COUNTY OF LAKE - File #: 24-1223

• File #: 24-1223
• Version: 1
• Type: Action Item
• Status: Agenda Ready
• File created: 12/2/2024
• In control: BOARD OF SUPERVISORS
• On agenda: 12/17/2024
• Title: 9:15 A.M. - Consideration of Appeal (AB 24-04) of Planning Commission’s Denial of Major Use Permit (UP 22-24) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 22-29) for Rancho Novoa special event venue on a property located at 5680 Blue Lakes Road, Upper Lake (APN: 003-007-03)
• Sponsors: Community Development

Date	Ver.	Action By	Action	Result
12/17/2024	1	BOARD OF SUPERVISORS

MEMORANDUM

TO:                                          Board of Supervisors

FROM:                     Mireya Turner, Community Development Director

                                          Michelle Irace, Planner

DATE:                                          December 17, 2024

SUBJECT:                     9:15 A.M. - Consideration of Appeal (AB 24-04) of Planning Commission’s Denial of Major Use Permit (UP 22-24) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 22-29) for Rancho Novoa special event venue on a property located at 5680 Blue Lakes Road, Upper Lake (APN: 003-007-03)

EXHIBITS                     

A.                     Staff Report from the October 10, 2024 Planning Commission hearing with the following attachments:

1.                     Site Plan (Updated August 19, 2024)

2.                     Draft Conditions of Approval for PC

3.                     Public Comments (as of December 3, 2024)

4.                     Biological Survey Scoping Report (Updated June 21, 2024)

5.                     Noise Impact Study (October 29, 2023)

6.                     Agency Comments

7.                     Initial Study (Revised September 16, 2024)

B.                     Planning Commission Minutes from October 10, 2024 Public Hearing

C.                     Appeal Application (AB 24-04)

D.                     Lake County Planning Commission Bylaws

I.                     EXECUTIVE SUMMARY

On January 25, 2024, and October 10, 2024, the Lake County Planning Commission considered Major Use Permit (UP 22-24) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 22-29) for a special event venue with a 16-site campground for weddings and gatherings at 5680 Blue Lake Road, Upper Lake (APN 003-007-03). The Planning Commission denied the project without prejudice by a 4-1 vote, noting issues related to traffic hazards, noise, and the project not fitting the character of the neighborhood and surrounding uses.

The October 10, 2024, Planning Commission Staff Report and associated attachments are included as Exhibit A,  and the Minutes of the meeting are included in Exhibit B. The  October 10, 2024, Planning Commission meeting may be viewed online at: <https://lakecounty.granicus.com/player/clip/746?view_id=1&redirect=true>

The January 25, 2025, 2024, Planning Commission meeting and related materials may be found online at: https://lakecounty.granicus.com/player/clip/698?view_id=1&redirect=true

In accordance with County of Lake Zoning Code Section 58.31, the applicants (now Appellants) Amy and Juan Novoa, filed an appeal (AB 24-04) of the Planning Commission’s decision on October 11, 2024. The appeal application is included in Exhibit C. As described in their application, the Appellants note they feel the hearing was unfair because noise related issues raised by two of the Commissioners were based on their personal opinions and experiences living near and recreating at Blue Lakes (and other lakes) and not based on findings from the Noise Impact Analysis prepared for the project. Additionally, the Appellants claim Community Development Director Turner has a conflict of interest because she has recreated at the Narrows Family Resort and has communicated with the owner, who is in opposition of the project.

II.                     SUMMARY OF PROJECT

Setting. The ±26.97 acre parcel is located on Blue Lakes Road, a narrow, paved County-maintained road. The general area is characterized by resorts and smaller developed lots to the north and east adjacent to Blue Lakes, and large, sparsely developed lots to the west. Specifically, there are three other resorts in the vicinity of the proposed project including ‘The Narrows Resort”, located across Blue Lakes Road from the project site; “La Trianon Resort”, located about ½ mile from the project site, and Pine Acres Resort, located within a mile southeast of the project site.

The Project site contains an existing single-family dwelling (under construction); an existing permitted groundwater well and pumphouse; two 2,500-gallon water tanks; a septic system and leach field, water and electric utilities, a 10’ x 12’ shed, a water fountain feature and some outdoor lighting. The Project area is currently fenced with a six-foot tall, solid wood fence and gate that are accessed via Blue Lakes Rd. The portion of the site that would be developed with the Project contains some Oak trees but is flat and previously disturbed. The remainder of the parcel has significant tree coverage and varies in slope.

Proposed Project. An application for Major Use Permit (UP 22-24) was originally submitted on July 20, 2022. The project is proposed to be built in two stages, as follows (refer to Exhibit A for a detailed Project Description and Site Plans):

•                     Stage I: main parking lot with 35 parking spaces; 16 campsites (for event attendees only-not open to general public); an outdoor stage; one 12’ x 22’ restroom building.

•                     Stage II: a second 12’ x 22’ restroom building; a 20’ x 24’ office building, an RV dump station, and a 30’ x 40’ barn/storage building.

Operation will be seasonal, generally from April to October, but some holiday events may occur as well. One event per week (up to 250 guests) is anticipated. The use of the campsites would be restricted to use by attendees of  booked special events and not open to the general public. Hours of operation for special events would be primarily on weekends (Friday through Sunday) from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m., depending on each event’s needs. However, amplified music will be turned off by 9:45 p.m.

Environmental Review. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires agencies to evaluate the environmental impacts of land use actions. A Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Attachment 7 of the Planning Commission Staff Report in Exhibit A) was prepared and circulated for public review in compliance with CEQA on May 10, 2023, and recirculated on March 29, 2024. The Initial Study found that the Project would result in potentially significant impacts to Biological Resources, Cultural Resources, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, Noise, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources and Wildfire. However, with implementation of the identified mitigation measures, all impacts can be reduced to a less than significant level. Public comments from the circulation of the Initial Study, as well as all other comments received as of December 3, 2024, are included in Attachment 3 of Exhibit A).

