Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
Agenda Report - December 17, 1986
I CCUJI1' IMPROVENII3ns UNDER LODI GRAPE F3C74'L SEAT REPLACEMENT CONTRACT OC -20 OC -47 CITY CMNCIL MEETING DECiM ER 17, 1986 Council accepted the i nproven-nts for "I.,odi Grape Bowl Seat Replacem-nt" and directed the Public Works Director to File a Notice of C Wletion with the Courcy Recorder's office. The contract was awarded to Stadiums Unli.nuted, Inc.. of Grinnell, Iowa, on July 16, 1986, in the am.-)unt of $29,586.50. The contract has been complet0d in substantial conformance with the plans and specitic•ations approved Lv the City Council. The centra( -t ccnpletion date was October 10, 1986 and the actual c- xvp.leti.on date was Nc vejnber 26, 1.986. The final contract prig was $29,586.50, less l.icluick:ted da^.viges of $1,950.00. CITY CSF LODi . CO[`tiCIL COM:lit.;NICATIOti PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council accept the improvements for "Lodi Grape Bowl Sat Replacement" and direct the Public Works Director tr file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder's office. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The contract was awarded to Stadiums Unlimited, nc. of Grinnell,Iowa, on July 16, 1986, in the amount of $29,586.50. The contract has been completed in substantial conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council. The contract completion date was October 10, 1986 and the actual completion date was November 26, 1986. The final contract price was $29,586.50, less liquidated damages of $1,950.00. ,lack L. Ronsko Public Works Director JLR/GER/ma cc: Parks & Recreation Director APPROVED: ire •'` r . -�-�n:,Vi :, c•. ^^anager FILE NO. CSTADIUM/TXTW.02M December 9, 1986 Project Data TO: City Council Originally Bu aete : 198E Budgeted Fund: Capital Outlay FROM: City Manager Reserve Amount Budgeted: $58,000 MEETING DATE: December 17, 1986 Final Project Cost: $30,700 - AGENDA TITLE: Accept Improvements Under Lodi Grape Bowl Seat Replacement Contract RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council accept the improvements for "Lodi Grape Bowl Sat Replacement" and direct the Public Works Director tr file a Notice of Completion with the County Recorder's office. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The contract was awarded to Stadiums Unlimited, nc. of Grinnell,Iowa, on July 16, 1986, in the amount of $29,586.50. The contract has been completed in substantial conformance with the plans and specifications approved by the City Council. The contract completion date was October 10, 1986 and the actual completion date was November 26, 1986. The final contract price was $29,586.50, less liquidated damages of $1,950.00. ,lack L. Ronsko Public Works Director JLR/GER/ma cc: Parks & Recreation Director APPROVED: ire •'` r . -�-�n:,Vi :, c•. ^^anager FILE NO. CSTADIUM/TXTW.02M December 9, 1986 TABLE 3 LEVEL OF SERVICE DEFINITIONS LEVEL OF SERVICE SIGNALIZED INTERSECTION UNSIGNALIZED INTERSECTION "A" Uncongested operations, all Little or no delay. queues clear in a single - signal cycle. "B" Uncongested operations, all Short traffic delays. queues clear in a single cycle. "C" Light congestion, occasional Average traffic delays. backups on critical approaches. "D" Significant congestion of Long traffic 0 -lays. critical approaches but intersection - functional. Cars required to wait through more than one cycle during short peaks. No long queues formed. "E" Severe congestion with.some Very long traffic delays, long standing queues on failure, extreme congestion. critical approaches. Block- age of intersection may occur if traffic signal does not provide for pro- tected turning movements. Traffic queue may block nearby intersections) upstream of critical approach(es). "F" Total breakdown, stop -and- Intersection blocked by -go opera -tion. external causes. TABLE 4 LEVEL -OF -SERVICE LOCATION TYPE OF EXISTING CONTROL BASE EXISTING + FUTURE PROJECT BASE rUIUPE + PROJECT LWR SAC/W PROJECT STREET One -Way Stop -- A -- A LWR SAC/LODI Four -Way Stop B (A*) B(A*) D(A*) C(A*) LODI/S PROJECT STREET One -Way Stop -- B -- C *Assumed location was signalized with existing lane geoineVics. Impacts for Ultimate Conditions n Traffic projections for the year 2010 were obtained from the San Joaquin Council of Governments. The traffic projections for Lower Sacramento Road and Lodi Avenue are 24,000 daily vehicles and 14,000 daily vehicles, respectively. Exhibit 7 presents tentative lane geometries for ultimate traffic volumes to allow uncongested conditionsat the intersection. It is necessary for the developer/owner- to dedicate additional right-of-way to the City. As shown in the exhibit, sixty-five feet from the centerline to the -project will be required on Lower Sacramento Road and fifty feet from the centerline to the project will be required on Lodi Avenue. The limits of this additional right of way dedication has not yet been determined. Impacts On -Site The City's minimum parking requirements for the project are 1-1/2 sp,:.; re-4rire6 oer unit. The number of spaces proposed for Parkview Terrace project is �E4 scac s 3!5 spaces per unit). It is recommended that the number of spaces be increased to 310 (2 spaces per unit) for the various reasons discussed below. The purpose of the City's parking regulations is to provide adequate off-street parking for employees, customers, residents and visitors. The project contains a clubhouse, tennis courts and swimming pool. Additional spaces will be necessary for employees of these facilities. Lower Sacramento Road and Lodi Avenue are major arterials which will not have on -street parking at the intersection. The project units will also have reverse frontage and therefore the walking distance from any vehicles parked on -street to resi-deuces will be inconvenient, especially for senior citizens. The only parking spaces available for the project will be the on-site spates. For these reasons, it is recommended the Parkview Terrace project contain 310 spaces. 3. Mitigations The primary effects of project traffic will be at the Lodi Avenue/South project street intersection. Motorists will experience average traffic delay under future base plus project conditions. To improve traffic conditions at this intersection, it is recommended that two outbound lanes and one wile inbound lane divided by a median be installed. To provide adequate ingress and egress traffic flow at this location, it is also recommended that a Special Commercial Driveway be installed rather than a standard driveway. The City's design standards require opposing streets to be located a minimum of 150 feet between intersections. It is recommended to construct the south project street at least 150 feet east of Cabrillo Circle, not as shown on the proposed project plan. The Specific Plan for Lower Sacramento Road includes frontage roads from Turner Road to Lodi Avenue. Currently, the last frontaqe road ends at the Parkview Terrace project. It is recommended that the abandonment of the frontage road from the project to Oxford Way be considered. This would eliminate future conflict between the west project street and the frontage road. Costs of this abandonment including any improvements should be tirne solely by Parkview Terrace developers. The mitigation measures required with the development of Parkview Terrace are as follows: - construct the sc•ith project street a minimum of 150 feet east of Cabrillo Circle; - install a special corarercial driveway at Lodi Avenue/south project street; and - construct two outbound lanes and one wide inbound lane divided by a median at the south project street. - abandonment of Lower Sacramento Road frontage road. C. SOILS, GEOLOGY AND DRAINAGE The soil type on project site is Hanford sandy loam. The surface soil is the Hanford sandy loam and consists of an 8 to 14 inch layer of light, grayish brown, soft friable sandy loam which has a distinct grayish cast when thoroughly dry. The material grades downward into a subsoil of slightly darker and richer brown soil. Agriculturally Hanford sandy loam is one of the best soils. It is used in the projection of orchard, vineyard and other intensive perennial crops. In the Lodi area this soil is primarily used for grape vineyards. The soil conservation service rates Hanford sandy loam as Class 1 (the highest rating) and the Storie Index rates it at 95 percent for the ability to produce crops. The soil is also rated for construction purposes. The bearing