................................................................... 20 9.1. Inclusion in Community Facilities District............................................................................. 20 9.2. Use of Community Facilities District Revenues...............................................I..............1..... 22 9.3. Community Facilities District for Residential Property — Landowner Financing ................... 22 10. Processing of Subsequent Development Applications and Building Permits ............................. 22 11. Amendment or Cancellation......................................................................................................... 22 I 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 11.1. Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws ............................................... 22 11.2. Amendment by Mutual Consent............................................................................................ 23 11.3. Insubstantial ArnAendments.................................................................................................... 23 11.4. Amendment of Project Approvals......................................................................................... 23 11.5. Cancellation by Mutual Consent........................................................................................... 23 12. Term of Project Approvals............................................................................................................ 23 13. Annual Review. ................................................................................................ 23 13.1. Review Date.......................................................................................................................... 24 13.2. Initiation of Review................................................................................................................ 24 13.3. Staff Reports......................................................................................................................... 24 13.4. Costs..................................................................................................................................... 24 13.5. Non-compliance with Agreement; Hearing........................................................................... 24 13.6. Appeal of Determination........................................................................................................ 24 14. Default ..........................................................................................................................................24 14.1. Procedure Regarding Defaults.............................................................................................. 25 15. Estoppel Certificate...................................................................................................................... 26 16. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure............................................................................. 26 16.1. Mortgagee Protiection............................................................................................................26 16.2. Mortgagee Not Obligated........................................................... .. 26 ......................................... 18.3. Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure ........................................... 27 17. Severability...................................................................................................................................27 18. Applicable Law ............................................................................................................................. 27 19. Attorneys' Fees and Costs in Legal Actions By Parties to the Agreement. ..., ............................. 27 20. Attorneys' Fees and Costs in Legal Actions By Third Parties to the Agreement and Continued PermitProcessing.................................................................................................................................. 27 21. Transfers and Assignments.......................................................................................................... 28 22. Agreement Runs wih the Land.................................................................................................... 28 23. Bankruptcy, ................................................... _ .............................................................................. 28 24. Indemnification............................................................................................................................. 28 25. Insurance...................................................................................................................................... 29 25.1. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance.................................................................. 29 25.2. Workers' Compensation Insurance....................................................................................... 29 25.3. Evidence of Insurance........................................................................................................... 29 26. Excuse for Nonperformance ......................................................................................................... 29 27. Third Party Beneficiaries................................................................................. 30 28. Notices.......................................................................................................................................... 30 29. Form of Agreement; Recordation; Exhibits.................................................................................. 30 30. Further Assurances...................................................................................................................... 31 31. City Cooperation........................................................................................................................... 31 2 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT FCB SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT This Development Agreement is entered into as of this day of , 2006, by and between the CITY OF LODI, a municipal corporation ("City"), and, FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. ("Landowner"). City and Landowner are hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties" and singularly as "Parry." RECITALS 1. AuMerilpf a. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in compreheAsive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the LegisWture of the State of California adopted Government Code Section 65864, et seq. (the "Development Agreement Statute"), which authorizes the City and any person having a legal or equitable interest in the real property to enter into a development agreement, establishing certain development rights in the Property which is the subject of the development project application. 2. Proyerty. Landowner holds a legal or equitable interest in certain real property located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin, more particularly described in Exhibit A-1 attached hereto (the "Property"). Landowner represents that all persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property shall be bound by this Agreement. 3. Pr t. Landowner has obtained various approvals from the City (described in more detail in Recital 6 below) for a mixed use project known as FCB Southwest Gateway (the "Project") to be located on the Property. 4. Pub irc dWn . On , 2006, the Planning Commission of the City. of Lodi, acting pursuant tt) Government Code Section 65867, held a hearing to consider this Agreement and the Planning Commission action has been reported to the City Council. 5. ErirtironEotal Review. On , 2006, the City Council certified as adequate and complete, the Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Project. Mitigation measures were required in the EIR and are incorporated into the Project and into the terms and conditions of this Agreement, as reflected by the findings adopted by the City Council concurrently with this Agreement. 6. Prosect AaRroyMls. The following land use approvals (together the "Project Approvals") have been granted for the Property, which entitlements are the subject of this Agreement: 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 6.1. The EIR. The Mitigation Measures in the EIR are incorporated into the Project and into the terms and conditions of this Agreement (City Resolution No. ); 6.2. A General Plan Amendment (the "General Plan"), (attached hereto as Exhibit B) approved by the City on , 2006 (City Resolution No. ); 6.3. The Zoning of the Property (attached hereto as Exhibit B-1) approved by the City on , 2006 (City Ordinance No. ); 6.4. The Large Lot Tentative Subdivision Map for the Project (attached hereto as Exhibit C-1) to be subsequently considered by the City through a noticed public hearing process. (The parties agree that the large lot subdivision map included herein is for illustrative purposes only and shall not be effective until approved through a notice public hearing process by the City. If approved by the City, the Large Lot Subdivision Map shall thereafter be included within the Project Approvals listed herein); 6.5. Reserved; 6.6. The Development Plan and Infrastructure Plan for the Project (attached hereto as EKbibit D), approved by the City on , 2006 by City Resolution No. 6.7. The Growth Management Allocations, as required by Chapter 15.34 of the Lodi Municipal Code, as set forth in Exhibit E, approved by the City on , 2006 by City Resolution No. ; 6.8. This Development Agreement, as adopted on , 2006 by City Ordinance No. (the "Adopting Ordinance"); and, 6.9. The Annexation Approvals granted by San .Joaquin County Local Agency Formation Commission as shown in.Exhibit F attached hereto. 7. t! M for %Wlaos� and Fggiiil s. Development of the Property will result in a need for murkipal servic6s and facilities, some of which will be provided by the City to such development subject to the performance of Landowner's obligations hereunder. With respect to water, pursuant to Government Code Section 65867.5, any tentative map approved for the Property will comply with the provisions of Government Code 66473.7. S. Coaritw#iWIg Costa of Fici1 #lies and fiervices. Landowner agrees to contribute to the costs of such public facilities and services as required herein to mitigate impacts on the community of the development of the Property, and City agrees to provide such public facilities and services as required herein to assure that Landowner may proceed with and 4 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 complete development of the Property in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. City and Landowner recognize and agree that, but for Landowner's contributions set forth herein including contributions to mitigate the impacts arising as a result of development entitlements granted pursuant to this Agreement, City would not and could not approve the development of the Property as provided by this Agreement and that, but for City's covenant to provide certain facilities and services for development of the Property, Landowner would not and could not commit to provide the mitigation as provided by this Agreement. City's vesting of the right to develop the Property as provided herein is in reliance upon and in consideration of Landowner's agreement to make contributions toward the cost of public improvements as herein provided to mitigate the impacts of development of the Property as development occurs. 9. Qvaloum Ag ejnent RMIWign ComD1112 Qe.. City and Landowner have taken all actions mandatejd by, and fulfilled all requirements set forth in, the Development Agreement Resolution of the City of Lodi, as set forth in the City Council Resolution No. 2005- 237 for the consideration and approval of the pre -annexation and development agreement. 10. QortsigMM with Qe0tral and_Spnific Plan. Having duly examined and considered this Agreemerft and having held properly noticed public hearings hereon, the City found that this Agreement satisfies the Government Code §65867.5 requirement of general plan consistency. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, conditions and covenants hereinafter set forth, the Parties agree as follows: AgRaWNT 1. lWaRgraft y itals. The Preamble, the Recitals and all defined terms set forth in both are hereby iniorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full. 2. Q29criRligS of Property. The property, which is the subject of this Development Agreement, is described iM Exhibit A-1 and depicted in Exhibit A-2 attached hereto ("Property"). 3. Interest of" ndo er. The Landowner has a legal or equitable interest in the Property. Landowner represents that all persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property shall be bound by the Agreement. 4. Rely#ions iQ of C1W and Landnat . It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been negotiated and voluntarily entered into by City and Landowner and that Landowner is not an agent of City. The City and Landowner hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and Landowner joint venturers or partners. 5 $59465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 5. E#Ktive go and Imm. 5.1. Lfttiy2, . The effective date of this Agreement ("Effective Date") is 2006, which is the effective date of City Ordinance No. adopting this Agreement. 5.2. Terms. Upon execution, the term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and extjend for a period of fifteen (15) years, unless said term is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement. Following the expiration of the term, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect. Said termination of the Agreement shall not affect any right or duty created by City approvals for the Property adopted prior to, concurrently with, or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement nor the obligations of Sections 20, 24 or 25 of this Agreement. In the event that litigation is filed by a third party (defined to exclude City and Landowners or any assignees of Landowner) which seeks to invalidate this Agreement or the Project Approvals, the expiration date of this Agreement shall be extended for a period equal to the length of time from the time the summons and complaint and/or petition are served on the defendant(s) until the judgment entered by the court is final and not subject to appeal; provided, however, that the total amount of time for which the expiration date shall be extended as a result of such litigation shall not exceed four years. 5.3. Amer eft Ter int} ,,, ation VRn CoW2#9n and Sade of ftid2ogal Lot. This Agreement shaall automatically be terminated, without any further action by either party or need to record arty additional document, with respect to any single-family residential lot within a parcel designated by the Project Approvals for residential use, upon completion of construction and issuance by the City of a final occupancy permit for a dwelling unit upon such residential lot and conveyance of such improved residential lot by Landowner to a bona -fide good -faith purchaser thereof. In connection with its issuance of a final inspection for such improved lot, City shall confirm that all improvements, which are required to serve the lot, as determined by City, have been accepted by City. Termination of this Agreement for any such residential lot as provided for in this Section shall not in any way be construed to terminate or modify any assessment district or Mello -Roos Community Facilities District lien affecting such lot at the time of termination. 6. Use of PE!W . 6.1. V d Right to QRyjd2 . landowner shall have the vested right to develop the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals, the City's existing policies, standards and ordinances (except as expressly modified by thiis Section 6.1 and Section 8.3) and any amendments to any of them as shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to this Agreement. Landowner's vested right to develop the R 859465 Version 4 Final 10/Q4/06 Property shall be subject to subsequent approvals; provided however, except as provided in Section 6.3, that any conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for such subsequent approvals shall not prevent development of the Property for the uses, or reduce the density and intensity of development, or limit the rate or timing of development set forth in this Agreement, so long as Landowner is not in default under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the vested rights granted herein, Landowner agrees that the following obligations, which are presently being developed, shall apply to development of the Property: 6.1.1 Payment of a development fee for a proportionate share of the design and construction cost of the Highway 99 interchange project at Harney Lane. 6.1.2 Payment of Agricultural Land Mitigation fee, as identified in Mitigation Measure , pursuant to the ordinance and/or resolution to be adopted by the City of Lodi. 6.1.3 Payment of Electric Capital Improvement Mitigation fee (see Section 6.4.10) pursuant to the ordinance and/or resolution to be adopted by the City of Lodi. 6.1.4 Payment of development fee for proportionate share of the costs of designing and constructing a water treatment system and/or percolation system for treatment of water acquired from Woodbridge Irrigation District (see Section 6.4.4) pursuant to the ordinance an/or resolution to be adopted by the City of Lodi. With regards to the fees identified in Sections 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, and 6.1.4 and these fees only, Landowner hereby consents to their imposition as conditions of approval on any discretionary or ministerial land use entitlement subsequently granted by the City including but not limited to issuance of building permits. City agrees that the fees payable by the Landowner pursuant to Sections 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3 and 6.1.4 shall be adopted in conformance with applicable law, and shall apply uniformly to all new development on properties within the City that are zoned consistent with the Project Approvals, or apply uniformly to all new development on properties that are similarly situated, whether by geographic location or other distinguishing circumstances. Except for the fees identified in this Agreement including but not limited to the Project Approvals, Sections 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.1.4 and 8.3, no other subsequently enacted development or capital fee shall be imposed as a condition of approval on any discretionary or ministerial decision. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the fees applicable to the development pursuant to the Project Approvals and this Agreement may be increased during the term of this Agreement provided that (1) such increases are limited to annual indexing (i.e. per the Engineering News Record Index, or the CPI, or other index utilized by the City) and as provided in current fee ordinances and (2) the increased fees are adopted in conformance with applicable law, apply uniformly to all new development on properties within the City that are zoned consistent with the Project Approvals, or apply uniformly to all new development on properties that are similarly situated, whether by geographic location or other distinguishing 7 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 circumstances. The initial adjustment shall be effective as of four years after the Effective Date of the Agreement and shah be calculated based on the difference in the applicable index from the numerical rate at the and of the month following the third year after the Effective Date and the numerical rate at the end of the month following the fourth year after the Effective Date. All subsequent increases shall be based on the annual change in the applicable index. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, index adjustments to the fees set forth in Section 8.2, subsections 2, 3 and 4 shall be effective annually as set forth in the relevant ordinances and resolutions. Moreover, Landowner will be subject to the indexing called for above even if Landowner has filed a complete application for a Vesting Tentative Map and will not vest against such indexing until payment of the fees as called for in this Agreement. 6.2. Perlott,o Uggs. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements, location of public utilities and other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Property, shall be those set forth in this Agreement, the Project Approvals and any amendments to this Agreement or the Project Approvals. City acknowledges that the Project Approvals provide for the land uses and approximate acreages for the Property as set forth in Pte. chibjt B-1 and Exhibit B-2. 6.3. NowAgwigm. QMgW. EWIpkiadons gr Oftr ro h WMIbLtIons. Landowner and City intend that, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, this Agreement shall vest the Project Approvals against subsequent City resolutions, ordinances and initiatives approved by the City Council or the electorate that directly or indirectly limit the rate, timing, or sequencing of development, or prevent or conflict with the permitted uses, density and intensity of uses or the right to receive public services as set forth in the Project Approvals; provided however Landowner shall be subject to rules, regulations or policies adopted as a result of changes in federal or state law (as provided in Section 7.3) which are or have been adopted on a uniformly applied, City-wide or area -wide basis, in which case City shall treat Landowner in a uniform, equitable and proportionate manner with all properties, public and private, which are impacted by the changes in federal or state law. 6.31 ANoeations Under Oi#v Growth Renscon ent Erourarn a. Allocations Required Prior to Mkp Augroval Consistent with the City's Growth Management Program, which shall apply to the Project, except as otherwise provided herein, no tentative map for any portion of the Property shall be issued until such time as Landowner has obtained allocations for each residential unit within the area covered by such map, consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance (Ordinance 1521), codified as Section 15.34 of the City of Lodi Municipal Code. 0 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 b. _ Schle of Allocation of Residential _Unit The following schedule of residential unit allocations shall apply to the Project. i Initial Allgoti n: As of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the following number of residential units shall be initially allocated to the Project from the City's reserve of unused allocations ("Initial Allocation"): 300 Low Density units 300 High Density units { units shall be used to construct apartment units adjacent to Highway 12/Kettfeman Lane as shown in the Project Approvals) Except for the requirement set forth in Section 6.3.1(a) above the Initial Allocation has been determined to be exempt from and in compliance with the provisions of the Growth Management Ordinance and Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171 (timing and point system requirements). ii Sybseguent Annual Allocations: As of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall be entitled to apply for future annual allocations in three-year increments, and on a rolling basis. Provided that Landowner otherwise complies with the City's Growth Management Program, Landowner shall be entitled to annual allocations set forth in Exhibit E ("Annual Allocations"). If Landowner elects in any year to request fewer allocations than provided for in Exhibit E or if the term of any allocation granted expires before it is used as part of obtaining a subdivision map, Landowner shall be entitled to receive, upon submission of a complete growth management allocation application, additional allocations after the eighth year of this Agreement and through the term of this Agreement incluceng any extension thereto granted pursuant to Section 5.2. The total number of growth management allocations granted hereunder shall be limited to the number of residential units approved as part of the Project Approvals excluding any senior housing residential units. The use of such allocations shall be restricted to the year for which such allocations were made, consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Landowner may request additional allocations, over and above those set forth in Exhibit "E", and City may grant such allocations in its discretion, provided such additional allocations are consistent with the City's Growth Management Allocation Program, Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171, subject to such additional community benefits and/or exactions negotiated upon such a request. Landowner is not required to apply for such allocations on an annual basis. Landowner may instead comply with all development plan and related requirements under the Growth Management Ordinance and Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171 every third year, at which time 0 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 Landowner may apply for allocations for the next three-year period. After the expiration of the year for which an Annual Allocation was issued to Landowner, Landowner may submit a request and t* issued by the City another Annual Allocation, such that Landowner may maintain, on a rolling basis, a number of allocations equal to three Annual Allocations. Except for allowing the Landowner this flexibility in terms of the number of years for which Landowner may apply, all requests for Annual Allocations must otherwise comply with the Growth Management Ordinance and Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171. The requirement that Landowner apply for Annual Allocations does not alter the vested rights of the Project, specifically as to the General Plan and zoning designation of the Project. (c) Growth Manaaement Ordinance in full force and effect: Except where otherwise specifically stated herein, nothing in this section 6.3.1 is intended to modify in any way the City's Growth Management Program, including its exemptions under Section 15.34.040 (e.g., for senior citizen housing). Section 6.3.2 Future Growth Control Ordinances/Policies, Etc. (a) One of the specific purposes of this Agreement is to assure Developer that, during the term of this Agreement no growth -management ordinance, measure, policy, regulation or development moratorium of City adopted by the City Council or by vote of the electorate after the Effective Date of this Agreement will apply to the Property in such a manner so as to the reduce the density of development , modify the permissible uses, or modify the phasing of the development as set forth in the Project Approvals. (b) Therefore, the parties hereto agree that, except as otherwise expressly provided in the Project Approvals, Sections 6.1, 6.3.1 or 6.4 or other provision of this Agreement which expressly authorize City to make such pertinent changes, no ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, decision or any other City action, or any initiative or referendum voted on by the public, which would be applicable to the Project and which would affect in any way the rate of development, construction and build out of the Project, or limit the Project's ability to receive any other City service shall be applicable to any portion of the Project during the term of this Agreement, whether such action is by ordinance, enactment, resolution, approval, policy, rule, regulation, decision or other action of City or by public initiative or referendum. (c) City, through the exercise of either its police power or its taking power, whether by direct City action or initiative or referendum, shall not establish, enact or inose any additional conditions, dedications, fees or other exactions, policies, standards, laws or regulations, which directly relate to the development of the Project except as provided in Sections 6.1, 6.3.1, or 6.4 herein or other provision of this Agreement which expressly allows City to make such changes. Nothing herein prohibits the Project from being subject to a (i) City - 10 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 wide bond issue, (ii) City -Wide special or general tax, or (iii) special assessment for the construction or maintenance of a City-wide facility as may be voted on by the electorate or otherwise enacted; provided that such tax, assessment or measure is City-wide in nature, does not discriminate against the land within the Project and does not distinguish between developed and undeveloped parcels. (d) This Agreement shall not be construed to limit the authority of City to charge processing fees for land use approvals, public facilities fees and building permits as they relate to plumbing, mechanical, electric or fire code permits, or other similar permits and entitlements which are in force and effect on a city-wide basis at the time those permits are applied for, except to the extent any such processing regulations would be inconsistent with this Agreement. (e) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the City may condition or deny a permit, approval, extension, or entitlement if it determines any of the following: (1) A failure to do so would place the residents of the Project or the immediate community, or both, in a condition dangerous to their heafth or safety, or both. (2) The condition or denial is required in order to comply with state or federal law (see Section 7.3). 6.4. AdInor-mll CondW s. 6.4.1. Tb nlno of DmUcOms W -d Im2[p men% o„�ftft RUM th 22IMOIN Plc 'Landowner agrees to dedicate park land and complete consOuction of all the parr improvements as described and set forth in the Project Approvals at its sole cost and expense. The lists of the parks and park improvements contemplated herein are set forth in Exhibit "I" and "J". Landowner and City agree that the provision of land and the construction of all park facilities and installation of equipment within the Project boundaries will satisfy Landowner's Quimby Act obligations as set forth in Lodi Municipal Code Chapter Therefore, Landowner shall not be obligated to pay any additional park fees, other than the payments required pursuant to Section 6.4.8, and Landowner shall not be entitled to any credit for the value of the improvements constructed or equipment installed. The phasing of such improvements shall be in compliance with the Phasing Schedule included in Exhibit I. With regards to the park improvements listed in Exhibit J, prior to approval by the City of the first tentative subdivision map, Landowner shall prepare plans and specifications for all park improvements included in the Project Approvals and submit those plans and specifications to the City for review and approval which approval will not be unreasonably withheld provided that the plans and specifications contain all park improvements listed in Exhibit J and satisfy all 11 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 applimble conditions of approval included in the Project Approvals. The Landowner shall construct the parks in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. The City will inspect improvements during construction. If improvements are of poor quality and/or do not meet the requirements of approved plans and specifications, the City will notify the Landowner in writing and the Landowner, at its sole cost, shall correct any errors or deficiencies. The Landowner shall construct the parks to the satisfaction of the City, which shall be defined as compliance with the approved plans and specifications. 6.4.2 Paynwt of WRY, Exit Few The Lodi Electric Utility is a city -owned and operated utility that provides electrical utility services for residential, commercial and industrial customers in Lodi. As the proposed project sites would be annexed to the City of Lodi, the Lodi Electric Utility would provide electrical utility services to the project site. To the extent that Landowner is assessed "exit fees," also known as "Cost Responsibility Surcharges," by Pacific Gas & Electric for its departing load, Landowner shall pay said fees when they are due. Landowner may, at its option and at its own cost, request a Cost Responsibility Surcharge Exemption from the California Energy Commission for any qualified departing load pursuant to Title 20, California Code of Regulations, Section 1395, et. seq. Forms for the exemption are available on-line at http://www.ene[gy.ca.gov/exit fees/documents/2004-02- 18 PGE EXEMPAPPL.PDF City makes no representation that Landowner is eligible for exemptions pursuant to these regulations. Landowner agrees to save, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City from any and all costs, judgments or awards owed to Pacific Gas & Electric arising out of or related to City's provision of electrical utility services to the project site. 64; Maintenance of Specified Public Improyments Landowner agrees to provide or pay for all park, median strip, and other landscaping maintenance and repairs for two years for lands dedicated by the Landowner to the City and accepted by the City. In the event that Landowner chooses to pay the City for the costs of maintenance and repair, the City shall provide an estimate of the annual costs and the Landowner shall pay the full amount within thirty calendar days after the City by U.S. Mail or email, transmits the estimate to the Landowner. If the amount paid to the City exceeds the actual amount incurred by the City plus reasonable staff costs to administer the contract, the City shall, within a reasonable period of time, refund the difference to the Landowner. 5.4•'x. W tWTrapatrner►t angor Perco-tabon Qost Landowner shall pay a fee based on the proportionate share of the costs of designing and constructing a water treatment system and/or percolation system for treatment of water acquired by the City from the Woodridge Irrigation District. Landowner shall pay the fee as required under the fee program to be development by the City, but in no event later than when water service connection for each residential, office and commercial unit is provided. 12 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 6.4.$ LiSMI Lips elm- City is preparing a policy pursuant to which property developed will pay the actual costs of capital improvements necessary to extend utility services to a development. Landowner acknowledges that such an extension is necessary to implement the Project Approvals on the Property. Landowner agrees to pay the City, pursuant to the policy to be adopted by the City, the costs of the capital improvements necessary to extend utility services to the Property. 6.4.E _ PAm20t for _ Park ,.,lag Recren n DeR§dMt Eauitrment In addition to construction of any park and public works improvements required pursuant to the Project Approvals and tNs Agreement, Landowner shall pay One Hundred Thousand U.S. dollars ($100,000) to the City for use to acquire equipment for the Lodi Parks and Recreation and Public Works Departments. The amount payable hereunder shall be paid based upon the following schedule of payments: Payment Due Dates Payment Amount 1. Payment of $100,000 for acquisition of parks equipment/ Lawnmower upon the effective date of this Agreement. The Project Approvals require the installation of specified public and private improvements. Landowner shall, as speoified in the Project Approvals, either design, engineer and construct the following improvements or pay the City the appropriate fee for the design, engineering and construction of said improvements. The obligations imposed on the Landowner herein shall be in addition to any other obligations set forth in this Agreement In the event that any of Developer's improvements encroach upon any city facilities, property or rights of way, developer shall indemnify City against any and all expenses, including legal fees, incurred by the City to secure replacement facilities, property or rights of way. 6.4.7.1 Surface Wabr Facilites Transmission Main (Proportionate share of the total design, engineering and construction costs) Stone Tank (Proportionate share of the total design, engineering and construction costs) 6.4.7.2 Water Suaoly EMINAw 13 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04106 One r*w water well to cover proposed development within the Southwest Gateway and Westside development areas. The well will be installed in the Westside area at the location identified in the Project Approvals or approved by the City Engineer. The well shall be installed and operational on or before . Satisfaction of this requirement shall also constitute satisfaction of the requirement set forth in Section 6.4. of the FCB Westside Development Agreement. Similarly, if the well is installed to comply with Section 6.4 of the FCB Westside Development Agreement and the well is accepted by the City, this requirement shall be deemed satisfied. All wafer pipes and related infrastructure in all streets. Any ir0erim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director. All serer pipes and related infrastructure in all streets. Any iriterim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director. All re4ycled water pipes and related infrastructure for irrigations systems located in or on streets, public and private school sites (to property boundary line only), places of assembly including but not limited to religious facilities (to property boundary line only), and high density residential sites. Provide up to a maximum of $50,000 to partially fund the City of Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study. 