Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - May 21, 2003 G-01 PH�sCITY OF LODI COUNCIL COMMUNICATION AGENDA TITLE: Conduct Public Hearing to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval of the request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and J, Jeffrey first for an Annexatiota, General Placa Amendment and Prezoning at 13669North Cherokee Lane; 1441,407I, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Lane. The request also includes a recommendation to certify Negative Declaration ND -02-1 I as adequate environmental documentation for this project ME:E'FING DATE.: May 2I, 2003 PREPARED BY: Community Developcxaent Director RECOMMENDED ACT1W That the City Council approve the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval of the request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and J. Jeffrey Kirst for an Annexation, General Plan Amendment and Prezoning at I3669 North Cherokee Latae; 1443,4071, 41.45 and 4219 East Harney Lane. That the City Council also approves the recommendation to certify Negative Declaration ND -02-1I as adequate environmental documentation Fer the project. BACKGROUND INFORMATION: The Planning Commission at its Public Hearing of April 9, 2003 reviewed and approved the recornmendations of staff for a recommendation of approval of the requested actions above to the City Council. At this meeting staff explained that the request included two separate project areas and three requests. The first was the annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning of the I- anserdMiller Properties (Southeast Gateway Annexation) at the southeast corner of Lodi. The second was the general plan amendment and prezoning of the Kirst property, which fronts Harney Lane just west of Mills Avenue. It is important to note the Kirst property had already been annexed by the Local Agency Formation Commission (1.AFC ) as part of the previously reviewed acid approved, Lac.lcyard Annexation. The, Planning Commission found that the Southeast Gateway Annexation will add 18.21 acres of land to the City for Ow purpose, of development under the general plan land use designation of MDR, Medium Density Residential and zoning classification of R -MD, Residential Medium Density. These laird use and zoning classifications allow the development of attached or detached residences at a density no greater than 20 dwelling units per acre. The Planning Commission also considered that the Kirst property is already within the City Limits, but without a general plan or zoning designation that allow for development. The property i s 1.23 -acres in size and will develop under the general plan desigzaatiota of LDR, Low Density Residential and zoning of R-2, single family residential. The Planning Commission found that these designations are consistent with the surrounding land north of Narney Lane, which will develop as homes at a density of lap to 7 -units per acre. The Planning Commission approved resolutions P.C. 03-05 and 06 finding the rec;ormnended zoning changes and general plan amendments for both of the project sites to he consistent with the General Plan. The Califomia Environmental Quality Act requires that projects be reviewed for their potential to create c°nvirommental impacts. The process requires that potential areas of impact are identified and a level of significance assessed, The Southeast Gateway project area was found to have impacts that may be found significant if not mitigated. Statements and specific mitigations are provided in the attached mitigated negative declaration (ND -03 - APPROVED:.. I= Flyni City Mallager '1308N euschaff er.doc 05/13/03 coulicil. Communication Meoting Date: May 21, 2003 Page 2 11), which has been reviewed by the Planning Commission and found to adequately address and mitigate potential e :vitonmental impacts. The proNrty of the first gene-ral plan affie.ndmfnit and prezone has been reviewed in Negative Declaration D-02-04 that was certified by the Planning Cornnaission and City Council during. the Lac;kyard Annexation hearings. FUNDING None required r Konradt Bartlarn Community Development Director Prepared by: Associate Planner. Mark Mossner M Attachwettts j MI:+MCiitANDTTM, City of Lodi, Community Development Department. P, Toa Planning Commission From: Community Development Department Date: April 9, 2003 Subject: The request of fury E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and L Jeffrey Kirst for the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval to the City Council for an Annexation, General Plan Amendment and Prezoning for 13669 Notch Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane. The request also includes a recommendation that the City Council certify Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project, SUMMARY 'This public hearing review item includes three separate parts: I _ The annexation, general plan amendment, and prezoning of the IlansenlMiller Properties at the southeast coater of Lodi; 2. The recommendation that the City Council -certify Negative Declaration ND -02-1 I as adequate environmental documentation for number one; 3. The general plata amendment and prezoning of the Kirst property, which fronts Harney Lane just west of Mills avenue. This property has already been annexed by the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) as part of the previously reviewed and approved, Lackyard Annexation. The property of the Kirst general pian amendment and prezone has been reviewed in Negative Declaration Nig-02-04 that was certified by the Planning Commission and City Council during the Lackyard Annexation hearings. The Southeast Gateway Annexation will add 18.21 acres of land to tire City for the purpose of development under the general plan land use designation of MDR, Medium Density Residential and zoning classification of R -MD, Residential Medium Density. These land use and zoning classifications allow the development of attached or detached residences at a density no greater than 20 dwelling units per acne. T he Kirst property is within the City Limits, but without a general pian or zoning designation that allow for development. The property is 1.23 -acres in size and will develop under the general plan designation of LDR, Low Density Residential and zoning of R-2, single family residential. These designations are consistent with the surrounding land, and ensure that the property can be integrated into future developments. Single-family zoning allows residential development up to 7 -units per acre (See Vicinity Map). BACKGROUND The City's General Ilan is required by State Law to provide information and analysis of seven different aspects of development; these aspects are referred to as elements. The required elements include Land Use, Circulation, Housing, Conservation, Open Space, Noise, and Safety. The City's General Flan includes these required elements and has added Growth Management and Urban Design and Cultural Resources. Each element of the General Plan is required to be equally weighted, integrated, internally consistent, and compatible, The threee relative elements to the annexation process are the Land Use Element, which in this case is being amended to establish a permanent designation, the Growth Management Element, which provided direction leading to the establishment of the City's Growth Management Ordinance, and the. Housing Element with the goal to provide a range of housing types and densities. AX-62-01doc When tom's General Plan was adopted by the City Council in 1991 the subject properties were designated in the Land Use Element to be PR, Planned Residential. The City's Growth Management Ordinance was also adopted in 1991. This ordinance has designated the Southwest Gateway properties with a Priority Area I status and the Kirst property as Priority Area 2. The priority areas are established based on a land areas ability to connect to existing utilities and its adjacency to existing or planned development. There are three levels of priority, one being the highest and three being the lowest. ANALYSIS The General Plan defines PR, Planned Residential as follows: "This designation provides for single family detached and attached homes, secondary residential units, multifamily residential units, parks, open space., public and quasi -public uses, and similar and compatible uses and is applied to largely undeveloped areas in Elie unincorporated area of the GP." Planned Residential is anticipated to be re- designated during the annexation process. Staff finds that the proposed MDR, Medium Density Residential and LDR, Low Density Residential amendments are consistent with PR as defined. In addition, we find that the subsequent zoning designations of RSD, residential medium density and R-2, Single Farrtily Residential are consistent with the proposed General Plan land use designations. Residential Medium Density (R -MD) zoning at the Southeast Gateway properties is an important proposal for the City. This is an opportunity for the City to move toward the primary goal of the City's Housing Element, to balance housing types and densities. Staff finds that this is an ideal location being near a developing elemen€ary school and park to the northwest, and for its easy access to a major thoroughfare and highway to the south and east. Staff also finds medium density zoning provides more homes on less land, and provides an opportunity for a variety of housing types for varied incomes. These are basic planning principles that help slow the conversion of agricultural land into urban uses, and help the City meet its fair share of the regional housing needs mandated by the State of California The City's Growth Management Ordinance requires staff to appropriately time the annexation of new land for residential development, staff finds the Southwest Gateway project area request is appropriate. This land has been designated Priority Area I and is adjacent to existing development on the north and west sides. Given that the City has developed within priority area 2 for many years and is near to developing in priority area 3, the land of the Southwest Gateway project area is prime for development, Annexation, is the first step in the development process for this land. The Planning Commission will have the opportunity to review the development of the project site in detail when application is made for growth management development plan review and building permit allocation request, and subsequently during tentative subdivision map review. The soonest the City can accept an application for a growth management development plan review and allocation is May of 2003. Typically, the development plans are approved and allocated November of the same year, and the tentative subdivision maps are approved early the following year. With the typical time frame, the earliest staff would expect this site to develop is around the middle of 2004. As far as the Kirst property is concerned, the proposed zoning to R-2, Single Family Residential is the only zoning that makes sense. The property is a single parcel in an area that is committed to the development of single-family residences. During the annexation, general plan amendment and prezoning of this area under the Lackyard Annexation, this property was left out because staff was unable to reach the property owner. Jeff Kirst subsequently purchased the property and petitioned LAFCO to include the property in the annexation. LAFCO agreed with the condition that the property obtain the necessary general plan designation and zoning. The Kirst property is merely catching up with the actions that should have taken place as part of the Lackyard Annexation, The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that projects be reviewed for their potential to create environmental impacts. The process requires that potential areas of impact are identified and a level of significance assessed. This project was found to have no significant impacts. Statements to attest to this are provided in the attached negative declaration. Staff finds that the attached negative declaration (ND -02-1 1) is adequate environmental documentation for the project. 