Title
PLN200203 - NICOLA ANTHONY INC
Public hearing (continued from July 9, 2024) to consider an appeal by Dale Ellis of Anthony Lombardo and Associates, on behalf of Anthony Nicola, Inc., on a permit for the demolition of an existing single family dwelling and septic system and construction of two three-story buildings totaling approximately 36,200 square feet containing 34 two-bedroom units and one one-bedroom unit for agricultural employee housing of up to 250 employees, including a manager's suite, and three very low income housing units. The project also includes a request for a variance for a less than 200 feet agricultural buffer.
Project Location: 124 Gonda Street, Royal Oaks
Proposed CEQA Action: Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration
Report
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board of Supervisors:
a. Grant the appeal by Anthony Lombardo and Associates, on behalf of Anthony Nicola, Inc. from the April 10, 2024 unbreakable tie vote of the Planning Commission;
b. Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration;
c. Approve a Combined Development Permit consisting of:
1. Administrative Permit to demolish an existing approximately 850 square foot single family dwelling, 400 square foot shed, and septic system;
2. Use Permit to construct two three-story buildings totaling 36,200 square feet containing 34 two-bedroom units and one one-bedroom unit for agricultural employee housing of up to 250 employees, including a manager's suite, and three very low income housing units; and
3. Variance for less than 200 feet agricultural buffer.
d. Adopt a Condition Compliance and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan.
The attached draft Resolution includes findings and evidence for consideration (Attachment B). Staff recommends approval subject to 36 conditions of approval including ten mitigation measures.
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Agent: Dale Ellis, Anthony Lombardo and Associates
Property Owner: Anthony Nicola, Inc.
APN: 117-361-017-000
Zoning: HDR/20
Parcel Size: 1.3 Acres
Plan Area: North County Area Plan
Flagged and Staked: No
Project Planner: Mary Israel, ext. 5183, israelm@countyofmonterey.gov
SUMMARY:
On July 9, 2024, the Board of Supervisors considered the appeal of the Planning Commission’s unbreakable tie vote on the Nicola project in Pajaro. The project involves the demolition of a single-family dwelling, a shed and septic system and the construction of two three-story buildings for 34 two-bedroom units and one one-bedroom unit with office totaling 36,200 square feet for agricultural employee housing. Details about the project were provided in the staff report prepared for the July 9, 2024 hearing.
At the conclusion of the hearing in July, the Board of Supervisors continued the hearing and requested that staff provide information about the difference between housing not restricted for agricultural employees and the current proposal which would be for employee housing. Additionally, staff and the applicant have conferred on a new condition for payment to support ongoing maintenance and improvements at Pajaro Park.
After reviewing the difference between “agricultural employee housing” and housing not restricted to employees, staff has concluded that from a regulatory perspective, there is little difference. The regulatory path including discretionary permitting, density bonuses and incentives (height and parking), a variance for the agricultural setbacks, and CEQA analysis would all be the same. The distinctions primarily involve the anticipated occupancy of the housing. Agricultural Employee housing can be occupied by domestic (year-round) agricultural employees or by seasonal employees, usually for 8-9 months a year. The applicant is suggesting that the primary use of the housing will be for seasonal employes. Housing not restricted to employee housing could be occupied year-round by families or rented seasonally with approval from Environmental Health, as can any other dwelling unit. Housing of seasonal employees would allow up to 8 people per unit for 8-9 months out of the year. Housing (not seasonal) would likely mean that a “family” occupies the unit year round. In Pajaro, the average household size is 4.4 persons (Source: U.S. Census Bureau data portal accessed on August 23, 2024).
The Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the project considered the impacts of both year-round occupancy (as regular housing) and seasonal occupancy. Differences were found in traffic, parking, and water demand. Seasonal employees are less likely to have personal vehicles and the shorter occupancy duration (8-9 months a year) means that there would be less annual traffic, less need for parking, and less water demand overall.
DISCUSSION:
The discussion is attached as Attachment A.
OTHER AGENCY INVOLVEMENT:
The following County agencies reviewed this project:
Environmental Health Bureau
Public Works, Facilities and Parks
Water Resources Agency
North County Fire Protection District
Agricultural Commissioner’s Office
Agricultural Advisory Committee
Office of the County Counsel
ADVISORY COMMITTEE REVIEW:
The proposed project was reviewed by the Agricultural Advisory Committee (AAC) on May 27, 2021. The AAC recommended approval of the project and adopted a recommendation of support by a 7-0 vote with five absent and none abstaining. The AAC recommended an 8-foot-tall security fence around the perimeter rather than the proposed 7-foot-tall fence and recommended a 50-foot agricultural buffer easement. Instead of offering a redesign with a buffer area, the applicant requested a variance to the MCC Title 21 section 21.66.030.F requirement of a 200-foot agricultural buffer. The applicant kept the security fence at seven feet in height. (See Attachment I).
