A 8

s ....

APPL.1CANT:

<;ENERAL LEASE .,,.. COMMERCIAL USE

,ir.Napa Mill Development CO.~pany, A General Paf\i:nership

900 Fu~ton Auenue, Suite 103 Sacramen~o. California 95825

AREA. TYPE LAND AND LOCATXON: 0.083±-acr~ pa~cel of tide and s~bmerged lands

LAND USE:

in Napa Ri uer, .City of Napa, Napa Coun J:y •

Propcsod elevated public access pedestrian ualkwa~ adjace~'t to commercial development.

TERMS OF P~fC ~EASE: · Initial peri~d: "?S y.ears beginning May 1,

19.87. ')

- . Surety bon~: N/A.

Pub~ic liability insurance: CoMbined single limit coverage of $1,000,000.

CONSIDERATION: $4,230 per annum: with th~ S~ate reserving the right to fix a different r~ntal en the first anniuers..ary date, and each fifth anniversary of the lea~e thcre•fter.

BASIS FOR CONSIDERATION: Pursuant to 2 al. ~m. Code 2003.

A~PLICANT STATUS: Applicant is owner of upland.

\.

-1-

CAUNOAll MGI

\'

\\ ,,

,_,

':

<>:'

CALENDAR ITEM ~O. C 05 CCONT 1 D)

··-· PREREQUISITE CONOI·TIONS, FEES AND EX,PENSES:

f±ling fee has b~en receiued.

STATUTORY AN~ OTHER aEf~RENCES: A. P.R.C.~ Div~ 6, Par~s 1 and 2: Div. 13.

~a 884:

B. {:al,. Adm. Code·: Ti.tle 2, Diu. 3; Tii:le 14. t>i'.1. 6.

06/12/87.

OTHER PERTINENT lNFOR, iATION: l~ The proposed project is planned within an

area of dOt:.1ntown Napa that currently is improued with older warehouse buildings. In compliance with the City's approve~ "Riverfront Plan". the subject upland is being converted from an unused grain mill and warehouse t~ riverfront commercial use.. Plans call for renovation of the 57,000 sq. ft. structure to a series of retail shops. rsstaurant. office and seruice areas, and an arcade. The are& along the Napa River, and ouer State-owned lftnd, will be utilized as a ~blicly used pedes,trian walkway - cafltileuo~ed and eleuated above the River. !n a°'~ition to providing public access ~long t~c Riyer, the walkway will seru~ as access to the renouated building.

2. This a~tiuity i·nuolue5 lands identif:t,ed as possessing significant environmental values pursuant to P:R.C. 6l70, et seq. Class tb). The -project. as proposed, is consistent with its us~ ~lassifi~ation.

3. A Negative Declaration was prepared and adopted for this project by the City of Nap~. The State Lands Commiss~on,~ s~aff has reuiewed such document and belieues that it comp~)es with the , rGquirements of the CEQA.

APPRO!JAt.S OBTAINED: --~i ~y of Napa, United Stat~s Army'C~rps of Engineers, and Deparmtent of fi~h and Game.

-2-

•

e

--

•

.~ALENDAP. ITEM ~JO. C 05 (CONT'D..l

EXHIBITS: A. ..Land Des.cription. B. ttication .Map. c. Ne~atiue Declar&tion.

IT IS R~COMMENDED THAT THE COMMISSION:

1. f.Il(J THAT ~ NEGflTlUE DECLAB~TION WAS PREPARED AND ADOPl E~ FOR THI2 PROJECT BY THE CITY OF NAPA AND THAT THE COMMISSION HAS REUIEWEO f;~JO CONS'IDERED THE iNFORMATION C~NTAINED THEREIN.

2. nETERMINE TtlAT THE PROJECT, AS APPROVED, W:tlt. NOT t!AO.E A SIGNIFICANT EFFECT ON THE ENVIRONMENT.

3. FIND TH~T THIS ACTIVITY I~ CONSISTENT WlT~ THE USE CLAS9IFICAlION DE3IGNA~EI) FOR THE LANO PURSUANT TO P.R.C. 6370. ET SEQ.

4. AUTHORIZE IS~UANCE TO NAPA MI-LL DEVELO?MENT COMPANY, 0 GENERAL PARTNERSHIP, OF A 25-Y.EAR GENERAL LEASE -COMMERC!AL USE BEGINNING MAY 1, 1967; IN CONSIDERATION Of ANNU~L. REJ.JT IN THE AMOUNT OF $4.~ 23b.oo, WITil THE STA IE RESEPVlNG TH~ RIGH1 TO FIX A DIFFERENT RENTAL ON THE FIRST ANNIVERSARY DAT£ OF THE LEASE AND ON EACH

1( "\ f . '

F!FTK ANNl~~RSARY OF THE LEASE TttERE~FTER: PROVISION.Of PUB'LIC LIAiilLITY INSURANCE FOR .:OMBINED SINGtE LIM!:T ~OVER~GE OF $1, 000', 000: FOR C(J.TA'STRUCTION AND f.1AINTENANC~ OF AN ELEVATED-CANTILEVERED PUBLIC ACCESS PEDESTRIAN WALKWAY ON THE LAND -Of$CRIBEO 10r-J E:XHIBIT "A" ATTACHED AND BY REFERENCE ~ADE A PART HEREOF.

~ ;:, 0

) ,,

-3-...

r ·· 1' 0

--~'~ ?"A• (• ' 0 ~I,\

6

0

0

0

~ ()

<> ,,

0 ~ 0

'

"' 0

CAlENOAtl PAGE .. ~ 4 1~1'8' ,:;

\I ,""

'EZl!ll!l'.f MA•

LlUfD DESCRIPTlOli )f 23146

A parcel of t'ide and submerged .t.~nd in the N~pa River. Ci.ty of Napa. Napa county,. California., lyint,1 immediately ben~atb an elevatad walk\fa.y locat\ld adjac:ent to a •• d easteL-iY 1iu1d southerly of 'Lots i~ 2. 3. 4 a~ 10 ih Block •1. a~ showqon ~·he •a? ~ntitled .. Plan of Napa Cit.Y" recoi:ded Nove5l. ·:: 2J.-. 1853 in Book B of Deeds at p•qe 433. Officiai Records of Napa ~Qunty.

BX~PTDJG '?RBRZ!'ROM any portion lying landward of the .ordinary hiqh water aack of the Napa River.

PJmPA!Ulli Df!C~ER l. 1986 BY B~UNDARY SERVICES UNIT. K~ ~· SHAPER. SUPERVISOR.-

042tli

CALENDAR PACil

I ,

. NOTIC'l, CF ca-:-:z:::.~::'A r:c~I

TC:

Ow

SUC!JECT: Fir.tig of Nctia of Oetermina:lc:n in c:moliancs with f". 1on 21108 er Zl t52 tJf the i'ut:iic ne:curca:

Cede · ---- ~·~ ·-· Projc:: f;t11

. 85-094 :' NAPA MILL

&nuct Pe~cn -· - - T•ie:;:nc:nlf.Nurnccr ___ "°"" ____ _ ~-----~~-·.t1.._ _______________ J~e-~~t"V ........ c.o_r::ia,;;;;;;;;;_c_k ______ ,_t_o_1_)_2_s_2_-_1_1_1_i_XJ_-_6_0 ________ .._.~------Pro1tet Lcc:aucn

550 Main Street Pi""r:!'!!O~J&~ci~u~e~:c;~-:~ip~;~,C11~-R-e-n-o-v-a-t-io-n-.-o-f-t-h-e-h-i-s ... t-o-ri-c-Ha-t-t-B-u-i-l-d-i-ng~; -.-c-i--e-y ........ l_a_n_dma_r_k_s_i_t_e_,_a_n_d_,_

expansion of the building complex from 57,000 square feet to 84,615 square feet of floor area as a tourist commercial retail shopping complex.

,;

t:!TI Oe' NAP.\ (Llld A;cnc-1 er ntr.::cnsib!e A;tm:-/)

hu 1~c:ro~ed d1e abova ct.tc;:il:ltd pr~jcct :nrfha: mar!• U:t fcUowir.; c1urmin1iicns ri;irdin; t..,1~:.:"1 descii:td a:rcjac=

'· Th1·;m:j1c: 0 wm havt st;;nific;;nt-tf!ei;: en Utt tnvircnm!nt.

,.llr will not · 2. Cl An Ezwh:,cnmctataf fm~c: Res:=rt wu r:res:ared fer i.fiis r:rcjtct ;:u:suant to the s:rcvisicn: cf C~CA.

ID A N1gadv1 Cecfiration wa pre~utd for this proja-ct ::un-.:snt ta the r:t~isions ef c:~. The !!~<ft flr~azrv,, Declaration and t4<::rd of prcifec: ac;:!r:val may bf ex;mintd ar: ~la:tr!ti

_n~1~Rwi~r~b~-~-~~n~c~,=.._·1.6.0~0._F.i~~r.J!wt-...,.s.t~~-e.e.t •• _..~_a.7_a ........ ~.A .... 9_~_S_5_9 __ --i.,..~---...·~>--------------·~~ 3. Mitig:nicn mc3SUtH C!a were. 0 Mtre n~t. m.ade a c:nci:icn of t.'1! ar:;:rcval oh.-:e,i::rc;er::.