6.1.7.1 %Rrm OWnalg Faclilftm All stormwater pipes and related infrastructure in all streets and basins. All starmwater detention basins, control structures, pumping facilities and appurtenant piping and controls. Any iflterim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director. Developer will be entitled to apply for reimbursement under Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 16.40 for benefit received by undeveloped properties as a result of the construction of the improvements required by this paragraph. Without limiting in any manner, the City Council's future exercise of its legislative discretion in the public hearing called for by Chapter 16.40, the parties anticipate that the benefited properties will be those set forth in Exhibit J. The parties 14 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 also expressly acknowledge the final determination of benefited properties shall be determined pursuant to process set forth in Chapter 16.40. (i) Design and construct all streets within the Project Boundary as set forth in the Project Approvals. (ii) Dedicate land necessary for and design and install improvements including curb, gutter, sidevalk and landscaping on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road between Lodi Shopping Center' and Harney Lane. The land dedicated and the improvements installed shall be consistent with Lodi standards and the Project Approvals. (iii) Dedicate land adjacent to the Project frontage which is necessary for expansion of Harney Lane between Legacy Estates Unit No. 1 and the western City sphere of influence boundary as established in the General Plan and as necessary to comply with the City standards and Project Approvals. In addition, in the event that City, in compliance with applicable laws, takes action to form an assessment district to pay the costs of design and construction of Harney Lane as described herein, Landowner agrees to cast all votes within the control of Landowner in favor of formation of the assessment district and to not protest the formation of the assessment district. In the event, that City elects not to create an assessment district or there are not sufficient votes cast in favor of the assessment district to allow its formation, Landowner shall, at its sole cost, design and construct the improvements to Harney Lane adjacent to the Property necessary to meet City standards and to comply with the Project Approvals. (iv) Payment of fees assessed for recent underground utility improvements related to Lower Sacramento Road pursuant to Lodi Resolution No. , dated November 2006. The fee amount payable as of the Effective Date is $460,700. The amount payable shall be increased consistent with the index provision of Lodi Resolution No. . The amount due is based on the proportionate share of demand for the improvements arising from the Project Approvals. The fee shall be paid no later than , 2006. (v) Dedication of necessary land, design and installation of transition roadway lane adjacent to the Property along Highway 12/Kettleman Lane. (v) Payment of Fair Share Costs for traffic mitigation measures that are not projects within the Streets & Roads Fee Program. Realignment to location approved by City and reconstruction of Domestic Trunk and Industrial Trunk Lines that presently cross the Property. Pursuant to Lodi Resolution No. 2004-29, pay existing reimbursement obligations which presently total $300,206.43 related to the Harney Lane Sewer Lift Station and Trunk Line. The amount payable shall be paid upon submission of the first tentative subdivision map which 15 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 covers in part any portion of parcels 058-040-01, 058-040-02, 058-040-04, 058-040-05 or 058- 040-14. Within six years of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall pay the City Eight Million U.S. dollars ($8,000,000) for the design, engineering and construction of DeBenedetti Park as set forth in the plan. Landowner may satisfy part or all of this obligation through the provision of services necessary to design and construct DeBenedetti Park provided that (1) Landowner requests and obtains advance written approval from the City for any design or construction services provided which said approval shall include an agreed upon value of said services, and (2) Landowner complies with all applicable laws including but not limited to laws requiring payment of prevailing wages for any construction services or actions. Landowner acknowledges that City will enter into contracts to design and construct Debenedetti Park. As consideration for City's agreement to authorize satisfaction of this obligation, Landowner agrees to the following payment schedule: 1. Not later than three (3) years after the approval of this Agreement by the City Council, Landowner shall pay the City two million U.S. Dollars ($2,000,000). In the event, that any party other than the City or Landowner file a litigation challenging the approval by the City of the Project Approvals, the payment specified herein shall be due not later than four (4) years after the approval of this Agreement by the City Council. Landowner's failure to pay the amount required herein shall be considered a material default of this Agreement. 2. Not later than five years after the approval of this Agreement by the City Council, Landowner shall pay the City an additional three million U.S. Dollars ($3,000,000). Landowner's failure to pay the amount required herein shall be considered a material default of this Agreement. 3. No later than six years after the approval of this Agreement by the City Council, Landowner shall either (1) pay the City an additional three million U.S. Dollars ($3,000,000) or (2) provide a letter of credit payable to the City or other form of security acceptable to the City in an amount equal to $3,000,000. The letter of credit or other form of security shall be subject to review and approval as to form by the City Attorney. Landowner further acknowledges that the City may choose to obtain financing for the design and construction costs of DeBenedetti Park and Landowner agrees that the letter of credit or other form of security provided for herein shall be required to be in a form that is necessary to assist the City in obtaining financing at competitive market interest rates. City agrees that Landowner may substitute a letter of credit, in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, for a lesser amount upon satisfaction of a portion of the total obligation set forth herein. Upon delivery of such replacement letter of credit and its 16 859465 Versiem 4 Final 10/04/06 approval as to form by the City Attorney, the City will release and convey to Landowner the prior letter of credit. City further agrees that the other form of security may be in the form of a promissory note and deed of trust secured by a portion of the Property which has a value equal to a minimum of $3,000,000.. The outstanding principal balance set forth in the Promissory Note shall not accrue interest. Notwithstanding anything to the contrary set forth herein, the entire outstanding payment obligation required pursuant to this section shall be payable in full upon the sale or other Transfer of the Property encumbered by the Deed of Trust ("Restricted Property") or (ii) the occurrence of an Event of Default as specified in the Promissory Note or Deed of Trust. The Deed of Trust shall be recorded against the Restricted Property subordinate only to such liens as City may approve in writing. The City will not unreasonably withhold consent to subordinate the Promissory Note and Deed of Trust to construction financing for the Project provided that the principal amount of such construction financing does not exceed seventy-five percent (75%) of the appraised fair market value of the Project and the Restricted Property, and provided further that the senior lender agrees to provide reasonably adequate protections to City, including reasonable notice and cure rights in the event of default, and an agreement that if, prior to foreclosure of the senior loan, the City takes title to the Restricted Property and cures the default, the lender will not exercise any right it may have to accelerate the loan by reason of the transfer of title to the City. The parties further agree that the if final $3,000,000 payment required herein has not been paid by or before the end of the eighth year after approval of this Agreement by the City Council, the City may require payment pursuant to the terms of the letter of credit or other form of security provided and may foreclose on the deed of trust and promissory note. 6.5 Anr'� ax tion The ability to proceed with development of the Property pursuant to the Project Approwals shall be contingent upon the annexation of the Property into the City. Pending such annexation, Landowner may, at its own risk, process tentative parcel maps and tentative subdivision maps and improvement or construction plans and City may conditionally approve such tentative maps and/or improvement plans in accordance with the Entitlements, provided City shall not approve any final parcel map or final subdivision map for recordation nor approve the issuance of any grading permit for grading any portion of the Property or building permit for any structure within the Property prior to the annexation of the Property to the City. City shall use its best efforts and due diligence to initiate such annexation process, obtain the necessary approvals and consummate the annexation of the Property into the City, 17 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 including entering into any annexation agreement that may be required in relation thereto, subjedt to the City's review and approval of the terms thereof. Landowner shall be responsible for the costs reasonably and directly incurred by the City to initiate, process and consummate such annexation, the payment of which shall be due in advance, based on the City's estimate of such cost, and thereafter as and when the City provides an invoice(s) for additional costs incurred by City therefore in excess of such estimate. 7. cabla ties. Regulations. Fees and Official Policies. 7.1. RuWn Rogerin Per .MW Uses Except as provided in this Agreement, the City's ordi antes, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the rate timing and sequencing of development, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land shall be those in force on the Effective Date of this Agreement. Except as provided in Section 8.2, this Agreement does not vest Landowner's rights to pay development impact fees, exactions and dedications, processing fees, inspection fees, plan checking fees or charges. 7.2. Ru Fl2goingn and Cons&uction. The Project has been designed as a Planned elopment pursuant to Chapter 17.33 of the Lodi Municipal Code. Design, improvements and construction standards shall be as set forth in Project Approvals inclucing the Development Plan, and shall be vested for the term of this Agreement. Unless otherwise provided within the Development Pian or expressly provided in this Agreement, all other ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Project and to public improvements to be constructed by the Landowner shall be those in force and effect at the time the applicable permit approval is granted. 7.3. CWnnes in State or Feeral Law. This Agreement shall not preclude the application to development of the Property of changes in City laws, regulations, plans or policies, the terms of which are specifically mandated and required by changes in State or Federal laws or regulations. These changes may include any increase in an existing fee or imposition of a new fee that are necessary for the City or Landowner to comply with changes in State or Federal laws or regulations, including but not limited to sewer, water and stormwater laws or regulations. 7.4. Ugftm Cees Anctll e. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, the Project shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes, City standard construction specilfications, and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, relating to Building Standards, in effect at the time of approval of the appropriate building, grading, encroachment or other construction permits for the Project. If no permits are required for infrastructure improvements, 18 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 such improvements will be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes, City standard construction specifications, and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, relating to Building Standards, in effect at the start of construction of such infrastructure. 8.1. Proo"na EM 11nd Qhanm. Landowner shall pay those processing, inspection, and plan check fees and charges required by City under then current regulations for processing applications and requests for permits, approvals and other actions, and monitoring compfiance with any permits issued or approvals granted or the performance of any conditions with respect thereto or any performance required of Landowner hereunder. 8.2. Exiong Fees, Exactifs and moons Landowner shall be obligated to provide all deications and exactions and pay all types of fees as required for the types of development authorized by the Project Approvals as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. With regards any fees applicable to residential development, the Parties agree that the fees shall be payable at the earliest time authorized pursuant to the Government Code Section 66007 as it exists as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. The specific categories of fees payable are listed below. The dedication and exaction obligations and fee amounts payable shall be those obligations and fee amounts applicable (indexed as set forth hereinbelow) as of the date that the Landowner's application for the applicable vesting tentative map is deemed complete. For any development for which the Landowner has not submitted a vesting tentative map, the dedication and exaction obligations and fee amounts payable shall be those obligations and fee amounts applicable (indexed as set forth hereinbelow) as of the date the final discretionary approval for that development is granted by the City. Standard City Development Impact Fees Payable by the Landowner include: 1. Development Impact Fees (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 15.64) 2. San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 15.65 3. County Facilities Fee (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 15.66) 4. San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Development Fee (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 15.68) Any existing fees may be increased during the term of this Agreement provided that such incresses are limited to annual indexing (i.e. per the Engineering News Record Index, or the CPI, or other index utilized by the City) and as provided in current fee ordinances. The initial adjustment shall be effective as of four years after the Effective Date of the Agreement and shall be calculated based on the difference in the applicable index from the numerical rate at the end of the month following the third year after the Effective Date and the numerical rate at the end of 19 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/46 the month following the fourth year after the Effective Date. All subsequent increases shall be based on the annual change in the applicable index. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, index adjustments to the fees set forth in subsections 2, 3 and 4 of this section shall be effective annually as set forth in the relevant ordinances and resolutions. Moreover, Landowner will be subject to the indexing called for above even if Landowner has filed a complete application for a Vesting Tentative Map and will not vest against such indexing until payment of the fees as called for in this Agreement. 8.3. hft Pg"1 RMWt Impact Fees. Exactions and Dedi Landowner agrees to the pay the development fees identified in Section 6.1, including specifically subsections 6. 1.1 through 6.1.4, of this Agreement. With regards any fees applicable to residential development, the Parties agree that the fees shall be payable at the earliest time authorized pursuant to the Government Code Section 66007 as it exists as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. Except as expressly provided herein, Landowner shall not be obligated to pay or provide any development impact fees, connection or mitigation fees, or exactions adopted by City after the Effecttve Date of this Agreement. Notwithstanding this limitation, Landowner may at its sole discretion elect to pay or provide any fee or exaction adopted after the Effective Date of this Agreement. 8.4. Fee RedwLtigns To the extent that any fees payable pursuant to the requirements of Sections 8.1 are reduced after the operative date for determining the fee has occurred, the Landowner shall pay the reduced fee amount. 9. C2=uni!X ,Fac tW Qistrict. Formation of a Community Facilities District for PiAblic Improveinentsland Services. 9.1. Inclusion In a Community ' Facilities District. Landowner agrees to cooperate in the formation of a Community Facilities District pursuant to Government Code Section 53311 at seq. to be formed by the City. The boundaries of the area of Community Facilities District shall be contiguous with the boundaries of the Property excluding the portion of land zoned for commercial or office development. Landowner agrees not to protest said district formation and agrees to vote in favor of levying a special tax on the Property in an amount not to exceed $600 per year per single family attached or detached residential dwelling units and $175 per year for each attached multi -family rental unit as adjusted herein. The special tax shall be initiated for all residential dwelling units for which a building permit is issued, and shall commence to be levied beginning the subsequent fiscal year after the building permit is issued. Landowner acknowledges that the 2007-2008 special tax rate for the units in the Project will not 20 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 exceed $600 per single-family attached or detached dwelling unit and $175 per year for each attached multi -family renttl unit and that the special tax shall increase each year by 2% in perpetuity. A vote by Landowner against the levying of the special tax or a vote to repeal or amend the special tax shah constitute an event of default under this Agreement. 9.2. Use of Community Facilities District Revenues Landowner and City agree that the improvements and services that may be provided with the special tax levied pursuant to Section 9.1 may be used for the following improvements and services: a. Police protection and criminal justice services; b. Fire protection, suppression, paramedic and ambulance services; C. Recreation and library program services; d. Operation and maintenance of museums and cultural facilities; e. Maintenance of park, parkways and open space areas dedicated to the City; f. Flood and storm protection services; g. Improvement, rehabilitation or maintenance of any real or personal property that has been contaminated by hazardous substances; h. Purchase, construction, expansion, improvement, or rehabilitation or any real or tangible property with useful life of more than five years; and, i. Design, engineering, acquisition or construction of public facilities with a useful life of more that five years including: 1. Local park, recreation, parkway and open -space facilities, 2. Libraries, 3. Childcare facilities, 4. Water transmission and distribution facilities, natural gas, telephone, energy and cable television lines, and 5. Government facilities. Landowner and City agree that Property does not presently receive any of these services from the City and that all of these services are new services. 9.3. Codmunky.faciflWN DISM21 for PASINnUll Pro - Fe In addition to the funding provided as part of the Community Facilities District identified in Section 9.1, City acknowledges that Landowner may desire to finance the acquisition or construction of a portion of the improvements described in Section 8.2 through the Community Facilities District. The costs associated with the items identified in Section 8.2 shall be in addition to the annual cost imposed to comply with Section 9.1. The following provisions shall apply to any to the extent that the Landowner desires to fund any of the improvements set forth in Section 8.2 through the Community Facilities District: 21 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 9.3.1 I82M,Cof . City and Landowner agree that, with the consent of Landowner, and to the extent permitted by law, City and Landowner shall use their best efforts to cause bonds to be issued in amounts sufficient to achieve the purposes of this Section. 9.3.2 PAM2nt Prior to Issuance of Bonds. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to preclude the payment by an owner of any of the parcels to be included within the CFD of a cash amount equivalent to its proportionate share of costs for the improvements identified in Section 8.2, or any portion thereof, prior to the issuance of bonds. 9.3.3 Private Financina. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit Landowner's option to install the improvements through the use of private financing. 9.3.4 Acquisition and Payment. City agrees that it shall use its best efforts to allow and facilitate monthly acquisition of completed improvements or completed portions thereof, and monthly payment of appropriate amounts for such improvements to the person or entity constructing improvements or portions thereof, provided City shall only be obligated to use CFD bond or tax proceeds for such acquisitions. 10. Proaasainat of Su[basavent Devekwmnt Awtka iions and Buiidina Permi c Subject to Landowner's compliance with the City's application requirements including, speciffcally, submission of required information and payment of appropriate fees, and assuming Landowner is not in default under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City shall process Landowner's subsequent development applications and building permit requests in an expeditious manner. In addition, City agrees that upon payment of any required City fees or costs, City will designate or retain, as necessary, appropriate personnel and consultants to process Landowner's development applications and building permit requests City approvals in an expeditious manner. 11. ReMOM 11. 6MdmMS.or QW21101on. 11.1. M24feallort Because of Conflilat with SMAp or Fedwel LW . In the event that State or Fediral laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this 22 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 Agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the City, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such federal or State law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension of the Agreement shall be approved by the City Council in accordance with the Municipal Code and this Agreement. 11.2. Amolidmont by tlllllikal Consent. This Agreement may be amended in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the parties hereto and in accordance with the procedures of State law and the Municipal Code. 11,3. Ins tae#iat Amertdents. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceding Section 12.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a) the term of the Agreement as provided in Section 5.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in Sections 6.2 and 7.1; (c) provisions for reservation or dedication of land; (d) the location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings or (g) monetary contributions by Landowner as provided in this Agreement shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before either the Planning Commission or the City Council before the parties may execute an amendment hereto. 11.4. AMgndnrwnt of Proiect Approvals. Any amendment of Project Approvals relating to: (a) the permitted use of the Property; (b) provision for reservation or dedication of land; (c) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (d) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; (e) monetary contributions by the Landowner; (f) the location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements; or (g) any other issue or subject not identified as an "insubstantial amendment' in Section 12.3 of this Agreement, shalf require an amendment of this Agreement. Such amendment shall be limited to those provisions of this Agreement, which are implicated by the amendment of the Project Approval. Any other amendment of the Project Approval(s) shall not require amendment of this Agreement unless the amendment of the Project Approval(s) relates specifically to some provision of this Agreement. 11.5. CaU011don by Mutual Co t. Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement may be canceled in whole or in part only by the mutual consent of the parties or their successors in interest, in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Any fees paid pursuant to this Agreement prior to the date of cancellation shall be retained by City. 12. Term of ftW@o Mpravals. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66452.6(x), the term of any parcel map or tentative subdivision map shall automatically be extended for the term of this Agreement. 13. Annual Renew. 23 859465 Version 4 Finai 10/04/06 13.1. ftyllow P02. The annual review date for this Agreement shall occur either within the same month each year as the month in which the Agreement is executed or the month immediately thereafter. 13.2. 1 ItkWon of Resew. The City's Planning Director shall initiate the annual review by giving td Landowner written notice that the City intends to undertake such review. Within thirty (30) days of City's notice, Landowner shall provide evidence to the Planning Director to demonstrate good faith compliance with the Development Agreement. The burden of proof, by substantial evidence of compliance, is upon the Landowner. The City's failure to timely initiate the annual review is not deemed to be a waiver of the right to do so at a later date; accordingly, Landowner is not deemed to be in compliance with the Agreement by virtue of such failure to timely initiate review. 13.3. S a ReeQrte. City shall deposit in the mail to Landowner a copy of all staff reports, and related Exhibits, concerning contract performance at least three (3) days prior to any annual review. 13.4. Qla. Costs reasonably incurred by the City in connection with the annual review shall be paid by Landowner in accordance with the City's schedule of fees and billing rates in effect at the time of review. 13.5. Nog;VM1M11Mg2 wft. If the Planning Director determines, on the basis of 'substantial evidence, that Landowner has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the Agreement during the period under review, the City Council, upon receipt of any report or recommendation from the Planning Commission, may initiate proceedings to modify or terminate the Agreement, at which time an administrative hearing shall be conducted, in accordance with the procedures of State law. As part of that final determination, the City Council may impose conditions that it considers necessary and appropriate to protect the interest of the City. 13.6. ApVMI f Q&M21natfon. The decision of the City Council as to Landowner's compliance small be final, and any Court action or proceeding to attack, review, set aside, void or annul any decision of the determination by the Council shall be commenced within thirty (30) days of the final decision by the City Council. 14. alt. Subject to any applicable extension of time, failure by any party to substantially perform any term or provision of this Agreement required to be performed by such parry shall constitute a material event of default ("Event of Default"). For purposes of this Agreement, a party claiming another party is in default shall be referred to as the "Complaining Party," and the party alleged to be in default shall be referred to as the "Party in Default." A Comp#aining Party shall not exercise any of its remedies as the result of such Event of Default 24 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 unless such Complaining Parry first gives notice to the Party in Default as provided in Section 15.1.1, and the Party in Default fails to cure such Event of Default within the applicable cure period. 14.1. ProNdw'*%Mong EWSUJ . 14.1.1. NcaUce. The Complaining Party shall give written notice of defauk to the Party in Default, specifying the default complained of by the Complaining Party. Delay in giving such notice shall not constitute a waiver of any default nor shall it change the time at default. 14.1.2. Cure. The Party in Default shall diligently endeavor to cure, correct or remedy the matter complained of, provided such cure, correction or remedy shall be completed within the applicable time period set forth herein after receipt of written notice (or such additional time as may be deemed by the Complaining Party to be reasonably necessary to correct the matter). 14.1.3. Faure to Asart. Any failures or delays by a Complaining Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies. Delays by a Complaining Parry in asserting any of its rights and remedies shall not deprive the Complaining Party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings, which it may deem necessary to protect, assert, or enforce any such rights or remedies. 14.1.4. Notice of Default. If an Event of Default occurs prior to exercising any remedies, the Complaining Parry shall give the Party in Default written notice of such default. If the default is reasonably capable of being cured within thirty (30) days, the Parry in Default shall have such period to effect a cure prior to exercise of remedies by the Complaining Party. If the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot, practicably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, the cure shall be deemed to have occurred within such thirty (30) day period if: (a) the cure shall be commenced at the earliest practicable date following receipt of the notice; (b) the cure is diligently prosecuted to completion at all times thereafter; (c) at the earliest practicable date (in no event later than thirty (30) days after the curing party's receipt of the notice), the curing parry provides written notice to the other party that the cure cannot practicably be completed within such thirty (30) day period; and (d) the cure is completed at the earliest practicable date. In no event shall Complaining Party be precluded from exercising remedies if a default is not cured within ninety (90) days after the first notice of default is given. 14.1.5. Legal Proceedings. Subject to the foregoing, if the Party in Default fails to cure a default in accordance with the foregoing, the Complaining Party, at its option, may institute legal proceedings pursuant to this Agreement or, in the event of a material 25 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 defaL*, terminate this Agreement. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, the parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity, which are not otherwise provided for or prohibited by this Agreement, or in the City's regulations if any governing development agreements, expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement. 14.1.6. Eftliect of Ter (nation. If this Agreement is terminated following any Event of Default of Landowner or for any other reason, such termination shall not affect the validity of any building or improvement within the Property which is completed as of the date of termination, provided that such building or improvement has been constructed pursuant to a building permit issued by the City. Furthermore, no termination of this Agreement shall prevent Landowner from completing and occupying any building or other improvement authorized pursuant to a valid building permit previously issued by the City that is under construction at the time of termination, provided that any such building or improvement is completed in accordance with said building permit in effect at the time of such termination. 15. Estoppel Wificate. Either Party may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other Party requesting such Party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties; (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments; and (c) to the knowledge of the certifying Party the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within thirty (30) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to by the Parties. City Manager of City shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by Landowner. Should the party receiving the request not execute and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be deemed to be a default. 16. r f Qure- 16.1. AlIg"go Prok2tion. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon the Property, or any portion thereof after the date of recording this Agreement, including the lien for any deed of trust or mortgage ("Mortgage"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ("Mortgagee") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise. 16.2. Nlof ObIlIsSM. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 17.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the construction of P161 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 improvements, or to guarantee such construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon, authorized by the Project Approvals or by this Agreement, unless Mortgagee agrees to and does construct or complete the construction of improvements, or guarantees such construction of improvements, or pays, performs or provides any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition as required by the Project Approvals. 16-3. of Defoutt to RfWwawand LMnllon of FuGht to Qwe. If City receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given Landowner hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then City shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to Landowner, any notice given to Landowner with respect to any claim by City that Landowner has committed an Event of Default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to Landowner to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the Event of Default claimed set forth in the City's notice. City, through its City Manager, may extend the cure period provided in Section 15.1.2 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request of Landowner or a Mortgagee. 17. S9verab1l1 1. Except as set forth herein, if any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person, entity or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons, entities or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and each term, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law; provided, however, if any provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid or unenforceable and the effect thereof is to deprive a Party hereto of an essential benefit of its bargain hereunder, then such Party so deprived shall have the option to terminate this entire Agreement from and after such determination. 18. Amicable* jam. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 19. A e in LaW &JgM By Parties to the- A t. Should any legal action be brought by either party for breach of this Agreement or to enforce any provisions herein, the prevailing parry to such action shall be entitled to reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs, and such other costs as may be fixed by the Court. 20. Attorrneys' Fees and Costs in Le" Acts By Third Parti2s to the AgE@UnW and QondyM ft Proceselling. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an actron at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the Project Approvals, the parties shall cooperate and appear in defending such 27 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 action, Landowner shall bear its own costs of defense as a real party in interest in any such action. Landowner shall reimburse City on an equal basis for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by City in defense of any such action or other proceeding and shall pay any attorneys fees and costs that may be awarded to the third party or parties. The City agrees that in the event an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of the Project Approvals is filed by a third party other than by a state or federal agency, the City will continue to process and approve permit applications that are consistent with and Comply with the Project Approvals unless a court enjoins further processing of permit applications and issuance of permits. 