TO: Napa County Planning Commission
FROM: Brian D. Bordona, Planning, Building and Environmental Services Director
REPORT BY: Matt Ringel, Planner III
SUBJECT: Subject: Laketricity (DBA Dynamo Solar) Commercial Floating Solar Use Permit (P22-00340-UP), Zone Change (P23-00181-ZC), and Variance (P23-00268-VAR)
RECOMMENDATION
title
EVA PAULY / LAKETRICITY (DBA DYNAMO SOLAR) COMMERCIAL FLOATING SOLAR FACILITY, ZONE CHANGE, AND VARIANCE / APP NOS. P22-00340-UP, P23-00181-ZC, AND P23-00268-VAR
CEQA Status: Consideration and possible adoption of a Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration. According to the proposed Revised Mitigated Negative Declaration, the proposed project would not have any potentially significant environmental impacts after implementation of mitigation measures. Mitigation measures are proposed for the following areas: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Biological Resources, and Cultural Resources. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
Request: Make a recommendation to the Napa County Board of Supervisors regarding the following:
1) Adoption of an ordinance to rezone the developed portions of the project parcels (APN(s) 057-010-010 and 057-050-003) from the existing zoning district of Agricultural Watershed: Airport Compatibility (AW:AC) to Public Lands: Airport Compatibility (PL:AC);
2) Approval of a Variance to allow construction of 42 transmission line towers at a height varying between 38.5-feet and 70-feet tall, whereby Napa County Code (“NCC”) Section 18.104.120 establishes a 35-foot height maximum;
3) Approval of a Use Permit, subject to Conditions of Approval, for construction of approximately 56-acres of floating solar panels (approximately 63,840 solar panels) on top of two of the Napa Sanitation District’s existing wastewater ponds to produce approximately 34.7 megawatts (MW) of direct current electricity, converted to 24.5 megawatts (MW) of alternating current electricity, construction of approximately 2-miles of electrical transmission lines, with portions constructed above and below ground, and construction of one 0.13-acre electrical substation located at the northern edge of the solar panels.
The project is located on approximately 163.59-acre and 327.0-acre parcels within the AW (Agricultural Watershed) zoning district and Public Institutional (PI) General Plan designation at 1515 Soscol Ferry Road, Napa, CA 945584. APNs 057-050-003-000, 057-010-010-000, 057-050-006-000, 057-010-038-000, 057-010-039-000, 046-400-016-000, 046-400-011-000, 046-400-057-00, and 046-400-004-000.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission recommend the Board of Supervisors adopt the Revised Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project, adopt the ordinance for Rezone application No. P23-00181, approve Variance application No. P23-00268, and approve Use Permit Application No. P22-00340, as conditioned.
Staff Contact: Matt Ringel, Planner III, (707) 299-1351
Applicant Contact: Eva Pauly-Bowles, Laketricity Managing Director, 755 Baywood Drive, 2nd Floor, Petaluma, CA, 94954, (707) 658-4596
Applicant Representative Contact: Jeffrey Redding, Land Use Planning Services, (707) 255-7375
body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposed Actions:
That the Planning Commission adopt a motion recommending that the Napa County Board of Supervisors take the following actions:
1. Adoption of the Revised Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP), based on Revised recommended Findings 1-7 in Attachment B;
2. Adoption of an Ordinance for Rezone (Attachment F);
3. Approval of Variance Application No. P23-00268 based on Revised recommended Findings 8-11 in Attachment B, and subject to the Revised recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment C; and
4. Approval of Use Permit Application No. P22-00340 based on Revised recommended Findings 12-16 in Attachment B, and subject to the Revised recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment C.
Discussion:
The project was last heard at the May 15, 2024, Planning Commission meeting. At the hearing members of the public provided comments regarding biological studies and governmental jurisdiction. Planning staff requested that the hearing be continued to a future date to allow staff and applicants to review and respond to those comments. The prior staff report and attachments are available via the following link:
https://napa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6663668&GUID=E88308DB-80B0-4692-8A13-BA9E7DD70079&Options=&Search=
Since the last hearing, the applicant has prepared Attachment J - “Response to Public Comment”. The applicant’s letter responds to public comment received from Adams Broadwell Joesph & Cardoza Attorneys at Law. In summary, the applicant’s response clarifies the administrative record and establishes that information from Adams Broadwell and their biologist does not meet the threshold of substantial evidence for reasons set forth in more detail in Attachment J. The letter establishes that:
A) The County’s administrative record of proceedings is adequate and contains substantial evidence supporting the proposed actions.
B) The IS/MND adequately describes the baseline environmental conditions.
C) The IS/MND adequately analyzed the potential for wildfire impacts.
