Stockton General Plan approved by commission, headed to City Council

STOCKTON — The city’s latest General Plan is finally going to be presented to the City Council, but some are still opposed to section that proposes potential future development in the northwest.

The Stockton Planning Commission on Thursday night voted 6-1 to approve the City of Stockton General Plan 2040, and it will be considered by the Stockton City Council at a future meeting.

Commissioner D’Adrea Davie cast the lone dissenting vote.

Thursday’s meeting was continued from an Oct. 25 session, where the commission asked staff to clarify issues and concerns raised by residents opposed to the plan’s Economic and Education Enterprise land use designation, which proposes to develop 3,800 acres of land between Stockton and Lodi.

Eric Parfrey, chairman of the Sierra Club California Executive Committee and member of Campaign For Common Ground, said both groups would be 100 percent in favor of the document’s approval, as long as the Economic and Education Enterprise land use designation was eliminated from the plan.

Parfrey has long been opposed to the land use designation, stating the community has called for the city to redevelop vacant or underutilized parcels in existing urban areas and retain open space and agriculture in land beyond the city limits.

“We have not changed our position on this,” he said Thursday. “Any sort of development north of Eight Mile Road — unless it’s fully evaluated and justified — is just not acceptable to us. And we’ll fight that. Staff has done a poor job justifying why 3,800 acres is needed.”

However, Tanya Sundberg, a representative with PlaceWorks, the consulting firm that prepared the General Plan, said development on that 3,800 acres is merely theoretical.

She said the land in question is considered a “holding category” for future development that would be subject to a General Plan amendment, as well as reviews by CEQA and the Local Agency Formation Commission.

“The proposed designation limits residential development to development in support of a major job generator,” she said. “Any housing would be approximate to the job generator, and the cost of housing would have to be consistent with the wages of jobs included in a project. The designation does not allow for standalone residential development.”

While staff said any future housing proposed for the Economic and Education Enterprise land use is contingent upon commitment from a large employer coming to Stockton, resident Colleen Foster said she feared the city could be swayed to forego that requirement.

“I hope that you are feeling (the requirement) is actually true,” she said. “Because I think you can probably envision the possibility that someone could come before the commission or (City) Council and say ‘If you had some housing here, it would make the area so much more attractive for a potential employer.’ These policies need to be exceedingly strong and I hope you will enforce those in your recommendations.”