Napa Planning Commission Meeting - May 20, 2021
STREAMING COPY IN PREPARATION — RECORDING AVAILABLE FROM THE ORIGINAL SOURCE
Napa Planning Commission Meeting - May 20, 2021
The Napa Planning Commission met on May 20, 2021, at 5:30 PM via teleconference due to the COVID-19 pandemic. Vice Chair Reed Oñate chaired the meeting in the absence of Chair Paul Kelley and Commissioner Gordon Huether. The meeting covered approval of prior minutes, a public hearing on a single-family residence design review, and a continuance request for a larger mixed-use project.
Consent Calendar
- Planning Commission Minutes (May 6, 2021): Approved unanimously (3-0) with Commissioners Kelley and Huether absent.
Public Comments & Testimony
- General Public Comment (Non-Agenda): No members of the public spoke.
- Hardwick SFR Design Review: Two written comments were read into the record by staff:
- Ray Romano expressed concerns about the structure's size relative to the steep slope, the adequacy of riprap vs. a retaining wall, and potential failure impacts on his property above. He also quoted the draft resolution's statement that the project would not result in adverse impacts, calling that statement false.
- Glenda Roos objected that the house would block her view of the countryside and hills, eliminate privacy, and negatively impact property values. She argued the design did not consider the sensitive issues flagged in the subdivision approval and urged denial.
- Both commenters were also given time to speak live: Glenda Roos added that the property is for sale and the approval seemed to increase saleability rather than build a home; Ray Romano did not speak further.
Discussion Items
-
Hardwick Single-Family Residence Design Review (1275 Cayetano Drive): Staff presented the project—a new contemporary single-family dwelling on a 0.5-acre hillside lot. The site is in the RS-10 zone and Hillside Overlay District. Staff recommended approval with an additional finding that the project is consistent with hillside district purposes. The applicant, Bruce Hardwick, spoke briefly, noting the project had been in engineering for over a year. Commissioner Massaro asked about solar panels (not shown on plans) and the applicant said it would be addressed in building permits. Commissioner Massaro also commented on the stonework design, suggesting it could be more economical. Commissioner Hurtado noted the height was reduced by six inches to meet city requirements. Public comment was heard. The applicant responded to concerns about hillside stability, stating the lot had been engineered with retaining walls. He confirmed he intends to build and then sell the home. After deliberation, Commissioners Massaro and Hurtado expressed that while the design could be improved, it met all applicable standards. The commission voted 3-0 to approve the Design Review Permit and CEQA exemption (Section 15303).
-
Oxbow Yard Use Permit & Design Review (585 First Street): Staff reported that the applicant requested a continuance to June 3, 2021, to review public comments and consider project changes. The commission unanimously voted to continue the item to that date certain.
Key Outcomes
- Approved: Hardwick SFR Design Review (Resolution PC 2021-___). Vote: 3-0 (Commissioners Kelley and Huether absent). The project is exempt from CEQA under Section 15303.
- Continued: Oxbow Yard Use Permit & Design Review to June 3, 2021, at 5:30 PM, at the applicant's request.
- Next Meeting: The next regular Planning Commission meeting is scheduled for June 3, 2021.
Meeting Transcript
Just a moment here, so he can say I'll fix your name later, Vicky. So let's start off with Vice Chair Onyate. Here. Commissioner Masaro. Here. Commissioner Hurtado. Present. And Chair Kelly and Commissioner Hewther are both noted absent. Great. Uh staff, could you please enter uh explain to our viewers how the public will participate in this meeting this year this evening? Thank you, Vice Chair Onyate. For each section of the agenda, when public comment is asked for, members of the public who wish to speak on the item should use Zoom. Give your hand button to indicate that they would like to speak. And this appears as an on-screen button for those who have joined the teleconference online. For those members of the publish who have joined public who have joined us by phone, they should push star nine to indicate that they wish to speak when the item of interest comes up. And if members of the public submit email comments with 500 words or less to planning staff before the meeting starts and request that the comments be read, we will read those comments into the record when the item is called. Thank you. Uh item number three on the agenda there or agenda review. That the planning commission conducts all meetings in accordance with the Brown Act, which is California Government Code Section 59, 54950. And to pursue into the city rules of order for planning commission meetings, which is policy resolution number 10. Uh, due to the COVID uh pandemic, the commission will conduct this meeting as teleconference in accordance with governor's executive orders. Uh staff, are there any changes to the agenda this evening? Yes, Vice Chair Onyate. Um, due to receiving public comment on uh the consent calendar, sorry, the consent hearing item, uh which is the Hardwick uh design review. We recommend that be moved to the regular public hearing calendar, and then um we've also received a request from the applicant for the off so yard uh that that item be continued to June 3rd in light of the community the comments that have been received. The applicant would like some time to take another look at their project, clarify things, and then come back to the commission on June 3rd. So they're requesting that you continue it to that date certain. See, okay. Um well then in that case, let's see. On on my agenda, it's that there's nothing under consent, so we can move directly into item number seven, which is public hearings and appeals. Uh correct. So but yes, sorry, I know I thought it was on consent, but it's not, you're right. And you do have one item on the consent calendar, which is the planning commission minutes. Oh, thank you. Um then um so we have no so we have changes to approvals anyhow any changes that comment. Do we need to have a vote to approve those uh minutes then? Is that uh you should see whether anyone wants to make general public comment under item number four and then um go to the consent calendar um and see if there's any discussion of that item okay. Um so at this time, do we have any public comments um other than the public comment provides an opportunity for members of the public to direct uh directly address the plan commission on any items of interest not otherwise on the agenda? Do we have any members of the public who would wish to provide public comment on non-agenda items? I'm looking at our attendees here looking for raised hands and vice chair and I don't see any raised hands, so I don't believe we have any public comment this evening. Okay. Now moving on to number five on the consent calendar. Uh these routine items may be approved by single vote. However, any member of the public or commission may remove an item for consideration during the hearing portion of the agenda. If a member of the public wishes to pull an item from the consent calendar, they should use the raise hand feature in Zoom or push star nine on their phone. Um so I only so the only item on a consent calendar the commission meeting minutes, and uh do I have a motion to approve those. So moved second. So we'll have a vote. Commissioner uh Masaro. All right, Commissioner Hurtado, yes, Vice Chair Onyate, uh yes.
openpublica.com