21. Trarsfeus #ad _&aenments. From and after recordation of this Agreement against the Property, Landowner shall have the full right to assign this Agreement as to the Property, or any portion thereof, in connection with any sale, transfer or conveyance thereof, and upon the express written assignment by Landowner and assumption by the assignee of such assignment in the form attached hereto as Exhibit G, and the conveyance of Landowner's interest in the Property related thereto, Landowner shall be released from any further liability or obligation hereunder related to the portion of the Property so conveyed and the assignee shall be deemed to be the "Landowner," with all rights and obligations related thereto, with respect to such conveyed property. Prior to recordation of this Agreement, any proposed assignment of this Agreement by Landowner shall be subject to the prior written consent of the City Manager on behalf of the City and the form of such assignment shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney, neither of which shall be unreasonably withheld. 22.with ft Land. Except as otherwise provided for in Section 15 of this Agreement, all of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitude and shall constitute covenants running with tete land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on the Property hereunder, or with respect to any owned property; (a) is for the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such properties; (b) runs with such properties; and (c) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. 23. Bankruptcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy. 24. IndWnifi___gWion. Landowner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and its elected and appointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, 28 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for (1) any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the Landowner, or any actions or inactions of Landowner's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Property and the Project, provided that Landowner shall have no indemnification obligation with respect to the gross negligence or willful misconduct of City, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it has been dedicated to and accepted by the City or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond) and (2) any additional mitigation required, including but not limited to payment of any mitigation fees that may be imposed, as a result of a lawsuit filed by a third party challenging or seeking to invalidate the Project Approvals. 25. n n 25.1. PuMW LiLtiab ft and ProporW Dacnew InE armee. At all times that Landowner is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Landowner shall maintain in effect a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance with a per -occurrence combined single limit of not less than two million ($2,000,000) dollars and a deductible of not more than fifty thousand ($50,000) dollars per claim. The policy so maintained by Landowner shall name the City as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause or cross -liability endorsement. 25.2. WOW' Compensation Insurance. At all times that Landowner is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Landowner shall maintain Workers' Compensation insurance for all persons employed by Landowner for work at the Project site. Landowner shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Workers' Compensation insurance for its respective employees. Landowner agrees to indemnify the City for any damage resulting from Landowner's failure to maintain any such insurance. 25.3. Evidbnce of ,lnsWance. Prior to commencement of construction of any improvements which will become public improvements, Landowner shall furnish City satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in Sections 26.1 and 26.2 and evidence that the carrier is required to give the City at least fifteen (15) days prior written notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy. The insurance shall extend to the City, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives and to Landowner performing work on the Project. 26. [ie _for. Nolorrnce. Landowner and City shall be excused from performing any obligation or undertaking provided in this Agreement, except any obligation to pay any sum of money under the applicable provisions hereof, in the event and so long as the 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed, retarded or hindered by act of God, fire, earthquake, flood, explosion, action of the elements, war, invasion, insurrection, riot, mob violence, sabotage, inability to procure or general shortage of labor, equipment, facilities, matertls or supplies in the open market, failure of transportation, strikes, lockouts, condemnation, requisition, laws, orders of governmental, civil, military or naval authority, or any other cause, whether similar or dissimilar to the foregoing, not within the control of the Party claiming the extension of time to perform. The Parry claiming such extension shall send written notice of the claimed extension to the other Party within thirty (30) days from the commencement of the cause entitling the Party to the extension. 27. Thind PartPartX ftWfWaftl. This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Landowner and, the City and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision in this Agreement. 28. N§0s. All notices required by this Agreement, the enabling legislation, or the procedure adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 65865, shall be in writing and delivEwed in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notice required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: CITY OF LODI City Manager P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-19110 Notice required to be given to the Landowner shall be addressed as follows: FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. Either party may change the address stated herein by giving notice in writing to the other party, and thereafter notices shalf be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 29. ForM of Agum=a PwordMon: Il:xhibits. Except when this Agreement is autorr atically terminated dve to the expiration of the Term of the Agreement or the provisions of Section 5.3. (Automatic Termination Upon Completion and Sale of Residential Lot), the City shall cause this Agreement, any amendment hereto and any other termination of any parts or provisions hereof, to be recorded, at Landowner's expense, with the county Recorder within ten (10) days of the effective date thereof. Any amendment or termination of this Agreement to be recorded that affects less than all of the Property shall describe the portion thereof that is the subject of such amendment or termination. This Agreement is executed in three duplicate 30 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. This Agreement consists of _ pages and Exhibits, which constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. 30. Further Aigure. The Parties agree to execute such additional instruments and to undertake such actfbns as may be necessary to effectuate the intent of this Agreement. 31, City Cooperation. The City agrees to cooperate with Landowner in securing all permits which may be required by City. In the event State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date, or action of any governmental jurisdiction, prevent delay or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by City, the parties agree that the provisions of this Agreement shall be modified, extended, or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations or the regulations of other governmental jurisdictions. Each party agrees to extend to the other its prompt and reasonable cooperation in so modifying this Agrement or approved plans. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Lodi, a municipal corporation, has authorized the execution of this Agreement in duplicate by its Mayor and attested to by its City Clerk under the authority of Ordinance No. , adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi on the day of , 2006, and Landowner has caused this Agreement to be executed. "CITY' CITY OF LODI, a municipal corporation By: Name: Blair King Its: Cky Manager ATTEST: City Olerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: 31 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 "LANDOWNER" FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. By: — Name: Its: D. St hit Si*wa#auer City Awry 32 859465 Versi4 final 10/04/06 Exhibit A-1: Exhibit A-2: Exhibit B: Exhibit B-1: Exhibit C-1: Exhibit C-2: Exhibit D: Exhibit E: Exhibit F: Exhibit G: Exhibit H: Exhibit I: Exhibit J: 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 E) H iT Ll T Legal Description of the Property Diagram of the Property General Plan Land Use Map Zoning Map for Project Site Reserved Reserved Development Plan and Infrastructure Map for the Property Growth Management Allocations Annexation Approvals Form of Assignment Scheele of Improvements Park Improvements Required Park Amenities EXHIBIT A-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY The land refecred to herein is situated in the State of California, County of San Joaquin, City of Ldp, and is descrNm d as follows: 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 EXHIBIT A-2 DIAGRAM OF THE PROPERTY 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 EXHH31T C-1 Large Lot Subdivision Map 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 EXHIBIT C-2 Reserved 859465 Versioek 4 Final 10/14/06 EXHIBIT D DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND INPRASTRACTURE MAP FOR THE PROPE=RTY 859465 Version; 4 Final 10/04/06 A�ii :] i_d SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATION TABLE AppVable Date Allocation Effecve Date of 300 Low Density units (Reserve) Dev*pfl2gnt Agreement 300 High Density units Reserve Within the Calendar Year One Year 59 Low Density units after Effective Date 75 Medium Density units Within the Calendar Year Two Years 59 Low Density units after Effective Date 29 Medium Density units Within the Calendar Year Three Years 59 Low Density units after Effective Date 28 Medium Density units Within the Calendar Year Four Years 59 Low Density units after Effective Date 28 Medium Density units Within the Calendar Year Five Years 59 Low Density units after Effective Date Within the Calendar Year Six Years 59 Low Density units after Effective Date With* the Calendar Year Seven Years 58 Low Density units after fEffective Date Withil i the Calendar Year Eight Years 58 Low Density units after Effective Date 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 EXHIBIT F ANNEXATION APPROVALS 859465 Versim 4 Final 10/04/06 EXHIBIT G FORM OF ASSIGNMENT OFFICIAL BUSINESS Document entitled to free recording COvemment Code Section 6103 RECORDING REQUE$TED BY AND WHEN RECORDIED MAIL TO: City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1 91 0 Atm: City Clerk (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE) ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT RELATIVE TO FRONTIER COMMUNITY BIHLDERS WESTSIDE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT (hereinafter, the "Agreement") is entered into this day of , 200_ , by and between Frontier Community Builders, a corporation (hereinafter "Developer"), and a (hereinafter "Assignee"). RECITALS 1. On , 2006, the City of Lodi and Developer entered into that certain agreement entified "Development Agreement By and Between The City of Lodi and Frontier Community Builders, Inc. related to the development known as Frontier Community Builders Southwest Gateway Project (hereinafter the "Development Agreement"). Pursuant to the Development Agreement, Developer agreed to develop certain property more particularly described in the Development Agreement (hereinafter, the "Subject Property"), subject to certain conditions and obligations as set forth in the Development Agreement. The Development Agreement was recorded against the 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 Subject Property in the Official Records of San Joaquin County on , 2M6, as Instrument No. _- 2. Developer intends to convey a portion of the Subject Property to Assignee, commonly referred to as Parcel , and more particularly identified and described in Exhibit A-1 and Exhibit A-2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter the "Assigned Parcel"). 3. Developer desires to assign and Assignee desires to assume all of Developer's right, title, interest, burdens and obligations under the Development Agreement with respect to and as related to the Assigned Parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, Developer and Assignee hereby agree as follows: 1. Developer hereby assigns, effective as of Developer's conveyance of the Assigned Parcel to Assignee, all of the rights, title, interest, burdens and obligations of Developer under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel. Developer retains all the rights, title, interest, burdens and obligations under the Development Agreement with respect to all other property within the Subject Properly owned by Developer. 2. Assignee hereby assumes all of the rights, title, interest, burdens and obligations of Developer under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel, and agrees to observe and fully perform all of the duties and obligations of Developer under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel. The parties intend hereby that, upon the execution of this Agreement and conveyance of the Assigned Parcel to Assignee, Assignee shall become substituted for Developer as the "Developer" under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel. 3. All of the covenants, terms and conditions set forth herein shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 4. The Notice Address described in Section 28 of the Development Agreement for the Developer with respect to the Assigned Parcel shall be: 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. This Agreement may be signed in identical counterparts. DF-VELOPER: a By: Punt Name: Tie: division President 854465 Version 4 Final 10104/06 ASSIGNEE: a By: Print Name: Title: EXMB1T N SCHEDULE OF IMPROVEMENTS 859465 Version 4 Final 1 Q/04/06 EXHIBIT I PARK IMPROVEMENTS Westside/Southwest Gateway Development Agreement Basin/Park Area Summary Westside Annexation Park Location Basin (1), acres Net (2),acres Gross, acres Total, acres A 2.9 1.6 1.6 4.5 B 2.1 2.1 2.1 C 8.2 5.4 6.1 14.3 Southwest Gatewav Annexation Location Basin (1), acres Park Net (2),acres Gross, acres Total, acres D 5.9 1.5 1.5 7.4 B 6.7 2.4 2.4 9.1 F 4.8 1.5 1.5 6.3 G 2.2 2.2 2.2 H 2 2 2 Open Space on Century Blvd. 0 0 0 (1) Westside Annexation area basin calculations not approved. The basin area numbers are subject to change. (2) Net area measured from street right of way. Area requirements are exclusive of bike and ped routes. (3) Park to be located at the southwest end of designated area. (4) Park to be located at the south end of designated area. (5) Two slivers of open space are shown on Century Blvd. Neither area provides sufficient space for park facilities. 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 (3) (4) (5) EXHLBJT J REGUHREU PARK AMENMES 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 ©■■■�■�©O©�■�DD©BOO©�© 0�©�■■ODO©D©���OD©FOOD©© �i■©■����i��©SOD©���■ice ©■■s�oo©o©s�■■a0000000©© ©■■■©moo©o©�■■�vo©moo©�■© ®■■■��■���■�o©moo©���i■■ ©■©■000©o©■�■�0000000©© �■■■�■�■��■�■��©moo©���■■�■■ ©�������©o©i■■�oo©moo©■© o�©■■i�■�©o©■■moo©moo©�© ©�©■�■■����■�©o©i■�oo©moo©■© 859465 Version 4 Final 10/04/06 RESOLUTION NO. 200649*44�tr - A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THE SW GATEWAY DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Master Plan Amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Master Plan Amendment on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006, and their motion to recommendation approval to the City Council was defeated on a 2:4 vote; and WHEREAS, the City Council did certify the Environmental Impact Report (EIR- 05-01), and adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to C€QA; and WHEREAS, the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes a Class 1 bike path along the western edge of SW Gateway project area boundary; and WHEREAS, the request is to change the location of the Class 1 bike path shown of the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan to reflect the proposed location within the bike and pedestrian trail centrally located within the SW Gateway Development plan; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: I. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and hold in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The required public hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held In a manner prescribed by law. 4. It is found that the requested Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment does nGt conflict with adop#id plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. J '.CAW1TY1.qkSvte 20Wi-oz-sw C�y-Bikcplm Am nduwm.dm 5. The SW Gateway project would comply with the other bike path locations shown on with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan including a Class I bike path on Century Boulevard (between the western edge of the SW Gateway project boundary and Westgate Drive), a Class II bike path on Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and Century Boulevard (between Westgate Drive and Lower Sacramento Road). Lodi Avenue and a Class II or III bike path on Vine Street. 6. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the residential development proposed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby approves the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan amendments as follows: 1. The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan is hereby amended to modify the location of the Class I bike path from the western edge of the SW Gateway plan area to be centrally located within the plan area. Dated: November 1, 2006 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006- was passed and adopted by the Lodi City Council in an adjourned regular meeting held November 1, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — RANDIJOHL City Clerk �f. ,:,c,, ci�vw�swca z,x�ua z.sw oalmw yg B&plaa Am-&mm,d� 2 RESOLUTION NO. 2006- PR44 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVIN P1, AND FORWARDING TO SAN JOAQUIN LOCAL AREA FORMATION COMMISSION FOR ACTION THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FCB HOMES, FOR AN ANNEXATION OF 151 ACRES OF LAND INTO THE CORPORATE LIMITS OF THE CITY OF LODI (WESTSIDE PROJECT) WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested annexation in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, amendments; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Westside Project Area totaing 151 acres and are described as follows: APN Site Address Pro a Owner 029-380-Q5 351 East Sargent Rd. Georgia Perlegos Et al 027-040-01 70 East Sargent Rd. Manna Trust 027-04-010 212 East Sargent Rd. DHKS Development 027-04-010 1402 East Sargent Rd. I Noble D. Fore Jr. II WHEREAS, the applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suke 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents property owners of the parcels within the Westside project site and these property owners have provided written consent to the project proponent and applicant for this annexation; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the proposed annexation on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006 and their motion to recommendation approval to the City Council was defeated on a 2:4 vote; and WHEREAS, the City Council certified the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01), and adopted Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Westside development plan required by Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.33 P -D Planned Development District, consists of a master planned residential community consisting of 638 residential units, 24.7 acres of parks and trails, an elementary school and related infrastructure; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred, and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. 200,6- and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2006- 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. LWATWYTESUUe 20061E42-WestMde A—A., 3. The required public hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 4. The project site is entirely within the City's Sphere of Influence and the City's General Plan designates the project area as "PR" Planned Residential. The General Plan anticipated development of the PR designated properties by 2007. 5. It is found that the requested annexation does not conflict with adopted and proposed plans or policies of the Genera! Plan and will serve sound Planning practice. 6. It is further found that the parcels in the area proposed to be annexed are physically suitable for the development of the proposed project. 7. 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. 8. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. 9. The site is suitable for the density proposed by the project in that the density is compliant with the PR General Plen designation and the site can be served by all public utilities and creates design solutions for storm water, traffic and air quality issues. Potential environmental impacts related to utilities were identified in the EIR and found not be significant because mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce any impacts to a level of less than significant. 10. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the Westside land use plan submitted by Tom Douoette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby approves and forwards this annexation to the San Joaquin Local Area Formation Commission for action. Da*d: November 1, 2006 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006- was passed and adopted by the Lodi City Council in an adjourned regular meeting held November 1, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS - ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS - ABSTAiN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - RANDI JOHL City Clerk 2006- J'ICAlCi'1'Y&Mtw 2(MIA2-WeWWO An... d c 2 Tool ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR PRE -ZONING TO 40/?*44r tr PD (PLANNED DEVELOPMENT) ON 151 ACRES (WESTSIDE PROJECT) BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The properties subject to this pre -zoning include properties located within the Westside Project totaling 151 acres and are described as follows: APN Site Address Property Owner 029-380-05 351 East Sargent Rd. Georgia Perlegos Et al 027-040-01 70 East Sargent Rd. Manna Trust 027-04-020 212 East Sargent Rd. DHKS Development 027-04-030 402 East Sargent Rd. Noble D. Fore Jr. II SE TION 2. The applicant for the requested prezoning is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Coninunity Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219. The applicant represents property owners of the parcels within the Westside project site and these property owrmrs have provided written consent to the applicant for this zone change; and SE TION 3: The requested pre -zoning consists of the following: Reclassification of the afore -described properties from San Joaquin County AU - 20 (Agriculture, Urban Reserve, Minimum 40 Acres) to City of Lodi Planned Development (PD) Zone. SEQTIQN 4: The pre -zone designation is described as follows: Plaoned Development JP -D) Zone The planned development zone 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 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. 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. SEQTION 5: Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning CoMmission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. 2006- and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2006- 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 7..(:A,CFCY'.Ordina el-023Wcubide.�echmw.dn 3. The required public hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 4. The City must approve "pre -zone" zoning designations prior to requesting approval of the annexation of the lands into the City from the San ,Joaquin Local Area Formation Commission. 5. 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. 6. It is further found that the parcels of the proposed rezoning are physically suitable for the development of the proposed project. 7. 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. 8. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the proposed residential development. 9. 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. 10. 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. 11. Development of the proposed project shall be consistent with the Westside land use plan ultimately approved by the City Council. SECTION 6: All conditions of approval for this pre -zoning are included as Attachment A. SECTION 7: All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith will be repealed insofar as such conflict may exist upon the completion of the annexation of the subject properties into the City of Lodi. SEgJION 8: No Mandatary 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 shall 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. SECJION 10: 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 take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval. J %CA�CITY%0Tdinm q4)2 3 Wwside-zme buge.dw 2 Approved this day of , 2006 SUSAN HtTCHCOCK Mayor Attest: RANDI JOHL City Clerk Stats of California County of Son Joaquin, 9s. 1, Jennifer M. Perrin, Interim 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 November 1, 2006, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting of said Council held , 2006, 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. RANDI JOHL City Clerk Approved as to Form: D. STEPHEN SCHWABAIUER City Attorney J.'(WCITVNDrdin-61-021 Wst4d—D echange dor EXHIBIT "A" TO CITY OF LODI ORDINANCE NO. The pre -zone of the entire 151 acres of the Westside Project to PD (Planned Development), which includes designations specific to housing, and public/quasi-public uses all as shown on the attached map (Exhibit B), are subject to the following conditions of approval: Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final development plans shall be subject to review and approval by Planning Commission. The development plan shall include development standards for proposed residential units (i.e., building height, setbacks, lot coverage and permitted accessory uses). 2. Prior to the issuance of any tentative subdivision maps, final park plans shall be subject to review and approval by Parks and Recreation Department. 1 Prior to the issuance of a building permit the multi -family components of the project shall be subject to review and approval by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee. 4. Prior to the development of any portion of the Westside project, the applicantldeveloper 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. 5. The conditions of approval listed below are to be accomplished prior to deeming complete the first Tentative Subdivision Map, unless noted otherwise: A. Preparation of detailed master pians and supporting studies as listed below, including engineering calculations, for all phases of the development. The study area shall include all the area between Kettleman Lane, Lower Sacramento Road and W ID Canal and shall be coordinated with the master plans for the Southwest Gateway Project south of Kettleman Lane. a. Water master plan, including the following: i. Surface water transmission and distribution facilities. ii. 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. b. Recycled water master plan, including the following: i. Identification of areas to be irrigated. ii. Detailed summary of demand calculations. Include Southwest Gateway project demands in calculations. iii. Detailed summary of pipe sizing calculations. iv. Provisions for future westerly extension in Lodi Avenue and Vine Street. V. As an alternative to i) through iv) above, Developer may provide a one-time payment, not to exceed $50,000, to partially fund the Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study. C. Wastewater master plan. d. 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. e. Streets/circulation plan, including the following: i. Dimensions of street rights-of-way, including Kettleman Lane and Lower Sacramento Road, bike/pedestrian/open space corridor and utility corridors. 1"CA`C3TYlOrdinaeceJ-423 Westside --e6 np.dx 4 ii. Traffic analysis of operations at critical intersections to determine if supplemental right-of-way is required. iii. Typical cross-section diagrams showing proposed utility locations and demonstrating that sufficient width has been provided to meet separation requirements between pipes. iv. Traffic round -about in Lodi Avenue. v_ Traffic calming features at cross intersections, along long, straight streets and at other locations as required by the Public Works Director. f. Transit study to identify new or modified routes to serve the area. g. Topography for the entire study area to confirm validity of water, wastewater and storm drain master plans. h. Composite utility diagram to facilitate review of potential utility crossing conflicts. i. Modification of the Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan. The current master plan includes a Class I bike path along the westerly project boundary that would be part of the City-wide recreational trail in conformance with the Parks and Recreation Master Plan. This bike trail can be incorporated into the proposed north -south bicycle/pedestrian corridor. The bicycle master plan also includes a Class II or III bike boulevard extending north -south from the W ID canal north of Lodi Avenue to Harney Lane and east -west along the extension of Vine Street and Class II bike lanes along Lodi Avenue. All modifications to the bicycle master plan shall be to the approval of the City Council. j. Parks and Recreation master plan. Water, recycled water, wastewater and storm drain master plans for the project have been submitted and first check Public Works Department comments on the plans were issued on June 26, 2006. The plans require revision. In addition, on July 21, 2006, City staff forwarded information to the developer's engineer regarding existing utiity crossings, preferred utility alignments, existing easements and design requirements to be used in establishing utility alignments for the project. The project improvements must respect the preferred alignments and existing easements. For example, new pipes along Westgate Drive south of the project site need to be on the west side of the street which will require dedication of additional land to provide a utility corridor. The required master plans and supporting studies are necessary to confirm the design of the proposed development and will affect the number of growth management allocations that can ultimately be utilized. If 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. Completion and approval of the master plans and studies must then be accomplished prior to submittal of the first tentative map for the project. B. Phasing analysis to be approved by the City prior to submittal of the first tentative map. The analysis shall include the following: a. Phase boundaries and number of units to be constructed with each phase. b. Permanent and interim/temporary facilities required to implement each phase based on the mitigation monitoring program and the above mentioned master plans. C. Master utility calculations for permanent and interim/temporary facilities to be constructed with each phase. JACA}C TYK)rdinm dd 02 3 Wmiside zwe chmge.dec C. Preparation of a Traffic Mitigation Implementation and Financing Plan that details each of the physical improvements and the timing and geometric changes listed in Table IV.B-6 of the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for both the Existing + Project and Cumulative scenarios (cumulative to address Impact TRANS -2 in the EIR), who will be responsible for implementing the improvement, how the improvement will be funded, including a reimbursement program where appropriate, and the schedule or trigger for initiating and completing construction prior to the intersection operation degrading to an unacceptable level. D. 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. 6. All mitigation measures for the project, identified in the Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR), are hereby incorporated into this recommendation of approval. 7. All applicable state statutes, and local ordinances, including all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements for hazardous materials shall apply to the project. 8. 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 and Public Works Director. Said plans shall indicate that all corner lots shall have architectural treatments on both street facing elevations. 9. 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. 10. 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 Z-04-03." 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. 11. As part of Mitigation Measure LU -2 of the Lodi Annexations EIR (EIR-05-01) the developer has the option to pay fees consistent with the pending San Joaquin County Agricultural Mitigation program or preserve agricultural land in perpetuity to mitigate significant impacts associated with conversion of the 392 acres of Prime Farmland within the Westside, SW Gateway and Other Areas to be Annexed. If the developer proceeds with the mitigation to preserve land within an agricultural easement, and the City of the Lodi becomes party to said easement, the developer shall pay the City a one-time administration fee of five thousand dollars. Said fee shall be paid prior to approval of the first tentative subdivision map. ; %CAiCITy'Q,difSart "-02 3 WC95ide-zwe cbm gc doc 6 ORDINANCE NO. T- 1 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI ADOPTING A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DA) PERTAINING TO THE DEVELOPMENT OF 151 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD BETWEEN THE WOODBRIDGE IRRGATION DISTRICT CANAL AND VINE STREET (WESTSIDE PROJECT) (DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT GM -05-002) BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1. The properties subject to this Development Agreement include the following: 151 acres located on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road between the Woodbridge Irrigation District canal and Vine Street — Assessors Parcel Numbers 029-380-05, 027-040-01, 027-040-020 and 027-040-030. SE ION_2. The applicant for the requested Development Agreement is as follows: Frontiers Commupity Builders. SECTION 3. The requested Development Agreement is summarized as follows: Development Agreement GM-05-Y002is an agreement between the City and the developer in which the developer agrees to provide certain benefits to the City in exchange for a vested right to proceed with the development consistent with the development approvals. The term of the Development Agreement is 15 years. The vested right the developer obtains is the ability to proceed with the development as approved and to avoid the imposition of new regulations on subsequent discretionary approvals (i.e. vesting tentative maps) for the development. SECTION 4. The City Council hereby finds that the proposed Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan land use designation and the zoning for the proposed Development. SEQ,TION 5. The City Council, by Resolution No. 2006-, has certified the Lodi Annexations Environmental Impact Report for the proposed project. SECTION 6. The City Council hereby adopts Ordinance No. approving the Development Agreement by and between the City of Lodi and Frontiers Community Builders. SE„TION 7. 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. SE TION 8. 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 app ications 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. SEC$ION 9. 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 take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval. Approved this day of , 2006 SUSAN HITCHCOCK 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 November 1, 2006, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting of said Council held , 2006, by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES; COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS - 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. RANDI JOHL City Clerk Approved as to Form: D. STIEPHEN SCHWABAUER City Attorney 2 OFFICIAL BUSINESS Docwent eriitled to free wording Government Code Section 6103 RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1 91 0 Attn: City Clerk (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE) DRAFT DOCUMENT DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LODI AND FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. FOR FCB W ESTSIDE PROJECT TABLE OF CONTENTS RECITALS.................................................................................................................................................... 