Board Of Supervisors — Tuesday, December 9, 2025

TO: The Honorable Lake County Board of Supervisors FROM: Mireya G. Turner, Community Development Director Max Stockton, Associate Planner DATE: December 9, 2025 SUBJECT: 1:30 P.M. - (Continued from October 21, 2025) Consideration of Appeal (PL-25-198), Maria Kann, of Planning Commission's Approval of Major Use Permit (PL-25-68) for (UP 23-09), Poverty Flats Ranch / Kurt and Robert Barthel; location: 10535 High Valley Road, Clearlake Oaks (APN: 006-004-22) Exhibits A. Staff Report from the May 22, 2025, Planning Commission hearing with the following attachments: 1. Site Plans 2. Draft Conditions of Approval 3. Draft Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 23-29) 4. Property Management Plan 5. Hydrology Report and Drought Management Plan 6. Biological Assessment 7. Agency Comments 8. Public Comments received by May 22, 2025 B. Planning Commission Minutes from May 22, 2025, Public Hearing C. Appeal Application PL-25-198 D. Botanical Survey E. Site Visit Pictures - High Valley Road I. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY On May 22, 2025, the Lake County Planning Commission approved a Major Use Permit (PL-25-68) for (UP 23-09) request for commercial cannabis cultivation of 247,800 square feet (sf) (5.69 Acres) outdoor canopy and a Type 13 Distribution, Self-transport only license, on a property located at 10535 High Valley Road, Clearlake Oaks (APN: 006-004-22). At the May 22, 2025, hearing, the Planning Commission noted issues relating to High Valley Road, a county-maintained road. The Planning Commission approved the project on a 3 to 1 vote, with Commissioner Brown absent. The Planning Commission Staff Report and associated attachments are included as Exhibit A; the minutes of the meeting are included as Exhibit B, and the meeting may be viewed online at: Planning Commission on 2025-05-22 9:00 AM. In accordance with County of Lake Zoning Code Section 58.31, the appellant filed an appeal (PL-25-198) of the Planning Commission's decision on May 28, 2025. The appeal application is included in Exhibit C. All public comments received as of May 22, 2025, are included as Exhibit A8. The Appeal (PL-25-198) of the May 22, 2025, Planning Commission decision was filed by the applicant in a timely manner on May 28, 2025. The appellant raised concerns specific to legal violations, procedural errors, and public safety concerns. An analysis of the appeal is provided in Section IV below. There was no new information presented at the Planning Commission hearing or within the appeal application that identified inconsistencies between the project (as conditioned) and the County Code, or information resulting in Staff being unable to recommend the findings required for a major use permit. As such, Staff's original recommendation for approval of the project remains. Staff recommend the Board deny the appeal (PL-25-198) upholding the Planning Commission's adoption of the Initial Study (IS 23-29) and approval of Major Use Permit (PL-25-68) for (UP 23-09). II. PROJECT SUMMARY An application for Major Use Permit (PL-25-68) for (UP 23-09) was originally submitted on November 8, 2023. The Project includes commercial cannabis cultivation of 247,800 square feet (sf) (5.69 Acres) outdoor canopy and a Type 13 Distribution, Self-transport only license, on a property located at 10535 High Valley Road, Clearlake Oaks (APN: 006-004-22). A detailed project description and site plans can be found in the Planning Commission Staff Report (Exhibit A). The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires agencies to evaluate the environmental implications of land use actions. A Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (Exhibit A3) was prepared and circulated for public review in compliance with CEQA from 01/9/2025 to 03/2/2025. The Initial Study found all impacts to be less than significant with implementation of mitigation measures related to Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural/Tribal Resources, Geology/Soils, Hazards & Hazardous Materials, Hydrology/ Water Quality, Noise, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities, Wildfire, and Mandatory Findings of Significance. III. BASIS FOR THE APPROVAL The Planning Commission found that the proposed project meets all of the codified requirements contained within the Lake County Zoning Ordinance and state cannabis regulations; however, the Planning Commission noted issues relating to High Valley Road, a county-maintained road. IV. APPEAL ANALYSIS The Appeal (PL-25-198) of the May 22, 2025, Planning Commission decision was filed by the applicant in a timely manner on May 28, 2025. The appellant raised concerns specific to legal violations, procedural errors, and public safety concerns. The appeal application (PL-25-198) is included in Exhibit C. Staff's response to each of the issues raised by the appellant is provided below. 1. Illegal grading and unpermitted land disturbance. Staff Response: In 2022, following the Mendocino Complex Fire, the applicant submitted a grading permit to facilitate the clearing and maintenance of the existing fire break, along with improvements to the access road to meet Public Resource Code (PRC) 4290, et seq. standards. Permit number (GR22-12) was issued on April 18, 2022, and was subsequently inspected by a grading inspector in June of 2024. The inspection confirmed that the grading was completed in compliance, with minor trenching conducted in accordance with the well permit approved by Environmental Health on May 22, 2022. 