D) There is no substantial evidence that the Project may cause significant wildfire impacts.
E) There is no substantial evidence that the Project may cause significant unmitigated biological impacts.
Finally, at the time of publication of this report, County has received no further public comment from Adams Broadwell pertaining to this project.
Additionally, since the previous hearing, Staff and PG&E has further coordinated the cross-jurisdictional permitting requirements for the PG&E Anderson Road electrical substation expansion. Napa County is the lead agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and therefore, is completing the environmental review on behalf the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) and all other responsible agencies. All earthwork and construction related to the expansion of the electrical substation is under the permitting jurisdiction of the CPUC. Due to the CPUC’s overarching jurisdiction, the MND has been updated to reflect that a grading permit is not required, instead, Napa County has included recommended mitigation measures for the CPUC to implement throughout their permitting process. As a responsible agency, the CPUC has the authority to find Napa County’s CEQA review as adequate (using recommended mitigation measures) or the CPUC can conduct their own CEQA review for the proposed project.
Staff has reviewed the proposed project and supports recommending that the Napa County Board of Supervisors adopt the revised MND, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan (MMRP), and Zone Change Ordinance as currently drafted in the staff report packet. Staff also supports recommending that the Napa County Board of Supervisors approve the Use Permit and Variance requests as currently drafted in the staff report packet, subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment C. Findings in support of the MND, MMRP, Use Permit request and Variance request have been prepared in Attachment B. Napa County’s 2008 General Plans designates the floating solar parcels as Public Lands, a designation that is compatible with the Public Institutional (PI) zoning district. Commercial solar facilities are conditionally permitted uses within the Public Lands (PL) zoning district. Land uses in the area are dominated by existing wastewater treatment plant facilities, State Highway 29, State Highway 221, open agricultural lands, intermixed with industrial and commercial development.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Consideration and possible adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. According to the proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration, the proposed project would not have any potentially significant environmental impacts after implementation of mitigation measures. Mitigation measures are proposed for the following areas: Aesthetics, Agriculture and Forest Resources, Biological Resources, and Cultural Resources. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Discussion Points:
Environmental Analysis -
Staff prepared an Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH# 2024040604) that evaluated the environmental impacts of the project and did not identify any potentially significant effects with the incorporation of mitigation measures.
Since the last hearing, there have been no changes to the applicant’s requests for approval of a Use Permit, Zone Change, Variance, and Lot Line Adjustment to allow: a request to construct approximately 56-acres of floating solar panels on Napa Sanitation District’s existing wastewater ponds. The proposed commercial solar facility will produce approximately 34.7 megawatts (MW) of direct current electricity, converted to 24.5 megawatts (MW) of alternating current electricity. The proposed project includes approximately 2-miles of electrical transmission lines, with portions constructed above and below ground. The electrical transmission route will consist of 51 transmission line towers ranging in height from 38.5 feet to 70 feet tall. The proposed project will require the creation of one 0.13-acre electrical substation located on the northern portion of the Napa Sanitation District’s existing wastewater ponds. Since the previous hearing, it has been clarified that the CPUC has permitting authority for the 0.9-acre expansion of an existing Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) “Tulucay” electrical substation located on Anderson Road. The expansion of the PG&E electrical substation will require approximately 24,700 cubic yards of earthwork.
The construction of the 56-acre commercial solar facility, 42 of the proposed electrical transmission towers, and the 0.13-acre new electrical substation are within the permitting jurisdiction of Napa County. The project includes a request to change the Zoning District of the developed portions of the project parcels from Agricultural Watershed: Airport Compatibility (AW:AC) to Public Lands: Airport Compatibility (PL:AC) to support the establishment of a Commercial Solar Facility. The project includes request for a height Variance to construct above ground portions of the transmission lines taller than the Zoning District’s maximum height of 35 feet. The Variance requests relief of the height standards to establish 42 transmission line towers, within the jurisdiction of Napa County, at a height varying between 38.5 feet and 70 feet tall. A Lot Line Adjustment is proposed between Assessor Parcel Numbers 046-400-004-000 and 046-400-057-000, to accommodate the PG&E electrical substation expansion.
The installation of 8 electrical transmission towers and the undergrounding of approximately 1,800 feet of electrical transmission lines are within the permitting jurisdiction of the California Department of Transportation (CalTrans).
The electrical substation grading and electrical equipment associated with the 0.9-acre expansion of an existing Pacific Gas and Electric (PG&E) “Tulucay” electrical substation located on Anderson Road and one Point of Connection Outside (POCO) transmission tower are within the permitting jurisdiction of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC).