4. A sr3t!mcnr of Ovttrticiing C;nsicu--~ticns

Catt R~ivtd tor Filing __________ _ ' '

'-'

\' '

., •i 1 •• r ~. .i., .:. i J '; J 1

.,......,..._..--,so,.:a..,..,_;.----..,;:-~7::""t

CAlENQ~IC PACE ""'

·-1

•

I I --1 I

t~APAMILL ll!Nimffillb ~ID>W

Prepared for; CITY OF NAPA $EPTEMBEA 1SS6

ESA PLANNING A.Np ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES -

..

0 ,3 ...

v

'1 ·.o-

' <

" ~

760HARRISoN smeer SAN FRANCISW, CA..M107 (· _

(415) 196-5800 /,'

- ?. 8 CAU~RPAGE -~INUTIPAGE 1 5 2.2 °

0

,';>

SECTION.i

ENVIRQNMENT.AL INFORMATION FORM

A. DESCRIF l'lON OF PROP~RTY

1. Address or ·Location

The project. site is located m the downtown area of (he City of-Napa and is bQund~41~~ F.:fth Street on the nor!h, Brown StrA?et on the west, and the'Napa River Gil'lhe southern and eastern sides. The ·~enninus ofi Main Street divides the.site in two. Figme 1 shows the.project site in relation to the community.

~. Assessor's Parcel Numbers

The project site is identified by.~apa Coonty as Assessor's Parcel NumbeH (APNs) :t-2774>1, 3-275-01 anci"3-275-02. Figure 2 shows the sitecin relation to adjacent parcels.

3. Present use of the site: indicate any existing structures, their use and occupancy and any special features - biotic, bistorit; hydrologic, topographic, ~ '

a. Existing Uses on the Site

The :site consists of two blocks separat£d by Main'Street. At tJ>e southeast cov..er of the intersection of Fifth aiKl Main Streets is the .Hatt.Building,. a

1-,,

) '

clu5ter of ~ix separate buildings which appear from the eXterior as a-singJe unit a (see Figures 3, 4 and 5). The Hatt Building encompasses the entire eastern W block. Originally a grain mill, the building 118.J been used~most recently as a feed store and warehouse space. At present, the building is not used for commercial ~s and is vacant. Portions of the building have ~en listed on the National Regist~r of Hist~ric P.la~f!S and the ,enti!e structure is ~signated by the City of Napa as a ,.Landmark Priority." A footpath leads from the end of Main Street down to the riVf~r bank along the southern si~ of the a.tt Budding. The bank area is .used by persons fishing in the· river. Buil@lg walls are marked by graffiti.

The w~stern p ... rtion of the project site consists of _two parcels bounded by-Main, Fifth and Brown Streas (see Figures 3 and 4). A small~l,650-squa~"-foot, one-story building is located at the-~.~er of Fifth and Brmm Streets; ~e building is-being µsed·-asoa temporatjl Napa-Mill projf!~t office. The remainder of this porti0a, of thJ site k vacant except for several -trees. The surf a~ of these two parcels is primarily dirt snd>~vel.

b. Qtaracter of Surroundin~ Area

The Cowity Admini,stration nuildings are located diaSQnally aeross Fifth and Main Streets from the site (s.ee Figure 5), while the City/County library is located west across Brown ~treet from the site. Residential uses are located to the southwest and west. A va.cant, grass and:dirt-covere<Uost.i:s located north across Fafth Street ·frmn the site. The block north of this lot, on ~-sueet between Third a.id Fourth Streets,.-is the site Gf the proposed Nape National Sank project, a mixed-use retail~ office and bank development. Commer.cial

3

~NDARtAQ

MINUTE PACE 1523

l , __ -r--t---~

j

I l I I I

~-iown &Country

Fairgrounds

I ,~

! t .. f f ! l • 1 •

I· +

0 -

. -1

1 .J - t FEEJ- c

1.,_------·----~----_.::."c.!/ J

SOURCE:ESA ) .

4

··FIGURE 1 LOCATION ~AP

• CAUNOAI PACE 30

............ ......

"'

U1

._., U)

l: ! Cl

- I ....... o1 Q

<: ! 't

!:'<:

'l FOURTH

·,

... o . .

•• I •

•• FIFTH

26\

= ..

TE: ASSESSOR'S BtOCK & LOT NUMBERS SHOWN IN CIRCLES

- l

f 1181\NllUNf (l) . . ... ,... . .. • : :s ~ : ' : C:Cflllflt l~N· i tf.lll'il 1

J I t : ' ~•,}.c.t==t1•t<• a-_!;!)• • ••

, - I Q 11 o I .Id

1•4 ~~ ~21g.

I.• ~ :! t .,, •

·~·l't .........

.. H

J

• ., I t

I -i I ,, (;'.:;\ I It ~ -

i.!v : ___ ._. -· _:. _:)--,, •••cl t !" e......w:~~ ..... YiiiJ------

/ /

L

a I

/, /

2J

I

l \

,,..;,,,,--~~ ,_

I \ \ \ \

// .........

'\ \ \

,. l ! !

\. \ \ \ \

' f I '~ ~1

q)' /

I

an 0

_t

~1c -;.:'T--------~·~.....,.--------------------A-s_s_e_s_s_OR'_s .. _ ,~_ .. A_RF1G ... ~-1 _~_"*A_-:-" --."l URCt. r ;ip.:i Countv A!;:::cssor's Office SHOWING ZONING DteSlGNATIONS

e e

.... I I

I I , I I

VIEW TOWARD~'NOR'fHEAST FROM BROWN S\ iiEEt'

~? ..;_ < ,..... ..-- - ,,, .--,i,... ..-..- '-· 1~-~ -~ ...

.... ' ,,. -... - _ ...... ~_ . . .

. . · - . ~

.. . .. . -­•' . ~~ .e._ • . .. .

- .. :. .-:- .......... "f·. - ~ -- ... ; ·-- . -~- ...-:.• -

\)

1 VIEW TOWARDS' SOUl){,,fROM MAIN fi.R~ _,.._ ________ ....;.____ -----,--------------,,

1 SOURCE:ESA

FIGURE 3 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

1 ____________________ _.._ ____ ___

6 32

----- --

• --

VIEW OF Blt1LDING PR~~ED FOR DEMOLITION AT FlFTH AND BROWN STREETS·

FIGURE 4 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

. _, •.,:- -.. =- .- .v --... -

VIEW TOWARDS NORTH ON MAIN STREET SHOWING HATT BUILDING ON THE RIGHT AND COUNTY HALL OF JUSTICE ON THE LEFT

FIGURE 5 SITE PHOTOGRAPHS

SOURCE: ESA

I " ' !a.---------------------------------------------------------~;~a~r~1wNo~A~k~P~"e~1--------8 ~NUTE PACE

-·retail and office uses are 10!2.te<lon Main Street north of the site. The County currently has plans to expand-the jail onto a portion ~f the existing county parking lot to the rear (soutli} of the Administration buildings.

Buildings in the vicinity are generally low-scale. The County Admini$tration builmng, at three stories.plus a penthouse, is the tallest structure in the area other than the silos of the Napa Mill.

c. Environmental Sett~g

(See Section 3 for a complete and detailed description of the pi:oject site's environmental setting.)

Oil-site ~egetation consists of several trees, and grasses and weeds. All plant species are intrcduced and, common. Riparian (streamside} species grow along the Napa River bank. There is no important: wildlife nor are there any special features which inight support unique biological communities. The vacant portion of the site slopes gently towards the south towards the river; soils are Cole silt loam anii riverwash.

There are no known archaeolc;g{cal remains on the project site, which has been disturbed over the years.· Buildings A anrl-B are listed on the National Register of Historic Places and the entire structure is desgnated by 1he City of Napa as a "Landmark.Priority."

Views from the site are of the residential neighborhood to the southwest; the Napa,City/County Library building and loading area to the west; the small commercial structures to the nor-':hwest; the County Administration Building and landscaped parking lot to the north of the project's vacant portion; the vacant, sparsely veg~tated dirt and-gravel lot to the north of the Hatt Building; and. from the sides of the Hatt building ·ar.d from the bank along the southern sicb of the building, the Napa River to tae east and south.

Service levels at intersections in the vicinity of the project site are all excelbnt to very good. Air quality is good and noise levels are Within' accept~'Jle siandards.

The px-o~eci parking. lot area was the site of a 19th century gas-generating plant, ~d a·sUbsurface·gas tank is also located on site. Soil samples taken on ~ite indh;ate the presence of hydrocarbons, a-by-product of gasoline, which is considered a human health hazard.

9

tALENDAlt PAGE

I j

ft· a. I I f I I I •• J

B. DESCRIPTION OF PROJE€T

1. Project Name

Napa Mill

2~ Project Developer/Applicant

Napa.Mill Development Company 900 Fulton Avenue, Suite 100 Sac-riimento, CA 95825 -(916) 488-6670

3. Site Acreage or Size

The entire site is approximately 1.96 acres, and cgnsistct of three parcels. One, at ta1e southeast comer of Fifth and.Main Streets, is ap1Jroximately 0.96 acre, and the other two, together bounded by Fifth, Main and Brown Streets and the Napa River, are approximately one acre.

4. Building Square Footage

The existing Hatt Building contains approximately 57,100 gross square fe~t (gsf) of space. The project is the renovation of this existing space and the addition of 27,520 gsf, for a total of 84,620 gsf. New floor space will be provided in a partial second·and third floor additions. The project will consist of appro~ately 39,600 gsf of retail space, 16,600 gsf of restaurant area, 6,000 gst of offic;_e space and 22,400 gsf of circulation and services space. Figures·6 to 12 show the project site plan, floor plans, building elevations ahd sections.