3 1. Authorization...................................................................................................................................3 2. Property..........................................................................................................................................3 3. Project............................................................................................................................................3 4. Public Hearing................................................................................................................................3 5. Environmental Review.................................................................................................................... 3 6. Project Approvals........................................................................................................................... 3 7. Need for Services and Facilities..................................................................................................... 4 8. Contribution to Costs of Facilities and Services............................................................................. 4 D I t o +0 E t' C I" 5 V. ........................................................................"".."".............................. . Annexation eve ttpmen gree"nen W1W u ion W iance........................................................................ 10. Consistency with General and Specific Plan............................................"""""""....""......................... 5 11. 7.2. Creation of Career -Oriented Employment Opportunities AGRSEMENT...................................................................................................................""........""................ 5 1. 7.4. Incorporation of Recitals................................................................................................................. 5 2. Existing Fees, Subsequently Enacted Fees, Dedications, Assessments and Taxes .................... 5 Description of Property..............................................................................................."".""............... 5 3. 8.2. Interest of Landowner..................................................................................................................... 5 4. Subsequent Development Impact Fees, Exactions and Dedications Relationship of City and Landowner.............................................................................................. 5 5. 9.1. Effective Date and Term..........................................................""."".................................................. 5 9.2. 5.1. Effective Date.......................................................................................................................... 5 Community Facilities District for Residential Property — Landowner Financing ..................... 5 52. Term........................................................................................................................................5 11. 5.3. Automatic Termination Upon Completion and Sale of Residential Lot ................................... 5 6. 11.2. Amendment by Mutual Consent................................................................""............................ 5 Use of Property.............................................................................................................................. 5 11.4. Amendment of Project Approvals........................................................................................... 5 6.1. Right to Develop...................................................................................................................... 5 1 6.2. Permitted Uses: ....................................................................................................................... 5 6.3. Moratorium, Quotas, Restrictions or Other Growth Limitations .............................................. 5 64 Additional Conditions5 . . 6.5 . Annexation 7. Applicable Rules, Regulations, Fees and Official Policies............................................................. 5 7.1. Rules Regarding Permitted Uses............................................................................................ 5 7.2. Rules Regarding Design and Construction............................................................................. 5 7.3. Changes in Stale or Federal Law........................................................................................... 5 7.4. Uniform Codes Applicable...."".""............................................................................................. 5 8. Existing Fees, Subsequently Enacted Fees, Dedications, Assessments and Taxes .................... 5 8.1. Processing Fees and Charges................................................................................................ 5 8.2. Existing Fees, Exactions and Dedications.............................................................................. 5 8.3 Subsequent Development Impact Fees, Exactions and Dedications 9. Community Facilities District.......................................................................................................... 5 9.1. Inclusion in Community Facilities District............................................................................... 5 9.2. Use of Community Facilities District Revenues...................................................................... 5 9.3. Community Facilities District for Residential Property — Landowner Financing ..................... 5 10. Processing of Subsequent Development Applications and Building Permits ............................... 5 11. Amendment or Cancellation............................................................................""............................. 5 11.1. Modification Because of Conflict with State or Federal Laws ................................................. 5 11.2. Amendment by Mutual Consent................................................................""............................ 5 11.3. Insubstantial Amendments...................................................................................................... 5 11.4. Amendment of Project Approvals........................................................................................... 5 11.5. Cancellation by Mutual Consent........................................................................""".................. 5 859464 1 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 12. Term of Project Approvals.............................................................................................................. 5 13. Annual Review............................................................................................................................... 5 13.1. Review Date............................................................................................................................5 13.2. Initiation of Review.................................................................................................................. 5 13.3. Staff Reports...........................................................................................................................5 13.4. Costs....................................................................................................................................... 5 13.5. Non-complianoe with Agreement; Hearing............................................................................. 5 13.6. Appeal of Detwmination.......................................................................................................... 5 14. Default............................................................................................................................................5 14.1. Procedure Regarding Defaults................................................................................................5 15. Estoppel Certificate........................................................................................................................5 16. Mortgagee Protection; Certain Rights of Cure............................................................................... 5 16.1. Mortgagee Pro*ction.............................................................................................................. 5 16.2. Mortgagee Not Obligated........................................................................................................ 5 16.3. Notice of Default to Mortgagee and Extension of Right to Cure ............................................. 5 17. Severability.....................................................................................................................................5 18. Applicable Law............................................................................................................................... 5 19, Attorneys' Fees and Costs in Legal Actions By Parties to the Agreement .................................... 5 20. Attorneys' Fees and Costs in Legal Actions By Third Parties to the Agreement and Continued PermitProcessing.................................................................................................................................... 5 21. Transfers and Assignments............................................................................................................ 5 22. Agreement Runs with the Land......................................................................................................5 23. Bankruptcy......................................................................................................................................5 24. Indemnification............................................................................................................................... 5 25. Insurance........................................................................................................................................ 5 2.5.1. Public Liability and Property Damage Insurance .................................................................... 5 26.2. Workers' Compensation Insurance......................................................................................... 5 25.3. Evidence of Insurance............................................................................................................. 5 26. Excuse for Nonperformance...........................................................................................................5 27. Third Party Beneficiaries................................................................................................................ 5 28. Notices............................................................................................................................................5 29. Form of Agreement; Recordation; Exhibits.................................................................................... 5 30. Further Assurances........................................................................................................................ 5 31. City Cooperation............................................................................................................................. 5 859464 2 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT PCB WESTSIDE PROJECT This Development Agreement is entered into as of this day of , 2006, by and between the CITY OF LODI, a municipal corporation ("City"), and, FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. ("Landowner"). City and Landowner are hereinafter collectively referred to as the "Parties" and singularly as "Parry." RECITALS 1. Ayftrkp%M. To strengthen the public planning process, encourage private participation in comprehensive planning and reduce the economic risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California adopted Government Code Section 65864, et seq. (the "Development Agreement Statute"), which authorizes the City and any person having a legal or equitable interest in the real property to enter into a development agreement, establishing certain development rights in the Property which is the subject of the development project application. 2. Pro@er#v. landowner holds a legal or equitable interest in certain real property located in the City of Lodi, County of San Joaquin, more particularly described in Exhibit A-1 attached hereto (the "Property"). Landowner represents that all persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property shall be bound by this Agreement. 3. Pr t. Landowner has obtained various approvals from the City (described in more detail in Recital 6 below) for a mixed use project known as FCB Westside (the "Project") to be located on the Property. 4. Punto Hgong. On , 2006, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi, acting pursuant tb Government Code Section 65867, held a hearing to consider this Agreement and the Planning Commission action has been reported to the City Council. 5. F 4Arontal R . iew. On , 2006, the City Council certified as adequate and complete, the Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") for the Project. Mitigation measures were required in the EIR and are incorporated into the Project and into the terms and conditions of this Agreement, as reflected by the findings adopted by the City Council concurrently with this Agreement.. 6. Prgft2t Aftroyals. The following land use approvals (together the "Project Approvals") have been granted for the Property, which entitlements are the subject of this Agreement: 6.1. The EIR. The Mitigation Measures in the EIR are incorporated into the Project and into the terms and conditions of this Agreement (City Resolution No. ); 859464 3 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 6.2. A General Plan Amendment (the "General Plan"), (attached hereto as Exhibit B) approved by the City on , 2006 (City Resolution No. ); 6.3. The Zoning of the Property (attached hereto as Exhibit B-1) approved by the City on , 2006 (City Ordinance No. ); 6.4. The Large Lot Tentative Subdivision Map for the Project (attached hereto as Exhibit C-1) to be subsequently considered by the City through a noticed public hearing process. (The parties agree that the large lot subdivision map included herein is for illustrative purposes only and shall not be effective until approved through a notice public hearing process by the City. If approved by the City, the Large Lot Subdivision Map shall thereafter be included within the Project Approvals listed herein); 6.5. Reserved; 6.6. The Development Plan and Infrastructure Plan for the Project (attached hereto as ExNbit D), approved by the City on , 2006 by City Resolution No. 6.7. The Growth Management Allocations, as required by Chapter 15.34 of the Lodi Municipal Code, as set forth in Exhibit E, approved by the City on , 2006 by Ordinance No ; 6.8. This Development Agreement, as adopted on , 2006 by City Ordinance No. (the "Adopting Ordinance"); and, 6.9. The Annexation Approvals granted by San Joaquin County Local Agency Formation Commission as shown in Exhibit F attached hereto. 7. Need for J&Vi god fFaoili s. Development of the Property will result in a need for municipal services and facilities, some of which will be provided by the City to such development subject to the performance of Landowner's obligations hereunder. With respect to water, pursuant to Government Code Section 65867.5, any tentative map approved for the Property will comply with the provisions of Government Code 66473.7. 8. ti to Costsof 117millifin and SerWces. Landowner agrees to contribute to the costs of such public facilities and services as required herein to mitigate impacts on the community of the development of the Property, and City agrees to provide such public facilities and services as required herein to assure that Landowner may proceed with and complete development of the Property in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. City and Landowner recognize and agree that, but for Landowner's contributions set forth herein including contributions to mitigate the impacts arising as a result of development entitlements granted pursuant to this Agreement, City would not and could not approve the development of the Property as provided by this Agreement and that, but for City's covenant to provide certain facilities and services for development of the Property, Landowner would not and could not 859464 4 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 commit to provide the mitigation as provided by this Agreement. City's vesting of the right to develop the Property as provided herein is in reliance upon and in consideration of Landowner's agreement to make contributions toward the cost of public improvements as herein provided to mitigate the impacts of development of the Property as development occurs. 9. Develop t Agrawrant R n g9MgJJ2M.. City and Landowner have taken all actions mandefed by, and fulfilled all requirements set forth in, the Development Agreement Resolution of the City of Lodi, as set forth in the City Council Resolution No. 2005- 237 for the consideration and approval of the pre -annexation and development agreement. 10. CopsigtMy with„ General and Specific Pian. Having duly examined and considered this Agreement and having held properly noticed public hearings hereon, the City found that this Agreement satisfies the Government Code §65867.5 requirement of general plan consistency. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises, conditions and covenants hereinafter set forth, the Parties agree as follows: 1. Incerpor of WgilMLIs. The Preamble, the Recitals and all defined terms set forth in both are hereby incorporated into this Agreement as if set forth herein in full. 2. DewriptW of Prgo . The property, which is the subject of this Development Agreement, is described in Exhibit A-1 and depicted in Exhibit A-2 attached hereto ("Property'). 3. Interest A Land2n - The Landowner has a legal or equitable interest in the Property. Landowner represents that all persons holding legal or equitable interests in the Property shall be bound by the Agreement. 4. Relrrtionskin of City led Landowner. It is understood that this Agreement is a contract that has been nigotiated and voluntarily entered into by City and Landowner and that Landowner is not an agent of City. The City and Landowner hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them, and agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith shall be construed as making the City and Landiowner joint venturers or partners. S. Ffh p&e 161 % Ed Term. 5.1. Ef�tl tate. The effective date of this Agreement ("Effective Date") is 2006, which is the effective date of City Ordinance No. adopting this Agreement. 5.2. Tin. Upon execution, the term of this Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date and extend for a period of fifteen (15) years, unless said term is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set forth in this Agreement. Following the expiration of 859464 5 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 the Corm, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect. Said termination of the Agreement shall not affect any right or duty created by City approvals for the Property adopted prior to, concurrently with, or subsequent to the approval of this Agreement nor the obligations of Seotions 20, 24 or 25 of this Agreement. In the event that litigation is filed by a third parry (defined to exclude City and Landowners or any assignees of Landowner) which seeks to invalidate this Agreement or the Project Approvals, the expiration date of this Agreement shall be extended for a period equal to the length of time from the time the summons and complaint and/or petttion are served on the defendant(s) until the judgment entered by the court is final and not subject to appeal; provided, however, that the total amount of time for which the expiration date shall be extended as a result of such litigation shall not exceed four years. 5.3. Adgmatic Termination Upon Ct[rtgQn and _Side W Re�ai Lot. This Agreementshall automatically be terminated, without any further action by either party or need to record any additional document, with respect to any single-family residential lot within a parcel designated by the Project Approvals for residential use, upon completion of construction and issuance by the City of a final occupancy permit for a dwelling unit upon such residential lot and conveyance of such improved residential lot by Landowner to a bona -fide good -faith purchaser thereof. In connection with its issuance of a final inspection for such improved lot, City shall confirm that all improvements, which are required to serve the lot, as determined by City, have been accepted by City. Termination of this Agreement for any such residential lot as provided for in this Section shall not in any way be construed to terminate or modify any assessment district or Mello -Roos Community Facilities District lien affecting such lot at the time of termination. 6. Use of PrWrt . 6.1. V20d Right ifa DeW2p. Landowner shall have the vested right to develop the Project in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the Project Approvals, the City's existing policies, standards and ordinances (except as expressly modified by tWs Section 6.1 and Section 8.3) and any amendments to any of them as shall, from time to time, be approved pursuant to this Agreement. Landowner's vested right to develop the Property shall be subject to subsequent approvals; provided however, except as provided in Section 6.3, that any conditions, terms, restrictions and requirements for such subsequent approvals shall not prevent development of the Property for the uses, or reduce the density and intensity of development, or limit the rate or timing of development set forth in this Agreement, so long as Landowner is not in default under this Agreement. Notwithstanding the vested rights granted herein, Landowner agrees that the following obligations, which are presently being developed, shall apply to development of the Property: 6.1.1 Payment of a development fee for a proportionate share of the design and construction cost of the Highway 99 interchange project at Harney Lane. 6.1.2 Payment of Agricultural Land Mitigation fee, as identified in Mitigation Measure , pursuant to the ordinance and/or resolution to be adopted by the City of Lodi. 8594(14 6 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 6.1.3 Payment of Electric Capital improvement Mitigation fee (see Section 6.4.10) pursuant to the ordinance and/or resolution to be adopted by the City of Lodi. 6.1.4 Payment of development fee for proportionate share of the costs of designing and constructing a water treatment system and/or percolation system for treatment of water acquired from Woodbridge Irrigation District (see Section 6.4.7) pursuant to the ordinance an/or resolution to be adopted by the City of Lodi. With regards to the fees identified in Sections 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, and 6.1.4 and these fees only, Landowner hereby consents to their imposition as conditions of approval on any discretionary or ministerial land use entitlement subsequently granted by the City including but not limited to issuance of building permits. City agrees that the fees payable by the Landowner pursuant to Sections 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3 and 6.1.4 shall be adopted in conformance with applicable law, and shall apply uniformly to all new development on properties within the City that are zoned consistent with the Project Approvals, or apply uniformly to all new development on properties that are similarly situated, whether by geographic location or other distinguishing circumstances. Except for the fees identified in this Agreement including but not limited to the Project Approvals, Sections 6.1.1, 6.1.2, 6.1.3, 6.1.4 and 8.3, no other subsequently enacted development or capital fee shall be imposed as a condition of approval on any discretionary or ministerial decision. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the fees applicable to the development pursuant to the Project Approvals and this Agreement may be increased during the term of this Agreement provided that (1) such increases are limited to annual indexing (i.e. per the Engineering News Record index, or the CPI, or other index utilized by the City) and as provided in current fee ordinances and (2) the increased fees are adopted in conformance with applicable law, apply uniformly to all new development on properties within the City that are zoned consistent with the Project Approvals, or apply uniformly to all new development on properties that are similarly situated, whether by geographic location or other distinguishing circumstances. The initial adjustment shall be effective as of four years after the Effective Date of the Agreement and shall be calculated based on the difference in the applicable index from the numerical rate at the end of the month following the third year after the Effective Date and the numerical rate at the end of the month following the fourth year after the Effective Date. All subsequent increases shall be based on the annual change in the applicable index. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, index adjustments to the fees set forth in Section 8.2, subsections 2, 3 and 4 shall be effective annually as set forth in the relevant ordinances and resolutions. Moreover, Landowner will be subject to the indexing called for above even if Landowner has filed a complete application for a Vesting Tentative Map and will not vest against such indexing until payment of the fees as called for in this Agreement. 6.2. P"nitiml. Uses. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements, location of public utilities and other terms and conditions of development applicable to the Property, shall be those set forth in this Agreement, the Project Approvals and any amendments to this Agreement or the Project Approvals. City acknowledges that the 859464 7 Draft Version 4 11/1/20(]6 Project Approvals provide for the land uses and approximate acreages for the Property as set forth in Exhibit B-1 and Exhibit B-2. L7XI-117.71 MMI Landowner and City intend that, except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, this Agrewnent shall vest the Project Approvals against subsequent City resolutions, ordinances and initiates approved by the City Council or the electorate that directly or indirectly limit the rate, timing, or sequencing of development, or prevent or conflict with the permitted uses, density and intensity of uses or the right to receive public services as set forth in the Project Approvals; provided however Landowner shall be subject to rules, regulations or policies adopted as a result of changes in federal or state law (as provided in Section 7.3) which are or have been adopted on a uniformly applied, City-wide or area -wide basis, in which case City shall treat Landowner in a uniform, equitable and proportionate manner with all properties, public and private, which are impacted by the changes in federal or state law. 6.3..4 Alli_,, ggplions Under Cily Growth Marragemerlt, Prooram a. Allocations Reguired Prior to Map Approval Consistent with the City's Growth Management Program, which shall apply to the Project, except as otherwise provided herein, no tentative map for any portion of the Property shall be issued until such time as Landowner has obtained allocations for each residential unit within the area covered by such map, consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance (Ordinance 1521), codified as Section 15.34 of the City of Lodi Municipal Code. b. Schedule of Allocation of Residential Units The following schedule of residential unit allocations shall apply to the Project. (i) Initial Allocation: As of the Effective Date of this Agreement, the following number of residential units shall be initiay allocated to the Project from the City's reserve of unused allocations ('Initial Allocation"): 215 Low Density Units Except for the requirement set forth in Section 6.3.1(a) above the Initial Allocation has been detetxnined to be exempt from and in compliance with the provisions of the Growth MarW kgement Ordinance and Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171 (timing and point system requirements). iiSubagggenj Annual All ati ns: As of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall be entitled to apply for future annual allocations in three-year increments, and on a rolling basis. Provided that Landowner 859464 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 otherwise complies with the City's Growth Management Program, Landowner shall be entitled to annual allocations set folk in Exhibit E ("Annual Allocations"). If Landowner elects in any year to request fewer allocations than provided for in Exhibit E or if the terra of any allocation granted expires before it is used as part of obtaining a subdivision map, Landowner shall be entitled to receive, upon submission of a complete growth management allocation application, additional allocations after the eighth year of this Agreement and through the term of this Agreement including any extension thereto granted pursuant to Section 5.2. The total number of growth management allocations granted hereunder shall be limited to the number of residential units approved as part of the Project Approvals excluding any senior housing residential units. The use of such allocations shall be restricted to the year for which such allocations were made, consistent with the Growth Management Ordinance. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Landowner may request additional allocations, over and above those set forth in Exhibit °E", and City may grant such allocations in its discretion, provided such additional allocations are consistent with the City's Growth Management Allocation Program, Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171, subject to such additional community benefits and/or exactions negotiated upon such a request. Landowner is not required to apply for such allocations on an annual basis. Landowner may instead comply with all development plan and related requirements under the Growth Management Ordinance and Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171 every third year, at which time Landowner may apply for allocations for the next three-year period. After the expiration of the year for which an Annual Allocation was issued to Landowner, Landowner may submit a request and be issued by the City another Annual Allocation, such that Landowner may maintain, on a rolling basis, a number of allocations equal to three Annual Allocations. Except for allowing the Landowner this flexibility in terms of the number of years for which Landowner may apply, all requests for Annual Allocations must otherwise comply with the Growth Management Ordinance and Resolutions 91-170 and 91-171. The requirement that Landowner apply for Annual Allocations does not alter the vested rights of the Project, specifically as to the General Plan and zoning designation of the Project. (c) Growth Management Ordinance in full force and effect: Except where otherwise specifically stated herein, nothing in this section 5.3.1 is intended to modlIfy in any way the City's Growth Management Program, including its exemptions under Section 15.34.040 (e.g., for senior citizen housing). Section 6.3.2 Future Growth Control Ordinances/Policies, Etc. (a) One of the specific purposes of this Agreement is to assure Developer that, during the term of this Agreement no growth -management ordinance, measure, policy, regulation or development moratorium of City adopted by the City Council or by vote of the electorate after the Effective Date of this Agreement will apply to the Property in such a manner so as to the reduce the density of development, modify the permissible uses, or modify the phasing of the development as set forth in the Project Approvals. 859454 9 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 (b) Therefore, the parties hereto agree that, except as otherwise expressly provided in the Project Approvals, Sections 6.1, 6.3.1 or 6.4 or other provision of this Agreement which expressly authorize City to make such pertinent changes, no ordinance, policy, rule, regulation, derision or any other City action, or any initiative or referendum voted on by the public, which would be applicable to the Project and which would affect in any way the rate of development, construction and build out of the Project, or limit the Project's ability to receive any other City service shall be applicable to any portion of the Project during the term of this Agreement, whether such action is by ordinance, enactment, resolution, approval, policy, rule, regulation, decision or other action of City or by public initiative or referendum. (c) City, through the exercise of either its police power or its taking power, whether by direct City action or initiative or referendum, shall not establish, enact or impose any additional conditions, dedications, fees or other exactions, policies, standards, laws or regulations, which directly relate to the development of the Project except as provided in Sections 6.1, 6.3.1, or 6.4 herein or other provision of this Agreement which expressly allows City to make such changes. Nothing herein prohibits the Project from being subject to a (i) City- wide bond issue, (ii) City -Wide special or general tax, or (iii) special assessment for the construction or maintenance of a City-wide facility as may be voted on by the electorate or otherwise enacted; provided that such tax, assessment or measure is City-wide in nature, does not discriminate against the land within the Project and does not distinguish between developed and undeveloped parcels. (d) This Agreement shall not be construed to limit the authority of City to charge processing fees for land use approvals, public facilities fees and building permits as they relate to plumbing, mechanical, electric or fire code permits, or other similar permits and entitlements which are in force and effect on a city-wide basis at the time those permits are applied for, except to the extent any such processing regulations would be inconsistent with this Agreement. (e) Notwithstanding subdivision (b), the City may condition or deny a permit, approval, extension, or entitlement if it determines any of the following: (1) A failure to do so would place the residents of the Project or the immediate community, or both, in a condition dangerous to their health or safety, or both. (2) The condition or denial is required in order to comply with state or federal law (see Section 7.3). 6.4.1. Timilrm of DoWcOorre aid Improvements of P Landowner agrees to dedicate park land and complete construction of all the park improvements as described and set forth in the Project Approvals at its sole cost and expense. The lists of the parks and park improvements contemplated herein is set forth in Exhibit "I" and 859464 10 Draft Version 4 l t/1/2006 Exhibit "J". Landowner and City agree that the provision of land and the construction of all park facilites and installation of equipment within the Project boundaries will satisfy Landowner's Quimby Act obligations as set forth in Lodi Municipal Code Chapter. Therefore, Landowner shall not to obligated to pay any additional park fees and Landowner shall not be entitled to any credit for the value of the improvements constructed or equipment installed except as provided here4nbelow. The phasing of such improvements shall be in compliance with the Phasing Schedule included in Exhibit I. With regards to the park improvements listed in Exhibit J, prior to approval by the City of the first tentative subdivision map, Landowner shall prepare plans and specifications for all park improvements included in the Project Approvals and submit those plans and specifications to the City for review and approval which approval will not be unreasonably withheld provided that the plans and specifications contain all park improvements listed in Exhibit J and satisfy all applicable conditions of approval included in the Project Approvals. The Landowner shall construct the parks in compliance with the approved plans and specifications. The City will inspect improvements during construction. If improvements are of poor quality and/or do not meet the requirements of approved plans and specifications, the City will notify the Landowner in writing and the Landowner, at its sole cost, shall correct any errors or deficiencies. The Landowner shall construct the parks to the satisfaction of the City, which shall be defined as compliance with the approved plans and specifications. As part of the park improvements identified herein, Landowner is obligated to offer for dedication to the City for a period of six years, five acres of land located at West of Lower Sacramento Road, North of Vine Street and as depicted in the Westside Facilities Master Plan for park uses including a possible acquatic center. Upon acceptance of the dedication by the City, which must occur within six years after the offer of dedication is made, the City shall, for the remaining term of this Agreement and at the time of City approval of any development project located in the area south of West Vine Street, north of Highway 12, and west of North Lower Saramento Road ("Adjacent Property"), impose a requirement that the developer of the Adjacent Parcel pay the the City an amount equal to the reasonable actual costs incurred for park land and related construction costs by Landowner for parks developed within the Project in excess of the minimum amount of park dedication required by the Lodi Muncipal Code and which the developer of the "Adjacent Parcel" uses to satisfy its park dedication requirements. The parties agree that they shall calculate the any potential credit payable by the developer of the Adjacent Property pursuant to this paragraph prior to approval fo the first tentative subdivision map for the Property. Upon receipt of the that payment, City shall either pay that amount to Landowner or credit that amount against any outstanding fee payable by Landowner. 