Laserfiche WebLink
be utilized when feasible." This bullet will be deleted. Implementation would be difficult <br /> without establishing an architectural style for the remaining undeveloped properties. Any <br /> such single style would not accommodate the wide range of uses that are likely to be <br /> developed on the vacant lands. <br /> Comment 6 <br /> What is the intent of subsection 2.1.2 Parking? It does not seem to fit drive-through <br /> uses and does not seem to address the City's gateway concerns. <br /> Response 6 <br /> The Community Development Department will discuss this question with the City of Lodi <br /> prior to or at the Development Committee Meeting. <br /> Comment 7 <br /> Subsection 2.3.2 should be revised as follows: <br /> • Building heights, setbacks offsets and architectural features should be varied to <br /> define different functions such as restaurants, gas stations, other commercial <br /> shops, etc. <br /> Response 7 <br /> The change will be reflected in the proposed Plan. <br /> Comment 8 <br /> The third bullet in Section 2.4 "Access" should be eliminated as follows: <br /> - A mFnqFn-,m d&stnnne of 150 feet shall bp M;;*RtR6RPd hPbhoeen driveways when <br /> possible. <br /> Response 8 <br /> The revision will be reflected in the proposed Plan. The Department of Public Works will <br /> review driveways on public streets for compliance with County standards. <br /> The Plan with the proposed changes is attached. <br /> This item is tentatively scheduled for the Planning Commission meeting of July 5, 2007. <br /> RG:vb <br /> PA-0700226(SPP)CMDC061307 <br /> CC: Flag City Property Owners <br /> 3 <br />