Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMinutes - October 31, 2006 SSCITY OF LODI INFORMAL INFORMATIONAL MEETING "SHIRTSLEEVE" SESSION CARNEGIE FORUM, 305 WEST PINE STREET TUESDAY, OCTOBER 31, 2006 An Informal Informational Meeting ("Shirtsleeve" Session) of the Lodi City Council was held Tuesday, October 31, 2006, commencing at 7:03 a.m. A. ROLL CALL Present: Council Members — Beckman, Hansen, Johnson, Mounce, and Mayor Hitchcock Absent: Council Members — None Also Present: City Manager King, City Attorney Schwabauer, and City Clerk Johl B. TOPIC(S) B-1 "Review of Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee and Planning Commission Process" Community Development Director Hatch provided an overview outlining the history and current status of the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC). Mr. Hatch discussed various topics including, but not limited to, the make-up of SPARC, the charge of the non -legislative body, Planning Commission relations and involvement, specific concerns regarding the Lowe's and Vineyard Christian Middle School projects, operational procedures and timing associated with SPARC and Planning Commission reviews, and the lack of protocol for SPARC. Council Member Hansen inquired about the lack of guidelines to assist SPARC members in understanding their role and authority and suggested clear delineation of the same. Mr. Hatch stated the authority is limited by the Code, which does not set forth clear criteria for application or specific training requirements for SPARC members. Council Member Hansen inquired about design standards. Mr. Hatch stated a hodgepodge of design standards exist for the downtown area and big boxes while development plans are subject to individual standards based on each project. City Manager King provided examples of various design standards for different cities. Mayor Hitchcock stated the SPARC inception was controversial and criteria may not have been delineated purposefully. She stated the overstepping of authority on the Vineyard School project may have been based on a loss of institutional knowledge. Council Member Mounce stated the changed conditional use permit should have gone through the review process to ensure the approved project was the one that was being completed. City Manager King stated the question is whether SPARC is needed and if so, what about SPARC review before the Planning Commission review, an alternate order of review, and additional criteria. Mr. King also stated other cities include professional architects and engineers on SPARC to ensure a certain level of design review knowledge. Mayor Hitchcock stated professionals on SPARC may be difficult because Lodi is small, but it may be good to look at other cities. Mayor Pro Tempore Johnson stated he agrees with the concept of ratcheting down a bit but does not want to over engineer the issue. Community Development Director Hatch stated there is a disconnect between the projects that go to the Planning Commission and SPARC because those going to the Planning Commission have the benefit of the public notice and comments and SPARC projects do not. Mr. Hatch suggested it is possible to eliminate SPARC and have entire projects, with design elements, come to the Planning Commission because of the small number of projects. Continued October 31, 2006 Council Member Beckman stated Mr. Hatch's suggestion made sense. Mr. Beckman suggested the guidelines be given to applicants before Planning Commission review to ensure awareness of the process and requirements. Mayor Hitchcock inquired about the timing of a two-part process for Planning Commission review. Council Member Hansen stated the goal is to streamline the process while tightening up the process without creating an additional level of bureaucracy. Council Member Beckman stated having the entire project go to the Planning Commission takes care of issues regarding procedural change and finality of projects. Council Member Mounce asked how many projects arise within a six-month period. Mr. Hatch stated the City averages one project per month. Community Development Director Hatch stated a procedure may be put into place where smaller projects provide a complete set of plans with one pass through with the Planning Commission while larger projects can come back to Planning Commission an additional time after direction and staff assistance. Council Member Beckman agreed with Planning Commission review of entire projects. Council Member Hansen suggested alternatives be brought back to Council after comparisons with other cities. Mayor Hitchcock stated she was hesitant to have staff review projects instead of them being brought back to the Planning Commission and suggested criteria be given to applicants to ensure they are aware of the expectations. Community Development Director Hatch suggested a predevelopment review process for larger projects, including department review of preliminary concepts and design through an interactive process, to alleviate staff's greatest concerns with the projects before an applicant invests a large amount of money into the design