HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - September 20, 2000 F-01 PH40 Ed
COUNCIL• •
4<� ogee
AGENDA TITLE: Conduct Public Hearing to Consider the Planning Commission's
recommendation of approval to the City Council for a General Plan
Amendment from LDR, Low Density Residential to NCC, Neighborhood
Community Commercial; Rezone from C -S, Commercial Shopping and R-1,
Single Family Residential to PD, Planned Development; and Certification of
Negative Declaration ND -00-05 as adequate environmental documentation on
behalf of Kristmont West, Inc. for property located at 333 S. Lower
Sacramento Road.
MEETING DATE: September 20, 2000
PREPARED BY: Community Development Director
RECOMMENDED ACTION: That the City Council adopt the Planning Commission's
recommendations and approve the General Plan Amendment
and Zone change.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The project site is currently a single parcel containing 24 acres
and makes up the south west corner of the intersection of Lower
Sacramento Road and Sargent Road. The project site is within
the Lodi City Limits and has the following three different zoning
Designations; R-1, Single -Family Residential, R -C -P, Residential Commercial Professional, and C -S,
Commercial Shopping. Approximately 15 acres near the corner is zoned C -S, with 6 acres as R-1, and 3
acres as R -C -P. Approximately 9.8 acres of the C -S zoned portion of the site is the existing location of
the Westgate Shopping Center, which includes the Raley's Supermarket, Sak's furniture and electronics,
the Valley Cinema, a small branch of the Farmer's and Merchants Bank, and the USA gas station. The
remaining 14.2 acres are vacant.
The applicant, Kristmont West Inc., approached the City with the desire to establish a 3.3 acre mini
storage facility to the west of the existing Raley's Supermarket building. This desire prompted their
request to change the existing General Plan Land Use designation for the northernmost 2.12 acres of the
residential portion of the parcel from LDR, Low Density Residential to NCC, Neighborhood Community
Commercial. The same residential area and 11.92 acres of the C -S zone was also requested to be
rezoned to PD, Planned Development (See Rezoning Site Plan).
The Planning Commission held a public hearing on July 26, 2000 and voted to recommend approval of
the two actions before the Council as well as to approve a Tentative Parcel Map to create 5 new parcels
and a Designated Remainder. The parcel map created a parcel for the existing uses, an additional
vacant parcel at the southeast corner, and a 3.3 acre parcel to the west of the Raley's building for the
mini storage facility. The Designated Remainder makes up the vacant area south of the existing
shopping center.
The zone change and General Plan amendment are required because the existing single family zoning
which occupies the desired mini storage location does not allow mini -storage. As part of Staffs review of
the request we found that the mini -storage facility is a harmless use that creates less of an'impact on the
APPROVED: 7!�/� G=:�
H. Dixon Flynn -- City Manager
=0020.doc 09/11/00
Council Communication
Meeting Date: August 16, 2000
Page 2
surrounding area than a residential subdivision, and forms a buffer between the shopping center and the
future residences to the west. The land to the west of the shopping center is currently a vineyard in the
County, but is designated in the City's. General Plan as PR, Planned Residential.
Although staff found the mini -storage facility to be appropriate for the proposed location, we would not
recommend a change in zoning to general commercial or industrial because these zonings would allow
the potential development of a use far removed from the mini -storage with no further review by the City.
For this reason, Staff recommended PD zoning which allows for all uses when approved by the Planning
Commission on a development plan. With this zoning the City maintains control of any changes to the
approved development, which removes the potential for an incompatible use to take the place of the
mini -storage facility. One stipulation of a PD zone is that it be no less than 10 -acres in size; which is why
Staff directed the applicant to rezone the entire shopping center to provide a total of 14.2 acres.
For consistency with the General Plan, the land use amendment changing the existing LDR, Low Density
Residential designation to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial is required. The amendment
does not affect the entire shopping center, as does the rezone; the only area requiring the amendment is
the narrow strip of residential land. The land use amendment will not impact this area because it is
vacant other than portions of it being used as a temporary storm drainage basin for the shopping center.
The temporary basin will be moved to the vacant area to the south when development of the mini -
storage facility takes place.
The environmental review of this project shows negligible impacts to the project site and surrounding
area. One impact requiring mitigation was the lack of a permanent storm drainage facility. The
mitigation is simply to provide an on-site temporary storm drainage basin. The temporary basin will be
designed to accommodate the existing shopping center as well as the proposed mini storage facility.
There being no significant impacts, a recommendation to certify the Negative Declaration ND -00-05 as
adequate documentation is warranted.
The requested actions represent the only viable alternatives for this proposal. Staff is pleased with the
proposed project because it provides an appropriate use for a parcel of land that was otherwise
inadequately proportioned for its intended development.
FUNDING: None required
l
Konradt Bartlam
Community Development Director
Prepared by: Community Development Director
Cc: City Attorney
KB/1w
Attachments
Hearing Closed to the Public
The Planning Commission on motion of Commissioner Heinitz, Mattheis second, approved the
Use Permit subject to the conditions of the Resolution by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Beckman, Borelli, Crabtree, Heinitz, Mattheis, and
Chairman McGladdery
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners: Schmidt
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
The request of Kristmont West, Inc. for:
1) Certification of Negative Declaration ND -00-05 as adequate environmental
documentation for the project;
2) General Plan Amendment from LDR, Low Density Residential to NCC,
Neighborhood Community Commercial;
3) Rezone from C -S, Commercial Shopping and R-1, Single Family Residential to
PD, Planned Development; and
4) Tentative Parcel Map to create 5 parcels from one for property located at
333 South Lower Sacramento Road.
The above matter was presented to the Commission by Associate Planner Meissner. The
project site is currently a single parcel containing 24 acres and is known as the Raley's
shopping center. The goal of the request was to separate the parcel into 5 individual parcels.
The parcelization will establish individual land areas for existing uses and/or pad sites of the
shopping center and for a 3.3 acre mini -storage project to the west of the shopping center.
Associate Planner Meissner noted the Rezone request to change to PD was appropriate because
it allows for all uses when approved by the Planning Commission on a development plan. The
Zoning Ordinance requires PD zones to be no less than 10 -acres in size, so that was why the
applicant was rezonirig the entire shopping center and not just the area for the mini storage.
The proposed mini -storage project will be subject to SPARC review. The mini storage will
provide a buffer between the rear of Raley's and the future residences west of the project. A
recommended condition of approval from Staff to SPARC will be to construct a decorative
wall at the westerly property line. Staff was recommending approval of the project.
Commissioner Heinitz asked whether any service trucks would be entering the back of Raley's
to deliver goods. He was concerned that the mini storage would create more problems for
trucks. Community Development Director Bartlam felt the required improvements for the mini
storage project would improve truck movement on site. Commissioner Heinitz also noted the
drainage problems located within the center.
