6 21-424 9:30 a.m. Continuation from Public Hearing April 22, 2021 to consider MAJOR USE PERMIT (UP 19-46) in the Board of Supervisors' Chambers, 255 N. Forbes Street, Lakeport, California. Applicant/Owner: Stuart Spivack. Proposed Project: Applicant is applying for a total of 28,012 square feet canopy area within a total of 28,252 square feet of cultivation area and facilities including (2) 120 square feet accessory structures and water tanks. Location: 1027 Watertrough Road, Clearlake Oaks, CA; APN(s): 628-100-10. Environmental Evaluation: Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 19-65).
First, I would like to thank Director Scott De Leon for taking the time to listen to our voices and taking time to more thoroughly review the case. I am a resident of Double Eagle Ranch and I am against UP1946. I agree with the assessment of the staff report. The proposal of this project is the same as proposal to the creating of a deficit to the lives and homestead of those that made this community home. We are a residential subdivision. Not a commercial one. We have a HOA CC&R that prohibits such things. Consider the environmental and land impact if you will. And if not, at least consider the human impact. Thank you.
I am a resident of Watertrough Rd. near the proposed site. I am opposed to UP 19-46 for both community and environmental reasons. As stated in our CCR’s, this is a residential and not a commercial subdivision. Our water resources are scarce. Our roads are single-lane, deteriorated, and not engineered to withstand commercial traffic. They do not come even close to the Cal Fire requirements for this project as per their own Agency Comments. The applicant has been growing illegally for years on a very large scale in a manner disruptive to the area, and continues to demonstrate that they have every intention of going beyond what is allowed even if they were issued a permit. This can be elaborated if necessary. I realize the tax revenue each of these permits brings in and while I have no opposition to permitted grows in general, I am grateful to Scott DeLeon and others who took the additional time to look at this project in more detail and determine its unsuitability for our area. Thank you
I support this project. I generally support regulated, licensed commercial cannabis cultivation. It will generate much needed tax revenue for the County. As far as fire risk, I believe that the presence of water tanks could potentially be helpful in the case of a wildfire. Many of the issues mentioned by others generally apply to unlicensed cultivation and are more than adequately addressed with regulation. Unlicensed and unregulated commercial cannabis activity poses a much more significant risk to quality of life for residents as there are no safeguards in place to ensure that safety and ecological standards are met. Regulated and licensed commercial cannabis businesses are held to high standards ensuring that they do not pose the risks of their unlicensed, unregulated counterparts. The County should mitigate these risks by supporting and approving licensed commercial cannabis projects. Thank you.
I own and live on property contiguous to the proposed grow. I have observed him conducting an illegal grow for the last four years with unpermitted grading, creek alteration, generators and bright lights. His large trucks have severely damaged the road I need for access to my property and his proposed use of 650,000 gallons of water threatens my ability to live on my property. Watertrough road is the only escape fin case of fire evacuation and the only way in for firefighters. I have been evacuated for fires many times in the last several years. His proposed project violates the CC&Rs of the Double Eagle Ranch and is not a compatible use for our community which was desigened to be a residential and not a commercial subdivision. This area lacks the infrastructure to support this project and commercial agriculture of any kind.. His requests for mitigated negative declaration, early activation and use permit should all be denied. I agree with staff revised recommendation for denial.
I STRONGLY OPPOSE UP1946 for the reasons stated during my last public comment on 4/22/21. In addition, there are several issues not addressed in any of the reports. Some are; no well reports posted, no restrooms (per CalOSHA ag employer regulation, must be within ¼ mi or 5 min walk, whichever is less), soil deliveries that weigh approx the same as water & the lack of groundwater replenishment since plants are grown above ground. The concerns brought up by residents should be seen as a county-wide problem & this application is a good example that some issues may go overlooked. I STRONGLY AGREE WITH STAFF REPORT on 5/7/21 recommending it be denied. Thank you to Director Scott De Leon for listening to the residents, having staff take more time to review & concluding that it would have a detrimental effect on the residents & the area. Please be mindful of the county's limited resources when processing future applications. We do not have an endless supply of water & resources.
I support staff findings that the particular circumstances and charcteristics of this proposed commercial operation on our private Double Eagle Ranch lands would greatly infringe on the safety and welfare of neighbors....and that the permit should be denied as well as the Mitagated Negative Declaration. We have gone through some efforts to make the county aware of the unique charcteristics of this ranch and its' ecosystem, the watershed and the current burdens on the home owners association to maintain roads largely due to the recent proliferation of illegal grow houses in this neighborhood. While it is impossible to undue the reckless harm already caused to local creek beds, ranch roads and wildlife due to habitat loss and light pollution...it is imperative that the county, in its enthusiasm for cannabis revenue and profits...does not loose sight of the larger issues: available water, maintaining our designated night skies and upholding the safety and welfare of its' constituents.
