HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - February 24, 1982 SM107
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
February 24, 1982
NOTICE OF SPECIAL MEETING
NOTICE IS GIVEN that a majority of the members of the City Council of
the City of Lodi have called a Special Meeting of the City Council of the City
of Lodi to be held on Wednesday, February 24, 1982 at 8:00 p. m. , which
meeting is to be held in the City Council Chambers, City Hall, 221 West
{ Pine Street, Lodi, California.
The business to be transacted at the special meeting consists of --
a) a Public Hearing to consider the improvement plans for downtown
traffic circulation; specifically one-way streets on Oak and Walnut
Street in the City of Lodi
b) consideration of the request of Morris and Wenell, 301 West Locust
Street, Lodi, California, for public condemnation of the right-of-ways
on the Snell and Jerome properties (Assessor Parcel Nos. 049-020-02
and 049-020-16)
Information regarding these items may be obtained in the office of the
City Clerk at 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California.
All interested parties are invited to present their views. Written
statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the meeting
scheduled herein and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
Dated: February 5, 1982
By Order of the Lodi City Council
ALICE M. REIMCHE
City Clerk
108
CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF LODI
CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS
February 24, 1982
A Special/Adjourned meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi was held
beginning at 8:00 p.m. Wednesday, February 24, 1982 in the City Hall Council
Chambers.
Pursuant to the foregoing written notice, A Special Meeting of the City Council
of the City of Lodi was held beginning at 8:00 p. m. , Wednesday, February 24,
1982 in the Council Chambers of the City Hall, 221 West Pine Street.
KCVR, KSTN Radio Stations, the "Lodi News Sentinel", Lodi Cable TV,
"Stockton Record " and "Lodi Life and Times" were apprised in advance of
the meeting by City Clerk Reimche. Notices were sent to each member of
the Council and to the above listed media pursuant to Section 54956 of the
Government Code of the State of California. The Special Meeting was called
to consider the following items:
SPECIAL MEETING
a) Consideration of the request of Morris and Wenell, 301
West Locust Street , Lodi, California, for public condemnation
of the right-of-ways on the Snell and Jerome properties (Assessor
Parcel Nos. 049-020-02 and 049-020-16) Discussion and
appropriate action)
b) PUBLIC HEARING - To consider the improvement plans
for downtown traffic circulation: specifically one-way streets
on Oak and Walnut Street in the City of Lodi. (Discussion
and appropriate action)
t
ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen - Hughes, Katnich, Murphy -
Pinkerton, and McCarty (Mayor)
INVOCA TION
PLEDGE OF
ALLEGIANCE
SPECIAL MEETING
REQUEST FOR
PUBLIC CONDEMNA -
TION OF RIGHT-OF-
WAYS ON ASSESSOR
PARCEL NOS.
049-020-02 and
049-020-16
I"
Absent: Councilmen - None
Also Present: City Manager Glaves, Assistant
City Manager Glenn, Public
Works Director Ronsko, Associate
Civil Engineer Prima, Assistant
Planner Starr, City Attorney Stein,
and City Clerk Reimche
The invocation was given by Reverend Vernon
Robertson
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Mayor McCarty
Agenda item "a" as heretofore set forth was introduced
by City Attorney Stein. Diagrams of the subject area
was presented and explained in detail by Associate
Civil Engineer Richard Prima.
Speaking in favor of the proposed request were:
a) Mr. Robert Morris, Architect, President of
Morris and Wenell, 301 West Locust Street, Lodi,
representing Cal -Cushion and Willow Oaks Business
Park.
109
Continued February 24, 1982
REQUEST FOR
b) Mr. Jack Ward, California Cushion Company,
PUBLIC CONDEMNA-
1011 East Pine Street, Lodi
TION OF RIGHT-OF-
WAYS ON ASSESSOR
c) Mr. Bill Dorsey, San Joaquin Building Trade
PARCEL NOS.