of the project. Mayor Hitchcock stated the Planning Commission and SPARC evolved for a reason. Mr. Hatch stated some kind of project design review is necessary but it can be done by either the Planning Commission or SPARC. City Attorney Schwabauer clarified whether the Council desired a rule that requires the highest authority granting the conditional use permit to accept changes that occur thereafter. Council Member Mounce stated it made sense but inquired about the downside. Mr. Schwabauer stated the downside is that the City Council may end up making decisions for which the Planning Commission is better suited. Mayor Pro Tempore Johnson stated staff approvals of minor changes are acceptable; however, project redesigns, such as the inclusion of an additional building, should go through the entire process again b ensure only approved projects are constructed. City Attorney Schwabauer expressed concern with staff interpretation of changes and stated bright line rules are easier. City Manager King stated staff will report back to the City (buncil regarding Planning Commission and SPARC alternatives. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 00 David Johnson spoke in favor of eliminating SPARC and having entire projects reviewed by the Planning Commission. Mr. Johnson alternatively suggested adjusting timelines for SPARC review. W Continued October 31, 2006 B-2 "Power Supply Update" Electric Utility Director Morrow provided a presentation regarding power supply. Mr. Morrow discussed various topics including, but not limited to, existing resources, power supply planning, future needs, future resources, geothermal project, hydroelectric projects, CT1 and 2 projects, Western Area Power Administration Contract, Seattle City Light, existing power resources, types of power supply including peaking, intermediate, and baseload, power supply cost profile, load factor, load duration cure, Lodi energy forecast, Lodi peak forecast, fiscal year 2007 open position, fiscal year 2008 open position, energy balance, net energy balance, new Lodi project overview, wind projects, Resource 500 project, Northern California Power Agency green power project, green power summary, Senate Bill 1368, and challenges satisfying baseload needs and future activities. Mayor Hitchcock asked if peaking was defined by both cost and availability. Mr. Morrow stated it involves both and electric utilities need all three. Mayor Hitchcock inquired about the criteria for open position. Mr. Morrow stated various economy -related factors including history and trend analysis of certain known conditions are considered. Mayor Hitchcock inquired about open position based on greater percentage of ownership and tying up contracts. Mr. Morrow stated the open position is based on ownership percentages, contracts, and project involvement over an extended period of time. He stated 60% to 65% of open position is not a winning strategy. City Manager King provided open position examples for various cities, including Lompoc and Santa Clara. Mr. Morrow stated the current status is a result of 20 years of power supply decisions. Mayor Hitchcock asked why 30 megawatts are not being requested with the new project. Mr. Morrow stated it is important to diversify and the 30 megawatt issue will be addressed in the near future. Discussion ensued between City Manager King and Mr. Morrow regarding the disconnect with commercial and residential rates and the corresponding baseload needs served by specific resources. PUBLIC COMMENTS: 00 Myrna Wetzel inquired about solar energy. Mr. Morrow stated solar energy is a peak resource available when the sun is out and, while it can provide some contribution, it does not help with the core issue of a lack of baseload. Council Member Hansen stated the State backed off of solar energy due to a lack of technology and it is important to have a good portfolio that gives a variety of options. Mayor Pro Tempore Johnson inquired about the power line associated with the new Lodi project. Mr. Morrow stated it is expected to be online in 2011 and Phase 2A and 2B will include permitting, design, and engineering matters. Mr. Morrow stated the City is currently involved in impact studies and he anticipates reviewing the matter in three to six months. C. COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC ON NON -AGENDA ITEMS None. D. ADJOURNMENT No action was taken by the City Council. The meeting was adjourned at 8:37 a.m. ATTEST: Randi Johl City Clerk AGENDA ITEM �' JQ CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA TITLE: Review of Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee and Planning Commission Process. MEETING DATE: October 31, 2006 PREPARED BY: Community Development Director RECOMMENDED ACTION: BACKGROUND INFORMATION FISCAL IMPACT: Not Applicable. Attachment No action recommended. Pursuant to City Council request, this is a review of Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee and Planning Commission Process. / -ZD �_ Blair King, City ager APPROVED: (— Blair I City Manager MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Community Development