HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - March 1, 1989 (47)C 0 A C I L COMMUNICATION
TO: THE CITY COUNCIL
COUNCIL MEETING DATE: MARCH 1, 1989
FROM: THE CITY KMAGER'S OFFICE
SUBJECT: SET PUBLIC HEARING OPTIONS ASSESSMENT REPORT GENERAL PLAN UPDATE
INDICATED ACTION: Set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Wednesday, March 15, 1989
to consider the Options Assessment Report - General Plan Update, and to receive
Planning Commission's recommendation.
BACKGROUND .-INFORMATION: The Options Assessment Report. was presented to the C-1 ty..
Council and: Planning Commission by representatives of Jones and Sto'kes Associates,"
Inc. and J. Laurence Mintier at a joint special meeting on January 25, 1989.
The Planning Commission's hearing on this matter is scheduled for Monday, February
27, 1989. The report of that hearing will be available to the City Council on
Mardi 1, 1989.
B. SC
J S B HRO ER
B,,S(
unity Development.Director
i.
CC89/6/TXT0.01C February 22, 1989
January 24, 1989
City Council
C i ty of Lodi
In regard to your meeting Wednesday tc
discuss the General Plan for the City
of Lodi, I strongly urge you to consider
Option 1. Lodi is a lovely city: "now.
Please don't encourage greater growth.
Let's keep Lodi a safe and healthy place
to live more people - more problems.
Thank you for your consideration.
GY;
Gerri Rrrigale
512 Connie St
f:
7
Lodi, Ca 95240
f4
r
CIIY CCI JNCI., NIEF"ING
MARCH 1, 1989
H AN -1G Oa MST
REPORT Community Development Director Schroeder presented the
following Planning Commission Report of the Planning
Commission Meeting of February 15, 1989:
CC -35
FOR ACECN OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Recommended that the Land Use Element of the Lodi
General Plan be amended by redesignating the south
127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on Tentative
Parcel Map 89 P 001 from Residential - Low Density. . to
office Institutional and the north 335 feet
±(Southwest corner of West Vine Street and ..Interlaken.; -
Drive) of Parcel 3 of the same map from
Office -Institutional to Residential -Low Density (i.e.
2414 West Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000, South
Lower Sacramento Road - APN 027-0040-49) .
2. Recomn dad that the south 227.7 feet of Parcels 1 and. ;-
2 as shown on Tentative Parcel N83 P 001 be rezonedfrom P -D(25) Planned Developmenistrict M. 25 to
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional to 'P -U(25)
Planned Development District Na 25 conforming to
Residential Single -Family (i.e. 2414 West Vine Street
AYN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower Sacramento Road
APN 027-040-49).
3. ReoamrtrKW that a Negative Declaration as filed by the
Community Development Director be certified as adequate
environmental documentation on the above projects.
On motion of Council Member Hinchman, Olson second, the
City Council set the heretofore listed items 1, 2, and 3
for public hearing at the regular council meeting of April
5, 1989.
OF NTdUr TO THE COUNCIL
1. Conditionally approved the Tentative Parcel Map (90 P
001) to create three parcels by resubdividing the block
bounded by West Vine Street, Interlaken Drive, S t .
Moritz Drive and Lower Sacramento Road (i . e . 2414 West
Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower
Sacramento Road - APN 027-040-49) in an area zoned
P -D(25) Planned Development District No. 25 and
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional as
requested by Glen I. Baumbach, Baumbach and Piazza,
Consultin Engineers on behalf of Dwight F i l l ey, et al
and Dr. Chris Keszler, eta 1.
As part of the above action the Planning Commission
approved a Lot Line Adjustment between 2414 West Vine
Street (APN 027-040-40) and 1000 South Lower Sacramentc
Road (APN 027-040-49).
