TO: Napa County Planning Commission
FROM: Brian D. Bordona, Director Planning, Building and Environmental Services
REPORT BY: Sean Trippi, Supervising Planner
SUBJECT: Hess Collection - Laird General Plan Amendment and Rezoning
Brian
RECOMMENDATION
title
HESS COLLECTION WINERY & LAIRD KENNETH E & GAIL TR / HESS COLLECTION - LAIRD GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT P21-00055 & REZONE P24-00221
CEQA Status: Consideration and recommendation that the Board of Supervisors adopt an addendum to the 2008 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164, an addendum to a certified EIR may be prepared if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or if none of the conditions contained in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. The project area is not on any of the lists of hazardous waste sites enumerated under Government Code sec. 65962.5.
Request: That the Planning Commission make the following recommendations to the Board of Supervisors:
(1) Adopt a resolution to amend the General Plan to change the project site’s land use designation from Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space (AWOS) to Industrial (I); and
(2) Adopt an ordinance changing the project site’s zoning district from Agricultural Watershed: Airport Compatibility (AW:AC) to Industrial Park: Airport Compatibility (IP:AC).
The ±280-acre project site is located on the west side of State Route 29, south of its intersection with South Kelly Road, located at 5750 South Kelly Road. Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 057-090-065 (Hess Collection) & 057-090-066 (Laird). The project site is zoned AW:AC and has a general plan designation of AWOS.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and forward a recommendation to the Board of Supervisors on the requested actions.
Staff Contact: Sean Trippi, (707) 299-1353, sean.trippi@countyofnapa.org
Applicant Agent Contact: Clark Morrison, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP, 50 California Street, Suite 3200, San Francisco, CA 94111, (415) 262-5100, cmorrison@coxcastle.com
body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Proposed Actions:
That the Planning Commission recommend that the Board of Supervisors:
1. Approve and adopt the Addendum to the 2008 General Plan Environmental Impact Report based on Findings 1 - 5 of Attachment C;
2. Adopt a resolution to amend the General Plan to change the project site’s land use designation from AWOS to I (Attachment B); and,
3. Adopt an ordinance to rezone the property from the AW:AC zoning district to the IP:AC zoning district (Attachment C).
Discussion:
The project consists of a request to amend the General Plan to change the land use designation of the two properties comprising the project site from Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space (AWOS) to Industrial (I) and rezone the project site from Agricultural Watershed: Airport Compatibility (AW:AC) to Industrial Park; Airport Compatibility (IP:AC). No development of the project site is proposed currently. Subsequent development of the project site would be subject to development regulations in affect at the time of a development application submittal including an assessment of potential environmental effects pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Measure P does not apply to the project site because the site’s designation was changed from Industrial (I) to AWOS after September 28, 2007, the date on which parcels with an existing AWOS designation trigger Measure P requirements. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend the Board approve the General Plan amendment and Rezone.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Consideration and possible recommendation of an addendum to the 2008 General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). The project area is not on any of the lists of hazardous waste sites enumerated under Government Code sec. 65962.5. Review of the proposed project has concluded that it would not result in new significant impacts or an increase in the severity of any impacts previously identified in the GPU FEIR certified in 2008, as further explained in the CEQA Memorandum. None of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR or Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) have occurred, and thus an Addendum to the GPU FEIR is appropriate to satisfy CEQA requirements for the proposed project.
Link to 2008 General Plan EIR: https://www.countyofnapa.org/1760/General-Plan
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Owners: Hess Collection Winery, Attn: Timothy Persson, 4411 Redwood Road, Napa, CA 94558 and Laird Kenneth E & Gail Tr, 5055 Solano Avenue, Napa, CA 94558
Applicant/Representative: Clark Morrison, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP, 50 California Street, Suite 3200, San Francisco, CA 94111
Zoning District: Existing - Agricultural Watershed: Airport Compatibility (AW:AC)
Zoning District: Proposed - Industrial Park: Airport Compatibility (IP:AC)
General Plan Designation: Existing - Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space (AWOS) Industrial
General Plan Designation: Proposed - Industrial (I)
Application filed: March 26, 2021
Board of Supervisors Hearing: June 22, 2021, BOS initiated amendment
Property Area: Two lots totaling approximately 280-acres
Adjacent Zoning / Land Use:
North: AW:AC - Adjoining the northern boundary of the Laird property is the Eagle Vines golf course. North of the Hess property, east of Laird is a 40-acre undeveloped property.
South: AW:AC - To the south of the project area is an approximately 31-acre property with a single-family home. This property is within the boundary of the proposed City of American Canyon Paoli/Watson Lane annexation.
West: IP:AC - West of the Hess property, across SR 29 is a 3.45-acre property developed with an auto salvage yard. All other properties west of Hess are within the city limits of American Canyon. West of the Laird property, across South Kelley Road are several properties zoned GI:AC consisting of a restaurant and several light industrial uses.
