HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - February 17, 2021 G-01 PHAGENDA ITEM el . I
CITY OF LODI
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
TM
AGENDA TITLE: Public Hearing to Consider Adopting a Resolution Approving the Planning
Commission's Recommendation to Authorize an Additional 20 High -Density 2020
Residential Growth Management Allocations for The Benjamin Apartment Project
in the Van Ruiten Subdivision
MEETING DATE: February 17, 2021
PREPARED BY: Contract Assistant Planner
RECOMMENDED ACTION: Public hearing to consider adopting a resolution approving the
Planning Commission's recommendation to authorize 20 High -
Density 2020 Residential Growth Management Allocations.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: As part of the City's Growth Management program, the Planning
Commission reviews allocation requests for new housing
developments. Following a public hearing, the Commission makes
a recommendation for City Council consideration.
The project site is located within the Van Ruiten Ranch planned development area. This project site was
part of an annexation in 2007 and had originally been approved for 88 Units in Van Ruiten Ranch map.
On January 27, 2021, the Planning Commission held a public hearing regarding the applicant's request
for a 2020 Residential Growth Management Development Allocation and to review proposed
Development Standards and Guidelines.
At the conclusion of this hearing the Planning Commission:
1) Reviewed a request by Michael Carouba for C Note L.P. for approval of Growth Management
Allocations for an additional 20 High Density Units for a previously approved map with 88 Units
for Van Ruiten Ranch.
The applicant, Michael Carouba for C Note L.P., is requesting growth allocations in order to develop this
project.
EXISTING CONDITIONS/ANALYSIS
A detailed discussion of existing conditions and the requested growth allocation are provided in the
attached Planning Commission staff report.
PH The Benjamin GM Allocations
Page 2 of 2
REQUESTED GROWTH ALLOCATION
A summary of the status of existing available growth allocations and the applicant's request is shown
below. Granting the requested allocation would leave a total of 2,732 allocations available for other
projects.
Category I Unused
Alloca-
tions'
Low 1,257
Density
(Up to 7
DU/Acre)
Medium 634
Density
(7.1-20
DU/Acre)
High 794
Density
(20.1-30
DU/Acre)
Totals: 2,685
CONCLUSION
Add 2020
Alloca-
tions
210
134
134
478
Deduct
2020
Allocations
Already
Granted
<225>
Total Requested Total with
Available Reynolds The
for 2020 Allocations Allocations
<86> 58�
0 928
<261> 1 2,752
<20> 908
<20> 2,732 1
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution granting 20 additional Growth Allocations to
the Benjamin High -Density Project per the recommendation of the Planning Commission:
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable.
ohe o&
John R. Della Monica, Jr. (Feb 8, 202112:50 PST)
John R. Della Monica Jr.
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Staff Report
2. Planning Commission Resolution
3. Comment letters/emails
Allocations
Ranch
Benjamin
Deducted
1,242
--
1,242
<86> 58�
0 928
<261> 1 2,752
<20> 908
<20> 2,732 1
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution granting 20 additional Growth Allocations to
the Benjamin High -Density Project per the recommendation of the Planning Commission:
FISCAL IMPACT: Not applicable.
FUNDING AVAILABLE: Not applicable.
ohe o&
John R. Della Monica, Jr. (Feb 8, 202112:50 PST)
John R. Della Monica Jr.
Community Development Director
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission Staff Report
2. Planning Commission Resolution
3. Comment letters/emails
CITY OF LODI
PLANNING COMMISSION
Staff Report
MEETING DATE: January 27, 2021
APPLICATION NO: Growth Management Allocation: 2020-042 PC
REQUEST: Request for Planning Commission approval of Growth Management
Allocations for an additional 20 High Density Units for a previously
approved map with 88 Units for Van Ruiten Ranch. (Applicant: C Note
L.P.; File: PL2020-042; CEQA Status: Section 15332 — In -fill development
consistent with the General Plan and Zoning Code)
LOCATION: 2525 W. Century Blvd.
Lodi, CA 95242
APN: 058-030-30
APPLICANT: C Note L.P.
PO Box 1597
Lodi, CA 95241
Michael Carouba for
C Note L.P.
1420 S. Mills Ave. Suite M
Lodi, CA 95242
PROPERTY
OWNER: C Note L.P.
1420 S. Mills Ave. Suite M
Lodi, CA 95242
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the City Council approve the
additional 20 high density residential growth allocations for The Benjamin Apartment project
subject to conditions in the attached draft resolution.
PROJECT/AREA DESCRIPTION
General Plan Designation: The project site includes General Plan Land Use designations of
Low Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High
Density Residential, Open Space and Public/Quasi Public
Zoning Designation: PD (41)
Property Size: 2 acres — Project is 125,066 SF
SUMMARY
The applicant proposes to construct a new 108 units market rate apartment community. The
project will include 48 two bedroom apartments and 60 one bedroom apartments. The site
includes six apartment buildings, a clubhouse, landscaping, and parking lot with carports.
Per the Lodi Zoning Code, the proposed facility requires approval of a site plan and architectural
review by the Site Plan and Architectural Review Committee (SPARC).
BACKGROUND
The project site is located within the Van Ruiten Ranch planned development area. This project
site was part of an annexation in 2007 and has been designated previously for low density
residential. The property is zoned PD(41), which allows for innovative and creative development
that will enhance the City of Lodi.
General Plan and Zoning
The following sections describe the site and its setting:
General Plan and Zoning Compliance
Existing Land Use
General Plan Compliance: The project site includes General Plan Land Use designations of Low
Density Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Open Space and
Public/Quasi Public. The proposed project is consistent with the current General Plan (2010) land
use designations, layout and required density.
Zoning Compliance: The project site is zoned Planned Development 41 (PD -41). Planned
Development zoning designations provide flexibility in the application of development standards
that will produce development projects of superior quality, including retention of unique site
characteristics, creative and efficient project design, etc., then would have been achieved through
strict application of the development standards required by the primary zoning district.
TABLE A:
ADJACENT ZONING DESIGNATIONS AND LAND USES
GENERAL PLAN
ZONE
LAND USE
North
High Density
PD(41)
Residential
Residential
South
Medium Density
PD(41)
Residential
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
East
Residential
Medium Density
Residential
RMD
West
Low Density
PD(41)
Residential
Residential
Figure 1: Project Site — PD (41) Schematic Plan
The Residential General Plan land use designations are described as follows:
The Van Ruiten Ranch project densities are: Low Density Residential 2 — 8 units per acre,
Medium Density Residential 8 — 20 units for acre and High Density Residential 15 - 35 units per
acre. The General Plan Land Use Policy 3 (LU P3) prohibits development at less than the
minimum and maximum density prescribed by each residential land use category. The proposed
project does comply with applicable General Plan density requirements.
