Planning Commission — Thursday, October 26, 2017

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Robert Massarelli, Community Development Director Prepared by: Eric Porter, Associate Planner DATE: October 11, 2017 SUBJECT: Larry and Frances Montgomery; UP 17-06 and DR 17-07 Supervisorial District 3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Agency and Public Comments 3. Site Plan, Elevations, Sign Details, Photos, Statement of Compliance PROJECT SUMMARY: Major Use Permit and Design Review for an Off-Site Sign (Billboard). The sign proposed would be 22' tall at its highest point, with two faces, each being 300 square feet in area. The sign is proposed to be set back from the Highway 20 right-of-way by ten (10) feet. The base of the sign is proposed to be clad with rock or faux rock, and to be twelve (12) feet tall. The sign would be lit with two 120-watt LED lights per sign face. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission DENY the project with the following findings: A. Deny the Use Permit, UP 17-06 with the following findings: 1. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use applied for will under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the County. 2. That the project is not in conformance with the applicable provisions and policies of the General Plan and Upper Lake - Nice Area Plan. 3. Projects that are denied are exempt from CEQA environmental review. B. Deny the Design Review, DR 17-07 with the following findings: 1. That the project is not in conformance with the applicable provisions and policies of this Chapter, the Lake County General Plan and Upper Lake - Nice Area Plan. 2. That the placement and design of buildings and structures are not compatible with existing development and will detract from the visual setting. Sample Motion: Use Permit Denial. I move that the Planning Commission find that the Use Permit (UP 17-06) applied for by Larry and Frances Montgomery for an off-site sign proposed to be located at 2325 E. Highway 20, Nice, CA does not meet the requirements of Lake County Zoning Ordinance Section 51.4 and therefore the Use Permit be denied with the findings listed in the staff report dated October 11, 2017. Design Review Denial: I move that the Planning Commission find that the Design Review (DR 17-07) for an offsite sign (billboard) applied for by Larry and Frances Montgomery on the property located at 2325 E. Highway 20, Nice, CA does not meet the requirements of Lake County Zoning Ordinance Section 54.5 and therefore the Design Review be denied with the findings listed in the staff report dated October 11, 2017.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Robert Massarelli, Community Development Director Prepared by: Eric Porter, Associate Planner DATE: October 10, 2017 SUBJECT: Copper Cross Farms Inc.; UP 17-10 and DR 17-05 Supervisorial District 3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Agency and Public Comments 3. Site Plan, Elevations, Details; Statement of Compliance PROJECT SUMMARY: Major Use Permit and Design Review for an Off-Site Sign (Billboard). The sign will be twenty (20) feet tall measured from grade to the top of the sign. Each face will be two hundred (200) square feet per face with two faces. The sign will be lit with lights mounted to the top of the sign and pointed downward. Each fixture will be 78 watt LED type lighting. Lighting details have not been provided. The base of the sign will be two support poles, one on either side, which according to the applicant will be clad with rock or a similar treatment. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission DENY the project with the following findings: A. Deny the Use Permit, UP 17-10 with the following findings: 1. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use applied for will under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the County. 2. That the project is not in conformance with the applicable provisions and policies of the General Plan and Shoreline Communities Area Plan. 3. Projects that are denied are exempt from CEQA environmental review. B. Deny the Design Review, DR 17-05 with the following findings: 1. That the project is not in conformance with the applicable provisions and policies of this Chapter, the Lake County General Plan and Shoreline Communities Area Plan. 2. That the placement and design of buildings and structures are not compatible with existing development and will detract from the visual setting. Sample Motion: Use Permit Denial. I move that the Planning Commission find that the Use Permit (UP 17-10) applied for by Richard Kuehn for an off-site sign proposed to be located at 13550 E. Highway 20, Clearlake Oaks, CA does not meet the requirements of Lake County Zoning Ordinance Section 51.4 and therefore the Use Permit be denied with the findings listed in the staff report dated October 10, 2017. Design Review Denial: I move that the Planning Commission find that the Design Review (DR 17-05) for an offsite sign (billboard) applied for by Richard Kuehn on the property located at 13550 E. Highway 20, Clearlake Oaks, CA does not meet the requirements of Lake County Zoning Ordinance Section 54.5 and therefore the Design Review be denied

