Napa Planning Commission Regular Meeting – December 2, 2021

The Napa Planning Commission met on December 2, 2021, at 5:30 PM in City Hall Council Chambers. The meeting included approval of consent items, a public hearing on a public art installation at Embassy Suites, a lengthy appeal hearing regarding an accessory dwelling unit (ADU) built without permits, and an informational update on the proposed Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD).

Consent Calendar

• 5A. Planning Commission Minutes (November 18, 2021): Approved 4-0-1 (Commissioner Huether abstained because he was absent from the prior meeting). Vice Chair Oñate noted an informational clarification about video retention requirements.

Consent Hearings

• 6A. Napa River Inn Expansion Extension II (500 Main Street): Approved by a single vote. The project seeks a second two-year extension of a previously approved Design Review Permit for a 16-room hotel addition, spa, and commercial space.
• 6B. Mitchell Parcel Map Extension (2105 West Pueblo Avenue): Approved by a single vote. The project extends approvals for a four-lot subdivision on a 0.98-acre site.

Public Comments & Testimony

• No public comment was offered on non-agenda items.
• Embassy Suites Public Art: No public testimony; the hearing was closed without comment.
• Zeltser ADU Appeal: Three members of the public spoke:
  • Ricardo Gomez (appellant’s brother) argued that the administrative permit should be modified to include reorienting the roof and raising windows to a five-foot sill height on the west and south sides. He stated his sister is not opposed to an ADU but wants privacy protection. He argued the planning division had discretion to impose conditions and had already done so.
  • Mary Bartlett (neighbor at 2871 Laurel Street) questioned the notification process and expressed concern about her privacy.
  • The appellant’s rebuttal emphasized that the case was about design impacts, not an opposition to ADUs.

Discussion Items

7A. Embassy Suites Addition Public Art (1075 California Boulevard)

• Staff Report (Bond Mendez): The proposed art installation, titled "From Our Vineyard," consists of corten steel beams and a stainless steel sphere measuring 26 feet long, 17 feet wide, and 17 feet high. The piece is located on private hotel property. Staff recommended forwarding to the City Council a resolution approving the Design Review Permit and CEQA exemption.
• Applicant Presentation: Darcy Tent (Gordon Huether Studio) presented with the project architect; no additional comments.
• Commission Discussion: Questions focused on climbing risk, liability, and potential sun reflection. Commissioner Huether recused himself due to a conflict (he is the artist). The commission added a condition requiring signage (English and Spanish) to deter climbing. Commissioner Masaro raised liability concerns; the City Attorney confirmed indemnification protects the city. Commissioner Oñate initially suggested hedging but withdrew in favor of signage.
• Motion: Approved unanimously (4-0) to forward a recommendation to the City Council with the added condition for signage.

7B. Zeltser Accessory Dwelling Unit Appeal (2831 Laurel Street)

• Background: The property owner built a two-story ADU over an existing garage without permits. Staff issued an administrative permit on October 14, 2021, requiring removal of a porch and deck, opaque windows on the west elevation, and a one-foot setback adjustment. Adjacent neighbor Maria Gomez appealed.
• Staff Report (Mike Allen): Staff acknowledged errors in the original report (mislabeling elevations and distances). The ADU is over 16 feet, requiring an administrative permit. Staff argued that current city and state ADU regulations provide minimal design criteria, limiting discretion. However, staff had negotiated conditions to reduce privacy impacts. Staff recommended denying the appeal.
• Appellant Arguments (Ricardo Gomez): Requested two conditions: reorient the roof to a north-south configuration (reducing massing) and raise window sills to five feet on the west and south elevations. He argued that the administrative permit process is inherently discretionary and that staff had already exercised discretion; therefore, these conditions are reasonable. He also noted code violations and structural concerns.
• Property Owner (Mr. Zeltser): Acknowledged building without a permit during COVID, but stated he has made concessions (removing deck, agreeing to frosted windows). He argued no further changes are required under the code. He expressed willingness to compromise but stated reorienting the roof would require demolition.
• Public Testimony: One neighbor (Mary Bartlett) spoke, questioning the notification process and privacy impacts.
• Commission Deliberation: Extensive debate on the level of discretion available. City Attorney Sabrina Wolfson noted the ADU ordinance lacks specific criteria for projects over 16 feet, but the commission can modify the administrative permit on appeal. Commissioners expressed concern over the illegal construction and privacy impacts. They ultimately decided to grant the appeal in part and add conditions.
• Key Conditions Adopted:
  1. Reorient the gable roof to a north-south configuration, or provide a shed roof with a minimum pitch of 2.5:12.
  2. Maintain a six-foot separation between the ADU and the principal dwelling (the main house/water tower structure).
  3. All windows on the west and south elevations (facing neighboring properties) shall have a sill height of at least five feet, except for one required egress window that may be placed on the east elevation.
• Motion: Approved 5-0 to deny the appeal as written but modify the administrative permit with the above conditions.

8A. Review of 2022 Planning Commission Calendar

• Staff presented the draft 2022 meeting calendar. No action taken; informational.

8B. Napa Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) Update

• Presenters: Neil Harrison (Economic Development) and Joe Diegas (Cosmont Associates). The EIFD is a tool to capture future property tax increments (no new taxes) within a defined boundary (837 acres, 7% of city) to fund infrastructure. The district is non-contiguous and targets high-development areas (downtown, Soscol corridor, etc.). The draft Infrastructure Financing Plan proposes dedicating 50% of future property tax increment for up to 50 years toward priority projects: parking, civic center improvements, affordable housing, downtown streetscape, and as secondary, corridor improvements, climate change, etc. The plan forecasts a positive net fiscal impact on the general fund of over $300 million (present value). The Public Financing Authority (PFA) will hold three public hearings; next is February 2, 2022. No action required by the Planning Commission; informational only.

Key Outcomes

• Consent Calendar and Hearings: Approved as recommended.
• Embassy Suites Public Art: Forwarded to City Council with recommendation for approval and added condition for climbing-deterrent signage (English and Spanish).
• Zeltser ADU Appeal: Appeal denied; administrative permit modified with three conditions (roof reorientation, six-foot separation from main building, five-foot sill height on west/south windows). The property owner must comply with these conditions before proceeding to building permits.
• EIFD Update: No action; commissioners expressed support and noted the importance of leveraging federal infrastructure funds. The next PFA meeting is scheduled for February 2, 2022.