The following General Plan Land Use and Community Design and Livability (CDL) goals and
policies are applicable to the proposed project:
• Land Use Policy 3: Do not allow development at less than the minimum density prescribed
by each residential land use category.
• Land Use Policy 22: promote infill development that maintains the scale and character of
established neighbors.
• CDL Policy 2: Ensure that Zoning and Subdivision ordinances include measures that guide
infill development to be compatible with the scale, character and identity of adjacent
development.
The PD(41) zoning district is described as follows (Figure 1):
The Van Ruiten Ranch project densities are: Low Density Residential 2 — 8 units per acre,
Medium Density Residential 8 — 20 units for acre and High Density Residential 15 - 35 units per
acre.
Development standards for the PD (41) - High Density Residential zoning district are
summarized in (Table B): 108 units / 5.61 acres = 19
The proposed project does comply with applicable Development standards for the PD (41)
density requirements.
3
Table B: PD (41) High Density Residential — Zone Development Standards
The Planned Development was originally granted; 145 units (LDR), 55 units (MDR), and 88
units (HDR) Growth allocation units as seen in the Table C below:
Table C: PD (41) Land Use Summary
r General Plan
L
Low Density Residential
LDR LDR / LDR PD
Density
2 - 8 du/ac.
8 - 20 d
ulac,
15 - 33 du/ac.
Single Family Residential
t,A n mum -at Area (Scuare Fee-,
5.000
3,000
N/A
N/A
4.2
Mcximum Lot Coverage'
60%
65%
65%
70%
A
Minimum Lot Width (Fee -f
L3
30
NIA
N/A
Minimum Lot Depth (Feet)
75
70
NIA
NIA
Minimum Lot Frontage clang
Public Streets Feet
30
^0
N/A
N/A
Minimum Front Setbacks - =ram Public S-ree- (Fee-,'•
B
To living area
15
1.0
10
10
C
To aarch or entry
12.5
10
10
10
D
To garage
202
182
13 2
N/A
MLnimum Front Se -backs - =ram Prvate Drive (Feet) s
To living area j
N/A
j N/A j
L
j 4
To parch or en
N/A
•J/A
L
4
To garage
NIA
N/A
2
N/A
To second story living arec
NIA
N/A
2
N/A
Minimum Side Setbacks (Feet) 3
E
Interior lots
5
3
3
5
F
To public street
10
10
10
10
To open space
5
5
5
N/A
Zero lot line
5/0
4/0
410
4/0
Minimum Rear Setbacks {Feet) -3
G
To living area
14
10
10
5
To recessed qcrage
N/A
5
3
N/A
To detached garage
5
5
5
5
H
To cIaroce from olley
5
5
5
5
1
Setback from living area to garaqe
5
3
N/A
N/A
Maximum Building Height
35
35
35
45
J I
Minimum Distance between Builc n s
6
1 6 1
b
1 b
Parking Standards (off-street) Dimensions
AS DE=1NED
IN THE LODI DEVELOPMENT CODE
Spaces required per unit
2, covered
1, coverer
The Planned Development was originally granted; 145 units (LDR), 55 units (MDR), and 88
units (HDR) Growth allocation units as seen in the Table C below:
Table C: PD (41) Land Use Summary
r General Plan
L
Low Density Residential
LDR LDR / LDR PD
Single Family Residential
31.3
145
Medium Density Residential
MDR MDR I MDR P❑
Single Family Residential
7.0
55
High Density Residential
HDR HDR / HDR PD
Multi -Family Residential
4.2
88
Existing Land Use
The site is currently vacant. The area surrounding the project site is developed with residential
and open space. The project proposal is consistent with the neighborhood area.
Aerial photos and street views of the project site are shown on the next page.
Figure 2: Existing Site and Vicinity_ Aerial View
COMMERCIAL •{ FAA. �7••t}Q-__J
II �
(RESIDENTIAL I
MEDIUM
C I RHD T DENSITY)
1�
M. (RESIDENTIAL E 1
fR WDENT AL HIGH DENSITY) I 1
EDI UM
DENSITY] I` I <� �- rte` I 1 , •$S'�
Ian ULT i;
RHD III �_ j RMD
(RESIDENTIAL �� •. RE, DENTI �•
•�'. NIGH DENSITY) 7 I, ��•
DIUM' µµ
DENSITY)r IIS
BENJAMINr f� 4
APARMENT
1 I j COMPLEX 1 1 t
_ f SITE I
1
I '
RMD
(RESIDENTIAL OPEN T+
SPACE
DEENSINSITYY)
- 7
I •
Growth Management Allocations
The applicant is requesting 20 high density residential growth allocations to develop the project.
The applicant proposes to construct a new 108 unit market rate apartment community.
The allocation system gives priority through point assignments to projects that reduce impacts
on services, infrastructure, and resources. The ordinance sets an annual growth limit of two
percent of the City's population, compounded annually. Once the number of allocable units is
5
figured, the City requires that the allocation units be distributed among housing types as follows;
44 percent low density, 28 percent medium density and 28 percent high density (GM -P4).
The California Department of Finance (DOF) sets the City population for January 1st of each
year'. A summary of the city's population growth over the past ten years is shown below:
The average annual growth for the period from 2010 to 2020 has had an average growth rate of
0.92%, slightly less than 1 %, well below the maximum 2% annual growth allowed by the Growth
Allocation process.
Growth Allocations issued to projects from 2013 to 2019 are summarized below.
Table E: ISSUED GROWTH ALLOCATIONS 2013-2020
Table D: City Population
Low (0.1-7)
Year
High (20.1-30)
Dept. of Finance
Revised Population
Estimate
Growth
Rate
Percentage
2010
62,134
2011
63,317
1.9
2012
Garfield
63,447
0.2
2013
6
63,788
0.5
2014
329
63,975
0.3
2015
0
64,415
0.7
2016
64,920
0.7
2017
Harvest Crossing
65,911
1.5
2018
42
67,121
1.8
2019
67,430
0.46
2020
67,930
0.74
The average annual growth for the period from 2010 to 2020 has had an average growth rate of
0.92%, slightly less than 1 %, well below the maximum 2% annual growth allowed by the Growth
Allocation process.