S. f!,o~£!._Descrlption. Include information in narrative on proposed·uses and time of operation, proposed occupancy, construction scheduling and· phasing, and any ~l or unique characteristics.

(Mitigation measures will, in some cas2s, change the following description.)

The Napa MiU project consists of renovating the Hzu Buildirr· which.actually co~ists of six buildings referred to on the site plans.as Buildfiigs A to F. The project will, provide approximately 63,000 gsf of leaseable commercial space in the building, an exterior boardwalk allowing ~blic access to the Napa River, and landscaped parking. The theme will be "Jllapa Valley, Then and No'3" and will focus on food, crafts and recreation. The project will include a rezoning from "PC" (Planned Community) to "PD" (Planned Development).

The project proposes a total of approximately 39,600 gsf of retail space, 16,600 gsf of-restaurant area, 6,000 gsf of office space and 22,400 gsf of circulation and services space including the first floor, two-story·high arcade. The new third floor addition will be completely comprised'of office space and no office uses will appear on lower iloors. Three restaurants are proposed for the project. A small food service establishment is planned for tbe first floor adjacent to the riverwalk. Take-out service will supplesrn?nt high turnover seating for food including sandwiches, salads, ice cream and other snacks. Two restaurants are i:-roposed for the second floor: a supper club with bar and live~tertainment theatre in Buildings A and B, and an ensemble of fast-food concessionai~es serving-a variety of cuisine with seating in a common table area.

10

,, I

)

''· crz 8 /,~ ~ -.. - ._ <!J UJ e w ii: !:: ~ UJ

.Cl

I Ill

I u s :c u .. < ~j CJ c 5 c ro > .I ./. .a .. c:> e c I c ro ...

• • - --"'"'"

-"' ·I l

ol - •

. i • I -:ri"'l.

: ! 1 ~l

- -. . r-- -....:- -. ..., --· . . .:::.:-....;;.; ... . . » •

,_,._ - -- ---- --~--

r

.. f '-·~M :_~ -b ~

"'- A RETA.I. .. I ....

-""'-'. .. · . .; ·-· ~ e------: RElAl.

'-RETM..

c.-

~·1-----~--......... __ ...,. .. '""+------

. -· i '

8 I.

-----~

~- OURCE: Tanner &_ :YanDine Architects

.. . • B • RE:TAl.

•• .~ ~

•

• llVERWM.IC

L. 0

LEGEND -L I Cl)

jt ~

FEET '.J

50

FIGURE 7 FIRST FLOOR PLAN

..

! :;;:

·1 .I

..... w

s -2

I. .i

-....

':.=:r"

a •--

..... --r

-·-.......,.

0

OURCf': Tanner & VanOine Architects

r-" ·-~ _..,..

- ---·- -1- --

., .. .. ... , ...

... 11 r A ="

REST~

·-_,. r "' .. B

RESTAUWfT

• -.... o ....... -· • •

• 1· •Dfl?t I _,, .. 1-- --~

,_. ---- L,.

--·

...

._...,,_.., -- . c . ,

s _!

0

-L".J .t;

FEET 50

FIGURE 8 SECOND FLOOR PLAN

'. ~ /

I I)

e I

' ....

'\

•· l

u c

<

II fU d.,Jt l1UI

1,,_ ~ ...,:•

'-- .. \• --~

~_,,.~ ·--- J ._ ..........

F.l :=L­L· .. .... --

E c: -.. .. ! i:

ff!

w

< I

\ ..

1· .

,j

14

'I' ,, ,.

' "'

' I LI.

' '

:;~ I Iii. . . , ~--- .. -----~

. , . •

,.

~

<

. ----- •

-;;

J

... ;

"' w u.

.r'\

· c:Al.INDAR PAG~ ' /, ,,

f<i\IMUTl~'

i~ ~ '~ tt 0

0 _. ;~

.0 g: :c ....

CROSS SECTION A

ARCADE SE_CTION B

·---------

SOIJRCL: f.mncr .~ Van Uine Arch11ects

Bl.DO. A -

_...., -

• a.DG. B •

1

f .... -~ .. .

SLDG.E -- --- -- ---------

--~·.~--.. ·

NAPARIYER

L~...,._..,.r~---'J 0 FEET !>O

FIGURE 10 BUILDING SECTIONS

- - - --1----------------------~

Flflll SfRt£T

!= ~~~~~..,sl

lllDG A i lllOG B t WEST ELEVAilON AT MAIN STREET

. .,... ...... ~ ...... .... ...... , ........ ..,,...0

---............. ..,...,...... ................ ._...._ ...... ....., ~ ........................... ~ ......... ~

BLOG. ( - ! -- ·-·--·- BLOG f - · --l l'lAZA• ·....__ __

-~­... -~ • .......:> ... ~ ..... ~

.,..1:. _.

- fl • ----·-- -- eu><;l.C

tJORTH Et'.EVATION AT FIFTH STREET

- I

~ .....

------BLDG. A------1-- lWCSTREEf ~ J

(>

~\

~! ...... ~ .... ·111!'1 .... '.J.o O FEET 50 ,

:::-

FIGURE 11 NORTH AND Wl!:ST ELEVATtoNS

URCE: Tmw.1r & \fanOine Architects

\f ... ffi n > a: ... < z 0 j:: < > w ...I w :i: .... 5 en

-

li

I

I l •

j I

-'tr

a: II."'

Ii w > a: ... < z

_,,., 0 i= <

Ill

> u

w S! ~

...I u w ...

< ... Cl)

< C> c:

w 0 c: <II :> .., .. '-' c: e c: '; ...

•• a

' i I

•• _I

I

A new second floor will be added over Buildings D, E and F for retail 'and restaurant uses. New floors on Buildings D, E and F will be set back 16 to 20 feet from the first-floor facade, and Building F will include a deck overlookipg Main Street. No second-st!'nr. space wm be·a4<feg. t~J~:O::!ding C. A new third floor will be added above Building F !qr office space.

Providing primary horizontal circulation at the interior ground floor level will be an arcade, partially open .to the second floor level. Exterior circulation will be afforded by sidewalks along the Main and Fifth ·Street sides of the building 111.Jld by a rivetwalk along the eastern and southern sides. The riverwalk~win extend out over the mean high ~ter mark af the Napa River at an-elevation of 16.75 feet, and wil! be supported by knee braces. Sewn stairways and t\lree elevators will provide circulation between n~.

The project sponsor intends to maintain the architectural integrity of the historic portions of the Hatt building and-add new elements in a ~econdary, harmoni2ing role. A portion of the existing site, Buildings A and B (see pla.ris), are listed on the National Register of H"istoric Places, and the entire0sttucture has-been designated by the City of Napa as a "Landmark Priority." Buildings A and B will be renovated such that their exterior appearance will remain essentially as at present. The met~~ canopies at ~e north and west facades of these two buildings. which project several feet out from the building walls, will be retained. The pressed tin wainscoting in ihe second floor i:oom of Building B and the hardwood flc;>or of the.,second floor of Building A will be ~~tantially renovated in accordance with the requirements of· the State Historic Pre$ervation Office and the ~cretary of Interior's Standards fGr Rehabilitation (see Item 20.b, in Secfion 3, below). One wall and the roof of Building F will be demolished and replaced, and Btµlding C's roof will be replaced. Roofing ~terial will b2 tar and gravel. In Buildings C, D and E, the brick walls will be re\~ained, as will the existing trusses in Buildings C, D and E The existing 80-f oot-high silos and the roof top ~in structure will be retained; their exteriors will be renovated and the interiors of the silos modified consistent with the new Commercial use cf the'building, for retail space and an elevator. Some original granary equipment from the mill will be displayed in the main public arcade, and elements from the original feed store will be maintained~as well.

Across MaincStreet from the commercial complex will be a parking area; as proposed, the lat will provide 76 standard stalls, 14 c01npact car,stalls, and four handicapped stalls, for a total of 94·:self-park s~ces. The sponsor is seeking a variance from requited" property line landscape setbacks in o,rder to maximize on-site parking. (A lot to code standards would have 68 spaces.) As designed, the project proposes small, flowerin?· trees to ~ installed along the perimeter streets of Main, Fifth and Brow Streets, and larger, broadly spreading trees within the interior of the parking lot for shade. Underp!anting oi Io~, cturable shrubs and ground cover will be a~ed through<v.it the lot's landscaped areas.

The project applicant has requested that the City of Napa abandon or le8:$e to the project the street rights-of-way along Main and Fifth Street · fronting the project site and Brown Street bet-M:eirriith and Division Streets in order to accommodate additional spaces. Appendix A completely describes: the various parking options •

<Measures proposed tQ mitigate the project's deficiency in meeting the City'3 parking requirem~nt in;;ro!ve other matters that would-require a variance as 1"11. Please see Appendx-A.)

18

The site plans do not incb .. '$fe any p'foposecl landscaping on the river banks-~Iong the Hatt Building's southern $lde. b~ping will be installed ~thin and surrounding the parking area, iacl~ the top of thecriver bank along the southern side of the currently urumproved-lots.