Since the May 15, 2024, Planning Commission hearing, Staff and PG&E has further coordinated the cross-jurisdictional permitting requirements for the PG&E Anderson Road electrical substation expansion. Due to the CPUC’s overarching jurisdiction, the MND has been updated to reflect that a grading permit is not required, instead, Napa County has rewritten Mitigation Measure AG-1 to recommended mitigation measures for the CPUC to implement throughout their permitting process. Additionally, the language regarding the timing for many biological Mitigation Measures have been updated from “Prior to issuance of a grading permit” to “Prior to approval of a building permit” or similar language.
In response to public comment, Section IV - Biological Resources - Subsection d, of the MND has been updated to clarify that design features are included in the existing design of the proposed project to reduce potential for bird-strike.
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guideline §15073.5(c)(4) outlines that recirculation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required with the addition of new information which merely clarifies, amplifies, or makes insignificant modifications to the negative declaration. With no significant environmental effects anticipated, and with the project’s consistency with adopted County policies and regulations, staff believes that the necessary findings for the project can be made and recommends approval of the Use Permit as proposed and subject to the conditions.
Updated Attachments -
Staff has updated the recommended Conditions of Approval, Findings, and General Plan Consistency Analysis to match the language within the updated Mitigated Negative Declaration, with the clarification that PG&E’s earthwork is under the permitting jurisdiction of the CPUC. Additionally, the Findings have been updated to remove an inconsistency that referenced that the proposed project is outside of the boundaries of any airport land use plan. The proposed project is located within the boundaries of the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan and was found consistent with said plan by the Airport Land Use Committee (ALUC) on May 15, 2024.
Public Comments -
At the time of staff report preparation, four public comments have been received since the previous May 15, 2024, Planning Commission Meeting. The public comments include two support letters, one request for the addition of a public paved bike path, and one Public Records Act Request from the law firm Adams Broadwell on behalf of California Unions for Reliable Energy. (Attachment K)
Decision Making Options:
As noted in the Executive Summary Section above, staff is recommending the Planning Commission support the project as summarized in Option 1, below. Decision making options including the following:
Option 1 - Recommend the Board of Supervisors Approve Applicant's Proposal (Staff Recommendation)
Disposition - This action would make a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors to adopt an ordinance rezoning a portion of the project parcels zoning district, approve a variance, and approve the use permit for the commercial renewable energy facility. The General Plan consistency analysis demonstrates that the proposed zone change and the proposed commercial solar facility are consistent with a number of the overall goals and policies set forth for the County. With implementation of mitigation measures pertaining to aesthetics, agriculture and forest resources, biological resources, and cultural resources, the potential environmental impacts of the project would be less than significant.
Action Required - Follow the proposed action listed in Executive Summary. This option has been analyzed for its environmental impacts, and the project was found to have less than significant impacts.
Option 2 - Revised Project Request - Modify Use Permit or Variance Proposal
Disposition - This option allows the Planning Commission to recommend that the Board of Supervisors modify aspects of the proposed solar facility use permit or variance requests. The changes could be related to such components as solar panel location, transmission route location, and transmission route height, or recommend undergrounding of all transmission lines. If the Planning Commission elects to pursue this option, the recommended conditions of approval would need to reflect the revised components. The substantial modification of the proposed project may require additional CEQA review and recirculation of the Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration.
Action Required - Follow proposed actions listed in the Executive Summary and recommend amended scope and applicable conditions of approval. The item may need to be continued to a future date if significant revisions to the recommended conditions of approval are desired.
Option 3 - Recommend to Deny Proposed Project
Disposition - In the event the Commission does not support the rezoning, Use Permit or Variance as proposed, the Commission would vote to recommend denial of the project. The Commission should articulate why it does not recommend amending the zone change, Use Permit, or Variance, such as inconsistency with the General Plan including the proposed project conflicts with the goals, policies, or land use designations outlined in the existing General Plan. A denial recommendation would result in status quo of the site and would not result in a referral to the Board for further action. Applicant or any other interested party would be able to request Board consideration of the proposal upon filing of a timely written request with the Clerk of the Board within five days after the commission files its recommendation pursuant to NCC §18.136.060(C).
Action Required - Commission motion, second and vote to not recommend the proposed project to the Board of Supervisors.
Option 4 - Continuance Option
The Commission may continue an item to a future hearing date at its own discretion.
Attachments:
A. Revised Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
B. Revised Recommended Findings
C. Revised Recommended Conditions of Approval
D. General Plan Consistency Analysis
E. Zoning Code Uses Comparison Table AW-PL
F. Ordinance
G. Applications and Project Statement
H. Biological Resource Assessment
I. Graphics
J. Dynamo Solar Response to Citizens Comments 7/8/24
K. Public Comment (Received between May 15, 2024 and August 16, 2024 at 12pm)