Connecting You to Your Community
Lodi, California •

Story Tools

Email this story | Print this story

Indexes


December 1st, 2008
November 30th, 2008
November 29th, 2008
November 28th, 2008
November 27th, 2008
November 26th, 2008
November 25th, 2008
November 24th, 2008
ADVERTISEMENT
The Blue Shield building at the Reynolds Ranch construction site in southern Lodi is seen Monday. (Brian Feulner/News-Sentinel)

Reynolds Ranch developer wants hotel, senior housing, more commercial space

By Ross Farrow
News-Sentinel Staff Writer
Updated: Tuesday, August 26, 2008 6:48 AM PDT
Comments (82 comment(s))

The developers behind the Reynolds Ranch project wish to amend the scope of the project's commercial component with plans for a hotel, mini storage and senior housing.

San Joaquin Valley Land Co. is building a 20.5-acre Blue Shield office southwest of Harney Lane and Highway 99 to anchor its 226-acre mixed-use development from the western Highway 99 frontage road to the Southern Pacific Railroad tracks.

The Lodi City Council voted 3-2 to approve the original project on Aug. 30, 2006. Then-Mayor Susan Hitchcock and current Mayor JoAnne Mounce voted against the project.

The new plan still calls for 1,084 housing units, but on about 19 fewer acres. And 50 of the 77.8 acres designated for housing would be devoted to seniors, with 11.3 acres set aside for assisted senior living.

Reynolds Ranch at a glance
Land use
Approved plan (acres)
New plan (acres)
Retail/commercial
40.575.6
High-density housing
9.19.2
Medium-density housing
63.910.1
Low-density housing
20.68.5
Senior housing
3.038.7
Assisted senior housing
011.3
Park/open space
12.38.0

The Lodi Planning Commission will review San Joaquin Valley Land's application for a general plan amendment at 7 p.m. Wednesday.

Due to the large amount of senior housing, San Joaquin Valley Land, headed by Dale Gillespie, has eliminated a 14-acre elementary school site.

Gillespie and company representative Donnie Garibaldi did not return calls seeking comments on the expanded plans.

Lodi Planning Commission meeting

Possible changes to the Reynolds Ranch project will be reviewed by the Lodi Planning Commission at 7 p.m. Wednesday at Carnegie Forum, 305 W. Pine St.

Source: City of Lodi

Contact reporter Ross Farrow at rossf@lodinews.com.


(Marc Lutz/News-Sentinel)

Reader Feedback

falcon wrote on Sep 2, 2008 9:40 PM:

" TANDC, They should let them change the purchase requirement simply because it is asinine to require a developer to purchase land to offset his development. I dont know the whole story, but if nothing was returned for consideration, the people that instituted this confiscatory requirement, should be thrown out on their ass. I am still shaking my head over that. This sounds like something that communists would do, and they do, I have heard stories. This is a devastating requirement that if followed in the future will just increase the cost of creating locations for businesses. I guess that nobody cares if Lodi is competitive in attracting businesses to locate here. Surely they are not concerned about the high cost of development. If they do not understand, then they are incompetent, if they do, they are malicious. Either way, it is the wrong decision and makes Lodi unfriendly and less competitive to establishing new business homes. "

Report Abuse

TANDC wrote on Sep 2, 2008 8:06 PM:

" JF, the lies and the games continue. I still want to see those 200 acres PURCHASED by Gillespie before anything that says change can even be submitted. Wasn't that the original deal, or did council persons Johnson, Hansen and Katzakian let him change that, too? "

Report Abuse

TANDC wrote on Sep 2, 2008 8:02 PM:

" Common1, and you see where it went with you and your buddies on the planning commission. Lots of eyes and ears are on the wheeling-dealing going on here between Reynolds Ranch and the superWalmart EIR they're trying to sneak through there again. Keep playing with fire, boys, and you're going to get burned! "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Sep 2, 2008 7:56 PM:

" C1, Im pretty confident in my asessment of how this game is being played, and even you, oh dense one, cant deny the games being played. It's politics baby! The guy with the best and longest run of BS wins. Lets call it, "Peewee's big Fib". BTW who is your commercial anchor at RR? Was it the 1 cent store or Taco Bell? "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Sep 2, 2008 1:10 PM:

" JF...Stating the obvious, they have gone back to the Planning Commission for approval of the proposed changes. You have a problem with that? What idiot would not implement the "best financial model"? What part of their proposal doesn't benefit our community? "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Sep 2, 2008 9:23 AM:

" If I went to the county and pulled permits for a house, got it approved, and after I started it had the contractor "change the plan a bit" add a little here or there, change the design, etc. and the inspector shows up, what would happen next? KABOOM, It would be slammed shut, fines issued, licenses revoked. How is this different? "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Sep 2, 2008 9:14 AM:

" Dale, you have to stop promising A Ritz Carlton and then delivering a Motel 6 and tell us it's whats best for Lodi, it might be good for you and your partners bottom line but not for us.
Kind of like Delta College, Promise a 5000 student university style campus with cuddly senior housing tucked in a river setting, were down to trailers for all of them and I bet they would change the scope on that too! Do you see the trend? "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Sep 2, 2008 9:10 AM:

" Than maybe they should be forced to sit on the plan until the market returns. You dont come in and radically change the landscape on one accepted premise then totally revamp and switch it around to suit the "best financial model"and expect the public to be ok with it. Maybe the plan would not have been approved without the things you are dropping? "

Report Abuse

falcon wrote on Sep 2, 2008 6:36 AM:

" T&C, There you go again. You use the term "schemes" to describe and demean real estate investment. That would be a term more fitting to describe carbon offsets. Once again the magnitude of these investments exceeds your vision. You do not consider the benefits to the community. You forget that your entire community has been developed by real estate investment risk takers. Lodi did not always have a Mervyns, Food 4 Less, Target, Rayleys, Safeway, Wine and Roses, etc. etc. etc...There used to be Vineyards there. Who built them? Who works there? Where do those people who work there shop? What amount of aggregate dollars has these developments produced over the years in taxes, wages, secondary, and tertiary spending? These real estate "schemes" as you have put it, have contributed far more to our community in jobs and dollars than your "global investments." "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Sep 1, 2008 9:33 PM:

" There aren't any of my funds invested in realestate or financial institutions here in America. I invest in a global economy and none of them are foolish enough to invest in realestate. Your financial genius certainly doesn't tell you that the markets are all down drastically, no matter where they move their investments? I'm in it for the long term not the short term schemes developers and realtors depend on.
And, observer, there are quite a few developers in this area. Don't forget Snider and Geweke. And Gillespie has at least 5 different company aka's, as probably do all these little fish companies to make their profits one way or another. "

Report Abuse

falcon wrote on Sep 1, 2008 8:18 PM:

" Observer wrote on Sep 1, 2008 3:05 PM:
Does anyone think its a coincidence that when the construction industry goes in the tank that they pull a whole lot of other businesses down with them? "

Observer, you are absolutely correct. There are many ancillary businesses that are linked to the construction industry. There are many jobs at stake. The haters of development could care less about them. They hate business. They hate free markets. They cost others money and they should all be brought to bare the cost of the losses that we have to endure as a community. These new commercial buildings house businesses that provide jobs locally. Those jobs now will be delayed so that an EIR, (that is not going to change) can be resubmitted. It is not going to matter. More cost to the developer, less profit, delayed jobs, all are the result. This is raw meat for the T&C's of the world. Developments loss is T&C's gain. "

Report Abuse

Observer wrote on Sep 1, 2008 3:05 PM:

" I find these comments interesting. Have you ever thought about how many "developers" we even have in Lodi? You can count them on one hand. FCB is currently the largest, Bennett hasn't developed in Lodi for years, KB Homes had a small project on the East side, the Sasaki Brothers have done their one and only project off Kettleman. You have some contractors who build homes here and there but you can hardly call them developers. Does anyone think its a coincidence that when the construction industry goes in the tank that they pull a whole lot of other businesses down with them? "

Report Abuse

falcon wrote on Sep 1, 2008 8:42 AM:

" T&C Wrote, " It's time the wealthy and greedy money grabbers suffered along with the same people that are destitute, jobless and homeless because of their get rich quick schemes. "