Department To: City Council From: Randy Hatch, Community Development Director Through: Blair King, City Manager Date: 10/31/06 Subject: Shirtsleeve Session Review of the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee 1. ESTABLISHING ORDINANCES A. Ord. 939 — December 2, 1970 (attached) • Require site plan and architectural review and approval • Establish Site Plan and Architectural Approval Committee 1) Five member 2) Three appointed by the Planning Commission Chair 3) One Public Works Staff 4) One Planning Staff B. Ord. 1117 — September 7, 1977 (attached) • Changes membership to five members all appointed by Mayor C. Practice — one member is a Planning Commissioner as a liaison from the Planning Commission 2. SCOPE OF AUTHORITY (Municipal Code Section 17.81 — attached) A. The following require SPARC approval (generally) • Residential except single-family, duplexes, and triplexes • Nonresidential buildings in Residential -Commercial -Professional (R -C -P), Commercial -I (C-1), Commercial -2 (C-2), Commercial Light Industrial (C -M) • Nonresidential buildings in Light Industrial (M-1), Heavy Industrial (M-2) abutting residential ("W') zone, C-1, C-2 • Any use requiring a use permit B. The following is reviewed by SPARC (generally) • Site Plan • Circulation PC9901.doc • Parking / Loading • Landscaping • Fencing / Walls • Exterior design • Elevations • Colors / Materials 3. DISCUSSION TOPICS A. Is there a need to have a separate committee to review: Site Plan, Landscaping, Architecture, Colors, and Materials? Should this review be done by the Planning Commission? B. Where in the review process to consider specific site plan and design • After conceptual approval — current practice • Before conceptual approval • As part of conceptual approval — if done by Planning Commission C. Operational procedures for SPARC • Have 7-10 day deadline for material submission to allow for staff review and prior distribution to SPARC Members Respectfully Submitted, '114 np A%_ %Ran Hatch Community Development Director PC9901.doc ORDINANCE NO. 939 AN ORDINANCE AMENDING SECTION 27-18 OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF LODI AND THEREBY SUBSTI- TUTING SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL FOR THE EXISTING APPROVAL OF PLANS REQUIREMENT. The City Council of the City of Lodi does ordain as follows: Section 1, Section 27-18 of the Code of the City of Lodi is hereby amended to read in full as follows: SECTION 27-18. SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL. a. Purpose. The purpose of site plan and architectural approval is to determine compliance with this chapter (i.e. Zoning Ordinance) and to promote the orderly development of the City, the stability of land values, investment and the general welfare, and to help prevent the impairment or depreciation of land values and development by the erection of structures or additions or alter- ations thereto without proper attention to siting or to unsightly, undesirable or obnoxious appearance. b. Site Plan and Architectural Approval. Committee. There is hereby established a Site Plan and Architectural Approval Committee to assist the Planning Commission in reviewing site plans and architectural drawings. The membership thereof shall consist of five (5) members, three (3) of whom shall be appointed by the Chairman of the Planning Commission with approval of the City Planning Commission and two (2) members of the City Staff designated by the City Manager, one of whom shall be appointed from the Public Works Department and one of whom shall be appointed from the Planning Department, -1- Members of the Approval Committee shall be appointed for two (2) year overlapping terms. At its organization meeting, members of the Committee shall draw lots to determine their reappointment dates. c. Approval Required. Site Plan and Architectural approval is required for the following uses: 1. Residential building proposed to be erected in areas zoned R -GA, R -MD, R -HD, C -P and C-1 which abut upon areas zoned R-1 or R-2, except single-family dwellings, duplexes and triplexes, 2. Commercial- professional offices and institutional buildings proposed to be erected in areas zoned C -P and C-1 which abut upon areas zoned R-1, R-2 or R -GA. 3. Non-residential buildings proposed to be erected in areas zoned C-1, C-2, C -M, M-1 and M-2 which abut upon areas zoned R-1, R-2, R -GA, R -MD, R -HD or C -P. 4. Any use requiring a Use Permit. d. Application, 9pplication shall be made by the property owner or agent on a form provided by the City. e. Maps and Drawing Required. The following maps and drawing, in duplicate, shall be submitted: 1, Siting of structures so as to preserve light and air on adjoining properties. 2. Landscaping and/or fencing of yards and setback area, use of landscaping and/or wall or fencing for screening purposes. 3. Design of ingress and egress. 4. Off-street parking and loading facilities. - 2 - 5. Drawings or sketches of the exterior elevations. 