CITY COUNCIL., MEETING
MARCH. 1; 1989
2. Conditionally approved the Revised Tentative
Subdivision Map of Sunwest, Unit No. 9 (89S 001), a
3.7 acre, 12 lot single-family residential subdivision
proposed for the parcel at the southeast corner of
Lower Sacramento Road and St. Moritz Drive (APN
027-040-50) in an area zoned P -D(25) Planned
Development District No. 25 as requested by Glen I.
Baumbach on behalf of Dr. Chris Keszler and Fred Baker.
3. Conditionally approved the Tentative Subdivision. Map of
Sunwest, Unit No. 10 (89 S 002) , a 4.25 acre,. +24-' 3 of
single-family residential subdivision propposed for the
parcel at the northeast corner of tower Sacramento .Road
and St. Moritz Drive (Portions of APN 027-040-40 and
49) in an area zoned P -D (25) Planned Development:
District No. 25 and R -C -P,
Residential -Commercial -Professional as requested by
Glen I. Baumbach on behalf of Dr. Chris Keszler and .'..,:..
Fred Baker.
In a related matter the Planning Commission certified, the
filing of a Negative Declaration on the above` project as
adequate environmental documentation.
4. Continued consideration of the referral by. the -. San -
Joaquin County Planning Commission of the request of J.
Jeffrey Kirst on behalf of E. H. Nordman, et al to
rezone the parcel at 1 East Woodbridge Road from AG40
and A -L5 to R1 -U to allow a 126 unit residential
subdivision (Windwood).
5. Set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m. , Monday, February
27, 1989 to consider the Noi;e Regulation Ordinance as
prepared by the City Attorney.
6. Set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m. , Monday, February
27, 1989 to consider the Options Assessment Report,
General Plan Update, as prepared by Jones and Stokes
Associates and J. Laurence Mintier and Associates.
Conanunity Development Director Schroeder also gave the
following report of the Planning Commission meeting of
February 27, 1989:
FOR ACTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL.,
1. Recommended that Option 2, as outlined in the Options
Assessment Report, General Plan Update, as prepared by
Jones and Stokes Associates and J. Laurence Mintier and
Associates be the preferred Option and that the 2%
growth rate be based on population rather than dwelling
uni ts.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
14ARCH 1, 1989
1. Conditionally approved the Tentative Parcel Map (90 P 001) to create
three parcels by resubdividing the block bounded by West Vine Street,
Interlaken Drive, St. Moritz Drive and Lower Sacramento :odi "I.e.
2414 West Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 So. Lower Sacramento
Ro-,d - APN 027-040-49) in an area zoned P-0(25) Planned Development
District No.25 and R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional as
requested by Glen I. Baumbach, Baumbach and Piazza, Consulting
Engineers on behalf of Dwight Filley, et al and Dr. Chris Keszler>
et al.
As part of the above action the Planning Commission approved a Lot
Line Ad.-istment between 2414 West Vine Street (APN 027-040-40) and
1000 So. Lower Sacramento Road (APN 027-040-49).
S'
MEMO
a
TO: City Manager
s
FROM: Community Development Director:
..
SUBJECT: Planning Commission Actions
February 13, 1989
DATE: February 15, 1989
For Action Of The City Council
1. Recommended that the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan be
amended by redesignating the south 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2
as shown on Tentative Parcel Map 89 P 001(see attached) from
Residential - Low Density to Office Institutional and the north
i...
335 feet + (Southwest corner of West Vine Street and Interlaken
Drive) of -Parcel 3 of the same map from Office -Institutional to
S
Residential -Low Density (i.e. 2414 West Vine Street - APN 027-040-40
and 1000 So. Lower Sacramento Road - APN 027-040-49) .
2. Recommended that the south 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on
Tentative Parcel Map 89 P 001 be rezoned from P-0(25) Planned
Development District No. 25 to R -C -P Residential- Commercial -Profess-
ional and to rezone the north 335 feet + of Parcel 3 as shown on
the same map from R -C -P, Residential-Co�mercial-Professional to
P-0(25) Planned Development District No.25 conforming to Residential
Single -Family (i 2414 West Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000
So. Lower Sacramento Road - APN 027-040-49).