This is why you are so contemptible. You wish losses and suffering for the developers. You shout "good" when they loose. What kind of person wishes financial loss for risk takers? Once again we run into another dunce that has no concept of their market environment and the benefits of economic growth. If the people running your portfolio had your wisdom, it would be worth 0. Developers are trying to make profit. Profit is revenue less cost. Profit is what pays your salary. Profit is what makes your portfolio grow. So my conclusion is that either you are contemptible or you lack and understanding of the benefits of economic growth to a community. When these projects are losers, more people will be worse off. (less jobs, less profit) Why is that good? "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Sep 1, 2008 7:33 AM:

" Oh, and by the way, city council and manager, with this great senior housing soon to come at Reynolds Ranch, why do we need to build that housing project there on Railroad Avenue and Lockeford? At RR, they'll have their own shopping strip mall complete with all their shopping and banking needs and, surely, there'll be several new bus routes to service all those hew residents there if they actually decide to build a home there and homebuyers and realtors flock there to buy one of those beauties. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Sep 1, 2008 7:27 AM:

" Falcon, Gillespie took the risk and lost with his housing project and now he wants to change the rules and build whatever pleases him. You seem to be either the idiot or one of the partners in this venture gone astray. If he wants to change this project completely, stop all construction and start all over beginning with a new study and EIR.I don't have anything against any HONEST developer,but this project was approved after the densities already had been changed drastically once to make the gigantic kill on the housing boom. It's the manipulation and string pulling of the planning commission and three council members that I don't admire.
Hey, I'm down 30K in my portfolio in the last four months. Who's going to bail me out because my financial company is losing money on their investments like everyone else?
Quit cheerleading for these local rookies. They're all fighting one another for what little land is left in Lodi to develop.
Mr. Spanos owns the rest and it's hands off unless they're looking for trouble. Do you think these little boys would've even gotten past the planning commission in Stockton without inside help? "

Report Abuse

falcon wrote on Aug 31, 2008 11:38 PM:

" T&C... If you understood the economic benefits of these projects, you should welcome them. If you do not, and you are unaware, you should go back to school and get a better education. If you have an education, you should ask for your money back. "

Report Abuse

falcon wrote on Aug 31, 2008 11:32 PM:

" These developers take enormous risks and put up great amounts of money to create enterprises that benefit the community with jobs and infrastructure. It is sad that there are some that wish them ill harm. The useful idiots have no concept or clue as to the big picture. They just see the developers as opportunists. How stupid they are. Imagine all of the employees of all of the businesses that would not have a job if these morons had their way! "

Report Abuse

falcon wrote on Aug 31, 2008 11:27 PM:

" TandC. I have had it! You are a total idiot! You should be embarrassed at your colossal ineptitude. Your desire to punish these developers is pathetic! You are a miserable jealous person that wants to punish these risk takers because you are too stupid and dont have the resources to do what they do. You dont understand what they do, and you do not realize the benefit of what they do for the community. If you did, you are upset because you do not benefit. Either way you are a fool. It is way over your head. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 30, 2008 8:34 PM:

" It's time the wealthy and greedy money grabbers suffered along with the same people that are destitute, jobless and homeless because of their get rich quick schemes. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 30, 2008 8:31 PM:

" And the papers for the purchase for the 200 acres of agricultural land. Not some land borrowed from a business associate. I'd like to see the contract with the figures and date on it at the next planning commission or city council meeting, just for public records. "

Report Abuse

sam wrote on Aug 30, 2008 5:35 PM:

" Just curious but I thought we were told the sound wall would go up first...the wall to separate this development for the ag properties. What is going on?
Where is the wall? "

Report Abuse

Zinfandel wrote on Aug 30, 2008 12:57 PM:

" TandC, I don't think the grand jury is going to be interested in RR. Development plan changes happen all the time and with the economy the way it is are you really surprised the developers came by to the PC requesting changes?
I saw that coming for some time now. Housing market is dead.......do you really think the developers are just going to sit around and wait for the market to turn around.......and how many years will it take until it does? "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 30, 2008 12:38 PM:

" commonsense1, is everyone just a goofball to you? You've been proven wrong time and again and you're still in denial. Remember, no grand jury? Well, mark my word, they're not done yet. Book em', Dano. LOL "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 29, 2008 8:08 PM:

" JF.....SAVE DELTA NOW! Any question what this goof ball is about? You could care less about Reynolds Ranch. You just can't get away from the possiblity of Delta building a campus on land that IS NOT YOURS! You would like to return 100+ acres as your personal junk yard and dump. Get used to it, that will never happen. "

Report Abuse

patton1 wrote on Aug 29, 2008 4:48 PM:

" I think what your going to find is that the infratructure was so over built, that additional traffic could be acccomidated.
Mike "

Report Abuse

ccinlodi wrote on Aug 29, 2008 12:48 PM:

" T and C , WY I have been thinking about that disappearing farmland every since I posted yesterday.. I am wondering if the planning commission has any one who speaks up for the farmers in the area. I guess that is a question for city hall... "

Report Abuse

WY wrote on Aug 29, 2008 7:51 AM:

" Seems I can sing that diddy in every corner of the town. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 29, 2008 7:38 AM:

" Wy, doncha just love it? Remember - the paved paradise, the beautiful parking lot. Look what Walmart started in the once great city of Lodi. What a joke. Great song and absolutely true. "

Report Abuse

WY wrote on Aug 29, 2008 6:51 AM:

" They took out the trees and put them in a TREE MUSEUM....

Don't it always seem to go... that you don't know what you have till it's gone. "

Report Abuse

WY wrote on Aug 29, 2008 6:45 AM:

" Don't people think there are enough empty buildings in lodi? Why not fill up what we have before taking a vinyards and orchards and paving over then. An as I see it more business are closing. Look at Lakewwod mall... the whole south side of that strip mall is open, then over where ogga booga was on kettleman, how about the building that is across from jack in the box? is that rented? This place is gettting better and better for big city folk. come one come all.

They paved paradise to put up a parking lot. "

Report Abuse

SportsGuru wrote on Aug 28, 2008 7:28 PM:

" .
Do we need another hotel? The Hampton Inn just came on line, and Comfort Suites next year. Not to mention Wine and Roses, and the other small hotels in town.

We already have the two newer properties out at I5 and Highway 12.... seems another hotel would saturate the market and ultimately lead to run down properties (like the Ramada Inn in Stockton, on march and El Dorado) "

Report Abuse

ccinlodi wrote on Aug 28, 2008 11:17 AM:

" Other than the disappearing farm land, which I guess is inevitable, I think this is great land use. More dense residential and revenue and job creating property for Lodi with easy access on and off the major highway..I think my home in lodi will increase in value as fewer and fewer single family dwellings are built. I am all for this. "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Aug 28, 2008 8:49 AM:

" SAVE DELTA NOW!
San Joaquin Delta College at Reynolds Ranch! I bet they would even name the football field after you Dale. "Gillespie Field at Reynolds Ranch" or "Platt Park at Reynolds Ranch"
Or the Seniors only strip club, we could have the "Gray pole" or the "Council Club Room" Now thats great marketing, How about that for a business model? "

Report Abuse

Oh Bull wrote on Aug 27, 2008 10:43 PM:

" Boy If this goes I hope that they plan on widening the road from 99 to Hutchins. Boy what a mess that is in the morning and afternnoon, and hopefully you don't get stopped by a train at that time either. "

Report Abuse

sam wrote on Aug 27, 2008 7:19 PM:

" commonsense, I know T&C is a man and I believe Edumcation said she was a she. Not that sex matters, but if your read their blogs carefully, you can see the difference.

I personally love their passion for Lodi. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 27, 2008 5:55 PM:

" Sam...Seems amazing to me, but I belive you. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 27, 2008 5:54 PM:

" .....the answer to the question is, no I don't have anything to do with this development. Just seems reasonable, with no negative impact. It is my understanding that the widening of streets, reworking of Hwy 99 on/off ramps is already a requirement. If more business wants to locate in an approved project in Lodi, why would anyone discourage that? Adult Living Community is bad? "

Report Abuse

sam wrote on Aug 27, 2008 5:50 PM:

" commonsense, honestly, edumacations and T&C are not the same person. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 27, 2008 5:47 PM:

" edumacation, t&c, TandC or what ever name you choose to use today, why can't the developer and the City of Lodi (citizens) all benefit? You want a one way street and that's not good for anybody. Again, considering todays business climate, housing market, greying population, etc., this seems like a reasonable request and a good fit for the development. What's the problem? "

Report Abuse

sam wrote on Aug 27, 2008 5:05 PM:

" ... and please do not critisize my spelling or compostion errors. We are harvesting grapes at night and sleep is needed. "

Report Abuse

sam wrote on Aug 27, 2008 5:03 PM:

" I do beleive Renolds Ranch EIR is now NOT valid. They have all the cars from the area pouring onto the 2 lane Armstorng Road. They say it will have no effect.