6.4.2. Rehabliftation of E' Rggidentiall Unks Landowner agrees that within ten years of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall either rehabilitate or pay the costs (for a total value of $1,250,000) of rehabilitating up to a maximum of twenty-five (25) single-family or multi -family residential units within the area bounded by the Union Pacific railroad tracks, Cherokee Lane, Kettleman Lane and Lockford Street. To satisfy this obligation, Landowner may pay to rehabilitate residential units owned by 8594(x4 11 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 others or may purchase, rehabilitate and sell or rent said residential units. The City shall have the right to approve the residential units selected for rehabilitation; said approval shall not be unreasonably withheld by the City. The improvements required herein to facilitate rehabilitation of residential units may include landscaping, painting, roof repair, replacement of broken windows, sidewalk repairs, non- structural architectural improvements, and demolition and reconstruction of residential units. All work performed pursuant to this section shall be done pursuant to properly issued building permits as required by City of Lodi ordinances. As part of the annual review required pursuant to Section 13, Landowner shall report on work completed during the prior year towards meeting the obligations set forth in 1his paragraph. In the event that Landowner has not satisfied this obligation within ten years from the Effective Date, Landowners shall pay the City fifty thousand dollars ($50,000) per residential unit for each of the twenty-five (25) units that have not been rehabilitated as set forth above. The funds paid shall be placed in a dedicated city fund to be used for housing rehabilitation grants or loans within the area specified hereinabove. 6.4.3. Pz t for Promaf n of E , nomic [Mvaloom t Within ten (10) years of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall pay the City Two Hundred Twenty -Six Thousand U.S. dollars ($226,000) for use by the City for economic development actions including job creation, promoting retail sales and/or wine industry tourism all as determined by the City. The purpose of this payment is to assist the City in its effort to maintain a balance between employment and housing demands. 5.4.4 PeyMRM ofI� JA Fees The Lodi Electric Utility is a city -owned and operated utility that provides electrical utility services for residential, commercial and industrial customers in Lodi. As the proposed project sites would be annexed to the City of Lodi, the Lodi Electric Utillity would provide electrical utility services to the project site. To the extent that Landowner is assessed "exit fees," also known as "Cost Responsibility Surcharges," by Pacific Gas & Electric for its departing load, Landowner shall pay said fees when they are due. Landowner may, at its option and at its own cost, request a Cost Responsibility Surcharge Exemption from the California Energy Commission for any qualified departing load pursuant to Title 20, California Code of Regulations, Section 1395, et. seq. Forms for the exemption are available on-line at htip://www.energy.ca.gov/exit fees/documents/2004-0218 PGE EX MP APPL.PDF City makes no representation that Landowner is eligible for exemptions pursuant to these regulations. Landowner agrees to save, defend, indemnify and hold harmless City from any and all costs, judgments or awards owed to Pacific Gas & Electric arising out of or related to City's provision of electrical utility services to the project site. 6.M Mainterumu a of Smciffed Public ImprommmOts Landowner agrees to provide or pay for all park, median strip, and other landscaping maintenance and repairs for two years for lands dedicated by the Landowner to the City and 859464 12 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 accepted by the City. In the event that Landowner chooses to pay the City for the costs of mairdenance and repair, the City shall provide an estimate of the annual costs and the Landowner shall pay the full amount within thirty calendar days after the City by U.S. Mail or emal, transmits the estimate to the Landowner. If the amount paid to the City exceeds the actual amount incurred by the City plus reasonable staff costs to administer the contract, the City shall, within a reasonable period of time, refund the difference to the Landowner. f.4,�6 w Payment for Flre L1e.rtment Facilities, F,quioms�nt and Apnwallus In addition to any applicable development impact for fire services, within ten years of the Effecaive Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall pay Two Million Six Hundred Thousand U.S. dollars ($2,600,000) to the City for use to acquire additional facilities, equipment and apparatus for the Lodi Fire Department. Landowner acknowledges that City will enter into contracts to acquire the facilities, equipment and apparatus. As consideration for City's agreement to authorize payment in installment payments, Landowner agrees to provide a letter of credit payable to the City, in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, in an amount sufficient to cover the amount due herein. City agrees that Landowner may substitute a letter of credit, in a form reasonably acceptable to the City Attorney, for a lesser amount upon payment of any portion of the amount due herein. Upon delivery of such replacement letter of credit and its approval as to form by the City Attorney, the City will release and convey to Landowner the prior letter of credit. 6.I8 Water Treatment atment and/or Percolation Cost Landowner shall pay a fee based on the proportionate share of the costs of designing and constructing a water treatment system and/or percolation system for treatment of water acquired by the City from the Woodbridge Irrigation District. Landowner shall pay the fee as required under the fee program to be development by the City, but in no event later than when water service connection for each residential, office and commercial unit is provided. Pubic Art on -Property Within ten (10) years of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall obtain City approval for and install public art on the Project. The value of the public art installed shall be equal to One Hundred Fifty Thousand U.S. dollars ($150,000) inclusive of design and installation costs, which together shall not exceed $10,000. The public art shall be installed in a place within the Project that is visible from the public right-of-way or from an area or areas that provides public access. Landowner shall provide maintenance of the public art. Landowner shall be eligible to apply for City matching grant for the public art up to a maximum amount of $40,000. The parties agree that any matching grant provided by the City shall be in addition to the $150,000 contribution provided by Landowner pursuant to the section and shall be subject to any and all conditions normally imposed as part of the issuance of a grant by the City. 6.&10 l x City is preparing a policy pursuant to whioh property developed will pay the actual costs of capital improvements necessary to extend 859464 13 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 utility services to a development. Landowner acknowledges that such an extension is necessary to implement the Project Approvals on the Property. Landowner agrees to pay the City, pursuant to the poky to be adopted by the City, the costs of the capital improvements necessary to extend utility services to the Property. The Project Approvals require the installation of specified public and private improvements. Landowner shall, as specified in the Project Approvals, either design, engineer and construct the following improvements or pay the City the appropriate fee for the design, engineering and construction of said improvements. The obligations imposed on the Landowner herein shall be in addition to any other obligations set forth in this Agreement. In the event that any of Developer's improvements encroach upon any city facilities, property or rights of way, developer shall indemnify City against any and all expenses, including legal fees, incuffed by the City to secure replacement facilities, property or rights of way. 6.4.11.1 Jurfaim Water Faciliea Transmission Main (Proportionate share of the total design, engineering and construction costs). Storage Tank (Proportionate share of the total design, engineering and construction costs). §.4-11-2 W FININ One new water well to cover proposed development within the Southwest Gateway and WeNside development areas. The wO will be installed in the Westside area at the location ider4fied in the Project Approvals or approved by the City Engineer. The well shall be installed and operational on or before . Satisfaction of this requirement shall also constitute satisfaction of the requirement set forth in Section 6.4.7.2 of the FCB Southwest Gateway Development Agreement. Similarly, if the well is installed to comply with Section 6.4.7.2 of the FCB Southwest Gateway Development Agreement and the well is accepted by the City, this requirement shall be deemed satisfied. 6.4.11.3 Water DisMbutifon Fault! All water pipes and related infrastructure in all streets. Any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director. .4. 1.4 &Mr d F '! s All sewer pipes and related infrastructure in all streets. 859464 14 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 Any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director. All recycled water pipes and related infrastructure for irrigations systems located in or on streef0s, public and private school sites (to property boundary line only), places of assembly including but not limited to religious facilities (to property boundary line only), and high density residontial sites. Provide up to a maximum of $50,000 to partially fund the City of Lodi Recycled Water Master Plan Study. 6.4.11.6 Storm Dreioasm Faalfidw All stormwater pipes and rotated infrastructure in all streets and basins. All stormwater detention basins, control structures, pumping facilities and appurtenant piping and controls. Any interim or temporary facilities as determined necessary by the Public Works Director. Developer will be entitled to apply for reimbursement under Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 16.40 for benefit received by undeveloped properties as a result of the construction of the improvements required by this paragraph. Without limiting in any manner, the City Council's future exercise of its legislative discretion in the public hearing called for by Chapter 16.40, the parties anticipate that the benefited properties will be those set forth in Exhibit J. The parties also expressly acknowledge the final determination of benefited properties shall be determined pursuant to process set forth in Chapter 16.40. 6.4.1.1.7 Streeta_art"oads Design and construct all streets within the Project Boundary as set forth in the Project Approvals. Reconstruct Lodi Avenue west of Lower Sacramento Road to western project boundary. Reconstruct Tokay Ave./Lower Sacramento Road intersection to accommodate wider street sections. Pay Pair Share Cost payments for traffic mitigation measures identified in the Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report that are not projects within the Streets & Roads Fee Program. With regard to the requirement to construct streets and roads, for sections of such streets and roads that are not wholly within the project site, necessary to satisfy the obligations set forth in this Agreement and the Project Approvals, Landowner will use its best efforts to acquire all necessary real property interests including, but not limited to, (1) submitting formal offer letters to all persons or entities who own or lease said property, (2) diligently pursuing implementation of any purchase agreement, (3) paying all amounts required pursuant to the purchase agreement in a timely manner consistent with the terms of the purchase agreement and will then construct the streets or roads in compliance with the Project Approvals and any subsequent subdivisions maps. In the event Landowner is not able after its best efforts to 859464 15 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 acquire any necessary property, City and Landowner agree that City will consider all actions necessary to form an assessment district to provide the funds necessary for the City to acquire the necessary property, including through eminent domain as necessary, and Landowner agrees that upon the City complying with all requirements for consideration of formation of assessment district, Landowner shall, for all property within the proposed district that it owns or possesses the legal authority to vote on behalf of, vote in favor of formation of the assessment district. The parties agree that items to be included within the costs to be funded by the assessment district shall include, but not be limited to all costs, including attorneys fees necessary to acquire the necessary property interests, all design and engineering costs and all constructions costs. Developer will be entitled to apply for reimbursement under Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 16.40 for benefit received by undeveloped properties as a result of the construction of the improvements required by this paragraph. Without limiting in any manner, the City Council's future exercise of its legislative discretion in the public hearing called for by Chapter 16.40, the parties anticipate that the benefited properties will be those set forth in Exhibit K. The parties also expressly acknowledge the final determination of benefited properties shall be determined pursuant to process set forth in Chapter 16.40. 6.4.12 Hy"Ing SlLeet Square Encipwment Within ten (10) years of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Landowner shall pay the City Three Hundred Thousand U.S. Dollars ($300,000) as an endowment for the maintenance and operations of costs of Hutchins Street Square. 6,5 An$2mLJ9n The ability to proceed with development of the Property pursuant to the Project Approvals shall be continSent upon the annexation of the Property into the City. Pending such annexation, Landowner may, at its own risk, process tentative parcel maps and tentative subdKvision maps and improvement or construction plans and City may conditionally approve such tentative maps and/or improvement plans in accordance with the Entitlements, provided City shall not approve any final parcel map or final subdivision map for recordation nor approve the issuance of any grading permit for grading any portion of the Property or building permit for any structure within the Property prior to the annexation of the Property to the City. City shall use its best efforts and due diligence to initiate such annexation process, obtain the necessary approvals and consummate the annexation of the Property into the City, including entering into any annexation agreement that may be required in relation thereto, subject to the City's review and approval of the terms thereof. Landowner shall be responsible for the costs reasonably and directly incurred by the City to initiate, process and consummate such annexation, the payment of which shall be due in advance, based on the City's estimate of such cost, and thereafter as and when the City provides an invoice(s) for additional costs incurred by City therefore in excess of such estimate. &59464 16 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 7. /frpgHc Ire iulaa. I ecaNlatlone, FAM and Qll� &W P4ollcl e 7.1. RLfts Fbmrdkg P m Except as provided in this Agreement, the City's or antes, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing the permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the rate timing and sequencing of development, the maximum height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation and dedication of land shall be those in force on the Effective Date of this ,agreement. Except as provided in Section 8.2, this Agreement does not vest Landowner's rights to pay development impact fees, exactions and dedications, processing fees, inspection fees, plan checking fees or charges. 7.2. Rubs Reaggigg D"Wn n. The Project has been designed as a Planned Nveloprnent pursuant to Chapter 17.33 of the Lodi Municipal Code. Design, improvements and construction standards shall be as set forth in Project Approvals including the Development Plan, and shall be vested for the term of this Agreement. Unless otherwise provided within the Development Plan or expressly provided in this Agreement, all other ordinances, resolutions, rules, regulations and official policies governing design, improvement and construction standards and specifications applicable to the Project and to public improvements to be constructed by the Landowner shall be those in force and effect at the time the applicable permit approval is granted. 7.3. CbWgn in E&O or Federal Law. This Agreement shall not preclude the application to development of the Property of changes in City laws, regulations, plans or policies, the terms of which are specifically mandated and required by changes in State or Federal laws or regulations. These changes may include any increase in an existing fee or imposition of a new fee that are necessary for the City or Landowner to comply with changes in State or Federal laws or regulations, including but not limited to sewer, water and stormwater laws or regulations. 7.4. Unform AWicabie. Unless otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, the Project shall be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, P9umbing, Electrical and Fire Codes, City standard construction specifications, and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, relating to Building Standards, in effect at the time of approval of the appropriate building, grading, encroachment or other construction permits for the Project. If no permits are required for infrastructure improvements, such improvements will be constructed in accordance with the provisions of the Uniform Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical and Fire Codes, City standard construction specifications, and Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations, relating to Building Standards, in effect at the start of construction of such infrastructure. 8. ExIstirta fts,I na Fen, QWiCM110M.n and !nos. 8.1. PaWessWg Few and Charges. Landowner shall pay those processing, inspection, and plan check fees and charges required by City under then current regulations for processing applications and requests for permits, approvals and other actions, and monitoring 859464 17 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 conApliance with any permits issued or approvals granted or the performance of any conditions with respect thereto or any performance required of Landowner hereunder. 8.2. EAstirm &gL LjaWons and QloMons Landowner shall be obligated to provide all dedications and exactions and pay all types of fees as required for the types of development authorized by the Project Approvals as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. With regards any fees applicable to residential development, the Parties agree that the fees shall be payable at the earliest time authorized pursuant to the Government Code Section 66007 as it exists as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. The specific categories of fees payable are listed below. The dedication and exaction obligations and fee amounts payable shall be those obligations and fee amounts applicable (indexed as set forth hereinbelow) as of the date that the Landowner's application for the applicable vesting tentative map is deemed complete. For any development for which the Landowner has not submitted a vesting tentative map, the dedication and exaction obligations and fee amounts payable shall be those obligations and fee amounts applicable (indexed as set forth hereinbelow) as of the date the final discretionary approval for that development is granted by the City. Standard City Development Impact Fees Payable by the Landowner include: 1. Development Impact Fees (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 15.64) 2. San Joaquin County Regional Transportation Impact Fee (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 1$.65 3. County Facilities Fee (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 15.66) 4. San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Development Fee (Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 15.68) Any existing fees may be increased during the term of this Agreement provided that such increases are limited to annual indexing (i.e. per the Engineering News Record Index, or the CPI, or other index utilized by the City) and as provided in current fee ordinances. The initial adjustment shall be effective as of four years after the Effective Date of the Agreement and shall be calculated based on the difference in the applicable index from the numerical rate at the end of the month following the third year after the Effective Date and the numerical rate at the end of the month following the fourth year after the Effective Date. All subsequent increases shall be based on the annual change in the applicable index. Notwithstanding the preceding sentence, index adjustments to the fees set forth in subsections 2, 3 and 4 of this section shall be effective annually as set forth in the relevant ordinances and resolutions. Moreover, Landowner will be subject to the indexing called for above even if Landowner has filed a complete application for a Vesting Tentative Map and will not vest against such indexing until payment of the fees as called for in this Agreement. 8.3. NoW Devaloment Impact Fees, motions and Dedkations. Landowner agrees to the pay the development fees identified in Section 6.1, including speoffically subsections 6. 1.1 through 6.1.4, of this Agreement. With regards any fees applicable to residential development, the Parties agree that the fees shall be payable at the earliest time authorized pursuant to the Government Code Section 66007 as it exists as of the Effective Date of this Agreement. 859464 18 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 Except as expressly provided herein, Landowner shall not be obligated to pay or provide any development impact fees, connection or mitigation fees, or exactions adopted by City after the Effective Date of this Agreement. Notwithstanding this limitation, Landowner may at its sole discretion elect to pay or provide any fee or exaction adopted after the Effective Date of this Agreement. 8.4. Fee Aeductions To the extent that any fees payable pursuant to the requirements of Sections 9.1 are reduced after the operative date for determining the fee has occurred, the Landowner shall pay the reduced fee amount. 9. !Q2WyMt1&E"WtifM l3strict. Formation of a Community Facilities District for Prblic Improvements End Services. 9.1. Inclusion in a Community Facilities District. Landowner agrees to cooperate in the formation of a Community Facilities District pursuant to Government Code Section 53311 et seq. to be formed by the City. The boundaries of the area of Community Facilities District shall be contiguous with the boundaries of the Property excluding the portion of land zoned for commercial or office development. Landowner agrees not to protest said district formation and agrees to vote in favor of levying a special tax on the Property in an amount not to exceed $600 per year per single family attached or detached residential dwelling unit and $175 per year for each attached multi -family rental unit as adjusted herein. The special tax shall be initiated for all residential dwelling units for which a building permit is issued, and shall commence to be levied beginning the subsequent fiscal year after the building permit is issued. Landowner acknowledges that the 2007-2008 special tax rate for the units in the Project will not exceed $600 per single family attached or detached dwelling unit and $175 per year for each attached multi -family rental unit and that the special tax shall increase each year by 2% in perpetuity. A vote by Landowner against the levying of the special tax or a vote to repeal or amend the special tax shall constitute an event of default under this Agreement. 9.2. Use of Community Facilities District Revenues Landowner and City agree that the improvements and services that may be provided with the special tax levied pursuant to Section 9.1 may be used for the following improvements and services: a. Police protection and criminal justice services; b. Fire protection, suppression, paramedic and ambulance services; C. Recreation and library program services; d. Operation and maintenance of museums and cultural facilities; e. Maintenance of park, parkways and open space areas dedicated to the City; f. Flood and storm protection services; g. Improvement, rehabilitation or maintenance of any real or personal property that has been contaminated by hazardous substances; h. Purchase, construction, expansion, improvement, or rehabilftation or any real or tangible property with useful life of more than five years; and, 859464 19 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 Design, engineering, acquisition or construction of public facilities with a useful life of more that five years including: 1. Local park, recreation, parkway and open -space facilities, 2. Libraries, 3. Childcare facilities, 4. Water transmission and distribution facilities, natural gas, telephone, energy and cable television lines, and 5. Government facilities. Landowner and City agree that Property does not presently receive any of these services from the city and that all of these services are new services. 9.3. CoMurMtY FMllides DIGINet for HOOMM81 FE2MV. - Fid. In addition to the fundirt provided as part of the Community Facilities District identified in Section 9.1, City acknowledges that Landowner may desire to finance the acquisition or construction of a portion of the improvements described in Section 8.2 through the Community FaciBies District. The costs associated with the items identified in Section 8.2 shall be in addition to the annual cost imposed to comply with Section 9.1. The following provisions shall apply to any to the extent that the Landowner desires to fund any of the improvements set forth in Section 8.2 through the Community Facilities District: 9.3.1 Issuance of Bonds. City and Landowner agree that, with the consent of Landowner, and to the extent permitted by law, City and Landowner shall use their best efforts to cause bonds to be issued in amounts sufficient to achieve the purposes of this Section. 9.3.2 Paymertit Prior IMUMM of So . Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to preclude the payment by an owner of any of the parcels to be included within the CFD of a cash amount equivalent to its proportionate share of costs for the improvements identified in Section 8.2, or any portion thereof, prior to the issuance of bonds. 9.3.3 Private_ Financing. Nothing in this Agreement shall be construed to limit Landowner's option to install the improvements through the use of private financing. 9.3.4 Acauisition and Payment. City agrees that it shall use its best efforts to allow and facilitate monthly acquisition of completed improvements or completed portions thereof, and monthly payment of appropriate amounts for such improvements to the person or entity constructing improvements or portions thereof, provided City shall only be obligated to use CFD bond or tax proceeds for such acquisitions. 859464 20 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 10. PM2MJWof %ft"IMM Q*ys1gpM1pt morons lft UldinQ its Subject to Landowner'i comp#iance with the City's application requirements including, specifically, submission of required information and payment of appropriate fees, and assuming Landowner is not in default under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the City shall process Landowner's subsequent development applications and building permit requests in an expeditious manner. In addition, City agrees that upon payment of any required City fees or costs, City will designate or retain, as necessary, appropriate personnel and consultants to process Landowner's development applications and building permit requests City approvals in an expeditious manner. 11. Rawryed 11. AM2ndaglLt or Conceilation. 11.1, fl. F r In the event that State or Feberal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevent or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement or require changes in plans, maps or permits approved by the City, the parties shall meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such federal or State law or regulation. Any such amendment or suspension of the Agreement shall be approved by the City Council in accordance with the Municipal Code and this Agreement. 11.2. AnWdmmmt by Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be amended in writing from time to time by mutual consent of the parties hereto and in accordance with the procedures of State law and the Municipal Code. 11.3. Ind elgl AmenftWts. Notwithstanding the provisions of the preceeding Section 12.2, any amendments to this Agreement which do not relate to (a) the term of the Agreement as provided in Section 5.2; (b) the permitted uses of the Property as provided in Sections 6.2 and 7.1; (c) provisions for reservation or dedication of land; (d) the location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements; (e) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (f) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings or (g) monetary contributions by Landowner as provided in this Agreement shall not, except to the extent otherwise required by law, require notice or public hearing before either the Planning Commission or the City Council before the parties may execute an amendment hereto. 11.4. ArWdr>nnt of PrQk.�ct, &WrgMls. Any amendment of Project Approvals relating to: (a) the permitted use of the Property; (b) provision for reservation or dedication of land; (c) the density or intensity of use of the Project; (d) the maximum height or size of proposed buildings; (e) monetary contributions by the Landowner; (f) the location and maintenance of on-site and off-site improvements; or (g) any other issue or subject not identified as an "insubstantial amendment" in Section 12.3 of this Agreement, shall require an amendment of this Agreement. Such amendment shall be limited to those provisions of this Agreement, which are implicated by the amendment of the Project Approval. Any other amendment of the Project Approval(s) shall not require amendment of this Agreement unless the amendment of the Project Approval(s) relates specifically to some provision of this Agreement. $59464 21 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 11 -5- i Except as otherwise permitted herein, this Agreement rhay be canceled in whole or in part only by the mutual consent of the pars or their successors in interest, in accordance with the provisions of the Municipal Code. Any fees paid pursuant to this Agreement prior to the date of cancellation shall be retained by City. 12. Teem of &W20 &R1gvais. Pursuant to California Government Code Section 66452.6(a), the term of any parcel map or tentative subdivision map shall automatically be extended for the term of this Agreement. 13. Annual Wow. 13.1. Raw Date. The annual review date for this Agreement shall occur either within the same month each year as the month in which the Agreement is executed or the month immediately thereafter. 13.2. 10"i2n & Review. The City's Planning Director shall initiate the annual review by giving to Landowner written notice that the City intends to undertake such review. Within thirty (30) days of City's notice, Landowner shall provide evidence to the Planning Director to demonstrate good faith compliance with the Development Agreement. The burden of proof, by substantial evidence of compliance, is upon the Landowner. The City's failure to timely initiate the annual review is not deemed to be a waiver of the right to do so at a later date; accordingly, Landowner is not deemed to be in compliance with the Agreement by virtue of such failure to timely initiate review. 13.3. SIM Reuorts. City shall deposit in the mail to Landowner a copy of all staff reports, and related Exhibits, concerning contract performance at least three (3) days prior to any annual review. 13.4. Cgs. Costs reasonably incurred by the City in connection with the annual review shall be phid by Landowner in accordance with the City's schedule of fees and billing rates in effect at the time of review. 13.5. Naak-2am2ftnare wft Amt;, _, roar. If the Planning Director determines, on the basis of substantial evidence, that Landowner has not complied in good faith with the terms and condi ons of the Agreement during the period under review, the City Council, upon receipt of any report or recommendation from the Planning Commission, may initiate proceedings to modify or terminate the Agreement, at which time an administrative hearing shall be conducted, in accordance with the procedures of State law. As part of that final determination, the City Council may impose conditions that it considers necessary and appropriate to protect the interest of the City. 13.6. AQW1 Rf Defornilraffion. The decision of the City Council as to Landowner's compliance` shall be final, and any Court action or proceeding to attack, review, set 859464 22 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 aside, void or annul any decision of the determination by the Council shall be commenced within thirty (30) days of the final decision by the City Council. 14. QWul . Subject to any applicable extension of time, failure by any party to substantially perform any term or provision of this Agreement required to be performed by such party shall constitute a material event of default ("Event of Default"). For purposes of this Agreement, a party claiming another party is in default shall be referred to as the "Complaining Party," and the party alleged to be in default shall be referred to as the "Party in Default." A Complaining Party shall not exercise any of its remedies as the result of such Event of Default unless such Complaining Party first gives notice to the Party in Default as provided in Section 15.1.1, and the Party in Default fails to cure such Event of Default within the applicable cure period. 14.1. Pr$Murre Rewrdinsa Defaults. 14.1.1. Notice. The Complaining Party shall give written notice of default to the Party in Default, specifying the default complained of by the Complaining Party. Delay in giving such notice shall not constitute a waiver of any default nor shall it change the time of default. 14.1.2. Cure. The Party in Default shall diligently endeavor to cure, correct or remedy the matter complained of, provided such cure, correction or remedy shall be completed within the applicable time period set forth herein after receipt of written notioe (or such additional time as may be deemed by the Complaining Party to be reasonably necessary to correct the matter). 14.1.3. Failure to A„mM Any failures or delays by a Complaining Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies. Delays by a Complaining Party in asserting any of its rights and remedies shall not deprive the Complaining Party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings, which it may deem necessary to protect, assert, or enforce any such rights or remedies. 14.1.4. Notice of Default. If an Event of Default occurs prior to exercising any remedies, the Complaining Party shall give the Party in Default written notice of such default. If the default is reasonably capable of being cured within thirty (30) days, the Party in Default shall have such period to effect a cure prior to exercise of remedies by the Complaining Party. If the nature of the alleged default is such that it cannot, practicably be cured within such thirty (30) day period, the cure shall be deemed to have occurred within such thirty (30) day period if: (a) the cure shall be commenced at the earliest practicable date following receipt of the notice; (b) the cure is diligently prosecuted to completion at all times thereafter; (c) at the earliest practicable date (in no event later than thirty (30) days after the curing party's receipt of the notice), the curing party provides written notice to the other party that the cure cannot practicably be completed within such thirty (30) day period; and (d) the cure is completed at the earliest practicable date. In no event shall Complaining Party be precluded 859454 23 Draft Version 4 111112006 from exercising remedies if a default is not cured within ninety (90) days after the first notice of default is given. 