3. Recommended that a Negative Declaration as filed by the Ccmmunity
f
Development Director be certified as adequate environmental docu-
mentation on the above projects.
Of Interest To The City Council
1. Conditionally approved the Tentative Parcel Map (90 P 001) to create
three parcels by resubdividing the block bounded by West Vine Street,
Interlaken Drive, St. Moritz Drive and Lower Sacramento :odi "I.e.
2414 West Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 So. Lower Sacramento
Ro-,d - APN 027-040-49) in an area zoned P-0(25) Planned Development
District No.25 and R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional as
requested by Glen I. Baumbach, Baumbach and Piazza, Consulting
Engineers on behalf of Dwight Filley, et al and Dr. Chris Keszler>
et al.
As part of the above action the Planning Commission approved a Lot
Line Ad.-istment between 2414 West Vine Street (APN 027-040-40) and
1000 So. Lower Sacramento Road (APN 027-040-49).
MEMO
February 15, 1989
Page 2.
2. Conditionally approved the Revised Tentative Subdivision W of
Sunwest, Unit 13.9 (89S 001), a 3.7 acre, 12 lot single-family
residential subdivision proposed for the parcel at the southeast
corner of icier Sacramento Road and St. Moritz Drive (APN 027-040-50)
in an area zoned P -D(25) Planned Development District No.25 as
requested by Glen I. Baumbach on behalf of Dr Chris Keszler and
Fred Baker.
3. Conditionally approved the Tentative Subdivision Map of Sunwest,
Unit No. 10 (89 S 002), a 4.25 acre, 24 lot single-family residential
subdivision proposed for the parcel at the northeast corner of Lovwr
Sacramento Road and St. Moritz Drive (Portions of APN 027-040-40 and
49) in an area zoned P -D(25) Planned Development District No.25 and
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial -Professional as requested by Glen I
Baumbach on behalf of Dr. Chris Keszler and Fred Baker.
In a related matter the Planning Commission certified the filing of a
a Negative Declaration on the above project as adequate environmental
documenta ti on.
4. Continued consideration of the referral by the San,Joaquin. County. _
Planning Commission of the request of J. Jeffrey K.irst on behalf of
E. H. Nordman, et al to rezone the parcel at 1 East Woodbridge Road
from AG40 and A -L5 to R1 -U to allow a 126 unit residential subdiv-
ision
ubdivision (Windwood).
5. Set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday, February 27, 1989 to
consider the Noise Regulation Ordinance as prepared by the City
Attorney.
6. Set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday, February 27, 1989 to
consider the Options Assessment Report, General Plan Update, as
prepared by Jones and Stokes Associates and J. Laurence Mintier
and Associates.
CHANGE FROM
RESIDENTIAL LOW -DEN:
TO OFFICE -INSTITUTION
CHANGE FROM OFFICE -INSTITUTION TO RESUENTV%L LOW-DENSITY
COrMU.YITY NOSIITI�
VINE �. 9f,PEEr
[91.1iY \ /73 Y
PARCEL !
Ac. ISS Ar -
D
Y � I
483.2
PARCEL 3
4.21 S AC,
ST. -
A104?�rj
' O,P
••srh y, sr xa. �
w:
'd b3' w
a �
3
3S'
DJ
h
6RENOdLF OR.
b air 69
M
V
ss",rp ' M I
? 4v^
�e
M
SIP
aEN'L PLAN AMENDMENT
RECLASSIFY GP DESIGNATIONS
FILLEY, ET AL & KESZLER, ET AL
89-P-001 2-13-89
kv
ADO M PO -25
I
CoarAvairr woainit
V/NE
rARM /
L3! t At.
wt
J
REZONE FROM PD -25 TO R -CP -•--,
7
A
Z
W
t
- v
s
h
St.
173's
/Aff6L Z
/.3ds AC.
OVA
#*ARCFu 3
445 s Ac.
AMEND POVATTED USE FROM
OFFK:HNSTITUTK AL TO
FESKIENTIAL SDIMEFAKRY
R
JT.PEE7 .