In one breath Lodi says they want Ag alive and thriving on Armstrong Rd and in another they pour cars from Blue Shield and a heavy commercial area onto a 2 lane country road.

This will have a great effect on that area. "

Report Abuse

sam wrote on Aug 27, 2008 4:59 PM:

" Observer and Zin, I have met T and C. He is a kick. He does so much for Lodi with his volunteering. I believe he does love a good arguement, but his passion is to be a whistle blower. He wants people to wake up. He believes Lodi belongs to all Lodians.

Personally I wish he would run for CC. Do I agree with all his blogs?? Heck no. But the dude is passionate and anyone would be better off with him on your side.

Tand C for City Council.... YA !! "

Report Abuse

zinfandel wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:56 PM:

" Observer wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:45 PM:

" You are too funny t&c. In one blog you demand that the old WM building be occupied before allowing the move and in the next your bashing someone for suggesting a way to fill the building. Make up your mind. "

I believe that TandC just enjoys being argumentive. "

Report Abuse

Observer wrote on Aug 27, 2008 3:45 PM:

" You are too funny t&c. In one blog you demand that the old WM building be occupied before allowing the move and in the next your bashing someone for suggesting a way to fill the building. Make up your mind. "

Report Abuse

Edumacation wrote on Aug 27, 2008 2:44 PM:

" The issue can be summed up in two questions: 1) Is the Reynolds Ranch project as approved for the advantage of Lodi? or is it to the advantage of the developer? Its a simple YES or NO. Now the new REVISED proposals beg many questions: 1) Are these really revised proposals? 2) Why change now? Again, my questions are the same. Is this for the benefit of "Mr. Developer" ? or are they for the nenifit of Lodi? If they are for the benefit of Lodi, why isn't the request from our city council? The implication is that either the developer is in it for "NUMBER ONE", or he is such an upstanding citizen, that he only thinks unselfishly for Lodians. hhhm? What do you think? I don't even think the man lives on Lodi!! LOL ROFL

CAVEAT EMPTOR! IMHO - I don't believe anything this man says. I don't believe a used car salesman AND I don't believe him. Most Lodians have not fallen off the turnip truck. "

Report Abuse

zinfandel wrote on Aug 27, 2008 1:46 PM:

" TandC said:
And, Zin, your solution to put Delta College in Walmart's old building and strip mall is just a bailout for the new superstore to move and just leave that abandoned building to become part of that ghost town strip mall when they move across the street. "

TandC, Apparenty nothing mets with your approval in this City!
If you are so unhappy with Lodi, why are you still living here? I'm asking a serious question. I'm not being disrespectful, I'm just curious why continue to live here, if you don't like anything about Lodi? "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 27, 2008 11:54 AM:

" Commonsense1, the RR project changed the mix once after submitting it for discussion and when it came back up a few meetings later, the mix had already changed drastically and Ms. Hitchcock questioned whether that project would've been approved if they had asked for the revised mix in the original project. So now why the change in mix the third time? This is just rickery used to get the original project approved and then get their planning associates and friends to OK their changes whenever they like.
And, Zin, your solution to put Delta College in Walmart's old building and strip mall is just a bailout for the new superstore to move and just leave that abandoned building to become part of that ghost town strip mall when they move across the street. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 27, 2008 9:59 AM:

" JF....I think Zinfandel stated the "upside" very clearly. There is quite a difference between Senior Housing and an Adult Living Community. RDA has nothing to do with this. Reynolds Ranch was approved as a mixed use property, with residential and retail components. Why would "citizens" object to improving the mix? The developers aren't ramming anything down someones throat. They are going to present their plan and hope for city approval. If you feel so strongly about this, attend tonights meeting and voice your objections. That's what this process is all about. "

Report Abuse

Zinfandel wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:29 AM:

" A better fit for Delta college would be the Wal-Mart Center...take over Wal-Mart and all the small stores and possibly even Pennys. Move the small shops and Pennys across the street when the Wal-Mart Suppercenter is built. "

Report Abuse

Zinfandel wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:16 AM:

" JF...Delta college is not a good fit for the area. "

Report Abuse

Zinfandel wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:14 AM:

" TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 7:57 PM:

" Commonsense1, this development was plain and simple not approved for any use but the original.