2. Multiple violations of Public Resource Code 4290 and Title 14 Fire Safe Regulations (e.g. substandard access, insufficient turnarounds, improper road widths, lack of emergency egress). Cumulative traffic and fire safety impacts of substandard road networks. Staff Response: High Valley Road is a county-maintained road and a prescriptive right of way; therefore, the road is open to all the public who wish to access the road. PRC 4290, 4291 requirements must be met on interior roadways of the project parcel, with County-maintained roads not requiring alterations by the applicant. However, staff conducted a site visit on June 3, 2025, to High Valley Road to address concerns brought forth by the appellant. A sign located on High Valley Road reads, "Tractors-Semis Over 25 Feet Kingpin to Rear Axle Not Advised." The road is paved for approximately 3.7 miles to the Brassfield delivery and pickup driveway, where the road pavement ends and the dirt road begins. Staff measured across portions of the road around an S curve, from the shadow line to the edge of the road. Portions of the corner are twenty feet and greater with a posted warning sign of a 10 miles per hour advisory for this portion of the roadway. (See Exhibit E). The remainder of the dirt portion measured conservatively at eighteen to twenty feet with a variety of turnouts and portions of the road measuring in excess of thirty feet wide. The applicant has proposed interior roadway improvements on the project parcel, as required by PRC 4290 and 4291 and has proposed the use of box trucks for delivery services rather than the use of semi-trucks for the proposed cultivation operation. 3. Failure to adequately assess environmental impacts pursuant to CEQA. Staff Response: The appellant does not provide specific details regarding environmental impacts they purport were not adequately assessed. However, in compliance with CEQA, a Draft Initial Study/ Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated from January 9, 2025, to February 7, 2025. Mitigation measures were identified for Aesthetics, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Geology/Soils, Hazards & Hazardous Materials, Hydrology/ Water Quality, Noise, Transportation, Tribal Cultural Resources, Utilities, Wildfire, and Mandatory Findings of Significance. All impacts were determined to be reduced to less than significant with mitigation measures implemented. Staff has followed CEQA regulations, and the Draft Initial Study (Exhibit A3) was adopted by the Planning Commission on May 22, 2025. 4. Inadequate or absent biological, hydrological or archeological studies. Staff Response: Biological, Hydrological, and Archeological studies were prepared for the project; however, staff inadvertently omitted the Botanical survey dated May 8, 2024, by Graening and Associates, LLC, from the Planning Commission agenda packet, which is attached as Exhibit D. The Botanical Survey was not attached to the staff report, although the Biological Survey was included, reviewed, and referenced in both the Draft Initial Study and Staff Report. Staff also clarified this at the Planning Commission hearing. 5. Potential inconsistencies with General Plan land use and zoning policies. Response: A detailed analysis of the Project's consistency with the General Plan, Shoreline Communities Area Plan, and Zoning is provided in the May 22, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report. In summary, pursuant to Article 27, Sec. 21-27.10, Sec. 27.11 Table B of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance, the cultivation of cannabis is an allowable use within the "RL" Rural Lands upon securing a Minor/Major Use Permit. In reference to the Lake County Zoning Ordinance Article 27, (at), 1.i. the County requires a minimum 100-foot setback from all property lines of the subject property, and minimum of 200-foot setback from all residences. There are currently no off-site residences within 2,300 feet from the property lines, and 3,000 feet from the cultivation area. Additionally, Article 27, Sec. 21-27.10, (at), 3.iii.v. prohibits Commercial Cannabis Cultivation within 1,000 feet of Community Growth Boundaries, licensed childcare facilities, churches, or youth-oriented facilities. The closest community growth boundary is approximately 2.5 miles away, separated by rugged, mountainous terrain. The project meets these setbacks. Consistent with the General Plan, the approval of the use permit would allow both the agricultural industry and the cannabis industry to strengthen and revitalize the overall community through promoting economic development. Lastly, existing Major Use Permits for cannabis have been approved in the area. Therefore, the proposed project would not be an intrusion of a new incompatible land use within the existing zoning and general pan designation of this area as it is an allowable use. See the analysis in the Planning Commission Staff Report for more information. Conclusion. CDD Staff must analyze projects for conformance with existing code requirements and regulations. As summarized above and discussed in detail throughout May 22, 2025, Planning Commission Staff Report and associated documents, the project meets all required regulations related to development and siting, is also consistent with the General Plan and Shoreline Area Plan. Staff recommends the Board deny the appeal, upholding the Planning Commission's approval of the