Commissioner Mattheis asked if the drainage problem would be addressed and if there were
other locations within the City that have mini -storage combined with other uses. Community
Development Director Bartlam assured Commissioner Mattheis that the drainage problem
would be corrected with the project. He mentioned that the only mini -storage he could suggest
is Century Storage on Stockton Street, which has not had problems in that past being located so
7-26MINUTES.doc
close to residences. He noted that the mini storage would be low-key and the parcel it will be
built upon is only 140 -feet wide.
Chairman McGladdery asked about the southern parcel (Parcel 3) that was not assigned a
designation. He was concerned that future access to Parcel 3 could become a problem and
possibly the parcel could become "Land -locked."
Hearing Opened to the Public
Steve Pechin, Baumbach & Piazza. Mr. Pechin noted that homes could not be built on the site
where the proposed mini -storage facility is to be built because the parcel is not shaped for it.
The project functions on the property and any changes to the site would need to be reviewed by
the Planning Commission. The drainage problems that currently exist will be addressed with
bigger rerouted pipes and a larger basin. Parcel 3 was being created in the hope that the owner
will be able to market the parcel.
Chairman McGladdery questioned if the drainage pond will be landscaped. Mr. Pechin replied
that a chain link fence would encompass the pond.
Commissioner Heinitz was concerned about the capacity and size of the basin. Mr. Pechin
responded that he would consider the entire site and use City Standards for proper sizing. He
would not make the situation any worse than what it is currently.
Sandy Sandoval, Managing partner for Kristmont West, Inc. Mr. Sandoval was approached by
Sierra Storage to build a mini -storage facility. In three other locations, they have built mini -
storage facilities behind their stores without any problems. He stated that they would also like
to bring the shopping center up-to-date. He was desirous of moving forward with the retention
pond to resolve current drainage problems on site.
Steve Opp, 206 Rainer Dr, Lodi. Mr. Opp felt that the proposal was premature due to the City
currently studying the Westside Development Master Plan. He wanted the Commission to
delay their decision until the Westside Development Master Plan was approved.
Community Development Director Bartlam replied that the 3 major facilities being proposed in
the Master Plan would not affect the project or the property in any way. He felt that the project
could stand on its own without the Master Plan being in place.
Chairman McGladdery asked what kind of screening would be required for the holding pond.
Community Development Director Bartlam noted that there are no requirements for a basin
that is considered a drainage pond. He further stated that the Commission had the latitude to
require fencing or landscaping for the holding pond.
Commissioner Heinitz pointed out several locations throughout the City that currently, or at
one time, housed a drainage basin. He noted that these drainage basins were an eyesore due to
inefficient screening from public view.
Hearing Closed to the Public
The Planning Commission on motion of Commissioner Mattheis , Crabtree second, certified
Negative Declaration ND -00-05 as adequate environmental documentation for the project by
the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Beckman, Borelli, Crabtree, Heinitz, Mattheis, and
McGladdery
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners: Schmidt
7-26MINUTES.doc
ABSTAIN: Commissioners
The Planning Commission on motion of Commissioner Mattheis, Crabtree second, approved
the request for a General Plan Amendment from LDR, Low Density Residential to NCC,
Neighborhood Commercial subject to the conditions of the Resolution by the following vote:
AYES:
Commissioners: Beckman, Borelli, Crabtree, Heinitz, Mattheis, and
McGladdery
NOES:
Commissioners:
ABSENT:
Commissioners: Schmidt
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners
The Planning Commission on motion of Commissioner Mattheis, Crabtree second, approved
the Rezone from C -S, Commercial Shopping and R-1, Single Family Residential to PD,
Planned Development with an additional condition 5 (D) being added to the resolution, which
will read " Landscaped screening be provided around the proposed retention basin subject to
staff and SPARC approval." With this change the Resolution was approved by the following
vote:
AYES:
Commissioners: Beckman, Borelli, Crabtree, Heinitz, Mattheis, and
McGladdery
NOES:
Commissioners:
ABSENT:
Commissioners: Schmidt
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners
The Planning Commission on motion of Commissioner Mattheis, Crabtree second, approved
the Tentative Parcel Map to create 5 parcels from one property located at 333 S. Lower
Sacramento Road with a change to Item 6) E of the resolution which should read "Temporary
public storm drainage facilities will require City Council approval and need to be bonded and
under agreement for construction prior to final parcel map filing." The Resolution was
approved by the following vote:
AYES:
Commissioners: Beckman, Borelli, Crabtree, Heinitz, Mattheis, and
McGladdery
NOES:
Commissioners:
ABSENT:
Commissioners: Schmidt
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners
Steve Pechin asked for clarification of the material to be used for the landscaped screening.
Commissioner Mattheis mentioned that whatever screening material is used, it should be
visually pleasing. The Commission agreed that the screening should be done with "greenery"
V
and that it should encompass the entire basin.
7-20,11TIUTES.doc
ANNOUCEMENTS
Community Development Director Bartlam announced that Commissioner Heinitz had
volunteered his home to have a barbecue for the Commission, City staff and their families.
The date and time will follow.
ADJOURNMENT
As there was no further business to be brought before the Planning Commission, Chairman McGladdery
adjourned the session at 9:00 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lisa Wagner
Secretary
7-26MINUTES.doc 8
d 0 MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi, Community Development
Department
To: Planning Commission
From: Community Development Department
Date: July 26, 2000
Subject: The request of Kristmont West, Inc. for a recommendation of approval to
the City Council for a General Plan Amendment from LDR, Low Density
Residential to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial; a Rezone
from C -S, Commercial Shopping and R-1, Single Family Residential to PD,
Planned Development; and certification of Negative Declaration ND -00-05
as adequate environmental documentation for the project. As well as the
request for approval of a Tentative Parcel Map to create 5 parcels from 1,
all located at 333 South Lower Sacramento Road.
The project proposes to change the existing General Plan Land Use designation for the
northernmost 2,12 acres of the residential portion of the parcel from LDR, Low Density
Residential to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial. The same residential area
in addition to 11.92 acres of the C -S zone will also be rezoned to PD, Planned
Development (See Rezoning Site Plan). A final step of the project is to create 5
individual parcels from the one existing parcel. The parcelization will establish
individual land areas for the existing uses and/or pad sites of the shopping center and for
a 3.3 acre mini -storage project to the west of the shopping center. The area at the south
end of the project site, which is identified on the tentative parcel map as the Designated
Remainder, will maintain its existing zoning and land use designations (See Tentative
Map). This General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and Tentative Parcel Map was prompted
by the applicant who has plans to develop a mini -storage facility on what is parcel
number four on the proposed Tentative Parcel Map.
BACKGROUND
The project site is currently a single parcel containing 24 acres and makes up the south
west corner of the intersection of Lower Sacramento Road and Sargent Road (See
Vicinity Map). The project site is within the Lodi City Limits and is zoned R-1, Single -
Family Residential, R -C -P, Residential Commercial Professional, and C -S, Commercial
Shopping. Approximately 15 acres near the corner is zoned C -S, with 6 acres as R-1, and
3 acres as R -C -P. Approximately 9.8 acres of the C -S zoned portion of the site is the
existing location of the Westgate Shopping Center, which includes the Raley's
Supermarket, Sak's furniture and electronics, the Valley Cinema, a small branch of the
Farmer's and Merchants Bank, and the USA gas station. The remaining 14.2 acres are
vacant.