1X-02 03.dcc 2 Staff finds that the proposed annexation is a logical extension of the City's boundary. The project area is contiguous to the existing City limits and the City has anticipated annexing the land from the County as evidenced by its PR, Planned Residential General Plan land use designation; furthermore, the City has planned and is prepared to provide services to these areas. RECOLVIMENDATTC)N Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend a three-part approval to the City Council: J) Approve the request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller for their requested Annexation, General Plan Amendment, and Prezoning for the Southeast Gateway Addition to Lo& 2) Approve the request of J. Jeffrey Kirst for his requested General Flan Amendment and Prezoning; and 3) Certify Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for the project. The recommendations shall be, subject to the conditions listed in the attached resolutions. AERN 1TNF, PLANNING_CQMMISSIQN ACTIONS Approve the Requests with Alternate Conditions « Deny the Requests Continue the Requests Respectfully Submitted, Mark Meissner Associate Planner AX-02-03.doc Reviewed and Concur, —may F F � J.D. Hightower City Planner CITY OF LODI PLANNING COMMISSION Staff Report MEETING DATE: April 9, 2003 APPLICATION NO'S: Annexation: AX -02-03 Rezone No. Z-02-06 General Plan Amendment, GPA -LU -02-06. REQUEST- The request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy ,'Miller, and J. Jeffrey Kirst for the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval to the City Council for an Annexation, General Plan Amendment and Prezoning for 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4345 and 4219 East Harney Lane„ and 1443 East Harney Lane. The request also includes a recommendation that the City Council certify Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project. LOCATIONS: 13669 North Cherokee Lane, 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane. Assessor's Parcel Numbers: 062-290-17, 38, 37, & 14; and 058-230-17 (See Vicinity Maps) APPLICANTS: Gary E. Hansen Don & Nancy Miller L Jeffrey Kirst P.O. Box 2095 4071 East Harney Lane P.O. Box 1259 Saratoga, CA 95070 Lodi, CA 95240 Woodbridge, CA 95258 OWNERS: Parcel (062-290-17) Parcel (062-290-14,37,38) Parcel (058-230-17) Sarre as above. Same as above. Awnallah Ali Mossed 1443 East Harney Lane Lodi, CA 95242 Site Characteristics-. 'The Gary HansenlNeuschaffer property (062-290-17) is a 10.28 - acre lot on the northwest comer of the intersection of Harney Lane and Cherokee Lane. This property is mostly unimproved with a small rural residence and accessory building at the northeast corner of the parcel. The property is contiguous to the existing City of Lodi city limits tome north. The Miller's properties (062-290-14, 37, & 38) are contiguous parcels to each other and the Neuschaffer property and contain a total of 7.93 acres. Parcel 14 is a 0.67 -acre rural residence fronting Harney lane with no immediate adjacency to the City. Parcel 37 is a 6.57 -acre wholesale nursery and cherry orchard fronting Harney Lane and is adjacent to the City on its west and north boundaries. Parcel 38 is a 0.69 -acre rural residence fronting Harney lane adjacent to the City on its west boundary_ The Teff KirstlMossed property (058-230-17) is about 1.7 -miles west of the Miller and Neuschaffer property. This parcel contains 1,23 -acres with the northern half as vineyard and with a rural residence fronting Harney lane. This parcel was a last minute addition to the Lackyard Annexation approved by the Planning Commission and City Council in the later part of 2002, and the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) early this year. LAFCO has conditioned this property's annexation with the City's approval of a General Plan amendment and prezoning. nX-02-o3r.doc General Irian Designation: All Properties: PR, Planned Residential (City); RL, Residential Low Density (County) Zoning Designation: All Properties: AU -20, Agricultural Urban Reserve (County) Property Size.: Five parcels totaling 19.44 -acres, Aeeiasen4 �c>nina and Rand Use: North: All Properties: R-1 Single Family Residential. South: All Properties: ACT -20, Agricultural Urban Reserve (County) East; KirstlAwnallah: R-2, Single Family Residential. Neuschaffer & Miller: Hwy, 99. West: All Properties: R-2, Single Family Residential. N aghbnrhocad t:haracterlst9cs: Neuschaffer & Miller: These properties are within San Joaquin County and are generally located north of a vineyard across Harney Lane., south of the existing Richard's Ranch single-family residential subdivision in the City, east of the Thayer Ranch single-family residential subdivision in the City and Stockton Street, and west of Cherokee Lane and Highway 99. KirstlAwnallah: This property is in the process of being annexed as part of the Lackyard Annexation, which includes four other properties essentially surrounding this one. The adjacent properties are made up of rural residences fronting Harney Lane, a small vineyard, and otherwise mostly vacant land. At some point in the future, these properties are intended to develop as single-family residences as is dictated by their R-2 zoning. ENVIRONMENTAL. ASSESSMENT'S: Negative (declaration ND -02-11 has been prepared in accordance with CEQA. This document adequately addresses possible adverse environmental effects of this project. No significant impacts are anticipated. Negative Declaration ND -02-04 was previously reviewed and certified by the Planning Commission under resolutions PC -02-34 & 35 to be adequate environmental documentation for the subject actions on 1443 East Harney Lane (058-230-17). PUBLIC HEARING NoucE: Legal Notice for the Annexation, General Plan, Amendment, and Prezone was published on March 1, 2003. A total of 75 notices were sent to all property owners of record within a 300 -foot radius of the subject property. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend a three-part approval to the City Council: 1) Approve the request of Crary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller for their requested Annexation, General Pian Amendment, and Presorting of the Southeast Gateway Addition to Lodi: 2) Approve the request of J. Ieffrey Kirst for his requested General Plan Amendment and Prezoning; and 3) Cagy Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for the project. The recommendations shall be subject to the conditions listed in the attached resolutions. AX-02-03r.doc ALTERNATIVE PLANNING COMMISSION ACTIONS: Approve the Requests with Alternate Conditions Deny the Requests Continue the Requests ATTACHMENTS: I, Vicinity Maps 1 Negative Declaration 3. Draft Resolutions AX-QZ-U'3r.doc 0I ti, van x m' er ea .� I CENTURY BLVD ice! c7ri<To Hn c p'� � Bash i 7 _ /VIbVI Bf�C@ 1 �ame � vn r. O -- I _ —r-...._._ A 1 O _ brO k r. 1 I - NARN 1 1 J I j I----------- VICINITY MAP J de.f itirst. Propert,V i ij „ - Fvou�i'ertsi D� '° tW xl r r c J L'mP g ' 5611 1 @f Clr CENTURYBLVD--A-i-T a t f-`� -1 Ix E” :o Swallow Ln. I� �7,76, � 9 � ik Q � 2 m�, I` -=�o Raven n� hrookm cera r _ a p Salas 1J W L S LU = Park IdlelnndDr 3 � -T � I - B S 2111 !1' a Im I i- rr211 i a Cfl 101 ❑. e Y 8 k - 211 .� EQrcOS px � W "._ `li>`t' I�f ups - chaffer Dr. ?—fG I'llTr'�i__e Culbertson Dr, /CITY 3I..IMITS j; ul an � `iqJ nner I HARNEY LN ' I Area of annexation I VIC"INITY MAP I I ; I i I I ,t Southeast ti Gateway Proo yr .,el tinea J� 4 F. i2irvx5(luapry5,vn6t0)mryDEi(I-0RCO+�.➢JI aN. Y'.. RFSOLUTION NO. P.C. 03- A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LORI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF T14E REQUESTS OF GARY E. HANS N, DON AICD NANCY MILLER, ANIS J, JEFFREY IRST FOR GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENT 02-06 TO THE LORI 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 Dian Land Use Amendment in accordance with tivc- Gc.ver-nment Code and Lodi Municipal Ca e Chapter 11 .94, Amendments; WHEREAS, the properties ars; located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Ll. army Late; and 14�r3 East Plarney Lane (062-290-14,17 , 37, 38 &. 059-230-17); WHEREAS, l .5b69 North Cherokee Lane is a i 0.28 -acre parcel, contiguous to the Cite Limits on its noz° h rra bout davy=, and eomaii-is a small rural residence artai accessory, building at the northeast cornu- of the Marcel, WHEREAS, 4071 East. Harney Lane ss a 0,69 -acre rural residence fronting Harney large adjacent to the C-ity tin its ,vest bo€zndary; WHEREAS, 4145 East Harney Lane is a 6.57 -acre wholesale; nursery and cherry orchard fronting Harney Lame and is tadjaccnt to the City on its crest and north boundaries; WHE .l AS, 4214 Fast Harney Lane is a 0.67 -acre rural residciwe fronting Harney la.nf, with no immediate adjacency to tyre C'ity; WHEREAS, 1443 East Harney Lane is a 1,21 -acre parcel with the northern half as vineyard and with a rural residence fs ontinc, Har€rev lane-, WHEREAS, the pro €:ct proponents are Crary E. Hansen, P.O. Box 2095, Savatoga, CA 95070; Don & Nancy Miller. 4€171 East Harney Large, Lodi, CA 95240 & J. Jeffrey Kirst, POQ Box 1259, Woodbridge, CA 95258; WHEREAS, Negative Dcclaration File No. ND -02-1 l has been prepared in compliance with the C, lhfbratia Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided there under; WHEREAS, the properties have a General flan designation of PR, Planned Residential; WHEREAS, ` ho proposod amendment to the Land Use Diagram of the General Flan is consistent with all Elerntmts of the General Plan, specifically the proposed amendments implement the following policies: A) Land Use and Growth N'tanagoinent Element - Goal C, Policy 1, in that. the project will annex 18.21 acres of upsidential land, which is necessary to maintain an adequate supply of housing to accornrnodate the City's 2 percent per year housing growth rate. B Laird Use and G= -owth A\Aana=ment Eltment. - Goal C, Policy 6-: "'the City shall strive to maintain a lxousing ratio of 65% low density, 10% +medium density, and 25°1x, high density in new de.ivlopmcnt." C) Housing Elemcnt - Goal A, Policy 1, "The, City shall promote the development of a broad mix of housing t"wes." 19) Hous:trg Elemont - Goal A., Policy 9, in that the project is the first step of the adopted approval process for this residential development. E) Conservation Element - Goal C:, Policy 1, in Haat: the Southwest Gateway project area his existing or pending development on throe sides including the Richard's Ranch subdivision to the north, thy, Thayer Ranch subdivision to the west, and State highway 99 to the east. F) Safety Element - Gaal C, Policy 7, in that the nearest fire station to the; Southwest Gateway properties and Karst property is located at l-= & Beckman Park that is within a 3 -minute response time to both. Res for C1PA-02-06.doc G) Urban Design and Cultural Resources Element - Coal F, Policy 1, in that the general plan land use designation of the Rirst site to LDR will insure that the scale of development is consistent with surrounding land uses; and WHEREAS, all legal prerequisites to the approval of this request have occurred. NOW, THEREFORE, BE PTFOUNT}, DETERMINED AND RESOLVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi as follows: ?, It is found that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in Negative Declaration ND -02-1I- Further, the Commission recommends that the City Council certify the Negative Declaration as adequate environmental documentation for the project. 3. It is found that the parcels to be re -designated are the parcels located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane: 4671, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Sane; and 1443 East Harney Lane (062-290-14, 17, 37, 38 & 058- 230-17). 4. It is found that the requested General Plan Land Use Amendments from PR, Planned Residential to MDR, Medium Density Residential & LDR, Low Density Residential provides for the orderly development of the City and will serve sound Planning practice, 5. I; is hereby found that the project sites are physically suitable for their proposed types of development. 6. It is hereby found that the projects will have a Less than significant impact on Prime Farmland as defined by the. Land Evaluation and Site Assessment system of the California State Department of Conservation. 7- Lhe Planning Commission of the City of Iodi hereby recommends approval of General Plan Land Use Amendment 62-06 to the City Council of the City of Lodi. 8. No variance front any City of Lodi adopted code, policy or specification is granted or implied by the approval of this resolution. Dated: April 9, 2003. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 03 --was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on April 9, 2003, by the following vote: AYES. Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABs,rAIN: Commissioners: Secretary, Planning Cama fission Res for GPA-02-06.dee lLMon G n DFow arn I / ".-.i P �-�Ti �I a � 0f 17 �j @3 OW ar� t,T T� rl Imo_ -1 m � ban 1 er CIE. � CENTURY BLVD TTwa!IOW Ln,c Ll z�—tN Raven n no in b}rdDr. — O rt s Idtem,Dr d m_I� LO I Ii er egos �� Arcadia f �. m 2 Schaffer r. C�I ertson 6c I \� ° CT( MITS � b � rine rn U }d I IF cc PRR 7 ,5 l + �—• LD IN i E ���-E�ri1°� 11 -P RESIDENTIAL IAL: }} DD o c s R sn n. � '1 v J n �"1 t � r(- ow 'N D Osxsm aEs oTII .�1 n I-n t q 11 `y/1 ERD eioisI asDo All I'I �R """ED RESID rvlu, ��r).t tlheaSt G-d ieway Properties COMMERCIAL rvr. evresen000/couuuxm wuucacu 'ti cS cE 6MI. OW -1111 ; DC DCNMCWry COWWM3CW- -� JT,'1G!il P0� - CVByC/OU/5� P Pi1C OBP - %1(NY16N H0.5�k5 ANp FnSk•; > - GRICJLipRi o�J 11 1 r i ice; pan t � 77 r r Iti1 L ll 1 - j, 8r p. OWt1 f. C � ettilp Llj x Basin DBP r / :ml ance 1, _I L— T amen own r. j T— c ° -71-4.-J_1.. --� PQP I � PR t Y t -,LDR LD µ I I I SRR - i�� ��� F) j [ , r-, IR r , LEGEND r � l�1 �� �� -�' �� �'-� 1 du t� r'� .� 1- C� '� I RESIDENTIAL p LAN 4f \$ (( /�{� f.Dlcc o D Nsry aEs �;Niraf i �i D VS ET l � l I A T R AM NBP REDltlb_E PES ft SOENPAI� I 4 ASiSICE P?S@EN E 4R f7 RESIOEM l Jeff KMrsi Prop riy COMMERCIAL mcc c usoRN000/ca MUNin rouumcu.. cc EneWf cbMMEkC pf � 9c DF410. DIME W cbulAcecaf ' 6 - 'OTHER Bec !TIGRI i Bas NS +uB F0.RK5 j n - GRIgniURQ "trltlawey ry. .w.-iq OLW.Vxe�.b Rl P]fn'.:Wt%M�-IJ - RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 03 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTS OF GARY E. HANSEN, DON AND NANCY MILLER, AND J. JEFFREY KIRST FOR PREZONING Z-02-06 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 Prezoning in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17.84, Amendments; WHEREAS, the properties are located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East flat ney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane (062-290-14, 17, 37, 38 & 058-230-17); WHEREAS, the project proponents are Gary E. Hansen, P.O. Box 2095, Saratoga, CA 95070; Don & Nancy Miller, 4071 Fast Harney Lane, Lodi, CA 95240 & J. Jeffrey Kirst, P.O. Box 1259, Woodbridge, CA 95258; WHEREAS, the properties have zoning designations of RL, Residential Low Density, and AU -20, Agricultural Urban Reserve (San Joaquin County); and 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 -02-11 has been prepared in compliance with the. California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided there under. 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 the parcels to be prezoned are the parcels located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Barney Lane; and 1443 Fast Harney Lane (062-290-14, 17, 37, 38 & 058-230-27), 3, It is found that the requested prezoning of R -MD, Residential Medium Density and R-2, Residential Single Family are not in conflict with adopted plans or policies of the General Plan of the City and will servesound Planning practice. 4, It is further found that the parcels of the proposed rezoning are physically suitable for the development of a residential medium density project. 5. The Planning Connnission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of Rezone Z-02-06 to the City Council of he City of Lodi, Dated: April 9, 2003 I hereby certify that Resolution No, 03-_ was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on April 9, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Conunissioners: ATTEST; Secretary, Planning Commission ----------- ----- z w Up z i -mm PD(20) A LL A, 8 E if z' Al L T - f ip Tl 1 CENTURY BL�LD -4- R..11OW LO, �7- L TT f'-1 7-1- T 1 1 1 z c' Salas N, dlewiid Q-�' Park le —i—1 LLJ t if Aro d ha er F. 0 FIE D! E �Inedson D" -�7' c; -2n Z -Ll c - HA NINE LN H LEGEND RESIDENTIAL ZONES K -IED Z0-i\'-:lNG Vilf'Up 4 T H 'WW" Sout'heast Gat.eway Properties UOMMERCIAL ZONES ." G If 'Z.- "0' m ('—"M STREE ZONES 1110 - W� <1 v mer ea rum r o�a (� I 0 --- � _ _ 'f< �n 'n 7. � .— J y Of Basis -a Ik ° –° r � z F 4 rout ence L, PUB IZl !F I' amus ow! - m f b _ a I I l JfPOk pf: PUB lI J- I 1= �-{ efia`rna i 1. U -20 F� � �I gMq � l I � — I i I I i --- --- -- - i i LEGEND F `` ({� ((vp3 \7 'I jr j{ RESIDENTIAL ZONES_ -�l \� t F A0F 1� l J _� Z \� �� 1 `T MAP . R Q iN l£ AM1LV �i t LD P DE'MSIIY 11 u9J+ Maa.Nenx R up c au Nam (wNrc O J c fi ;.-" f7r P + R im xmH neHzrM UPnaiMDNr) it _� c Op., T'�} Pux mDenwnsm m c4L v+4:ce fusmpq � COMMERCIAL ZONES 1� 9- - Raf£390xgL or<ncra (.T�-PP6P2S51pNA1 piTl6? (�aeiSioCj - a Ifr11R0IXNb0D C -S - 3HOhC NC :6MF:R OT}i£R ZONES. +-R - XORAa5fi12D HOLDitic PV9 l,.L"NS LNRALI .-VIA+m r+3\ tRxB.9R1 59 JAA9 P✓.. 1.1 Minutes from April 9, 2003 The request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and J. Jeffrey First for the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval to the City Council for an Annexation, (general Plan Amendment and Prezoning for 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Marney Lane; and 1443 East fIarney Lane. The request also includes a recommendation that the City Council certify Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project. Associate Planner Meissner made the presentation to the Commission. The hearing included two non-contiguous parcels. The request for the properties located on Cherokee and Haney Lanes (Southeast Gateway) included 4 parcels that totaled 18.21 acres. The other parcel, which was already annexed into the City, was 1.2 acres in size and located _just west of the extension of Mills Avenue to Harney Lane. In regards to the Southeast Gateway, the three western properties contained two homes and a nursery. These three properties were included in the request to eliminate gaps in the City's boundaries. The remaining large corner parcel was anticipated to develop with a 7 to 20 dwelling per acre project, which would be coming before the Commission at the Development plan stage. The other parcel with this request, 1443 E. Harney Lane, will 'integrate with the single-family residential subdivision planned to the north. This property was within the City limits; however, it did not have a general plan or zoning designation that would allow for development. Staff was recommending approval of the requests. Hearing opened to the Public Steve Pechin, 323 W. Elm Street, Lodi. Mr. Pechin represented the owners for the properties on Cherokee Lane (Southeast Gateway). He felt the project was a good location for a medium density project. He was in agreement with all the conditions set forth in the resolution. Jeffrey Kirst, 221 W. Lockeford St, Lodi. Mr. Kirst shared that the property located at 1443 E. Harney Lane had been left out when the Lackyard property was annexed into the City. Joan Cahill, 530 Schaffer Drive, Lodi, CA. Ms. Cahill wanted to know what type of homes would be built on the Neuschaffer property. Mr. Hightower replied medium density which is 7 to 20 units per acre. It will be a mixture of single family homes and zero lot line homes. Hearing closed to the Public Corranissioner Mattheis felt the project was a good location for medium density housing. Chairman Heinitz noted that the project would help meet some of the housing element requirements. The Planning Commission on motion of Commissioner Mattheis, Aguirre second, approved the request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and J. Jeffrey Kirst for the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval to the City Council for an Annexation, General Plan Amendment and Prezoning for 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane. Also approved was a request for recommendation that the City Council certify Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES; Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners Aguirre, Haugan, Mattheis, and Heinitz Crabtree, Phillips, and White NEGATIVE DECLARATTO_A"�",\40.02-11 FOR Neuschaffer Aiinexation APPLICANT: Gary Hansen PREPARED BY: CITY OF LOM Cammunity DeveJopment Department R0. BOX 3006 LOM, CA 9524-1. December, 2002 I BLEE OF CONTENTS SECTION V VIRONMEA'TAL CHh CK-IS7' f 0RM. .... SCi.AMAR OF'POTENTIAL IMPACTS,......... '0C1_VIT Y MAP ..... _.... ,__,................. .............. '774CHAIE,,'Ts'._....._..._.............. - ._..,....--.. I CITY OF L)I The Neuscha fer Annexation PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Neuschaffer Annexation is a proposal to annex, amend the general plan land use designation, and pre -zone a 1.0.28 -acre property on the northwest corner of the intexsection of Cherokee and Harney La ea More specifically, the property is located at 13669 North C berokce Lane, at the southeast corner of Lodi, Assessor Parcel Number. (062-290-17). There is also the potential to add three additional adjacent properties totaling 7,93 -acres. These three properties are located at 4071., 4145, and 4219 east Harney Lane, .-assessor Parcel Numbers- (062-290-38, 37, & 14). At present, the subject parcels are in San Joaquin County adjacent to the south and east of the Lodi City limits. The properties have a San Joaquin County General Plan Designation of RL, Residential Low Density, and a County Zoning designation oAULf 2 , Agriculture l rharr Reserve. The general plan amendment ent will change the City general plan designation of PR, Planned Residential, to Ill, Medium Density Residential. For consistency the zoning will be established as R - MD, , esi entia Medium Density. Development of the primary y property will be limited to residences at a density no greater than 20 - units per acre, which amounts to no more than 206 houses. The three smaller properties have the potential to be included as part of a larger project and could contribute an additional 159 emits. Annexation and establishment of City land use designations is the extent of this project. 11 1 L am ? I`LCB .Q LS'F Project €itle: The Neuschaf'fer Annexation 2. Lead agency maze and address: City of Lodi -Community r'n€unity evelop ent Department Box 3006, Lodi, CA 95241 Contact person and phone number; 'dark Mcissner Associate Planner (M) 333-6711 4. Project location - an Joaquin County, ty, C A., Addresses and: Parcel Numbers listed above in Project Description Lodi, CA 95240. 5. Project sponsctn~'s name and address: Gary E. Hansen P.O. Box 2905 Saratoga, CA 95070 6. General plan designation- PR, Planned Residential 7, i g. AU -213 Agricultural Urban Reserve., (County Zoning). Description of project- See "Project Description" section. above. 9. Surrounding land uses and setting- The subject properties are within San Joaquin County and are generally located north of a vineyard acr°tsss Harney Lace, south of the existing Richard's Manch single-family residential subdivision in the City, east of the Thayer Ranch single-family, residential subdivision in the City and Stockton Street, and rest of Cherokee Lane and Highway 99. The properties are relatively flat Nvith no unusall or extraordinary topographic features. Parcel 17 is 10,28 -acres cif primarily vacant land with a small rural residence and accessory buildings at the northeast corner of the parcel. Marcel 14 is a 0.67 -acre rural residence fronting Harney lane, Parcel 37 is a 6.57 -acre wholesale nursery and cherry orchard fronting Harney Larne, and Parcel 38 is 0.69 -acre rural tn residence also fronting Harney latae. 