6. Designation of location of existing fire hydrants, f. Actions of the Site Plan and Architectural Approval Committee. The approval Committee shall have the function, duty, and power to approve or disapprove, or to approve subject to compliance with such modifications or conditions as it may deem. necessary to carry out the purpose of these regulations, the external design and site plan of all proposed new buildings or structures for which site plan and architectural approval are required. The Approval Committee shall impose such conditions as are necessary to carry out policies adopted by Ordinance or Resolution of the City Council. Upon arrival of submitted plans or at the expiration of twenty-one (21) days, the Building Inspector shall issue a permit for such building, provided, that all other provisions of law have been complied with and except as otherwise herein provided for buildings requiring use permits or on items appealed to the Planning Commission and/or City Council. g. Appeal Procedure. When the regulations specify that approval of a proposed development by the Approval Committee is a condition of issuance of a Zoning Approval, the decision of the Approval Committee approving or disapproving the development shall be subject to appeal to the Planning Commission by any person aggrieved, and shall not be effective until the expiration of the appeal. period. An appeal shall be made in writing to the Secretary of the Planning Commission within five (5) working days of the final decision of the Approval Committee. 3 - Sect i on 2. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. Section 3, This ordinance shall be published one time in the "Lodi News Sentinel, " a daily newspaper of general circulation, printed and published in the City of Lodi, and shall be in force and take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval. Approved this 2nd day of December, 19700 BEN SCHAFFER, Mayor r1 -Attest ,B` SSIE:;L: BENNETT City Clerk . St4e.,,9f •Califo"' County of.San'�'Toaquin, ss, I, Bessie L. Bennett, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, hereby certify that Ordinance No, 939 was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held November 18, 1970, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting of said Council held December 2, 1970, by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen - EHRHARDT, HUGHES, KIRSTEN, and SCHAFFER Noes: Councilmen - KATNICH Absent: Councilmen - None I further certify that Ordinance No. 939 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the, same has been published pursuant to law. els �e -,B enhett City,Clerk 4 160 CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF LODI CITY HALL COUNCIL CHAMBERS NDVEMBER 18, 1970 A regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi was held beginning at 8:00 p.m. on Wednesday, November 18, 1970, in the City Hall Council Chambers. ROLL CALL Present: Councilmen - EHRHARDT, HUGHES, KATNICH, KIRSTEN and SCHAFFER (Mayor) Absent: Councilmen - None Also present: City Manager Glaves, Assistant City Manager Peterson, City Attorney Mullen, Planning Director Schroeder and Public Works Director Jones. PLEDGE Mayor Schaffer led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag. MINUTES On motion of Councilman Ehrhardt, Katnich second, the Minutes of October 21, 1970 and November 4, 1970 were approved as written and mailed. PUBLIC HEARINGS AMEND Notice thereof having been published in accordance ZONING with law, Mayor Schaffer called for the public ORDINANCE hearing on the proposal of the City Planning Commission to amend Section 27-18 of the Code ORD. NO. 939 of the City of Lodi (Zoning Ordinance) to require INTRODUCED Site Plan and Architectural Approval for certain buildings proposed to be constructed within the City Limits. Planning Director Schroeder intro- duced the matter and reviewed the Commission's recommendation. There was no one in the audience who wished to speak in favor of the proposal Mr, John Talbot, 800 Maplewood Drive, spoke against the proposal. The public portion of the hearing was then closed. After Council discussion, Councilman Kirsten moved introduction of Ordinance No. 939 amending Section 27- 18 of the Code of the City of Lodi to require Site Plan and Architectural Approval for certain buildings proposed to be constructed within the City limits. The motion was seconded by Councilman Ehrhardt and carried by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen - Ehrhardt, Hughes, Kirsten and Schaffer Noes: Councilmen - Katnich - 1- Minutes of August 5, 1970 continued COMPLAINT - Mr. William Gretsinger, 904 Turner Road, addressed W. GRETSINGER the Council concerning City employee coffee breaks and lunch breaks. He also discussed the two Parking Enforcement Assistant positions recently authorized. He suggested policing of parking meters should be discontinued on Saturday afternoons. PLANNING COMMISSION OF INTEREST At its meeting of Suly 27, 1970 the City Planning Commission took the following actions of interest to the City Council: 1. Determined that a children's dancing school was not a proper use in the R-NID, Residential Medium Density zone. Z. Continued the public hearing to August 10, 1970 to consider the request of the Westmont