The Westgate shopping center was originally established by Use Permit (U-66-40) back
in 1966 with the first phase of development occurring later that year. Throughout the
00P003 Z0004 GPALU0002.doc
years the Shopping Center slowly developed into what it is today, a relatively small
center with 5 businesses.
ANALYSIS
As stated earlier, each of the actions requested by the applicant were made in order to
establish a 3.3 -acre mini -storage facility with a manager's residence west of the Raley's
shopping center (See Self Storage Site Plan). The existing single family zoning does not
allow mini -storage, and is too narrow to develop as a viable single family subdivision,
which is why the applicant has requested a change in zoning.
Staff finds that the mini -storage facility is an innocuous use that will create less of an
impact on the City and the adjacent areas, and will actually form a buffer between the
shopping center and the future residences to the west. The area adjacent to the west is
currently a vineyard in the County, but is designated in the City's General Plan as PR,
Planned Residential.
Although staff believes the mini -storage facility is an appropriate use, we were not
prepared to recommend a change in zoning to General Commercial or Industrial because
these zonings would allow the potential development of a use far removed from the mini -
storage with no further review by the City. We do, however, find that the proposed PD
zoning is appropriate because it allows for all uses when approved by the Planning
Commission on a development plan. The Planning Commission will review any changes
to the approved planned development, which removes the potential for an incompatible
use to take the place of the mini -storage facility.
The Zoning Ordinance requires PD zones to be no less than 10 -acres in size, so in order
meet this requirement staff directed the applicant to rezone the shopping center as well.
The new PD zone will encompass parcels 1-5 of the tentative parcel map, which contain a
total of 14.2 acres. Staff finds that the PD zoning will benefit the shopping center by
allowing greater flexibility in land uses and development standards, and does not harm
the City's ability to review changes. The City maintains its ability to review changes in
land use and development in the same fashion as the existing C -S, Commercial Shopping
zoning. For example, the Vineyard Shopping Center on Kettleman Lane is within a PD
zone.
For consistency with the General Plan, a land use amendment changing the existing LDR,
Low Density Residential designation to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial
must take place. The amendment does not affect the entire shopping center as does the
rezone, the only area requiring the amendment is the narrow strip of residential land to
the west. The land use amendment will not impact the residential strip because it is
vacant other than being used as a temporary storm drainage basin for the shopping center.
The temporary basin will be moved to the south when development of the mini -storage
facility takes place (See Tentative Map).
Staff would also like to point out that the change in zoning and land use will not remove
the requirement for Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC) approval.
Prior to the development of the mini -storage facility, the project will be reviewed by
SPARC for its general layout, on-site circulation, landscaping, colors, materials, and
general aesthetics.
00P003 Z0004 GPALU0002.doc
The request for approval of the tentative map is to simply establish property Iines around
the required areas for each building or pad site in the shopping center. The property lines
will give the owner the ability to sell or lease each building/property separately. Each
property will have its own floor area and requiredparking, but will remain an integral
part of the overall shopping center. Access to the parcels will not require any new
driveways or modifications to the existing layout. Staff finds that the proposed tentative
map will have no physical impact on the shopping center that cannot be mitigated though
the normal staff level.review and approval process.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City
Council for the General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and certification of Negative
Declaration ND -00-05 as adequate environmental documentation for the project. Staff
also recommends approval of the Tentative Parcel Map to create 5 parcels from one. All
subject to the conditions in the attached resolutions.
Respect ubmittd,
Mark M issner
Associate Planner
KB/MM/lw
OOP003 Z0004 GPALU0002.doc
Reviewed
tl
k -
Nil��
Konradt Bartlam
Community Development Director
CITY OF LODI
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
MEETING DATE: July 26, 2000
APPLICATION NO's: GPALU-00-2, Z-00-04, 00-P-003, & ND -00-05
REQUEST: The request of Kristmont West, Inc. for a recommendation of approval
to the City Council for a General Plan Amendment from LDR, Low
Density Residential to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial; a
Rezone from C -S, Commercial Shopping and R-1, Single Family
Residential to PD, Planned Development; and certification of Negative
Declaration ND -00-05 as adequate environmental documentation for the
project. As well as the request for approval of a Tentative Parcel Map to
create 5 parcels from one.
LOCATION: 333 South Lower Sacramento Road
APPLICANT: Kristmont West, Inc.
P.O. Box 6
Fair Oaks, CA 95628
PROPERTY OWNER: Same
Site Characteristics:
The project site is currently a single parcel containing approximately 24 acres and is
located at 333 South Lower Sacramento Road, which makes up the south west corner of
the intersection of Lower Sacramento Road and Sargent Road (See Vicinity Map). The
project site is within the Lodi City Limits and is zoned R-1, Single -Family Residential, R-
CP, Residential Commercial Professional, and C -S, Commercial Shopping.
Approximately 15 acres near the corner are zoned C -S, with 6 acres as R-1, and 3 acres as
R -C -P. The site is also the existing location of the Westgate Shopping Center, which
includes the Raley's Supermarket, Sak's furniture and electronics, the Valley Cinema, a
small branch of the Farmer's and Merchants Bank, and the USA gas station.
General Plan Designation: LDR, Low Density Residential; NCC, Neighborhood
Community Commercial; O, Office.
Zoning Designation: R-1, Single Family Residential; C -S, Commercial
Shopping; R -C -P, Residential Commercial Professional
Property Size: - Approx. 24 -acres.
00P003 Z0004 GPALU0002r.doc
Adjacent Zoning and Land Use:
North: County Zoning; PR, Planned Residential
South: PD(16), Planned Development; PQP, Public Quasi Public (Temple Baptist)
East: R-1 & R-2, Single Family Residential; LDR, Low Density Residential
West: County Zoning; P -R, Planned Residential
Neighborhood Characteristics:
The existing Westgate (Raley's) Shopping Center makes up approximately 11 acres of the
project site at the comer of Lower Sacramento and Sargent Roads. The areas to the north
and west of the project site are outside of the Lodi City Limits and are under the
jurisdiction of San Joaquin County. Land to the south and east are within the City limits
of Lodi. The area to the north across Sargent Road and the land adjacent to the west are
areas consisting entirely of grape vineyards. To the east of the project site across the
Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) Canal and Lower Sacramento Road are single
family residences. To the south of the project site is vacant land owned by the Temple
Baptist Church that is planned for church uses. There is also a small office building
adjacent to the southeast comer of the project site. The site fronts on Sargent Road along
its northern boundary and the WID Canal and Lower Sacramento Road along its eastern
boundary.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENTS:
Negative Declaration ND -00-05 was prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). This document adequately addresses possible
adverse environmental effects of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated.
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE:
Legal Notice for the Annexation and Prezone was published on July 15, 2000. A total of
19 notices were sent to all property owners of record within a 300 -foot radius of the
subject property.