14.1.5. Lull Proce"n . Sublect to the foregoing, if the Parry in Default fails to cure a default in accordance with the foregoing, the Complaining Parry, at its option, may institute legal proceedings pursuant to this Agreement or, in the event of a material default, terminate this Agreement. Upon the occurrence of an Event of Default, the parties may pursue all other remedies at law or in equity, which are not otherwise provided for or prohibited by this Agreement, or in the City's regulations if any governing development agreements, expressly including the remedy of specific performance of this Agreement. 14.1.6. Effect 9f T rmi . If this Agreement is terminated following any Event of Default of Landowner or for any other reason, such termination shall not affect the validity of any building or improvement within the Property which is completed as of the date of termination, provided that such building or improvement has been constructed pursuant to a building permit issued by the City. Furthermore, no termination of this Agreement shall prevent Landowner from completing and occupying any building or other improvement authorized pursuant to a valid building permit previously issued by the City that is under construction at the time of termination, provided that any such building or improvement is completed in accordance with said building permit in effect at the time of such termination. 15. Esioaoel Certificle. Either Parry may, at any time, and from time to time, request written notice from the other Party requesting such Party to certify in writing that, (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and a binding obligation of the Parties; (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified either orally or in writing, or if so amended, identifying the amendments; and (c) to the knowledge of the certifying Party the requesting Party is not in default in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement, or if in default, to describe therein the nature and amount of any such defaults. A Party receiving a request hereunder shall execute and return such certificate within thirty (30) days following the receipt thereof, or such longer period as may reasonably be agreed to by the Parties. City Manager of City shall be authorized to execute any certificate requested by Landowner. Should the party receiving the request not execute and return such certificate within the applicable period, this shall not be deemed to be a default. 16. N196 amr Pro ion; 22MB Ris�tt& of Quire. 16.1. tee. Prdection. This Agreement shall be superior and senior to any lien placed upon t e Property, or any portion thereof after the date of recording this Agreement, including the lien for any deed of trust or mortgage ("Mortgage"). Notwithstanding the foregoing, no breach hereof shall defeat, render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, but all the terms and conditions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and effective against any person or entity, including any deed of trust beneficiary or mortgagee ("Mortgagee") who acquires title to the Property, or any portion thereof, by foreclosure, trustee's sale, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise. 859464 24 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 16.2. Mg aggM-NQ Qbliaallmll. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 17.1 above, no Mortgagee shall have any obligation or duty under this Agreement, before or after foreclosure or a deed in lieu of foreclosure, to construct or complete the construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction of improvements, or to guarantee such construction or completion, or to pay, perform or provide any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition; provided, however, that a Mortgagee shall not be entitled to devote the Property to any uses or to construct any improvements thereon, authorized by the Project Approvals or by this Agreement, unless Mortgagee agrees to and does construct or complete the construction of improvements, or guarantees such construction of improvements, or pays, performs or provides any fee, dedication, improvements or other exaction or imposition as required by the Project Approvals. 16.3. Ngoo 9f, f itto MgdgAM SW g&t io f i t to re. If City receives notice from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given Landowner hereunder and specifying the address for service thereof, then City shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with service thereon to Landowner, any notice given to Landowner with respect to any claim by City that Landowner has committed an Event of Default. Each Mortgagee shall have the right during the same period available to Landowner to cure or remedy, or to commence to cure or remedy, the Event of Default claimed set forth in the City's notice. City, through its City Manager, may extend the cure period provided in Section 15.1.2 for not more than an additional sixty (60) days upon request of Landowner or a Mortgagee. 17. Severabift. Except as set forth herein, if any term, covenant or condition of this Agreement or the application thereof to any person, entity or circumstance shall, to any extent, be invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement, or the application of such term, covenant or condition to persons, entities or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid or unenforceable, shall not be affected thereby and each term, covenant or condition of this Agreement shall be valid and be enforced to the fullest extent permitted by law; provided, however, if any provision of this Agreement is determined to be invalid or unenforceable and the effect thereof is to deprive a Party hereto of an essential benefit of its bargain hereunder, then such Party so deprived shall have the option to terminate this entire Agreement from and after such determination. 18. AgRilaaft Law. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 19. Should any legal action be brought by either party for breach of this Agreement or to enforce any provisions herein, the prevailing parry to such action shall be entitled to reasonable attomeys' fees, court costs, and such other costs as may be fixed by the Court. Aorart t -arid _ContiaW PeWit _Proce"irta. If any person or entity not a party to this Agreement initiates an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of any provision of this Agreement or the Project Approvals, the parties shall cooperate and appear in defending such action. Landowner shall bear its own costs of defense as a real party in interest in any such 859464 25 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 action. Landowner shall reimburse City on an equal basis for all reasonable court costs and attorneys' fees expended by City in defense of any such action or other proceeding and shall pay any attorneys fees and costs that may be awarded to the third party or parties. The City agrees that in the event an action at law or in equity to challenge the validity of the Project Approvals is filed by a third party other than by a state or federal agency, the City will continue to process and approve permit applications that are consistent with and comply with the Project Approvals unless a court enjoins further processing of permit applications and issuance of permits. 21. Transfers Wd Assignments. From and after recordation of this Agreement against the Property, Landowner shall have the full right to assign this Agreement as to the Property, or any portion thereof, in connection with any sale, transfer or conveyance thereof, and upon the express written assignment by Landowner and assumption by the assignee of such assignment in the form attached hereto as Exhibit G. and the conveyance of Landowner's interest in the Property related thereto, Landowner shah be released from any further liability or obligation hereunder related to the portion of the Property so conveyed and the assignee shall be deemed to be the "Landowner," with all rights and obligations related thereto, with respect to such conveyed property. Prior to recordation of this Agreement, any proposed assignment of this Agreement by Landowner shall be subject to the prior written consent of the City Manager on behalf of the City and the form of such assignment shall be subject to the approval of the City Attorney, neither of which shall be unreasonably withheld. 22. &UegmentJJuns with ft Land. Except as otherwise provided for in Section 15 of this Agreement, all of the provisions, rights, terms, covenants, and obligations contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon the parties and their respective heirs, successors and assignees, representatives, lessees, and all other persons acquiring the Property, or any portion thereof, or any interest therein, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever. All of the provisions of this Agreement shall be enforceable as equitable servitude and shall constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable laws, including, but not limited to, Section 1468 of the Civil Code of the State of California. Each covenant to do, or refrain from doing, some act on the Property hereunder, or with respect to any owned property; (a) is for the benefit of such properties and is a burden upon such properties; (b) runs with such properties; and (c) is binding upon each party and each successive owner during its ownership of such properties or any portion thereof, and shall be a benefit to and a burden upon each party and its property hereunder and each other person succeeding to an interest in such properties. 23. BlokruRtcy. The obligations of this Agreement shall not be dischargeable in bankruptcy. 24. IrKlmnlifiloWn. Landowner agrees to indemnify, defend and hold harmless City, and its erected and agpointed councils, boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees, and representatives from any and all claims, costs (including legal fees and costs) and liability for (1) any personal injury or property damage which may arise directly or indirectly as a result of any actions or inactions by the Landowner, or any actions or inactions of Landowner's contractors, subcontractors, agents, or employees in connection with the construction, improvement, operation, or maintenance of the Property and the Project, provided that 859464 26 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 Landowner shall have no indemnification obligation with respect to the gross negligence or willful nisconduct of City, its contractors, subcontractors, agents or employees or with respect to the maintenance, use or condition of any improvement after the time it has been dedicated to and accepted by the City or another public entity (except as provided in an improvement agreement or maintenance bond) and (2) any additional mitigation required, including but not limited to payment of any mitigation fees that may be imposed, as a result of a lawsuit filed by a third party challenging or seeking to invalidate the Project Approvals. 25. [neuronce. 25.1. PWWc U�'liW MW ftoperty DanUM Durance. At all times that Landowner is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Landowner shah maintain in effect a policy of comprehensive general liability insurance with a per -occurrence combined single limit of not less than two million ($2,000,000) dollars and a deductible of not more then fifty thousand ($50,000) dollars per claim. The policy so maintained by Landowner shall name the City as an additional insured and shall include either a severability of interest clause or cross -liability endorsement. 25.2. W era' QoMpe.�yon Insurance. At all times that Landowner is constructing any improvements that will become public improvements, Landowner shall maintain Workers' Compensation insurance for all persons employed by Landowner for work at the Project site. Landowner shall require each contractor and subcontractor similarly to provide Workers' Compensation insurance for its respective employees. Landowner agrees to indemnify the City for any damage resulting from Landowner's failure to maintain any such insufance. 25.3. EyMerice 9J Insurance. Prior to commencement of construction of any improvements which will become public improvements, Landowner shall furnish City satisfactory evidence of the insurance required in Sections 26.1 and 26.2 and evidence that the carrier is required to give the City at least fifteen (15) days prior written notice of the cancellation or reduction in coverage of a policy. The insurance shall extend to the City, its elective and appointive boards, commissions, officers, agents, employees and representatives and to Landowner performing work on the Project. 26. InuIS ftl Noggftmemm. Landowner and City shall be excused from performing any obligation or undertaking provided in this Agreement, except any obligation to pay any sum of money under the applicable provisions hereof, in the event and so long as the performance of any such obligation is prevented or delayed, retarded or hindered by act of God, fire, earthquake, flood, explosion, action of the elements, war, invasion, insurrection, riot, mob violence, sabotage, inability to procure or general shortage of labor, equipment, facilities, materials or supplies in the open market, failure of transportation, strikes, lockouts, condemnation, requisition, laws, orders of governmental, civil, military or naval authority, or any other cause, whether similar or dissimilar to the foregoing, not within the control of the Party claiming the extension of time to perforin. The Party claiming such extension shall send written notice of the claimed extension to the other Party within thirty (30) days from the commencement of the cause entitling the Party to the extension. 859464 27 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 27. Third Pa ciairil". This Agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benelt of the Landowner and, the City and their successors and assigns. No other person shall have any right of action based upon any provision in this Agreement. 28. Nc ces. All notices required by this Agreement, the enabling legislation, or the procedure adopted pursuant to Government Code Section 65865, shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid. Notice required to be given to the City shall be addressed as follows: CITY OF LODI City Manager P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 Notice required to be given to the Landowner shall be addressed as follows: FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. Either party may change the address stated herein by giving notice in writing to the other party, and lfiereafter notices shWI be addressed and transmitted to the new address. 29. FQtLn of WommmWe . Except when this Agreement is automatically terminated due to the expiration of the Term of the Agreement or the provisions of Section 5.3 (Automatic Termination Upon Completion and Sale of Residential Lot), the City shall cause this Agreement, any amendment hereto and any other termination of any parts or provisions hereof, to be recorded, at Landowner's expense, with the county Recorder within ten (10) days of the effective date thereof. Any amendment or termination of this Agreement to be recorded that affects less than all of the Property shall describe the portion thereof that is the subject of such amendment or termination. This Agreement is executed in three duplicate originals, each of which is deemed to be an original. This Agreement consists of _ pages and Exhibits, which constitute the entire understanding and agreement of the parties. 30. Further AWrances. The Parties agree to execute such additional instruments and to undertake such aeons as may be necessary to effectuate the intent of this Agreement. 31. City CooagMon. The City agrees to cooperate with Landowner in securing all permits which may be required by City. In the event State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Effective Date, or action of any governmental jurisdiction, prevent delay or preclude compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, or require changes in plans, reaps or permits approved by City, the parties agree that the provisions of this Agreement shall be modified, extended, or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State and Federal laws or regulations or the regulations of other governmental jurisdictions. Each party 859464 28 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 agrees to extend to the other its prompt and reasonable cooperation in so modifying this Agre hent or approved plans. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Lodi, a municipal corporation, has authorized the execution of this Agreement in duplicate by its Mayor and attested to by its City Clerk under the authority of Ordinance No. , adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi on the day of , 2006, and Landowner has caused this Agreement to be executed. CITY OF LODI, a municipal corporation Bv: Name: Blair King Its: City Manager ATTEST: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: D. Sfiephen Schwabauer City Attorney "LANDOWNER" FRONTIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS, INC. By: Name: 859464 29 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 Its: EX##BIT LIST Exhibit A-1: Legal Description of the Property Exhibit A-2: Diagram of the Property Exhibit B: General Plan Land Use Map Exhibit B-1: Zoning Map for Project Site Exhibit C-1: Large Lot Tentative Subdivision Map Exhibit C-2: Reserved Exhibit D: Development Plan and Infrastructure Map for the Property Exhibit E: Growth Management Allocations Exhibit F: Annexation Approvals Exhibit G: Form of Assignment Exhibit H: Schedule of Improvements Exhibit I: Park Improvements 859464FCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 EXHIBIT A-1 LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY The Wnd referred to heroin Is situated in the State of California, County of San Joaquin, City Of Lodi, and is descAbed as follows: 859464PCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 EXHIBIT A-2 DIAGRAM OF THE PROPERTY 859464 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 EXHIBIT C-1 Largs Lot Tentative Subdivision Map 859464 Draft Version 4 11/1/2005 EXHIBIT C-2 Reserved 859464 Draft Vtrsion 4 11/1/2006 EXHIBIT D DEVIELOPMENT PLAN AND INFRASTRACTURE MAP FOR THE PROPERTY 859464 Draft Version 4 11/l/2006 EXHIBIT E WESTSIDE PROJECT GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATION TABLE A 10we Date Allocation Eff*tive Date of 215 Low Density Units (Reserve) Development Agreement Within the Calendar Year One Year 70 Medium Density Units after the Effective Date Witten the Calendar Year Two Years 180 High Density Units aftej Effective Date 40 Low Density Units Within the Calendar Year Three Years 40 Low Density Units after Effective Date Within the Calendar Year Four Years 40 Low Density Units after Effective Date Wiin the Calendar Year Five Years 40 Low Density Units aftq1 Effective Date WitNn the Calendar Year Six Years 40 Low Density Units aftef Effective Date WiAn the Calendar Year Seven Years 40 Low Density Units after Effective Date Within the Calendar Year Eight Years 40 Low Density Units after EtecWe Date 859464 Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 EXMBIT F ANNEXATION APPROVALS FCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 EXHIBIT G FORM OF ASSIGNMENT OFFICIAL BUSINESS Document entitled to fr#e recording Government Code Section 6103 RIJCORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDIED MAIL TO: City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 96241-1910 Arta: City Clerk (SPACE ABOVE THIS LINE RESERVED FOR RECORDER'S USE) ASNM.ENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT RELATIVE 'tO F*O#MIER COMMUNITY BUILDERS WESTSIIDE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT THIS ASSIGNMENT AND ASSUMPTION AGREEMENT (hereinafter, the "Agreement") is entered into this day of , 200. , by and between Frontier Community Builders, a corporation (hereinafter "Developer"), and , a (hereinafter "Assignee"). RECITALS 1. On , 2006, the City of Lodi and Developer entered into that cEttain agreement entified "Development Agreement By and Between The City of Lodi and Frontier Community Builders, Inc. related to the development known as Frontier Community Builders Westside Project (hereinafter the "Development Agreement"). Pursuant to the Development Agreement, Developer agreed to develop certain property more particularly described in the Development Agreement (hereinafter, the "Subject Property"), subject to certain conditions and obligations as set forth in the Development Agreement. The Devebpment Agreement was recorded against the Subject Property in the Official Records of San Joaquin County on 2006, as Instrument No. - FC$ Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Drxft Version 4 11/1/2006 2. Developer intends to convey a portion of the Subject Property to Assignee, commonly referred to as Parcel , and more particularly identified and described in Exhibit -1 and Exhibit A-2, attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference (hereinafter the "Assigned Parcel"). 3. Developer desires to assign and Assignee desires to assume all of Developer's right, title, interest, burdens and obligations under the Development Agreement with respect to and as related to the Assigned Parcel. NOW, THEREFORE, Developer and Assignee hereby agree as follows: 1. Developer hereby assigns, effective as of Developer's conveyance of the Assigned Parcel to Assignee, all of the rights, title, interest, burdens and obligations of Developer under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel. Developer retains all the rights, title, interest, burdens and obligations under the Development Agreement with respect to all other property within the Subject Property owned by Developer. 2. Assignee hereby assumes all of the rights, title, interest, burdens and obligations of Developer under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel, and agrees to observe and fully perform all of the duties and obligations of Developer under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel. The parties intend hereby that, upon the execution of this Agreement and conveyance of the Assigned Parcel to Assignee, Assignee shall become substituted for Developer as the 'Developer" under the Development Agreement with respect to the Assigned Parcel. 3. All of the covenants, terms and conditions set forth herein shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto and their respective heirs, successors and assigns. 4. The Notice Address described in Section 28 of the Development Agreement for the Developer with respect to the Assigned Parcel shall be: IN WITNESS HEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above written. This Agreement may be signed in identical counterparts. PCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061 DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 DEVELOPER: By: Print Name: TMe: Division President ASSIGNEE: By: Print Name: Title: FCB Westside Developmett Agreement )Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11{1/2006 EXHIBIT H SCHEDULE OF IMPROVEMENTS FCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 EXHIBIT 1 PARKIMPROVEMENTS Basin/Park Area Summary Westside Annexation Location Park Basin (1), Net acres (2),acres Gross, acres Total, acres A 2.9 1.6 1.6 4.5 B 2.1 2.1 2.1 C 8.2 5.4 6.1 14.3 Southwest Gatewav Annexation Basin (1), Location acres Park Net (2),acres Gross, acres Total, acres D 5.9 1.5 1.5 7.4 E 6.7 2.4 2.4 9.1 F 4.8 1.5 1.5 6.3 G 2.2 2.2 2.2 H 2 2 2 Open Space on Century Blvd. 0 0 0 (1) Westside Annexation area basin calculations not approved. The basin area numbers are subject to change. (2) Net area measured from street right of way. Area requirements are exclusive of bike and ped routes. (3) Park to be located at the southwest end of designated area. Park to be located at the south end of designated (4) area. Two slivers of open space are shown on Century (5) Blvd. Neither area provides sufficient space for park facilities. FCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 (3) (4) (5) REQUIRED PARK AMENITIES FCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 ��■■■moo©©©■a■a0000000©© ®■■■■■�■��■■�■o©moo©���■■■■ ©■©■■000©o©�■�0000000©© �■■�■■■�■��■■■■■©moo©��■■■■■�■ ©■■■�■■N�©o©�■�oo©moo©■© o�©�■■■■�■�©o©�■■■�■oo©moo©■© FCB Westside Development Agreement Final 10.31.061.DOC Draft Version 4 11/1/2006 RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE CONCEPTUAL LAND USE/CIRCULATION PLAN OF THE VWSTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Westside Facilities Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the applicant represents property owners within the Westside Project area, which is encompassed by the Westside Facilities Master Plan, and these property owners have provided consent to the project proponent and applicant for this General Plan amendment request; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the proposed General Plan amendments on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006 and their motion to recommendation approval to the City Council was defeated on a 2:4 vote; and WHEREAS, the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan of the Westside Facilities Master Plan contains a greenbelt buffer along western edge of the plan area; and WHEREAS, the request is to change the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan of the Westside Facilities Master Plan to reflect the proposed Westside Project Land Use Plan defined herein as Exhibit A; and WHEREAS, specific text amendments related to the change in the Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan are defined here as Exhibits B through G; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. 2005- and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2006- 2. The required public hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The required public hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. J:W ,CJTY'AES%RN dl"�p412-Wwmd WFMP Am"ment.dm 4. It is found that the requested Westside Facilities Master Plan Amendment does not conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 5. The proposO 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 are physically suitable for the residential development proposed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi hereby approves amendments to the Westside Facilities Master Plan as follows: 1. The Weetside Facilities Master Plan Land Use/Circulation Plan (page 9) shall be revised as shown on Exhibit A hereto. 2. Figures 7 and 8 shall be removed and text in the List of Exhibits (page ii) shall be revised as shown on Exhibit B hereto. 3. Page 14 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit C hereto. 4. Page 16 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit D hereto. 5. Page 17, Figure 6, shall be revised as shown on Exhibit E hereto. 6. Page 18 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit F hereto. 7. Page 31 of the Westside Facilities Master Plan shall be replaced with the text changes shown on Exhibit G hereto. Dated: November 1, 2006 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006- was passed and adopted by the Lodi City Council in a regular meeting held November 1, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — RANDIJOHL City Clerk J:x ACITYRESUtm 2("V -o7 -Wear ia�wFNP Amend �t.aa 2 EXHIBIT A REVISED FIGURRE 3: LAND USE/CIRCULATION PLAN FOR THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN JACA1CMMESMft 20Wl4i2-Westside-WFMP A—d�tdm EXHIBIT B REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE ii OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan List of Exhibits Tables TABLE 1 Land Use Distributions............................................................. 8 TABLE 2 K-6 Elementary School Facility Needs .......................................... 11 TABLE 3 Parkland Needs ..... ............................................................... 13 Figures FIGURE 1 Location Map................................................................2 FIGURE 2 Existing Land Use Map...................................................4 FIGURE 3 Conceptual Land Use/Circulation Plan ..................................9 FIGURE 4 Electric Substation Concept..............................................12 FIGURE 5 Westside Park and Aquatic Center.......................................15 FIGURE 6 emelt Open Space Corridor Detail..................................17 FIGURE 7 Rwfeat4evel Lagoons Reserved.........................................19 FIGURE 8 Nalwal begeens Re&erved ...............................................19 FIGURE 9 Master Plan Circulation Concept........................................21 FIGURE 10 Kettlemen Lane /Highway 12 Concept................................23 FIGURE 11 Lower Sacramento Road.................................................24 FIGURE 12 Lodi Avenue Concept...................................................25 FIGURE 13 Lodi Avenue Round-a-Bout............................................26 FIGURE 14 Minor Collector Concept................................................27 FIGURE 15 Road A Concept..........................................................28 FIGURE 16 Minor Residential Road Concept......................................29 FIGURE 17 Bike Lane Concept.......................................................30 FIGURE 18 Bike and Pedestrian Path Concept....................................31 TABLE OF CONTENTS ii k WATr€vMs�RA xc usJ-uz-wcus+Ck-wFW e,...n,� Ac 5 EXHIBIT C REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 14 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan Community parks are primarily for active uses and structured recreation. Community park facilities should be designed for organized activities and sports. Community parks may also provide specialized community wide interest facilities. Where neighborhood parks are absent, community parks can serve their function. 3.1 Westside Park Westside Park., a 17 -acre Neighborhood Park and aquatic center, is consistent with the Lodi Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan's, Cochran Park concept. As shown in figure 5, this park is intended to be the central focal element of the Plan Area. Westside Park forms, distinguishes, and gives character to the Plan Area residential neighborhoods creating a community image. Westside Park will be contiguous to the proposed elementary school site and the Gr-eenbelt Offen §pace Corridor. The park is designed to provide a variety of active play areas, especially focused on the needs of children. The adient C-.Feeabelt Open Space Corridor will provide access to surrounding neighborhoods. As illustrated in figure 5, the proposed park uses around the lake include two children's playgrounds, picnic areas, a paved bicycle and pedestrian pathway system, a soccer filed, tennis courts, and a multi -use basketballlroller blade/hockey court. The Lodi Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan recommends that an aquatic center be located in Westside Park. The aquatic center should be designed to adequately serve the Westside of Lodi. To enhance revenue opportunities for operation and maintenance of the aquatic center, the center should consider slides and other water related features in addition to a 25-yard/50-meter multi- purpose pool as proposed in the Master Plan. 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Revised 2006) 14 EXHIBIT D JACA!CITMEMRp 2(9)6ll412-W"ido-WFMP Awc.4wnt,dw 6 .. IN .. tr. In rl- 777 - As illustrated in figure 5, the proposed park uses around the lake include two children's playgrounds, picnic areas, a paved bicycle and pedestrian pathway system, a soccer filed, tennis courts, and a multi -use basketballlroller blade/hockey court. The Lodi Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan recommends that an aquatic center be located in Westside Park. The aquatic center should be designed to adequately serve the Westside of Lodi. To enhance revenue opportunities for operation and maintenance of the aquatic center, the center should consider slides and other water related features in addition to a 25-yard/50-meter multi- purpose pool as proposed in the Master Plan. 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Revised 2006) 14 EXHIBIT D JACA!CITMEMRp 2(9)6ll412-W"ido-WFMP Awc.4wnt,dw 6 REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 16 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan The three -acre aquatic center in located at the east end of the park, adjacent to the proposed Elementary School site. The aquatic center illustrated in Figure 5 includes a water park, a multi- purpose pool, a dive pool, and an office/restroom facility. The aquatic's center restroom will be accessible from the park. The water park site is capable of maintaining two water slides, a zero depth pool, water spray features for children and a sand area to give users a feeling of being at the beach. This center will have the capability to serve high schools and the Lodi Swim Club. Parking for the aquatic center will be served by a single parking lot located adjacent to planned collector streets. The parking lot will be served by two entries, each with access/egress ability. The parking lot will accommodate automobiles as well as buses. While parking is available, a substantial number of residences will access the Westside Park via a pedestrian/bicycle trail system. 3.2 Greenbelt Open loce Corridor Lodi has a well-defined edge that divides its urban uses from abutting agricultural uses, a value cherished by many residents. However, the proximity of agricultural operations to urban uses also creates conflicts affecting both farmers and residents. Conflicts relating to farming at the urban -agriculture interface can be minimized by " a4 the edgO E) eeFamuaity installati2g of a laodscaned open space buffer area, fences and/or walls as a transition from agriculture to urban. To maximize the beflefits use of an `" Open Space Corridor,sterm managefoe the Ogen Space corridor should be located central to the project area and its facilities should be integrated within lithe Corridor and -be -should be treated as a public asset, maintained for use as a No diwfsity, community benefit. The GFeettbel Open*ace Corridor shown in Figure 3, is a community facility that extends beyond the Plan Area. According to the Park, Recreation and Open Space Plan. The Corridor will extend north to Turner Road and south the Harney Lane. The corridor is central to the Plan Area papallels the wesWm edge of the Plan , and establishes a btt€fef central open space spice to orovide pedestrian connections to parks and schools within the Plan Area. between The width of the Gfeenbel-Open Space Corridor should range from 30 to SO feet. The Gfeeubelt Open Nplee Corridor &1so serves as a passive recreational facility with a 12 -foot meandering bike and pedestrian path a well as a dfai age basin f r the Plan nicee lv:t�uiaz thQ r anen4ighway 1 r..e f to Figum 44. The bicycle and pedestrian path will serve the community needs. The path should be designed to meander through the Open Space Corridor. aFeHffd the Detail. The bicycle and pedestrian path should provide links to the residential neighborhoods, Westside Park and to bike and pedestrian path that connects to the Elementary School. 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Revised 2006) . 16 J:TA%CC3 'AESUta 2(X)6U4)2-Wed.do-WF.MP Amendmcat.dw EXHIBIT E REVIS19D FIGURE 5: OPEN SPACE CORRIDOR DETAIL r,5CMMYRESWm l(M)rAl412-W.mmd�WFMF A—d—i dp EXHIBIT F REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 18 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan Landscaping along the 001 Smace(ifeeabelt Corridor should provide a natural open space atmosphere. Canopy trees should be grouped together along the corridor. Landscaping such as broad shade trees, accent trees, shrubs and native species should be encouraged within the open space area. The bicycle and pedestrian trail within the open sywm corridoe shall meander thresh the corridor and consist of a paved walking and biking trail and a decom-cased Erste Fail f r runMrs. as de „+:.,-. F ,.;lifts at:.. ..t of at,,fO lageons. Re alio al lapeR, as show in Figwe 7 indigenetts plant eeloftizmien. Consideration should be given to the integration a A zefte of pr-abeetive edge tfeatfaefft of design and ffi&Wial (O.g., Split Fail fefleiffg) and signage virainity of the lageoes, Gensidomtien should alge be given ie the alignmem of the hieYele and Recognizing the importance of the ones s ce gfeexbe corridor as a major open space and recreational amenity to Plan Area and community, it is important that the corridor provide and environment that is safe and accessible. Paralleling the open space gFeenbelt corridor with residential streets would provide safe and convenient access to the recreational opportunities along the Open Space g-eer�lt corridor. As a recreational and open space amenity to the Plan Area and the community, a parallel street would result in an attractive and aesthetically pleasing streetscape that would promote individual neighborhood and overall community identity. Homes adjacent to the opgn space gFeeebelt corridor should be oriented to encourage maximizing the aesthetic value of the open space gr-eenbeh corridor and create and inviting community edge. Preferably, homes adjacent to the open space greenbelt corridor should be oriented with the front yard and entry of the home directly facing the open space greenbelt corridor. Orientation of residences toward the open space gmenbelt corridor would provide visual access into the corridor and discourage neighborhood policing of the open space gFOORbe corridor. Homes adjacent to the open space gFeenbelt corridor may be oriented with the side yard facing the open space gFeeabelt corridor. However, this type of orientation should be provided only under limited conditions. Under no circumstance should homes adjacent to the open space gFeenbek corridor be oriented with the rear yard facing the corridor . 