Develop- ment Company for the rezoning from the R-1 Single Family Residential District to the P -D, Planned Development District; the C -P, Commercial Professional District; the C -S, Commercial Shopping District, and the R -GA, Residential Garden Apartment District for the former S. C. Beckman property located generally west of West Lane and south of Century Boulevard. Consideration of the Tentative Map for Westmont Oaks was continued to the same time. 3. Recommended to the County Planning Commission that a prefix or some other distinguishing feature be added to County house numbers along West Turner Road to eliminate duplicate house numbers inside and outside of the City. 4. Continued discussion of a possible amendment to the "Zoning Ordinance which would provide for Site Plan Approval and Architectural Review. COMMUNICATIONS ABC LICENSE Notices of Application for Alcoholic Beverage License were read as follows; 1. Rita P. Nunes, 122 North Sacramento Street, on - sale beer and wine eating place, new license. Z. Michael R. and Salley Richards and The Southland Corporation (co -licenses), 7/Eleven, 401 North California Street, off -sale beer and wine, person- to-person transfer, temporary license. 3. Harold Hugh Cochran 111, 27 Club, 27 North Sacramento Street-, on -sale beer and wine public i premises, person - to- person transfer. ack�'ced Minutes of December 2, 1970 continued HIGHWAY 12 Councilman Ehrhardt reported on a recent meeting ASSOCIATION of the Highway 12 Association which he attended. ADDITIONAL Mayor Schaffer announced that this meeting would COUNCIL be adjourned to Wednesday, December 9, 1970 MEETINGS at which time the Council would be meeting with the Lodi Area Behavior Deterioration and Drug Abuse Council. He also stated that he hoped to meet in adjourned sessions on each second Wednesday of the month in an effort to devote time to the study of particular subjects of interest to the City Council. ORDINANCES AMEND ORDINANCE NO. 939, entitled "AN ORDINANCE ZONING AMENDING SECTION 27-18 OF THE CODE OF ORDINANCE THE CITY OF LODI AND THEREBY SUBSTITUTING SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL ORD. NO. 939 FOR THE EXISTING APPROVAL OF PLANS REQUIREMENT," having been introduced at a regular meeting November 18, 1970, was brought up for passage on motion of Councilman Kirsten, Ehrhardt second. Second reading was omitted after reading by title, and the ordinance was then passed, adopted and ordered to print by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen - Ehrhardt, Hughes, Kirsten and Schaffer ADJOURNMENT Noes: Councilmen - Katnich Absent: Councilmen - None At approximately 10:05 p.m. the meeting was adjourned to 8:00 p.m. Wednesday, December 91 1970, on motion of Councilman Katnich, Kirsten second. The Council then went into executive session to discuss personnel matters. i Attest: B SSIE L( B]NE City Clerk - (0- 101 ORDINANCE NO. 1117 AN ORDINANCE REPEALING SECTION 27-18(b) OF THE CODE OF THE CITY OF LODI AND RE-ENACTING SAID SECTION ENTITLED ''SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL COMMITTEE''. Be it ordained by the City Council of the City of Lodi as follows: Section 27-18(b) of the Code of the City of Lodi is hereby repealed. Section 1. A new Section 27- 18(b) entitled ''Site Plan and Architectural Approval Committee'' is hereby added to the Code of the City of Lodi to read as follows: There is hereby established a SitePlan and Architectural Approval Committee to assist the Planning Commission in reviewing site plans and architectural drawings. The member- ship thereof shall consist of a 5 member body appointed to four- year, overlapping terms by the Mayor with the approval of the City Council. Section 2. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. Section 3. This ordinance shall be published one time in the ''Lodi News Sentinel'', a daily newspaper of general circulation printed and published in the City of Lodi and shall be in force and take effect thirty days from and after its passage and approval. Approved this 7th day of September 1977 WALTER J. KATNICH Mayor Atte st: ALICE Mo REIMCHE CITY CLERK -I- State of California County of San Joaquin, ss. 1, Alice M. Reimche, City Clerk of the City of Lodi do hereby certify that Ordinance No. 1117 was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held August 17, 1977, and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting of said Council held September 7, 1977 by the following vote: Ayes: Councilmen - Ehrhardt, Hughes, Katzakian, Pinkerton and Katnich Noes: Councilmen - None Absent: Councilmen - None I further certify that Ordinance No. 1117 was approved and signed by the Mayor on the date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law. / 14� ALICE' M. RErNICHE CITY CLERK -2- Chapter 17.81 SITE PLAN AND ARCHITECTURAL APPROVAL 17.81.010 Purpose. The purpose of site plan and architectural approval is to determine compliance with this title (i.e. zoning ordinance) and to promote the orderly development of the city, the stability of land values, investment and the general welfare, and to help prevent the impairment of