capacity of the soil is 2,000 lbs. per square foot. It does not have expansive qualities and will support most structural building loads. The soi_1 in the project area is derived from the Modesto Formation, a geologically young alluvial deposit that is part of 8,000 to 10,000 feet of lake and river sediments filling the Great Valley. Underlying these sediments are abort 60,000 feet of relatively undeformed marine sedimentary rock. Although no faults appear on the surface in the vicinity r.f Lodi, the structure of the bedrock indicates that ancient faults probably affected the Great Valley Sequence. The nearest potentially active faults are in the Rio Vista -Montezuma area, 22 to 32 miles west of Lodi. The Stockton Fault (about 14 miles south) and the isleton-Ryde Fault Zone (about 14 miles west) are older, buried faults generally ccnsidered inactive. The nearest historically active faults, the mest probable source of strong groundmotion, are in the San Francisco Bay Area of the Coast Ran es. These faults include the San Andreas (about 70 miles southwest), the Hayward ?about 55 miles southwest), the Calaveras (about 45 miles southwest), the Livermore (about 40 miles southwest), and the Antioch (about 30 miles west southwest). The Midland Fault Zone (about 20 miles west) is buried and considered mostly inactive although a Richter Magnitude 4+ earthquake was epicentered in the zone within this century. Lateral bedrock acceleration from a maximum expected earthquake along one of the active faults would be about 30% of the speed of gravity (o.39). Lodi is in seismic Zone 3, as defined by the 1978 Uniform Building Code, which requires the strictest design factors to resist these lateral forces. The project site and the surrounding area are generally flat with elevations of approximately 35-40 feet above sea level. The land in Lodi slopes gently from the northeast to the southwest at the rate of approximately 5 feet per mile. It is probable that the land was leveled sometime in the past to facilitate surface irrigation. The parcel contains no natural topographic feature. There are no natural water features or drainage channels located on the project site. The property does not lie within the floodplain of the Mokelumne River and would not be affected during a 100 -Year Flood. The Woodbridge Irrigation District Canal runs along the west an.! sou_h ed -,,e -f the Batch property, across Lower Sacramento Road. This canal carries wager fro -,-,he Mokelumne River to irrigate agricultural properties to the south and west of Lodi. The canal is full during the irrigation season that runs from early spring to late fall. Except for agricultural properties served by irrigation canals the majority of properties in the Lodi area including the City of Lodi, are supplied by water pumped from underground sources. The City of Lodi provides water to its customers from a series of 18 wells drawing on 150-500 foot deep aquifiers. The entire system has a capacity of 42 million gallons per day (mgd). New wells are drilled using water utility revenues as additional areas are developed. Thd City operates a system of interzonnecting storm drainage basins to provide temporary storage for peak storm runoff. The runoff is stored until the water can be pumped into the Woodbridge §Irrigation District Canal (W.I.D.) or the Mokelumne River at controlled rates and locations. The Parkview Terrace project would use the B-2 Basin located in Henry Glaves Park, just north of the project, which serves northwestern Lodi. Basin -parks serve both a storm drainage function and a recreational function. Impacts Development of the Parkview Terrace site would increase the erosion potential on the site during the construction period. Erosion hazard is slight and could be kept low with a minimum of dust control/wind erosion control measures, such as watering the site during the grading period of construction. In the event of an earthquake, people and structures on the site would be exposed to strong groundmotion on one of the faults in the nearby Coast Ranges. During such an event, windows might bp broken, plaster cracked and unstable objects overturned. Trees, poles and other tall objects would be disturbed. Adherence to the recommended lateral force requirements of the Structural Engineers Association of California (embodied in the Uniform Building Code) would greatly reduce the likelihood of damage or injury due to seismically induced groundshaking. Development of the Parkview Terrace project would create impermeable surfaces in the form of roads, walks, patios and structures. These surfaces would effectively prevent storm water from percolating into the ground and would generate higher runoff values than currently exist. The City storm drainage lines and facilities have been desirned to accommodatc chis increased runoff from the project area. Mitigation If Parkview Terrace is approved and constructed, 20.8 acres of prime agricultural soil will be covered, removing it from future agricultural purposes. There is no practical way to mitigate the loss of this resource. Once cleared and developed with streets and houses, it is unlikely that the land will ever return to agricultural use. Erosion during the period of construction can be kept to a minimum by doing as much of the excavation as possible during the dry season. Maintaining undeveloped areas as quickly as possible would also reduce erosion potential. It is unlikely that a Formal erosion/sedimentation control plan would be necessary at this site. D. NOISE Setting The proposed project would be subject to the standards contained in Title 25 of the California Administrative Code which states that residences (other than detached single-family) located in areas of Community Equivalent Noise Levels (CNEL) of 60 dBa or greater are required to have an acoustical analysis showing that the structure has been designed to limit noise to the prescribed allowable levels. The City of Lodi Noise Element states that areas exposed to less than day/night average noise levels (CNEL) of 60 dBa are considered acceptable for residential -12- development. Areas exposed to L 60-65 dBa are conditionally acceptable if miner sound reduction measures are inc orated into the project design. Impacts The City's Noise Contour Map shows that L noise levels reach 65-70 dBa alono both Lower Sacramento Road and Lodi Avenue adi ent to the subject property. This would indicate that sound reduction measures will be required for any residences (other than detached single-family) located adjacent to these roadways. The project would result in significant short-term noise impacts due to construction activities. Peak noise levels generated during the noisiest construction operations, those involving earthmoving and grading, would range from about 80-85 dBa at 50 -foot. +'? distances and about 74-79 dBa at distances of 100 feet. This could cause some inconvenience for residences in the vicinity of the site. Project operation would increase traffic volumes in the vicinity of the site. It is generally agreed that perceptible increases in traffic noise occur when traffic volumes double. Based on the traffic volumes predicted on page 6 of this report, it is expected that increases in traffic noise on adjacent streets due to project generated traffic would not be perceptible. However, it should be noted that in combination with traffic increases from other sources, audible impacts could occur. Mitigation Because the noise levels on portions of the project site along Lower Sacramento Road and Lodi Avenue exceed 60 dBa, Title 25 of the California Administrative Code requires that a noise analysis be performed to show that the proposed buildings be designed to limit intruding noise. Measures to mitigate excess noise could include, but are not necessarily limited.to the following: Mi;iimize number and size of windows facing Lower Sacramento Road or Lodi Avenue. - Shield sliding glass doors facing noise sources with solid balcony wall. Avoid placing bedrooms facing Lodi Avenue or Lower Sacramento Road. - Locate parking structures, recreational building or other non -habitable buildings to block noise transmission from adjacent streets. - Sound wall (masonry) should be erected along Lower Sacramento Road and Lodi Avenue. -13- E. AIR QUALITY Setting The Lodi area is part of the Sar. Joaquin Valle. Air pollutants of concr,rr in the northern San Joaquin galley include ozone (the main component of photochemical smog), suspended particulate