3.0 PARKS AND OPEN SPACE (Revised 2006) 18 175CAUTMESUtes 20061J4j2-Wearsi4e-WFMP Awnd—w dm to EXHIBIT G REVISED TEXT FOR PAGE 31 OF THE WESTSIDE FACILITIES MASTER PLAN Lodi Westside Facilities Master Plan 4.4.2 Bicycle Path A Bicycle Path or Class I Bikeway that is separated from a street or road. According to the Lodi Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, the preferable hike path is 12 feet wide. This allows for a two way bike path and pedestrian facility, as shown in Figure 18. 50'M in, Notes • B&C am podestrian Path May ;Meandeu wiin PUnting Sip BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN PATH CONCEPT FIGURE 18 As a regional facility, the Greer a} Open SRHe Corridor would ultimately extend beyond the Plan Area. A bicycle path should adhere within the Greenbelt Open Space Corridor, meandering tll�rot� the corridor within the Plan Area, and may continue north and south to the extents of the proposed Gfeenbeh Open Space Corridor, as shown in Figure 6, G#eenbelt Opn SSRace Corridor Detail. The path would be used for bicyclists and pedestrians. The path would link the Plan Area neighborhoods through other pathways. 4.5 Pedestrian Facilities The key pedestrian path should be located along the Cfeenbelt Open Space Corridor to provide alternative modes of transportation within the Lodi Westside Plan Area, as shown in Figure 6 -5, 6feeMwl Open Space Corridor Detail. The path may be combined with a bicycle path, which has the capability of connecting the north side of the Plan Area to the southern portion of the area with links to residential areas, the Westside Park and Aquatic Center, the elementary school and to commercial areas. The pedestrian path may also continue north and south to the extents of the proposed Greexbelt QpM Space Corridor. 4.0 CIRCULATION (ftLse d 2M) 31 f%CA)CITY4R S%,t 2"9-d2-WWide-WFW Amadm talo I I RESOLUTION NO. 2006- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE REQUEST OF TOM DOUCETTE, FRONTIERS COMMUNITY BUILDERS, FOR AN AMENDMENT TO THE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION MASTER PLAN TO IMPLEMENT THE WESTSIDE DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Master Plan Amendment, in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84; and WHEREAS, the affected properties are located within the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; and WHEREAS, the project proponent and applicant is Tom Doucette, Frontiers Community Builders, 10100 Trinity Parkway Suite 420 Stockton, CA 95219; and WHEREAS, the City of Lodi Planning Commission held public hearings on the proposed amendments on October 11, 2006 and October 25, 2006 and their motion to recommendation approval to the City Council was defeated on a 2:4 vote; and WHEREAS, the City Council certified the Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05- 01), and adopted Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA; and WHEREAS, the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan includes a Class 1 bike path along the western edge of Westside project area boundary; and WHEREAS, the request is to change the location of the Class 1 bike path shown of the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan to reflect the proposed location within the bike and pedestrian trail centrally located within the Westside Development plan and a portion of the path (north of Sargent Road and south of the WID Canal) to be accommodated on a local street within the residential development; and WHEREAS, ail legal prerequisites to recommend the approval of this request have occurred; and WHEREAS, based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Ciity Council of the City of Lodi makes the following findings: 1. The Environmental Impact Report (EIR-05-01) was certified by City Council Resolution No. 2006- and Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations for the project pursuant to CEQA were adopted by City Council Resolution No. 2006- 2. The required pubic hearing by the Planning Commission was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. 3. The required pubic hearing by the City Council was duly advertised and held in a manner prescribed by law. I TMCITYWS4Rzs 2WU-02-WeMwde WUPI-Am d—m.doc 1 4. It is found that the requested Bicycle Transportation Master Plan Amendment does not conflict with adapted plans or policies of the General Plan and will serve sound planning practice. 5. The Westside project would comply with the other bike path locations shown on with the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan including a Class II bike path on Lodi Avenue and a Class 11 or III bike path on Vine Street. 6. The size, shape and topography of the site are physically suitable for the residential development proposed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED, AND RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby approves amendments to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan to implement the Westside Development Plan as follows: 1. The Bicycle Transportation Master Plan is hereby amended to modify the location of the Class I bike path from the western edge of the Westside plan area to be centrally located within the plan area. Dated: November 1, 2006 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2006- was passed and adopted by the Lodi City Council in an adjourned regular meeting held November 1, 2006 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — RANDIJOHL City Clerk J-TAkC y&ESVtw 3ai6V-02.Wc"d.V1'Lp]—Am .dm ul.doc 2 Ak ssage Please t i stribute to entire City Council. From. Trevor Atkinson Phone: 209-478-4360 Fax: 209-476-1060 To: Lodi City Council Mayor Susan Hitchcock I Date: 11/1/2006 Page(s): 3 1 qc� � 06 '_ ,Tz 4�jjt i ki tAt 1�S�' F.O. Box 693545 Stockton, CA 95269 November 1, 2006 To: Lcxli City- Council Attn: Mayor Susan Hitchcock From: Campaign for Common Ground Carnp&ign for Common Ground is a countywide citizens' group that promotes Smart Growth principles to improve the quality of life in San Joaquin County. (1-ittp::'i'wN,vNv,campaignforcommonground.org/.) Campaign for Common Ground also sponsored Measure Q on the Stockton 2004 ballot to place an urban separator between Lodi and Stockton. We are still active in encouraging a Stockton General Plan that will provide for land preservation between the two cities. We are concerned about the proposed approval of the Lodi Annexation/Frontiers Community Builders Project for several reasons. The Southwest Gateway portion of the project will promote gro,Alh south of Harney Lane, into the area that should remain in agriculture to separate Lodi and Stockton. Adequate mitigation for the farmland conversion impacts of the Project is not mandated. The mitigation measure does not require 1:1 mitigation for each acre of converted farm?and and the conservation easements need only last for 15 years. The Project does not meet the Smart Growth Principles promoted by Campaign for Common Ground. (See http:l/wu-%v.lwc.org ahwahnee/principles.html.) New development in San Joaquin County should be designed and constructed in a manner that will reduce future environmental impacts — especially those related to air quality. It does not appear that the Project has an adequate water supply. Campaign for Common Ground objects to new projects that continue to rely on the now over -dratted groundwater basin. Further support for these claims: The DEIR analysis of water quality and wastewater impacts is deficient because it contains no information and analysis of the recent revelations by a consultant of the water quality issues related to leakage from the wastewater treatment fines in the vicinity of the plant, and resvilting contal-nination wish nitrates (see "Solution to White Slough area water quality could take years," Lodi 'yews -Sentinel, October 4, 2006). The article notes that "It could take several years for Lodi ,o 5j)d a viable solution for groundwater problems near its wastewater treatment plant, sore of which have been linked to a pipeline collapse earlier this year. At an informal Lodi City Council ;neetin�Z Tuesday morning, Public Works Director Richard Prima presented the results of a year- long groundwater study. which revealed an increased level of nitrates in the water surrounding the White Slough wastewater treatment plant." The DUR fails to provide adequate justification for the single statement from a City staff member that "The White Slough Treatment facility has the capacity to treat the additional wastewater generated by the proposed pro .ject." The DIIR also fails to provide an adequate range of alternatives. In particular. the alternatives fai. to include a "agricultural buffer" that would help to mitigate impacts of urbar development directly adjacent to productive farmland, and no alternative includes a comprehensive "smart growth" design that seeks to reduce low density subdivisions, increase pedestrian and transit trips, and provide additional public amenities. The Increased High Density Mix alternative fails to include a full range of smart growth, "neo- traditional," o: "transit -oriented development" lands use and infrastructure strategies. It only simplistically deletes medium density residential Units. For thiese reasons, «Ve uxge the Lodi City Council not to approve the Project. Campaign for Common Ground Rosemary Moon Atkinson L� Trevor Atkinson Ann Johnston Eric Parfrey John Eilers Lez Fennell SIERRA .-CLUB FOUNDED 1892 November 1, 2006 Lodi City Council City of Lodi 221 W. Pine Street Lodi, CA 95242 Re: Lodi Annexation/FCP Project Environmental Review Dear Council Members: RECaE I CI.,_ Y of _ I The Sierra Club expressed our comments and concerns about this project in a letter to the City Planning Commission dated October 11, 2006. We are disappointed that most of our concerns were not adequately addressed in the response to comments (the Final EIR). There is not a sufficient response to Sierra Club and CCG's assertion that nitrate contamination of drinking water wells within the project area may be a problem and should be addressed. Moreover, there is still no formalized change to the ag mitigation measure that would ensure that the purchased easements would be perpetual, would be near the project area or would meet Central Valley Farmland Trust criteria. In addition, the FEIR and staff report fail to recommend creation of an ag buffer to reduce impacts to adjacent ag operations, and fail to analyze and propose changes or alternatives to the project based on "smart growth" concepts that we outlined in our letter. Sincerely, Eric Parfrey Mother Lode Chapter Executive Committee cc: Ann Cerney Page 1 of 1 X�r Randi Johl From: Mary Mustain [marymustain@sboglobal.netl Sent: Wednesday, November 01, 2006 11:17 AM To: Randi Johl Subject: For City Council Members TO: Suisan Hitchock Bab Johnson Joanne Monce Larry Hanson John Beckman SUBJECT: Westside Project and Southwest Gateway Project We are both registered voteres in Lodi. We are both very much oppossed to the Westside Project and the Southwest Gateway Project! We are oppossed for three main reasons: 1. We belive these developements would have a detrimental effect on our already taxed traffic flows, water and sewer systems, and police and fire capabilities. 2. We are greatly concerned that the proposed agreement between the city and FCB Homes does not have enough details as to exact schedules and responsibilies and does not contain penalities for failing to comply with the agreement. 3. We believe the so clled "bag of goodies" is in effect a bribe to the city to vote for something that overwhelmingly favors the contractor. We strongly recommend any action on this matter be tabled until after the November 7 elections and that a Citizens Committee be appointed to assist in developing a better agreement. Thank you very much for your time . Robert E. Mustain Mary A. Mustain 1103 Port Chelsea Cr. Lodi, CA 95240 369-9496 11/01/2005 10!2412006 10:45 2093691084 PROOF OF PUBLWATION (2015.5 C_C.C.P.) STATE Of CALIPORN1A County of Sap Joaquin I am a citizen of the United States arld a resident of the Counts aforesaid: I am over the age of ..eighuan-yew aad,nat a pastyu or Wereged in the above entitled matter. I arra the principal clerk of the Ininter of the Lodi News -Sentinel, a newspaper of general circulation, printed and published day except Sundays and holidays, in. the City of Lodi, California, County of San Joaquin and which newspaper had been adjudicated a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court, Department 3, of the County of San Joaquin., State of Californ* under the date of May 26th, 1953. Case Number 6599o; that the notice of which the annexed Is a printed copy (set in type riot smaller than non-pareil) has been published in each regular and emtira issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereto on the following dates to -wit: October Rist, all in the year 2006. I certify (or declare) under the penalty of perjury that the fore@Ding is true and correct. Dated at l ocI4 Calif= ' this 2xst clary Of Dcto R2oa6. Signature LODI NEWS SENTINEL PAGE 02103 ilia spree is for the County Clerk's Filing Stamp Proof of Publication Notice of Public Hearing Concerning the Southwest Gateway "act (Including "Other Annexiation Areas") and Westside Project 55IL3448 Please immediately carr receipt o, f this fax by ca thng 333-6702 CITY OF LODI P. O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT (INCLUDING "OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS") AND WESTSIDE PROJECT PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2006 TEAR SHEETS WANTED: Three (3) please SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BLL TO: RANDI JOHL, CITY CLERK City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1 91 0 DATED: FRIDAY, OCTOBER 20, 2006 ORDERED BY: IFER If PERRIN, CMC DEPUTY CITY CLERK DADA R. CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK RANDI JOHL CITY CLERK JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR, CMC DEPUTY CITY CLERK Faxed to the Sent el at US,A 0 at 9'.2:Q_(time) on id 34 6 este), (pa. _) LNS P*ned to comm receipt of all Daws at _ltltne} _-_ JLT D _(initials) forinAadvins.doc NOTICE OF PUMJC HEARING CONCERNIING THE SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT (INCLUDING "OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS") AND WESTSIDE PROJECT On Friday, October 20, 2006, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public Hearing concerning the Southwest Gateway Project (including "other annexation areas") and Westside Project (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 October 20, 2006, at Lodi, California. III AA�. Al 14LA11Lklu FERM. PERRIN, CIVIC PUTY CITY CLEW DANA R. CHAPMAN AiwDIVIMISTRATIVE CLERK N:1Administration\CLERK\ForQs1DECPOST.DOC ORDERED BY: RANDI JOHL CITY CLERK JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR, CMC DEPUTY CITY CLERK NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE SOUT14WEST GATEWAY PROJECT (INCLUDING "OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS") AND WESTSIDE PROJECT On October 20, 2006, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in the United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing Notice of Public Hearing concerning the Southwest Gateway Project (including "other annexation areas") and Westside Project, attached hereto Marked Exhibit A. The mailing list for said matter is attached hereto, marred 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 penally of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on October 20, 2006, at Lodi, California. IFER PERRIN, CMC DUTY CITY CLERK DANA R. CHAPMAN �IANISTRATIVE CLWK Forms/decmail.doc ORDERED BY: RANDI JOHL CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR, CIVIC DEPUTY CITY CLERK CITY OF LODI Carnegie Forum 305 West Pine Street, Lodi NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING Date: November 1, 2006 Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Randi Johl City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 EXHIBIT A NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARItS NOME IS HEREBY GIVIN that on Wednesday, November 1, 2006, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the mattor may be heard, the City Council will conduct a public hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following matter. a) Certify the Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report for the Southwest Gateway Project (including "other annexation areas") and Westside Project b) Approve the Southwest Gateway Project, which includes an annexation; pro -zoning; amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; and Development Agreement; to incorporate 306 acres into ft City of Lodi (257 acres with the Southwest Gateway Project area and 47.79 contiguous acres outside the Project); to allow construction of 1,300 dwelling units, 5 neighborhood/community parks, and a public elementary school on the west side of Lower Sacramento Road, south of Kettleman Lane, north of Harney Lane Including a City initiated request for the 'other annexation areas" {47.79 acres) for annexation, General Plan Amendment from a land use designation of PR (Planned Residential) to MDR (Medium Density Residential), and a pre -zoning of R -MD (Residential Medium Density) to avoid creation of a county island C) Approve the Westside Development Project, which includes an annexation; pre -zoning; amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; Development Agreement; and an amendment to the Westside Facilities Master Plan to incorporate 151 acres into the City of Lodi to allow construction of 750 dwelling units, 3 neighborhoodtcommunity parks, and a public elementary school at 351 East Sargent Road, 70 East Sargent Road, 212 East Sargent Road, and 402 East Sargent Road Information regarding this tem 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 slatements may be filed with the City Clerk, City Hall, 221 W. Pine Street, 2'4 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 Clerk, 221 West Fine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing, f the Lock City Council: City lerk Dalpd: Octoiber 18, 300 iWn1tF_ D. 0#ephen Sclwvabauer 0ty5Attorney CiEMPUBFEAf1lrWICESNORM.130c 10MM EXHIBIT B rG5 -50,01kx�+ 6,ko�y -IRST RIVERBANK LP 100 SWAN WAY SUITE 206 OAKLAND, CAr. 94621 !1l11111IIfll+lir 111++:1ilr1ll! �UEZADA, JAVIER & MARIA 1'ERESA 502 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95242 I I11111111111I l 1t1111111111111t1 CHRISTOPHERSON, EDWARD C &CK 29 N ALLEN DR LODI, CA 95242 II1111111111111111111111111111 i1 FIRST LODI PLAZA ASSOCIATES 100 SWAN WAY SUITE 206 OAKLAND, CA 94621 115111111111111 I1111I1111II IIr11 LAKESHORE GARDENS PTP 619 WILLOW GLEN DR LODI, CA 952(40 pill 11111111111131 FESSLER, JERRY & DEBORAH 2223 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 j IIiII11I1I111IlIlIIIIIIIIII FIS H CRISPI, MIKE & DONNA L TR 2230 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 111111111111k1111111111 r11111i11 HAND, ARTHUR L JR & DELIA J 2212 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 9524jj2 fill 1111111111111111111111111111 DEWITT, ROBERT D & PATRICIA AN 1801 ORCHIS CT LODI, CA 95242 [ 111IIIIIIII 11111111i111�1k111111 WATT, BRADLEY H & 1818 ORCHIS CT LODI, CA 95242 I!1l1r11f11r1111111, 111�r1111111 BDC LODI III LLC 100 SWAN WAY SUITE 206 OAKLAND, CA 94621 1!!111+I:1!1111,+,11l,1,111r1111 GRELLE, JERRY B & CATHRYN B 490 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95242 iiiiiiiiiii111111iiiiil1tlllflll GATES, DAVID L & BETTY L TR DAIS, SAM & ELSIE TR 540 E HARNEY LN 585 E SPRINGER LN LODI, CA 95242 LODI, CA 95240 IIILIIIJIIIIJIJIILIk1111J11 11111111111,111111111111111L111 BRADLEY, RICHARD & NANCY 5421 ONETO RD STOCKTON, CA 95212 11+IIIF111l1IIII11+Illlilrlllill FIRST LODI PLAZA ASSOCIATES PO BOX 100001 DALLAS, TX 75301 IIIIII11111111111IIIIIIlII111r11 GALAS, JOHN A & PAULINE TR 2211 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 IiliIl711I11i111111111111i111111 WEBER, JIM D & K TRS 2229 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 Iilkililiiiiiiiiiiiilillilltlill JOHNSTON, DAVID & JEANNE 2224 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 VIIIIIIIIIIil1111111111J1ii111 COSBIE, WILLIAM 11061 UPPER PREVITALI RD JACKSON, CA 95642 fill, 111111111111111111111111111 DUFFY, MICHAEL & D M 1807 ORCHIS CT LODI, CA 95242 111111 till 1111lIIIIIiIIllillllll Y M DE LEON, JOHN & CAMILLE 1812 ORCHIS CT LODI, CA 95242 I[11111111111111111111I 111111111 WAL MART REAL ESTATE BUSINESS 702 S W 8TH ST BENTONVILLE, AR 72716 I[111[fl[Ilrlllrllllrlrrllllllll - FIRST LODI PLAZA ASSOC LTD PTP 100 SWAN WAY SUITE 206 OAKLAND, CA 94621 111111111t11r1111111111111111111 GABRIEL, CRISPINO & CELESTINA 2217 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 llrirlr1rl11rI+If1r111rI11lrrlr! AZEVEDO, LAWRENCE & C A 2235 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 lIJII IIIIIIJJ1111lIJIIIIJJ BERNARD, DENIS & MICHELLE R 2218 MANZANITA CT LODI, CA 95242 111111111111111III111111111rt111 HODGE, DAVID & KRISTEN 2201 ORCHIS DR LODI, CA 95242 111I11111If11I1I111111111r111I11 BROZINICK, BRENDA C 1811 ORCHIS CT LODI, CA 95242 11.1.1.1 lilt 111111111411 lilt 1111 PAYNE, JAMES L & JEAN JUSTEAU 1806 ORCHIS CT LODI, CA 95242 1111111L111111111t1111111111111 I 3 SUMP, JON E & TAUNYA 1800 ORCHIS CT LODI, CA 95242 IIIIIIIIIIIIIf111111111I•llflll 11 NACHAND, LYLE N & CLARA JANE T 2217 ORCHIS DR LODI, CA 95242 III11111111111111111111111111111 VAN RUITEN RANCH LTD J401 W TURNER RD LODI, CA 95242 11111111111111111111111111111111 BITTNER, DONALD N & ROBIN L 2207 ORCHIS DR LODI, CA 95)242 J 11111111illllll llllltllll ltlllll CROTHERS, JOHN S & LAURIE A 2228 LUPINE CT LODI, CA 95242 11.1, 1111111 111111JI11.1 111. 11.1 VAN RUITEN RANCH LTD 463 W TURNER RD LODI, CA 95240 II}II11111111111 J llllll,II11i11 SHEAR, JAMES & MAXINE 2211 ORCHIS DR LODI, CA 95242 IL111J11i111,11111L111111J11 SMITH, ANDREW DAVID & JENNIFER 2222 LUPINE CT LODI, CA 95242 11111 1111111111111111111i1I111E1 VAN RUITEN RANCH LTD 463 W TURNER RD LODI, CA 95240 11.1 r1111111i1110111111111111 HOWARD INVESTMENTS LLC REICHMUTH, CAROLYN HINES SCHUMACHER, WELDON & ETAL 1358 MIDVALE RD BONNIE TR 2026 ANGELICO CIR LODI, CA 95240 1303 RIVERGATE DR STOCKTON, CA 95207 11111 l 111111 111111 111 l l l l l l l i i i l LODI, CA 95240 11111i111111111111111I1E1111i111 111111111 fill 11 fill 11111111111 If SCHUMACHER, WELDON & SCHUMACHER, WELDON & SCHUMACHER, WELDON & BONNIE TR BONNIE TR BONNIE TR 1303 RIVERGATE DR 1303 RIVERGATE DR 1303 RIVERGATE DR LODI, CA 95240{ LODI, CA 95240 LODI, CA 95240 111111111111111111111It1.11411111 Illliiililiiil J J Iillllillllill Ililiiititiiitilililllllilillill RIEGER, EARL & NAOMI WELLS, LARRY D & D R DIETRICH, THEODORE & 395 E HARNEY LN 427 E HARNEY LANE LOUELLA T LODI CA 9524j2 LODI, CA 95240 11 N AVENA AVE 11i1iiJiiiiilililiill}1ilLull IliliiililiiiliLliillllilllllil LODI, CA 95240 IIII1111}11111,111,1IIIllll11111 MASTEL, RICHARD L & PHYLLIS 499 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 952(40 illIIIII1111111IIIIIIIlr IIIIEI II HALL, FRANK PO BOX 90 FRENCH CAMP, CA 95231 IIII Ir1I11111111111111111111}111 VAN RUITEN, ROBERT TR 361 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95242 11111111 F11111111111111�III11111 BADYAL, JASBIR ETAL 184 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95242 tlrlrrrlltlt+Irti1r11ri1111rr1rl ALVAREZ, JOE L ETAL 533 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95242 111111111111111111klllllllli1111 SCHUMACHER, WELDON D & BONNIE 1303 RIVERGATE DR LODI, CA 95240 11111111111111111111I111111I1111 BRADEN, RONALD B & A 36 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95240 I IJ11s11111J111111111111111111 URIZ, FAUSTINO & MARIA C TR 202 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95240 11111111i1111111illilll1111l11i1 PINNELL, ROBERT S & LETHA J 16450 N ALPINE RD LODI, CA 95240 Ilililililiiilililiillllillitiil TAMURA, JOEY TR 788 W ARMSTRONG RD LODI, CA 95240 II 11111111111111111 i l l 1111111111 BECERRA, VALENTIN k ELVIRA 102 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95242 111111111111111111 fill 11 111111 11 SIDHU, NACHHATAR S & RUSE V 10 W HARNEY LN LODI CA 95242 IIII11111�1111111111111111111111 aov-3 LICE, LESLEY M GEIST, CLIFFORD & M D HERNANDEZ, STEVEN & M .3480 N EXTENSION RD 650 W HARNEY LANE ETAL .ODI, CA 95242 LODI, CA 95240 668 E HARNEY LN i11i1111111k1111111i1,1111lkikl II, L 11111k1l11111k111 L 111111 i1 LODI, CA 95240 I1111111i111ir1it11111111.111181 WILLIAMS, GLENN L & HAYN, BRIAN S FRAME, DEAN K & SHARON L 3ARBARA TR 810 E HARNEY LN TR S92 E HARNEY LN LODI, CA 95242 212 RUTLEDGE DR L"ODI'CA 95242 IL11kk11L1111JkJ1l11k111Lllll LOD(I, CA 95242 11111111111111111111111Flililll 1111111111111i111111111111111111 AL1, RAMZAN HERRMANN, VERNET & C TRS DEL RIO, SANTIAGO M & 1112 RIVERGATE DR 1200 GLENHURST RAMONA T [,ODI,j CA 95240 LODI, CA 95240 15315 N HOERL RD 11,11111111�11,IJklil11111h k11 llElrirlil111lIIIIIEIIIEIEIIIEII LODI, CA 95240 11111111E1F111111111111111111111 HALL, FRANK DEL RIO, SANTIAGO M & AMIGABLE, LETICIA F ETAL PO BOX 90 RAMONA T 930 E OLIVE AVE FRENCH CAMP, CA 95231 865 E OLIVE AVE LODI, CA 952[40 [11111111111111i11ill Illif Vold LODI, CA 11f1E1lllllfllilfr1i11liifllfEll (95242 111111l1111111111111111111111111 GREYER, ZANE M & P TRS PETERSON, M BILL PETERSON, RUTH SUSAN 1432 PARK ST P O BOX 473 PO BOX 331 LODI, CA 95j2422( LOCKEFOR/D!, CA SUTTER CREEK, CA 95685 11111111 11.1111191 ill J95237 iilllilll llk111i1, II1111111111r1 lr1r11111111r1111FlllllflllElErl MARTIN, MARILYN ANN VAUGHN, FREDDIE L & WISENOR, GERALD L & 791 KRISTEN CR KHRISTINA LAUREL M T LODI, CA 9524E2 805 KRISTEN CT 808 TEHAMA. DR 11111111111,11111I11I11rf111111I LODI, CA 95242 LODI, CA 95242 11111l111111,11JJ1111i111111111 111L1l11J111L1111k11lL1111111 LUU, NHI & MINH H GOLUB, IRVING & SHELIA KUBOTA, TSUGIO TR ETAL 13625 HARTLEY LN 13675 HARTLEY LN 1500 VISTA DR LODI, CA 9524`2 LODI, CA 95242 LODI, CA 95242 Jill 11111111111111 11 k1i 11111,1 1i111111111lllllllld 111111111111 IIIl1111111111111111111111111i11 GERLACK, JOHN D & B TRS SCHUMACHER, WELDON & 101 N LOMA DR BONNIE TR LODI CA 95240 1303 RIVERGATE DR 11.1. 11loll Ill fill 11111Y,1111111 LODI, CA 95240 11111111111,1111!111111111111111 Fed - V)Qs4-60,j i t s4- KRISTMONT WEST PO BOX 6 FAIR OAKS, CA 95628 II111111111111111i 111flllil11111 KRISTMONT, WEST PO BOX 6 FAIR OAKS, CA 95628 111111111111111 }} 1I'll„11111111 BATCH, ROBERT II 2952 APPLEWOOD DR LODI, CA 95242 II111111111111111111111i,fllllll HANSEN, LAWRENCE DONALD & LIND 2928 APPLEWOOD DR LODI, CA 95242 ] I1t111llllllklll}11111111111111 BARCUS, CASEY TR 3013 OLD RANCH CIR STOCKTON, CA 95209 11tI'11I11111I11#11111 Ilrl l 11 II I HERRICK, BRADLEY C & BEVERLY F 2852 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 II1111tI11i1tIi1k11111 t1'1111111I BUTORAC, JOHN P TR 2828 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 Ili!itllilikllllilt'litlillt'I'I CHRISTENSEN, ANDERS & JOAN 2804 PARADISE DR jLODI, CA 952+4/2 111111111111 II II II IIf11111111I11 CRANFORD, STEVE P ETAL 2712 PARADISE DR LODIICA 95242 I11111111IIIIIIIIIIIIIIlk11111i1 JOHNSON, GARY 2688 PARADISE DR LjODI, CA 9521J42J Illlflll1111F11111k1I1#111111111 KRISTMONT WEST PO BOX 6 FAIR OAKS, CA 95628 I11111111I111#1,1111111111111111 LARSEN, JEFFERY & LAURIE 55 APPLEWOOD DR LODI, CA 95242 11111111]11111111111111111111111 KORT, DALLAS DEAN & JONI ELLEN PO BOX 126 LODI, CA 95241 111111113111111111111111111111t1 CLARK, MICHAEL & MELINDA 2920 APPLEWOOD DR LODI, CA 95242 IIIIIIII111111i11111111#1111[111 GATSCHET, TIMOTHY W & DONNA LE 2868 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 IIIII'Illll'111I111111111I1]Ill1 HALL, LYNN E TR ETAL 2844 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 Illllllltll i1llllllrl11111I11I11 KRISTMONT WEST PO BOX 6 FAIR OAKS, CA 95628 11111111111 pill Rill 11it11?1#1111 GIANNONI, JOHN M JR & KERRY TR 2960 APPLEWOOD DR LODI, CA 95242 111111,111 IIkI11111iI1 J 11111#Il HERYFORD, WILLIAM P & TINA CW 2936 APPLEWOOD DR LODI, CA 95242 Illlllllll lklll#1111111111111111 WALLACE, KEITH & MACHELLE 29 PARADISE DR TLODI, CA 95[242 111#111111111111t1]II11111111111 PEARSON, SUSAN P 2860 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 lil#Illlllltllllllllllllll1ti111 MORIN, JULIAANE TR ETAL 2836 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 1111, t'L111'l, I'l'!I'lIlI1'1I11 KESSLER, ERNEST K & JOAN A MACBETH, KATHY L 2820 PARADISE DR 2812 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 LODI, CA 95242 111I1k11111111111#Illllllllllltl IIIII III Rill III lei 11111111111111 DEMPSEY, LLOYD B & MARCIA HEBERLE, FREDERICK J & M TR JUDY D 2728 PARADISE DR 2720 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 LODI, CA 95242 1111111111111111111111111111111I Ilklllll 11k1111111111111111111 i1 CURL, JASON & JENNIFER K 2704 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 1111111111 ktiI111IIIIIII111111►I WATSON, STEVEN D & IVA M 2682 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 llllll lllll III; life 1111111111111 VOURLES, JUDITH ETAL PO BOX 450 WOODBRIDGE, CA 95258 11111i11111i11111I IIII i1I1111111 NORTON, RONALD G & NAOMI JOYCE 2676 PARADISE DR LODI,/ CA 95242 IIEIIIklllk11111111111111111111) 1 o�,3 HARPER, RONALD G & LUCILLE TR 2670 PARADISE DR LODI,j CA 9524[2 il1i111111111ilillltl,lilll1fi11 HURST, SHARON D TR 2652 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 iiil11111i111ililillilll1illllll PERLEGOS, GEORGIA PO BOX 1823 LODI, CA 95241 111i1tlillllllllllllllllllllllll LATERREUR, NORMA L 2621 CREEKSIDE DR LODI, CA 95242 i11i1, 1111 1t11 r1 r11 111111 i1r 11 MARTINEZ, ERASMO J & ELAINA L 2664 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 lilil11i111f1111111{I,IIfl111111 MILLER, JAMES D JR & LARELLE L 2658 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 1111111111111111111111111111i11i WOODS, STEVEN P & DENISE L PERGERSON, MATTHEW T & 2646 PARADISE DR GINA E LODI, CA 95242 2640 PARADISE DR 11111 1111 1 1111 J 111 i 11111 111 J LODI, CA 95242 1r1r111rlrlilrlrlrll 11 lrlrillill LUBELL, DONNA H 2628 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 111111i111111111IIlilli11111111 TR WILSON, ROBERT G & NANCY A TR 2627 CREEKSIDE DR LODI, CA 952412 111111111i111i1111111r111111111 LIEBELT, BRIAN D & MARLIES N 2639 CREEKSIDE DR LODI, CA 95242 J 111111! loll 11111111111411iiill li MAGEE, JERRY K 2640 CREEKSIDE DR LODI, CA 95242 1111rr,111r,L1111111J11lri111 O DONNELL, ZACHARY R & KELLY J 130 FIELDSTONE CT LODI, CA 95242 11.1.111 ... 1.1111d64111111111 LARRABEE, GARY M & KELLY L 108 FIELDSTONE CT LODI, CA 95242 i111r1111111r13i11 IliNilllhili MATTHEW S, DALE K 127 BOXWOOD CT LODI, CA 95242 11111111,11111JJ1111i111111J NICHOLS, DENNIS L 136 BOXWOOD CT LODI, CA 95242 111111►I111111111111111111,111 CHATHA, INDER S & SURJIT K 2643 CREEKSIDE DR LODI, CA 95242 iiiilliiiilliiiiiiiiiillllllii,l SILVANO, ROBERT M & BETHANY A 109 FIELDSTONE CT LODI, CA 95242 Ilililllllllllllf11111!111!11111 FREGGIARO, VICKIE L 120 FIELDSTONE CT LODI, CA 95242 i111J1111111111J111J11111 FLAHERTY, DONALD D & DEBORAH R 115 BOXWOOD CT LODI, CA 95242 IIIIIIIililt111i1i1{IE1111111111 SOUZA, RODNEY J & TAMMY A 139 BOXWOOD CT LODI, CA 95242 iIE1111I111l11111111i11111i1111i ODOM, DENISE A 130 BOXWOOD CT LODI, CA 95242 11111111l,1E111,11111J1111i11 ROMERO, ANTHONY J & MELISSA M 2622 PARADISE DR LODI, CA 95242 liillltillllillillllillil111111 CHANG, CHE MING 2633 CREEKSIDE DR LODI, CA 95242 111/111111 toll 11111111191119111 PERLEGOS, JEFF ETAL PO BOX 1823 LODI, CA 95241 111111EIIIII�IJ11J1111111111 PORTILLO, ADELA 127 FIELDSTONE CT LODI, CA 95242 1111111111111i1i 1i 11111111111111 HAPPEL, DEAN A ETAL 114 FIELDSTONE CT LODI, CA 95242 111111111IF11il1lrllllllli11111 SANDOVAL, PAUL D & MARTHA 121 BOXWOOD CT LODI, CA 95242 11111111111111111111111111111111 MYERS, JERRY L 142 BOXWOOD CT LODI, CA 95242 1111111111111111111111111111111 BAUMBACH, MITZI M TR 124 BOXWOOD CT LODI CA 95242 1111111/ 111111111111111111 �o3 NODI CITY OF TRAVERSO, ALBERT K ETAL TRAVERSO, ALBERT K ETAL PO BOX 3006 PO BOX 247 PO BOX 247 €L€ODI , CAl 95241 ACAMPO, CA 95220 ACAMPO, CAj 95220 YIIli111111111111111111i#I1i1111 11iIIIIIt11111F11111111111111111 II11l1IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIf U11111 WL INVESTORS LP 10100 TRINITY PARKWAY SUITE 420 S]]TOCKTON, CA 95E219 I1i111111111l111k11111FFi 1111[11 DHKS DEV CO 621 EVERGREEN DR LODJI, CA 952 11111111111111 [ 1111111.1611.4.1 WOODBRIDGE, IRRIG DIST 00000 Illiiiiii!!II!!!IIllfllflf111i1I PERLEGOS, GEORGIA ETAL PO BOX 1823 LODI , CA 95241 III II IIIJI[l11111111111111lI[11 Pleawe immediately confirwroceipt of this fax by cog 333-= CITY OF LODI P. O. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS SU E T: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT (INCLUDING "OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS") AND WESTSIDE PROJECT PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, NOVEMBER 4, 2006 TEAR SHEETS WANTED: three (3) please SEI) AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: RANDI JOHL, CITY CLERK City of Lodi P.O. Box 3006 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 DATED: THURSDAY, NOVEMBER 2, 2006 ORDERED BY: IFER hy. PERRIN, CMC 'DEPUTY CITY CLERK RANDIJOHL CITY CLERK DANA R. CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK n NASiT : ". NOTICE OF PI,iIBW HEANNO CONCERNING THE SOUTHWEST QATEWAY PROJECT (INCIi DING "OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS") AND WISTSIDE PROJECT On Friday, November 3, 2006, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a Notice of Public Healing concerning the Southwest Gateway Project (including "other annexation areas") and Westside Project (attached and marked as Exhibit A) was posted at the following locations: Lodi Public Library Lodi City Clerics Office Lodi City Hall bobby Lodi Carnegie Forum I declare under penally of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. &eouted on Novembor 3, 2006, at Lodi, California. • ;FYUMA .. N:1AdministmtionlCLERK)FormsU)ECPQST.DDC ORDERED BY: RAND11 JOHL CITY CLERK DANA R. CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK w NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING CONCERNING THE SOUTHWEST GATEWAY PROJECT (INCLUDING "OTHER ANNEXATION AREAS") AND WESTSIDE PROJECT On November 3, 2006, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in the United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing Notice of Public Hearing concerning the Southwest Gateway Project (including "other annexation areas") and Westside Project, attached hereto Marked Exhibit A. The mailing list for said matter is attached hereto, marked Exhibit B. There is a regular dally communication by mail between the City of Lodi, California, and the *c®s to which said envelopes were addressed. I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. EXecuted on November 3, 2006, at Lodi, California. (�:" —.A' laFEA RIN,�CMC PUTY Ci CLERK rbrmsidecmad.doc ORDERED BY: RANDI JOHL CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI DANA R. CHAPMAN ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK CITY OF LODI Carnegie Forum 305 West Pine Street, Lodi NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEAiNNO Date: November 15, 2006 Time: 7:00 p.m. For information regarding this notice please contact: Randi Johl City Clerk Telephone: (209) 333-6702 NOTICE OF CONTINUED PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, November 15, 200 6, 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 the following matter: a) Certify the Lodi Annexation Environmental Impact Report for the Southwest Gateway Project (Including "Other Annexation Areas") and Westside Project b) Approve the Southwest Gateway Project, which Includes an Annexation, Pre -Zoning, Development Agreement, and Amendment to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, to Incorporate 305 Acres into the City of Lodi to Allow Construction of 1,300 Dwelling Units, 5 Neighborhood/Community Parks, and a Public Elementary School on the West Side of Lower Sacramento Road, South of Kettleman Lane, North of Harney Lane (including 565 and 603 East Harney Lane) Including a City Initiated Request for the "Other Annexation Areas" (48 Acres) for Annexation, General Plan Amendment frorh a Land Use Designation of PR (Planned Residential) to MDR (Medium Density Residential), and a Pre -Zoning of R -MD (Residential Medium Density) to Avoid Creation of a County Island C) Approve the Westside Development Project, which Includes an Annexation, Pre -Zoning, Development Agreement, Amendnwnt to the Bicycle Transportation Master Plan, and an Amendment to the Westside Facilities Minster Plan to Incorporate 151 Acres into the City of Lodi to Allow Construction of 750 Dwelling Units, 3 Neighborhood/Community Parks, and a Public Elementary School at 351 East Sargent Road, 70 East Sargent Road, 212 East Sargent Road, and 402 East Sargent Road Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Community Development Department, 221 West Fine 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 Hall, 221 W. 