RECONS IENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend approval to the City
Council for the General Plan Amendment, Rezone, and certification of Negative
Declaration ND -00-05 as adequate environmental documentation for the project. Stall
also recommends approval of the Tentative Parcel Map to create 5 parcels from one. All
subject to the conditions in the attached resolutions.
OOP003 Z0004 GPALU0002r.doc
ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS:
e Approve the Requests with Alternate Conditions
• Deny the Requests
• Continue the Requests
ATTACHMENTS:
1. Vicinity Map
2. Tentative Parcel Map
3. Rezone Map
4. Self Storage Site Plan
5. Site Utilization Map
6. Negative Declaration
7. Draft Resolutions
i
00P003 Z0004 GPALU0002r.doc 3
0
a
1N79i' I f
?SLY � zt>i
I
I I
W
I� ��
/!/AIM 1/1111170
!I fl
it
J
�
IJ
W
Cr
s.»
I;
a
1�
�1
iI
II
I!
I;
Q
so
♦n,
1
1
44
I b
= ti
YNR/7��r 3als • ,�
I
Westgate Shopping Center
Tentative Parcel Map
333 South Lower Sacramento Road
00-P-003 07-26-00
ff—
39N4fq' CN (I.v IJNUS4%I)
3vgv+ a or (4 2 y ZnL:5I:7)
T
PLtSTi+ZtiG
Westgate Shopping Center
7tln2nn Rezone 3 Parcels
333 South Lower Sacramento Road
Z-00-04 07-26-00
avoa ,tx.�ot�s
ce
�216-
� .. ar rw ♦r�.
r
r
a 2 aaa
_ �nwnr iaoi
t
CL
y0.
-77
�•
f
1 i
uj
ooc]0000[3V'
_awn .�wasea _
a 2 aaa
NEGATIVE DECLARATION NO. 00-05
FOR
General Plan Amendment,
Rezone And Parcel Map For
The Westgate Shopping Center
File No's.:
GPALU-00-2
Z-00-04
00-P-003
APPLICANT: K.ristmont West, Inc.
PREPARED BY:
CITY OF LODI
Community Development Department
P.O. BOX 3006
LODI, CA 95241
June 2000
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTION
PAGE
PROJECTDESCRIPTION..............................................................................•......................................3
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FOPjVL.............................................................................................4
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL. IMPACTS..............................................................................................10
DETERMINATION ................................. ..............................................................................................11
VICINITYMAP....................................................................................................................................12
2
CITY OF LODI
General Plan Amendment, Rezone and Parcel Map for the Westgate Shopping
Center.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project site is currently a single parcel containing 24 acres and is located at 333
South Lower Sacramento Road, which makes up the south west corner of the
intersection of Lower Sacramento Road and Sargent Road (See Vicinity Map). The
project site is within the Lodi City Limits and is zoned R-1, Single -Family
Residential, R -C -P, Residential Commercial Professional, and C -S, Commercial
Shopping. Approximately 15 acres near the corner is zoned C -S, with 6 acres as
R-1, and 3 acres as R -C -P. The site is also the existing location of the Westgate
Shopping Center, which includes the Raley's Supermarket, Sak's furniture and
electronics, the Valley Cinema, a small branch of the Farmer's and Merchants
Bank, and the USA gas station.
The project proposes to change the existing General Plan Land Use designation for
the northernmost 2.12 acres of the residential portion of the parcel from LDR, Low
Density Residential to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial. The same
residential area in addition to 11.92 acres of the C -S zone will also be rezoned to PD,
Planned Development (See Rezoning Site Plan). A final step of the project is to
create 5 individual parcels from the one existing parcel. The parcelization will
establish individual land areas for the existing uses and/or pad sites of the shopping
center and a 3.3 acre mini -storage project to the west of the shopping center. The
area at the south end of the project site, which is identified on the tentative parcel
map as the Designated Remainder, will maintain its existing zoning and land use
designations (See Tentative Map).
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
I. Project title:
General Plan Amendment, Rezone and Parcel Map for the Westgate Shopping Center.
2. Lead agency name and address:
City of Lodi -Community Development Department
Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241
3. Contact person and phone number:
Mark Meissner-
Associate
eissnerAssociate Planner
(209) 333-6711
4. Project location:
San Joaquin County, CA.;
333 South Lower Sacramento Road
Lodi, CA 95243.
5. Project sponsor's name and address:
Kristmont West, Inc.
P.O. Box 6
Fair Oaks, CA 95628
6. General pian designations: LDR, Low Density Residential; NCC, Neighborhood Community
Commercial; O, Office.
7. Zoning: R-1, Residential Single Family; C -S, Commercial Shopping; R -C -P, Residential
Commercial Professional.
8. Description of project: See attached "Project Description"
9. Surrounding land uses and setting: The existing Wesgate (Ralev's) Shopping Center makes up
approximately 11 -acres of the project site at the corner of Lower Sacramento and Sargent
Roads. The areas to the north and west of the project site are outside of the Lodi City Limits
and are under the jurisdiction of San Joaquin County. Land to the south and east are within
the City limits of Lodi. The area to the north across Sargent Road and the land adjacent to the
west are areas consisting entirely of grape vineyards. To the east of the project site across the
Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) Canal and Lower Sacramento Road are single family
residences. To the south of the project site is vacant land owned by the Temple Baptist Church
that is planned for church uses. There is also a small office building adjacent to the southeast
corner of the project site. The site fronts on Sargent Road along its northern boundary and the
WID Canal and Lower Sacramento Road along its eastern boundary.
10. Other public agencies whose approval is required: none..
ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a (Potentially Significant Impact") by the checklist on the following paves.
El Land Use and Planning ❑ Transportation/Circulation ❑ Public Services
❑ Population and Housing ❑ Biological Resources 0 Utilities and Service Systems
❑Geological Problems ❑ Energy and Mineral Resources ❑ Aesthetics
❑ Water ❑ Hazards ❑ Cultural Resources
❑ Air Quality ❑ Noise ❑ Recreation
❑ Mandatory Findings of
Significance
n
-r
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS:
Potentially
0
0
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g.,
Significant
0
through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major
Potentially
Unless
Less than
I. LAND USE AND PLAtNNING. Would the proposed:
Significant
mitigation
Significant
No
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?0
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning?
b) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by
O
0
0
El
agencies with jurisdiction over the project.?
0
0
0
H
c) Be incompatible with existing land use in the vicinity?
0
0
0
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations (e.g., impacts to soils or0
0
0
farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)?
0
❑
❑
H
e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established
0
0
0
. community (including a low-income or minority community)?
0
0
0
II POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections?
0
0
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either directly or indirectly (e.g.,
0
through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing?0
0
0
Q
III. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. Would the proposal result in or expose people
to potential impacts involving:
a) Fault rupture?
0
0
0
H
b) Seismic ground shaking?
c) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction?
d) Seiche, tsunami, or volcanic hazard?
