TO: Board of Supervisors
FROM: Brian D. Bordona, Director of Planning, Building and Environmental Services
REPORT BY: Matthew Ringel, Planner III
SUBJECT: Hayes Drumright/Vida Valiente Winery Appeal
RECOMMENDATION
title
PUBLIC HEARING 2:00 P.M. - VIDA VALIENTE WINERY APPEAL (USE PERMIT NO. P20-00079-UP)
Conduct a public hearing to consider an appeal filed by Appellant and Applicant Hayes Drumwright concerning the Napa County Planning Commission’s decision on May 1, 2024, to deny the Vida Valiente Winery Use Permit No. P20-00079-UP. (No Fiscal Impact.)
body
BACKGROUND
The matter before the Board involves an appeal filed by Hayes Drumwright (Applicant/Appellant or Drumwright) concerning the Vida Valiente Winery Use Permit Application No. P20-00079 and the decisions made by the Napa County Planning Commission on May 1, 2024, to deny Use Permit Application No. P20-00079-UP for a new 30,000 gallons per year winery with a wine cave; tours and tastings by appointment; a marketing program; full-time, part-time and seasonal employees; on-premise consumption of wines produced on-site within outdoor hospitality areas; and winery related infrastructure and improvements.
The project is proposed on approximately 16.93-acre and 1.15-acre parcel, at 407 Crystal Springs Road, St. Helena, CA (APN: 021-410-013-000 & 021-372-001-000) within the Agricultural Watershed (AW) zoning district with a General Plan land use designation of Agriculture, Watershed, and Open Space (AWOS).
On May 13, 2024, a timely notice of intent to appeal was filed by Applicant/Appellant and a timely appeal packet was submitted on March 23, 2024 (the Appeal) (Attachment A). Staff responses to the Appeal are in Attachment B.
Documents and previous public comment associated with the Project and this appeal record (No. P24-00133) are available for review in Planning, Building and Environmental Services’ (PBES) Department at: https://www.pbes.cloud/index.php/s/gKnYZKxYLz8c4jz or at the PBES Department located at 1195 Third Street, 2nd Floor, Napa, CA 94559.
Discussion:
On March 4, 2020, Drumwright submitted a use permit application for a new 30,000 gallon per year winery with the following components:
a. Construction of a new 17,722 sq. ft. winery facility containing 10,762 sq. ft. of production space and 6,960 sq. ft. for accessory uses;
b. Construction of a new 13,675 sq. ft. wine cave containing 9,113 sq. ft. of production space and 1,335 sq. ft. for accessory uses;
c. Removal of 0.8 acres of woodland canopy, and the planting/preservation of 2.4 acres of woodland canopy on the project parcel and neighboring parcel under common ownership;
d. Removal of approximately 0.15 acres of vineyard;
e. Excavation of approximately 19,400 cubic yards of spoils associated with the cave and construction of structural pads;
f. Onsite parking for 10 vehicles;
g. Up to five (5) full-time employees, two (2) part-time employees and two (2) seasonal employees;
h. On-site domestic and process wastewater treatment systems;
i. Hours of operation seven days a week: production 6:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. (non-harvest), visitation 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. and marketing events 11:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. (conclusion of cleanup);
j. Establishing tours and tastings with a maximum of twenty-eight (28) guests per day with a limit of one hundred and twenty (120) guests per week between the hours of 10:00 a.m. and 6:00 p.m.;
k. Establishing a marketing program with twenty-four (24) events per year with up to 24 guest per event and wine and food pairing, three (3) events per year with up to 60 guests per event and wine release and wine club events, two (2) events per year with up to 125 guests per event;
l. On-premises consumption of wines produced on-site; and
m. Driveway expansion to meet County Road and Street Standards for commercial driveways; and
n. Landscaping, and other improvements associated with wineries (hereafter referred to as the Project or Winery).
On November 4, 2023, the Public Notice for the Planning Commission hearing and Notice of Intent to adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration was mailed to all property owners within 1,000 feet of the subject property and additional residents of the northern portion of Crystal Springs Road. It should be noted that the County’s requirements to notice all property owners within 1,000 feet far exceeds the State mandate of noticing all owners within 300 feet. Notice was also provided to those persons on the general CEQA document notification list. The Notice was published in the Napa Valley Register on November 4, 2023.
On December 6, 2023, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to consider the Project and after considering public comment continued the matter to a date uncertain for further evaluation.
On April 20, 2024, Project was re-noticed for the May 1, 2024, Planning Commission meeting.
On May 1, 2024, the Planning Commission held a continued public hearing on the Project, considered public comment and ultimately voted to deny (2:1-AYES: Dameron and Brunzell; NOES: Whitmer; EXCUSED: Phillips and Mazotti) the Vida Valiente Winery project. All documents associated with the Vida Valiente Winery, including but not limited to the application materials, Planning Commission Staff Reports, CEQA document, comments and correspondence, the transcripts of the Planning Commission meetings, and the Appeal can be accessed at: https://napa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=6648336&GUID=13CA0485-AAAA-43B5-ABD0-9F2CCF7135C1&Options=&Search=
Public notice of this appeal hearing was mailed and provided to all parties who received notice of the Planning Commission.
Findings:
When reviewing the proposed Project, the Planning Commission based its decision on a series of Findings, as required under both County Code and State law. The Board of Supervisors must also consider all of the same Findings in reaching its decision. To uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of the Project and denial of the appeal, the Board must determine that the Project is inconsistent with at least one (or more) of the following Findings or the County General Plan. Alternatively, to approve the Project and grant the Appeal, the Board must determine that the Project is consistent with each of the following Findings.