Growth Allocations issued to projects from 2013 to 2019 are summarized below.
Table E: ISSUED GROWTH ALLOCATIONS 2013-2020
Project
Low (0.1-7)
Medium (7.1-20)
High (20.1-30)
TOTAL
Bennett Interlaken Dr.
25
Camper - Sac
28
28
Garfield
6
6
Gateway North
107
98
329
534
Gateway South
560
0
0
560
Gianoni / Baker
18
18
Harvest Crossing
42
42
Iris Drive
9
9
Luca Place
17
17
State of California, Department of Finance, E-1 Population Estimates for Cities, Counties and the State
with Annual Percent Change — January 1, 2019 and 2020. Sacramento, California, May 2020
Miller Property
65
65
Reynolds Ranch
39
338
330
707
Rose Gate
232
232
Rose Gate II
250
95
180
525
Sunwest Cottages
12
Tienda Square
8
8
Twin Arbors
27
Van Ruiten Ranch
145
55
88
288
Villa Fiore (VRR)
67
67
Vineyard Terrace
235
235
Vintner Square
57
57
TOTAL
1,559
982
939
3,480
Average Per Year:
222
140
134
496
The following calculation explains the current City population of 67,930 as of January 1, 2020
and 477 units available for 2020:
1. Calculate two percent of the City's current population: 67,930 x 2% = 1,358.60
2. Divide 1,358 by the average number of persons per household 1,358 / 2.85 = 476.49
3. Divide the 476.49 (477 du) units into the 3 housing types:
44% low density = 210 units
28% medium density = 134 units
28% high density = 134 units.
A summary of the status of existing available growth allocations and the applicant's request is
shown below. Granting the requested allocation would leave a total of 2,732 allocations
available for other projects.
The resulting total number of Growth Allocations available for 2020 are:
Table F: Growth Allocations 2020
Category
Unused
Add 2020
Deduct
Total
Requested
Total with
Alloca-
Alloca-
2020
Available
The
The
tions'
tions
Allocations
Allocations
Benjamin
Benjamin
Already
for 2020
Allocations
Allocations
Granted
Deducted
Low
1,257
210
<225>
1,242
--
1,242
Density
(Up to 7
DU/Acre)
Medium
634
134
<86>
582
--
582
Density
(7.1 —20
DU/Acre)
High
794
134
0
928
<20>
908
Density
(20.1 —30
DU/Acre)
Totals:
2,685
478
<261>
2,752
<20>
2,732
Growth Allocation Point System and Analysis
The land use and density of development proposed (Low Density Residential, Medium Density
Residential, High Density Residential, Public / Quasi Public and Open Space) are the same as
the project examined in those documents, there is no evidence that any of the impacts identified
would be substantially increased or made more severe. Development which has occurred since
2010 is consistent with the assumptions included in the Final El R, including development within
the Van Rutien Ranch Planed Development.
The Growth Management Ordinance includes a priority location area and a point system to
assist the City with prioritizing issuance of growth management allocations. The priority location
area designates lands available for development and provides development categories of one,
two or three, with Priority Area 1 being the first priority area for development. The priority areas
are based on availability of city services (e.g., water, wastewater, storm drains, streets, police,
fire and parks). The proposed project site is classified as an in -fill project. For scoring purposes
in -fill projects are considered Priority Area 1 projects. The point system was established to rate
projects based on various project merits in order to determine if one project should be approved
before another, particularly if there are more allocation requests than there are available
allocations.
Cmclusinn
Staff sent a copy of the application to various City departments for review and comment. Their
comments and requirements incorporated into the attached resolution. Staff believes that the
Commission can make the findings in order to approve the proposed project, subject to
conditions outlined in the attached resolution.
The proposed residential development aligns with the residential land use designations and
densities assigned to site in the current General Plan. Further, as stated in the code compliance
sections above, the applicant has proposed development standards for this subdivision that are
consistent with the historical development of the City.
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT
The Class 32 "Infill" Categorical Exemption (CEQA Guideline Section 15332), hereafter referred
to as the Class 32 Exemption, exempts infill development within urbanized areas if it meets
certain criteria. The class consists of environmentally benign infill projects that are consistent
with the General Plan and Zoning requirements. This class is not intended for projects that
would result in any significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality impacts. This exemption
is not limited to any use type and may apply to residential, commercial, industrial, public facility,
and/or mixed-use projects.
The City Council, by Resolution No. 2010-41, which became effective on April 7, 2010, certified
an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 20009022075, for the City of
Lodi General Plan. This General Plan designated the project site as Low Density Residential,
Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Public / Quasi Public and Open Space.
No potential new impacts related to the Project have been identified that would necessitate
further environmental review beyond the impacts and issues already disclosed and analyzed in
the General Plan EIR. No increase in development density beyond what was anticipated in the
General Plan for the Project site would occur. No other special circumstances exist that would
create a reasonable possibility that the proposed Project will have a significant adverse effect on
the environment.
Therefore, the proposed Project qualifies for the exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section
15332 and no further environmental review is required.
PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE:
Legal Notice for the Use Permit was published in the Lodi News Sentinel on Saturday, January
16, 2021. Thirty-five (35) public hearing notices were sent to all property owners of record
within a 300 -foot radius of the project site as required by California State Law §65091 (a) 3.
Public notice also was mailed to interested parties who had expressed their interest of the
project.
RECOMMENDED MOTIONS
Should the Planning Commission agree with staff's recommendation, the following motion is
suggested:
"I move that the Planning Commission adopt a Resolution finding that the project has
satisfied the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant
to Section 15332, the project is consistent with the findings of the previous
environmental documents prepared for the 2010 Lodi General Plan and is an infill
development in an urban area and recommend to the City Council approval of the
request for Growth Management Allocations for an additional 20 High Density Units for a
previously approved map with 88 Units for Van Ruiten Ranch (File No. 2013-02)."
ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS:
Approve the request with attached or alternate conditions
Deny the request
Continue the request.
Respectfully Submitted,
Joann Martinez
Contract Assistant City Planner
ATTACHMENTS:
A. Project Aerial Landscape View
B. Draft Resolution
Concur,
John R. Della Monica Jr.