10, Other public agencies whose approval is required, San Joaquin County Local Agenncv Formation Commission (L AFC O) lf,_NVIRONNIE ° TAL, .FAC -TORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED - The et a ironmenkal factors checked below mould be potentially affected by this project, involving at least nue impact that is a ("Potenntialgy Significant Impact" by the checklist on the following pages. El Land Ilse and Planning Population and Housing Geological Problems D Water EJ Air Quality 0 Trans fsort.ationiCirculation lD Biological Resources Cl Ener-' and Mineral Resources L) Hazards 1] Noise ❑ public Services ® Utilities and Service Systems ® Aesthetics Cl CulfurO resources C Recreation 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance ENVIRONMENTAL I1t'IpAC TS: L LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the prrrposer,& at) C oaftict with general plant designation or zoning? b) C;con£lict with aflppkadble environmental plans or policies adopted by ag ra 's s with jurisdiction over the project? C) Be incompatible with existing larsd use in the vi€^inity`' d) effect agricultural resources or operations (Qog., impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts from incompatible land uses)? e) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established cornta unity (including a low-income or minority cerrttmunisty)? II POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal. a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local population projections`' h) Induce substantia€ growth in an area dither directly or indirectly (e.g., through projects in an undeveloped area or extension of major infrastructure)? c) Displace existing housing, especially affordable housing? 111. GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS. t oMM the prof? Osrrl rf,, rlt irs or expose people w Potential impacts inrolvtng; Via) Fatah ru..pture? b) Seismic, ground shalnuV e.) Seismic ground failure, including liquefaction? d) Se€che, tsunami, ar volcanic hazard? Erosion, charges in topography or unstable soil conditions from excavation, grading or fill? g) Subsidence of tancd? h) Expaaasive soils' i) Unigoe gcolog€c or physacal features? El 0 Potentially 0 0 C1 El Significant 0 Potentially Unless Less than Significant mitigation significant o Impact Incorporated Impact Impact 13 D 0 ED 0 Rl ® 0 El 0 0 0 El El 0 D El 0 EJ 0 0 C1 El 0 0 E 13 ® 0 0 0 Q El 0 0 E 0 ® fI 0 Rl ® 0 El 0 0 0 RI VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result ire: a) increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ❑ Potentially ❑ 0 b) Hazards to safety from design feature, (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ ❑ significant intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? Potentially Unless Less than ❑ IV, WATER Significant mitigation Significant No ❑ RT Would the proposot result in; Impact Incorporated Impact impact a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of ❑ ❑ ❑ u❑ bus turnouts, bicycle varied? surface runoff? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? Ill Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 flooding? 6 Discharge into surface waters or other alteration of surface water quality ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 (e,g., temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? d) Changes in tite amount of surface water in any water body? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 e} Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ iy Change in the quantity of ground water, either through direct additions or ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavation or through substantial loss of ground water recharge capability? g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundwater? ❑ ❑ ❑ Q b) Impacts to groundwater quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ I) Substantial reduction in the amount of groundwater otherwise available for ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 public ,eater supplies? V. AIR. QUALITY. Would the proposal: a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 air quality violation? b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or cause any change in ❑ ❑ ❑ r❑ climate? d) Create objectionable odors? ❑ [') ❑ VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the proposal result ire: a) increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 b) Hazards to safety from design feature, (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) insufficient parking capacity onsite or offsite? ❑ ❑ ❑ RT e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? ❑ ❑ ❑ [,7j f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative transportation (e.g., ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 bus turnouts, bicycle varied? g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 0 Vill, ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plan? [) F b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( El RI c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be Q © El f,3( of future value to the region and the residents of the State? IN, HAZARDS. Potentially Would the proposal Involve: Waat(eGthe proposed Irttve an ell upon, or result in a need for new or altered Significant a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances FII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES, Potentially Unless Less than a) Would lite proposal result in impacts lo: Significant mitigation Significant No b) Police protection? Impact incorporated impact Impact a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their habitats (including but not Q ❑ [ Q Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? limited to plants, fish, insects, animals, and birds? ❑ [] [ e) Increased fore hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage trees)? [f (:] Q El c) Locally designated natural communities (e.g., oak forest, coastal El El aabdtai, etc.)? d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian, and vernal pool)? ❑ 0 D e) Wildlife dispersal migration corridors? (� ❑ Vill, ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal: a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plan? [) F b) Use nonrenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient manner? ( El RI c) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be Q © El f,3( of future value to the region and the residents of the State? IN, HAZARDS. Would the proposal Involve: Waat(eGthe proposed Irttve an ell upon, or result in a need for new or altered a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of hazardous substances 0 El (including, but not banned to, oil, pesticides, chemicals, or radiation)? a) Fire protection? b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan or emergency Q 0 b) Police protection? evacuation plan? c) The creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard? 0 ❑ 0 d) Exposure of people to existing sources of potential health hazards? © ❑ [] [ e) Increased fore hazard in areas with flammable brush, grass, or trees? ❑ El [] 0 X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in: a) increase in existing noise levels? 0 0 ❑ 0 b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? ❑ CI 0 0 XL PUBLIC SERVICES, Waat(eGthe proposed Irttve an ell upon, or result in a need for new or altered government services let any of the following areas: a) Fire protection? 0 0 0 b) Police protection? p e) Schools? 0 ❑ 0 L1 d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? ❑. El 0 Q e) Other government services? 0 ❑ ❑ 0 6 XII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SXSTEMS, Would the proposal result in a head for new systems or supplies, or sulea rstiat 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) Storni water drainage? D Solid waste disposal? g) Local or regional water supplies? XIII. AESTHETICS. Wouldtheproposak a) .Affect a scenic sista or scenic highway? b) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? e) Create light or glare? X V, (AIL[URAL RESOURCES. R'oulsl the proposal: a) Disturb paleontological resources? b) Disturb archaeological resources? c) have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? d) Restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? XV, RECREATION. €{'ould the proposal: x) Increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities? b) Affect recreation opportunities? ❑ El Potentially C ❑ ❑ ❑( Significant ❑ ❑ ❑ Potentially Unless Gess than Q Significant mitigation Significant No Impact incorporated impact Impact ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 ❑ ❑ 0 Cl ❑ 10 ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ C✓ ❑ ❑ El ❑ C ❑ ❑ ❑( [?� ❑ ❑ ❑ G�f ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ [?� ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Q ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ ❑ Ef Potentially Significant Potentially Unless Less than XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE significant mitigation Significant No Impact Incorporated 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 or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or annual or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or pre -history? 0 0 a b) Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goads? Cl El 0 CRI 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 of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) 11 0 C1 0 d) Does the project have environmental effects, which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? El Cl D Rl A.y'II. 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), Earlier analyses used. June 1911, City of Lodi General Plan EIR, This area was identified in the Loch General Plan and discussed in the Environmental Impact Report SCH4 4020206 A) Mitigation measures. See Attached Summary for dnscus.sbmu SUMMARY OF POTENTIAL IMPACTS Ia LAND USE AND PLANNING As stated in date project description the project: is a change in jurisdiction from San Joaquin County to the City of Lodi, and establishing City land use designations. The Community Development Department finds that the proposed actions of the City will not have a physical effect on the environment. We do however; acknowledge that the actions anticipate development of the properties as some type of medium density residential development. The City's growth management ordinance requires that projects over four dwelling units whether attached or detached are required to be reviewed and approved. tinder its regulations. When the City receives application for development of this parcel it would be a new project and would therefore be subject to a separate and more detailed env; ronmental review. he properties in question are currently designated as PR, Planned Residential. The General Plan defines PR as follows "This designation provides for single family detached and attached homes, secondary residential units, multifamily residential units, parks, open space, public and quasi -public uses, and similar and compatible uses and is I applied to largely undeveloped areas in the unincorporated area of the GP area." Planned Residential is intended to be re -designated during the annexation process. The entire project area is to be designated, MDR, Medium Density Residential, which is consistent with PR as defined above. For consistency with the proposed General Pian designations, the project will be prezoned to R -MC), medium -density residential. Action by the City Council to make the requested changes will mitigate inconsistencies with the General Plan and Zoning to less than significant levels. The subject properties total approximately 18.21 -aures of rural residential and agricultural land. Page 3-2 of the General Plan Policy Document identifies the conversion of agricultural land as an adverse impact of residential, commercial and industrial development. In order to mitigate the adverse impacts of converting farmland to urban Uses, Chapter Three of the General Plan Policy Document specifies on page 3-4, among other things, that the City shall encourage the preservation of agricultural uses surrounding the city and to discourage any premature urbanization of farmland. Specific policies in the Conservation Element are aimed at delaying the loss of prime agricultural lands and facilitating their continued use, including: I. Designating all open space greenbelt around the urbanized area of the City. The City of Lodi is a participant with the County in establishing a greenbelt area between Stockton and Lodi, for which the Lodi City Council has authorized up to 525,400 for further study of the area. 2. Support the continuation of agricultural uses on lands designated for urban uses until such time that urban development is imminent. 