��i
h
O
i
o
t
6JE�►OQtf 0�
H
M '
V
,
'
? SSA wfSt A721
Y.
sr�
ANf�y O�
�':
t+•
:4
s
M -S fir as s"
!!
K
l:
r
J
REZONE
AND GENEF%AI_ PLAN AMENDVENT
FILLEY, ET AL & KESZLER, ETAL
89-P-001 2-13-89
- .; .. -t",. `a s{d."!`-„'-Yr .:st.T r:. -=..;; er..-'s,,..,v..;,. <^.c.K.,k! "'a+t°`"fa �L`.. e°,-.,• a ft n.
a
e' !t
DECLARATION OF NAILING
Cry March 10, 1989 in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California,. I
deposited i n the United States mail, envelopes with first- class? A-Ctaru+
prepaid thereon, containing a copy of the Notice attached hereto,
Exhibit "A"; said envelopes were addressed as i s more particuiarVysboMrnarxen
on Exhibit "B" attached hereto. '
There i s a regular daily communication by mail between the City cif LWqi,
California, and the places to which said envelopes were addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing i s true and Ir
.orrect.'
ALICE M. REIMCHE
c� J*k
�o nso
y
pu Clerk
DEC/O1
TXTA. 020
PH/10
TXTA.02D
F
([Z3
E��RT
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
TO 03NSEER THE H V4%W CONMSSIONS RECOMMENDATION THAT THE LAND USE ELEMENT
OF THE LM GENERAL PLAN BE AMENDED BY REDESK3gATWTG THE SOUTH 127.7 FEET OF
;I :
PARCELS 1 AND 2 AS SIM ON TH\TrA'IlVE PARCEL MAP 89 P 001 FROM RESUFNT AL
LOW EE 31Y TO OFFICE PgSIERJEONAL AND THE NORTH 335 FEET fi(S0LJHTvV1!-T, CORNER
OF WEST VINE STREET AND INTERLAKEN OF PARCEL 3 OF THE SAME MAP FROM
TO RE4CENUALLOVV D (I. E. 2414 WEST VM STREET -
APN 027-040-40 AND 1000 SOUTH LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD - APN 027-040-49).,7.:
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, April 5, 1989 at the hour of 7:30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lpdi City "Council
will conduct a, public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation that the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan be amended by
redesignating the south 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on tentative
parcel map 89 r 001 from Residential-Low Density to Office Institutional and.
the north 335 feet + (Southwest corner of West Vine Street and Interlaken
Drive) of Parcel 3 of the same nap from Office-Institutional to Residential;;-Lm
t '
Density (i.e. 2414 West Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower"...1
Sacramento Road - APN 027-040-49).
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Communi ty
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested
persons are invited toppresent their views and comments on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the
#
hearing scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
;
1
m
If you challenge the subject matter in court you ay be limited to raising only
those issues you or someone else raised a t the Public Hearing described in this
notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk, 221 West Pine
Street, Lodi, California, at or prior to, the Public Hearing.
Eiy Order Of the Lodi City Council:
y,
Alice M. Remichc
i
City Clerk
t
Dated: March 1, 1989
Approved as to form:
.6
Bobby W. McNatt
C i ty Attorney
PH/10
TXTA.02D
OWNERS NAME
MAILING ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
'Imma
Wroarl-m-m
tkv �k,
IMMIX=
-.
owm==
WWA innu
mov'r-E-'ell lat
EMP.2
n--- 7.nr'I, %
MAILING LIST FOR
— _
mere■■
�IcDDRESS�
■Cl TY
ff IT -1
mm
ir■■in
- ... a .:�
.. .c: .. - .a
■■■
Mfg
,�,
........��
■tilt■■
�■■�
NMI■
1#
DECLARATION OF MAILING
On March 10, 1989 in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California,
deposited in the United States mail, envelopes with first - class "IR
tap
prepaid thereon, containing a copy of the Notice attached hereto,.. marked
cular
Exhibit "A"; said envelopes were addressed as is more parti lyt,:S'hown: W.1_
on Exhibit "B" attached hereto.