Council
049 -020-02 and
049-020-16
The following person spoke in opposition to the
Cont'd
request:
a) Mrs. Jan Snell, Cluff Avenue, Lodi - Mrs. Snell
stated that she feels the project is excellent. Mrs.
Snell asked for answers to a number of questions
including why the proposed road curves the way it
does.
A very lengthy discussion followed with questions
being directed to Staff and to persons in the audience
who had given testimony.
Councilman Katnich then moved to keep Turner Road
as a two lane road until such time as traffic warrants
four lanes.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Hughes,
but failed to pass by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen Hughes and Katnich
Noes: Councilmen - Murphy, Pinkerton,
and McCarty
Absent: Councilmen - None
Following Additional discussion and questions, Council-
man Pinkerton moved "that we try to acquire the
property so we can continue the streets and tie
it into the existing contract and get it done at a
reasonable price so it's done, out of the way, and
so we have a development with an access to the
industrial area of the City of Lodi".
The motion was seconded by Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy
and carried by the follovn ng vote:
Ayes: Councilmen - Murphy, Pinkerton
and McCarty
Noes: Councilmen - Hughes and Katnich
Absent: Councilmen - None
RECESS Mayor McCarty Declared a five minute recess and
the Council reconvened at approximately 9:50 p.m.
Mayor McCarty then called for the Public Hearing
to consider the improvement plans for downtown
traffic circulation; specifically one-way streets on
Oak and Walnut Street in the City of Lodi (Discussion
and appropriate action)
110
Continued February 24, 1982
CONSIDER IMPROVE- The matter was introduced by Staff, Mr. Harry Tow
MENT PLANS FOR of Quad Consultants then addressed the Council
DOWNTOWN TRAFFIC stating that "with respect to the streets under
CIRCULATION:
discussion, the original report which was prepared
SPECIFICALLY
for CLIC and submitted to the City Council,
ONE-WAY STREETS
included as a minor component of the proposal,
ON OAK AND
the recommendation that the traffic on Oak and
WALNUT STREET
Walnut be one-way east and west.
-�'
East on Oak Street and west on Walnut and that
proposal was to go from Sacramento Street to
Pleasant. Since the time of the original report
the westerly boundary of the proposed assessment
district and the improvements which would be
included in that assessment district have been
modified to stop one block further east at Church
Street. The original rationale for the one-way
street pattern was two -fold. One, the improvement
in circulation because of the facts that you have
less conflict at intersections, you have a traffic
flow pattern which permits ready circulation
at the bottom end of the proposed parking area;
and secondly, because you would pick up a good
deal of additional diagonal parking. --- You
are now looking at a project which in its reduced
form has lost some of the impetus for the one-way
street pattern, since you will pick up less than a
score of additional parking spaces because of the
number of driveways involved between Church
Street and Sacramento Street. We would indicate
to you that if the reduced area involved in terms
of only a two block length makes it still desirable
from a traffic and parking standpoint to undertake
the one -way street pattern, there are inevitably
some inconveniences and dislocations involved in
terms of businesses located on one-way streets
which feel that their business, because of its
peculiar nature in terms of either service or
service to its customers, would prefer not to have
the one-way street pattern, it is not essential or
vital to the project as a whole that that pattern
would be maintained. It is a minor component of
the overall downtown program and one which the
Council should have some leeway and some
consideration for". Mr. Tow concluded his remarks
by stating "that the Council should weigh the
advantages and disadvantages and make that decision
wi shout fear of having done mortal damage one way
or the otiier or having done marvelous things for
one-way or the other, the project as a whole��.