matter, and carbon monoxide. Ozone and suspended particulate matter are regional pollution problems while carbon monoxide problems are generally restricted to small, localized areas. Ozone and carbon monoxide problems are both due in large part to emissions from motor vehicles. High levels of suspended particulate matter are primarily die to agricultural burning. Localized occurrences of high particulate matter concentrations can also be due to nearby construction activities or industrial sources. Since ozone and carbon monoxide, are the pollutants of concern which are related to urban development, the remainder of this analysis focuses on tht,se pollutants rather than on suspended particulate matter. Both the State of California and the federal government have established ambient air quality standards for several common air pollutants. These standards represent pollutant exposure levels (pollutant concentrations over - specified time intervals) designed to avoid adverse health effects in relatively sensitive members of the general population. Federal standards are set by the U.S. Environmental (EPA) while state standards are set by the California Air Resources Board (ARB). The state and federal standards for• ozone are based on 1 -hour exposure periods. The state standard is 10 ppm (parts per million, by volume), phrased as a level not to be equalled or exceeded. The federal standard is 12 ppm, phrased as a level not to be exceeded more than 3 times in any 3 -year period. State and federal carbon monoxide standards have been set for both 1 -hour and 8 -hour exposure periods. The state 1 -hour standard is 20 ppm, while the federal 1 -hour standard is 35 ppm. Both the state and federal 8 -hour standards are set at 9 ppm. The federal carbon monoxide standards are phrased as levels not to be exceeded more than once per year. The state carbon monoxide standards are phrased as levels not be be exceeded. There are no ambient air quality monitoring stations currently operating in Lodi. Prior to 1983, there was a monitoring station on Ham Lane. -During the -- - - 1978-1982 period, this station reported one day in 1978 when carbon monoxide - levels exceeded 9 ppm as an 8 -hour average. Peak ozone levels during this period ere 0.13-0.15 ppm. The current federal ozone standard was exceeded 5-13 days each year in the 1978-1980 period, but only 1 day each year in 1931 and 1982. Available data from monitoring stations in Stockton are probably representative of current ozone conditions in Lodi. State and federal ozone standards are typically exceeded on a few days each summer ir. San Joaquin County. The federal ozone standards have generally been exceeded on 1-6 days each year, with peak ozone levels of 15 ppm. Carbon monoxide data from monitoring stations in Stockton are not -14- repre'sentati ve of c-)nd i :ions i r. Lodi. The federal Clean Air Act requires that areas which violate federal air quality standards must prepare and implement plans to achieve the federal standards by certain deadlines. The deadline for achieving the federal air quality standards for both ozone and carbon monoxide in San Joaquin County is December 31, 1987. The air quality management plan for San Joaquin County currently projects attainment of both the ozone and carbon monoxide standards by the 1987 deadline. County planning officials, however, have expressed some concerns about whether the ozone standard will actually be attained by 1987. Impacts Contribution to Regional Air Quality Problems: As noted above, ozone represents a reg'onal air- pollution problem. Emissions from motor vehicles arethe dominant source of this pollution problem. Current ozone problems are the cumulative result of overall traffic patterns, rather than the result of a limited number of individually significant development projects. Development of the project site will add additional vehicle traffic to the region. Emissions from this traffic will add incrementally to current difficulties in achieving and maintaining the federal ozone standard. This EIR has not estimated to amount of emissions from traffic associated with development of the project, since the added increment will be so small in a regional context. Potential for Localized Carbon Monoxide Problems: Localized carbon monoxide problems typically occur in the vicinity of roadways having substantial traffic congestion problems. Development of the project site will not by itself result in significant traffic congestion on local roadways. As other approved projects in the Lodi area are developed, however, significant traffic congestion will occur on a number of local roadways. The potential for localized carbon monoxide problems in the project vicinity was analyzed using the CALINE 3 dispersion model. This model and the procedures used for the analysis are discussed in Appendix A. Anal-ses were performed for both near-term and long-term future tr..,ffi! corditions. Near -Term Conditions. Results of the modeling analyses show that with near-term development of the project site plus other local development, future peak hour carbon monoxide levels will be well below the state and federal standards at all locations on the project site. Assuming a "background" - carbon monoxide levels of 2-3 ppm, peak 1 -hour carbon monoxide levels may reach 6-7 ppm along the western side of the site. The federal 1 -hour standard is 35 ppm, while the state 1 -hour standard is 20 ppm. Eight-hour average carbon monoxide levels are typically 50-70 percent of the peak 1 -hour value. Recent data from carbon monoxide monitoring stations in Stockton show 8 -hour carbon monoxide levels at 49-76 percent (averaging 60 percent) of the 1 -hour value. Consequently, maximum near-term 8 -hour average carbon monoxide values on the project site arra likely to be 3.6-4.2 ppm; this is well below the federal and state standards cif 9 pprr. -15- Long -Term Conditions. Analyses for ultit ate devel!jpmt2nt in the Lodi irea (after the year 2000) show a greater potential for development of carbon monoxide prof-lems on.the project site. Traffic volumes on Lower Sacramento Road are projected to approach 24,000 vehicles per day, with nearly 14,000 vehicles per day on Lodi Avenue. Even with planned highway improvements for both Lodi Avenue and Lower Sacramento Road, there will be peak -hour traffic congestion at the intersection of these roadways. This will cause considerable back-up of traffic during peak hours, with many vehicles waiting through at least c -re - - - --- light change. The amount of vehicle idling associated with potential traffic congestion: was incorporated into the analysis performed for this EIR. Results indicate that peak hour carbon monoxide levels along the western side of the site could reach 15-18 Ppm (including "Background" levels of Q-4 ppm). The=se values_jre still below the current federal and state 1 -hour standards of 35 and 2C ppm, respectively. Potential 8 -hour carbon monoxide levels on the western side of the project site might reach 9-11 ppm (60 percent of the 1 -hour values). Such carbon monoxide levels would exceed both the federal and state 8 -hour standards. Eight-hour carbon monoxide levels above 9 ppm would not extend. beyond the first row of buildings along the western side of the site. Mitigation No mitigation measures are required for air quality conditions attributable to near-term development conditions. Long-term future development conditions for the Lodi area have the pote.itial for creating carbon monoxide problems along the western side of the project site Such air quality problems would not be due to traffic related to the proposed project. Avoidance of such potential problems might require roadway improvements beyond those that are currently anticipated. Alternatively, land use decisions that avoid the projected traffic volumes would also avoid the potential air quality problem. F. HISTORICAL AND CULTURAL RESOURCES There are no sites or buildings on the subject property that are designated as historical landmarks by any federal, state or local agencies. The nearest recorded landmarks are in the community of Woodbridge, one mile to the northwest. There are no recorded archeological surveys of the site, and it is doubtful that there are any archeological sites on the property. Known Indian sites in the Lodi area are usually located along the banks of the Mokelumne River, one mile to the north. The property has been extensively cultivated for many years. There is no record of any it?ms of antiquity ever- being unoa!