There is a regular dailycommunication by mail between the Cit of Lodi
communic e l
California, and the places to which said envelopes were addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on March 10, 1989, at Lodi, California.
. . . . . . . . . . . . . .
DEC/01
TXTA.02D
City'Xlerk
ut-voCYty Clerk
I:`� --Ili: I�I� :•� �
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER
THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO CERTIFY
THE FILING OF A NEGATIVE DECLARATION
BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR AS
ADEQUATE ENVIRONMENTAL DOCUMENTATION
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, April 5, 1989, at the hour of 7:30
p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be heard, the Lodi City Council
will conduct a public hearing to consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation to certify the filing of a negative declaration by the Community
Development Director as adequate environmental documentation on the following
projects:
1. Recommended that the Land Use Element of the Lodi General Plan be amended
by redesignating the south 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on
tentative parcel map 89 P 001 from Residential -Low Density to Office
Institutional and the north 335 feet + (Southwest corner of West Vine
Street and Interlaken Drive) of ParceT 3 of the same map from
Office -Institutional to Residential -Low Density (1.e, 2414 West Vine
Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower Sacramento Road - APN
027-040-49).
Recommended that the south 127.7 feet of Parcels 1 and 2 as shown on
Tentative Parcel Map 89 P 001 be rezoned from P -D (25) Planned Development
District No. 25 to R -C -P, Residential- Commercial -Professional and to
rezone the north 335 feet + of Parcel 3 as shown on the same map from
R -C -P, Residential -Commercial- Professienal to P -D (25) Planned Development
District No. 25 conforming to Residential Single -Family (i.e. 2414 West
Vine Street - APN 027-040-40 and 1000 South Lower Sacramento Road - APN
027-040-49).
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community
Development Director at 221 West Pine Street, todi, California. All interested
persons are invited to present their views and comments on this matter.
Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk 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 be limited to raisin only
Y g J Y �' g Y y
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 Pine
Street, Lodi, at or prior to, the public hearing.
B� Order 0 f The Lodi City Council:
Alice M. Remiche
City Clerk
Dated: March 1, 1989
Approved as to form:
Bobby W. McNatt
City Attorney
PHI 11
TXTA. 02D
ig
... .... .. ........
FM
MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi , Community Development Department
TO: CITY MANAGER
FROM: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
DATE: FEBRUARY 28, 1989
SUBJECT: PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS FEBRUARY 27, 1989
FOR ACTION QV THE MY COUNCIL
1. Recommended that Option 2, as outlined in the Options Assessment
Report, General Plan Update, as prepared by Jones and Stok6s..�_
Associates and J. Laurence Mintier and Associates be the preferred .--
Option and that the 2% growth rate be based on population.ftth.er
than dwelling units.
2. Recommended the adoption of a Noise Regulation Ordinance as'..
outlined in Draft 6 as prepared by the City Attorney.
OF INTEREST TO THE CITY COUNCIL
1. Set a public hearing for 7:30 p.m., Monday, March 13, 1989 to
consider the request of David B. and Kimberly G. Young for a Use
Permit for a residential day care center for 12 children at 327
East Oak Street in an area zoned R-1*, Single -Family (Eastside)
PCACTI/TXTD.01C
! L.I.F.E. COMMITTEE
February 27, 1989
TO: Lodi Planning Commission
FEB u 7 1989
CORMUNm►
From: Ernest F. J nson, Presid nt 1 0 DrMPVVfi
DEPM"EXT
Re: Options Assessment Report, General Plan Update
On behalf of the L.I.F.E. Committee (Lodians In -favor
of Free Enterprise), the Petitioner/ Respondent in the Appeal
from the Superior Court of San'Joaquin County Superior Court
Case No 178641 and Third Appellate District Court of Appeal
Case No. 3 Civil 26034, we would like to submit the following
comments and objections:
I. We renew our opposition to Option 1 for all of the same
reasons and on the same grounds as stated in,our original complaint
in the matter of L.I.F.E. vs. Lodi, because it will interfere with
the orderly annexation process, is an unreasonable exercise of the
"police Power", creates an illegal and invalid general plan, and
fails to adequately provide for Lodi's fair share of regional
housing needs.