Hours of Operation. The followina hours of operation have been pro~ded by the project sponsor:

Overall Shops

Restaurants 1st floor deli

8:00 a.m. to 2:00 a.m. lO:oo·a.m. to 9:00 p.m., Monday-5aturday 10:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., ~Y

11:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. 2nd floor food hall 2nd floor supper club

11:30 a.m. to 2:00 p.m., lt 4:30 to 11:00 p.m. 11:30 ~.m. to 2 p.m., & 4:30 p.m. to 2:00 a.m. 8:00 a.m. ,to 5:00 p.m. Offic~s

Anticipated Employment. As acknqwledged-in the i;rroject application, the number of employees depends on final tenant mix and r~::arket demand for goods ~ services to be provided. The sponsor does, however, project the foll9wing employment levels:

Retail/Arcade Space

-Restaurant Space

Office-Space

47,200 square feet 2,830 employee hours per week 47 iull-time & 47 half-'"me jobs

Assumption: One employee per each 800 square feet of retail and arcade space for 48 hours,per week (8 hours per day, 6 days per week).

11,100 square feet 1,165 employee _hours per week 14 fun-time lt 29 half-time jobs

Assumption: One employee per each 400 square feet of seating space for 42 hours ~r week (7 hours per day, 6 days per week).

6,000 square feet 1,200'employee hours per week 29 full-time jobs

Assumption: One employee per each 200 square feet of offic-e space for 4Q hoUi's per week (8 bours'per day, 5 days per week).

1 full-time & 4 half-time .k>bs

Assumption: One full-timJ! maintenance person. -one half-time maintenance pe-rson, and three half-time janitorial workers.

£onstructlon Schedule. Asswning a start_~::. date of November 1986, the project would ~ complet<?d in August 1947.

19

• G\UNOAI PAGE

9,.,

•• I I

t

-­t

•• t

6. Permits and Approvals. List_ all other related permits and/or public approvals ~gtdred cf this project bv other agencies. ·

The following permits/approvals would be required for this project:

Environmental Review. An Initial Study is required to comply ~thJhe California ~vironmental Quality Act CCEQA) and Na{Ja Mw1icipa1Code. The Initial Study must be tj.tculated through the State Clt!minghou...~ to state and (ederal agencies tor review.

Rezoning. The pr~ject s~te is currendy zoned "PC" (Planned Community); tbe. project includes a request for rezoning to "Pn" (Planned Development).

Use- Permit. A permit is required for developmmt of the site for a commercial use.

Design Review. Preliminary approval was gr.mt~d by the Design Review Board··on July 9, 1986.

Certificate of Appropriateness. This certificate is re:;mred-b<?fore11!ly construction to or alteration, removal or d¢molitibn of the Hatt Building, as it kc: designated city landmark and is located in an historic district. The Napa .. Design Review Board granted this cer~ifice.te oo July 9, 1986, subject to1review by the State Office of Historic Preservation.

1J~riai.tce. A·~~~ has been requested,because the project will provide f ~wer than the required number of parking spaces, and- ~"le par~g lot,. as pr\,posed, does not have the .required depth of setback.$ for lan4Scaping. (0\1her measures proposed in this report for mitigating the project's detlciency in meeting the City's parking requirement wiU ilr.;olve a 1>ariance as well. Please see Appendix A.)

Approval to Use Street Right~f-Way. The project pr9poses to·either lease, have the city abandon, or have the project acquire a licerme to use city property in the stree~ adjacent to the Hatt Btrllding. The City's approval of such an arrangement will allow on-saeet·parking s~ces--~o be counted towards rutfillment of the parking requirement ..

Historic Rehabilitation .Approvals. The project ne~ds appr9vru from the U.S. Department of ·Interior, National Park Service and the State Office of Historic P!eservation in order to receive a federal hlstoric rehabilitation investment tax credit.

UndergroWld Tank Removal Permit. The Napa County He~lth Depart..me{lt must issue a permit to remove the subsurface gas tank<at the project site.

State Lands Conunission,·Permit. This permit and fee is .necessary-as the project's riverwalk will extend into State lands; the fee would.be nomina! ~ind- 'ieview 1of the permit would not delay the project.

~~ction 404 and Section 10 Pt:rmits. A Sei:tion 10 permit is required. f9r th.~ riverwalk and Section 4g4 and Section 10 permits for the plaza and parl~g lot; both are issuec!-by the Army Corps of Engineers. (The project s~r has agr£ed to ef.mmate the plaza and, thus, these two-permits ':.. would oot be required.)

20

CALENDAR PAGE

Stream,Alteration Agreement. An agreement with the Pepartment of F'lSh and Game is necessary for the proposed plaza, the riverwalk ·and the portion of the parking lot near the river. (The project sponsor bas agreed to eliminate die plaza and, thus, an agreement for this part of the project would not0 be necessary.)

Building Permit. A permit appr~g f'mal-«:;onsttucti~ drawings is rettuired. Approvals are also needed for daign of street and utillty imilrovements.

21

--

I

.. I ,1 ·j

I I i I ,, t

-I t t i

\ -I

SECTION 3

INITIAL STUDY o

ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM AND EXPLANATION

The CJty of Napa requir.i?S that au qu~tiOE'S O!l the Jnitial Study Environmental Checklist Form be answered urith a "yes," "no," or "maybe." Explanations for "yeS:" and "maybe" answers are required. Items mid questions Jrom the City's form ake shown belo,lV ~th Ul1CWli.ning, foll!)wed by a response or extilanation. A copy of the completecl'checkiist fonn is provided Jn the Appendix for ref erenc:e.

A. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS

1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:

a. Unstable earth conditions or in changes in geologic substruc_t_ures?

NO. The project will transform a flat, wideveloP£d portion of the sit~ west of the Hatt &ilding to a paved parking lot with some landscaping. Soils on .the project site consist primarily of Cole silt loam.Ill This type of soil is charactefaed as having severe l!mitations for loc&l .road and street development because of low bearing strength and high shrink-swe!l potential. Permeability is:inoderate·to high, and-there is·!•~-!?e or no hazar4 of er<>Sion. Compliance with the Uniform Building,Code will reduce any-limitations for use .of these soils for construction to a leve~ of insignificance.

Riverwash soils, limited to the banks of the Napa River, are"1variabl'!, t'-ORSistmg of irregular layers of sand, gravel, stones and cobbles./l/ The Napa Coonty Soil Survey identifies that, becaiise of their variability, eval!!ation.of the engineering and physical properties of riven.'3Sh soils is not possible without a site specific analysis. The proposed pla~.a will extend out over the river bank and presumably be supported by a retaining wall. The p~uking lot will extend into the setback area required by the City~s Stre~bank Setback Ordinance, and, hence, riprap or a retaining wall will be necessary. A Califomi" Department o~ Fish 8Zld Game Stream Alteration-Agreement (Section 1601-1603) will be necessary for construction of -the plaq and park1ng1!qt,,and Army Corps ofF.ngineers' Section 10 and 404 permits coUid be require;J. The stability of these-river ~ soils will have to be analyzed to determine! proper construction design. C'Jrilpliance with the Uniform BuiJding,Code will tedu~e impacts ~a level of insignificance. Also see the discussion in Item 3.c below regarding compliance of the proposed plaza design With the City's restriction against fioodway,encroachment.

In orde~· ,to mitigate•adverse impacts,~£ the proposed plaza on the river bank, ~ jJI'Oje:ct,sponsor has agreed to eliminate the plaza from tile project. Main Street will terminate wh.,~e paving now ends.

b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcoverir l of the soil?

YES. The project will re~~i! clearing at¥t grading for s:onstruction of an mphalt~"l!red parking let and new sidewalk, curb and gutter. Assoc~ted excavati~ £or utilities and·ct>mpaction of parking lot-sub-grad~ are typical for urban:development.and have no significant local or regional impacts. Because the site is fia1, the disturbance that will-QCcur is 19w.

. " ... -- .....

CALENDAR PAGE

MINUTIPAGI 1542, 4R

An wxlergwund ·tank is located beneath tbe Main Street frontage of the building. 'As required by law, the tank will be removed, reqiµrlngadd,itiooal excavation. Standard methods for f"tlling and compactiQR of this excavation will result in no long-term· significant impacts. fl'

1 c. Change· in topography or $ound surface relief features?

NO. The existing grmmd surface on the wtimproved portion of the site ~ relatively flat. Grading activities needed to prepare the site for ~e p11JkJ.ng-!ot Will be minor. Design will be in accordance with City of Napa standards or engineetjng standards. N<> additional fill will be required foi'-surface grading 91K!tatiOOS beQUSe the flat site will remain flat after mstdlation of ~ par~g lot. fill mt.g be necessary, however, to replace ihe volwne of the· underground tank that will be rmnoved. (See Item 10, Risk of'Hazards, below.)

Stabilization of one part of the Hatt Building f oundation,_-will be necessary due to ~-121 Such construction woul_4-be in compliance with the City's Sttf1'1Ubank Setback Ordinance which applies only to. new construction. If, however, aµy riprap or other materials are plac~d in the flaodway as a result of f~tiorHvork,. such obstructions will require Army Corps or-Engineers pennits'(Sectiro 10 and Section ~land a pepartment of Fish and'Game Strea.n:a Alteration Agreement, and wil\ not be .in accotdan~~ with·1the City's floodplain ordinance (Ord. No. 2571).