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Robert Massarelli, Community Development Director Prepared by: Eric Porter, Associate Planner DATE: October 11, 2017 SUBJECT: Administrative Appeal, AA 17-01 of Tentative Parcel Map, PM 05-08 Extension request denial. Supervisor District 5. ATTACHMENTS: 1. Vicinity Map 2. Appeal form submitted by applicant with attachments 3. Aerial photo 4. Tentative Parcel Map 5. Tentative Parcel Map Conditions (Original file no. PM 05-08) APPEAL BACKGROUND: On April 6, 2005, the applicant applied for a Tentative Parcel Map to divide a 30+ acre parcel into three parcels. The file remained inactive until November 8, 2013 when the applicant submitted a revised Parcel Map and re-started the review process. On February 26, 2015, the Planning Commission approved the tentative Parcel Map, PM 05-08 and IS 05-25. The tentative map approval was valid for a period of two years until February 26, 2017. On February 28, 2017, just over 2 years after the original approval date, the applicant contacted County staff to discuss getting a tentative map extension. County staff advised the applicant to submit her extension on February 28, 2017, which was two days after the tentative map expired. On March 22, 2017, the applicant submitted a Parcel Map Extension application with the applicable fee to the County. The applicant indicated that she understood the written correspondence from County staff to mean that she had 60 days to submit an extension request therefore the late filing of the extension. On June 13, 2017, county staff sent a letter to the applicant indicating that the extension application could not be accepted as the Tentative Parcel Map had expired. The applicant is appealing the June 13, 2017 letter as it has the effect of being a decision. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends that the Planning Commission DENY the appeal AA 17-01 with the following findings: 1. Tentative Parcel Map PM 05-08 expired on February 26, 2017. 2. A timely Parcel Map extension was not filed. Sample Motion of Denial: I move that the Planning Commission deny the administrative appeal AA 17-01 of Michelle Wright with the findings listed in the staff report dated October 11, 2017.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Robert Massarelli, Community Development Director Prepared by: Peggy Barthel, Assistant Resource Planner DATE: October 12, 2017 SUBJECT: Fernandez Pond Use Permit, UP13-01, CEQA Initial Study IS13-04, Grading Permit GR13-011 Supervisorial District 3 ATTACHMENTS: 1. Site Map 2. Initial Study IS13-04 3. Recommended Grading Permit Conditions of Approval 4. Recommended Use Permit Conditions of Approval PROJECT SUMMARY: Adam Fernandez proposes grading 23,000 cubic yards of earth to construct a 2.6 acre-foot pond. The pond would be impounded behind a 27-foot-high dam. The pond would be used to provide water for animal care and garden irrigation. In addition, water from the pond could potentially be used in fighting a wildfire. The pond would be supplied with water by an existing on-site well. A clay liner would be installed to prevent water from seeping into the ground. Erosion control best management practices (BMPs) would be implemented to keep sediment from leaving the site. Vegetation would be added after grading is complete, to make the pond more aesthetically pleasing and provide protection for wildlife to utilize the pond. In accordance with Article 27 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance, a major use permit is required in the "RR" zoning district for a large dam or reservoir. Although a large reservoir has a capacity of 15 acre-feet or more, a large dam is any over 15 feet in height. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the project with the following findings: A. Adopt a mitigated negative declaration based on Initial Study IS13-04 for UP 13-01 and GR13-011 with the following findings: 1. Potential environmental impacts related to Air Quality have been mitigated to insignificant levels by mitigation measures listed in Grading Permit Section B and Use Permit Section B. 2. Potential environmental impacts related to Geology & Soils have been mitigated to insignificant levels by mitigation measures listed in Grading Permit Section D and Use Permit Section C. 3. Potential environmental impacts related to Hazards & Hazardous Materials have been mitigated to insignificant levels by mitigation measures listed in Grading Permit Section E. 4. Potential environmental impacts related to timing and monitoring have been mitigated to insignificant levels by mitigation measures listed in Grading Permit Section G and Use Permit Section D. 5. This project is consistent with land uses in the vicinity. 6. This project is consistent with the Lake County General Plan, Upper Lake-Nice Area Plan and Zoning Ordinance with the incorporated mitigations and conditions of approval. 7. As mitigated, this project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. B. Approve Use Permit UP13-01 with the following findings: 1. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use applied for will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the County. 2. That the site for the project is adequate in size, shape, location, and physical characteristics to accommodate the type of use and level of development proposed. 3. That the streets, highways and pedestrian facilities are reasonably adequate to safely accommodate the specific proposed use. 4. That there are adequate public or private services, including but not limited to fire protection, water supply, sewage disposal, and police protection to serve the project. 5. That the project is in conformance with the applicable provisions and policies of this Code, the General Plan and any approved zoning or land use plan. 6. That no violation of Chapters 5, 17, 21, 23 or 26 of the Lake County Code currently exists on the property, unless the purpose of the permit is to correct the violation, or the permit relates to a portion of the property which is sufficiently separate and apart from the portion of the property in violation so as not to be affected by the violation from a public health, safety or general welfare basis. C. Approve Grading Permit GR13-011 with the following findings: a) Is consistent with the intent of the Lake County General Plan and any applicable Area Plan b) Is consistent with the Lake County Zoning Ordinance c) Is consistent with the characteristics and constraints of the site d) Is appropriate for the proposed use and will not create site disturbance to an extent greater than that reasonably required to establish the use e) Is consistent with erosion control plan requirements and applicable standards and proposed erosion and sediment control measures are appropriate for the degree of site disturbance f) Will not result in accelerated erosion, sedimentation or other adverse effects or hazards to life or property g) Will not result in adverse impacts to the environment or sensitive biological or cultural resources h) Is consistent with dust control requirements and applicable standards and proposed control measures are appropriate for the degree of site disturbance i) Meets the Asbestos Dust Mitigation Plan requirements, or has been otherwise reviewed and approved by the LCAQMD. Sample Motions: Mitigated Negative Declaration I move that the Planning Commission find on the basis of the Initial Study (IS13-04) prepared by the Planning Division and the mitigation measures and conditions of approval which have been added to the project, that the use permit and grading permit as applied for by Adam Fernandez will not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore a mitigated negative declaration shall be issued with the findings listed in the staff report dated October 12, 2017. Major Use Permit Approval I move that the Planning Commission find that the Major Use Permit (UP13-01) applied for by Adam Fernandez on property located at 8050 State Highway 29, Upper Lake does meet the requirements of Section 51.4 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance and that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration which was adopted for this project and the Major Use Permit be granted subject to the conditions and with the findings listed in the staff report dated October 12, 2017. Grading Permit Approval I move that the Planning Commission find that the Grading Permit (GR13-011) applied for by Adam Fernandez on property located at 8050 State Highway 29, Upper Lake does meet the requirements of Section 28.3 of the Lake County Grading Ordinance and that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration which was adopted for this project and the Grading Permit be granted subject to the conditions and with the findings listed in the staff report dated October 12, 2017.