II. The Report fails to adequately discuss the impact of
limited growth on the supply and cost of housing for all segments
of the community and more specifically those who -can least afford
higher costs such as the young just starting out; and, the elderly
on fixed incomes who cannot afford price increases due to shortages
which will be created by the growth restrictions of Options 1 and 2.
III. The Report fails to adequately discuss the impact of
restricting growth upon housing rental prices and opportunities
for all segments of the community particularly because there
already exists a tight rental market.
IV. The Report fails to adequately discuss the inability
of churches, community center advocates, and other social, cultural,
and business enterprises to find adequate land under Option 1.
V. The Report is inadequate because it is predicated upon
adopting arbitrary and inflexible rates of growth which do not allow
for changing times, conditions, and circumstances.
VI. The Report fails to discuss the costly process of de-
fending limited growth against legal attack particularly because
California Evidence Code Section 669.5 establishes a presumption
that growth limitation ordinances adversely affect regional housing
needs and places the burden of proof on the City to show that the
ordinance is necessary to promote public health, safety, and welfare.
It is also the right of litigants to recover attorney fees and costs
from the City of Lodi.
VII. The Report fails to adequately discuss the impacts of
other cities and towns growing up around and adjacent to Lodi.
Page 1
P
It tends to appear from the Report that Lodi is in a vacuum
and that all development will stop and that agricultural land
will be preserved by Lodi limiting its growth when in fact the
reverse is true. For example Woodbridge develope'rs are discussing
relocating and expanding the sewer plant; Grupe Company has bought
all or part,,of the Saler! Ranch adjacent to "Saddle City" and in-
tends to develope there; and, Stockton continues to row North and i
West with the massive Spanos development, Grupe Moraga development,
and etc.; and in the future Thornton will also likely grow.
VIII. The Report fails to take into account that growth in #
the City of Lodi will take pressure off the County of San Joaquin
to allow growth in the County to compensate for limited City growth.
It is generally understood that Cities can better provide more
efficient housing opportunitis than can the County.
IX. The Report fails to discuss the loss of political,
economic, social, and cultural influence with limited growth,
Examples of this can be seen in the move to change the name of.
Lodi Unified School District to another name; also, the inde-
pendence of Woodbridge to go its own way; and, the inability
for Lodi to accomodate new industrial and commercial opportunities
due to limited growth.
We ask that the Planning Commission and City of Lodi in
general not be lead down the primrose path or wear rose -colo
glasses by not addressing the negative and serious problems a.R4a
consequenses of Options 1 and 2, some of which are set forth above...
Very truly yours
so�
rnest
President, L.I.F.E. Committee
Page 2
S e c t i ons :
9.20.010. Definitio,_s:.r
A.
B.
C.
oA-
"Ambient Nci se" means the all -encompassing not se associated with
s
a given environment, usually being a composite of sounds with
many sources near and far as determined at any specific point.`'^`
f•
i
"Clearly Audible" means those sounds or noises which can be heard
by any person of average or normal hearing capability.
r.
i`
s<
"Commercial Noise" means that noise or sound which i s generated
cr created by the use, operation or maintenance of any commercial
activity, including but not limited to the operation of
machinery, c o xtructi on equipment, manufacttiriny equipment, motor
vehicles operated in conjunction with such use, and shall include
but not be limited to compressors, fans, air conditioning units,
and sound ampl i ficaticn systems uti 1 iLed in conjunction with such
finctior,s.
-1-
-.f
t
ORDINANCE NO.
AN
ORDINANCE OF THE arY COUNCIL OF THE CXTY
OF LODi
ENACTING A NOIf RBa A'> EN ORDINANCE.ZV
,
t
BE 1T C M441) BY THE LCIC[ CITY CC[.NM AS FOLLOV&
K_`m__
xi-
SBCIION 1.