Community Development Director
10
Aerial Landscape View
CLUBHO
L>Ui
Aerial Landscape View
From:
Prabh Nav
To:
Planning Commission Comments
Subject:
Refused
Date:
Thursday, January 21, 2021 1:48:56 PM
I just got an letter in my mail about building plan near to my i m not agree with that plan i
have an issues regard that first of that pool and club area view on front of my door we have
allmost 10-15 kids all arround my house thats not safe for them .... driveway should not b in
front of street i have a lot of issues n i m not agree in these building map
From: BESS SIERRA
To: Planning Commission Comments
Subject: File # PL2020-042 Applicant C Note L.P. Van Ruiten Ranch
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 20217:15:33 AM
Hello -
We received a Notice of Public Hearing requesting for the planning commission to approve
growth management allocations for additional 20 high density units in our neighborhood.
Where will these additional 20 units be built? Will there be another story added?
Has the planning commission even visited the area? Perhaps even walk around our
neighborhood?
Do you realize that the streets in the area are somewhat narrow, unlike Reynolds Ranch
Parkway?
We have driven by Hibiscus and Petal streets, and find many small children riding their bikes
or just playing out in their front yard. (Not good to have a lot of traffic.)
Can you just imagine the traffic this will cause? People are concerned about the safety of their
children.
Could you take a look again at having the entrance and exits on Lower Sac or Century?
Take a look at the other side of Lower Sac; the K. Hovnanian homes have a street into their
neighborhood off of Lower Sac, and another off of Century.
Thank you.
Concerned Neighbor
Bess Sierra
From: Rochelle Pham
To: Kari Chadwick
Subject: My Comment for: Notice of Public Hearing SPARC - January 27 2021
Date: Tuesday, January 26, 20218:55:04 AM
Hi Kari,
Here's my comment for the proposed additional 20 units in the Notice of Public Hearing SPARC - January 27 2021.
I hope residents really can have a say in situations like this. My comment below:
I am a Lodi resident and homeowner practically right next to the empty lot that has been approved for the apartment
complex. I received another Notice that shows the proposed/approved apartment complex requesting an additional
20 units. I want to send my comments because this is serious to me as a Lodi resident and homeowner that will be
affected by this proposal apartment complex/additional units that will be located next to me.
Since the first time I sent my email above and spoke during the City of Lodi meeting (12/09/20), I am still standing
firm with my disapproval and vote against the apartment complex that will be build on the empty lot right next to
my home. If a resident really can have a say in these circumstances or projects, I would like to say that I am voting
against the apartment complex and the additional 20 units.
The apartment complex will be overwhelming to the neighborhood, even with the approved 88 units. The additional
20 units is unnecessary. It is located too close to our homes. The complex is literally right next to our home and
neighborhood. Why can't these apartments be build further away? The size of the complex alone will block the
entire brand new neighborhood. The entry/exit openings will become a nuisance and inconvenience because it is
facing into the neighborhood. It will cause an influx of traffic in our neighborhood due to these inconvenient
entry/exit openings. Apartments bring in a number of random people. There are going to be too many people in this
small lot. We do not want people we do not even know looking into our homes, yards. It is important to know our
neighbors to protect each other and prevent crime. These concerns are the same to my first email: privacy, noise,
parking, safety, and crime/prevention.
As a homeowner that lives next to the empty lot, I am voting against the apartment complex and the additional 20
units. Please, please, please do not add more to the complex; it is going to be massive in size already. This apartment
complex will bring nuisance and concerns to our neighborhood. Please take a homeowner's concerns into
consideration. Lodi was known for its wineries and beautiful homes, but unfortunately that's not the case anymore.
Thank you
Rochelle Pham
RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 21-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATIONS FOR AN
ADDITIONAL 20 HIGH DENSITY UNITS FOR A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED MAP WITH 88
UNITS FOR VAN RUITEN RANCH.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a duly noticed
public hearing, as required by law, in accordance with the Lodi Municipal Code,
Section 17.74; and
WHEREAS, the project proponent is C Note L.P., P.O. Box 1597, Lodi, CA 95241; and
WHEREAS, the project parcel is owned by: C Note L.P., P.O. Box 1597, Lodi, CA 95241; and
WHEREAS, the project is located at 2525 W. Century Blvd. (APN 058-030-30); and
WHEREAS, the property has a General Plan designation of Low Density Residential, Medium
Density Residential, High Density Residential, Open Space and Public/Quasi
Public and is zoned PD 41 (Van Ruiten Ranch Planned Development), which
designates the site for high density residential development; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred; and
Based upon the evidence within the staff report and project file the Planning Commission finds:
Environmental Analysis
1. The Class 32 "Infill" Categorical Exemption (CEQA Guideline Section 15332), hereafter
referred to as the Class 32 Exemption, exempts infill development within urbanized areas
if it meets certain criteria. The class consists of environmentally benign infill projects that
are consistent with the General Plan and Zoning requirements. This class is not intended
for projects that would result in any significant traffic, noise, air quality, or water quality
impacts. This exemption is not limited to any use type and may apply to residential,
commercial, industrial, public facility, and/or mixed-use projects:
The City Council, by Resolution No. 2010-41, which became effective on April 7, 2010,
certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR), State Clearinghouse No. 20009022075, for
the City of Lodi General Plan. This General Plan designated the project site as Low Density
Residential, Medium Density Residential, High Density Residential, Public / Quasi Public
and Open Space.
No potential new impacts related to the Project have been identified that would necessitate
further environmental review beyond the impacts and issues already disclosed and
analyzed in the General Plan EIR. No increase in development density beyond what was
anticipated in the General Plan for the Project site would occur. No other special
circumstances exist that would create a reasonable possibility that the proposed Project will
have a significant adverse effect on the environment.
Therefore, the proposed Project qualifies for the exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15332
and no further environmental review is required.
Growth Allocation
2. The proposed map is consistent with the Growth Allocation process, and qualifies for a 2020
growth allocation, as follows:
1
a. The proposed project is an "infill project" and therefore considered to be within a Priority
1 area for development; and
b. Assuming an average household size of 2.85 persons (per the Housing Element of the
General Plan), The average annual growth for the period from 2010 to 2020 has had an
average growth rate of 0.92%, slightly less than 1 %, well below the maximum 2% annual
growth allowed by the Growth Allocation process; and
c. Because the City is not approaching the maximum number of applications for growth
allocation (The Benjamin project is the final 2020 application), the points system does
not apply.
Electric Utility
3. All PUE's on the southern perimeter of this project (in proximity to W Century) and the
western perimeter of this project (in proximity to Hibiscus Dr., & Petal Way), are required to
remain and not be impacted by this project. PUE's are imperative to serving power to local
and wider areas and are vital for enabling future growth. All applicants and projects should
always work under the assumption that the Utility will NOT abandon any PUE's. Further,
this project will eventually need to dedicate additional PUE where determined by the Utility,
when the project finalizes its design.