..Title ..Body MEMORANDUM TO: Planning Commission FROM: Robert Massarelli, Community Development Director Prepared by: Mark Roberts, Associate Planner DATE: September 27, 2017 SUBJECT: Major Use Permit, UP 16-10, Initial Study, IS 16-26 PROJECT SUMMARY: The applicant is requesting approval of a Major Use Permit, UP 16-10 to construct a sixty-five (65) foot tall mono-pine tree foliage wireless communication facility. The proposed mono pine tree foliage would have nine (9) panel antennas, two - six (6) foot microwave dishes and ancillary equipment. The proposed facility would be contained within a leased area approximately 875 SQ FT (25'X 35') with a six (6) foot chain link fence. The proposed facility would be accessible from a proposed twenty (20) foot wide gated non-inclusive utility easement off of Little Peak Road. RECOMMENDED ACTION: Staff recommends the Planning Commission approve the project with the following findings: A. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for Major Use Permit, UP 16-10 with the following findings: 1. Potential environmental impacts related to Aesthetics have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section B. 2. Potential environmental impacts related to Air Quality have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section C. 3. Potential environmental impacts related to Biological Resources have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section D. 4. Potential environmental impacts related to Cultural Resources have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section E 5. Potential environmental impacts related to Geology & Soils have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section F. 6. Potential environmental impacts related to Hazards & Hazardous Materials have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section G. 7. Potential environmental impacts related to Hydrology & Water Quality have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section H. 8. Potential environmental impacts related to Noise have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section I. 9. Potential environmental impacts related to Land Use Planning have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section J. 10. Potential environmental impacts related to Public Services have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section K 11. Potential environmental impacts related to Transportation & Traffic have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section L. 12. Potential environmental impacts related to Utilities & Service Systems have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section E. 13. Potential environmental impacts related to Timing & Mitigation Monitoring have been mitigated to insignificant levels by major use permit conditions of approval Section M. 14. This project is consistent with land uses in the vicinity. 15. This project is consistent with the Lake County General Plan, Lower Lake Area Plan, Middletown Area Plan and Lake County Zoning Ordinance. 16. As mitigated, this project will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. B. Approve Major Use Permit, UP 16-10 with the following findings: 1. That the establishment, maintenance, or operation of the use applied for will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety, morals, comfort and general welfare of the persons residing or working in the neighborhood of such proposed use, or be detrimental to property and improvements in the neighborhood or the general welfare of the County. 2. That the site for the project is adequate in size, shape, location, and physical characteristics to accommodate the type of use and level of development proposed. 3. That the streets, highways and pedestrian facilities are reasonably adequate to safely accommodate the specific proposed use. 4. That there are adequate public or private services, including but not limited to fire protection, water supply, sewage disposal, and police protection to serve the project. 5. That the project is in conformance with the applicable provisions and policies of this Code, the General Plan and any approved zoning or land use plan. 6. That no violation of Chapters 5, 17, 21, 23 or 26 of the Lake County Code currently exists on the property, unless the purpose of the permit is to correct the violation, or the permit relates to a portion of the property which is sufficiently separate and apart from the portion of the property in violation so as not to be affected by the violation from a public health, safety or general welfare basis. C. Approve the Wireless Communication Facility with the following findings: 1. That the development of the proposed wireless communications facility will not significantly affect any public view shed, scenic corridor or any identified environmentally sensitive area or resource as defined in the Lake County General Plan or Area Plans. 2. That the site is adequate for the development of the proposed wireless communications facility and that the applicant has demonstrated that it is the least intrusive for the provision of services as required by the FCC. 3. That the proposed wireless communication facility complies with all of the applicable requirements of Article 71 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance. 4. That the subject property upon which the wireless communications facility is to be built is in compliance with all rules and regulations pertaining to zoning uses, subdivisions and any other applicable provisions of this Title and that all zoning violation abatement costs, if any have been paid. SAMPLE MOTIONS: Mitigated Negative Declaration I move that the Planning Commission find on the basis of the Initial Study No. 16-26 prepared by the Planning Division and the mitigation measures which have been added to the project, that the use permit as applied for by Verizon Wireless - Epic Wireless Group will not have a significant effect on the environment and therefore a mitigated negative declaration shall be issued with the findings listed in the staff report dated September 27, 2017. Use Permit Approval I move that the Planning Commission find that the Major Use Permit, (UP 16-10) applied for by Verizon Wireless - Epic Wireless Group on property located at 15447 Spruce Grove Road does meet the requirements of Section 51.4 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance and that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration which was adopted for this project and the Use Permit be granted subject to the conditions and with the findings listed in the staff report dated September 27, 2017. Wireless Communication Facility Approval I move that the Planning Commission find that the Wireless Communication facility applied for by Verizon Wireless - Epic Wireless Group on property located at 15447 Spruce Grove Road does meet the requirements of Section 71.13 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance and that the Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration which was adopted for this project and the Use Permit be granted subject to the conditions and with the findings listed in the staff report dated September 27, 2017.