3. Allow the continuation of viable agricultural activities around the City. The following statement is quoted from the Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 8.18 "NOTICE OF AGRICL'LTE?RAL OPERATIONS AFFECTING OTHER PROPERTY," Section 010 "Policy statement": "It is the policy of the city to protect, preserve and encourage the use of viable agricultural lands for the production of food and other agricultural products. When nonagricultural land uses extend into or encroach upon agricultural areas, it is likely that conflicts will arise between such land uses and the agricultural operations. These conflicts often result in an involuntary curtailment or cessation of agricultural operations, are detrimental to the local economy, and discourage investment in such agricultural operations. The purpose of this chapter is to reduce the occurrence of conflict between agricultural and non-agricultural land uses within the city." This section of the Municipal Code requires that the seller of a property near an agricultural area provide a disclosure statement to the buyer that there is agricultural activity nearby and ',hat the buyer sign to the following: "The City of Lodi permits operation of properly conducted agricultural operations within the city limits, including those that utilize chemical fertilizers and pesticides. YOU ARE HEREBY NOTIFIED LHAT THE. PROPERTY YOU ARE PURCHASING MAY BE LOCATED CLOSE TO ACRICITl TtTRAI., LANDS AND OPERATIONS. YOU MAY BE SUBJECT TO 9 INCONVENIENCE OR DISCOMFORT .ARISING FROM TILE LAWFUL AND PROPER USE OF CHEMICALS AND AGRICULTURAL CHEMICALS AND PESTICIDES AND FROM OTHER AGRICULTURAL ACTIVITIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT 111MIfATION, CULTIVATION, PLOWING, SPRAYING, IRRIGATION, PRL NING. HARVESTING, BURNING OF AGRICULTURAL WASTE PRODUCTS, PROTECTION ION OF CROPS AND ANIMALS FROM DEPREDATION, AND OTHER ACTIVITIES WHICH OCCASIONALLY GENERATE DUST, SMOKE, NOISE, AND ODOR. Consequently, depending on the location of your property, it may be necessary that you be prepared to accent such inconveniences or discomfort as a normal and necessary aspect of living in an agriculturally active region." Arnrexing the Neuschaffer pro}ect area could take roughly 18.21 -acres of agricultural land out of production; however, its proximity to developed land within the City limits on two of four sides diminishes its viability for continued harming. Inappropriate and premature conversion of productive agricultural land would occur if "leap frog" development were taking place, involving development of land not adjacent to the existing City limits. Annexing and developing the subject land as a residential development is in keeping with the City's General Plan policies and ordinances promoting orderly and planned growth. Through continued efforts of the City to establish a greenbelt, continued participation in the Saar Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan, continued implementation of the City's Growth Management practices, and continued enforcement of the City's "Right to Farm" ordinance, the City will remain the most compact city in the County, and one of the most compact cities in the State. Impacts assoc.aied vvith rhe conversion of the subject property from agricultural to urban uses are deemed less than significant. 11. POPULATION AND HOUSING Tlie land area has been reviewed and included in the City of Lodi General Plan and its environmental impact report as evidenced by its general plan designation of PR, Planned. Residential. The general pian anticipated development of the project area as homes and anticipated its population. In order to maintain consistency with the Growth Management element of the general plan the City strives to maintain Iand for the development of all types of housing at a ratio of 65% Tow density, 10% medium density, and 25% high density. Given the difficulties the City has had in attracting residential development other than low density, the proposed medium density residential land use designation is found to be beneficial. Future development of the project area will not create unanticipated population, will only require routine utility and roadway extensions, and does not require the removal of existing housing. HL GEOLOGIC PROBLEMS The Project area is located in the San Joaquin Valley portion of the Central Valley of California. A sequence of sedimentary rocks up to 60,000 feet thick has filled the valley. Basement rocks composed of meta -sediments, voleanics, and granites underlie these 10 deposits, `rhe Midland Fault: Zone is the nearest seismic area, and lies approximately 24 rules west of Lodi. Based upon the inactive; status of this fault, the area has not been identified as a Special Studies Zone within the definitions of the Alquist-Priolo Act. However, appropriate construction standards will be utilized to conform to Seismic Zone 3 requirements. IV. WATER "Chis project by itself cannot reduce dle amount of groundwater available for public water supplies; however, fixture residential development will contribute to the existing decline in the quantity of ground water by creating additional demand on the groundwater basin. According to the City's "Urban Water Management Plan, June 2001," the City of Lodi obtains all of its fresh water supply Elvin 24 existing water wells that pump ,groundwater from the Longer San Joaquin Valley Groundwater Basin, The Plan states that the City has been over drafting the groundwater basin, which is the cause of the gradual but continued decrease in groundwater levels. "Overall, the average annual decrease in groundwater levels from 1927 to 2000 has been 0.35 feet per year, Generally, groundwater elevations have decreased with the increase in population and water production." At the time the General Plan was drafted in 1987, water demand stood at 13.7 MGD, In 1991, it had grown to 14.1 MGD. According to estimates prepared in 1991, development provided for by the General Plan would create demand for approximately Ts MGD of water, or 76 percent more than the, current amount. The "Urban Water Management Plan" provides many recommendations the City could implement to ensure that he City maintains an adequate supply of fresh water. These recommendations include. Developing a conjunctive use program to reduce overall pumping of groundwater, recycling waste water, continuing current water conservation efforts, and adopting many "Best Management Practices" (BMP) water conservation processes established by the California Urban Water Conservation Council. The basic finding of the report is that if the City is going to continue its sole reliance on groundwater, it must establish additional conservation programs or the City will eventually run out of groundwater. rhe land of the Neuschaffer Annexation should develop in time as a medium -density development. Prior to development the City will require a development plan review as provided by the City's Growth Management Program. Because of this program, growth v✓ithm the City of Lodi has not exceeded the limit of providing housing for a 2% pop=ulation increase per year. In fact, population growth has occurred at an average rate of 1.2% per year since the establishment of the Growth Management Program in 1991. This has reduced the anticipated per capita consumption of water. In addition, increased ?eater conservation efforts by the City beginning in 1995 have also reduced the per capita consumption of water to less than expected levels. Even with the existing efforts of the City, water usage of existing homes, businesses, and industry are continuing to overdraft the groundwater basin. For this reason, the City is actively pursuing each of the recommendations cited in the Urban Water Management Plan; however, these recommended efforts are comprehensive to the City as a whole. At this time the City has not established a mechanism to mitigate by compensation or other II means the cumulative impact on the. City's fresh water supply at the individual project level. For this reason the City of Lodi finds that future development of the Ivreuschaffer Annexation project area shall, at the time of establishment of the mechanism for compensation, be required to compensate the City on a "fair share" basis for the difference in water consumption between the original use of the Land and a low density residential development. We find that the preceding sentence as well as the continuing effort of the City to regulate water usage and promote water conservation, shall suffice as mitigation to reduce the impacts of the fixture development of the Nieuschaffer Annexation project area on groundwater supply to less than significant. V. AIR QUALITY The development of the project site may cause a small decrease in ambient air quality standards and increase air emissions, Chapter IS, Air Quality, of the City of Lodi General Plan Environmental impact Report states that the City of Lodi will coordinate development project review with the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (SJVAPCD) in order to minimize future increases in vehicle travel and to assist in implementing any indirect source regulations adopted by the SJV APCIa_ In order to determine the significance of potential air quality impacts we have utilized the SJVAPCD "Guide for assessing and mitigating air quality impacts-" According to this document, we have determined that the project falls within the "Small Project Analysis Level (SPAL)," and does not require further air quality analysis. We have found in section Vl. Transportion/Circulation section below that development of the primary IO2&-acre parcel could result in the development of 212 dwellings with the potential of 1,272 daily vehicle trips. Accordinis to SJVAPCD, these numbers are under the threshold of Significance qualifying them under SPAT_,. Although the project does not involve any development at this point, the City of Lodi will implement impact -reducing measures prescribed by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution C'ontroI District in order to reduce the potential impact from fugitive dust (PM - 10) due to earth shoving and other construction activities. The "Regulation VILI control measures" are listed as follows: * All disturbed areas, including storage piles, which are not being actively utilized for construction purposes, shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water, chemical stabilizer/suppressant, covered with a tarp or other suitable cover or vegetative ground cover. * All on-site unpaved roads and off-site unpaved access roads shall be effectively stabilized of dust emissions using water or chemical stabilizer/suppressant. * All land clearing, grubbing, scraping, excavation, land leveling, grading, cut & fill, and demolition activities shall be effectively controlled of fugitive dust emissions utilizing application of water or by presoaking. s With the demolition of buildings up to six stories in height, all exterior surfaces of the building shall be wetted during demolition. * When materials are transported off-site, all material shall be covered, or effectively wetted to limit visible dust emissions, and at least six inches of freeboard space from the top of the container shall be maintained. 12 ® All operations shad limit or expeditiously remove the accumulation of mud or dirt from adjacent public streets at the end of each workday. (The use of dry rotary brushes is expressly prohibited except where preceded or accompanied by sufficient meting to limit the visible dust eaussions.) (Use of blower devices is expressly ("trrbidden;i Following the addition of materials to, or the removal of materials from, the surface of outdoor storage piles, said piles shall be effectively stabilized of fugitive dust emissions utilizing sufficient water or cher meal stabilizer/suppressant. o Within urban areas, trackout shall be immediately removed when it extends 50 or more feet from the site and at the end of each workday. An./ site with 150 or more vehicle trips per day shall prevent carryout and trackout. By implementing the measures above, the temporary impacts from construction (primary impacts) on air quality will be reduced to less than significant levels. In addition; the City is reducing impacts from vehicle emissions (secondary impacts) by implementing programs for alternate transportation. Programs such as the City's Dial-A- [cide system, which is a door to door service; or the Grape Line, which is a fixed route transit system, or the City's Bicycle Transportation Master Plan; or even the recent introduction of Amtrak rail service to the City's Multi -Modal station will help to reduce vehicle emissions. The City's programs along with the programs at the Federal, State, and County levels will help to reduce vehicle emissions created by this project to less than significant levels. VL 17PUNSPORTATION/CIRCULATION Additional vehicle trips will affect transportation patterns relative to existing traffic loads and street capacity in the immediate project area In order to reduce impacts from additional traffic, "The City shalt review new developments for consistency with the General Pian Circulation Element and the Capital Improvements Program. Those developments found to be consistent with the Circulation Element shall be required to pay then far share of traffic impact fees. Those developments found to be generating more traffic, than that assumed in the Circulation Element shall be required to prepare a site-specific traffic study and fund needed improvements not identified in the capital improvements program in addition to paying their fair share of the traffic impact fees." 