4. For system reliability reasons, Electric Utility will require installation of electric primary
conduits along Lower Sacramento Road.
5. Actual total and size of conduits including possible vault(s) will be disclosed with
Substructure and Electrical Layout Work Order.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT DETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of
the City of Lodi that:
1. The Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council approve a 2020
Growth Allocation of 20 high-density units for the proposed project, The Benjamin, for a
previously approved map with 88 Units for Van Ruiten Ranch (File No. 2013-02).
I certify that Resolution No. 21-01 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the
City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on January 27, 2021 by the following vote:
AYES: Commissioners: Maciel, Martin, Olson, Singh, Slater and Chair Hicks
NOES: Commissioners:
ABSENT: Commissioners: Cummins
ATTEST
Secretary, Planning Commission
VJ
Kari Chadwick
Subject: FW: Concern: Proposed Apartment Complex - Empty Lot - 2525 Century Blvd, Lodi CA
-----Original Message -----
From: Jennifer Cusmir
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 202110:53 AM
To: 'rochellephamtrinh@yahoo.com' <rochellephamtrinh@yahoo.com>
Subject: RE: Concern: Proposed Apartment Complex - Empty Lot - 2525 Century Blvd, Lodi CA
Ms. Pham,
Thank you for contacting the Lodi City Council. Your email has been received and also forwarded to City Manager Steve
Schwabauer, Deputy City Manager Andrew Keys, City Attorney Janice Magdich, and Community Development Director
John Della Monica.
Jennifer Cusmir, CMC, MPA
City Clerk / Interim PIO
Post Office Box 3006, Lodi CA 95241-1910
(209) 269-4504 Direct 1 (209) 333-6807 Fax www.lodi.gov
-----Original Message -----
From: Rochelle Pham <rochellephamtrinh@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, January 26, 20218:41 AM
To: City Council <CityCouncil@lodi.gov>
Subject: Concern: Proposed Apartment Complex - Empty Lot - 2525 Century Blvd, Lodi CA
Hi,
I am sending this email in regards to receiving a letter in the mail about a notice that includes a plan for a multifamily
unit proposal (apartments). I have sent this email for the meeting that was held on 12/09/20. 1 want to send this email
to the City Council because this is serious to me as a Lodi resident and homeowner that will be affected by this proposal
apartment complex that will be located next to me.
The location for the multifamily unit proposal is the empty lot (2525 Century Blvd, Lodi CA) on Century Blvd & Lower
Sacramento, next to the FCB homes empty lot.
I am aware that the lot is zoned for high density residential. I was told that the FCB homes empty lot was going to
become town homes / single family homes, therefore, I thought this empty lot was to become town homes, single family
homes, or (I was also told) senior homes. Or at least match the other empty lot and the neighborhood. Our current
neighborhood, which I love, is safe, quiet, low to no traffic, and family oriented.
I am disappointed that the empty lot may become apartments with THREE STORIES. I have multiple concerns about this
multifamily unit proposal (apartments) and in no specific order.
1.) Safety - Apartments bring in all sorts of (random) people - Good and bad. Noise, break ins, crime.... How will safety be
managed? Vineyard apartments in Lodi had car break ins, car rims stolen ... and they are located right next to homes.
Rubicon apartments have reviews where people complained about noise. Children will not be able to play or ride their
bikes/etc in the neighborhood due to traffic, people, and cars.
2.) Entry/Exit Openings - Both openings are facing into our neighborhood which leads to an increase in traffic.
Apartments often have parking issues (too many people in one apartment/too many cars) and people will try to find the
closest parking possible. We have very limited existing street parking already!!
3.) Traffic - We have low to no traffic in our neighborhood. Apartments bring in more (random) people and more traffic.
The exit and entry openings face into our neighborhood. It will cause safety, traffic, and parking issues.
4.) Parking - There can double or triple the parking, but there is never only 1 person in a one bedroom and there is never
only 2 people in a two bedroom apartment.... People have more than 1 car. People have guests and parties, there's
rarely only 1 guest per person. Parking will never be enough for an apartment complex. We have very limited existing
street parking. Parking will become an issue, especially if apartment parking isn't enough as well as the entry/exit
openings facing our neighborhood.
5.) Privacy - The apartments will not be 1, not 2, but 3 stories, with balconies. People will be able to see into our
backyards. Yes, pine trees can be grown, but pine trees can't cover everything.
6.) Location - Why are these apartments being built so close to our new homes? Again, affecting all of the concerns I've
listed. Apartments should be at least built across the street and away from homes. There are many empty lots, that are
not close to homes, that can be used for apartments.
7.) Park Usage - Home owners in the area are paying taxes for the park that is near by. Are people in the apartments
going to be using/paying for it too?
8.) Home Value - Are these apartments going to decrease value in our homes? Are they going to be low income? If not
enough occupied, will they become section 8?
9.) Neighborhood — The overall neighborhood will be affected with these 3 story apartments. These apartments will not
match or "fit in" with the neighborhood, rather it will overwhelm it. We only have 1— 2 story homes, so all you will see
when you look at the neighborhood are 3 story apartments. You can paint or dress up the apartments to match the
neighborhood, but all you will see on Lower Sacramento and Century Blvd are those 3 story apartments. I believe Lodi
should have beautiful homes in a beautiful neighborhood, like Sun West and Rose Gate.
I am voting against having the empty lot become apartments. I want to stay in Lodi and have my family here for a long
time. I am all for Lodi's community and city growth, but I feel this apartment proposal won't benefit. Our neighborhood
has great people and families who respect the city, and it can become well established for/in the future. For the city and
community to grow, Lodi need long term people, families, adult, children. It is also important to know your
neighbors ... to protect the neighborhood and to keep crime down.
There are brand new apartments already that is right off the freeway 99 (Rubicon). There are affordable apartments
down the street (Century Apartments and Vineyard Apartments) Why do we need more? I feel that building more
homes in the empty lot will be beneficial and will look more cohesive/match with the neighborhood.
What type of people does Lodi want to bring in with this apartment?
I received another Notice that shows the proposed/approved apartment complex requesting an additional 20 units.
Since the first time I sent my email above and spoke during the City of Lodi meeting (12/09/20), 1 am still standing firm
with my disapproval and vote against the apartment complex that will be build on the empty lot right next to my home.
If a resident really can have a say in these circumstances or projects, I would like to say that I am voting against the
apartment complex and the additional 20 units.