depreciation of land values and development by the erection of structures or additions or alterations thereto without proper attention to siting or to unsightly, undesirable or obnoxious appearance. (Prior code § 27-18(a)) 17.81.020 Committee established. There is established a site plan and architectural approval committee to assist the planning commission in reviewing site plans and architectural drawings. The membership of the committee shall consist of five members appointed to four-year, overlapping terms by the mayor with the approval of the city council. (Prior code § 27-18(b)) 17.81.030 Required. Site plan and architectural approval is required for the following uses: A. Residential building proposed to be erected in areas zoned R -GA, R -MD, R -HD, R -C -P, C-1 and C- 2, except single-family dwellings, duplexes and triplexes. B. Commercial -professional offices and institutional buildings proposed to be erected in areas zoned R -C -P and C-1. C. Nonresidential buildings proposed to be erected in areas zoned C-1, C-2 and C -M. D. Nonresidential buildings proposed to be erected in areas zones M-1 and M-2 which abut upon areas zones R-1, R-2, R -GA, R -MD, R -HD, R -C -P, C-1 and C-2. E. Any use requiring a use permit. (Ord. 1353 § 1, 1985: prior code § 27-18(c)) 17.81.040 Application. Application shall be made by the property owner or agent on a form provided by the city. (Prior code § 27-18(d)) 17.81.050 Maps and drawings. The following maps and drawings, in duplicate, shall be submitted: A. Siting of structures so as to preserve light and air on adjoining properties; B. Landscaping and/or fencing of yards and setback area, use of landscaping and/or wall or fencing for screening purposes; C. Design of ingress and egress; D. Off-street parking and loading facilities; E. Drawings or sketches of the exterior elevations; F. Designation of location of existing fire hydrants. (Prior code § 27-18(e)) 17.81.060 Committee action. A. The approval committee shall have the function, duty and power to approve or disapprove, or to approve subject to compliance with such modifications or conditions as it may deem necessary to carry out the purpose of these regulations, the external design and site plan of all proposed new buildings or structures for which site plan and architectural approval are required. The approval committee shall impose such conditions as are necessary to carry out policies adopted by ordinance or resolution of the city council. B. Upon approval of submitted plans or at the expiration of twenty-one days, the building inspector shall issue a permit for such building; provided, that all other provisions of law have been complied with and except as otherwise herein provided for buildings requiring use permits or on items appealed to the planning commission and/or city council. (Prior code § 27-18(f)) 17.81.070 Appeal from committee. Any actions of the site plan and architectural committee on matters referred to in this chapter may be appealed to the planning commission by filing, within ten business days, a written appeal to the community development director. The appeal shall be processed in accordance with Chapter 17.88, Appeals, of the Lodi Municipal Code. (Ord. 1757 § 1 (part), 2005) CITY COUNCIL CITY OF L O D I SUSAN HITCHCOCK, Genteaa Mayor BOB JOHNSON, Mayor Pro Tempore JOHN BECKMAN LARRY D. HANSEN +yob 'aoob JOANNE MOUNCE CITY HALL, 221 WEST PINE STREET / P.O. BOX 3006 LOD1, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910 (209) 333-6702 / FAX (209) 333-6807 / www.lodi.gov October 27. 2006 David Johnson 2200 Jackson Street Lodi, CA 95242 RE: OCTOBER 31, 2006, SHIRTSLEEVE SESSION BLAIR KING, City Manager RANDI JOHL, City Clerk D. STEPHEN SCHWABAUER, City Attorney Review of Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee and Planning Commission Process This is to notify you that at the City Council Shirtsleeve Session of October 31, 2006, at 7:00 a.m. in the Council Chamber, at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, the Council will discuss the following matter. B-1 Review of Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee and Planning Commission Process (CD) Enclosed is a copy of the October 31 City Council Shirtsleeve Session agenda and the staff report related to the above item. Should you wish to speak on this matter, please submit a "Request to Speak" card (available in the Carnegie Forum) to the City Clerk prior to the opening of the meeting. Should you have any questions, please contact me at 333-6702. PD- Randi Johl City Clerk RJ/JMP Enclosure cc: Community Development Department followup/lUpcomingMeetingAm CITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA TITLE: Power Supply Update MEETING DATE: October 31, 2006 PREPARED BY: Electric Utility Director RECOMMENDED ACTION BACKGROUND INFORMATION: FISCAL IMPACT: Not Applicable. Attachment AGENDA ITEM (50 )w' No action recommended. Electric Utility Director George Morrow will present an update on the City's power supply, including inventory, resources, and future acquisition strategies. Blair King, Cit nager APPROVED: IQ Blair kKg, City Manager