A very lengthy discussion followed with questions
!
being directed to Mr. Tow by the Council. I
Mr. Walter Sanborn, Chairman of the CLIC Committee
then addressed the Council stating that the CLIC Committee
will not object to- those streets remaining two way
streets as they n.*jui are, because in talking with
people and merchants, they have given "us" soma
good points. Mr. Sanborn concluded his remarks
by stating that "We recommend you leave it Iike
it is. "
111
Continued February 24, 1982
The following persons spoke in opposition of
establishing one-way streets on Oak and Walnut
Streets in the City of Lodi:
a) Ron Mettler, Manager, First Interstate Bank,
Walnut and School
b) Mr. Larry Mallory, 2216 Cabrillo Circle, Lodi
c) Mr. John Oschner representing the Senior Citizens.
d) Mr. Bob Gray, Manager of the Bank of Stockton
e) Mr. James Flaherty, Secretary of the Eagles
Lodge
f) Terry Knutson, representing five pieces of property
in the downtown business district
g) Mr. Rea Nathan, owner operator of Reo's
Appliance Center on Oak Street
h) Mr. Stanley Hust, owner of Hust and Son
Plumbing, School Street
i) Bob Rivers, President of Senior Citizens Club
in Lodi
j) Bill Canepa, 131 South Orange Street, Lodi
k) Dale Prohaska, owner of the Montgomery Ward
Catalog Office, Lodi
1) Barbara McWilliams, partner in Poser's TV
and Radio
m) Richard Linton, Central Valley Trophy
n) Frank Poser
o) Neal Koch, 805 Wightman, Lodi
p) Betty Blewett Smith, Blewett Ice Cream
City Clerk Reimche Reported that three letters opposing
the one way streets (Oak and Walnut) were received from:
i) Mr. Blewett
2) Judy Van Rooyam, and
3) Elizabeth Emery
A very lengthy discussion followed with questions
j being directed to Staff, Mr. Tow, Sanborn, and
to various individuals heretofore listed who had
given testimony.
Councilman Katnich then moved that "we maintain
what we have in the downtown and make no change at
this time - that we let downtown remain exactly
as it is with two-way traffic on School Street, Church
and all of the streets that are involved. " The motion
was seconded by Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy, and
following additional discussion carried by unanimous
vote.
Continued February 24, 1982
RECESS Mayor McCarty declared a five-minute recess and
the Council reconvened at approximately 11:20 p. m.
Mayor McCarty indicated that the meeting was now
in the Adjorned portion. Following discussion, Council-
man Katnich then moved that School Street remain as
it is right now, with two-way traffic. The motion was
seconded by Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy and carried
by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen - Hughes, Katnich,
Murphy, and McCarty
Noes: Councilmen - Pinkerton
Councilman Hughes indicated that "as you know I
was concerned about authorizing the engineering
portion of this project until we dealt with tH s issue,
and certainly the change in School Street is going to
have a major impact on that plan, good or bad, but
it's going to have a major impact. Councilman Hughes
indicated that he has been concerned all along that
the City not obligate itself to approximately $50, 000
to pursue this study through the protest hearing, be -
cause, he indicated, he is afraid that we might not
have a project at the end of that period, and there's
$50, 000 of City money down the drain." Councilman
Hughes then moved that "we" not issue the Contract
to Tow Engineering until we've had a chance to
further evaluate the CLIC position and that "we"
come back and decide whether, in fact, the City is
willing to foot the bill for that 90 days study.
The motion was seconded by Councilman Katnich. A
very lengthy discussion followed with questions being
directed to Staff and to persons who had earlier given
testimony. The motion carried by unanimous vote.
Again, lengthy discussion followed with Councilman
Hughes, Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy and Mayor McCarty
volunteering an evening for a special meeting just to
serve as a forum and have everybody come down and
discuss the subject, to find out what is acceptable and
what isn't and what the pros and cons of the whole
thing are.
Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy then asked to have the
record show that he would like to change his vote on
the direction of School Street to a "no" vote, because
he did not want to see this killed if at all possible and
that he would like to have the pros and cons try to
get together to work something out, because he thinks
it can be.
A full transcript of this hearing is on file in the office
of the City Clerk.