'The traffic impact fee will be used to finance future improvements such as traffic signals and street widening projects for older intersections and streets congested by new development. The entire proieet site was originally designated in the City's General Plan as PR, Planned Presidential so its circulation needs were projected for residential development, which is what is proposed. According to the City's Traffic Engineering of the Public Works Department, the trip rate for multi -family residential dwelling units is six trips per dwelling unit. The 18.21 -acre project site could contain as many as 20 -units per acre or 364 dwelling units. This number of units could generate around 2,184 daily trips, and 1,29 peak hour trips. 13 Given that ownership of the project site is mixed and that the secondary parcels are involved in agricultural operations and residences, we do not believe the entire 18.21 - acres will develop. We find that it is wore likely that the main 16.28 -acre property will develop alone, so the numbers would be 212 dwelling units, with 1,272 daily trips and 891 peak hour trips. Furthermore the existing single-family residents to the north will Prompt a transition of develop, meaning the area adjacent to the single-family residents will probably develop as single-family residences also, Harney Lane to the south and Cherokee Lane to the east are the main access points to the project area. Harney Lane is planned in the City's Street Master Plan as a minor arterial (94' right -of way, 4 -lanes and left turn median), and Cherokee Lane is planned as a secondary arterial (80' right-of-way, 4 lanes). Bath are designed to accommodate the anticipated residential development of the remaining vacant land in this area. The improvements typically only take place upon development of properties fronting the street being improved. Given the adjacency of the Harney Lane Highway 99 interchange, the Department of Transportation will be directly involved in this ,project. They have provided initial comments regarding the proposed annexation, which are primarily concerned with the fixture development of the project site (see attached). The Community Development Department finds that the comments apply to the future development of the project site. The Community Development Department will forward all development proposals and their environmental reviews to the Department of Transportation when they become available. We believe, that implementation of the City's Circulation Master Plan based on the General Plan Circulation Element and EIR, specifically the items as listed above, will adequately reduce traffic impacts in the immediate area to less than significant levels. VIL BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Development of the project site is subject to the payment of fees in accordance with the San .,loaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan. The proposed project is consistent with the San Joaquin County Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), as amended, as reflected in the conditions of protect approval for this proposal. Pursuant to the Final EIR/ElS for the San Joaquin county Multi -Species Habitat Conservation and Open Space Plan (SJMSCP), dated November 15, 2000, and certified by the San Joaquin Council of Governments on December 7, 2000, implementation of the SJMSCP is expected to reduce impacts to biological resources resin*erg from the proposed project to a level of less-than— significant. That document is hereby incorporated by reference and is available for review during regular business hours at the San Joaquin Council of Governments (6 S, El Dorado St., Suite 400/Stockton, CA 95202) or online at: www.sjco V111. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES Development of the project site will require review by the Building Division of the Community Development Department, who will ensure that the construction adheres to 14 Provisions of 2001 Title 24, Part 6 California's Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings. The Energy Efficiency Standards for Residential and Nonresidential Buildings were established in 1978 in response to a legislative mandate to reduce California's energy consumptiom the standards are updated periodically to allow consideration and possible incorporation of new energy efficiency technologies and methods, New standards were adopted by the Commission in 2001 as mandated by Assembly Bill 970 to reduce California's electricity demand. The new standards went into effect on June 1, 2001, Construction under these standards should elumnate wasteful and inefficient use of nonrenewable resources. lit addition, development of the site is not expected to result in the loss of availability of anry known mineral resource that would be of future value to the region and the residents of the State, There are no known mineral deposits within the area. The soil in the area is a sandy foam type with hardpan approximately 6 to 8 feet beneath the surface. There is no indication that valuable minerals are located within the general area of the well. No impacts associated within the loss of minerals are expected because of the project. IX, HAZARDS By establishing a land use designation of RMD, Residential Medium Density the expected future development would not involve explosives or hazardous substances except perhaps gardening supplies, The development of the site will be reviewed by the Fire Department to ensure that the site as well as any future structures meet or exceed the requirements of the ire code, X. NOISE The project will develop as residences that will be restricted by the City's noise ordinance. 'hhe noise ordinance will prohibit above ambient residential noise levels between the hours of 10 p.m. and 7 a.m, Noise generated by the future development of the project site is not anticipated to be an impact to the existing residences to the north and west. The residents of the future development could be exposed to the noise generated by, the traffic on Highway 99 and the frontage road (Cherokee Lane) adjacent to the east. The General Plan environmental impact report identifies the project area closest to the highway with a Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) of 70dB to 75dB, which without mitigation could be considered "Normally Unacceptable," Prior to development of the project area the City will require a noise study to be performed to determine ways of reducing noise to acceptable levels consistent with the General Plan, Mitigations could include sound attenuation walls, increased insulation, and highly insulated windows. XI. PUBLIC SERVICES The change from County agricultural land to its eventual development will generate the need for expanded governmental services including schools, fire and police. The Citywide Development Impact Mitigation Fee schedule was adopted to insure that new development generates sufficient revenue to maintain specified levels of service in Lodi, In addition, the Lodi Unified School District has adopted a fee per square foot that is 15 intended to mitigate the cost of providing school services to new development. The project area will be served by a new K-6, elementary school under construction less than 114 of a mile to the north. Page 9-5 of the General Plan Policy Document states that the City shall add personnel, equipment, or facilities necessary to maintain a minimum three (3) minute travel time for Ince calls. Page 9-6 of the Policy Document goes on to state that the City shall also strive to maintain a staff ratio of 3.1 police officers per 1,000 population with response times averaging; three (3) minutes for emergency calls and 40 minutes for non emergency calls. Impact fees are calculated on new development based on use and density to generate enough revenue to preser%- adequate service levels, thereby mitigating potential adverse impacts on governmental services to less than significant levels. X11. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. The General Plan EIR points out on page 10-2 that at the time the General Plan was prepared in 1989, there was a design treatment capacity of 6.2 MGD. A planned (and later completed) expansion increased capacity to 8.5 MGD in 1991. Assuming that residential growth was to continue at the Alarmed two (2) percent annual rate, and that flows would increase at a proportionate rate, the City's White Slough Water Pollution Control Facility (WSWPCF) has adequate capacity for the life of the 20 year plan. In fact, residential growth has not reached the two (2) percent mark since the plan was adopted. Over the last five (5) years, growth has averaged 1.63%. This being the case, there is estimated to be excess carrying capacity at the WSWPCF, enough to mitigate any impacts of the new homes and school site to less than significant levels. The General Pian EIR, page 10-3 outlines the City's storm water collection, distribution, and disposal system. In Lodi, storm water is discharged to the Mokelumne River and the Woodbridge Irrigation District (WID) Canal. The project area's storm drainage will flow to the Sales Park drainage basin. "rhe Sal as Park basin was engineered with a capacity to handle storm water runoff from a 48-hour, 100 -year storm. Storni runoff' from the development of the project site will not impact the City's existing drainage basins. Page 10-1 of the General Plan EIR explains that the water supply for the entire City is provided by a groundwater aquifer, tapped into by a system of interconnected City welts. According to Lodi standards, one water well shall be maintained per each 2,000 population. New wells are drilled as necessary to provide an adequate supply commensurate with growth. Al the time the General Plan was drafted in 1987, water demand stood at 13.7 MGD. In 1991, it had down to 14.1 MGD. According to estimates prepared in 1991, development provided for by the General Plan would create demand for approximately 7.8 MGD of water, or 67 percent more than the current amount. As stated previously in this initial study, due to the affect of the City's Growth Management Program, growth has not reached the levels anticipated in 1991, reducing the anticipated per capita consumption of water. In addition, increased water conservation efforts by the City beginning in 1995 have also reduced the per capita 16 cortsuxnption of water to less than expected levels. With M water wells currently in operation there is estimated to be a sufficient supply of water. Considering the aforementioned mitigating factors, any impacts on the water supply created because of the Neuschaffer Annexation/reorganization are reduced to less than significant levels. XIII. AESTHETICS. Development of the project area would not affect a scenic vista or scenic highway because there are no known or recognized scenic views or highways in or immediately around the project area_ 'the pro}ect area is south of an existing single-family residential subdivision, north of a vineyard, west of a wholesale nursery, and east of State Highway 94. Given the proposed multi -family zoning, the development of the site will most likely be a multi-farnily project, which will be reviewed by the City's Site Plan and Architectural Rce ,iew Committee (SPARC). SPARC is charged with determining, "compliance with the zoning ordinance and to promote the orderly development of the city, the stability of land values, investment and the general welfare, and to help prevent the impairment or depreciation of land values and development by the erection of structures or additions or alterations thereto without proper attention to siting or to unsightly, undesirable or obnoxious appearance." As part of the review by SPARC, lighting is required to be shielded or low level to eliminate potential glare on neighboring properties. XIS'. C ULTUICAL RESOURCES. Annexation and the establisinnent of land use regulations will not create a physical change of the project site. As stated many times in this document, by establishing land use regulations for the property there will be a potential for development at which time will be separately required to be reviewed under CEQA. The Community Development Department will review any proposed future development for its impact on cultural and archaeological values or resources. XV. RECREA,rION. The future development of the project site will increase the population of Lodi, which will create an increase it, the demand for recreational opportunities. The City's Parks Master plan adopted in January of 1994 has taken into account the recreational needs of Lodi, and has included the project area and its demand in its projections. The Parks Master Plan is a 15 -year plan that identifies improvements to existing parks and new park areas throughout Lodi including a neighborhood park less than %4 mile to the northwest of the project site. Continued progress with the implementation of this plan is anticipated to provide parks and recreational opportunities at no less than a satisfactory level. There are no existing recreational opportunities on this property. Iii;IIRVIMNAT[ON: 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. 