First, I would like to thank Director Scott De Leon for taking the time to listen to our voices and taking time to more thoroughly review the case. I am a resident of Double Eagle Ranch and I am against UP1946. I agree with the assessment of the staff report. The proposal of this project is the same as proposal to the creating of a deficit to the lives and homestead of those that made this community home. We are a residential subdivision. Not a commercial one. We have a HOA CC&R that prohibits such things. Consider the environmental and land impact if you will. And if not, at least consider the human impact. Thank you.
I am a resident of Watertrough Rd. near the proposed site. I am opposed to UP 19-46 for both community and environmental reasons. As stated in our CCR’s, this is a residential and not a commercial subdivision. Our water resources are scarce. Our roads are single-lane, deteriorated, and not engineered to withstand commercial traffic. They do not come even close to the Cal Fire requirements for this project as per their own Agency Comments. The applicant has been growing illegally for years on a very large scale in a manner disruptive to the area, and continues to demonstrate that they have every intention of going beyond what is allowed even if they were issued a permit. This can be elaborated if necessary. I realize the tax revenue each of these permits brings in and while I have no opposition to permitted grows in general, I am grateful to Scott DeLeon and others who took the additional time to look at this project in more detail and determine its unsuitability for our area. Thank you
I support this project. I generally support regulated, licensed commercial cannabis cultivation. It will generate much needed tax revenue for the County. As far as fire risk, I believe that the presence of water tanks could potentially be helpful in the case of a wildfire. Many of the issues mentioned by others generally apply to unlicensed cultivation and are more than adequately addressed with regulation. Unlicensed and unregulated commercial cannabis activity poses a much more significant risk to quality of life for residents as there are no safeguards in place to ensure that safety and ecological standards are met. Regulated and licensed commercial cannabis businesses are held to high standards ensuring that they do not pose the risks of their unlicensed, unregulated counterparts. The County should mitigate these risks by supporting and approving licensed commercial cannabis projects. Thank you.
I own and live on property contiguous to the proposed grow. I have observed him conducting an illegal grow for the last four years with unpermitted grading, creek alteration, generators and bright lights. His large trucks have severely damaged the road I need for access to my property and his proposed use of 650,000 gallons of water threatens my ability to live on my property. Watertrough road is the only escape fin case of fire evacuation and the only way in for firefighters. I have been evacuated for fires many times in the last several years. His proposed project violates the CC&Rs of the Double Eagle Ranch and is not a compatible use for our community which was desigened to be a residential and not a commercial subdivision. This area lacks the infrastructure to support this project and commercial agriculture of any kind.. His requests for mitigated negative declaration, early activation and use permit should all be denied. I agree with staff revised recommendation for denial.
I STRONGLY OPPOSE UP1946 for the reasons stated during my last public comment on 4/22/21. In addition, there are several issues not addressed in any of the reports. Some are; no well reports posted, no restrooms (per CalOSHA ag employer regulation, must be within ¼ mi or 5 min walk, whichever is less), soil deliveries that weigh approx the same as water & the lack of groundwater replenishment since plants are grown above ground. The concerns brought up by residents should be seen as a county-wide problem & this application is a good example that some issues may go overlooked. I STRONGLY AGREE WITH STAFF REPORT on 5/7/21 recommending it be denied. Thank you to Director Scott De Leon for listening to the residents, having staff take more time to review & concluding that it would have a detrimental effect on the residents & the area. Please be mindful of the county's limited resources when processing future applications. We do not have an endless supply of water & resources.
I support staff findings that the particular circumstances and charcteristics of this proposed commercial operation on our private Double Eagle Ranch lands would greatly infringe on the safety and welfare of neighbors....and that the permit should be denied as well as the Mitagated Negative Declaration. We have gone through some efforts to make the county aware of the unique charcteristics of this ranch and its' ecosystem, the watershed and the current burdens on the home owners association to maintain roads largely due to the recent proliferation of illegal grow houses in this neighborhood. While it is impossible to undue the reckless harm already caused to local creek beds, ranch roads and wildlife due to habitat loss and light pollution...it is imperative that the county, in its enthusiasm for cannabis revenue and profits...does not loose sight of the larger issues: available water, maintaining our designated night skies and upholding the safety and welfare of its' constituents.