Lodinews.com

default avatar
Welcome to the site! Login or Signup below.
|
||
Logout|My Dashboard

Greenbelt issues can be resolved

Print
Font Size:
Default font size
Larger font size

Posted: Tuesday, January 15, 2008 10:00 pm

Last week the Lodi Chamber of Commerce task force presented their General Plan White Paper to the planning commission.

Through the combined efforts of Lodi's business and community leaders, a vision for Lodi's future was created. This was a daunting task requiring hundreds of hours. The result is an informative analysis which outlines the Chamber's position on the major components of our general plan, and it offers real strategies as we move forward.

As we explored the research, there was consensus on a majority of the points, but as with any large-scale project, there were questions and differences in interpretation. The best example was the AL-5T "community separator" concept. Basically, the AL-5T designation can be defined as 5-acre-minimum parcels containing one dwelling and/or one conforming commercial enterprise. The AL-5T proposes "cluster" residential parcels and lists conforming commercial uses (principally those that target the expansion of our tourism industry). Mike Carouba and Pat Stockar spoke passionately about this proposal and they believe if done correctly, their model would alleviate many of the "worst case scenario" fears raised at our meeting.

When we consider our options, this concept may be our best opportunity to create a community separator. It certainly warrants our full attention and consideration.

While the Sentinel's story accurately reflected many of the discussions, it did not seem to capture the positive "cooperative" spirit of the meeting. Readers did not have the opportunity to hear the positive, discussions about economic development, tourism and revitalization, and I regret not doing a better job of communicating those positives.

Through cooperation and understanding, I am convinced we can overcome the remaining hurdles and a viable proposal will be crafted. One thing we can all agree on is that Lodi is very fortunate to have community members and volunteers who willingly share their resources and experience for the betterment of our community. We have some of the best and brightest people working on our general plan and I have no doubt their efforts will yield positive results for Lodi.

David Kirsten

Lodi City Planning Commissioner

Pat Patrick

Lodi Chamber of Commerce

Rules of Conduct

  • 1 Use your real name. You must register with your full first and last name before you can comment. (And don’t pretend you’re someone else.)
  • 2 Keep it clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually oriented language.
  • 3 Don’t threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
  • 4 Be truthful. Don't lie about anyone or anything. Don't post unsubstantiated allegations, rumors or gossip that could harm the reputation of a person, company or organization.
  • 5 Be nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
  • 6 Stay on topic. Make sure your comments are about the story. Don’t insult each other.
  • 7 Tell us if the discussion is getting out of hand. Use the ‘Report’ link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
  • 8 Share what you know, and ask about what you don't.
  • 9 Don’t be a troll.
  • 10 Don’t reveal personal information about other commenters. You may reveal your own personal information, but we advise you not to do so.
  • 11 We reserve the right, at our discretion, to monitor, delete or choose not to post any comment. This may include removing or monitoring posts that we believe violate the spirit or letter of these rules, or that we otherwise determine at our discretion needs to be monitored, not posted, or deleted.

Welcome to the discussion.

7 comments:

  • posted at 4:46 pm on Wed, Jan 16, 2008.

    Posts:

    I think all those in favor of the 5 acre proposal should show their support by buying their own parcels first, at fair market value. The parcels they should buy are the ones that butt up against the Stockton city limits. They should lead by example, put their money where their mouth is, etc.

     
  • posted at 11:41 am on Wed, Jan 16, 2008.

    Posts:

    T&C, I agree. I have no plans on attending this meeting. More political garbage. That's why we hire lawyers. I have no interest in ever seeing Suzie's face again. She wants an MOU ( an agreement that says she and the other CC members can control my land). Sorry, but BS. That 5 acre proposal was a "sweet offer" without a MOU. If Lodi wants it, pay. If not, leave us alone. My land is in the county, not in the city of Lodi, so Lodi should have no say in what I do with my land. I kinda like the trailer park idea from another blog.

     
  • posted at 10:58 am on Wed, Jan 16, 2008.

    Posts:

    Taxpayer and Oscar, thanks for the support. I always got the feeling that all Lodians thought our land was for their taking. I , and many others out here, appreciate your support.

     
  • posted at 9:46 am on Wed, Jan 16, 2008.

    Posts:

    Uh,oh....I'm agreeing with T&C. Property owners should not be required to take anything less than the fair market would command. I like the idea of putting the greenbelt issue on the ballot. If the entire City is going to benefit by a greenbelt then the entire City should be willing to pay for it. Only then we will find out how important a greenbelt really is.

     
  • posted at 9:18 am on Wed, Jan 16, 2008.

    Posts:

    Nothing that 2 or 3 hundred thousand an acre wouldn't cure. Why would you expect anyone to sell for anything than the developers and their investors and builders are getting for it. Pony up Patrick, if you want that greenbelt so bad. The money you and your "business" envoy just wasted on that trip to China would've made a nice little down payment! LOL What a bunch of REAL hypocrites.

     
  • posted at 3:05 am on Wed, Jan 16, 2008.

    Posts:

    Anything with a Pat in it can't be good. Mr. Patrick, Ms. Hitchcock, the planning commission and the city council are the reasons there'll NEVER be a real greenbelt. The farmers and landowners refuse to talk with any of these entities and let their attorneys handle the towns threats, bullying and lies.

     
  • posted at 1:34 am on Wed, Jan 16, 2008.

    Posts:

    Sorry, anything with Pat Stockar involved in it can't be good

     

Recent Comments

Posted 2 hours ago by Rick Houdack.

article: Letter: Darwin’s theory has never been …

Facts and truth are not the same thing to you, Kevin Paglia? Your deceptive quote-mining does a disservice to Sagan; the spirituality of wh…

More...

Posted 3 hours ago by M. Doyle.

article: Letter: Darwin’s theory has never been …

Science tries to give you knowledge, Kevin. Nothing more. You have to find meaning for yourself. You don't need science or religion to t…

More...

Posted 4 hours ago by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Obama may be protecting his chi…

Treacy, my readings about the PRA absolutely confirm what you are saying. I doubt any "picture" will change that.

More...

Posted 4 hours ago by M. Doyle.

article: Letter: Darwin’s theory has never been …

Kevin, we need to clarify definitions and be honest about facts. Science is not a religion or a "belief system." To say that is…

More...

Posted 4 hours ago by Christina Welch.

article: Letter: Darwin’s theory has never been …

While I am more of a humanities gal myself, I do hear what you are saying, even if I'm not as enthusiastic. (I still have nightmares from …

More...

Video

Popular Stories

Poll

Loading…

Your News

News for the community, by the community.

Mailing List

Subscribe to a mailing list to have daily news sent directly to your inbox.

  • Breaking News

    Would you like to receive breaking news alerts? Sign up now!

  • News Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily news headlines? Sign up now!

  • Sports Updates

    Would you like to receive our daily sports headlines? Sign up now!

Manage Your Lists