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. i I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMP9 CT REPORT is required. .J I find 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 ease because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately m an earlier FIR pursuant to applicable standards,, and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that re impose ion the proposed project Signature: _ Date: -- Printed Name; Mark Yleissner For: Cit1 of ;:Jodi 18 Idajr, i i, s Q o-CENTURYBLVD OU amt, Z3: Potential Annexatibnl Area of Annexation RESOLUTION NO. P.C. 03-05 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTS OF GARY E. HANSEN, DON AND NANCY MILLER, AND J. JEFFREY KIRST FOR PREZONING Z-02-06 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 Prezoning in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter 17,84. Amendments; WHEREAS, the properties are located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4971, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane (062-290-14,17, 37,38 & 058-230-17), WHEREAS, the project proponents are Gary E. Hansen, P.O. Box 2095, Saratoga, CA 95076; Don C`. Nancy lv ller, 4071 East Harney Lane, Lodz, CA 95240 & J. Jeffrey Kirst. P.O. Box 1259, Woodbridge, CA 95258; WHEREAS, the properties have zoning designations of RL, Residential Low Density, and Ali -20, Agricultural Urban Reserve (San Joaquin County); and 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 Fite No. ND -02-11 has been prepared in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided there under. 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 the parcels to be prezoned are the parcels located at 13669NoxtIt Cherokee Lana; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Barney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane (062-290-14, 17, 37, 38 & 058-230-17). 3. It is found that the requested prezoning of R -MD, Residential Medium Density and R-2, Residential Sin -Lie Family are not in conflict with adopted pans or policies of the General Paan of the City and will serve sound Planning practice. 4, it is further found that the parcels of the proposed rezoning are physically suitable for the development of a residential medium density project. 5. 'The Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of Rezone Z-02-06 to the City Council of the City of Lodi. Dated: April 9, 2003 1 hereby certify that Resolution No. 03-05 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on April 9, 2003, by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Cominissioners: ABSENT: Cormitissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners; Aguirre, Haugan, Mattheis, and Chairman Heinitz Crabtree, Phillips, an ATTEST: _ ecretary, Planning C.omriazssion PRO-POSE'D ZONING MAP Southeast t_a's=way Properties LEGEND RESIDENTIAL ZONES: tE IMM I➢ Wk SDYN � 1(p(f R 1I K�RU4 IT 14YMSYPIilj. I� RP PCH DEN61Ty (MMYkEP]) v -D - v;wNx[D D6vtWVVEM S v04¢-!'Af1 Y (bii510£) COMMERCIAL ZONE$: 1 A, prcaa>ru cmcEs arrssmxu, oPnaet @K"iipc) J L UrIU1BCkHa6 C-9 — 91a0vG W6 OENI£A OTHER ZONES: won vua G usi,i y, t P (4) �,-D j 7/1 i I T'� T{ !/"�! (/'�{� `� ZONING (� y' ,( '�'^� LEGEND P 1 b 0 V S EP� t ! p! N A N G M�( A ¢_r - RESiDEISTStS ZONES: D LJ �J S_ 3� I 1 i w w. rocxsm e aarapl :waRsxexr Tn.fi K.txSi. PY'QUE:"fi)` exn uro°e°neus'rri ("�sAmu''"'xer:p) = Di.WxCp bZVClaiu¢kY R-� - ¢1L.£tss0.V i3a4'tflpL7 COMMERCIAL ZONES: F.-CP+..9�pp{�T651DHrJ. �IC�PS ("-N'ISIb'a) L -S _. C�G��AHDOb [-S - SkPPFIN4 CflRCR OTHER ZONES: -x oxcuss�nec xotbixc _ nxu''i n� LrvxuV rv� - F�suo RESOLUTION NO, P,C, 03-06 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LODI RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF THE REQUESTS OF GARY E, HANSEN, DON AND NANCY MILLER, AND J. JEFFREY KIRST FOR GENERAL PLAN LAND USE AMENDMENT 02-06 TO THE LOBI CITY COUNCIL. WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of hodi has heretofore held a duly noticed public hearing, as required by law, on the requested General Plan Land Use Amendment in accordance with the Government Code and Lodi Municipal Code Chapter l7,84, Amendments; WHEREAS, the properties are located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 144;. Fast Harney Lane (062-290-14,17, 37, 38 & 058-230-17); WHEREAS, 13669 North Cherokee Lane is a 16.28 -acre parcel, contiguous to the City Limits on It', northern boundary, and contains a small rare! residence and accessory building at the northeast corner of the, parcel; WIiEREAS, 4071 East Harney Lane is a 0.69 -acre rural residence fronting Harney lane adjacent to the City onas west boundary; WHEREAS, 4145 Fast Harney Lane is a 6.57 -acre wholesale nursery and cherry orchard fronting Harnev Lane and is adjacent to the City on its west and north boundaries; WHEREAS, 4219 East Harney Lane is a 0.67 -acre rural residence fronting Harney Ian-, with no immediate adjacency to the City; WHEREAS, 1443 East Harney Lane is a 1.23 -acre parcel with the northern half as vineyard and with a rural residence fronting Harney lane.; WHEREAS, the project proponents are Gary E. Hansen, P.O. Box 2095, Saratoga, CA 95070; Don & Nancy Miller, 4071 East Harney Lane, Lodi, CA 93240 & L Jeffrey Kirst, P.O. Box 1259, Woodbridge, CA 95258; WHEREAS, Negative Declaration File No. ND -02-11 has been prepared un compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, and the Guidelines provided there under; WHEREAS, the properties have a General Plan designation of PR, Planned Residential; WHEREAS, The proposed amendment to the Land Use Diagram of the General Plan is consistent with all Elements of the General Plan, specifically the proposed amendments implement the following policies; A) Land Use and Growth Management Element - Goal C, Policy 1, in that the project will annex 18,21 acres of residential land, which is necessary to maintain an adequate supply of housing to accommodate the City's 2 percent per year housing growth rate, B) Land Use and Growth Management Element- Goal C, Policy 6: "The City shall strive to maintain a housing ratio of 65% low density, 10% medium density, and 25% high density in new development" Cj Housing Element - Goal A, Policy 1, he City shall promote the development of a broad mix of housing types." D) Housing Element - Goal A, PaLcy 9, in that the project is the first step of the adopted approval process for this residential development, E) Conservation EIement - Goal C, Policy I, in that the Southwest Gateway project area has existing or pending development on three sides including the Richard's Ranch subdivision to the north, the Thayer Ranch subdivision to the west, and State Highway 99 to the east. F) Safety Element - Goal C, Policy i, in that the nearest fire station to the Southwest Gateway properties and Kirst property is Located at Hary & Beckman Park that is within a 3 -minute response time to both. 6, %Aoc Gli Urban Desig, -i Cultural Resources Element- Goal F, Polic- in that the _general plan land use de„gnatio- of the Kirs she to LDR will insure that the scar, .7f development is consistent with su,-rounding rand uses; and 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: 2. Itis found that fire Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the information contained in Negative Declaration ND -02-1 1. Further, the Commission recommends that the City Council certify the Negative Declaration as adequate environmental documentation for the project. 3. It is found that the parcels to be re -designated are the parcels located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane, 40'1, 4145 and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane (062-290-14, 17, 37, 38 & 058- 230-i 11)- I It is found that the requested General Plan Land Use Amendments from PR, Planned Residential to MDR, Medium Density Residential & LDR, Low Density Residential provides for the orderly development of the City and will serve sound Planning practice. 5. It is hereby fomd that the project sites are physically suitable for their proposed types of development. 6. It is hereby found that the projects will have a less than significant impact on Prime Farmland as defined by the Land Evaluation and Site Assessment system of the California State Department of Conservation. T 74ie Planning Commission of the City of Lodi hereby recommends approval of General Plan Land Use Amendment 02-06 to the City Council of the City of Lodi. S. No variance from any City of Lodi adopted code, policy or specification is granted or implied by the approval of this resolution. Bated: April 9, 2003. I hereby certify that Resolution No. 93-06 was passed and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Lodi at a regular meeting held on April 9, 2003, by the following vote: AXES: Commissioners: Aguirre, Haugam Mattheis, and Chairman Heinitz NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: Crabtree, Phillips, and White ABSTAIN: Conwrissioners: l ATTEST: _ Secretary, Planni mission v-06.doc �0PT TECE��D � C�P0 ED GENERAL LIEN REDDENTAL: � LAND f A T�{�{} T -'�f 1 —� �/�{ (/� 1� t{ Cdr Low ReNmr ecs Den�nl, i� , y�i .3�/ � . / � _1 D C NL3 '� t }'_s �1 �/� nRR �IIUX pEN$Itt kE51 CNiIA � .. Jl 1 EP V$i$IDE R.514G YNl G A6 ,.Wk.R RESIOEMUL Solt. neast Gateway Properties COMMERCIAL: - N Nory&oxn000/rouuuLim muu,kcu cC — ^.. F.uc GDMUFRwu — OOWNTt94N tluu¢kCIFL i� — DFFlCE OTHER: J@ -. 6EYFNY PN ga5n jmpx0 epRkS - camuvvsc �� I_r IRPOSE D GES' E fie. !_: I-AND 1 SE DIAGRAM �'�� PLAN � � LEGEND RESIDENTIAL: MR OW DENS, RISIgSNIiµRETIDEMI4 RR MEDi11N O.NS1 PCSID<MW. ✓DR MGh pfNSltt ER xYtSDE REfr10E idL {I N UOMMGRG'AL: C NE CNao,N Oo CJi6yp LpyMtRcuy +C GE CRR1, CpfA ERLIpL OL DOWMJWN GOM4CPCt4t i OTHER: PPP - PIlBIIC/OiV51 PV9LIC � >BF _ pCiNIION RASiN4 MO RnR� I A - FDRyV4iuRf t� AN ORDINANCE OF THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AMENDING THE OFFICIAL DISTRICT MAP OF THE CITY OF LODI AND THEREBY PREZONING THE PARCELS LOCATED AT 13669 LANE; 4071, 4145, AND 4219 EAST HARNEY LANE; D 1443 HARNEY LANE, APN 062-290-14, 17, 37, 38, D 058-230-17 FROM SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY RL, RESIDENTIAL LOW DENSITY AND AU - 20 AGRICULTURE URBAN RESERVE TO R-2, SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL BE IRT ORDAINED BY THE LODI CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: ;jection 1. The Official District Map of the City of Lodi adopted by Title 17 of the Lodi Municipal Code is hereby amended as follows: The parcels located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145, and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane, APN 062-290-14, 17, 37, 38, and 058-230-17 is hereby prezoned as follows: 19.44 -acres — San Joaquin County RL, Residential Low Density and AU - 20, Agricultural Urban Reserve to R-2, Single Family Residential, as shown on the Vicinity Map, on file in the office of the City Clerk. Section 2. 