Lodi Municipal Code Title 9 - Public Peace, Morals Atrd
,,.
Welfare is
hereby amended by adding Chapter 9.20
entitled "Noise
Y_
{ s
Regulation",
as follows:
S e c t i ons :
9.20.010. Definitio,_s:.r
A.
B.
C.
oA-
"Ambient Nci se" means the all -encompassing not se associated with
s
a given environment, usually being a composite of sounds with
many sources near and far as determined at any specific point.`'^`
f•
i
"Clearly Audible" means those sounds or noises which can be heard
by any person of average or normal hearing capability.
r.
i`
s<
"Commercial Noise" means that noise or sound which i s generated
cr created by the use, operation or maintenance of any commercial
activity, including but not limited to the operation of
machinery, c o xtructi on equipment, manufacttiriny equipment, motor
vehicles operated in conjunction with such use, and shall include
but not be limited to compressors, fans, air conditioning units,
and sound ampl i ficaticn systems uti 1 iLed in conjunction with such
finctior,s.
-1-
D. "Decibel" (db) means a unit of level which denotes the ratio
between two quantities which are proportional to power; the
number of decibels corresponding to the ratio of two amounts of
power is ten times the logarithm to the base ten of this ratio; a t'
unit of measure of sound (noise) level.
K "Emergency Work" means work made necessary to restore property to
{ J
a safe condition following a public calamity, or work required to
protect persons or property from eminent exposure to danger 'or
damage, or work by public or private utilities when restoring
utility service.z
I Y
F. "Motor Vehicle" includes any car, truck, motorcycle, motor 4
scooter, and any and all self-propelled vehicles, as defined in:
the California Vehicle Code, including but not limited to
mini -bikes and go-carts.
G. "Noise Level" means the same as "sound level". The terms may be
.used interchangeably.
a
I "Sound Level" means the same as "noise level"; in decibels, that
quantity measured with a sound level meter as defined herein, by
use of the "A" frequency weighting and "fast" time averaging
unless some other time averaging is specified.
I. "Sound Level Meter" means an instrument of measurement of sound
including a microphone, amplifier, an attenuator, networks for at
-2-
least the standardized "V frequency weighting, arij an indicating
instrument having at least the standardized dynamic
characteristic "fast", as specified in the American National
Standards Institute specifications for sound level meters,
S1.4-1371.
9.20.020. Public Nuisance Noise.
The following special noise restrict ons are hereby established
without regard to their sound level impact and may be enforced without
the prerequisite of a sound 'level measurement.
A. General Noise Regulations:
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Chapter, and in
addition thereto, it shall be unlawful for any persons to
willfully make or continue or permit or cause to be made or
continued, any loud, unnecessary or unusual noise which
unreasonably disturbs the peace and quiet of any neighborhood or
which causes discomfort or annoyance to any reasonable person of
normal noise sensitivity.
B. The standards which shall be considered in determining whether a
violation of the provision of this Section exists shal include,
but not be limited to, the following:
1. The volume of the noise;
2. The intensity of the noise;
3. Whether the nature of the noise is usual or unusual
-3-
This section shall be inapplicable to emergency work as defined
herein.
9.20.030. Excessive, Offensive or Disturbing Noise.
The following activities are declared to cause excessive,
offensive or disturbing noise in violation of this secticn, but said
enumeration shall not be deemed exclusive:
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to sound any horn or other
signalling device on any vehicle except as an emergency or danger
warning signal. This provision shall be inapplicable to the
-4-
for the area and hour;
4.
Whether the the
Y
origin of noise s natural or
unnatural ;
5.
The volume and intensity of the background noise,
i f any;
6.
The proximity of the noise to residential sleeping
faci 1 hies;
7.
The nature and the zoning of the area within which
the noise emanates;
8.
The density of the inhabitation of the area within
which the noise emanates;
9.
The time of day or night the noise occurs;.