The changes the developers are requesting make sense . . .more senior housing. Conveniently located within walking distance to a shoping center. Even the hotel; near the freeway and next to a shopping center. Mini storage along the railroad tracks. "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Aug 27, 2008 8:10 AM:

" Commondear, I get the better biz model angle, the problem is, as citizens, we bought in to what you were peddling and so did the CC, so if you REALLY want to improve your bizness model, redraft the acreage as I outlined for you and put the satellite Delta campus with the BS campus. Senior housing is already a part of the RDA on the east side. It is a logical alternative to Victor rd, but you and I both know its still full steam ahead on Victor. So clear a spot for me Common Im moving in. "

Report Abuse

OTH wrote on Aug 26, 2008 9:38 PM:

" TandC

Please tell me you don't believe Winkin, Blinkin and Nod are known for their ethics? One of them doesn't even speak unless he's told what to say. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 7:57 PM:

" Commonsense1, this development was plain and simple not approved for any use but the original. It's being changed because the planning commission belongs to the developers and the city councils' three votes from Johnson, Katz and Hansen will seal the deal. Maybe not proven criminal but very unethical. Why are those same three votes the key to the passage of any issue for the real owners of Lodi? The names are always the same. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 26, 2008 5:40 PM:

" JF...Are you suggesting you don't understand the adult living and additional retail business decision? Do you think they planned this years ago? Sounds like basic economics to me. When you see a better business model, should you ignore it? "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 26, 2008 5:25 PM:

" JF...This kind of sounds like a Delta thing......You could care less what happens at Reynolds Ranch as long as it includes Delta College.......NIMBY! "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Aug 26, 2008 4:39 PM:

" Tell me that is not perfect? If we are re writing the rules, than lets really get to it. You have BS right there to send graduates, you have the Sutter Gould shed coming in to the West on Harney, the poor saps who are stuck with those vineyard homes South of the concrete monster surely want out so you can become viticultured. "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Aug 26, 2008 4:35 PM:

" Commoner,
See, Thank you for perfectly illustrating my point. I dont "object" to senior housing.I object to the method of deceit your associates continue to use to manuever and get what they want. "Delta College at Reynolds Ranch". Come on Dale, You have the acreage they want, Re designate the 38.7 acres away from senior housing and incorporate the 8.0 acres for a park and you have 46.7 acres for Raul and the troops to romp and frolic in. "

Report Abuse

Observer wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:46 PM:

" I want my local government to provide incentives for companies like Blue Shield. The benefits far outweigh the investment. Lodi needs to be business friendly. "

Report Abuse

4AStrongLodi wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:30 PM:

" Finally some growth!

We need it badly. I'm tired of the poverty-stricken City we're becoming. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 26, 2008 3:11 PM:

" JF..."you're favorite realtor pal???? I know you better than any real estate agent. Why would you object to an adult living subdivision? "

Report Abuse

zinfandel wrote on Aug 26, 2008 2:20 PM:

" TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 1:04 PM:

" Zin, I'd like to know when they're going to let us know where the 200 acres are that they've agreed to preserve?"

TandC, if you really want to know, why don't you call the developer and ask them? "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 1:21 PM:

" And the most important topic no one seems to want to address: the fact that these multi-million dollar corporations like BC/BS didn't, and don't, decide to stay or move to Lodi or any other city simply because they like it. They move or relocate to the city that OFFERS them the most giveaways. If you knew what those "enticements" really were you'd recall each and every council council member for giving away that much of your money and land. Bottom line. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 1:04 PM:

" Zin, I'd like to know when they're going to let us know where the 200 acres are that they've agreed to preserve?
With Governor Schwartzenegger agreeing to sign that high-speed rail bill, that will more than likely move Amtrak services to the tracks east of I-5 and create those tracks that run parallel to 99 to become the main line for the freight trains, and many more of them than are presently using them now. Will that senior housing project love all those train whistles all day and night? Why not include some affordable housing projects there, too, as a stipulation?