The project sponsor has agreed. as mitigation. to provide building ~:~bilization, to • es.tent possU>le, through the placemenr-of caissQns from withi'h the building, eliminating the need for exterior, stream bank modifi~tiollS c:tlong the -buildir11. If exterior WC>fk is undertaken, the sponsor will rem~ve eXist 'ng ~tnX:~ons in ·;be fioodway (e.g., woOden pylons) such ~t the net eU!ct is a a. zer.o rise in the Rood elevatic:;a. •

d. Destruction. covering or modification of any unique geoiogie or phvsical features? -

NO. The underi!flng geologic formation consists of thick alluvial fan dePQSits. that·.m-e widely distributed throughout the Napa Valley and are not .unique to the site./3/ The project proposes to modify the river bank by installing a plaza at the end of Main.Street; thjs will require a- retaining wall extending down to the river·bank. The parking lot also will necessit~te a retajning wall or ·rlprap" as it ext~ into the stream setback area (see Item I.a a!Jove).

The sponsor has agreed,. as mitigation, to de\ete the proposed pfaza from the project. M~caticns to th:s .portion of the stream bank would not be required as part of the project.

A sm!lll utility shed of about 450 square f~et in area is proposed· for the southeast cotner of tl,'\e parking lot; it will be about 10, _feet ftqm_an e~ting rock retaining-wall. 1bis constructign will be in ~r1lianee wim~the-City's Streambank Setback Ordinmce, whiclnestricts construction of buildings and accessory buildings greater than 500 square feet wittlin 20'feet of the river bank.

e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, eithe1r on or oU the site?

NO. ~rading·of the pa::king lot area and excavation1·~f the undergY~ ~torage .A taJ1Jc will resUlt in the temporary exPQSUie,of bare soil to-wind. especiaUy.dufing ..,

23

·1

I

•• I I t I I

... I I 19

the swnmer dry peri'ld, and nmoff during the rainy season. To,miti93te potential erosion prob.'-ems, the sponsor has agreed to require• c:onsirUCtion eontractor to sprinkle the site at least twice daily to minimize dmt, and to till the perking lot and plant a silt fence to minimize nmoff. .

f. Ch!§es in deposition or erosioo-.0£ beach sands, or changes in silta!!!!t deJ>9Sition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed·of the ocean or any bay, lnlelor lake? '

NO. The project as,proposed includes a plaza at the end of Main Str,~t, preswnably including a retaininv-·-wall support structure that will extet ICl down to the high water mark of the rivet. This. construction is not prohibited t~er the City's Streambank Setback Ordlnance which regulates new~building atOng streams and river banks. The retaining wall willnot obstruct low flows of the river, but will impede flood waters of the 100-r,ear event and, COliSequendy, will not comply with the City's floodplain regv4atlons. A plaza and retaining wall also will require a SectiPn 404 permit antJ a Section tO::permit fram the fumy Corps of Engineers. The project ~"' has agreed, as mitigation, to eliminate the plaza from the project. The P'tnnits discussed woWO\TIOt'be required as a result of this action •

The project's-parking lot will extend into the setba~ area req.µir~d b!/, t>.; City's Streambank Setbock Ordinance. Conseqlmldy,.rfprap or~ retaining wall will be required to stal>Uize the~ Work on.the.bank wtJl be supervised 1;15' the Dryartrnent of Fish and Game under a Stream Alteration Agreemept, and could ~ecessitate permit review by the Army Cups of Engineers (Sec~ 10 and 404 permits).

g. ~ure of J>!Ople or property to geologic hazards suclh as eartl!Quakes; landslides, mud,lides, fi!ound'f2Jlµre ot'similar hazards? _

YES. Tae project is located MM several potentially ~ctive faults including the $llverado Faul': {1.3 miles east), the We5t Napa Fault (1.2 miles west), and• Cameros Fault (3.8 miles west) whi~ tun 1'0Ugh1"1 m a·nqrthwest lo southeast direction./4/

A major earthquake on any of these faults and other active,faults s~ as the Green Valley Fault about nine miles to the southeast of the she could result in severe groundshaking at the site.IS/ Compliance with-the Uniform Building Code will reduce most effects to a level of insignificance. Durins an orthquakt!, there is potential for liquefac,:tioa in pockets of~ aJons the beak of the Napa River. The project site is flat. with no potential for JandiHdn or mudslides. ·

111 'USDA, Soil Cooservaticm.Service. Soil Survey of Napa County! Callfomia..1 1978.

/2/

.. 131 ,- '

Letter from Charles W. Shinnamon, P.E., Comulting.Civil ~er to James McCanr ';~pa City Planning Department, dated Jwte 4, 11986.

K. f9x, et al., Preliminary G!olQB!c Map of Eastern Sonoma COulltV and·Westem Nae Ccunty, Cintomia, a reprint by San Francisco Bay Dnisn ~tai and R~~-PlaMing ShKfsrt 1973.

24

,_,-.... \

l '

/4/ Cit!I of Napa,.Napa General Plan,,page 137, as cited in Edward E. Wallace, Civil Enginetr, Community Planmng Services, Atrium of Napa Environmental Initial Study, J~l~ . ~

151 Glenn Borchert, SoiJs GeocMmtst, California Division of Mines and Geology, Plauat Hilt telephone comrenation, July 18, 1936.

2. Air. W'tll the J>!oposal i:~sult in:

a. Substantial aiT emissiom or deterioration of .ambimt air gualltv?

MAYBE. The project site is located in the nofthem pordon of the San Francisco Bay Area ,t\i1 Basin; designated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency as a nan-attaiM1ent area for oxidant (ozone}, for suspended pardculates, and for carbon monoxide.Ill An Air ~ty Plan fer the.basin has been adopted as required by the federal Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977. The Plan descn"bes the air pollution conuo! strategies.necasary to attain federa! m·quallty.standards by 1987. Air quality standards have~ establl.shed by state and-federal agencies to achieve impottamt aathedc and public health objectives.

The Bay Area Air Quality ~gement District (BAAQMD) is the loc:a1 agency empowered to regulate -air-pollutant emiuions. E.AAQMD opt.~tes a regional air quality monitoring network that provides infcmnatioa on pollutants for which state antl federal agencie~ have es~bllshed ambient concentration standards (i.e., criteria pollutants}. Ozone ((b), hydrocabons (HC), carbon 1nonoxide (CO), ~otalsuspended particulates CfSP). nittoga dioxide il«>2>. and sulfur dioxide (~) are regularly measured by this ~twork.

The City of Napa enjoys relatively clean air when compared to other portions of the Bay Area. No violations of the federal standards for <>3 or CO were recorded' in 1984 or 1985. There were no recorded violations of the state standards for N<l2• ~or TSP in 1984 or 1985./2/

Ozone (03). The most severe air quality problem in the Bay Area is high concentrations of 03. A~ulations of 03 depend heavily upon 10eather patterns and these 'Jary substantially from year to year. <l3 is prcJuce4 in the atmosphere through pbotochemical-react!ons involving hydf ocarbons (HC) and nitrogen oxldp (NOx>· The m.unerous small sources emitting most of the HC and NOx are :spread throughout the region.

' Carbon Monoxide (CO). CO is emit~ed primarily by moto1: vehicles~ Ambient CO coacentratiom normally closety foUow the spatial and temporal distributions.or vehicular traffic. CO concentrations are als9 influenced by meterological ·factors such as wind spe~d and atmospheric mixing./3/

Total ~-Puticulat~ <TSP). The federal 24-hour primary standard for TSP h&S been met-everywhere in the Bay Area during the last iive years./4/ The latg,?,st saurca. of TSP in Napa are demolition and ccostruction activities, agricultural activities, vehicular traffic on-paved and unpaved r~ and quarfy ope.rations.IS/. -

Httrt)Sen Dioxid~ (NQ2). The major sources of N92, essential to the~fonnation -· of photochemical smog, are vehicular, residential, and industrial futl

25

I

le 1. I 1· I I .I

I I I

... I I

combustion. The standards f pr ni~IJSen dioxide <N92>,are being met in the Bay Atea, and BAAQMD does noh:::r~·ct these standar& to be exceeded in the fu~e.

Sulfur Dioxide (~). The major source of ~ is combustion of high-sulfur fUels for e!ectricity·generation, for·petrolewn refining, and for shipping. The standards for ~ are being met in the Bay Area, and BAAQMD does not expect these."4tt~rds to be exceeded in the future.

Demolition, grading and other construction activities will temporarily affect local air quality for several months, causing a temporary increase in perticulate dust and other pollutants. Dust emissions during demolition and excavation will increase particulate concentrations near the site. Dustfall CP be expected at times on surfaces within 200 to 800 feet of the construction site. Undft high Winds exceeding 12 miles per hour, localized effects inci~ human discomfort might occur downwind from blowing dust. Construction dust is composed primarily of luge particles- that settle out of ·the atmOsphere. more rapidly with increasing distance· from thee source. More of a nuisance than a hazard for most people, this dust cauld .affect persons with respiratory-diseases.. as well as sensitive electronics or comfllunications equipment. To mitigate potential dust emissions, the project sp...uor has agreed to ?equire tht' contractor to wet down the site at least twice c·&:Jay during canstmction, &'Id almost continuously when the Hatt BuUdm,g's roofs are removed; th1s will reduce particulate emissions by about'1Ut1f.

Diesel-powered equ!l'l!lent will emit, in decreasing·order by weight. N()i, CO,. ~, HC and TSP. This will increase local concentration5 temporarily, bUt is not expected to increase the frequency of vio~tions 9f air qualiw standards. The f!Oject sponsor has,agrecd, as mitigation, to require the project contractor to maln~lu mu! operate construction equipment in such a way.a to minimize exhaust, emissions.