10.
The duration of the noise;
11.
Whether the noise is produced by a commercial or
noncommercial activity.
This section shall be inapplicable to emergency work as defined
herein.
9.20.030. Excessive, Offensive or Disturbing Noise.
The following activities are declared to cause excessive,
offensive or disturbing noise in violation of this secticn, but said
enumeration shall not be deemed exclusive:
A. It shall be unlawful for any person to sound any horn or other
signalling device on any vehicle except as an emergency or danger
warning signal. This provision shall be inapplicable to the
-4-
sounding of any horn, bell, whistle, siren or other audible
warning device which is operated in compliance with section 7604
of the California Public Utilities Code, or with any other state
or federal provision governing railroad operations.
B. It shall be unlawful to play or operate any drum, radio,
phonograph, loud speaker, sound amplifier, stereo, television, or
other similar sound system, whether mobile or from a fixed
location upon the public streets, pubiic right of way or in
public parks in such a fashion that it is clearly audible at a
distance of fifty feet. The City Council: -,hereby finds and
declares that any sound or noise audible at such distance
endangers the public safety and welfare by interference with
normal human capability for hearing nearby traffic movement and
warning signals. This section shall be inapplicable to radio
systems operated under or pursuant to Federal Communications
Commission licenses in the regular course of business.
It is hereby found and declared as a matter of legislative policy
that the operation of the aforementioned equipment or instruments
on the public streets and rights of way adjacent to public par:.s
during the hours between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. in such a
manner as to be clearly audible at a distance of fifty (50) feet
or greater shall constitute prima facie evidence of a
violation of this section.
-5-
C.
It shall be unlawful for any person, firm or corporation to
cause, permit, or generate any noise or sound as described herein
between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. which exceeds the
ambient noise level at the property line of any residential
property (or, if a condominium or apartment house within any
adjoining apartment) as determined at the time of such reading by
more than five (5) decibels. This section shall be applicable
whether such noise or sound is of a commercial or noncommercial
nature.
9.20.040. Animal Noises.
Notwithstanding any other provision of this Code, it shall be
unlawful- for any person to keep or maintain, or to permit the keeping
or maintenance upon any premises owned, occupied or controlled by such
person, any animal or animals which by any frequent or long -continued
noise shall disturb or cause discomfort to any reasonable person of
normal noise sensitivity. For purposes of this section, "frequent or
long -continued noise" shall mean any noise which is essentially
continuous for ten (10) minutes aggregate during any sixty (60) minute
period.
This section shall not apply to any kennel, cattery or anima
hospital operated legally within the City of todi.
9.20.050. Exemptions.
This part shall not apply to th_ following:
W-2
A Sirens or other similar emergency warning devices located upon
any emergency vehicle as defined by the Veh i c i e Code, or upon the
premises of any public safety agency.
B. Arry bell, siren or similar device on any vehicle, which' is`
required by law, and which i s automatically activated by. placing
the vehicle transmission in reverse, or by any backing movemert
F. Noise necessarily generated in conjunction with health or
sanitation services, including but not limited to refuse
col lection.
9.20.060. Penalty.
A violation of any provision of this part shall be an infraction,
punishable by a fine not exceeding two hundred and fifty dollars ($250).
IVA
9.20.070. Enforcement.
The provisions of this part may be enforced by any peace officer,
or the Director of Community Development or his/her designee.
9.20.080. The provisions of this ordinance are severable. If any
part hereof is deemed unenforceable or invalid by a courf';of competent
jurisdiction, all other provisions hereof shall remain in full force'
and effect.
SECTION 2. All ordinances and
parts of ordinances
in conflict ::fir
herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist.y'.
S �y
SECTION 3. This ordinance shall
be published one time in the "Lodi
v
News Sentinel" a daily newspaper
of general circulation
printed and
published in the City of Lodi and
shall be in force and
take effect
thirty days from and after its passage and approval.
Attest:
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City Clerk
Approved this day of
WKl ' '
Mayor
-a-