-thed on the site. Additionally, the extensive digging and plowing to cultivate the vineyards and ® the trenching to install irrigation lines would have destroyed any archeological material. Mitigation If, during construction, some article of possible archeological interest A should be unearthed, work will be halted and a qualified archeologist will be called in to examine the findinas. G. RECREATION The Parkview Terrace development will certain tennis courts, swimming pools and clubhouse for its residents. On the north side of the project is Henry Glaves Park, an existing basin park. This park is fully turfed and has play and picnic equipment, play apparatus, par course, a football -soccer fir-ld and restrooms. c H. COMMUNITY SERVICES a POLICE The Lodi Police Department serves the area within Lodi City Limits which is divided .into seven patrol areas. TheDepartmenthas 59 sworn officers, 43 patrol officers and 16 patrol cars. The Department has recently added.3. motorcycles to the fleet. There is one central dispatch station. The average r response time is just under 3 minutes. Impacts The development of Parkview Terrace will mean the end of the present patrol arrangement between the Lodi Police Department and the San Joaquin County r Sheriff. The Lodi Police Department will provide police service to the development if it is within the City limits. According to the Police Chief the additional population generated by the project will increase the number of calls and put a definite impact on the police service. — Mitigation The addition of police officers is a budgetary item and will be negotiated at such time population demands warrant it. FIRE The City of Lodi will provide fire protection to the project area. The Lodi Fire Department provides service within the City limits, an area of approximately 9.3 square miles with a population of 43,000. The Department has 42 firefighters. The Department has four 1,500 -gallon pumpers, one -17- elevated platform truck, one ladder tru6 , and one equipment truck. The equipment is distributed between three stations. Response time to the project - from Fire Stations 1 and 3 i approximately 4 to 5 minutes. This is w•itrin the Departments 3-5 minute maximum. The City has a Class III ISO rating. Impact Development of the proposed projects will not adversely affect the service level of the Fire Department. Continued development of the western portion of Lodi may require future construction of an additional fire station. The City has a site on Lower Sacramento Road just north of Elm Street. Mititgation None Required. SCHOOL The project has been proposed as a Senior Citizen Retirement. Center and will not have any affect on the Lodi Unified School District. WATER Water for the project will be provided by the City of Lodi. There are existing major lines along Lower Sacramento Road that will be extended as a part of development of the Parkview Terrace property. The project will also be served by a 10" line in Lodi Avenue. The City of Lodi provides water to the area from.a series of_1F.wells drawing on 150-500 deep aquifers. The entire system has a capacity of 42 million gallons per day (mgd). Current residential water use is not known, as water is not metered. New wells are drilled using water utility revenues as additional areas are developed, and demand increases. The developer is responsible for extension of all water mains. Residential water use is not metered; commercial and industrial use is metered and priced at a declining rate. The City of Lodi has an ongoing water monitoring and testing program for all its City well sites. The program is designee. to alert the City to the presence of any chemicals, organisms or other potentially harmful materials that may be present in the water system. Of particular concern has been the possible presence of the chemical DBCP, A chemical product that was used by farmers to control nematodes. Although the product has been banned for a number of years, traces of the chemical are still present in the soil and underlying water tables. Trace levels have been detected in some of the City's wells, however, the levels are below the State's "Action Level" of 1 p.p.b. (parts per billion). If the DBCP level did exceed 1 p.p.b., the City would either reduce or cease pumping from the problem well in accordance with State regulations. Impacts The City estimates that approximately 3.1 acre feet (Ac.ft.) of water per year -18- is required for each acre of sing -.:-fainlydevelnpa,ent. Greer thi , the project's residential water consuarption is estimated to be about Ac.ft. per year or .055 million gallons per day (mad). The level of water consumption will not significantly affect the City's current capacity. Water use will be heavier if the property is developed as residential use rather than if it remains in agricultural use. The California Department of Water Resources provides the following estimates for various agricultural crops: Alfalfa Deciduous Orchards Vineyards Truck Gardening Barley 3.4 Ac.ft. per acre per year 3.0 Ac.ft. per acre per year 2.4 Ac.ft. per acre per year- 1.8 ear1.8 Ac.ft. per acre per ,year 0.0 Ac.ft. per acre per year - (An acre-foot of water is the amount of water needed to cover one acre of land with one foot of water, or 325,900 gallons). Mitigation The Parkview Terrace project is estimated to use about 62 Ac.ft. per year. Consumption can be substantially reduced through water conservation and cut. by as much as half by metering the residential supply and charging customers for the amount used rather than a flat rate. WASTEWATER The City of Lodi Sanitary System handles wastewater within City limits, serving 35,000 residential and commercial customers. The City's White Slough Treatment Plant provides primary and secondary treatment and has a capacity of 5.8 mgd. Current residential wastewater flow is not known but it is estimated that 40% of residential water consumption is carried away as wastewater. The developer pays for installation of all connecting lines and a connection fee (treatment plant buy -in charge) for each unit developed. impacts Assuming about 40% of water consumption can be carried away as wastewater, t`�r_ Parkview Terrace project can be expected to generate 25 Ac.ft. of wastewater per year. The treatment plan has the capacity to absorb the flow but is - currently at 85+% of total capacity. At current growth rates, expansion of the treatment plant will be needed by 1990-1992. The plant expansion is now being planned. Mitigation None required. SOLID WASTE Solid waste disposal is provided in the project area by Sanitary City Disposal, a private franchise collector., Sanitary City Disposal services the area within Lodi City limits and has more than 14,000 customers. Collection is made by truck on a weekly basis for residential customers and more frequently for commercial clients. Refuse is taken to a transfer station in Lodi where approximately 25% is reclaimed. The remainder is trucked to Harney Lane Disposal site, a Class II -2 landfill. Harney Lane Landfill has nearly reached capacity and measures are being taken to extend the life of the Harney lane site by utilizing fill dirt from an adjoining site. Impacts The franchise operator estimates an average of 39 lbs. of solid waste is generated per residential unit per week. Therefore the 155 proposed units would create approximately 157 tons of refuse a year. The sanitary service is a mandatory service that operates on a user fee basis. The Parkview Terrace development would rt,uire additional manpower .and service equipment. Sanitary City considers this is part of a normal growth pattern and the cost of capital improvements would be repaid by user fees. Mitigation None required. ELECTRICITY The City of Lodi owns and operates the local electrical distribution system. It is a member of the Northern California Power Agency from which it receives power and also buys power from a number of other sources. Impact The proposed project will have no impact on electrical service and will be readily served. Mitigation None required. GAS Pacific Gas and Electric Company will provide service. TELEPHONE Pacific Bell will provide local service. TELEVISION CABLE King Video Cable will provide service. -20- UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS The loss of prime agricultural land would be an unavoidable impact. Once the land is developed with homes, streets and stores there is little likelihood