The mQ3t heavily traveled intersection.in· the vicinity of the project will M Filst Street~ Soscol Avenue. This intersecti~ was chosen for the air·quility ana!ysis as it represents worst-ase traffic conditions. The intersectlon of Third and Main Str~ets, however, will' be most affected W'Pfoject-related tuffic:. Traffic generated by existing plus projJct a$nd wmulativt! development will mt cause ex~eedances of-federal one-hour or eJght-hour 00 '5tandar<l$:·at the intersection of First Street~ Soscol Avenue in 1990./6/ Project traffic w.ill emit less tha? one .percent of the Napa County total e~ions for each of the following pollutants: CO, HC, N~. 502, ·and TSP.n I

b. Jbe creation of objectionable odors?

NO. The project will not crete any objectionable odo.rs.

c. Alteration of air movement, moisture or temperature, Dr any c:hanse in climatet either locally .>r regionally?

NO. The project will not alter air currents, moisture or temperatures.

NOTES-Air

lll Association of Bay Area Governments, Bay Area Air Quality Martagement District. a.'ld Mettopolitan Transportation Commission, 1982 Bay Area.Air Quality Plln. 1912.

26

,,

121 The BAAQMD manitorang station for Napa is located on 2552 Jefferson Street, Napa.

/3/ Carbon moooxide concentration., reach their maximums in winter, When . surface~d radiation'inversions coincide 1'ith eYJenhig peak-period traffic voiwnes. while ozone leve~ are-:highest·on warm autumn days when wind speeds are low.

/4/ ,Federal primary standards are the levels of air quality necessary, with an adequate ~gin of safety, to protect the public health.

151 Jean Rogg~p, Planner, E:ly Area Air Quality Management District, telephone cooversatiOn, July 18, 1986.

161 Carbon monGXide screening calculations were performed based on Bay Area Air PollutiCll\ Control District, Guidelines for Impact Allalysis of Project, 1975, and assume dtreme warst case meteorological conditions for purposes of this analysJ,s. Bothcthe one-hour and eight-hour CO concentratons wi1J not exceed the federal standards at the Third and Soscol intersection. S-mce this intersectton will ~ the havlest traffic, from all development in the project area in 1990, it can-be assumed that other Intersections will t>. affected to a lesser extent.

n I Prolect-senerated CO will be ab,oc..at o.~ of comtywide emissions; HC will be about 0.3Wt of countywide emissions;~ will be about 1.0'X. of countywide em!!isicm;t.50! will m about o.~ of ccuntywide einissions; and TSP will be about 0.145 of ' countywide ~om.

3. Water. WUl the, proposal result in:

a. Changes in currents, ot the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh u,-aters?

NO. The riverwalk proposed-for addition to the Hatt Bcl.1::ling's f°2l'st ik-or level will extend out GVer the Ntlpa River•s,designated Doodway and cnnsequcntly ~d be overtQpped b!! Dood waters of the 100-year stcum eve1 .... /1/ in addition, a retaining wall proposed ,for the plaza at the end of"Mmn,Suecu and a Jetaining wall or riprap required to stabilize the river'bank along the pariing lot will impede flood flows and may change flow cunents in its vicinJty. Pie~ ~e respon..~ to Item 3.c belowe

f ' J. '

eJ' I .. ,

' . "

r i • •

e.0

I

\ j

--i t

• 1-'l/I II

• • • II II

, II

b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface water runoJ!?

YES. Smface flow over the site~runs to the Napa River both to the east and to · the south ~f the propertY./3/ Dev~lopment of the parking area will 'add impemous surface to a currently unimproved, prlmarlly dirt and gravel site. Pavlng will reduce absorption ~tes of rainfall into the soil and will slightly inerds_~ the rate ~ amount of surface runoff. The drainage pattem is expected to rea:natu as it pr~ily cs!sts. The changes in absorption rates and ruooff rate and vol~e will be small and therefore insignificant.

c:. Alterations~ the course, or now of flood waters?

NO. The rivaiwalk, proposed to be built at the first fioor level of the·Hatt Building, at an et<?vation of 16.75 feet, will extend over the Napa River .on the east and south sides of the btl..~di.ng. 1'1¢; walkway will be flooded by a 100-year flnad event which, according to calculations of me.Federal Engineering Managem~t Agency, would x-esult m a water level of 17 .8 feet.Ill The placement of the riverwalk will not be in comp~ce with the City's floodplain regulations. Jn addition, a Section 10 permit will be requlred·from the Army Co?Ps of Engineers./4/ The Anny Corps permit may qualify for a "Letter of Permission" which would not require public notice. A State Lands Commissi~ permit also will be required for that.portion of the riverwalk that extend$ to within the high water mark of the river.IS/

To mitigate im~cts of the rivea. walk, UJg ptoject sponsor has agreed- to redesign the'project. The fi':.re_~alk :.:.iif-~ cantilevered from the first !loor level instead of being supported by lmee braces, as originally proposed. In order to avoid incr~5ing the flood water surface !evel, the sponsor has agr~ed to remove exisdng,obstructions in tM fioodway adjacent to the Hatt·Building. These obs°'1Ctioils include trees and Um~. conerete blocks, wooden pylQllS ana miscellaneous roots and deb$ (please see A~ B). Removal of thes.e obsttucti~ will compensate for addit\~ of a n~w obstruction. the riverwaUt, and \eill actually result in a net decrease of 1/lODths of a foot in the 1qter surface ~levation./2/ A ~ctioo 10 pemlit 3lld State Lands Commission permit will stilt.be requite\!.

~e proposed plaza will be supported by a retaining wall extending down .to the high water line of the Napa River. This retaining wall will not comply with City floodplain regulations which prohibit construction:impeding water :flows within the 100-year floodway of the N~pa R\ver. In addition, Army Corps of Engineers permits to satisfy Section 10 requitements of the Rivers and Harbors Act of 1899-and Section 404 of the C1.ean Water Act will be necessary./4/ Because the retaining wa.Jl will·not be within the high water mark of tM -river, no-Statt!! Landi Commission permit will be required for this pi>rtion of the project./5/ A California Department of F°lSh and Galµe Stteam Alteratioo Agreement (Sec. 1601-1603) will be ne~essary; negotiation and approval of this agreement is outside the environmental review process establls~zd bY Q:QA.

In qt<!~r to mltigate adverse impacts of the proposed plaza on ·the river bank the project·sponsor ~ agreed to eliminate the plaza and retaining wall from the project. Thus, the peitnits identified would not be required.

The project's parking lot will extend into the setback area reqtired by the City's Stteambank Setback Ordinance. Riprap 9r a re~ -wall will be necessary. This construction will trigger review by the Departmenl' of F"lSh and

28 CMINOAIPAGI

MINUTfPAGI

I

Game which r~quires a Stream Al~e~ation Agreement for MY mOdification to a stream or its banks. The Army Corps of Engineers also could require a permit urider its Section 10 and·404 jurisdiction. Coostruction of iuupport structure will not likely create· any significant impact on the leve.•~'1f floodwaters as a portion of the bank mYSt be removed in ·t>rder to ~t"asct the support; this will 'llpe.a up mote area within the floodway./6/

If any stabilization of the Hatt Building foundation is undertaken within the bank of the Napa Riv :r (for example, if ripmp is placed at points eroding adjacent to the building), both Section 10 and Secti~ 464 permits Will be required from the Army Corps of Engineers, as well as a Stream Alteration Agreement from the Cepartment of Fish and Game.

"to the extent possible, the project sponsor agrees, as mitigation, to stabilize the foundati~ from within the building its~lf. If exterior work is undertaken, the sponsor will remove existing obstruction in the floodway (such as wooden

. pylons) suc!t that the net ef feet is a zero ~ in the flood elevation.

cL Change in the amount of ~face water in~ water body?

NO. The quantity of surface water in the Napa River Will not signiijcantly increase as a result of this project.

e. Discharge into surface waters. or in any alteration of surface mter gualltvz including but-not limited to temperature. dissolved oxygen or tilrbidity?

MAYBE. Discharge as a result of storm·events·willresult in runoff to the Napa River; urban nu-.off typically. contains pollutants such as oil and grease~ heavy metals, and.sediment. These will add sUghtly to the biological oxwen demand of the Napa River watars and to the turbidity lev~ls of the river. These let'els will have an insignificant effect on Napa River water quality, however.

f. Alteration of the,direction or rate-of flow of ground waters?

NO. Any tr~ching that may be'necessary for utility lines or landscape irrigation will not"likely encounter groundwater. If grovndwater is encountered, ~truction activities will have no permanent effect on grOundwater flow.

An. Wlderground gas tank located beneath the site will be required to be removed (see Items 10and17, below). Excavation for removal will likely . ~counter grOundwater. Proper f"ill and compaction will result in no significant effect in groundwater flow.

g. Change· in the quantity of ground waters, either throush direct additions or withdrawals, or through interce~tion of an aguif er b_y cuts or e~cavations?

NO. As discussed in Item 3.f. above, groundwater may be encountered during l'emoval of an underground •· If groundwater is encountered, temporaey pumping may be nece5sary but will-not affect any water supply wells In the adjacent area. Proper fill and compaction will result in no sigmiir..arit loog-term eftects on groundwater~

b. ~bsta.Tttial' reduction in the amotmt of water otherwise available for eblic pttr supplies? · - · ·

NO. Existing-water supplies in the area can accbllUllOdate demand from the projtect (see Ut.'Uties, 16.c, Water, below).