The apartment complex will be overwhelming to the neighborhood, even with the approved 88 units. The additional 20
units is unnecessary. It is located too close to our homes. The complex is literally right next to our home and
neighborhood. Why can't these apartments be build further away? The size of the complex alone will block the entire
brand new neighborhood. The entry/exit openings will become a nuisance and inconvenience because it is facing into
the neighborhood. It will cause an influx of traffic in our neighborhood due to these inconvenient entry/exit openings.
Apartments bring in a number of random people. There are going to be too many people in this small lot. We do not
want people we do not even know looking into our homes, yards. It is important to know our neighbors to protect each
other and prevent crime. These concerns are the same to my first email: privacy, noise, parking, safety, and
crime/prevention.
As a homeowner that lives next to the empty lot, I am voting against the apartment complex and the additional 20 units.
Please, please, please do not add more to the complex; it is going to be massive in size already. This apartment complex
will bring nuisance and concerns to our neighborhood. Please take a homeowner's concerns into consideration. Lodi was
known for its wineries and beautiful homes, but unfortunately that's not the case anymore.
Thank you
Rochelle Pham
RESOLUTION NO. 2021-45
A RESOLUTION OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE
PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION FOR 2020 GROWTH
MANAGEMENT ALLOCATIONS FOR THE VAN RUITEN SUBDIVISION
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi has heretofore held a
duly -noticed public hearing, as required by law, in accordance with the Lodi Municipal Code,
Section 17.74; and
WHEREAS, the project proponent is C Note, L.P., P.O. Box 1597, Lodi, California,
95241; and
WHEREAS, the project parcel is owned by: C Note, L.P., P.O. Box 1597, Lodi,
California, 95241; and
WHEREAS, the project is located at 2525 West Century Boulevard (APN 058-030-30);
and
WHEREAS, the property has a General Plan designation of Low -Density Residential,
Medium -Density Residential, High -Density Residential, Open Space and Public/Quasi Public
and is zoned PD 41 (Van Ruiten Planned Development), which designates the site for high-
density residential development; and
WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Lodi City Council does hereby approve
a 2020 Growth Allocation for the proposed project, The Benjamin, for a previously -approved
map with 88 units for Van Ruiten (File No. 2013-02) as follows:
Requested Recommended
2020 Allocations 2020 Allocations
The Benjamin 20 High -Density 20 High -Density
Dated: February 17, 2021
------------------------------------------------------------------------
------------------------------------------------------------------------
I hereby certify that Resolution No. 2021-45 was passed and adopted by the City
Council of the City of Lodi in a regular meeting held February 17, 2021, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Chandler, Hothi, and Mayor Nakanishi
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — Khan and Kuehne
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None
NNIFE CU IR
City Cler
2021-45
City Council Consideration
Of Growth Management Allocations
For An Additional 20 High Density
Units For A Previously Approved Map
With 88 Units For Van Ruiten Ranch
January 20, 2021
Background
The applicant is proposing to construct a new 108 -unit
market rate apartment community that has recently
been approved through SPARC and Planning
Commission.
Previously 88 units of growth allocation were approved
for this site as part of the Van Ruiten Ranch. An
additional 20 high density residential growth allocations
are required to accommodate the 108 -unit project.
(88+20=108)
A Growth Allocation for 20 high density residential units
will need to be approved by the City Council
i�=IT.M M,
E RUI EW City Council
COMMERCIAL
Aerial Vi:e:w:]--�-
------- ------
I
�I ! RHD
f RMD (RESIDENTIAL
(RESIDENTIAL HIGH DENSITY)
I MEDIUM
DENSITY)
RHD I
cp (RESIDENTIAL
HIGH DENSITY) t
BENJAMIN =
j+l APARMENT `-
I I COMPLEX
SITE
. t,
RMD
(RESIDENTIAL
MEDIUM
DENSITY)
7 F
RMD
(RESIDENTIAL
MEDIUM—
! DENSITY) I
_ Ai
rttp
WNW .
OPEN 7R MMD
SPACE (RESIDENTIAL
MEDIUM
DENSITY)
OPEN
SPACE
A
d v
Site Plan
r 7-T-]
s�szsu'w
BUILDING
C1
.tm
.. ,IF
I I
I
CLUBHOUSE I � I
8UlLDING
64
BUILDING
B1
Ill Lu A2 Of
W
I.° O
r
UI(n -- -- ----------------------
BUILDING
- - -- -- --
aO
I
�I
0
BUILDING BUILDING
C2 B2,
--- --- - --------------- -- ------------- ------- -- -------------- --
---
0
"I
Q
O�
��
Lu
Lu
q� I Q
a
J)
Ill Lu A2 Of
W
I.° O
r
UI(n -- -- ----------------------
BUILDING
- - -- -- --
aO
I
�I
0
BUILDING BUILDING
C2 B2,
--- --- - --------------- -- ------------- ------- -- -------------- --
---
Proposed Amendments to Growth Allocation
Available Growth Allocations
1
1
Deduct
Total with
Unused Add 2020 2020
Total
Requested
The
Alloca- Alloca- Allocations
Available
The
Benjamin
�
tions tions Already
Allocations
Benjamin
Allocations
for 2020
Allocations
Granted
Deducted
1,257 210 <225> 1,242 -- 1,242
634 134 <86> 582 -- 582
794
134 0 928 <20> 908
ENJELM 2,685 478 <261 > 2, 752 <20> 21732
Questions?
9
I
G-1
Jennifer Cusmir
From: Rochelle Pham <rochellephamtrinh@yahoo.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 12:12 PM
To: City Council Comments
Subject: My Concerns/Opinion: The Benjamin Apartment Complex
I am a Lodi resident and homeowner next to the empty lot that has been approved for the apartment complex. I take
this situation seriously because the apartment complex will affect me, our neighborhood, and homeowners.
Unfortunately, my home is located RIGHT NEXT to this lot. I have been strongly voicing my vote AGAINST the apartment
complex proposal via my last emails due to many concerns: safety, privacy, crime & prevention, traffic, parking,
entry/exit openings, noise, overwhelming size of the complex, location of the complex (too close to homes), and effects
on home value.
The overall apartment complex is going to be three stories tall and massive in size. It's not 1 building, it's going to be 6
buildings in the lot. I do not want people I do not even know looking into my home and back yard from their balconies.