There has been nothing but deceit about this project from the day of its inception, including misleading facts to the city council. I believe after the project was approved, the densities were changed to build even more homes than originally planned. Some were led to believe that if this wasn't approved in this manner that BC/BS might go elsewhere. I vaguely remember Ms. Hitchcock and Mounce asking why the densities were to be changed from the original. I hope someone will correct me if I'm wrong and give me the real prefabrication instead. "

Report Abuse

zinfandel wrote on Aug 26, 2008 12:38 PM:

" TandC wrote:
Valuable agricultural land for a mini-storage?

Agricultural land along Harney Lane is no longer practical with development all along the north side and now Reynolds Ranch. Even if Reynold Ranch was never approved, it would only have been a matter of time before the farmers would have been forced to quit farming. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 12:29 PM:

" Reynolds Ranch wasn't submitted and approved contingent to any changes. If it were to have been submitted without a school and less acreage for parks and another senior housing project, it never would have been approved. And we deserve to see those 200 acres put aside before any changes or additional work is done.
With all that commercial, they're going to need four lane roads on both Harney and 99Frontage to even begin to handle the traffic, not to mention traffic lights and a larger overpass and interchange there. Is the developer going to pay for those, too? Or are taxpayers again?
The planning commission needs to quit pandering to these developers and builders and hold them to what is submitted and approved, nothing more, nothing less. There has to be some accountability and now we citizens should demand it.
The same complainers about Lodi not growing population fast enough are now saying that a mini-storage and maybe a Costco are going to bring population growth? It's all about the money for only the city coffers and the influential, nothing else. Valuable agricultural land for a mini-storage? "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Aug 26, 2008 12:11 PM:

" Commondant, my old realtor pal you, I know the favorite tag lines are, "for the children" or "for the seniors" and when you say it I lock the gate and grab my wallet because you are trying to get in one or both. Hey I know, put Delta there instead of the houses and commercial? Since you are re writing the SCOPE, include Delta. See problem solved. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 12:09 PM:

" Commonsense1, please add something of content to your mindless, hateful blather of any blogger that speaks his mind. Are you afraid that you're going to be proven one of the guilty ones? "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 12:08 PM:

" Who's going to submit and approve a new EIR for this mumbo jumbo project?Or will this project change not affect the EIR? I would certainly think so. Where are those thousands of employees of BC/BS and all those new "businesses", such as Costco, live? I thought that was the idea for the original approval was to have all those "well built", spiffy,cookie cutter new homes built for those well paying jobs?
And where is the 200 acres that this developer was to set aside for agricultural land at? Is it going to be owned and undeveloped and kept for agricultural use ten years from now? Will he or one of his influential associates or family be the "backdoor" owner?
It'd be nice if you'd tell the citizenry who's going to be building the hotel and mini-storage.Who'll be the developer on this new planning? Will it be DGP, SJVLC, Reynolds Ranch Partners, RPM Company or DG Land Company. And how many partners and silent owners are there in this tangle of just a few of the company names that all involve the same names? The planning commission needs to be very careful even approvingthis. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 26, 2008 11:25 AM:

" zinfandel....Don't confuse edumacation with facts. T&C and edumaction will have nothing to do with factual information. "

Report Abuse

zinfandel wrote on Aug 26, 2008 11:18 AM:

" Read the article in the today's Record. It has a map showing mini storage and a pond running along the tracks. "

Report Abuse

zinfandel wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:56 AM:

" edumacation, from what I have heard I believe they will be building rental storage buildings along the tracks. "

Report Abuse

stucknlodi wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:48 AM:

" i think they need to have a school site and build the school for LUSD as well. Borchardt school is already overcrowded and to have a plan that has 1000 homes and no school is crazy. I think the new LUSD super needs to step up and say we need our school site. She is from Manteca and MUSD had schools built before the houses went in. "

Report Abuse

edumacation wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:35 AM:

" Are the seniors living quarters going to be next to the rail road tracks? Or will it be the other housing? I can hear that freight train now...ding dong ding dong. I forgot these developers know that trains make noise? LOL!! So what is going to be built next to the tracks? hhmmm maybe a park? But that can be an "attractive nuisance" in legal parlance? How about retail and commercial? I would love to have an office overlooking the Railroad tracks
as long as the Union Pacific keeps to its schedules (yeah right!) We can have meetings every other Wednesday instead of every day. What are these developers thinking? Yeah I like the idea of putting houses next to tain tracks---the whole west side of the development gets to watch and listen to freight cars. LOL Maybe they won't charge is to listen to the trains.