The proposed project was reviewed by the North County Land Use Advisory Committee (LUAC) on June 1, 2022. Several members of the public attended and three spoke against the project with concerns for public safety, the conditions of the neighborhood’s services, reduction of private views, and general dislike of the idea of multistory agricultural housing facilities in the area. LUAC members shared concerns including the potential for the property to convert to a standard apartment complex after Density Bonus provisions have been granted, that traffic analysis needs to consider traffic on San Juan Road from the two projects together (Rio Vista Group - PLN210152, and Nicola), and it was suggested that the two share an access driveway loop. This project does not include a provision to share access with the property to the east (Rio Vista Group) despite that project having developed the infrastructure that would allow such a connection. Staff reviewed the concerns with the applicant. The IS included a review of cumulative traffic, and the applicant was not able to combine driveway access with the Rio Vista Group project. If, in the future, the owner wishes the project use to change, they will have to apply for an amendment to the permit and the impacts of the change would be analyzed at that time. Public concerns for safety influenced the subsequent IS analysis and precipitated, in part, the recommendation of Mitigation Measure PUBLIC-1, which requires the owner to provide an Emergency Action Plan for the site. The LUAC voted not to support the project as proposed 4-1 with one member absent. (see Attachment J).
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA):
A Draft Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for PLN200203 was prepared in accordance with CEQA and circulated for public review from September 1, 2023 through October 2, 2023 (SCH#2023090035). The document reflects the independent judgment of the County. Issues that were analyzed in the MND affected by the proposed project include: aesthetics, agriculture and forest resources, air quality, biological resources, cultural resources, energy, geology/soils, greenhouse gas emissions, hazards/hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, land use/planning, noise, population/housing, public services, recreation, transportation/traffic, tribal cultural resources, utility/service systems and wildfires. Potentially significant impacts were identified in the areas of biological resources, cultural resources, drainage/discharge, hazards/safety/public services, and utilities, but proposed mitigation measures will reduce these impacts to below their respective thresholds of significance. Six of the mitigation measures ensure avoidance of impacts to biological resources. Four others ensure safe evacuation through a project-specific Emergency Action Plan, safe drainage and wastewater delivery through a sewer system assessment, and that cultural and tribal cultural resources are not mishandled or destroyed during excavation.
Three comments were received (Attachment G). Staff found some of the comments would best be handled with responsive errata edit in the text of the IS. Also, in the first hearing on the project (February 14, 2024), the applicant shared a comment related to recent communication from County Public Works staff that indicated Mitigation Measure UTIL-1 should be amended. Staff requested additional information from PWFP to add clarification on one of the mitigation measures. The responsive edits are in a redline version of the IS/MND (Attachment H). It is this version which staff recommends the Board of Supervisors adopt.
The proposed project involves the construction of a high-density agricultural employee housing facility in a high-density residentially zoned parcel within a developed neighborhood. The identified mitigation measures mitigate all potentially significant impacts to less than significant level. There is no substantial evidence that would support a fair argument that the project has a reasonable possibility of having a significant effect on the environment or that it would result in a cumulative significant impact.
FINANCING:
Funding for staff time associated with this project is included in the FY2023-24 and FY2024-25 Adopted Budgets for HCD, Appropriation Unit HCD002, Unit 8543. Application fees for the Use Permit, Environmental Review, and this appeal have been collected.
BOARD OF SUPERVISORS STRATEGIC INITIATIVES:
This action represents effective and timely response to HCD customers. Processing this application in accordance with all applicable policies and regulations also provides the County accountability for proper management of our land resources.
__Economic Development
X Administration
__Health & Human Services
__Infrastructure
__Public Safety
Prepared by: Mary Israel, Supervising Planner
Reviewed and approved by: Craig Spencer, Housing Community Development Director
The following attachments are on file with the Clerk of the Board:
Attachment A - Discussion
Attachment B - Draft Resolution for PLN200203, including:
- Mitigation Measures and Conditions of Approval
- Plans
Attachment C - Employee Housing Development Plan
Attachment D - Vicinity Map
Attachment E - Planning Commission Resolution NO. 24-011
Attachment F - Public Draft IS-MND
Attachment G - Comment Letters on the IS-MND
Attachment H - IS-MND with post-circulation errata edits
Attachment I - Agricultural Advisory Committee Meeting Minutes for May 27, 2021
Attachment J - North County LUAC Meeting Minutes for June 1, 2022
Attachment K - Letter from PVWMA to the applicant 020922
Attachment L - PLN200203 Trip Generation Memo
Attachment M - Notice of Appeal
Attachment N -June 10, 2024 Letter from State Housing Community Development
cc: Front Counter Copy; Environmental Health Bureau; HCD-Engineering Services; HCD-Environmental Services; Anna Quenga, Principal Planner; Mary Israel, Project Planner; Anthony Lombardo, Agent; Anthony Nicola, Inc., Owner/Appellant; Jeffrey Nohr, Interested Party; Dolores Rodriguez, Interested Party; Christine Shaw, Interested Party; The Open Monterey Project (Molly Erickson); LandWatch; Planning File PLN200203