The location is located way too close to our home(s). It is not even across the street, it is located RIGHT NEXT to my
home. The entry and exit openings is also located RIGHT NEXT to me and faces into the neighborhood. This creates an
inconvenient influx of traffic and nuisance to the neighborhood. It doesn't matter if an apartment complex is luxurious
because if a person can't afford the rent, they can partner up with multiple people to get on the lease or just find
someone to put their name on the lease. What type of people do you want to bring into Lodi?
If a resident/homeowner can have a voice in this situation, I am strongly voting against the 20 additional units. There is
no confusion on what I am voting on. Honestly, I wish/pray that the apartment complex will not be build in the empty
lot. What will be best is completing the empty lot with single family homes so the neighborhood looks cohesive. As I
mentioned in my previous email, it is important to know our neighbors to protect one another and to prevent crime.
Whoever is making a decision on this, please put yourself in my/our shoes as a homeowner that lives right next to this
lot.
P.S. It's sad because it is getting exhausting for me to continue voicing my opinion when I feel this whole apartment
complex project/additional units will get approved either way, especially after listening to the City meetings. Please,
please, please put all of the concerns you receive into consideration. Please read my previous email of concerns as well.
Again, whoever is making a decision on this, please put yourself in the shoes as a homeowner that lives right next to this
lot. Honestly, would you want your home to be RIGHT NEXT to massive 3 story apartments? If there's yes, that means
you've never lived next to an apartment complex.
Thank you
Rochelle Pham Trinh
Jennifer Cusmir
From: Prabh Nav <prabh.nav11 @gmail.com>
Sent: Wednesday, February 17, 2021 12:26 PM
To: City Council Comments
Subject: 20 High -Density 2020 Residential Growth Management Appts
Hey my name prabhjot Singh Uppal I m currently reside In LODI. This project is pretty close to me . House which I own is
closed to that area where they plan to build high density appt. I have an issue with this construction first of all we all
need a morning sunlight. If high density units build it affect sun exposure to my house which I enjoy most in early
morning other than that this area. Is congested already . If high density appt will exist thats not safe for us we feel like
stuck. In future if any natural disaster happen like earthquick etc high density units are not safe for us .there are too
many reason .which I wanna explain but at end I just wanna say I m not satisfy with this plan. If it doesn't stop I will go to
court regard that .......
Please immediately confirm receipt
of this fax by calling 333-6742
CITY OF LODI
P. O. BOX 3006
LODI, CALIFORNIA 95241-1910
ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS
SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION
APPROVING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO
AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL 20 HIGH-DENSITY 2020 RESIDENTIAL
GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATIONS FOR THE BENJAMIN
APARTMENT PROJECT IN THE VAN RUITEN SUBDIVISION
PUBLISH DATE: SATURDAY, FEBRUARY 6, 2021
TEAR SHEETS WANTED: One (1) please
SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL TO: JENNIFER CUSMIR, CITY CLERK
LNS ACCT. #5100152 City of Lodi
P.O. Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
DATED: THURSDAY, FEBRUARY 4, 2021
ORDERED BY: JENNIFER CUSMIR
CITY CLERK
PAMELA M. FARRIS
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
KAYLLe CLAYTON
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
Verify Appearance of this Legal in the Newspaper — Copy to File
Emailed to the Sentinel at legals@lodinews.com at (time) on (slate) (pages)
fonnAadvins.doc
DECLARATION OF POSTING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION
APPROVING THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO
AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL 20 HIGH-DENSITY 2020 RESIDENTIAL GROWTH
MANAGEMENT ALLOCATIONS FOR THE BENJAMIN APARTMENT PROJECT IN
THE VAN RUITEN SUBDIVISION
On Tuesday, February 4, 2021, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a
Notice of Public Hearing to consider adopting resolution approving the Planning
Commission's recommendation to authorize an additional 20 High -Density 2020
Residential Growth Management Allocations for The Benjamin Apartment Project in the
Van Ruiten Subdivision (attached and marked as Exhibit A) was posted at the following
locations:
Lodi City Clerk's Office
Lodi City Hall Lobby
Lodi Carnegie Forum
WorkNet Office
I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct.
Executed on February 4, 2021, at Lodi, California.
PAMELA M. FARRIS
ASSISTANT CITY CLERK
ORDERED BY:
JENNIFER CUSMIR
CITY CLERK
KAY Eo CLAYTON
ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK
\\cvcftiv0l\administration$\Administration\CLERK\Pubtic Hearings\AFFADAVITS\DECPOSTCDD.DOC
DECLARATION OF MAILING
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER ADOPTING RESOLUTION APPROVING THE
PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION TO AUTHORIZE AN ADDITIONAL 20
HIGH-DENSITY 2020 RESIDENTIAL GROWTH MANAGEMENT ALLOCATIONS FOR THE
BENJAMIN APARTMENT PROJECT IN THE VAN RUITEN SUBDIVISION
On Tuesday, February 4, 2021, 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
Notice of Public Hearing to consider adopting resolution approving the Planning Commission's
recommendation to authorize an additional 20 high-density 2020 Residential Growth
Management Allocations for The Benjamin Apartment Project in the Van Ruiten Subdivision,
marked Exhibit A. The mailing list for said matter is attached hereto, marked Exhibit B.
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 February 4, 2021, at Lodi, California.
PAMELA M. FARRIS
DEPUTY CITY CLERK
Forms/decmail.doc
ORDERED BY:
JENNIFER CUSMIR
CITY CLERK, CITY OF LODI
'+ '''1Jl_.�' �. +V
KAY CLAYTON
ADMINISTRATIVE G ERK
�. CITY OF LODI NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
Carnegie Forum Date: February 17, 2021
• 305 West Pine Street, Lodi Time: 7:00 p.m.
For Information regarding this notice please contact:
Jennifer Cusmir
City Clerks" Ili i TI A
Telephone: (209) 333-6702 -
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, February 17, 2021, 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 at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider
the following item:
a) Adopting a resolution approving the Planning Commission's
recommendation to authorize an additional 20 High -Density 2020
Residential Growth Management Allocations for The Benjamin
Apartment Project in the Van Ruiten Subdivision.
While social distancing measures are imposed due to COVID-19, Council chambers are
closed to the public during meetings of the City Council. Members of the public may
view and listen to the open session of the meeting at www.facebook;comlCit of�il or
, ttps:llaoom.usllt98343457003'7i)wd Vn]14anRKUm9PWURFbcJnbThSWDFOdz09.