29 s:AUM>AI PMiE. l) ~ '

15-49" -

I 1e I I I

i. Exposure of people or property to water-:-related'hazards such.as flooiing or tidal waves?

NO. Floodwaters of the 100-yec.U' ·flood event would reach appt9ximately ,to an elevation or 17.8 feet, according to the Federal Emergency Management _ Agency.Ill The riverwalk will extend frcm the Hatt Building a~ its first floor level of 16.75 feet above sea level and therefore will be inundated in a flood event of this magnitude. A t!iUJlami resulting in a 20-foot run-up of water'at the Golden Gate would be expected at a return interval' of 20C) years.n I At the project site, ~~r levels for an event of this magnitude would increase less than two feet. Because flood events and-tswlamis are predictable in advance, the exposure of people to U-.ese events would be minimal. The riverwalk wnt ·be inundated and exposed to damage during a 100-year flood.

To mitigate impacts of the riverwalk, the pr~ject sponsor has· agreed to redesign the project. The riverwalk will be cantilevered from the first floor level imtead of being supported by knee bni_ces, as originally proposed. In tcder t~ avoid increasing the flood water surf~ee level, the spcmsor has agreed to remove existing obstructions ~ the floodway adjacent to the Hatt Building. These obstructions include trees·ancHimbs,.concrete blocks, wooden py!oos and miscellaneous roots and debris (please see Appendix 8). Removal of these ·""1bstruct!ons will·compemate for addition of a ne.w-obstruction, the riv~, and will actually.result in.a net dt:crease of 1/l(IOths of a foot fn,the water . surfaee elevation./2/

NOTES - Water -=

Ill Robert Peterson. Supervising Civil Engineer, City of Napa Public Works Department, meeting, .July 15, 1986.

121 Letter from Dennis J. Metaxas, Project Engineer, Camp Dresser & McKee Inc., to George Schroder, Napa Mill Development Company, da_ted September 2, 1986, and letter from Rolancf Friedrich, Project Superinteildent, Friedrich Company Inc., to George Schroder, dated August 7, 1986. Also~ Dennis Metaxas, Camp Dresser it McKee Inc., telephone ·conversation, September 10, 1986.

131 Letter from Charles \V. Shllmamon, P.E., Consulting.Civ~tEngmeer, t~James . MeCann, Napa City Planning Department, dated June 4, 1986.

141 Calvin Fong, Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch, U.S. Army Co?P$ of En9'h-~4-~ Fianci.sco, mzeting, July 18, 1986. · - ,

151 Jim Poe, Land Agent, State Lands Commission, telephone conversations, July 17 anc1·21, 1986.

161 Dennis Mataxas, Project Engineer, Camp Dresser A McKee, me., telephone conversation, September 12, 1986. :)

fl/ J.R. Ruth and W.~. Dupre, tfap·Showing Areas of Potential lnundatioo bv Tsunamis in the San Francisco Bay Rest& Ciilfomia <Miscellaneous Field Studies Map· MF0480), a reprint by saii fnmeisco y Regim En\iironment and Plannlng Study, 1982. ·

30 CAl.£NDAIPAGE

MINUTIPAGE 1550 .55

, , 4. Pla:rit Life. Will the proposal r~5Ult in:

a. Change in the div~rsity of species, or number of any speci~ cf plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants}?

NO. The project s!te consists of the Hatt Building and an adjacent Wlimproved fbt ~:rea of expos::d soil and grav~I. On this Jatter area, plants coosist prlmarLJ of introduced grasses·such as oatgrass and brome'. and introduced weeds suC:t ~ fennel and bull thistle. A num~r of large ~.troduc_ed trees are also located £..ere. Tilese include uee-of-~~\Ven, English elm and black locust~ The~ pla:"ts which are either V1eeds.or planted trees are common species. The diversity d plants on the wlimproved portion of the site is tow compared to natural areas and the less of this vegetation will not be sigmficaut. Landscaping will replace the existing ttees With ~aller ornamental trees and shrubs..

The Napa Riuer bank contains a greater variety of plant species including several· emergent aquatic specieitsuch as bullrush and cat-tall, introduced grasses suc..li as Hardinggr~ ~ crabgrass, ancrintrodt.Jced weeds such as bull thistle, fennel and sweetcU>vei. One multi-trunked introduced black locust tree grows at the water's edge at the southeut portion of the Hatt BWlding. Three box elder trees, a California native of the riparian zone, grow at the water's edge: one at the,$ite of the proposed plaza, C>!le DR the upper river bank below the proposed parking lot, and the third at the nortbeastem CC)mer.of the buildlng. These trees are large with tnmk diameters of eight to fifteen inches ., at the ~. They are in poor condition, however, with the two near the Hatt Building having many broken branches. Two healthy cottonwood trees and an English elm grow on the riv2r bank west.of the ·location of the proposed plaza.

The construction of the riverwalk will require the trimming or removal of two ~ elder trees ~-C)lle black locust tree to provide clearance for the walkway. A box elder below the parlting lot will be removed and·replacej with landscaping plants, probably small flowering trees. Another ~x elder lTee will be removed for construction of the plaza and retaining wall. The loss of these trees will not be a significant impact.

The Army Corps of Engineers wllheview permits to determine d\Sturbance of ripr..aian or wetland habitat at the site.Ill In addition,-disturbance to the bank during construction of the,plua and the parking lot's· support structure will require a California Departm1!nt of Fish~ Game Stream Alt~ration 4\greement (Se.s:tions 1601-1603).12/ The project as proposed will have liMited impact on the low-valm? habitat that is present.

The project sponsor.,has agreed, as mitigation, to eliminate ~ phiza and its , retaining,wall from 'the development; no Stream Alteration Agreement will be necessary for tbis portion bui will be necessary for the other riverside activities.

b. 1!,~tion of t!£\ numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants?

NO. The project \Site is a small, disturbed ·parcel within an urban area; no miiquc, riua~ or •ndangered species are orMhe site.

31

• CAUNOAR •AGI

I : .. I I

--1 I I I

-

I ~--1 I

c. Introduction of new species of plants in ta an area" -or in a barri«r to the normal r.:efa':™m1ent of existing species? _ -

YES.. Landscaping plants to be U$ecl h the par~g· IOt will lntroduce new spe-;tes into the project site. The new lancbcaping will replace trees previously planted CD the Site. No significant im[.C1-:tZ VJiU result from !3ndscaping; (Mitigation measures proposed, below for parking-Impacts woulct.eliminate any interiOr landscaping from the lot.)

d. Reduction in acrease of any agricultural crop?

NO. nae prgject site has no agricultural uses.

NOTE - Plants

111 Qilvin Fong, Chief, Regulatory Functions Branch, U.S. Anny Corps of Engineers, San Fnmcisco, meeting, July lit 1986.

121 Fred Botti, Biologist, California Department of rub and ~e, telephone conveTAtioo, Jilly 21, 1986.

-.

5. Animal Uf e. Will the proposal result in:

a. Change in the div~rsity of species, or numbers cf any species of animals (birds, land animals including reJ?tiles. fish and shellfish, benthic organisms, insects>?

NO. The pro~-=t site provi<Ns litt{e habitat for wildlife. ·Common bird species such as crow, starling, and house sparrows use the open, unimproved portion of the site. Red-whig blackbirds, mourning dove, song-sparrow, and fence· liiard use the sparse riparian.border of the river. The removalof existlngctrees.from the parking lot and ~J-\e river'bank will temporarily reduce th~ available habitat of these common animal species. Landscaping of the parking lot will, ht..1wever, provide replaeement habitat for these species.

b. Reduction of the numbers of any imigue. rare or encbngered spe_cies 1>f animals?

NO~ Because the project is in an urbanized area, .no,rare Qr endangered wildlife species inhabit the site.

c. Introduction of -new species of animals into-an area, or a barrier to the miaration or m<M!ment of animals?:

No. No-new animals or anhnal species will be introduce!! to the area. No animal species require the project site for significant mi5 -atory moverraents.

d. Deterioration to existing f"'tsh or wildlife habitat?

NO. Terrestrial wildlife diversity is low. The project will not signjfican,iy affect existing wildlife !pecies. r~oject components such as -the rivirwalk 'and plaza will n~t,have an!l slgnifiC8Jlt>effect on f"J.Sb,babitat.

- l

32

CAl£1fl)AR PAGE

I

• •

6. NoiH. \VaU theJm>posa1 result.in:

a., J.naeaus in existing mlse levels?

YES. &isting land uses in the pruje~t vicinity are:primarily Jnixed-use urban development ~ting of office, retail, residentbl1an(l,.oo ~ east side o{ the ,Napa Rl'.Ter, industrial activitie_s .. Backgrowld outdc:lw,r noise levels in·.the:.me:'l are dominated by. vehicular tte .ffic :includ!t.g trucks.1autom~Ua, buse~, motorcyclies, and c:m~rgency vebicles·tmveliilg alor\1 SJ,lrface streets. OccaaionaHnttusive noises are "5Sociated with res~c~ntlal, ~t;JcW, and industrial activities. The tntf fic along Soseol Aveneli! ~frlbutes more to the !leise envir~"'nt than other SOtll'ces in the projec~ wdnuy. AZ?eraft and railroad noise are-Mt·CQnSidered a probJem in the City of Napa./11

Normal conveuation becomes increasing!,; more difflet..dt with ~ground noise levels exceeding 55 dBA. When background noise levels r•ach-70 dBA,,p_eople must.raise tl1'Ir voices to be beard. For most people, sleep !s distutbad W!Mn bltulor noise levels n:cud' 50 dBA. Theta and other relatlcnlbiPi' ~twea. people and MjH,f1've ccmpelled state and local ~ts to atablllh mlu s~ds for various land uses.