East: AW:AC - To the east are several properties ranging in size from 1.76 acres to 203.6 acres and include vineyards and a residence on the 1.76-acre property.
Proposed Structural Development: No specific land uses, buildings, or infrastructure are proposed.
Property History/Setting:
The site is currently undeveloped and has slopes ranging between 2 to 11%. A number of Erosion Control Plans (ECPs) for vineyard development have been approved over the years. The site had been planted in vines as recently as January 2021. The vines have subsequently been removed. There are two recorded archaeological sites on the property.
June 14, 2021: Erosion Control Plan #P21-00124-ECPA (Track II, Replant) was determined by the Director to be compete for implementation to remove and winterize approximately 55.4 acres of vineyards on an approximately 241-acre property. (APN 057-090-065)
March 30, 2020: Erosion Control Plan #P20-00070-ECPA (Track II, Replant) was determined by the Director to be compete for implementation to replant approximately 4.7 acres of vineyards on an approximately 241-acre property. (APN 057-090-065)
May 5, 2009: Erosion Control Plan #P09-00169-ECPA (Track II, Replant) was determined by the Director to be compete for implementation to replant approximately 15.2 acres of vineyard on an approximately 241-acre property. (APN 057-090-065)
March 22, 2007: Erosion Control Plan #P07-00151-ECPA (Track II, Replant) was determined by the Director to be compete for implementation to replant approximately 14-acres of an existing approximately 175-acre vineyard on approximately 241-acre property. (APN 057-090-065)
July 27, 1998: Erosion Control Plan #98020-ECPA was approved by the Director to develop approximately 65-acres of new vineyards on an approximately 241-acre property. (APN 57-090-065)
September 7, 1997: Applications for a Rezone 97134-RZ and Tentative Parcel Map 97135-PM were submitted to subdivide an approximately 241-acre property into two parcels of approximately 192.7 and & 48.3 acres and rezone the proposed 48.3-acre parcel from AW:AC to IP:AC were submitted. A letter was sent to the applicant on January 5, 1998, indicating that an EIR would be required. No further processing occurred. (APN 057-090-065)
July 20, 1994: Tentative Parcel Map Number 2539-PM was approved by the Planning Commission to subdivide a 325-acre parcel (APN 057-090-015) into three (3) parcels of approximately 40, 44 and 241 acres. (APN’s 057-090-065, -066, -067)
March 5, 1991: Consideration by the Board of Supervisors of an appeal to the decision of the Planning Commission on December 19, 1990, upholding the Director’s decision to require an EIR for a request to rezone 325-acres from AW to I. The appeal was subsequently withdrawn on March 25, 1991. (APN 057-090-015)
September 16, 1986: The Board of Supervisors denied Tentative Parcel Map 2420-PM to subdivide an approximately 325-acre property into 3 parcels of approximately 41, 112, and 172 acres and to Rezone (18586-RZ) the proposed 112-acre parcel from AW to I. The Planning Commission recommended denial of these applications at their August 6, 1986, meeting. (APN 057-090-015)
November 8, 1977: The Board of Supervisor’s denied an appeal and upheld the Planning Commission’s September 21, 1977, approval of a Use Permit #U-687677 to remove approximately 400,000 cubic yards of fill materials from a 27-acre portion of the 325-acre parcel to be utilized for highway construction.(APN 057-090-015).
Code Compliance History:
There are no open or pending code violations for the subject site.
Discussion:
General Plan Amendment - A general plan amendment may be initiated by a private individual or group if the Board of Supervisors first finds that the amendment is in the public interest and internally consistent with the Napa County General Plan, both among the elements and within each element, and all necessary changes are proposed to maintain consistency per Section 65300.5 of the California Government Code (Resolution No. 05-173 - Establishing New Procedures for Filing and Processing General Plan Amendments). In 2021 Hess Collection filed General Plan Amendment request P21-00055. At a Board of Supervisors hearing held June 22, 2021, the Board determined that the criteria and processing requirements of Resolution No. 05-173 were met and directed staff to process the general plan amendment. At the time the General Plan Amendment was initiated by the Board the proposal included a conceptual development plan. However, as noted above, no development is proposed at this. (See Attachment G - June 22, 2021, Board of Supervisors Staff Report)
Amendments to a general plan must be internally consistent and compatible with the policies throughout the general plan. “A project is consistent with the general plan ‘“if, considering all its aspects, it will further the objectives and policies of the general plan and not obstruct their attainment.” A given project need not be in perfect conformity with each and every general plan policy. To be consistent, a [project] must be ‘compatible with’ the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the general plan. Since policies in a general plan reflect a range of competing interests, the governmental agency must be allowed to weigh and balance the plan's policies when applying them, and it has broad discretion to construe its policies in light of the plan's purposes. (Save Our Peninsula Committee v. Monterey County Board of Supervisors 87 Cal.App.4th 99, 142.)