FIGURE 1-VICINITY MAP

   Source: Lake County GIS

FIGURE 2-SITE PLAN

   Source: Application Materials

III.                     BASIS FOR THE DENIAL

The Planning Commission noted the following issues to support their denial of the project. 

1.                     Project (and specifically, large events with amplified music) is not consistent with surrounding uses.

2.                     Impacts associated with traffic and road hazards.

3.                     Impacts from noise related to events with amplified music.

The issues noted by the Commission were analyzed within the Staff Report and Initial Study for the project (See Exhibit A and associated attachments). Community Development Staff recommended approval of the project,  but the Commission ultimately found that the findings to approve the Use Permit could not be made and denied the project.

IV.                     APPEAL ANALYSIS

Per Lake County Zoning Ordinance Section 58.31, decisions of the Planning Commission may be appealed by an interested party within seven (7) calendar days of the decision and shall be accompanied by a written statement setting forth the grounds upon which the appellant asserts there was an error or abuse of discretion by the Planning Commission.

In accordance with County of Lake Zoning Code Section 58.31, the applicants (Amy and Juan Novoa) filed an appeal (AB 24-04) of the Planning Commission’s decision on October 11, 2024. The appeal application is included in Exhibit C. As described in their application, the Appellants note they feel the hearing was unfair because noise related issues raised by two of the Commissioners were based on their personal opinions and experiences living near and recreating at Blue Lakes (and other lakes) and not based on findings from the Noise Impact Analysis prepared for the project. Additionally, the Appellants claim Community Development Director Turner has a conflict of interest because she has recreated at the Narrows Family Resort and has communicated with the owner, who is in opposition of the project.

Noise. The information below was presented to the Planning Commission at the October 10, 2024, hearing, and also described within the Staff Report and Initial Study reviewed by the Commission. The Commission took this information, as well as public comment received, into consideration when making their decision.

A Noise Impact Study was prepared by The Acoustics & Vibration Group, Inc. (October 29, 2023; Attachment 5 of Exhibit A). The study included taking noise measurements for baseline levels, as well as levels projected by different types of music at different volume levels. Monitoring locations included several on the site, at the entrance, and also at the Narrows Family Resort (across from the proposed Project). In summary, the study found that the noise levels measured at the property lines will not exceed the noise limits established in the General Plan and in Article 41, “Performance Standards” if several measures are implemented, including but not limited to, construction of a sound attenuation wall; placing speakers at specific heights; pointing speakers in a specific direction; and requiring amplified music to be turned off by 9:45 p.m. This information was incorporated into the Initial Study (Section XIII, Noise) that was prepared for the project; and all suggested measures identified within the noise study were included into Mitigation Measures NOI-1 through NOI-10. With implementation of these measures,  impacts from noise are mitigated to a ‘less than significant’ level, as further discussed in the Project Analysis and Environmental Review sections of the Planning Commission Staff Report. These requirements were also added to the proposed conditions of approval for the project.

FIGURE 3-NOISE MONITORING LOCATIONS

Source: Noise Impact Study, prepared by The Acoustics & Vibration Group, Inc.

Conflict of Interest Claims. The basis of the Appellants appeal is related to claims of conflict of interest and not received a fair hearing. According to Section18700, Basic Rule and Guide to Conflict of Interest Regulations <https://www.fppc.ca.gov/the-law/fppc-regulations/regulations-index.html>, of  the California Fair Political Practices Commission, a conflict of interest includes the following,

“(a) Basic Rule: A public official at any level of state or local government has a prohibited  conflict of interest and may not make, participate in making, or in any way use or attempt to use the official's position to influence a governmental decision when the official knows or has reason to know the official has a disqualifying financial interest. A public official has a disqualifying financial interest if the decision will have a reasonably foreseeable material financial effect, distinguishable from the effect on the public generally, directly on the official, or the official's immediate family, or on any financial interest described in subdivision (c)(6)(A-F) herein. (Sections 87100, 87101, & 87103).”

When considering whether or not to approve the project, the Planning Commission reviewed information presented in the Staff Report, Initial Study, and associated technical documents such as the Noise Study, as well as information provided during public comment from both the applicant (now Appellant) and members of the public during the January 25, 2024, and October 10, 20204, public hearings. In addition to noise concerns, other issues raised by the public and Commission included traffic hazards, evacuation, wildfire, and illegal activity at the project site. The Community Development Department recommended approval of the project, but based on the aforementioned, the Commission felt that the findings to approve the Use Permit could not be made, and denied the project (4-1).

While two of the four Commissioners who voted to deny the project noted that they agreed with some of the public comment related to the aforementioned issues, including noise and the quiet nature of the area from personal experience, they did not base their decision solely on personal opinion or experience. Further, neither the Commissioner nor Director Turner have noted that they have a financial interest in the decision that was made or the outcome of the project.

Lastly, both of the public hearings for the project were held in compliance with the Commission’s adopted Bylaws (included in Exhibit D), the Brown Act, and Rosenberg’s Rules of Order.

V.                     RECOMMENDATION

Staff recommends that the Board of Supervisors:

Deny the appeal (AB 24-04), upholding the Planning Commission’s denial of Use Permit (UP 22-24) and Initial Study (IS 22-29) for Rancho Novoa special event venue on a property located at 5680 Blue Lakes Road, Upper Lake (APN: 003-007-03).

Sample Motion:

Appeal Denial (AB 24-04)

I move that the Board of Supervisors deny Appeal AB 24-04, in concept, and direct Staff to prepare Draft Findings of Fact.