Where is G-REM on this deal? How about GFLIP? Is it time to build ANOTHER HOLIDAY INN EXPRESS? "

Report Abuse

4AStrongLodi wrote on Aug 26, 2008 10:17 AM:

" YEAH!!! I'm so glad we're going to get another hotel. How can this town claim to be a tourist destination when the only decent places to stay are Wine & Roses and (now) Hampton Inn?

It's about time we started having some of this positive growth. These projects will also bring new jobs...and they won't be the minimum wage jobs that our City leaders have brought recently.

Let's keep greenlighting projects like this and get Lodi off the road to slumville. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 26, 2008 9:46 AM:

" JF, you dog you. Just can't sneak anything by you and t&c. You forgot to mention the part about adding 78 acres for adult living community. Who else but you could come up with that great idea for a "stip club for seniors"? As an added service they could pass out free Viagra too. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 26, 2008 9:38 AM:

" TandC.....I like that new "and" part. You are 100% correct about Snider and F&M. However, you forgot Trump, Gates, Grupe and Spanos. All of those GOB's are trying their best to sneak one by you. But, we know that's not possible, you're just too sharp for these guys. "

Report Abuse

commonsense1 wrote on Aug 26, 2008 9:32 AM:

" This needs to be investigated by the Grand Jury. With the population "greying" and no senior living subdivisions available, how could anybody have the nerve to serve that segment of our community? And by god, they better build that school for those old folks too. You just can't trust these developers. Oh, and let's not forget the additional retail that wants to be in Lodi. Tax revenue is ruining this farming town and should be sent to Stockton or Galt. I swear, these greedy developers are killing us. "

Report Abuse

TandC wrote on Aug 26, 2008 8:19 AM:

" And don't forget our ex-mayors' family, Mr. Snider, is a big player in these development schemes, as is F&M bank. "

Report Abuse

Neo wrote on Aug 26, 2008 8:07 AM:

" So Gillespie and Co. get burnt speculating about the housing market so I guess the people of Lodi should just let them do whatever they want now? God forbid the Gillespie, Geweke, Reynolds families not be given whatever they need to make money! "

Report Abuse

edumacation wrote on Aug 26, 2008 7:58 AM:

" Oh what a crock! Hitchcock and Mounce knew the perps of the plan and were smart enough to say NO! Unforunately for Lodi, we have to hear more excuses. What has changed? Nothing! The same old same old. How long will it be before they revise the plan again? and again? and again? AH yes, the GOB is working us good this time. Watch what stories we hear with the RDA! It hasn't started yet and we are already getting doubletalk. Exactly who is "San Joaquin Valley land"? A large company" No. Well who are they? I mean name EACH "investor". I bet we see some familar names? LOL ROFL.

There is NO surprise in this story. they just saved millions on NOT building a school. It looks like they are already making money?...by NOT SPENDING IT. "

Report Abuse

JF wrote on Aug 26, 2008 7:17 AM:

" HAHAHAHA!
LMAO!
This is the way they do it people. Get their footsie in the door and change the scope after its too far ahead to stop. With the extra commercial square footage Dale, I may want to put up a strip club for the seniors. LOL! "

Report Abuse

Comments on this story are now closed.

Special Sections

Santa Claus Route Map

Photo Reprints

Find Ads


Services

Contact Us

Office

125 N. Church St.
P.O. Box 1360
Lodi, CA 95241
(209) 369-2761
Fax: (209) 369-1084

Newsroom

E-mail

(209) 369-7035
Fax: (209) 369-6706

Subscriptions

Subscribe

Problems with your subscription?
(209) 333-1400

Advertising

E-mail

(209) 369-2761
Fax: (209) 369-1084

Classifieds

Place an ad E-mail

(209) 333-1111
Fax: (209) 369-1084