Applicant urges planning commission to forward Lodi-area land-use change; commission continues amendment after city-notice error

The San Joaquin County Planning Commission on the evening it met voted to continue a countywide general-plan text amendment and a related land-use permit after staff said several cities received late notification, preventing staff from making the findings required to approve the permit.

Robert Beetles, the applicant for proposals identified in the hearing as PA2500411 and PA2500412, told the commission he owns a 1.1-acre parcel at 5440 East Harney Lane and urged the commissioners not to postpone the items. "The city of Lodi filed a letter today saying that my parcel is within Lodi's sphere of influence and Lodi is the only city with jurisdictional standing over this property," Beetles said, noting Lodi "does not oppose my project" and that Lodi’s general plan already designates the site as a business park that allows the uses he proposed. He described the project as converting an existing 5,500-square-foot building to administrative office space, adding a 4,000-square-foot storage building, proposing dense landscaping and a screen fence, and employing about 13 people with roughly one delivery per day during 8 a.m.–4 p.m. Monday–Friday. Beetles added the project has an existing well and septic and referenced a nitrate-loading study approved by environmental health on October 28, 2015.

Beetles proposed a narrowly tailored modification to the text amendment that would allow parcels smaller than two acres to be redesignated for warehouse-industrial uses only when the parcel is either outside a city's sphere of influence or inside a city's sphere with written city consent. "That modification answers every city on the record," he said, arguing it would preserve county flexibility while giving cities a veto over redesignation inside their spheres.

Tom Terpstra, city attorney for the City of Ripon, urged the commission to keep the continuance. "We have no opposition to the project," Terpstra said, but he said cities raised concerns about the process used to bring the countywide text amendment forward and that those process issues "do need to be a discussion amongst the cities" because a countywide policy change can have differing local impacts. He noted, as an example, that some cities have "oddly shaped" spheres of influence and that a single solution may not fit every city.

Jennifer Jolly, director of community development for the county, apologized to the applicant for a notification oversight and explained why staff recommended the continuance. "Without the text amendment item number three being approved tonight to forward on to the board, we would not be able to make findings for the project," she said, adding that findings require the project to be consistent with the general plan and zoning. Jolly said staff had contacted multiple city directors and planned a meeting next week to address the cities' concerns and bring the amendment and the land-use permit back together as quickly as possible. She told the commission there would be no additional fees charged to the applicant for the delay.

After discussion, the commission declined to reconsider its earlier action to remove items three and four from the calendar; the chair called for the vote to remove the items and recorded the motion as passing unanimously among present commissioners. The commission did not forward the text amendment or the related permit to the Board of Supervisors at this meeting.

Votes at a glance - Minutes from 8/15/24: approved (recorded yes votes: Commissioners Sangha, Milos, Rhodes, Rustad). - Minutes from 2/5/26: approved (recorded yes votes: Commissioners Sangha, Milos, Rhodes, Rustad). - Non-contested items 1 and 2: approved (recorded yes votes: Commissioners Sangha, Milos, Rhodes, Rustad). - Motion to remove/continue items 3 and 4: passed (recorded yes votes: Commissioners Sangha, Milos, Rhodes, Rustad).

Why it matters The text amendment under consideration would change countywide policy governing when smaller parcels can be redesignated for industrial uses. Because general-plan and zoning changes apply across the county, cities said they needed adequate notice and an opportunity to weigh in; staff said an internal notice error left some cities unaware until late in the referral period. The commission’s decision to continue allows staff and city officials to meet and try to resolve the concerns before the items return to the commission and then to the Board of Supervisors.

Next steps Staff said it will meet with city directors next week to refine the amendment and seek a mutually acceptable approach; the county expects to schedule the items for a future hearing and to return both the text amendment and the permit together so staff can make required findings prior to any recommendation to the Board of Supervisors.