Information regarding this item may be obtained in the Community Development
Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, (209) 333-6711. All interested persons are
invited to present their views and comments on this matter. Written statements may be
filed with the City Clerk by emailing councilcommentscr.lodi,gov. All comments received
prior to the close of the public hearing will be read into the record. Oral comments may
be made at: mtoswzoani,ws/il83434570037nwd;gVm14an-R . m9PWURFbQJnbThSW_DF0d249.
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 close of the public hearing.
By Order of the Lodi City Council:
Jennifer Cusmir
Jennifer Cusmir
City Clerk
Dated: February 3, 2021
Approved as to form:
Janice D. Magdich
Janice D. Magdich
City Attorney
AVISO: Para obtener ayuda interpretativa con esta noticia, por favor Ilame a la oficina de la
Secretaria Municipal, a las (209) 333-6702.
CLERK\PUBHEAR\NOTICES\NOTCDD_lelaconl_GrowlhAllocallon 1127121
02-17-21 CC PH 300 foot radius mailing list for Growth Allocations for The Benjamin at 2.rC� �ty�d ^
APN
OWNER
ATTN
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
2057 LOWSAC LLC
19934 MEADOW
05803006
ETAL
OAK DR
WOODBRIDGE
CA
95258
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875014
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875015
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875016
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875017
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875018
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875019
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875020
ICOMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875021
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875029
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875030
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875038
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
BLOSSOM LAND
10100 TRINITY
05875046
COMPANY
PARKWAY #420
STOCKTON
CA
95219
2606 CARNATION
05871028
BOGACS JOSEPH JR
WY
LODI
CA
95242
05875039
CHAFFEE MICHAEL
2636 PETAL WAY
LODI
CA
95252
CHAVEZ ANTHONY
2601 CARNATION
05871011
& ANNMARIE
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
CUNNINGHAM
2607 CARNATION
05871012
LINDA RAE
WY
LODI
CA
95242
DIAZ CHRISTINA L
05871006
ETAL
GEORGE R OROZCO
2630 PETAL WAY
LODI
CA
95242
590 MADISON AVE
05876007
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876008
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876009
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876010
DRP CA 3 LLC
113TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
02-17-21 CC PH 300 foot radius mailing list for Growth Allocations for The Benjamin at 2525 W. Century Blvd
APN
OWNER
ATTN
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
590 MADISON AVE
05876011
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876012
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876013
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876014
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876015
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876016
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876019
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876020
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876021
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876022
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876023
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876024
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876025
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
�NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876026
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05876027
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05879019
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05879020
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
590 MADISON AVE
05879021
DRP CA 3 LLC
13TH FLR
NEW YORK
NY
10022
2631 CARNATION
05871016
DUVAL KRYSTAL M
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
340 PALLADIO
05871027
ELLIOTT HOMES INC
PKWY STE 521
FOLSOM
CA
95630
2628 HEATHER
05875033
FIELDS MELYSSA
STREET
LODI
CA
95242
GAINES HOLLADAY
2637 CARNATION
05871017
PRISCILLA IRENE
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
02-17-21 CC PH 300 foot radius mailing list for Growth Allocations for The Benjamin at 2525 W. Century Blvd
APN
OWNER
ATTN
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
GARCIA CARLOS
ROCHELLE PHAM
05871002
ETAL
TRINH
2609 PETAL WY
LODI
CA
95242
GEORGE CHESTER P
05871008
& NICOLE D
2618 PETAL WAY
LODI
CA
95242
HAFNER MARK C &
05875031
MICHELLE A
2616 HEATHER ST
LODI
CA
95242
HERNANDEZ
05871007
MANUEL A
2624 PETAL WY
LODI
CA
95242
JIMENEZ DANIEL
NOEL & RIVERA
2613 CARNATION
05871013
LISBETH ETAL
WY
LODI
CA
95242
JUAREZ JOSEPH A JR
05875040
& LORENA
2648 PETAL WY
LODI
CA
95242
K HOVNANIAN CA
3721 DOUGLAS
05876017
LAND HOLDINGS
BLVD STE 150
ROSEVILLE
CA
95661
K HOVNANIAN CA
3721 DOUGLAS
05876018
LAND HOLDINGS
BLVD STE 150
ROSEVILLE
CA
95661
KIM DANIEL &
2624 CARNATION
05871025
WONSUN
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
05803038
LODI CITY OF
CITY CLERK
PO BOX 3006
LODI
CA
95241
05803039
LODI CITY OF
PO BOX 3006
LODI
CA
95240
05823024
LODI CITY OF
PO BOX 3006
LODI ICA
95241
LOGAN DERWIN
05871010
ETAL
2606 PETAL WY
LODI
CA
95242
MCCABE TIMOTHY
2636 CARNATION
05871023
M ETAL
LAURA E KADLACSIK
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
05871004
MUSTO ALYSSA
2621 PETAL WAY
LODI
CA
95242
NEHRER URSULA S
18740 RED BANK
05871015
TR
RD
RED BLUFF
CA
96080
RIVERA FIDELMAR
05871009 j&
MARIA
2612 PETAL WY
LODI
CA
95242
RIVERA JOSE &
2619 CARNATION
05871014
CELIA YERENA
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
ROJAS SUSANA A
05871005
ETAL
JORGE L LUNA
2627 PETAL WAY
LODI
CA
95242
SCHMITZ BRETT &
05871001
SCHMITZ EMILY
2603 PETAL WY
LODI
CA
95242
SIERRA JOSE P TR
2622 HEATHER
05875032
ETAL
jSTREET
LODI
CA
95242
SINGH INDERJIT &
2630 CARNATION
05871024
KAUR SATBIR
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
SINGH JARNAIL &
2600 CARNATION
05871029
SANJALEETA
WAY
1LODI
CA
95242
02-17-21 CC PH 300 foot radius mailing list for Growth Allocations for The Benjamin at 2525 W. Century Blvd
APN
OWNER
ATTN
ADDRESS
CITY
STATE
ZIP
SINGH KAMALDEEP
05871003
& SEMIRA
2615 PETAL WY
LODI
CA
95242
2634 HEATHER
05875034
TORRES GILBERT
STREET
LODI
CA
95242
UPPAL PRABHJOT
2618 CARNATION
05871026
SINGH ETAL
WAY
LODI
CA
95242
ZUNINO, JACOBA TR
1021 SPRINGFIELD
05803030
ETAL
JDR
WALNUT CREEK
CA
94598
Mfair St. MWfair Ct
LM
Ln
s
Mintury Btvd.-
Bernlni wy.
o --_F6_
Henri L
r