AWARD-SACRAMEN- City Manager Glaves presented the following bids
TO STREET INDUST- which had been presented for "Sacramento Street
RIAL WASTEWATER Industrial Wastewater Lift Station Modification:
LIFT STATION
MODIFICA TION
1
41-.1
Continued February 24, 1982
RES. NO 82-18 A BIDDER AMOUNT
Claude C. Wood Co. $41,925.00
C. Edward Jones and Co. $43,619.00
Lawson Mechanical Co. $73,300.00
Following discussion, on motion of Councilman Hughes,
Mrrphy second, Council adopted Resolution No. 82-18
awarding the bid for "Sacramento Street Industrial
Wastewater Lift Station Modification" to Claude C.
Wood Construction Co. , the low bidder, in the amount
of $41, 925. 00
ORDINANCE
Following introduction of the matter, Council on
DECLARING THE
motion of Councilman Pinkerton, Murphy second,
NEED FOR AN
read for the first time Ordinance No. 1252 - "An
INDUSTRIAL DE VE-
Ordinance of the City of Lodi, California, declaring
LOPMENT
the need for an Industrial Development Authority to
AUTHORITY TO
function in said City, and declaring the City Council
FUNCTION IN LODI
of the City of Lodi to be said Authority. "
AND DECLARING THE
information. Further, it was requested that a
CITY COUNCIL TO
The motion was carried by unanimous vote.
BE SAID
Council at the April 7, 1982 meeting. Public comment
AUTHORITY
?rrIv
regarding the matter was invited through calls to
v
members of the Council, the City Manager, Assistant
The subject of the modified rate schedule filed by
the Lodi Ambulance Service on February 10, 1982
was discussed. Councilman Katnich indicated that
he had no conflict of interest in this matter. Mr
Perry Schimke, Controller of the Lodi Ambulance
Service was in the audience and responded to
questions as were posed by the Council.
MODIFIED RATE
Following a lengthy discussion, on motion of
FILED BY THE
Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy, Pinkerton second,
LODI AMBULANCE
Staff was directed to review Lodi ambulance Service
SERVICE
staffing and equipment, classification and numbers,
rate of return, cost of medical supplies, what the
impact is of the County rates vs City rates, City
of Stockton rates vs City rates and any other pertinent
information. Further, it was requested that a
report pertaining to this review be presented to the
Council at the April 7, 1982 meeting. Public comment
regarding the matter was invited through calls to
members of the Council, the City Manager, Assistant
City Manager, or the City Clerk.
Following additional discussion, on motion of Councilman
Hughes, Pinkerton second, it was further determined
that the modified rate schedule received by the City
Clerk on February 10, 1982 would go into effect 30
days from the date filed; however, the modified rates
would be subject to revision following receipt of the
review from staff.
Councilman Katnich left the meeting during the
aforementioned discussion.
114
Continued February 24, 1982
ORDINANCES
Ordinance No. 1251 entitled, Ordinance amending the
Official District Map of the City of Lodi, thereby
820 S. CLUFF AVE.
rezoning the parcel at 820 South Cluff Avenue (i. e.
REZONED FROM R-1
APN 049-070-14) from R-1, Single -Family Residential
TO M-1
to M-1, Light Industrial having been introduced at
the February 17, 1982 regular meeting was brought
ORD. NO. 1251
up for passage on motion of Mayor Pro Tempore Murphy,
ADOPTED ` ,
Pinkerton second. Second reading was omittad after
reading by title, and the Ordinance was then passed,
adopted, and ordered to print by the following vote:
Ayes: Councilmen - Hughes, Murphy,
Pinkerton, and McCarty
Noes: Councilmen - None
Absent: Councilmen - Katnich
ADJOURNMENT Mayor McCarty adjourned the meeting at approximately
12:30 a. m. to 8:00 p.m. Wednesday, March 10, 1982.
ATTEST:
ALICE M. RR IMCHE
City Clerk