that it would ever be used for agricultural purposes. IRREVERSIBLE ENVIRONMENTAL CHANGES The loss of agricultural land is also considered to be an irreversible change. It is unlikely that the land, once developed, would ever be used again for agricultural purposes. RELATIONSHIP BETWEEN SHORT-TERM USES OF ENVIRONMENI AND ENHANCEMENT OF LONG-TERM PRODUCTIVITY Development of the site would have_a long-term effect of depleting the supply of prime agricultural land in the Lodi area. This is both a project -specific and cumulative impact. -21- ENERGY CONSERVATION Structures in the project will be constructed to meet State of California Energy Standards. The standards include such things as window area, -insulation, energy efficient appliances, etc. Approximately 70% of the units in the project have a north -south orientation. This orientation provides the best adaptability for doth passive and active solar design. The developer could also offer various solar design packages as part of the construction of the homes. -22- -23- CUMULATIVE IMPACTS AGRICULTURAL LAND E The proposed project will contribute to a cumulative loss of prime agriculture land that has occurred in the past several years. Table 5 shows the projects that did, or will, contribute to this loss. i TABLE 5 LOSS OF FARM LAND IN LODI i s 0 PROJECT APPROXIMATE ACRES STATUS r The Meadows 58 Acres Under Construction Lakeshore Village 98 Acres Under Construction Whispering Oaks 34 Acres Under Construction Lodi Park West 88 Acres Under Construction I Tandy -Johnson Ranch 58 Acres Under Construction Noma Ranch 20 Acres Under Construction Woodlake North 35 Acres Under Construction "f Sunwest IV 55 Acres Approved TOTAL ACREAGE 446 Acres All land in and around the City of Lodi is designated as prime agricultural } land. Thus every development must utilize agricultural land. Most future residential, commercial and industrial development will require the urbanization of agricultural land. -23- 01 If the voters of Lodi approve a general plan amendment and annexation of the Parkview Terrace property, the project will have some growth -inducing impacts on Lodi. The property is outside the existing City limits and is therefore subject to the requirements of Measure A. This initiative requires an approval of the electorate for any General Plan Amendment/Annexation to the City of Lodi. Besides approving this specific project, voter approval could indicate some willingness on the part of the electorate to approve additional annexations to the City of Lodi. This willingness could mean that other properties covered by Measure A could, in future years, be approved for development by the voters. All this is somewhat speculative at this point since there is no way of knowing if the proposal will be approved by the voters. If it is not approved, then there would be no growth -inducing impact. Even if the proposal were approved, the growth -inducing impact woul. be limited. First, every proposal would have to be voted on by the electorate, so it is possible that this proposal could be approved and all future proposals rejected. Second, there is substantial undeveloped areas west of Lower -Sacramento Road, although everything west of WID Canal is outside of the Pre -Measure A General Plan area. This means that the City's utilities are not designed to go west or the canal so it would not be possible for this land to be developed in the City. There are only three large parcels that could be developed, even with Measure A approval. One is the Batch property, and one is the triangular piece located south of the Batch property between the WID Canal and Lodi Avenue. The third is the piece of land north of Lodi Park West between Lower Sacramento Road and the WID Canal. In any case, the voters will ultimately determine whether any additional growth will occur. -24- ALTERNATIVES TO THE PROJECT Alternative 1 The principle alternative to the proposed project would be to not go forward_ with the project. This would maintain the existing agricultural use of the properties and eliminate the adverse impacts resulting from the proposed project. This "no build" alternative would eliminate the environmental impacts of the proposed project; it could auversely affect the future housing supply in the City of Lodi. Although there currently appears to be a sufficient number of subdivision lots available to meet housing demand, this supply will not last indefinitely. It is estimated that at current building rates, there is approximately a 5 year supply of subdivision lots. This includes subdivisions that have houses under construction and also subdivisions that exist only as a subdivision map. Several of these subdivisions will probably be built out in the next year or two. While a 5 year supply of lots may seem like a substantial amouit, it must be remembered that large subdivision projects take 2-3 years from the planning stage t. when actual houses are built. Even if the Parkview Terrace project were approved, it might be 1988 before any units are completed. By then.the number of existing subdivision lots will have been reduced substantially. This alternative could also affect the supply of senior citizen housing in _. Lodi. Lodi has a high proportion of senior citizens compared to the rest of San Joaquin county, and studies show that the senior population is growing by 25% per year. Although at the present there seems to be an adequate supply of senior housing at various rents. This growth rate, if it continues, could exhaust the supply quickly. The proposed project is also unique in the fact the units will be for sale, not for rent, which might appeal to seniors who want to live more independently and have more money. Alternative 2 Alternative 2 would be to utilize a vacant "infill" property located somewhere in the City of Lodi as an alternative site for this project. This would eliminate the development of the Parkview Terrace property and place the project in a location that presumably is already impacted. The problem with this alternative is that the City of Lodi does not have any large "infill" properties remaining. Because the City has had a continuous policy of only developing properties that are adjacent to developed areas of the City, there have never been many "infill" properties in the City. The City is, in fact, extremely compact in area for its population. In recent years, Lakeshore Village, Turner Road Estates (formerly Colony -25- Ranch), Rivergate Mokelumne, Whispering Oaks, Lodi Park West, .Woodlake North, and Mokelumne Village have been approved on "infill" properties. These subdivisions are all under construction with various types of development. These developments have utilized all the large vacant properties that existed within the developed parts of Lodi. Of the remaining vacant parcels, most are too small for a residential subdivision. They range in size from individual, single-family lots to parce.ls of several acres. Many of the larger parcels are owned by church groups or individuals who do not want to sell their properties: Other properties have an approved tentative map on them or have a map under review by the City. In any case these properties are not suitable for development for the Parkview Terrace project. The Parkview Terrace property could, in fact, be considered an "infill" property. The parcel has had development surrounding it for a number of years. There are existing utilities and streets adjacent to the property and residential, churches and commercial development surrounding the parcel. Alternative 3 Alternative 3 would be to delete the senior citizen project in favor of a single-family project. Under this alternative the net density would be 5 units per acre resulting in 104 single-family units. This alternative would reduce all environmental impacts except those impacts on the Lodi Unified School District. This alternative would add 104 students to the District. -26- ,. R COMMENTS AND RESPONSES TO THE DRAFT E.I.R. -27- STATE OF CAUF7RNIA—OFFICE Of THE GOVERNOR OFFICE -- OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1A00 TENTH STREET ro t SACRAMENTO. CA 95814 Erin Corey City of Lodi 221 W. Pine Street Lodi, CA 95240 Subject: Parkview Terrace - SCH# 86072202 September 4, 1986 Dear Mr. Corey: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named environmental document to selected state agencies for review. The review period is closed and none of the state agencies have caunents. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Envi-omental Quality Act. Please call Norma Wood at 915/443-0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. When contacting the Clearinghouse in this matter, please use the eight -digit State Clearinghouse number so that we may respond promptly. Sincerely, John B. dhanian i Chief Deputy Di:•ector Office. of Planning and Research a J y' U.- :J V i S E r 1966 x COMMUNITY i DEVELOPMENT DEPAPTYENT =28- O v,,qU1 \ Z! HENRY M. HIRATA Daae Boa COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ► O BOX 1810 — 1810 E HAZEITON AVENUE STOCKTON. CALIFORNIA 9A201 12091 944-2281 August 22, 1986 MEMORANDUM TO: City of Lodi Planning Department, Attn: Erin Corey Planning and Building Inspection Departnpnt FROM: Thanas M. Gau, Senior Civil Enginee Public Services Division SUBJECT: DRAFT E.I.R. FOR PARKVIEW TERRACE The Public Works Department wishes to make the following ccmnents relative to the above referenced subject: The summary should identify the proposed improvement/signalization in the traffic mitigation measure. The annexation should include the full width of Laser Sacramento Road. The analysis for Other Development (Future Base), page 10, should also include future development occur:-ing in the Woodbridge area. W:RWH:pw PS5-PT -29- MANL;EL l_O;'E.. RF.C�� E SEP 21966 ; cc•.::.;ur.:;�� ttt �8 DEVELOPMENT DEPARTWNT A RESPONSES TO COMMENTS COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN - DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS 1. Corrected in text. 2. Annexation will include full width of Lower Sacramento Road. 3. Traffic volumes for the year 2010, discussed on page 13, include development in the Woodbridge area. As noted on page 11, traffic signal warrants for the intersection of Lodi Avenue and Lower Sacramento Road are already satisfied. This location is fifth on the City's priority list which would indicate the signal will be installed in a few years. Table 4 indicates the intersection will operate at LOS A with existing lanes and a traffic signal. The installation of curb, gutter and sidewalk on Lower Sacramento Road to ultimate width will be done by the developer. Paving will be done by the City as part of its Capital Improvement Program. -30- d� ��— SAN JOAQUIN COUNi4 COUNCIL Of GOVERNMENTS 1860 EAST HAZE; TON AVENUE + STCG,TON CALIFORNIA 95205 Aua i S t 1, 1986 TELEPHONE !2041 944.2231 [. r] &I, Ms. Erin Corey City of Lodi Community Development Department 221 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 95240 Re: Draft Environmental Impact Report for Parkview Terrace EIR 86-3 Dear Ms. Corey: COG staff have reviewed the above EIR in accordance with our comments on the Notice of Preparation in our letter of June 23, 1986. The analysis of the air quality aspects of the project is ade- quate. de- quato. The analysis of traffic impacts is generally adequate. However, there should be specific discussion of the possible need for widening of Lower Sacramento Ro.d along its entire length from Turner Road to Route 12. The draft EIR fails to address the impact of the project on the Lodi Dial -a -Ride system. As the system is heavily utilized by seniors, the project could be expected to result in increased ridership which could exceed the system's capacity. This issue should be addressed in the final EIR. If you have any questions, please contact me or Gordon Moore of my staff. PDV:GEM:gmw Very truly yours, i � os� PETER D. VERDOORN Executive Directorj' a �U c 1986 -31- • COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN 0 CII IES OF STOCKT, N LOCI, TRACY, MANTECA. ESCALON, RIPON • Irk RESPONSES TO COMMENTS SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY - COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS I. See Response No. 3 to San ,;oaquin County Department of Public Works. 2. The Parkview Terrace project will have an impact on the Lodi Dial A Ride system . It should be noted, however, that many of the Parkview Terrace seniors using Dial A Ride already liva in Lodi and would not be adding to the system's capacity. The added demand generated by Parkview Terrace will be mitigated by adding more cars to the Dial A Ride system. Dial A Ride is a system that is increased - more cars are added - as demand warrants. -32- 0- %I 7 sl ©1 41 BOB unlifled achooR dhatftt FACILITY PLANNING 815 W. Lockeford St., Lodi, CA 95240 (2091 369.5511 369.5561 464.1748 July 23, 1986 City of Lodi Community Development Department 221 West Pine Street Lodi, CA 95240 RE: COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR PARKVIEW TERRACE The Lodi Unified School District has reviewed the Draft Environmental Impact Report for Parkview Terrace, a proposed construction project of 155 cluster homes for senior citizens in north west Lodi, just outside the city limits. The project as a "Senior Citizen Retirement Center" will have no effect upon the Lodi Unified School District. If the use of Parkview Terrace is converted, however, from a senior itizen residential area to a typical apartment complex open to families, the project could have the effect of adding 155 students to the District. We appreciate the opportunity to comment on the Draft EIR for the pro- posed project. If you have any questions regarding our comments, please contact Planning Analyst, Robert Lauchland in Facility Planning at (2W 369-5511. claryn Marr FacilVU Planner 0 no -33- Env ironmen�aI Assessment INITIAL STUDY 1. PROJECT TITLE PARKVIEW TERRACE EIR-86-3 2. LOCATION Northeast corner of Lower Sacramento Road and Lodi Avenue. 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION 155 unit senior citizen project to be built as duplexes, triplexes, and fiveplexes. Project includes tennis courts, pool, spa, and clubhouse. Project density is 7.4 units per acre. 4. General Plan Designation (A) Existing (city), (B) Proposed (A) Low residential (San Joaquin County); (B) Low Density residential. density 5• Site description and surrounding !and use 20.88 acres in vineyards surrounded by residential to the east and south, agriculture to the west, and a chirch anu park on the north. 6. Zoning (A) Existing, (B) Proposed (A) I -PA, Interim Protective Agricultural (San Joaquin County); (B) P -D, Planned Development - low-density residential. Will the Project Ha— a Significant Effect Through Any of the Following Impacts? Yes No Maybe 7. a. Substantial alteration of natural topography, soil or subsoil features ................................... X. _ b. Substantially degrade surface or groundwater qualitv.. X y c. Substantially deplete surface or groundwater X resources............................................. d. Substantially interfere with groundwater flow X orrecharge ........................................... e. Cause a significant affect related to flood, erosion X orsiltation .......................................... f. Substantial interference with the habitat of any X species of fish, wildlife or plant .................... y g. Violate ambient air quality standards or create X substantial air emissions or objectionable odors...... h. Substantially increase ambient noise or glare X level for adjoining areas ............................. i. Substantial reduction of existing cropland............ X j. Expose individuals or property to geologic, public health, traffic, flood, seismic or other hazards...... X Adverse impacts of project and their magnitude: SEE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Mitigation Measures to Reduce Adverse Impacts Identified by Initial Study: SEE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT RECOMMENDATION E Negative Declaration X EIR Conditional Negative Declaration JAMES B. SCHROEDER Environmental Review Officer By Date 9-15-86 EIR/1-81 -,r- ERIN COREY, JR. PLANNER Yes No Maybe k. Have a substantial, demonstrable, negative aesthetic effect............................................... X 1.. -Result in the disruption or alteration of an X archeological, historical or paleontological site.... i M. Cause or allow substantial increase in consumption in X any natural resources ................................ n. Results in the use or waste of substantial amounts of X fuel or energy ....................................... o. Necessitate major extensions of water, sewer, storm X drain, electrical lines or public roads .............. p. Substantially increase demand for or utilization of public services such as schools or fire or police X protection........................................... q. Substantially change transportation patterns related to existing traffic load, street capacity, parking X availability or traffic sefety....................... X r. induce substantial growth, concentration or displace- X ment of population ................................... — — — s. Result in an alteration or conflict with existing or X plannedland uses...................................