project. Findings for approval are provided below; conditions of approval are included in Exhibit A2. V. MAJOR USE PERMIT FINDINGS FOR APPROVAL The Review Authority shall only approve or conditionally approve a Major Use Permit (Lake County Zoning Ordinance Section 51.4, Major Use Permits) if all of the following findings are made: 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. The proposed use of commercial cannabis cultivation operation is a permitted use in the "RL" Rural Lands zoning upon issuance of a Major Use Permit pursuant to Article 27, Sec. 21-27, Sec. 27.11 Table B of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance. The project scope complies with the regulatory requirements set by the local ordinances to address the health, safety, morals, comforts, and general welfare of those working or residing near the proposed use. The project meets or exceeds all required setbacks for this type of use, including distance to nearby sensitive receptors. Prior to the applicant construction, the applicant shall obtain the necessary permits and licenses from the appropriate federal, state, and/or local government agencies. Additionally, the Community Development Department would conduct annual compliance monitoring inspections during the cultivation season to ensure compliance with the County's ordinances, the approved Property Management Plan, mitigation measures, and conditions of approval. 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. The project proposes 247,800 sf, or 5.69 acres of cannabis cultivation canopy. The location and the size of the project site comply with the local ordinance requirements for use and setbacks. The site is large enough to meet the standards and criteria for commercial cannabis licenses applied for as found in Article 27.11. The Lake County Zoning Ordinance allows Type 3 cultivation operations within "RL" - Rural Lands zoning districts, and the subject site is +196.7 acres in size, large enough to accommodate up to 9 acres of commercial cannabis canopy. The applicant proposes a total of 5.69 acres. 3. That the streets, highways and pedestrian facilities are reasonably adequate to safely accommodate the specific proposed use. The proposed cultivation area is accessed from a private driveway, which is accessed from High Valley Road, a county-maintained road. The applicant must comply with California Building Code prior to construction of structures. There is no pedestrian access to the Project Site. The site has adequate access to accommodate the specific use. 4. 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. The project will utilize one on-site groundwater well and a total of twenty-five 3,000-gallon water storage tanks and one (1) 4,000-gallon tank, totaling 79,000 gallons of water storage. Additionally, the project parcel has adequate emergency service protection through the Lake County Sheriff's Office, the California Board of Forestry and Fire Protection, (CAL FIRE), and the Northshore Fire Protection District. The applicant must comply with all relevant local, state, and federal regulations, mitigation measures, and approval conditions to ensure sufficient services and safety at the site. This includes equipping all water tanks with 2.5-inch fire hose connectors. The applicant plans to store 12,500 gallons of water dedicated to fire suppression. This application was routed to all of the affected public and private service providers, including Public Works, Special Districts, Environmental Health, PG&E, and there are adequate public utilities and services available to the site. No adverse comments were received (Exhibit A7). 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. The cultivation of commercial cannabis is a permitted use within the Rural Lands Zoning district upon securing a Major Use Permit according to Article 27.13 of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance. The General Plan and Shoreline Communities Area Plan contain provisions that ensure compatibility between economic, water, and agricultural land use. The subject property satisfactorily meets minimum setbacks and development standards as required by these plans. 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. There are no violations of Chapters 5, 17, 21, 23, or 26 of the Lake County Code on this property. 7. The proposed use complies with all development standards described in Chapter 21, Article 27, Section 1.i. This application and supporting documentation meets the following Development Standards, General Requirements and Restrictions as specified within Article 27.11(at) of the Lake County Zoning Ordinance. 8. The applicant is qualified to make the application described in Chapter 21, Article 27, Section 1.ii.(g). The applicant has completed the 'live scan' background check and is qualified to apply for this permit. VI. RECOMMENDATION Staff recommend the Board of Supervisors: Deny the Appeal (PL-25-198), upholding the Planning Commission's approval of Major Use Permit (PL-25-68) for (UP 23-09) and Initial Study (IS 23-29), subject to the findings in the Memorandum dated December 9, 2025, and Conditions of Approval (Exhibit A2). Sample Motions: Appeal Denial (PL-25-198) I move that the Board of Supervisors deny Appeal (PL-25-198), in concept, upholding the Planning Commission's adoption of Initial Study (IS 23-29), and approval of Major Use Permit (PL-25-68) for (UP 23-29), and direct staff to prepare Draft Findings of Fact. PL-24-198 Poverty Flats Ranch Appeal 6 | Page