0
❑
❑
H
f) Erosion, changes in topography or unstable soil conditions from
excavation, grading or fill?
0
0
0
g) Subsidence of land?
❑
❑
0
H
h) Expansive soils?
0
0
13
0
i) Unique geologic or physical features?
0
❑
0
0
5
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal.
All No" Reference Source: AppendZr H, #ZS A Environmental Setting, Sec 3.3:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected
❑
Potentially
❑
air quality violation?
b) Hazards to safety from design feature, (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
0
Significant
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants'.
I]
❑
Potentially
Unless
Less than
❑
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
Significant
mitigation
Significant
No
All "No"- Reference Source: See Project Description
impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of
0
❑
❑
EY
surface runoff'
❑
❑
❑
Q
b) Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as
❑
❑
i]
El
flooding?
0
0
0
C) Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality
l]
11
❑
Q
(e.g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any water body?0
0❑
Q
e) Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements?
❑
0
❑
Q
f) Change in the quantity of ground water, tither through direct additions or13
❑
❑
El
withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavation
or through substantial loss ofground water recharge capability?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater?
❑
❑
❑
EZ
h) Impacts to groundwater quality?
Cl
❑
❑
I) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for
❑
❑
❑
public water supplies?
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal.
All No" Reference Source: AppendZr H, #ZS A Environmental Setting, Sec 3.3:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected
❑
❑
❑
air quality violation?
b) Hazards to safety from design feature, (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
0
0
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants'.
I]
❑
❑ �(
c) Aker air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in
O
❑
❑ Q
climate?
❑
❑
j7
d) Create objectionable odors?
❑
❑
❑ a
VI. TRANSPORTATIOLNICIRCULATION'. Would the proposal result in:
All "Wo " Reference Source. See Project Description
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?0
❑
❑
Q
b) Hazards to safety from design feature, (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
0
0
0
0
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)'.
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses?
❑
❑
❑
j7
d) Insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite?
❑
❑
❑
0
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists.?
❑
❑
❑
EZ
Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g.,
❑
❑
❑
Q
bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
0
0
0
7
Potentially
Significant
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result in impacts to:
Potentially
Significant
Unless
mitigation
Less than
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not
[]
❑
❑
B
limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)?
❑
0
0
❑
c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal
[]
0
❑
N7
habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)?
0
0
0
0
e) Wildlife dispersal migration corridors?
0
❑
0
0
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plan?
❑
❑
❑
0
b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner?
0
0
❑
�j
c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be
O
O
❑
8
of future value to the region and the residents of the State?
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances
❑
0
0
(including, but not limited to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency
13
0 1
evacuation plan?
c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard?
❑
❑
❑
0
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards?
❑
❑
❑
0
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees?
❑
0
0
�j
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in.-
n:a)
a)Increase in existing noise levels?13
❑
❑
❑
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels?
13
0
0
0
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposed have an effect upon, or result in
a need for new or altered government services in any of the following areas:
a) Fire protection?
0
0
❑
a
b) Police protection?
0
0
0
H
C) Schools?
❑
0
0
E7
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?
❑
0
❑
0
e) Other government services?
0
0
0
a
7
XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the proposal result in a
nerd for new systems or supplies, or substantial alterations to the following -
utilities:
a) Power or natural gas?
b) Communications systems?
c) Local or regional water treatment or distribution facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks.?
e) Storm water drainage?
f) Solid waste disposal?
g) Local or regional water supplies'.
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
Potentially
❑
❑
Ef
Significant
❑
❑
Potentially
unless
Less than
❑
Significant
mitigation
Significant
No
Impact
Incorporated
Impact
Impact
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
❑
❑
❑
[Jj
impact area?
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
❑
Q
❑
❑
❑
Q
a) Affect a scenic vista or scenic highway?
❑
❑
❑
Ef
b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect?
❑
❑
❑
Q
c) Create light or scare?
❑
❑
❑
0
XIV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal.•
a) Disturb paleontological resources?
❑
❑
❑
Q
b) Disturb archaeological resources?
❑
❑
❑
Q
c) Have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique
0
0
❑
Q
ethnic cultural values?
d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential
❑
❑
❑
[Jj
impact area?
XV. RECREATION. Would the proposal.
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
❑
❑
❑
Q
recreational facilities?
b) Affect recreation opportunities?
❑
❑
❑
Q
0
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE
Potentially
Significant
Potentially Unless
Significant mitigation
Impact Incorporated
Less than
Significant No
Impact Impact
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat
of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number of restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or pre -history?
❑ ❑ 11
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals?
❑ ❑ ❑
c) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively
considerable' means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with
the effects of past projects, the effects ofother current projects, and the effects of probable future projects)
❑ ❑ p
d) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either
directly or indirectly.
XVII. EARLIER ANALYSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one or
more effects have been adequately analyzed in earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D).
a) Earlier analyses used.
None.
b) Mitigation measures. See Attached Summary for discussion.
9
M
J
131
SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS
An explanation of potentially significant unless mitigation incorporated or less than
significant impacts from the Environmental Checklist Form above. Measures included in
this summary shall be treated as mitigation where indicated.
LAND USE AND PLANNING
1. a) As stated in the title of this initial study, a General Pian amendment and
subsequent rezoning will be taking place as part of the project. These actions
are necessary in order for the intended mini -storage facility to be an
allowable use. The current residential land use designation and zoning would
not allow the mini storage facility. The Community Development
Department finds that the chance in land use, rezoning, and parcel map will
not create a significant impact. We also find that the development of the
mini storage facility will have less of an impact on the community and the
environment than if the area were to develop as single-family residences.
The change in land use from Low Density Residential to Neighborhood
Community Commercial and the rezoning establish consistency with the
City's General Plan and Zonin, Ordinance, therefore reducing any potential
impact to less than significant.
UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS
XII. e) The developed portion of the project site was built in 1967. Since this time
the City has not had the ability to provide storm drainage to this area, so
storm drainace was provided by way of a temporary drainage basin. The
proposed mini storage facility is located in the area of the existing temporary
drainage basin. The existing temporary basin will be relocated to the south in
the undeveloped portion of the project site.
The City's Utilities Master Plan includes the project area in its calculations
and design; however, the required permanent storm drainage basin (F -Basin)
to serve the properties in the immediate area has not been constructed. In
order for the project to be approved and constructed, all of the necessary
utilities are required to be designed and installed according to the City's
Utilities Master Plan. Sewer, water, and electricity are available to the
project site by extending existing utilities to the area; however, storm
drainage for this project will require a temporary drainage basin.
The City's Public Works Department will condition the project to design and
install a temporary drainage basin. The condition will be made by resolution
of the City's Planning Commission and will be written to require a storm
drainage master plan with design calculations that shall be approved by the
RM
Public Works Director prior to development. Approval of a storm drainage
master plan for this project and the installation of a temporary storm drainage
basin will reduce the noted utilities and service systems impacts to a less than
significant level. Subsequent installation of the permanent storm drainage
basin "F -basin" as specified in the City's Utilities Master Plan will eliminate
the utilities impact of this project completely.
DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
❑ I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and
a NEGATIVE declaration will be prepared.
El I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an
attached sheet have been added to the project. A NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be
prepared.
❑ 1 find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
❑ I rind that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets' if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated."
❑ I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a)
have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation
measur hat ar osed the proposed project
Signature: Date: i� 90
Printed Name: Mark Meissner For: Citv of Lodi
�I
nv�y
NO
RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 00-_
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING
APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST OF KRISTMONT WEST, INC. FOR APPROVAL,OF GENERAL PLAN
LAND USE AMENDMENT 00-2 TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed
public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan Amendment in accordance with the
Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, Amendments;
WHEREAS, the property is located at 333 South Lower Sacramento Road
(APN's 027-040-04);
WHEREAS, the project proponent is Kristmont West, Inc., P.O. Box 6, Fair Oaks, CA 95628;
WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-1, Single -Family, C -S, Commercial Shopping, and RCP,
Residential, Commercial Professional;
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of Lodi as follows:
1. Negative Declaration File No. NTD -00-05 has been prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided thereunder. Further, the
Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration with
respect to the project identified in this Resolution.
2. It is found that approval of the General Plan Amendment will result in good planning practice.
3. It is hereby found that the site is physically suitable for the proposed type of development.
4. The Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of General Plan
Amendment 00-2 to the City Council of the City of Lodi.
Dated: July 26, 2000
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 00-_ was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Lodi at a continued meeting held on July 26, 2000, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners:
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners:
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Secretary, Planning Commission
Res for GPLUA-00.2.doc 1
IPPR} LDR
000? E;:Z ; Li IIP u0W 5mp-Z-00 puawy md9\s5urm2J0\9NIN0Z\:W
LEGEND
RESIDENTIAL:
l7R - EOr OER9T/ AESIOE-nM
rK
MOR- Kom oom" Fcsxx
Rpt _ IRC1 OE -WN RE90EM
ER- c4sro E RE90EE rAL
A - PRAWMEO RE906M K
COMMERCIAL:
GENERAL PLAN
OOMEROL
mc. NtRa+Iw WOMM/ERCAt
O�NORtOMEmzkPROP0SED
M
LAND USE
DIAGRAMmp
OTHER:
or _ DVVnpM ""Mq OMI($
A - A61$LUMRE
000? E;:Z ; Li IIP u0W 5mp-Z-00 puawy md9\s5urm2J0\9NIN0Z\:W
RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 00-15
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUEST OF KRISTMONT WEST, INC. FOR
APPROVAL OF REZONE,
Z-00-04 TO ESTABLISH PD(35) TO THE LODI CITY COUNCIL.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly
noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Rezone in accordance with the
Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, Amendments;
WHEREAS, the property is located at 333 South Lower Sacramento Road
(APN's 027-040-04);
WHEREAS, the project proponent is Kristmont West, Inc., P.O. Box 6, Fair Oaks, CA
95628;
WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-1, Single -Family, C -S, Commercial Shopping, and
RCP, Residential, Commercial Professional;
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the Planning
Commission of the City of Lodi as follows:
I . Negative Declaration File No. ND -00-05 has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided
thereunder. Further, the Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained
in said Negative Declaration with respect to the project identified in this Resolution.
2. It is found that approval of the Rezone will result in good planning practice.
3. It is hereby found that the land of the proposed mini storage facility site is physically
suitable for its development.
4. It is further found that the change in zoning will not negatively impact the existing shopping
center, or the ability of the City to regulate the project site as a shopping center.
5. The Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of Rezone Z-00-
04 to the City Council of the City of Lodi with the following conditions:
A) The use of Parcel 5 as established on Tentative Parcel Map 00-P-003 shall be limited to
the development of a mini storase facility with a manager's residence. Any change in
use shall be reviewed and approved by the Planning Commission as an amendment to
the development plan of the PD.
B) The use of Parcel 3 as established on Tentative Parcel Map 00-P-003 shall be limited to
the permitted uses as listed in the Lodi Municipal Code, Chapter 17.30, C -S,
Commercial Shopping zone, or otherwise reviewed and approved by the Planning
Commission as an amendment to the development plan of the PD.
Res0015.doc
C) The setback of the structures of the mini storage facility shall be no less than that of the
existing Valley Cinema building or 25 -feet, whichever is greater.
D) Landscaped screening be provided around the proposed retention basin subject to staff
and SPARC approval.
Dated: July 26, 2000
I hereby certify.that Resolution No. 00-15 was passed and adopted by the Planning
Commission of the City of Lodi at a continued meeting held on July 26, 2000, by the following
vote:
AYES:
Commissioners:
Beckman, Borelli, Crabtree, Heinitz, Mattheis, and
Chairman McGladdery
NOES:
Commissioners:
ABSENT:
Commissioners:
Schmidt
ABSTAIN:
Commissioners:
ATTEST:
Res0015.doc
Secretary, Planning Commission
0002 E1:99:Li Li IT uoW 6Mp,b000Z auo7ay\SbuTm2J0\9NIN0Z\:W
LEGEND
EMMENTTAL ZONES!
a -t - scu sunt
Ras- �sf ewn+
R -W fAlmfa YfRHfJn
Ym1YY RRbRT WY[nWr!
4YY
R-Mp- IRG OOYR'f WYR'Y�1
�- aRq�ii--lvN IRYifmi�
COMMERCIAL ZONES:
■-w. faorumm+m. Dorm
R-Ct`- �R9SmRYL mlCf al.T•'>mRl
C-1 - RpdidOmimR
C -f - mpGILL
C -a - aIaIMC �A
..
-
OTHER ZONES:
MAP
y
PROPOSED
ZONING
N;_
0002 E1:99:Li Li IT uoW 6Mp,b000Z auo7ay\SbuTm2J0\9NIN0Z\:W
RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 00-16
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI APPROVING THE
REQUEST OF KRISTMONT WEST, INC. FOR APPROVAL OF A TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP TO
CREATE FIVE NEW PARCELS FROM ONE, LOCATEb AT 333 SOUTH LOWER SACRAMENTO
ROAD
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed
public hearing, as required by law, on the requested Tentative Parcel Map in accordance with the
Subdivision Map Act and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 16.12, Parcel Maps;
WHEREAS, the property is located at 333 South Lower Sacramento Road
(APN's 027-040-04);
WHEREAS, the project proponent is Kristmont West, Inc., P.O. Box 6, Fair Oaks, CA 95628;
WHEREAS, the property is zoned R-1, Single -Family, C -S, Commercial Shopping, and RCP,
Residential, Commercial Professional;
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT FOUND, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of Lodi as follows:
1. Negative Declaration File No. ND -00-05 has been prepared in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act of. 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided thereunder.
Further, the Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative
Declaration with respect to the project identified in this Resolution.
2. It is found that approval of the Tentative Parcel Map will result in good planning practice.
3. It is hereby found that neither the design nor planned improvements are likely to cause substantial
environmental damage or substantially and unavoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat.