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 3 - No Mandator Dut 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. All ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict herewith are repealed insofar as such conflict may exist. Section 6. 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 _, 2003 SUSAN HITCHCOCK Mayor Attest: SUSAN J. BLACKSTON City Clerk State of California County of San Joaquin, ss, 1, 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 Play 21, 2003 and was thereafter passed, adopted and ordered to print at a regular meeting of said Council held 2003 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS — ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS -- ABSTAIN: 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. Approved as to Form: )41 R?NDALL A. HAYS City Attorney RESOLUTION NO. 2003-89 BE IT FURTnER RESOLVED that a Negative Declaration ND -02-11 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 its Resolution No, PC. 03-06. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council has reviewed all documentation and hereby certifies the Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project located at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 4071, 4145, and 4219 East Harney Lane; and 1443 East Harney Lane. Dated, May 21, 2003 HIM11114,121M AYES. COUNCIL MEMBERS — Beckman, Hansen, Howard, and Land NOES- COUNCIL MEMBERS — None ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS — None SUSAN J. BLACKSTON City Clerk EXHftsii A PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN t T LAND JSE DIAGRAM Southeast Gateway Prop�rtios LEGEND RESIDENTIAL. i OR U'll DUM W 1101 COMMERCLAL WXot"am000/owmuwry qwRo tommuOR- WMftM4 C.OMKAOAL Wl' CE OTHER: Ws mb "RXs 'N'Ovoc PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN LAND T-,,lSE DIAGRAM J. Jeff Kirst Property LEGEND RES IDE NTIA4 p" COMMS RCIAL: OTHER: pop puffm t;mc, / Is"or, �ic DR" t� IRS AK13 VARIES A 'it" t N Please immediately eonfirm reeei qfthisfax by calling 333-6702 Y OF LODI P. 0. BOX 3006 LODI, CALIFORNIA. 95241-1910 ADVERTISING INSTRUCTIONS �jUBJECT- TO SET PUBLIP HEARING TO GONSIDER THE PLANNING COMMI$SION'S RECOWENTDATION OF APPROVAL TO THE CITY COUNCIL FOR THE.. PREZONING AT 13669 NORTH CHEROKEE LANE; 1443,4071, 4145, AND 4219 A: HARNEY LANE PUBLISH DATE, SATURDAY MAY 10, 2003 SEND AFFIDAVIT AND BILL T: THURSDAY, MAY 8, 2003 JACQUELINE L.TAYLOR DRTY CITY GLER N LN5 S'o�'��as;a[9viat5.�ft3e SUSAN BLACKSTON, CITY CLEF City of Lodi P.0, Box 3£06 Lodi, CA 95241-1910 PAS ILIA OCHOA ADMINISTRATIVE CLERK to the Sentinel at 369-1084 at (tir ___-- Phoned to Confirm receipt of all pages at JENNIFER M. PERRIN DEPUTY CITY CLEFT (initial$) DECLARATION OF POSTING. On'Thursday, May 8. 2003, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, a copy of the notice to set public hearing for May 21, 2003, to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval of the request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and J. Jeffrey first for an Annexation, General Plan Amendment, and Prezoning at 13669 North Cherokee Lane-, 1443, 4071, 4145, and 4219 East Harney Lane; the request also includes a recommendation to certify Negative Declaration ND -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project (attached hereto, marked Exhibit "A") was posted at the following four locations: Lodi Public Library Lodi City Clerk's Office Lodi City Hall Lobby Lodi Carnegie Forum I declare under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Executed on May 8, 2003, at Lodi, California. Patricia Ochoa Administrative Clerk *,V0W1_,WXUUFT#7Uf CITY CLERK Jacqueline L. Taylor Deputy City Clerk Jennifer M, Perrin Deputy City Clerk DECLARATION OF MAILING �Wl ill, Mal. On May 8, 2003, in the City of Lodi, San Joaquin County, California, I deposited in the United States rnail, envOopes with first-class postage prepaid thereon, containing a public hearing notice to consider the Planning Commission's recommendation of approval of the request of Gary E_ Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and J. Jeffrey First for an Annexation, General Plan Amendment, and Prezoning at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 1443, 4071, 4145, and 4219 East Harney Lane; the request also includes a recommendation to certify Negative Declaration No - 02 -11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project, 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 May 8, 2003, at Lodi, California, xmm�� Forms/decillat kkw: 19DIMIrd'am- JENNIFER M. PERRIN DEPUTY CITY CLERK V "ITY OF' LODI Camegie Forum 305 West Piiie Sti-eet, Lodi For information regarding this notice please contact: Susan J. Blackston City Clerk Telephone., (20 9) 3336702 NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING EEA7�_ NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that on Wednesday, May 21, 2003, at the hour of 7:00 p.m., or as soon thereafter as the matter may be board, the City Council will conduct a Public Hearing at the Carnegie Forum, 305 West Pine Street, Lodi, to consider the following matter: a) Planning Commission's recommendation of approval of the request of Gary E. Hansen, Don and Nancy Miller, and J. Jeffrey Kirst for an Annexation, General Plan Amendment, and P(ezoning at 13669 North Cherokee Lane; 1443, 4071, 4145, and 4219 East Harney Lane; the request also includes a recommendation to certify Negative Declaration NO -02-11 as adequate environmental documentation for this project. Information regarding this item may be obtained in the office of the Community Development Department, 221 West Pine Street, Lodi, California, Ali 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 o4 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. - t3__ Susan J. Blackston City Clerk Dated: May 7, 2003 Appfaved a form: Randall A. Hays City Attorney J.iCITYCLRK\FOIIM',\N(YrCt)D.DOC 518/03 EXHIBIT B Neuscbaffer Annexation 1. O6256015;MARTIN, JOHN A & SANDRA D ;2384 KINGSTON WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 2. 06256016;VARRIANO, MARILYN ;2385 KINGSTON WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 3. 06256017;CRAWFORD, DAVID M & YANG SU ;2391 KINGSTON WAY ;LORI rCA;95240 4. 062.56002;LOPEZ, VALLDE:MAR & DELMI i ;2386 LANYARD WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 5. 06256014;SMMETT, ANDREA ;2390 KINGSTON WAY ;LODI ;CA05240 6, 062.57022;MEDEIROS, RICHARD & JIL,L S ;294 CULBERTSON DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 T 06256012;CAREY, PATRICK J & MARY M ;2395 CAYMAN DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 8, 06256035;RIVAS, PHILLIP & LOIS ;416 SCHAFFER DR ;LODI ;CA;9.5240 9. 06229023;LODI UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT ;1305 E VINE ST ;LODI ;CA;95240 10.06229025;LOGAN, WENDELL & DORATHEA ;311 E HARNEY IN ;LODI ;CA;95242 11.0625'7011;PARK PLACE DEVELOPMENT LLC ;PO BOX 1598 ;LODI ;CA;95241 12.06229026;THAYER, WALTER & J M ;325 E HARNEY LN ;LODI ;CA;95240 13.06257006;MARTiNEZ, SALOMON & MARISELA ;2532 MELBY DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 14. 06257007;PETERSON, RONALD E & KAREN M ;2526 MELBY DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 15.06256001;AYON, RAMON S & CAROL ;2392 LANYARD WAY ;LOCI ;CA;95240 16.06256003;CRYSTAL ENTERPRISES LP ;PO BOX 1259 ;WOODBRIDGE ;CA;95258 12.06256004;CONTI, LANA ETAL ;2381 LANYARD WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 18.06256005;GARCIA, JOSE J ETAL ;2387 LANYARD WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 19.06256006;COUNCIL, RICHARD & THERESA ;2393 LANYARD WAY ;LODI ;CA;95242 2O.06256007;FRANZONE, RICHARD & TERRY ;2394 CAYMAN DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 21.06256008;FLEMMER, BRUCE & MICHELE ;281.8 APPLEWOOD DR ;LODI ;CA;95242 2?. 06256009;SEEFRIED, COREY D & MARYANN C ;2382. CAYMAN DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 23.06256010;TZIMBAL, GEORGE & CAROL ;2383 CAYMAN DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 24.06256011;OCHOA, FERNANDO & ANA M ;2389 CAYMAN DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 25,06256013;NAVARRO, ROSALIO & MARIA ;2396 KINGSTON WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 26.0625601.8;CASTLE, LISA E ;2397 KINGSTON WAY ;LODI ;CA;95242 27.06256019;THOMAS, MICHAEL V & SUSAN A ET;1252 HEIDELBERG WAY ;LODI ;CA;95242 28, 06256020;KAMAKEEAINA, YUSEF K ;2392 BLUEJAY WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 29.06256021;WELK, KEVIN JAMES & ANDREA E ;2386 BLUEJAY WAY ;LODI ,-CA;95240 30.06256024;PADILLA, RODOLFO D & CARMEN L ;534 SCHAFFER DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 31,06256025;BLAKELY CAHILL, JOAN ;530 SCHAFFER DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 32.06256026;VALENTE, THOMAS C & CARRIE L ;526 SCHAFFER DR ;LODI ,CA;95240 33,06256027;MACIAS, ABEL & OFELIA ;522 SCHAFFER DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 34.06256028;PENNER, CHARLES L & RUTH ;505 VISTA RIO CT ;WOODBRIDGE ;CA;95258 35, 06256030;FLEMMER, LOWELL, B & VIOLET ;2031 BERN WAY ;LODI ;CA;95242 3& 06256032tSILVA, TONY III ;2409 TRADEWIND WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 32,06256033;HALFORD, ROSALIE ;424 SCHAFFER. DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 38.06256034;PLINSKI, JOHN P ;420 SCHAFFER DR ;LOPS ;CA;95240 39.06256036;BARNETT, JESSE W & TRACI C ;2410 BLUEJAY WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 40.06256037;SHERMAN, PATRICK H & JANET R T;808 WESTWIND DR ;LODI ;CA;95242 41.0625h038;SEXTON, KEVIN J & STACY R ;24.28 BLUEJAY WAY ;LODI ;CA;95240 42.06256039;JONES, BRAD H & TER.I S ;388 CULBERTSON DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 4.3.06256040;GU`PIERREZ, JESUS H & SANDRA 080 CULBERTSON DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 44.06256041;MCKNIGHT, MICHAEL E ;370 CULBERTSON DR ;LORI ;CA;95240 455.06256042;LOBOS, MtARIO & HAMA R ;364 CULBERTSON DR. ;LODI ;CA;95240 46,06256043;SIMPSON, TIMOTHY D & M T ETAL ;2405 S STOCKTON ST SUITE 1 ;LODI ;CA,95240 47.06256044;HARRIS, STEPHEN C ;352 CULBERTSON DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 4& 06256046,ALVAREZ, FRANK A & ANDREA M ;340 CULBERTSON DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 49.062.56047;BECH`L'HOLD, DUANE TR ;17577 N KENNISON LN ;LODI ;CA;95240 50.06256048;MUHLBEIER, TIM & KATHY ;4279 SCOTTSDALE RD ;LODI ;CA;95240 51.06256049;BECHTHOLD, DUANE TR ;322 CULBERTSON DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 52.0625'7001;CHUGHTAI, AFTAB & FARHAT ;2564 MELBY DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 53.06257002;TIIORPE, ROBERT M ETAL ;308 DRIFTWOOD DR ;LODI ;CA;95242 54.06257003;FULTON, TAMMY ETAL ;314 DRIFTWOOD DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 55.06257004;LAWLEY, RODNEY & PENNY COST ;2058 PETERSBURG WAY ;LODI rCA;9524.2 56.06257005;KEARNEY, MARK J ;309 DRIFTWOOD DR ;LODI ;CA;95240 57.06.257009;WILLIAMS, THERESA V ;1728 LE BEC CT ;LODI ;CA;95240 5& 06257010;SIMPSON, TIMOTHY & MARJORIE ET;2405 S STOCKTON ST SUITE 1 ;LODI ;CA;95240 59.0625'701.3;CASTIL,LANOS, ANTHONY G & DIANA;282 MARINER CT ;LODI ;CA;95240 W 06257018;RENSCHLER, BOBBY D & NICHOLE M;287 MARINER CT ;LODI ;CA;95240 61.0625'7019;CROSS, MORAY C & AMY I ;291 MARINER CT ;LODI ;CA;95240 61 06257023;MOORE, BRIAN M ;290 CULBERTSON DR ;LODI ;CA;95242 63.05813003;MCI.EAN, JEFFREY JOHN ETAL ;4044 E HARNEY LN ;LODI ;CA;952.40 64.0581.3009;BRADLEY, ERMA F TR ETAL ;4044 E HARNEY LN ;L,ODI ;CA;95240 65.05813010;STOCKAR, PATRICK F & SANDRA H ;PO BOR 673 ;VICTOR ;CA;95253 60.06224414;REIMCHE, A & L LIFE EST ;4219 E HARNEY LN ;LODI ;CA;95240 67.06229017;NEUSCI!AEFER, ROBERT W ETAL ;1024 SARATOGA ;SAN JOSE ;CA;95129 68.(}6229038;MILLER, DONALD & N TRS ;4071 E HARNEY LN ;LODI ;CA05240 69.05821029;HARNEY DEVELOPMENT LLC ;777 S HAM LN SUITE L ;LODI ;CA;95242 70.05809003;EV13RTTT, RAYMOND E TR ;1320 E HARNEY LN ;LORI ;CA;95242 71.05£309004;MANASSER0, MICHAEL & PATRICIA ;1490 E HARNEY LN ;LODI ;CA;95242 72,05E31.0020;LODI CITY OF ;PO BOX 3006 ;LODI ;CA;95241 73.05£310021;PERRIN RANCH LLC ;18989 N DAVIS RD ;LODI ;CA;95242 74.0582.3017;AWNALLAH, ALI MUSSED ;1443 E HARNEY LA ;LORI ;CA;95240 75.05823021,;LACKYARD, DONALD D & SUSAN G ;1477 E HARNEY LN ;LODI ;CA;95240 76,05823022;NEPOTE, GIUSEPPE O EST ;1477 E HARNEY LN ;LODI ;CA;95240