CEQA:
1. The Board of Supervisors has read and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP) prior to taking action on said Mitigated Negative Declaration and the proposed project.
2. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and MMRP is based on independent judgment exercised by the Board.
3. The Mitigated Negative Declaration and MMRP was prepared and considered in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
4. There is no substantial evidence in the record as a whole, that the project will have a significant effect on the environment provided that measures to mitigate potentially significant impacts to biological, cultural, noise and transportation resources are incorporated into the project approval.
5. There is no evidence, in considering the record as a whole that the proposed project will have a potential adverse effect on wildlife resources or habitat upon which the wildlife depends.
6. The site of this proposed project is not on any of the lists of hazardous waste sites enumerated under Government Code Section 65962.5 and is not within the boundaries of any airport land use plan.
7. The Clerk of the Board is the custodian of the records of the proceedings on which this decision is based. Records are located at the Napa County Planning, Building, and Environmental Services Department, 1195 Third Street, Room 210, Napa, California.
Use Permit:
1. The Board of Supervisors has the power to issue a Use Permit under the Zoning Regulations in effect as applied to the Property.
2. The procedural requirements for a Use Permit set forth in Chapter 18.124 of the County Code (zoning regulations) have been met.
3. The grant of the Use Permit, as conditioned, will not adversely affect the public health, safety or welfare of the County of Napa.
4. The proposed winery use complies with applicable provisions of the County Code and is consistent with the policies and standards of the Napa County General Plan.
5. The proposed use would not require a new water system or improvement causing significant adverse effects, either individually or cumulatively, on the affected groundwater basin in Napa County, unless that use would satisfy any of the other criteria specified for approval or waiver of a groundwater permit under Sections 13.15.070 or 13.15.080 of the County Code.
The proposed Conditions of Approval for the Project that were provided to the Planning Commission are included in Attachment D.
Applicant’s Letter:
On July 22, 2024, the Applicant/Appellant provided Staff with a letter (Attachment G), which proposed a reduced visitation and marketing plan. The applicant’s reduced project scope would reduce daily visitation from 28 visitors per day with a 120 visitors per week maximum to 22 visitors per day with a 100 visitors per week maximum. Additionally, the Applicant/Appellant has proposed reducing their marketing plan from 24 events per year with 24 visitors, 3 events per year with 60 visitors, and 2 events per year with 125 visitors to 12 events per year with 24 visitors, 3 events per year with 60 visitors, and removing all proposed 125 visitor events. The reduced scope would reduce the proposed project’s visitation and marketing program by 5,668 visitors per year, or by approximately 22%.
Road Improvements:
If the Board is inclined to require improvements to Crystal Springs Road, staff has drafted two versions of a Conditions of Approval within Appeal Ground 3 of Attachment B.
Appeal:
Staff has summarized Appellant’s Grounds of Appeal. Staff’s response to the Appeal is in Attachment B. Staff recommends the Board review the actual Appeal for further details.
Options:
The following options are provided for the Board’s consideration regarding possible action on the Appeal:
• Deny the Appeal in its entirety and uphold the Planning Commission’s denial of the Project;
• Grant the Appeal in its entirety or in part and reverse the Planning Commission’s decision thereby approving the Project;
• Modify the scope of the Project or Conditions of Approval (Attachment D) thereby reversing the Planning Commission’s denial and approving the Project; or
• Remand the matter to the Planning Commission with direction.
REQUESTED ACTIONS:
1. Conduct a public hearing to consider Drumwright’s Appeal.
2. Take tentative action to grant the Appeal in its entirety and reverse the Planning Commission’s denial thereby approving the Project.
3. Refer the matter to County Counsel’s office for preparation of a Resolution of Findings and Decision on Appeal and direct County Counsel to return on September 10, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. with the proposed Resolution for adoption.
PROCEDURAL REQUIREMENTS
1. Chair introduces item and invites disclosures regarding any ex-parte communications or new Levine Act disclosures, if any.
2. Staff Report presentation.
3. Chair opens the public hearing and invites testimony from the Applicant/Appellant and Applicant/Appellant’s witnesses, as previously disclosed on and in the order noted on the witness list attached as Attachment C.
4. Chair invites any other interested members of the public to testify regarding the Appeal.
5. Chair then invites Applicant/Appellant to have final rebuttal.
6. Chair closes the public hearing.
7. A motion of intent is made and seconded to deny, uphold, and/or remand the Appeal.
8. Chair refers the matter to County Counsel’s office for preparation of a Resolution of Findings and Decision on Appeal. Due to current workload, good cause exists for County Counsel’s office to have up to ninety days to prepare the Resolution of Findings and Decision on Appeal. Consequently, Staff recommends that the Board direct County Counsel’s office to return to the Board on September 10, 2024, at 9:00 a.m. with the proposed Resolution for the Board’s consideration and adoption.
In the event that the Board is inclined to uphold the Planning Commission’s interpretation of the Road and Street Standards, staff would recommend that the Board direct staff to commence a public process to amend the Road and Street Standards and return at a later date with a resolution formally adopting those amendments rather than denying this Project.
FISCAL & STRATEGIC PLAN IMPACT
|
Is there a Fiscal Impact? |
No |
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: Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Noise, and Transportation. The project site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5.