— t. Conflict with adopted plans, goals or policies of X the City of Lodi .................................... � — — Adverse impacts of project and their magnitude: SEE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT Mitigation Measures to Reduce Adverse Impacts Identified by Initial Study: SEE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT RECOMMENDATION E Negative Declaration X EIR Conditional Negative Declaration JAMES B. SCHROEDER Environmental Review Officer By Date 9-15-86 EIR/1-81 -,r- ERIN COREY, JR. PLANNER i LIST OF RESOURCES Charles Wentland, Principle, Wentland and Associates. San Joaquin County General Plan Map to 1995, April 1983. City of Lodi, Tandy -Johnson Ranch Final Environmental Impact Report, 1983. City of Lodi, Batch Final Environmental Impact Report, June 1984. Paula Fernandez, Engineer, Traffic, City of Lodi. Richard Prima, Chief Civil Engineer. Fran Forkas, Water and Wastewater Superintendent, City of Lodi. Linda Porterfield, Administrative Assistant, City of Lodi, Police Department Ray Schatz, Fire Administrative Officer, Lodi Fire Department. City of Lodi, Noise Contour Map, 1978. Tsen & Assoc., Lodi Motel Market Demand Study, June 1986. i -36- CITY COUNCIL ME1,TING DECEMBER 17, 1986 COUNCIL CERTIFIES OFFICIAL ELECTION SUMMARY GENERAL ELDCTION HELD NM04BER 4, 1986 RES. NO. 86-181 Council adopted Resolution No. 86-181 - Resolution of tlx? Lodi City Council certifying the Official Election Sunrerry CC -18 for the City of Lodi Measures K, L, M, N, O, and P as set forth below for the Consolidated General Election held November 4, 1986 as Prepared by the San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters: Measure K - Yes - 7,137 No - 5,511 Measure L - Yes - 6,001 No - 6,562 Measure M - Yes - 51590 No - 6,799 Measure N - Yes - 6,269 No - 6,128 Measure O - Yes - 5,185 No - 7,264 Measure P - Yes - 5,493 No - 6,883 _ JUNCIL COMMUNICATIL _d TO: THE CITY COUNCIL DATE, NO. FROM: THE CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE December 17, 19$6 SUBJECT: CERTIFY OFFICIAL ELFJCTION SUMMARY FOR CITY OF IiODI MEASURES K, L, M, N, O AND P FOR THE CONSOLIDATED amyAL ELDC'PION HELD NOi7fP9BER 4, 1986 AS PREPARED BY THE SAN JOAQUIN COEMY REGISTRAR OF VOTERS a Rid ED ACTION: That Council adopt Resolution No. 86-181 - Resolution of the Lodi City Council certifying the Official Election Summary for City of Lodi measures K, L, M, N, O and P appearing on the ballot for the Consolidated General Municipal Election l held November 4, 1986 (see Exhibit B attached) Attached please find a copy of the Official Election Summary Consolidated General Election November 4, 1986 (marked Exhibit A) which has been prepared by the San Joaquin County Registrar of Voters. Pursuant to the State of California Election Code the Governing Body shall., upon receipt of the canvass of returns, adopt a resolution reciting the fact of the election and the results. Alice M. Reimche City Clerk AMR -.JJ COUNCOMI/TXTA.02D J 11/25/86 12:56 P.M. OFFICIAL ELECTION SUMMARY PAGE 01 CONSOLIDATED GENERAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 4, 1986 i REGISTRATION t TURNOUT t STATE TREASURER t MEMBER OF THE ASSEMBLY t I i 1 10TH DISTRICT 1 I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 51/ 51 1 I I t 1 1 COUNTY REGISTRATION ...... 189,033 1 JESSE UNRUH DEM..81,827 83.2 1 PHILLIP ISENBERG OEM ... 9,470 52.2 1 1 PRECINCT REGISTRATION .... 189,033 1 RAY CULLEN LiS-8,229 8.4 1 DARYL SULLIVAN REP ... 8,620 47.6 1 1 PRECINCT BALLOTS CAST.... 100,913 53.4 I MERTON SHORT AIP... 5,227 5.3 1 ........................................I I ABSENTEE BALLOTS CAST...... 7,723 4.1 1 MAUREEN SMITH PtF... 2,879 2.9 1 MEMBER OF THE ASSEMBLY i ITOTAL BALLOTS CAST....... 108,636 1 ..................•....•.... ^••-•'^ •••t 26TH DISTRICT 1 I........................................I ATTORNEY GENERAL i COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 267/ -267 1 1 GOVERNOR I I 1 1 i COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 PATRICK JOHNSTON DEM..63,386 74.0 1 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 DOUG BIGGS REP --22,152 25.9 1 I 1 JOHN VAN DE KAMP DEM..67,352 66.0 1 ........................................1 1 GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN REP..76,297 71.2 1 BRUCE GLEASON REP..30,596 30.0 1 ROSE BIRD, CHIEF JUSTICE 1 1 TOM BRADLEY DEM..28,817 26.9 1 CAROL NEWMAN LIS... 1,689 1.7 1 SUPREME COURT i 1 GARY MiLLER A1P..... 793 0.7 1 GARY ODOM AIF ... 1,283 1.3 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 MARiA MUNOZ P&F..... 623 0.6 1 ROBERT EVANS P&F... 1,094 1.1 1 1 i JOSEPH FUNRiG LIS ..... 452 0.4 1 ........................................I YES. 24.205 23.7 1 1 ........................................1 BOARD OF EQUALIZATION I 110..7i,M 76.3 1 1 LIEUTENANT GOVERNOR I 2ND DISTRICT I........................................I i 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 PANELLi, ASSOC JUSTICE I 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 SUPREME COURT i I 1 CONWAY COLLIS DEM -49,615 50.2 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 MIKE CURB REP..51,554 48.6 1 CLAUDE PARRISH REP..46.550 47.1 1 1 1 LEO MC CARTHY DEM -51,265 48.3 1 ROSERTO LOVATO PLF... 2,655 2.7 1 YES..68,334 76.2 1 1 JAMES GRIFFIN AIP... 1,670 1.6 1..•.......••••........•....•..'•••" ....1 N0..21,401 23.8 1 1 NORMA ALMODOVAR LIS ..... 874 0.8 1 UNITED STATES SENATOR I .................•--^ ..................i i CLYDE KLP-4 P&F..... 736 0.7 1 1 GRODIN, ASSOC JUSTICE i I.....••••• .............................•I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 SUPREME COURT i 1 SECRETARY OF STATE I 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 I ED ZSCHAU REP..57,572 54.3 1 ► I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 ALAN CRANSTON DEM..'1,770 43.1 1 YES..33,508 35.1 1 1 1 EDWARD VALLEN A►P... 1,369 1.3 1 N0..61,934 64.9 1 1 MARCH FONG EU DEM..79,032 75.1 1 BRECK MC KiNLEY LIS ..... 922 0.8 1 ........................................i I BRUCE NESTANDE RiP..22,544 21.4 1 PAUL KANGAS P&F..... 449 0.4 1 MOSK, ASSOC JUSTICE I I GLORIA GARCiA PBF... 1,712 1.6 1 ..................••••••................i SUPREME COURT 1 1 THERESA DiETRICH AIP... 1,029 1.0 1 U.S. REPRESENTATIVE I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 RICHARD WiNGER LIS ..... 953 0.9 1 14TH DISTRICT 1 1 I........................................I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 193/ 193 1 TES..64,861 70.7 1 1 STATE CONTROLLER 1 1 N0..26,862 29.3 1 1 1 NORM SHUMWAY REP..50,536 73.2 i........................................i I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 BILL STEELE DEM -17,706 25.6 i LUCAS, ASSOC JUSTICE i i i BRUCE DANIEL LIS ..... 774 1.1 1 SUPREME COURT i 1 GRAY DAVIS DEM..49,759 48.5 1-•^ ......• .............................I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 I BILL CAMPBELL REP..48,581 47.4 1 U.S. REPRESENTATIVE 1 1 I CAROLYN TREYNOR LIS ... 1,687 1.6 1 18TH DISTRICT 1 YES -.65,074 76.0 1 i JOHN HAAG PSF... 1,381 1.3 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 125/ 125 I N0..21,510 24.0 1 i NICHOLAS KUDROVZEFF AiP... 1,091 1.1 1 1 ........................................I 1 ........................................1 RiCHARD LEHMAN DEM -25,974 74.4 1 I DAVID CREVELT REP ... 8,905 1 ........................................1 25.5 1 1 J 11/25/86 12.56 P.N. OFFICIAL ELECTION SUMMARY PAGE 02 CONSOLIDATED GENERAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 4, 1986 1........................................1........................................1........................................1 i REYNOSO, ASSOC JUSTICE 1 MAYOR - CITY OF MANTECA I PROP 58: PROPERTY TAX 1 1 SUPREME COURT I I EXEMPTION - FAMILIES I I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 23/ 23 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 i I 1 I 1 YES..30,379 31.7 1 JACK SNYDER................6,304 91.7 1 YES..76,748 74.S I I NO..65,592 68.3 1......•••• ..............................1 NO..25,533 25.5 1 1 ........................................i COUXCILMEMBER, MANTECAi........................................ i 1 SPARKS, ASSOC JUSTICE I TWO TO BE ELECTED 1 PROP 59: ELECTION OF 1 I 3RD APPELLATE COURT I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 23/ 23 1 DISTRICT ATTORNEY i 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 II BILL PERRY.................4,347 28.3 1 1 1 YES..63,651 75.8 I AL NEZZETTI................2,185 14.2 i YES..84,858 85.6 1 1 X0..20,304 24.2 1 RICHARD CROSS..............2,160 14.1 1 NO..14,256 14.4 1 I........................................i TONY GUTIERREZ............. 2,022 13.2 i ........................................ 1 i EVANS, ASSOC JUSTICE i WAYNE FLORES............... 1,935 12.0 i PROP 60: TAXATION 1 I 3RO APPELLATE COURT I JUNE ROLAND................1,562 10.2 1 REPLACEMENT RESIDENCES i i COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 JOHN HASKINS...............1,212 7.9 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 i1 ........................................1 I i YES..65,910 77.7 1 PROP 53: SCHOOL LEASE- i YES..73,100 74.3 1 1 N0..18,935 22.3 i PURCHASE BOND 1 NO..25,317 25.7 1 i........................................1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 ........................................ i i REGAN, ASSOC JUSTICE 1 I PROP 61: GANN SAU6tT I I 3R0 APPELLATE COURT I YES..61,506, 63.1 1 LIMITATION 1 I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 NO..35,977 36.9 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 I 1 1 ........................................i I 1 YES..64,318 75.0 i PROP 54: NEW PRISON i YES..36,478 36.2 1 1 NO..21,481 25.0 1 CONSTRUCTiON BOND 1 NO..64,427 63.8 1 1 ........................................1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1........................ .......1 i SIMS, ASSOC JUSTICE I 1 PROP 62: LOCAL AGENCIES I I 3RD APPELLATE COURT1 YES..66,182 67.2 1 TAXATION I I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318% 318 1 NO..32,233 32.8 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 I1 ........................................1 I I YES..65,292 76.'l 1 PROP 55: SAFE DRINKING 1 YES..52,068 53.7 1 NO..20,628 24.0 i WATER BOND 1 NO..44,810 46.3 1 i ........................................1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1........................................1 i BOARD OF SUPERVISORS I I PROP 63: OFFICIAL STATE I I 47H DISTRICT 1 YES..75,741 77.5 1 LANGUAGE I 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 72/ 72 1 NO..22,041 22.5 1 CL" PLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 1 1 ......................:.................I 1 i GEORGE BARBER.............11,613 49.4 I PROP 56:HIGHER EDUCATION 1 YES..77,548 77.1 1 I RICHARD WOOLSTRUM .......... 9,174 39.1 I FACILITIES BOND 1 N0..23,009 22.9 1 T......• .................................1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 ---------------------------------------- I I DISTRICT ATTORNEY i I PROP 64: ATOS I 1 1 YES..56,748 58.1 1 QUARANTINE 1 I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 3111/ 318 1 NO..40,964 41.9 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 1 ! I........................................i i i JOHN PHILLIPS.............50,251 50.0 I PROP 57: CONSTITUTIONAL I YES..36,248 36.4 1 I RICHARD EICHENSERGER...... 49,810 49.6 1 OFFICERS RETIREMENT 1 No..63,329 63.6 i 1 ........................................1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 I ........................................ 1 I I I YES..67,T36 69.8 1 I N0..29,343 30.2 1 I........................ ................ I i 11/25/86 12:56 P.M. OFFICIAL ELECTION SUMMARY PAGE 03 CONSOLIDATED GENERAL ELECTION NOVEMBER 4, 1986 I ........................................ i ........................................ I ........................................ i 1 PROP 65: TOXIC DISCHARGE I MEASURE 1: STOCKTON i MEASURE P: LODI I I RESTRICTIONS I MORADA LANE I TAVES PARK I I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 318/ 318 I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 35/ 35 1 i t I 1 I YES..52,036 51.7 I YES..23,897 58.9 1 YES ... S,i93 44.4 I 1 1#0..48,576 48.3 1 NO..16,679 41.1 1 NO... 6,883 55.6 1 1 ........................................ I.................................. ..... I ...................... :................. I i CITY OF STOCKTON I MEASURE J: STOCKTON i MEASURE 0: EASTSIDE FIRE 1 i CHARTER AMENDMENT I BROOKSiDE COMMUNITY 1 TAX RATE INCREASE i I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 19/ 19 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 MEASURE 8..16,359 43.5 I YES..24,274 59.8 i YES ... 2,170 65.8 1 1 MEASURE C..21,286 56.5 1 NO..16,298 40.2 1 NO ... 1,129 34.2 1 1 ........................................ I ........................................ I ........................................ I 1 MEASURE D: STOCXiON 1 MEASURE K: LODI i MEASURE R: WATERLOO- { i LATERAL ENTRY - POLICE I PARKVIEW TERRACE I MORADA FiRE TAX RATE 1 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 35/ 35 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 18/ 18 1 1 1 YES..26,511 71.5 1 YES ... 7,137 56.4 1 YES ... 2,865 72.0 1 1 NO. .10,059 27.5 1 NO ... 5,511 431.6 1 90 ... 1,112 28.0 1 1 ........................................ I ........................................ I ........................................ I 1 MEASURE E: STOCKTON I MEASURE L: LODi 1 i AUTO CENTER i BATCH PROPERTY i I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 35/ 35 1 i iJ I 1 YES..28,351 70.7 1 YES ... 6,001 47.8 i 1 NO..11,774 29.3 1 No ... 6,562 52.2 1 1 ........................................ i ........................................ I i MEASURE F: STOCKTON 1 MEASURE M: 1001 1 i CHRISTIAN LIFE CENTER i JOHNSON RANCH it 1 I COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 35/ 35 1 1 14 1 1 YES..23,647 59.5 1 YES ... 5,590 4511 1 I NO..16,107. 40.5 1 NO ... 6,799 54.9 1 i.....................................I.................................... .I i MEASURE G: STOCKTON 1 MEASURE N: LODI 1 i HARBOR COVE 1 MAGG10 INDUSTRIAL PARK I i COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 1 COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 3S/ 35 1 1 i 1 YES..24,480 59.7 li YES ... 6,269 50.6 1 I NO..16,499 40.3 1 00 ... 6,128 49.4 1 I........................................ I ........................................ I 1 MEASURE N: STOCKTON 1 MEASURE 0: LODI I 1 SPANOS PARK t TOWNE RANCH I i COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 124/ 124 1 j COMPLETE PRECINCTS: 35/ 35 1 1 1 1 1 YES..25,837 61.8 1 YES ... 5,185 41.6 1 1 1#0..15,956 38.2 1 NO ... 7,264 58.4 1 i........................................ i ........................................ I Exhibit B RESOLUTIGN NO. 86-181 RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING THE OFFICIAL ELECTION SU44ARY FOR CITY OF LODI MEASURES K, L, M, N, O AND P APPEARING ON THE BAUDT FOR THE CONSOLIDATED GENERAL ELECTION HELD NOVEMBER 4, 1986 AS IT PERTkM TO -THE CITY OF LODI RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby certify the Official Election Slnnnary for City of Lodi Measures K, L, M, N, O and P appearing on the ballot for the Consolidated General Election held November 4, 1986 as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and thereby made a part hereof. Dated: December 17, 1986 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 86-181 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a Regular Meeting held December 17, 1986 by the following vote: Ayes: Council Members - Noes: Council Members - Absent: Council Members - Alice M. Reimche City Clerk 86-181 RESOLUTION NO. 86-181 RESOUMON OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL CERTIFYING THE OFFICIAL ELOC.TION SLI44ARY FOR CITY OF IWI MEASURES K, L, M, N, O AND P APPEARING ON THE BALLOT FOR THE CONSOLIDATED COAL ELECTIC N HELD NovEKBER 4, 1986 AS IT PERTAINS Ta THE CITY OF UVI RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Lodi does hereby certify the Official Election Sumrazy for City of Lodi Measures K, L, M, N, O and P appearing on the ballot for the Consolidated General Election held Novenber 4, 1986 as shown on Exhibit A attached hereto and thereby made a part hereof. Dated: December 17, 1986 I hereby certify that Resolution No. 86-181 was passed and adopted by the City Council of the City of Lodi in a Regular Meeting held December 17, 1986 by the following vote: Ayes Council Members - Olson, Snider, Hinchaman, Pinkertcn and Reid (Mayor) Noes: Council Members - None Absent: Council Members - None t&" -4c., h> /�)xckk.- Alim M. Reimche City Clerk 86-181