The County’s General Plan reiterates this balancing and states that because “policies in the General Plan reflect a range of competing interests, the decision-makers are allowed to weigh and balance the Plan’s policies when applying them, and they have broad discretion to construe the policies in light of the Plan’s purposes”. It continues, explaining that balance requires the “weighing of pros and cons to achieve an acceptable mix” of land uses, development, and preservation. The policies allow for flexibility and require interpretation by staff and the decision-makers. Staff has reviewed the proposed General Plan Amendment for consistency with the General Plan and determined the project complies with, supports, and/or is not in conflict with said goals and policies. See Attachment D - General Plan Consistency Analysis.
Hess Collection is seeking to re-designate approximately 281 acres of AWOS designated property to Industrial. The site was previously designated Industrial in the 1975 and 1983 General Plan but was re-designated AWOS with the 2008 General Plan Update. The 2008 action included General Plan Policy AG/LU-40 which states:
“The properties known as the “Hess Vineyards” shall be designated Agriculture, Watershed & Open Space, but shall be considered for re-designation to an Industrial designation if Flosden/Newell Road is ever extended North of Green Island Road, through the property.”
As shown in Figure AG/LU-1 of the 2008 General Plan (Attachment J, Graphics), the properties referred to at that time as the “Hess Vineyards” include three parcels: APN: 057-090-065, owned by Hess Collection Winery; APN: 057-090-066, owned by Kenneth and Gail Laird; and APN: 057-090-067, owned by the Phillis N. Farr et al Trust. The third (Farr) property is not a part of this application and is not required for the connecting road from Newell to South Kelly.
The City of American Canyon is moving forward with the Watson Ranch Subdivision as well as an annexation of the Watson Lane/Paoli Loop Road area located just south of the subject property. These projects contemplate the extension of Newell Drive (formerly Flosden Road) to connect with State Route 29 at Green Island Road/Paoli Loop Road. The conceptual alignment of Newell Drive’s extension encroaches within the southern edge of the Hess Collection property. The applicant has expressed interest in the road extension through their property and has entered into a right-of-way dedication agreement with the City of American Canyon (Attachment I) and is requesting re-designation of their property to Industrial as enabled by Policy AG/LU-40.
Relationship to Measure J / Measure P - In 1990, the voters of Napa County passed Measure J amending the Napa County General Plan to establish voter-controlled protections of certain agriculturally designated lands through 2020. In 2008, voters approved Measure P extending Measure J’s provisions to 2058. Measure J’s provisions are referenced in the current General Plan (2008) under Policies AG/LU-111, and AG/LU-112. Although the subject property for this General Plan Amendment is presently designated for agricultural land use, Policies AG/LU-111 & 112 do not apply because the subject property was designated Industrial at the time Measure J was adopted. Measure P (an ordinance extending Measure J) in general, prohibits the redesignation of AWOS or AR lands to a non-agricultural designation without a vote of the people. Measure P essentially “froze” the land use designation of those parcels that were designated either AWOS or AR as of September 28, 2007, on the Land Use Map. This parcel was changed from Industrial to AWOS after September 28, 2007, and therefore the AWOS designation was not “frozen”, and the lands can be converted without triggering Measure P requirements and a without a vote of the people. With the adoption of the 2008 General Plan, numerous areas throughout the County were changed to agricultural designations to more precisely align General Plan mapping with existing land uses. These areas are not subject to Measure P’s provisions and are shown in General Plan Figure AG/LU-3.5. The subject property is one of the properties shown in the Figure.
Rezoning - The proposed General Plan amendment requires a conforming amendment to the zoning map. The property is currently zoned Agricultural Watershed: Airport Compatibility (AW:AC). As part of this action, the property would be zoned Industrial Park: Airport Compatibility (IP:AC).
The proposed General Plan amendment and rezoning do not include a development proposal but would allow future development of the property with business park/light industrial uses which would be subject to analysis pursuant to CEQA to assess any potential environmental effects. The proposal would also not result in any potential impacts to the environment.
Airport Land Use Commission - Pursuant to State Aeronautics Law (Public Utilities Code 21676), the proposed amendments to the AIASP must be reviewed by Napa County's Airport Land Use Commission (ALUC) prior to consideration by the Board of Supervisors because the proposal involves changes to land use regulations within the influence areas of the Napa County airport. A public hearing before the Airport Land Use Commission is required to determine if the proposed amendments to the AIASP are consistent with the Airport Land Use Compatibility Plan. The ALUC's determination will be forwarded to the Board as part of their consideration of the proposed amendments.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
A. Planning Commission Resolution Recommendation to the Board of Supervisors
B. Recommended Resolution for General Plan Amendment - Exhibit A
C. Recommended Ordinance for Rezone - Exhibit B
D. General Plan Consistency Analysis
E. Zoning District Comparison Table
F. CEQA Addendum
G. June 22, 2021, Board of Supervisors Staff Report
H. Application Materials
I. Newell Drive Extension Right-of-Way Dedication Agreement
J. Graphics