4. It is hereby found that the Vesting Tentative Subdivision Map is unlikely to cause public health
problems.
5. It is further found that approval of the Tentative Parcel Map will not conflict with easements
acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property within the proposed
parcel(s).
6. Tentative Parcel Map Application Number: 00-P-003 is hereby approved, subject to the following
conditions:
A) That the General Plan amendment 00-2 to change a portion of the existing LDR, Low
Density Residential district to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial district is
approved by the Lodi City Council.
B) That the Rezoning to change portions of the existing R-1, Single Family Residential zone
and C -S, Commercial Shopping Zone to PD(35), Planned Development is approved by
the Lodi City Council.
The following conditions of approval are required for the subject project per City codes and
standards, all to be accomplished prior to, or concurrent with, final parcel map filing unless noted
otherwise:
C) Dedication of street right-of-way as shown on the tentative map.
D) Dedication of public utility easements as required by the various utility companies and
the City of Lodi.
E) Temporary public storm drainage facilities will require City Council approval and need
to be bonded and under agreement for construction prior to final parcel map filing.
i) Submit a storm drainage master plan with design calculations in conformance
with City of Lodi Design Standards. Master plan shall be to the approval of the
Public Works Director or his designee and include the following:
a) A temporary drainage basin to serve the site until the future F -Basin is
constructed.
b) Collection system for all parcels to be served by the temporary
drainage basin. System shall be designed for future connection to
public storm drain system when public facilities are available.
C) Shared use, operations and maintenance agreement for storm water
collection system and temporary drainage basin.
ii) Submit engineered improvement plans conforming to the above-mentioned
master plan for the storm water collection system. Plan submittal shall include
an engineer's estimate and soils report in conformance with City of Lodi Design
Standards.
F) Submit final parcel map per City and County requirements including the following:
i) Waiver of access rights at the Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) canal
except at the existing approved canal crossing.
ii) Standard note regarding requirements to be met at subsequent date.
G) Payment of the following per the Public Works Fee and Service Charge Schedule:
i) Engineering fees for parcel map check/processing.
ii) Engineering plan check and inspection fees for storm drainage collection system
and temporary drainage basin construction.
The following items are conditions of approval for the tentative parcel map, but shall be
deferred until the time of development or building permit issuance:
H) Installation/extension of all public utilities and street improvements in Lodi Avenue in
conformance City of Lodi master plans, design standards and specifications, and Lodi
Municipal Code § 15.44 Off -Site Improvements and Dedications.
All public improvements to be installed under the terms of an improvement agreement to
be approved by the City Council.
I) Engineering and preparation of improvement plans and estimate per City Public
Improvement Design Standards for all public improvements prior to issuance of a
building permit. Plans to include:
i) Soils report.
ii) Grading, drainage and erosion control plan.
J) Abandonment/removal of wells, septic systems and underground tanks in conformance
with applicable City and County requirements and codes prior to approval of public
improvement plans.
K) Design and installation of public improvements to be in accordance with City master
plans.
L) Acquisition of the following outside the limits of the map:
Street easement north of Parcel 4, if needed, to provide pavement transition on
Lodi Avenue (Sargent Road).
M) Payment of the following:
i) Filing and processing fees and charges for services performed by City forces per
the Public Works Fee and Service Charge Schedule.
ii) Development Impact Mitigation Fees per the Public Works Fee and Service
Charge Schedule prior to issuance of a building permit or connection to public
utilities, whichever occurs first.
iii) Wastewater capacity fee at building permit issuance.
The above fees are subject to periodic adjustment as provided by the implementing
ordinance/resolution. The fee charged will be that in effect at the time of collection
indicated above.
N) Obtain the following permits:
i) San Joaquin County well/septic abandonment permit.
ii) San Joaquin County encroachment permit for work within their right-of-way.
iii) Woodbridge Irrigation District permit for improvements within their right-of-
way.
O) The City will participate in the cost of the following improvements:
i) Street construction on Lodi Avenue, if in excess of 34 feet.
ii) Master plan water mains 10 inches and larger.
The following comments are provided as a matter of information. The items listed are not
requirements of the Public Works Department, but indicate conditions normally imposed by other
City departments or agencies which affect and/or need to be coordinated with the design and
installation of Public Works requirements:
P) On-site fire protection as required by the Fire Department.
Q) Landscaping and irrigation system as required by the Community Development
Department.
R) Applicable agreements and/or deed restrictions for access, use and maintenance of
shared, private facilities to Community Development Department approval.
Dated: July 26, 2000
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 00- 16 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission
of the City of Lodi at a continued meeting held on July 26, 2000, by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Beckman, Borelli, Crabtree, Heinitz, Mattheis, and Chairman
McGladdery
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners: Schmidt
ABSTAIN: Commissioners:
ATTEST:
3
Secretary, Planning Commission
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE
OFFICIAL DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF LODI AND THEREBY
REZONING 333 S. LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD (APN 027-040-
04) FROM C -S, COMMERCIAL SHOPPING AND R-1, SINGLE-
FAMILY RESIDENTIAL TO PD, PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
BE IT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. The Official District Map of the City of Lodi adopted by Title 17 of the Lodi
Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows:
15 -acre parcel located at 333 S. Lower Sacramento Road (APN 027-040-
04) is hereby rezoned from CS, Commercial Shopping to PD, Planned
Development Zone, as shown on Exhibit "A" attached, which is on file in
the office of the City Clerk.
6 -acre parcel located at 333 S. Lower Sacramento Road (APN 027-040-
04) is hereby rezoned from R-1, Single -Family Residential to PD,
Planned Development Zone, as shown on Exhibit "A" attached, which is
on file in the office of the City Clerk.
Section A Negative Declaration has been prepared in compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided
thereunder. Further, the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the
information contained in said Negative Declaration with respect to the project identified
in their Resolution No. P.C. 00 -
Section 3 - No Mandatory Duty of Care. This ordinance is not intended to and shall not
be construed or given effect in a manner which imposes upon the City, or any officer or
employee thereof, a mandatory duty of care towards persons or property within the City
or outside of the City so as to provide a basis of civil liability for damages, except as
otherwise imposed by law.
Section 4 - Severability. If any provision of this ordinance or the application thereof to
any person or circumstances is held invalid, such invalidity shall not affect other
provisions or applications of the ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid
provision or application. To this end, the provisions of this ordinance are severable.
The City Council hereby declares that it would have adopted this ordinance irrespective
of the invalidity of any particular portion thereof.
Section 5. The alterations, changes, and amendments of said Official District Map of
the City of Lodi herein set forth have been approved by the City Planning Commission
and by the City Council of this City after public hearings held in conformance with
provisions of Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code and the laws of the State of California
applicable thereto.
Section 6. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed
insofar as such conflict may exist.
Section 7. 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 day of , 2000
STEPHEN J. MANN
Mayor
Attest:
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
State of California
County of San Joaquin, ss.