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 Clerk, 221 West Fine Street, at or prior to the close of the public hearing. tl y the Lodi City Council: '�!n Johi City i+lerk D. Sphen Schwabauer City orney CLER)OPu8HEARMTICESINOTCMDOC 11rA6 Westside 500 R radius APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP SITUS ADDRESS 027050 PROTESTANT 1055 LOWER LODI CA 95242 05 EPISCOPAL BISHOP SAC RD ca 027240 AGUIRRE, DAVID S 301 LELAND LODI CA 95242 01 & JULIE CT 027240 HALE, RAYMOND L 309 LELAND LODI CA 95242 02 CT 027240 RARDWICK, ROBERT 324 LELAND LODI CA 95240 05 0 & GAY CT 027240 FRADKIN, CHANAN 316 LELAND LODI CA 95242 06 CT 027240 NICKEL, ESTHER 308 LELAND LODI CA 95242 07 TRUSTEE CT 027240 NEUHARTH, 300 LELAND LODI CA 95242 08 RICHARD & EDITH CT TR 027240 LIEBIG, GIDEON J 317 LELAND LODI CA 95242 09 TR CT 027240 UEHLING, KENNETH 325 LELAND LODI CA 95242 10 R & JULIET TR CT 027340 KOSTA, 340 S LODI CAi 95242 07 CHRISTOPHER LOWER SAC LLOYD RD 027400 KRISTMONT WEST 7700 SACRAMENTO CA 95826 2650 W LODI AV 04 COLLEGE TOWN DR #111 027400 WESTGATE 7700 SACRAMENTO CA 95826 333 S LOWER SAC 05 SHOPPING CENTER COLLEGE RD L ET TOWN DR #101 027,400 KRISTMONT WEST 7700 SACRAMENTO CA 95626 2500 W LODI AV 06 COLLEGE TOWN DR #111 027400 WESTGATE 7700 SACRAMENTO CA 95826 363 S LOWER 07 SHOPPING CENTER COLLEGE SACRAMENT RD L ET TOWN DR ##101 027400 KRISTMONT WEST 7700 SACRAMENTO CA 95826 515 S LOWER SAC 09 COLLEGE RD TOWN DR #111 027400 TEMPLE BAPTIST 801 S LODI CA 95242 2695 W VINE ST 12 CHURCH OF LODI LOWER SAC RD 029320 DOLLINGER, VIOLA 2537 LODI CA 95242 01 TR CENTRAL PARK DR 0.29320 GRIFFANTI, 2541 LODI CA 95242 02 FERNANDO C & CENTRAL NANCY PARK DR 029320 WESTERBACK, 2545 LODI CA 95242 03 EDWIN E & DENISE CENTRAL L PARK DR 029320 CLELAND, LARRY & 2459 LODI CA 95242 2549 CENTRAL PARK 04 LYNETTE TR CENTRAL DR PARK DR 029320 UPDEGRAPT, 2553 LODI CA 95242 Westside 500 ft radius 05 BARBARA D TR CENTRAL ETAL PARK DR 029320 KISHIDA, EIKO PO BOX STOCKTON CA 95201 2557 CENTRAL PARK 06 20101" DR 029320 BARTHOLOMEW, 2561 LODI CA 95242 07 ROBERT W & E TR CENTRAL PARK DR. 029320 ROSEBERRY, CAROL 2565 LODI CA 95242 08 R TR CENTRAL PARK ' DR 029320 MCMAHON, MARY 2569 LODI CA 95242 09 ELLEN TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 CAVEY, NOLAND B 8079 SACRAMENTO CA 95826 2573 CENTRAL PARK 10 & SANDRA J TR CARIBBEAN DR WAY 029320 BONNER, CHERYL 2577 LODI CA 95242 11 CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 BENTZ, BEVERLY 2581 LODI CA 95242 12 TR ETAL CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 MORIWAKI, SVGA 2585 LODI CA 95242 13 ANN CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 GARIBALDI, WILMA 2589 LODI CA 95242 14 J TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 FIELD, MARILYN E 624 PALM LODI CA 95240 2335 HYDE PARK Cl 15 TR AVE 029320 MCINTOSH, JAMES 2339 HYDE LODI CA 95242 16 L & MARGARET T PARK CIR 029320 PARKIN, PATRICIA 2343 HYDE LODI CA 95240 17 LEA PARK CIR 029320 COONEY, LOLA M 2347 W LODI CA 95242 18 TR HYDE PARK CIR 029320 WRITE, WARNER & 5185 CHOWCHILLA CA 93610 2351 HYDE PARK Cl 19 DONNA CONGRESSIO NAL ST 029320 GRANT, JAMES R 2355 HYDE LODI CA 95242 20 111 & KATHRYN PARK CIR 029320 PARK, CHUNIL E. 1316 BERKELEY CA 94709 2359 HYDE PARK CZ 21 SOONJA BONITA AVE #6 029320 LEONARD, LEON F 2363 HYDE LODI CA 95240 22 & BARBARA J PARK CIR 029320 MACOMBER, ROY C 2367 HYDE LODI CA 95242 23 & ADELAIDE TR PARK CIR 029320 CARTER, JACK E & 2371 HYDE LODI CA 95242 24 MARTHA L TR PARK CIR 029320 LUNDIN, ROY H & 2375 HYDE LODI CA 95242 25 N B TRS PARK CIR 029320 SWEENEY, JAMES M 2379 HYDE LODI CA 95242 26 TR ETAL PARK CIR 029320 DURHAM, JUDITH J 2383 HYDE LODI CA 95242 27 TR PARK CIR 029320 FARRELL, COLETTE 2387 HYDE LODI CA 95242 28 L TR PARK CIR 029320 KAYL, HAROLD H & 2388 HYDE LODI CA 95242 Westside 500 ft radius 29 MARTHA S PARK CIR 029320 SEIBEL, DONALD J 2384 HYDE LODI CA 95242 30 & VIRGINIA TR PARK CIR 029320 SWEIGARD, ROBERT 2376 HYDE LODI CA 95242 31 B & VIRGINIA PARK CIR 029320 WALKER, STEPHEN 2348 HYDE LODI CA 95242 32 U & JUDY ANN T PARK CIR 029320 DARCY, MIKE ETAL 2342 HYDE LODI CA 95242 33 PARK CIR 029320 SEARDSLEY, BETTE 2338 HYDE LODI CA 95242 34 D TRUSTEE PARK CTR 029320 PARKISON, 2334 HYDE LODI CA 95242 35 MARJORIE L TR PARK CIR 029320 SCHMIDT, WALTER 208 LODI CA 95242 36 TR GRAMERCY PARK DR 029320 REISS, W & C 204 LODI CA 95242 37 COTRS ETL GRAMERCY PARK DR 029320 MITCHELL, CHERYL 200 LODI CA 95242 38 R TR GRAMERCY PARK DR 029320 SLIGO, JERRY ETAL 2495 LODI CA 95242 39 MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 WJNNELL, DOLORES 2491 LODI CA 95242 40 A TR MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 ROSENAU, LELAND 15625 N LODI CA 95242 2487 MACARTHUR PK 41 A & D ARLENE R DAVIS RD 029320 0 LEARY, DANIEL 2483 LODI CA 95242 42 G & BEVERLY A MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 SMITH, DONALD R 2479 LODI CA 95242 43 & LILA F TR MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 PFANNMULLER, 2475 LODI CA 95242 44 MARJORIE A ETAL MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 DEMSKI, STANLEY 2471 LODI CA 95242 45 L TR ETAL MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 MOORE, MILDRED I 2467 LODI CA 95242 46i MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 S'SEMORE, DANIEL 2463 LODI CA 95242 47 C & MABEL E MACARTHUR PARKWAY 029320 ICUEHNE, LLOYD D 2459 LODI CA 95242 48 TR ETAL MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 MCINTOSH, PO BOX 414 PACIFIC CA 90272 2455 MACARTHUR PK 49 GREGORY J & LORI PALISAD W 029320 PAIGE, JAMES M & 2451 MAC LODI CA 95242 50 MARJORIE M ARTHUR PKWY 029320 FORE, MILLARD L 2447 LODI CA 95242 & N01 Mf1 j TR Mi1CAl."L'HUR PKWY Westside 500 ft radius 029320 GLENN, JERRY L & 2443 LODI CA 95242 52 SUSAN Y MACARTHUR PARKWAY 029320 FELL, DOUGLAS E 222 E SANTA CA 93101 2439 MACARTHUR PK 53 TR CARRILLO BARBARA 029320 GABRIELSON, CURT 2435 LODI CA 95242 54 & BEVERLY MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 HONEY, RAYMOND & 2431 LODI CA 95242 55 JANET MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 RINAUDO, JAMES J 2427 LODI CA 95242 56 & NANCY L TR MACARTHUR PKWY 029320 FILBIN, BARNEY & PO BOX LODI CA 95241 2396 CENTRAL PARK 57 V TRS 2661 DR 029320 SMITH, RICHARD C 2402 LODI CA 95242 58 CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 DANIELS, ALLEN L 2406 LODI CA 95242 59 TR ETAL CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 CRETE, MICHAEL M 2884 E ACAMPO CA 95220 2410 CENTRAL PARK 60 WOODBRIDGE DR RD 029320 REDFORD, MICHAEL 177 RIVER WOODBRIDGE CA 95258 2409 CENTRAL PARK 61 D ETAL MEADOWS DR DR 029320 ANDERSEN, BOB R 2405 LODI CA 95242 62 & NAOMI R TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 MARTIN, WILLIAM 2401 LODI CA 95242 63 F & SUSAN K CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 FORNEY, CHARLES 2397 LODI CA 95242 64 A & MAVIS B TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 kANDEL, LEON E & 10155 E LODI CA 95240 2393 CENTRAL PARK 65 BETTY L TR KETTLEMAN DR LN 029320 SCHULENBURG, 2426 LODI CA 95242 66 MARIE ROSE TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 HODGSON, MICHAEL 5843 E STOCKTON CA 95212 2430 CENTRAL PARK 67 GEORGE TR ETA ASHLEY LN DR 029320 BAUSERMAN, 2434 LODI CA 95242 68 GEORGE L TR ETAL CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 KRONEMANN, LINDA 2438 LODI CA 95242 69 L CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 CHALMERS, ROY M 1234 ROHNERT CA 94928 2442 CENTRAL PARK 70 & REGINA S TR HEARTWOOD PARK DR DR 029320 MEHAFFEY, DONALD 2446 LODI CA 95242 71 C TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 WILLIAMS, PO BOX WOODBRIDGE CA 95258 2458 CENTRAL PARK 72 ELIZABE'T'H N TR 1064 DR ETAL 029320 EMLER, HAROLD & 2462 LODI CA 95242 Westside 500 ft radius 73 L TRS CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 THOMASON, BOB M 2466 LODI CA 95242 74 & DONNA D TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 MERRILL, H L TR 2470 LODI CA 95242 75 CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 MOREHEAD, WILLA 2474 LODI CA 95242 76 D ETAL CEN'T'RAL PARK DR 029320 RAMIREZ, EZEKIEL 2478 LODI CA 95242 77 S & L CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 ARMKNECHT, 5595 SAN PLEASANTON CA 94566 2482 CENTRAL PARK 78 JANETTE TR ANTONIO ST DR 029320 DUNCAN'HAROLD W 2486 LODI CA 95242 79 & NONA E TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 9WOLDT, DONALD D 2490 LODI CA 95242 80 & ETHEL L CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 QUINN, THOMAS J 2494 LODI CA 95242 81 & MARGARET E T CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 SOLARI, ANNETTA 2498 LODI CA 95242 82 M TR ETAL CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 CUSHING, V 2497 LODI CA 95242 83 LOUISE CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 BLUE, KENNETH F 2485 LODI CA 95242 84 & HELEN W TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 GARVEY, SHARON A 2481 LODI CA 95242 85 TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 LEWKOWITZ, 2477 LODI CA 95242 86 GEORGE V & CENTRAL MARJORIE PARK DR 029320 SWIFT, SYLVIA L PO BOX MINDEN NV 89423 2473 CENTRAL PARK 87 TR 1977 DR 029320 HOPE, BETTY L TR 2469 LODI CA 95242 88 CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 KING, NORMAN D & 2465 LODI CA 95242 89 LAQUITA J TR CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 BRUSA, SELDON C 2461 LODI CA 95242 90 & S ELIZABETH CENTRAL PARK DR 029320 PARKVIEW TERR, 2346 LODI CA 95242 91 HOMEOWNERS ASSN CENTRAL PARK DR 029430 DEVINE, DAVID M 2857 LODI CA 95242 06 & NANCY I TR APPLEWOOD DR 029430 PRICE, STEVEN D 2865 LODI CA 95242 07 & SUSAN C APPLEWOOD DR Westside 500 R radius 029430 MCMULLIN, MATHEW 2905 LODI CA 95242 08 E & CALISTA M APPLEWOOD DR 029430 ROSS, ELLWOOD & 2915 LODI CA 95242 09 DOROTHY ANN APPLEWOOD DR 029430 $YPNIESKI, STEVE 2923 LODI CA 95242 10 & ELIZABETH APPLEWOOD DR 029430 BRAND, RICKY L & 2931 LODI CA 95242 11 LEILA M TR APPLEWOOD DR 029430 TURNER, RICHARD 2943 LODI CA 95242 12 & MARGARITA APPLEWOOD Dig 029430 BATCH, ROBERT R 2615 PARK LODI CA 95242 52 APPLEWOOD DR 131 & SMADAR WEST DR 029430 NICHOLS, EILEEN 60 LODI CA 95242 14 APPLEWOOD DR 029430 HIES, WESLEY 68 LODI CA 95242 15 KENN APPLEWOOD DR 029430 SCHRENK, BRADLEY 76 LODI CA 95242 16 S & MARJORY L APPLEWOOD DR 029430 STERNECKER, 87 LODI CA 95242 23 GEORGE & JOAN TR APPLEWOOD DR 029430 BLEHM, TERRANCE 79 LODI CA 95242 24 L & MICHELE R APPLEWOOD DR 029430 NICOLAOU, BRENDA 71 LODI CA 95242 25 J TR APPLEWOOD DR 029430 SHERMAN, PATRICK 63 LODI CA 95242 26 H & JANET R APPLEWOOD DR 029430 LARSEN, JEFFERY 55 LODI CA 95242 27 & LAURIE APPLEWOOD DR 029430 SPALETTA, JASON 45 LODI CA 95242 28 & JENNIFER APPLEWOOD DR 029430 GIANNONI, JOHN M 2960 LODI CA 95242 29 JR & KERRY TR APPLEWOOD DR 029430 BATCH, ROBERT II 2952 LODI CA 95242 30 APPLEWOOD DR 029430 KORT, DALLAS PO BOX 126 LODI CA 95241 2944 APPLEWOOD DR 31 DEAN & JONI ELLEN 029430 HERYFORD, 2936 LODI CA 95242 32 WILLIAM P & TINA APPLEWOOD C W DR 029430 HANSEN, LAWRENCE 2928 LODI CA 95242 33 DONALD & LIND APPLEWOOD DR 029430 CLARK, MICHAEL & 2920 LODI CA 95242 Westside 500 ft radius 34 MELINDA APPLEWOOD DR 029430 WALLACE, KEITH & 29 LODI CA 95242 35 MACHELLE PARADISE DR 029430 MORTENSON, FRED 2856 LODI CA 95242 F-36 K & MYRA A APPLEWOOD DR 029430 PATRICK, ROBERT 2848 LODI CA 95242 37 E & SUSAN C APPLEWOOD DR 029430 RHED, ROBERT J 2840 LODI CA 95242 38 III & LISA J APPLEWOOD DR 029430 ENDTER, DAVID & 2832 LODI CA 95242 39 CATHLEEN APPLEWOOD DR 029430 01HAVAMI, MOBIN P 2824 LODI CA 95242 40 APPLEWOOD DR 029450 MAPLE, LOUISE S 2631 LODI CA 95242 29 PARADISE DR 029450 YAO, WEIPING & 2623 LODI CA 95242 30 XIAOJI PARADISE DR 029450 GARRETSON, 2617 LODI CA 95242 31 PHILLIP E & LYNN PARADISE E DR 029450 RAUSER, MICHAEL 2611 LODI CA 95242 32 L PARADISE DR 029450 WHITE, RANDEL E 2610 LODI CA 95242 33 & CHARLENE M PONDEROSA DR 429450 SMITH, STAN P & 2616 LODI CA 95242 34 KAREN J PONDEROSA DR 029450 DEVINE, GREGORY 2622 LODI CA 95242 35 D & KANDACE L PONDEROSA DR 029450 CASALINA, MARVIN 2630 LODI CA 95242 36 & DOLORES PONDEROSA DR 429450 KLABACKA, 2636 LODI CA 95242 37 RICHARD PONDEROSA DR 029450 GOODWYN, DORAN L 2640 LODI CA 95240 38 & KENDALL M PONDEROSA DR 029450 WALKER, ROBERT D 2646 LODI CA 95242 39 & VICKY E PONDEROSA DR 029450 KELLEY, GLENN P 2652 LODI CA 95242 40 & DEBRA A PONDEROSA DR 029450 BERCHER, LULA M 2658 LODI CA 95242 41 TR PONDEROSA DR 029450 COCKRUM, VIRGLE 2664 LODI I CA 95242 Westside 500 ft radius 42 & LUELLA J TR PONDEROSA DR 029450 LEE, DAVID & 2670 LODI CA 95242 43 DEANNA PONDEROSA DR 029450 HALL, KATHLEEN 2676 LODI CA 95242 44 PONDEROSA DR 029450 JORGENSON, 2682 LODI CA 95242 45 EDWARD C & JOANN PONDEROSA DR 029450 SEVERSON, RYAN & 2688 LODI CA 95242 46 KRISTIN PONDEROSA DR 029450 BARRON, JEFFREY 9 ELDERICA LODI CA 95242 48 D & NICOLE A WAY 029450 KLINKER, MATTHEW 7 ELDERICA LODI CA 95242 49 H & JESSICA A WAY 029450 WOZNICK, MICHAEL 5 ELDERICA LODI CA 95242 50 K & JANE E TR WAY 029490 LUNA, SHIRLEY B 23 LODI CA 95242 01 TR EVERGREEN DR 029490 CASTILLO, ERNEST 17 LODI CA 95242 02 & GENEVIEVE T EVERGREEN DR 029490 ITO, WARREN K & 11 LODI CA 95242 03 TRACI T TAMURA EVERGREEN DR 029490 ARCHULETA, 2811 LODI CA 95242 04 JORDAN A PARADISE DR 029490 SHEPARD, ROBERT 2819 LODI CA 95242 05 L JR & ANGELA PARADISE DR 029490 BATCH, ROBERT SR 52 LODI CA 95242 2825 PARADISE DR 06 TR APPLEWOOD DR 029490 REITZ, MICHAEL 2833 LODI CA 95242 07 DONALD TR ETAL PARADISE DR 029490 (RIVELLI, STEVEN 2841 LODI CA 95242 08 & JULIE A PARADISE DR 029490 BATCH, ROBERT SR 52 LODI CA 95242 2851 PARADISE DR 09 TR APPLEWOOD DR 029490 GATSCHET, 2868 LODI CA 75242 10 TIMOTHY W & PARADISE DONNA LE DR 029490 PEARSON, SUSAN P 2860 LODI CA 95242 11 PARADISE DR 029490 MERRICK, BRADLEY 2852 LODI CA 95242 12 C & BEVERLY F PARADISE DR 029490 HALL, LYNN E TR 2844 LODI CA 95242 13 ETAL PARADISE DR 029490 MORIN, JULIAANE 2836 LODI CA 95242 Westside 500 ft radius 14 TR ETAL PARADISE DR 029490 15 BUTORAC, JOHN P TR 2828 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 16 KESSLER, ERNEST K & JOAN A 2820 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 17 XwCBETH, KATHY L 2812 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 18 CHRISTENSEN, ANDERS & JOAN 2804 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 19 DEMPSEY, LLOYD B & MARCIA M TR 2728 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 HEBERLE, 20 FREDERICK J & ------------- 2720 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 JUDY D DR 029490 21 CRANFORD, STEVE P ETAL 2712 PARADISE LORI CA 95242 DR 029490 22 CURL, JASON & JENNIFER K 2704 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 23 MCMILLEN, LARRY K & JEANNE L 2715 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 MY ADS, RICHARD 4 24 D & SHERRIE L EVERGREEN LODI CA 95242 DR 029490 25 ARCHISEQUE PATRICK J & a EVERGREEN LODI CA 95242 CHERIE DR 029490 SC GAN, GREGORY 12 26 R & CAROLE A EVERGREEN LODI CA 95242 DR 029500 01 VOURLES, JUDITH ETAL PO BOX 450 WOODBRIDGE CA 95258 2694 PARADISE DR 029500 02 JOHNSON, GARY 2688 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029500 WATSON, STEVEN D 2682 03 & IVA M PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029500 WORT W, RONALD G 2676 04 & NAOMI JOYCE PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029500 HARPER, RONALD G 6333 05 & LUCILLE TR PACIFIC STOCKTON CA 95207 2670 PARADISE DR AVE 029500 MARTINEZ, ERASMO 2664 06 J & ELAINA L PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029500 07 [TILLER, JAMES D JR & LARELLE L 2658 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 DR 029500 08 Pl0VOST, PERCY P 4 FRANCES J Tj 2639 PARADISE LODI CA 95242 Westside 500 ft radius DR 029500 DIIALIWAL, JASBIR 2647 LODI CA 95242 09 & HARBINDER T PARADISE DR 029500 B9UNO, JEFFERY P 2655 LODI CA 95242 10 & KATHLEEN M PARADISE DR 029500 BALL, DOUGLAS 2661 LODI CA 95242 11 PARADISE DR 029500 TWITTY, MIKE W & 2667 LODI CA 95242 12 JILL M PARADISE DR 029500 MAYERS, 2673 LODI CA 95242 13 FREDERICK R TR PARADISE ETAL DR 029500 DAVIS, ROGER E & 2679 LODI CA 95242 14 PATRICIA A TR PARADISE DR 029500 LEWIS, MARTHA E 935 LODI CA 95242 2685 PARADISE DR 15 INTERLAKEN DR 029500 SHANKLES, 2691 LODI CA 95242 16 WILLIAM D & PARADISE JANICE J DR 029500 HURST, SHARON D 2652 LODI CA 95242 17 TR PARADISE DR 029500 WOODS, STEVEN P 2646 LODI CA 95242 18 & DENISE L PARADISE DR 029500 PERGERSON, 2640 LODI CA 95242 19 MATTHEW T & GINA PARADISE E DR 029520 PERLEGOS, PO BOX LODI CA 95241 2634 PARADISE DR 01 GEORGIA 1823 029520 LUBELL, DONNA H 2628 LODI CA 95242 02 PARADISE DR 029520 ROMERO, ANTHONY 2622 LODI CA 95242 03 J & MELISSA M PARADISE DR 029520 BYRD, RICHARD & 2618 LODI CA 95242 04 TRACT PARADISE DR 029520 FUREY, GREGORY J 4555 N STOCKTON CA 95207 2614 PARADISE DR 05 & MABEL L TR PERSHING AVE PMB## 3 3113 029520 CORDER, ANITA E 2610 LODI CA 95242 06 TR PARADISE DR 029520 ANDRESEL, 2606 LOBI CA 95242 07 CATALIN PARADISE DR 029520 BUCK, DANA R & 2602 LODI CA 95242 08 JENNIFER R PARADISE DR 029520 BTU, STEVEN C M & 2609 LODI CA 95242 09 CHIN MET TR CREEKSIDE Westside 500 ft radius DR 029520 OSENGA, DENNIS J 2615 LODI CA 95242 10 & PATRICIA J CREEKSIDE DR 029520 LINCZ, FRANK 2621 LODI CA 95242 11 CREEKSIDE DR 029520 WILSON, ROBERT G 2627 NODI CA 95242 12 & NANCY A TR CREEKSIDE DR 029520 CHANG, CHE MING 2633 LODI CA 95242 13 TR CREEKSIDE DR 029520 LIEBELT, BRIAN D 2639 LODI CA 95242 14 & MARLIES N CREEKSIDE DR 029520 CHATHA, INDER S 2643 LODI CA 95242 15 & SURJIT K CREEKSIDE DR 029520 PERLEGOS, JEFF PO BOX LODI CA 95241 2649 CREEKSIDE DR 16 ETAL 1823 029520 MAGEE, JERRY K 2640 LODI CA 95242 17 CREEKSIDE DR 029520 SILVANO, ROBERT 109 LODI CA 95242 18 M & BETHANY A FIELDSTONE CT 029520 PORTILLO, ADELA 127 LODI CA 95242 19 FIELDSTONE CT 029520 O DONNELL, 130 LODI CA 95242 20 ZACHARY R & FIELDSTONE KELLY J CT 029520 FREGGIARO, 120 LODI CA 95242 21 VICKIE L TR FIELDSTONE CT 029520 RAPPEL, DEAN A 114 LODI CA 95242 22 ETAL FIELDSTONE CT 029520 LARRABEE, GARY M 108 LODI CA 95242 23 & KELLY L FIELDSTONE CT 029520 MCGOWAN, DENNIS 107 LODI CA 95242 24 J BOXWOOD CT 029520 FLAHERTY, DONALD 115 LODI CA 95242 25 D & DEBORAH R BOXWOOD CT 029520 SANDOVAL, PAUL D 121 LODI CA 95242 26 & MARTHA BOXWOOD CT 029520 MATTHEWS, DALE K 127 LODI CA 95242 27 BOXWOOD CT 029520 SOUZA, RODNEY J 139 LODI CA 95242 28 & TAMMY A BOXWOOD CT 029520 MYERS, JERRY L 142 LODI CA 95242 29 BOXWOOD CT 029520 NICHOLS, DENNIS 136 LODI CA 95242 30 L BOXWOOD CT Westside 500 ft radius 029520 ODOM, DENISE A 130 LODI CA 95242 31 BOXWOOD CT 029520 BAUMBACH, MITZI 124 LODI CA 95242 32 M TR BOXWOOD CT 029520 NAHIGIAN, JUDI A 118 LODI CA 95242 33 BOXWOOD CT 029520 HOGUE, ALEX B 112 LODI CA 95242 34 BOXWOOD CT 029520 WOEHLKE, KIRK M 106 LODI CA 95242 35 BOXWOOD CT 029520 TALENS, ZYRUS R 2509 LODI CA 95242 36 DORIS G CREEKSIDE DR 029520 OLIVER, GEORGIA 2515 LODI CA 95242 37 F TR CREEKSIDE DR 029520 DOSIO, SHANE 2521 LODI CA 95242 38 CREEKSIDE DR 029520 ROYAL, GARRY M & 2574 LODI CA 95242 39 STEPHANIE M PARADISE DR 029520 VARGAS, JASON R 2568 LODI CA 95242 40 & JENNY R TR PARADISE DR 029520 VALLE, KARLA 2564 LODI CA 95242 41 PARADISE DR 029520 BANNON, CYNTHIA 2560 LODI CA 95242 42 A PARADISE DR 029520 LODI CITY OF PO BOX LODI CA 95241 144 BOXWOOD CT 43 3006 027030 JOHNSON, WILLIAM 907 TARA LODI CA 95240 458 W SARGENT RD 05 F & M S TR ET PL 027030 TRAVERSO, ALBERT PO BOX 247 ACAMPO CA 95220 120 W SARGENT RD 08 K ETAL 027030 FUKUNAGA, R 14704 N LODI CA 95240 21 W TAYLOR RD 22 MICHAEL BECKMAN RD 027050 MAXINE 179 E LODI CA 95242 Ol CHRISTESEN TAYLOR RD FAMILY LP 027050 MAXINE 179 E LODI CA 95242 351 E TAYLOR RD 02 CHRISTESEN TAYLOR RD FAMILY LP 027050 R$ISWIG, ELMER A 15671 N LODI CA 95242 22 TR LOWER SAC RD 027400 TRAVERSO, ALBERT PO BOX 247 ACAMPO CA 95220 70 E SARGENT RD 01 K ETAS, 027400 DHKS DEV CO 621 LODI CA 95242 212 E SARGENT RD 02 EVERGREEN DR 027400 WL INVESTORS LP 10100 STOCKTON CA 9521.9 402 E SARGENT RD 03 TRINITY PARKWAY SUITE 420 029020 [PERROTT, PATRICK 17560 SONOMA CA 95476 199 W SARGENT RD 20 ANDREW ETAL HIGHLANDS Westside 500 R radius BLVD 029020 PERROTT, PATRICK 17560 SONOMA CA 95476 197 W SARGENT RD 21 ANDREW ETAL HIGHLANDS BLVD 029020 JUNGEBLUT, 859 TILDEN LODI CA 95242 201 W SARGENT RD 22 ROSEMARY TR ETAL DR 029380 WOODBRIDGE, 00000 04 IRRIG DIST 029380 PERLEGOS, PO BOX LODI I CA 95241 1 351 E SARGENT RD 05 GEORGIA ETAL 1823 Southwest Gateway Mailinp- list APN OWNER ADDRESS CITY STATE ZIP SITUSNUM SITUSSTNAME SITUSTYPE 05803011 FIRST RIVERBANK 100 SWAN OAKLAND CA 94621 1440 WESTGATE DR LP WAY SUITE 206 05803012 WAL MART REAL MAIL STOP BENTONVILLE AR 72716 1600 WESTGATE DR EST BUSINESS 0555 TRU 05803013 BDC LODI 111 100 SWAN OAKLAND CA 94621 LLC WAY SUITE 206 05808001 VIRAMONTES, 425 LODI CA 95242 ABELARDO SPRINGER LN 05808002 SANDOVAL, 451 LODI CA 95242 JIMMIE SPRINGER LN 05808003 HALLORAN, 483 LODI CA 95242 MICHAEL & SPRINGER ELIZABETH LN 05808004 GRELLE, JERRY B 490 E LODI CA 95242 & CATHRYN B HARNEY LN 05808005 HAGELIE, 501 LODI CA 95242 13ERDEAN & SPRINGER CAROLINE DR 05808006 QUEZADA, JAVIER 502 E LODI CA 95242 & MARIA TERESA HARNEY LN 05808008 IWANURA, SHOZO 553 E LODI CA 95242 & B B SPRINGER LN 05808009 GATES, DAVID L 540 E LODI CA 95242 & BETTY L TR HARNEY LN 05808010 DYAS, JASON L 569 LODI CA 95242 SPRINGER LN 05$08011 DAIS, SAM & 585 E LODI CA 95240 ELSIE TR SPRINGER LN 05808012 CHRISTOPHERSON, 29 N LODI CA 95242 612 HARNEY LN EDWARD C & C K ALLEN DR 05808013 BRADLEY, 5421 STOCKTON CA 95212 634 HARNEY LN RICHARD & NANCY ONETO RD 05808014 RODRIGUEZ, 13447 N LODI CA 95242 SERGIO & MARIA LOWER SAC A RD 05808015 BYRUM, PHYLLIS 598 LODI CA 95242 S TR SPRINGER LN 05808016 HAKALA, HARRY & 13421 N LODI CA 95242 M LOWER SAC RD 05808017 CHAMPLIN, 13401 N LODI CA 95242 THERESA A LOWER SAC RD 05808018 COOK, MARK T 590 LODI CA 95240 SPRINGER LN 05808019 VALENTE, MARY $ 13385 N LODI CA 95242 LF EST LOWER SAC RD Southwest Gateway Mailing list 05808020 ARMSTRONG, 582 LODI CA 95240 THOMAS & RACHEL SPRINGER LN 05808021 NELLMAN, GLENN 13359 N LODI CA 95242 L & LENORE M ILOWER SAC RD 05808022 FUNAMURA, GARY PO BOX SACRAMENTO CA 95865 550 SPRINGER LN M TR 255824 05808023 MONTANEZ, 13351 N LODI CA 95242 VICTORIO & LOWER SAC EUFROCINA RD 05808024 CAMPOS, 520 LODI CA 95242 FEDERICO & JOVA SPRINGER LN 0580802.5 ZIMMERMAN, ADAM 13339 N LODI CA 95242 LOWER SAC RD 05806026 GUTIE'RREZ, 500 E LODI CA 95242 RAMIRO & SHERRY SPRINGER LN 05808028 EHRHARDT, 484 E LODI CA 95240 LELAND J & 3 SPRINGER LN 05808037 KUROKAWA, ANDY 13376 N LODI CA 95240 T & B F EXTENSION RD 05814019 LAKESHOR& 619 LODI CA 95240 2080 SYLVAN WY MEADOWS GROUP WILLOW GLEN DR 05814020 LAKESHOR13 619 LODI CA 95240 2081 SYLVAN WY MEADOWS GROUP WILLOW GLEN DR 05814035 WAL MART REAL 702 S W BENTONVILLE AR 72716 2350 KETTLEMAN LN ESTATE BUSINESS 8TH ST 05814044 FIRST LODI 100 SWAN OAKLAND CA 94621 2430 KETTLEMAN LN PLAZA WAY SUITE ASSOCIATES 206 05814045 FIRST LODI PO BOX DALLAS TX 75301 2422 KETTLEMAN LN PLAZA 10001 ASSOCIATE$ 05814050 FIRST LODI 100 SWAN OAKLAND CA 94621 2414 KETTLEMAN LN PLAZA ASSOC LTD WAY SUITE PTF 206 05823023 LODI, CITY OF CITY HALL LODI CA 95240 05834001 LAKESHORE 619 LODI CA 95240 1903 SAGE WY GARDENS PTP WILLOW GLEN DR 05636001 FOUNTAINS AT 700 LARKSPUR CA 94939 1718 SYLVAN WY LODI LLC, LARKSPUR LANDING CIR #199 05836002 MADHARA, 2205 LODI CA 95242 SUKHDEV & MANZANITA KASHMIR KAU CT 05836003 GALAS, JOHN A & 2211 LODI CA 95242 PAULINE TR MANZANITA CT 05836004 GABRIEL, 2217 LODI CA 95242 CRISPINO & MANZANITA CE:LESTINA CT Southwest Gateway Mailing list 05836005 FESSLER, JERRY 2223 LODI' CA 95242 & DEBORAH MANZANITA CT :05836006 WEBER, JIM D & 2229 LODI CA 95242 K TRS MANZANITA CT 05836007 AZEVEDO, 2235 LODI CA 95242 LAWRENCE & C A MANZANITA CT 05836008. CRISPI, MIKE & 2230 LODI CA 95242 DONNA L TR MANZANITA CT 05836009 JOHNSTON, DAVID 2224 LODI CA 95242 & JEANNE MANZANITA CT 05836010 BERNARD, DENIS 2218 LODI CA 95242 & MICHELLE R MANZANITA CT 05836011 HAND, ARTHUR L 2212 LODI CA 95242 JR & DELIA J MANZANITA CT 05836012 COSBIE, WILLIAM 11061 JACKSON CA 95642 2206 MANZANITA CT UPPER PREVITALI RD 05836013 HODGE, DAVID & 2201 LODI CA 95242 KRISTEN ORCHIS DR 05836017 DEWITT, ROBERT 1801 LODI CA 95242 D & PATRICIA AN ORCHIS CT 05836018 DUFFY, MICHAEL 1807 LODI CA 95242 & D M ORCHIS CT 05836011 BROZINICK, 1811 LODI CA 95242 BRENDA C ORCHIS CT 05836020 WATT, BRADLEY H 1818 LODI CA 95242 & Y M ORCHIS CT 05836021 DE LEON, JOHN & 1812 LODI CA 95242 CAMILLE ORCHIS CT 05836022 PAYNE, JAMES L 1806 LODI CA 95242 & JEAN JUSTEAU ORCHIS CT 05836023 SUMP, JON E & 1800 LODI CA 95242 TAUNYA ORCHIS CT 05836024 BITTNER, DONALD 2207 LODI CA 95242 N & ROBIN L ORCHIS DR 05836025 SHEAR, JAMES & 2211 LODI CA 95242 MAXINE ORCHIS DR 05836026 NACHAND, LYLE N 2217 LODI CA 95242 & CLARA JANE T ORCHIS DR 05837001 FOUNTAINS AT 900 LARKSPUR CA 94939 1516 SYLVAN WY LODI LLC LARKSPUR LANDING CIR #100 05837009 AMIN, BASHARAT 2226 LODI CA 95242 CHAPARRAL CT 05837016 SHEROILL, PAUL 2220 LODI CA 95242 S & MANROOP K CHAPARRAL CT 05837011 MAGALLANES, 2214 LODI CA 95242 GERARDO & CHAPARRAL GUADALUIP CT Southwest Gateway Mailing list 05837014 PALACIOS, 1537 LODI CA 95242 KEILAN J LF EST SYLVAN WAY 05837015 MORRELL, JAMES 2209 LODI CA 95242 A LUPINE CT 05837Q16 ALBER, EDWIN A 2215 LODI CA 95242 & S A LUPINE CT 05837017 BLANK, RANDALL 2221 LODI CA 95242 S & BEATRICE S LUPINE CT 05B37018 AMAN, CRAIG & 2227 LODI CA 95242 JUDITH LUPINE CT 05837019 CROTHERS, JOHN 2228 LODI CA 95242 S & LAURIE A LUPINE CT 05837020 SMITH, ANDREW 2222 LODI CA 95242 DAVID & LUPINE CT JENNIFER 05837021 TAYLOR, PAUL B 2216 LODI CA 95242 & CYNTHIA L LUPINE CT 05837022 CHACKO, 2210 LODI CA 95242 CHERUKATTA A & LUPINE CT MARY K 05837023 SCOTT, STEVEN L 2204 LODI CA 95242 & DEBORAH L LUPINE CT 02703012 MAXINE 179 E LODI CA 95242 99 ST RT 12 HY CHRISTESEN TAYLOR RD FAMILY LP 02705015 DOLLINGER, 101 E HWY LODI CA 95240 31 ST RT 12 HY DAVID L 12 02705016 BROWN, BOB K & 35 E LODI CA 95242 JUDITH HIGHWAY 12 02705018 DOLLINGER, 101 E HWY LODI CA 95242 LEROY L & 12 GLADYS D 02705019 HEDRICK, LAMAR 209 E HWY LODI CA 95242 A & JOANN A TR 12 02705020 HEDRICK, LAMAR 209 E HWY LODI CA 95242 291 ST RT 12 HY A & JOANN A TR 12 02705021 GEWEKE FAMILY 2475 LODI CA 95240 341 ST RT 12 HY LTD PTP MAGGIO CIR 05802005 VAN RUITEN 463 W LODI CA 95240 340 ST RT 12 HY RANCH LTD TURNER RD 05802013 VAN RUITEN J401 W LODI CA 95242 413 HARNEY LN RANCH LTD TURNER RD 05802018 EHLERS, WALTER 530 S LODI CA 95242 415 HARNEY LN & VIOLET TR ETA MILLS AVE 05803003 VAN RUITEN J401 W LODI CA 95242 14509 LOWER SAC RD RANCH LTD TURNER RD 05803004 VAN RUITE14 463 W LODI CA 95240 14499 LOWER SAC RD RANCH LTD TURNER RD 05803005 VAN RUITEN 463 W LODI CA 95240 14433 LOWER SAC RD RANCH LTD TURNER RD 05803006 HOWARD 2026 STOCKTON CA 95207 14195 LOWER SAC RD INVESTMENTS LLC ANGELICO ETAL CIR 05803009 REICHMUTH, 1358 LODI CA 95240 252 ST RT 12 HY CAROLYN HINES MIDVALE RD 05803010 LODI CITY OF PO BOX LODI CA 95241 2800 KETTLEMAN LN Southwest Gateway Mailing list 3006 05804001 SCHUMACHER, 1303 LODI CA 95240 14101 LOWER SAC RD WELDON & BONNIE RIVERGATE TR DR 05804002 SCHUMACHER, 1303 LODI CA 95240 13837 LWR SACRAMENTO WELDON & BONNIE RIVERGATE RD TR DR 05804004 SCHUMACHER, 1303 LODI CA 95240 13537 LOWER SAC RD WELDON & BONNIE RIVERGATE TR DR 05804005 SCHUMACHER, 1303 LODI CA 95240 13589 LOWER SAC RD WELDON & BONNIE RIVERGATE TR DR 05604006 RIEGER, EARL & 395 E LODI CA 95242 NAOMI HARNEY LN 05804007 WELLS, LARRY D 427 E LODI CA 95240 & D R HARNEY LANE 05804008 DIETRICH, 11 N LODI CA 95240 463 HARNEY LN THEODORE & AVENA AVE LOUELLA T 05804009 MASTEL, RICHARD 499 E LODI CA 95240 L & PHYLLIS HARNEY LN 05804010 ALVAREZ, JOE L 533 E LODI CA 95242 ETAL HARNEY LN 05804011 PINNELL, ROBERT 16450 N LODI CA 95240 565 HARNEY IN S & LETHA J ALPINE RD 05804012 HALL, FRANK PO BOX 90 FRENCH CAMP CA 95231 603 HARNEY IN 05804013 SCHUMACHER,' 1303 LODI CA 95240 641 HARNEY LN WELDON D & RIVERGATE BONNIE DR 05804014 TAMURA, JOEY TR 788 W LODI CA 95240 ARMSTRONG RD 05804015 VAN RUITEN, 361 E LODI CA 95242 373 HARNEY LN ROBERT TR HARNEY LN 05805001 BRADEN, RONALD 36 E LODI CA 95240 B & A HARNEY LN 05805007E BECERRA, 102 E LODI CA 95242 VALENTIN & HARNEY LN ELVIRA 05805003 BADYAL, JASBIR 184 E LODI CA 95242 ETAL HARNEY LN 05805004 URIZ, FAUSTINO 202 E LODI CA 95240 & MARIA C TR HARNEY IN 05805005 LODI UNIFIED, 00000 13451 EXTENSION RD SCHOOL DIST 05805006 CARDENAS, ABEL 1718 LODI CA 95242 13351 EXTENSION RD R SYLVAN WAY APT 1002 05806010 SIDHU, 5360 STOCKTON CA 95219 10 HARNEY LN NACHHATAR S & GLADSTONE RUSE V DR 05806046 MAINLAND, J50 W LODI CA 95242 122 HARNEY LN NURSERY INC TURNER RD 05807001 RICE, LESLEY M 13480 N LODI CA 95242 EXTENSION RD 05807002 SIBERT, MARY S 13444 N LODI CA 1 95242 Southwest Gateway Mailing list EXTENSION RD 05807003 GEIST, CLIFFORD 650 W LODI CA 95240 & M D HARNEY LANE 05807004 HERNANDEZ, 666 E LODI CA 95240 STEVEN & M ETAL HARNEY LN 05807005 WILLIAMS, GLENN 692 E LODI CA 95242 L & BARBARA TR HARNEY LN 05807007 HAYN, BRIAN S 810 E LODI CA 95242 HARNEY LN 05807008 BELL, LYNDLE A 814 E LODI CA 95242 TR HARNEY LN 05807009 WOODS, MARY E 880 E LODI CA 95242 TR HARNEY LN 05807010 PANOS, PETE N & 13420 LODI CA 95242 PENNY TR SHATTUCK TRACT RD 0580702$ SAN JOAQUIN 222 WEBER STOCKTON CA 95202 COUNTY OF 05814004 FRAME, DEAN K & 212 LODI CA 95242 14752 LOWER SAC RD SHARON L TR RUTLEDGE DR 05814005 ALI, RAMZAN 1112 LODI CA 95240 865 OLIVE ST RIVERGATE DR 05814006 HERRMANN, 1200 LODI CA 95240 800 OLIVE AV VERNET & C TRS GLENHURST 05814007 DEL RIO, 15315 N LODI CA 95240 844 OLIVE AV SANTIAGO M & HOERL RD RAMONA T 05814008 HALL, FRANK PO BOX 90 FRENCH CAMP CA 95231 890 OLIVE AV 05814009 DEL RIO, 865 E LODI CA 95242 908 OLIVE AV SANTIAGO M & OLIVE AVE RAMONA T 05814010 YANG, JERRY 930 E LODI CA 95242 OLIVE AVE 05814011 GREVER, ZANE M 1432 PARK LODI CA 95242 777 OLIVE AV & P TRS ST 05814012 PE'T'ERSON, M P 0 BOX LOCKEFORD CA 95237 14500 LOWER SAC RD BILL 473 05814014 PETERSON, RUTH PO BOX SUTTER CA 95685 14620 LOWER SAC RD SUSAN 331 CREEK 05822001 MARTIN, MARILYN 791 LODI CA 95242 ANN KRISTEN CR 0582200.2 VAUGHN, FREDDIE 805 LODI CA 95242 L & KHRISTINA KRISTEN CT 05822003 ROSEN, T H & V 833 LODI CA 95242 L TRS KRISTEN CT 05822004 NEUMANN, 865 LODI CA 95242 WILLIAM D & KRISTEN BONNIE R CT 05822005 NORDWICK, FLOYD 895 LODI CA 95242 H & LACE A TR KRISTEN CT 05822009 YAMASHITA, 884 LODI CA 95240 KENNETH K & Y KRISTEN Southwest Gateway Mailing list CT 05822010 FAUGHT, MICHAEL 860 LODI CA 95242 & TERESA KRISTEN CT 05822011 LANGWORTHY, 13710 LODI CA 95240 ELMER D & S M HARTLEY LN 05822012 LEAR, WOODBURN 13696 LODI CA 95242 L & CLAIRE L TR HARTLEY LN 05822013 WOOD, BRUCE D & 867 LODI CA 95242 JANEEN TEHAMA DR 05822014 PARRISH, 889 LODI CA 95242 RANDALL R & TEHAMA DR DEBORAH 05822017 HATRAWAY, 890 LODI CA 95242 ROBERT W & R M TEHAMA DR TR 05822018 BARAJAS, TERESA PO BOX LODI CA 95241 868 TEHEMA DR 631 05822019 HANNA, GARY D & PO BOX WOODBRIDGE CA 95258 830 TEHEMA DR SHARON L TR 568 05822020 WISENOR, GERALD BOB LODI CA 95242 L & LAUREL M T TEHAMA DR 05822021 SAN JOAQUIN, 00000 999184 TBHEMA DR COUNTY OF 05822022 LW, NHI & MINH 13625 LODI CA 95242 H HARTLEY LN 05822023 GOLUB, IRVING & 13675 LODI CA 95242 SHELIA HARTLEY LN 05822024 SAN JOAQUIN, 00000 COUNTY OF 05823004 KUBOTA, TSUGIO 1500 LODI CA 95242 13786 LWR SACRAMENTO TR ETAL VISTA DR RD 05823006 GALINDO, MARK L 871 E LODI CA 95242 & ELEANOR R HARNEY LN 05823007 STICE, LARRY & 893 E LODI CA 95242 GORETI HARNEY LN 05823010 SCHUMACHER, 1303 LODI CA 95240 13520 LOWER SAC RD WELDON & BONNIE RIVERGATE TR DR Doc 0: 2007-129844 7/16/07 3:06 PM CERTIFICATE OF TERMINATION SanyJoaquineman County Recorders City of Lodi 221 West Pine Street Lodi, California 95241-1910 NOTICE OF TERMINATION OF WILLIAMSON ACT CONTRACT NO. 72-C1-516 Notice is hereby given that the City of Lodi is Contract No. 72-C1-516 for 88.21 acres of Number 058-030-03 and further described as: Attached as Exhibit A. executing the right to terminate Williamson Act land currently identified as Assessor Parcel Parcel 058-030-03 (88.21 acres) is part of the 307 -acre Southwest Gateway Project Area annexation approved by the San Joaquin Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCo) on May 18, 2007. The City of Lodi City Council protested the execution of this Williamson Act Contract by Resolution No. 3623 dated April 5, 1972. The City's protest resolution was filed with San Joaquin LAFCo on September 1, 1978, and LAFCo upheld the protest by Resolution No. 396 dated October 20, 1978. It should be noted that the City of Lodi Resolution No. 3623 protested the execution of the Williamson Act Contract initiated by John and Ann Van Ruiten, Assessor's Account Numbers 48546 and 62346. Assessor Account Number 62346 is now APN 058-030-03. Thus the City of Lodi Resolution clearly identified the subject Williamson Act Contract and parcel. As evidenced in the Environmental Impact Report that analyzed the Southwest Gateway Project (Land Use and Planning Policy Section, pages 83-85 and 93-94), the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Mitigation Measure LU -3 of the MMRP, which was part of the City Council Staff Report), and Statement of Open Space (Agriculture) Land Conservation provided with the Southwest Gateway LAFCo application, the City of Lodi confirmed that the City would execute its right not to succeed to this contract. Following San Joaquin LAFCo's approval of the annexation of which APN 058-030-03 is a part, the City of Lodi is hereby exercising its option not to assume the rights of the County Under the Williamson Act Contract No. 72-C1-516. ✓4 J�... Randy H�ch, Director Community Development Department City of Lodi Date EXHIBIT A LEGAL DESCRIPTION THAT CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY SITUATED IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL ONE: A PORTION OF THE WEST HALF OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 6 EAST, MOUNT DIA13LO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID WEST HALF, SAID POINT BEING 75 FEET SOUTH OF THE QUARTER CORNER AT THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE DUE NORTH ALONG SAID EAST LINE, 719 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 89. 25' WEST 98.5 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 790 50' WEST, 184 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87o 15' WEST, 130 FEET; TH ENCE NORTH 20 45' EAST, 112 FEET TO A POINT DESIGNATED POINT "A"; THENCE NORTH 890 16' WEST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF ITS EASTERLY EXTENSION OF THAT CERTAIN 20.70 ACRE PARCEL AS DELINEATED ON MAP OF SURVEY FILED FOR RECORD SEPTEMBER 29, 1942 IN BOOK 5 OF SURVEYS, PAGE 265, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY RECORDS, 2237.3 FEET TO AN IRON PIPE AT THE SOUTHWEST CORN ER OF SAID 20.70 ACRE PARCEL; THENCE SOUTH 00 01 I/2' EAST, ALONG THE WEST LINE OF AID SECTION 15 1050.35 FEET TO THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF THE NORTH 20 ACRES OF THE SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 15; THENCE SOUTH 89a 12' EAST, ALONG THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID NORTH 20 ACRE PARCEL, 2340 FEET TO A POINT BEING 301 FEET WESTERLY OF SAID EAST LINE; THENCE DUE NORTH 225 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 890 12' EAST, 301 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO GEORGE W. EMDE, ET UX, RECORDED DECEMBER 30, 1963 IN BOOK 2770 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, PAGE 340, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY RECORDS. ALSO EXCEPT THEREFROM THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND DESCRIBED IN DEED TO HAPPYHOLME FARMS, INC., RECORDED APRIL 15, 1971 IN BOOK 3514 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, PAGE 340, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY RECORDS PARCEL TWO: A PORTION OF THE SOUTH HALF OF THE NORTHWEST QUARTER OF SECTION 15, TOWNSHIP 3 NORTH, RANGE 6 EAST, MOUNT DIABLO BASE AND MERIDIAN, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH HALF AND RUN DUE SOUTH ALONG THE EAST LINE OF SAID SOUTH HALF, 331 FEET TO A POINT BEING 990 FEET DUE NORTH FROM THE QUARTER CORNER OF THE CENTER OF SAID SECTION; THENCE DUE WEST, 504.5 FEET; THENCE DUE SOUTH, 260.1 FEET; THENCE NORTH 890 16' WEST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF THAT CERTAIN PARCEL CONVEYED BY DEED RECORDED NOVEMBER 7, 1968IN BOOK 3254 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS, PACE 39, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY RECORDS, 2136.9 FEET TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID SECTION; THENCE NORTH 0o 01 1/2' WEST, ALONG SAID WEST LINE, 600.15 FEET TO THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH HALF; THENCE SOUTH 890 121/2' EAST, ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH HALF 2641.7 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. L S A ATTACHMEN arm •�—�--_, (I 400 Boo ......: Q• I rr=r SOURCE CITY OF LOD7, 2005. L�LOD531 w ide _n,w2ai (gr.B , Parcels Within Southwest Gateway Projes and Other Parcels to be An- ACKNOWLEDGMENT State of Cali rnia County of n On = before me, 150H l 1 i tJ C�� u— ` (here I-insert hame arAd title of the officer) personally appeared�(�Yl(��TTU'��1 personally known to me to be the person{4whose namefWiyare subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that e/ #e4heyy executed the same it Tii /her-*i9W-authorized capacity(iesj-and that by is ' signature(&} on the instrument the persot(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person4s}ected, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Signature (Seal) RANDIJOHL COMM. #1516020 x NOTARY PUBUC • CAUrORNIA ORANGE COUNTY comm. Exp. SEPT. 27, 2008