I, Susan J. Blackston, City Clerk of the City of Lodi, do hereby certify that Ordinance No.
was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Lodi held
September 20, 2000 and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a
regular meeting of said Council held , 2000 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS —
I further certify that Ordinance No. was approved and signed by the Mayor on the
date of its passage and the same has been published pursuant to law.
SUSAN J. BLACKSTON
City Clerk
Approved as to Form:
RANDALL A. HAYS
City Attorney
R-1_
R—CP
PD(16)
ti _mom --
PROPOSED ZONING
LEGEND
RESIDENTIAL ZONES:
[-Il-
A[--YAD-• WOADOEO o
YO
I-
[R---xrxx--- WmmaMffi
r
COMMERCIAL ZONES:
[-n- mxrsseiaxu. em®
L -I - xGEN®Wxw
4i 4�1[ErNG ®Yfnl
OTHER ZONES:
rum - PMU rVxUC
0002 E6:95:LI Ll Inf uoW 6Mp*b000Z auozad\G6utr+eu0\9NIN0Z\
RESOLUTION NO. 2000-173
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AMENDING
THE LAND USE ELEMENT OF THE LODI GENERAL PLAN BY
REDESIGNATING THE NORTHERNMOST 2.12 ACRES
LOCATED AT 333 S. LOWER SACRAMENTO ROAD FROM
LDR, LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL TO NCC,
NEIGHBORHOOD COMMUNITY COMMERCIAL
BE IT RESOLVED, by the City Council of the City of Lodi, that the Land Use
Element of the Lodi General Plan is hereby amended by redesignating the
Northernmost 2.12 acres located at 333 S. Lower Sacramento Road from LDR, Low
Density Residential, NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial, as shown on Exhibit
"A" attached, which is on file in the office of the Lodi City Clerk; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a Negative Declaration ND -00-05 has been
prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as
amended, and the Guidelines provided thereunder. Further, the Planning Commission
has reviewed and considered the information contained in said Negative Declaration
with respect to the project identified in their Resolution No. P.C. 00-14 through 00-16.
Dated: September 20, 2000
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2000-173 was passed and adopted by the
Lodi City Council in a regular meeting held September 20, 2000 by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Hitchcock, Nakanishi, Pennino and Mayor
Mann
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Land
SUSAN J. BLAC STON
City Clerk
2000-173
c V
L'r
Henry Glaves
' ark
z `--
—� R
�I
r—v. ----------
!-Cc�! av
L XI 1 I 1
I
I KQPE:" rz
< I
LDR
C,. a lu-.ate
PR ( pop:
O LD R
j- 7 _ f_ LD R �1 z
P R
L�G�TEN D
wttaL:
f� :.fSpCo^
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN a
LAND USE DIAGRAM y---�:
rY . +iC1w4 +V�.t
7l - 2�-9. �S .V �•�C
• - .oCL-X
•. CITY OF LODI NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Date: September 20, 2000
Carnegie Forum
• • 305 West Pine Street, Lodi Time: 7:00 p.m.
For information regarding this notice please contact:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Telephone: (209) 333-6702
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, September 20, 2000 at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon
thereafter as the matter may be heard, the City Council will conduct a Public Hearing to consider the
following matter:
a) the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval to the City Council for a General Plan
Amendment from LDR, Low Density Residential to NCC, Neighborhood Community Commercial;
rezone from C -S, Commercial Shopping and R-1, Single Family Residential to PD, Planned
Development; and certification of Negative Declaration ND -00-05 as adequate environmental
documentation on behalf of Kristmont West, Inc. for property located at 333 South Lower
Sacramento Road
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community Development Department
Director, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California. All interested persons are invited to present their views and
comments on this matter. Written statements may be filed with the City Clerk at any time prior to the hearing
scheduled herein, and oral statements may be made at said hearing.
If you challenge the subject matter in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone
else raised at the Public Hearing described in this notice or in written correspondence delivered to the City
Clerk, 221 West Pine Street, at or prior to the Public Hearing.
By Order of the Lodi City Council:
Susan J. Blackston
City Clerk
Dated: August 16, 2000
Approved as to form;
Randall A. Hays
City Attorney
JaC1TYCLRKXF0RMS1N0TC00.00C 8/16/00
9��FOp�
DECLARATION OF MAILING
Set A Public Hearing For September 20, 2000 to consider Planning Commission's
recommendation of approval to the City Council for a General Plan Amendment and Rezoning
on behalf of Kristmont West for property at 333 S. Lower Sacramento Road
On August 17, 2000 in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in
the United States mail, envelopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing a
copy of the Notice attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A"; said envelopes were addressed
as is more particularly shown on Exhibit "B" attached hereto.
There is a regular daily communication by mail between the City of Lodi, California, and
the places to which said envelopes were addressed.
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on August 17, 2000, at Lodi, California.
ORDERED BY:
JACQUELINE L. TAYLOR
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
decmail/forms
ORDERED BY:
SUSAN BLACKSTON
CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI
JENNIFER M. PERRIN
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Kristmont West, Inc.
333 S. Lower Sacramento Road
1) 02710237;SEIBEL, HERMAN C & PENELOPE A ;2449 Irl TOKAY ST ;LODI ;CA;95242
2) 02704004;KRISTMONT WAST ;PO BOX 2397 ;LODI ;CA;95241
3) 02704035;VALLEY LAND CO CORP ;7700 COLLEGE TOWN DR STE 101 ;SACRAMENTO
;CA;95826
4) 02704031;TEMPLE BAPTIST CHURCH OF LODI ;801 S LOWER SAC RD ;LODI ;CA;95242
5) 02734001;CHASE, RANDALL G ;2431 DIABLO DR ;LODI ;CA;95242
6) 027240fl1;LARKIN, KEITH & DEBORAH ;301 LELAND CT ;LODI ;CA;95242
7) 02724009;LIEBIG, G J & GOLDA F ;317 LELAND CT ;LODI ;CA;95242
9) 02710102;DAETWEILER, LENARD & ESTHER K ;2449 CORBIN LANE ;LODI ;CA;95242
10)02710103;WOLFF, WESLEY M & V L ;2443 CORBIN LN ;LODI ;CA;95242
11)02710202;WITH£RS, JON D & G A ;2448 CORBIN LN ;LODI ;CA;95242
12)02710203;BOYER, HARVEY V SR & INA M TR ;2442 CORBIN LN ;LODI ;CA;95240
13)02710238;JOINES, RYLLT_S E TR ;4766 E HARVEST RD ;ACAMPO ;CA;95220
14)02710201;ULLRICH, RONALD ;PO BOX 972 ;LODI ;CA;95241
15)02724002;CASHEROS, NICHOLAS SR & M ;309 LELAND CT ;LODI ;CA;95242
16)02734006;BELLA, BRUNO ;2430 W DIABLO DR ;LODI ;CA;95240
17) City Manager
18)Gwynneth Beckman, 2026 Cabrillo Ci., Lodi, CA 95242
19)DHKS DEV. CO., P.O. BOX 667,LODI, CA 95241