Th.e City of Napa has adopted the noise and lanci:u5e compatibility standards developed by the State Department of Health Services, Office of.Noise Control. These stendards categorize noise eli()OSU?e levels (Community Noise Equivalent Level f~~NEL)), expressed in decibels (d.BA), for given,land uses On a continuum from· "normally accep1',ab~e" noi&e levels to Qfclearly 911acceptable!' noise ]evels./2/ The "normally af O:eptable~ desigmtion means that nonn,al -CQOStruction ~would suffice t9 keep !!lterior r.aise levels within the acceptable range. "Conditiqn&lly acceptable" m~ans tlmt new development ~~ requir~ a detailed analytis of noise red' ..tction requirements and the ,inclusion of insulation features tn~o ~design. ~~mially W18cceptable" means that new deveiopment within this noise e."'lvironm~nt s..'°'1ld be ~ged or-should pr~ed only after a detailed acoustical analysis is completed. New construction or · developtnent should ge~~ally not ht t;ndertaken within a noise environment designated as·J'c!early ut.ecceptable~"/11 A ~Uy ~ceptable no~ em.'1ronment for both.-rr,sidential and library use iS a muimum of ~ d8A, CNEL; a conditionally #JC!Cep &ble noise envir~enHt,a maximum of 70 dSA, ~L. A ncmnally aeceptable noise environment ~r office ~ commue!al use is 67 ~ CNEL; a conditionally acceptable noise environmeat-ls 75 dBA, CNEL./3/

Residential1mits, schools, hospitals w:id parks are1anchases.""tare caasider~d to be more sensitiv& to changes in mnbient r\~~e levels than commercial or industrial land .s. The County's office bu,ilcfings are loan~ approxfJµately 500 feet northwest from the ~ojeet; the city/County l\braty is approximately 100 feet west; re5idential uniu are approximately 300 ·feet Stlutbwest; and of fices (small businesses in former residences) are approximately 200 feet southwest of the project site. A park is approximately 1,fOO feet north of t1ae project site.

Construction remporerlly will generate high noise levels intennittently:on and adjacent to th~ project site. Typical outdoor noise levels for commercial and industrial construction range from 78 dBA L~,12/ at SO feet fGI' foundation wcrk to 89 dBA, 1..tq, •t SO feet for exc;avatiOQ and finishing work.14/ It should

33

e.

,, _,

I I I

_I fli

j

j

J

--\ • •

be 1;10ted that tlte mojority of construction work on the project will be .peiformed on the interior of the building, with walls forming r.oise barriers, which could reduce the noise levels given below by up to 10 dBA; once the building is sealed (no leaks due to open windows and no roof), reductions in noise levels will be as mu~ as 15 dBA. Work on the roof is projected to last about two months. Parapet walls will provide shielding for adjacent land uses.

Assuming worst case conditions fe>r the purposes of this analysis (89 dBA, Leq• a.t 50 feet), ambient noise 'levels at the library could be as high as 83 dBA, Leq· Ambient nolse levels at the·of fices south of the project could be as high as 77 dBA, Leq and ambient no'5e levels at the residences-could be as high as 73 d.BA, Leq· Inteticr noise levels can be expected to be reduced approximately 15 dSA due to the attenuation provided by the building envelope. Thus, indoor noise levels would ~ expected to be reduced to .68 dBA, Leq• 62 dBA, Leq, and 58 dBA, Leg respectively. Con~truction nolse could oceasiOilally dis~b concentration and communication of adjacent residents, the patrons and wcr'"..ArS at the llbr~, and office workers.

Vehicular traffic associated with the project will have an insignificant-effect on -ambient noise levels in the area. Project-related traffic will ®t increase the ambient noise level by more than·3 dBA, this change will be imperceptible to the human ear./5/ · -

b.

The project, therefore, will result in a temporary increase of existing noise levels.

~e of peoJ?le to sev~ie noise levels?

NO. The project will not expose people to severe noise-bvels (He ltem i.a. above).

1:!9TES - Noise

111 City cf Napa, ~eral Plan! Noise Element, 1982.

12,I Noise is mecuured ~-Wlits of decibels (dB), a logaridunic scale. The cl.BA, or A-weighted decibel~ refers to a scale or noise measurement that approximates the range of sensitivity of the human ear to sow>ds to dUf erent frequencies. Environmental noise fluctuates in int~nsity;o11er time, and i1 typically described as a time-averaged,noise level. Two desciiptors are commonly used: Leq. and CNEL. LeR,• the. energy equivalent level, is a measure of the ~verage eru!rgy intensity of noiSe over a given period. CNEL, the Community Noise Equivalent Level, is an index based oo a 24-hot~.r average of the energy a>ntent of the.noise, with a lO-dBA "pmalty" added for.IU!jhttime noise (10:00 p.m. to 7:00 a.m.) and a five~A "penaltjJ" added for evenjng noise·(7:00 p.m. to 10:00 p.m.) to account for the greater sensitivity of people to noise during these peai~..!.

131 These st..andards reflect the outcioor noise environment- not the resulting indoor ooise enviro.-,t1ent.

141 Bolt. Beranek a!k1 Newman..Noise fa-om Construction J;guipment and Op!ration, Bulkfin1l Jig~pm~·fz and Home Appliances, 1911 •

/

•:

., ~-

I I 1. I I

JS/ Traffic volumes would have to double for an increase of 3~dBA; an increeH of 3 dBA b just barely perceptible to the human ear. Traffic volumes, as a result of the project, would nat double (see Appendix A for a discussion of traffic volumes).

7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or g~~r!.?

YES. Project plans call for,decorative lighting in~ aroun0·t1.&e ~~king lot which will match other lights used in the city park at11drd and: !!Ain Streets. Plans specify lighting around the Hatt Building, which will be_difected onto the building itself. New lighting could be,,erceived as inuusive to residents,of the ~es southwest of the site. Glare from vehicles in the petking lot and headlights from cars of the project's nighttime patrons coald also affect nearby residents.

New street lighting and se~ty lighting for the parking area and walkways will provi~ increased visibillty·for rlght·1drivlilg and pedestrims, and will therefore provide bmefits to the area's security. 1be overall-effects are not ezpected to be detrimental if the parking lot's perimeter is ~ped and statiooary lights are directed away fran residences.

S. Land'Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration:af the present or .f!!!niied land use of an area?

YES (present) I NO (planned). Existing land uses in the project vicinity ate public buildings, including the County Hall of. Justice and Administration Building diagonall\' across Fifth al1Cl Main Streets from the site, and the City/County Library across Brown Street from the site. Two vacant lots are directlv north of th!hJiatt Building acrcss Fifth Street. Furdler north are ihe corr::.-nercial, retail ~office uses along Main Street and its side streets. Residential uses are tOc..,ted to the southwest and ~t. Former single-family homes located along Di~'ion Stree.t between Randolph and Brown Street~ and along Coombs1Stteet.adjaet.-"Ut to the County buildings are now occupied by small businesses aJld social service of fices. Industrial USES predominate 00 the eastern bank of the Na~-River ..

Planned new uses in the vi,e;inity of the project site include a new County jail facility to be built as an extension to th_e south of the eitlstlng Hall of Justice bUilding. Th~ extensioo would encompa5$-~.portion of the existing parking lot sening the bullc:lm.gs' workers and visitors. Ptcpased new uses include the Napa Natioiia!.Bank project, a mixe~-use, three-storv retail/office/bank building at the southeast come: of the intersection of Third and Main .Streets. The configµration of the project in July 1986 calls for approxlmately 9,000 square feet or space devoted to a branch bank, 5,000 sq~re feet of retail and 18,000 square feet of of flee space./11 There is no plan or submitted application for the unimproved lot north of the Hatt Building. ·

The N&pa Gene\~l Plan designates the project site as W'J'C" <Tourist Commercial), and deimes this classification as pr9'1iding fo~ visitor-oriented .commercial useis such as ho~el, motels, restaurants, recreation and amusement./2/ Although "CL" (Limited Commercial) is the zoning:district that most appropriately corresponds to the General Plan designation of TC,/3/ the

.. s

CAUNOASMGI

site is zoned "PC" (Planned Ccmmunity). This zone allows all land uses~~t are consistent with the City's General Plan provided that • site de_velopmmt-atM is prepared and approved. The problem with this circular authority is that t1* General Plan contains very few policies.as to what the TC designatio:i allows.

Un:::;r the current zoning code, the site must be rez~d from PC to "PC" (Plaim.ed Development) in order to allow the proposed inixed-use project at this location. PD is similar to PC, yet is mote site-specific, intended for the scale of a building rather than that of a neighborhood.

The City of Napa is in the process of developing a new zoning code that would more appropriately classify areas in the City and more specifically state which ~s in each district are allowed and which are conditional. Different sections of the proposed new ordinance are in different stages t.lf review ~ the Planning Department and the Planning Commission. Ultimately the,City Council will Jdopt the new code, either as proposed or witll changes; adoption iS anticipated scmetime in the summer of 1987 • .!4/ The zoning district proposed for the Hatt Building_ siteJs "CV" (Visitor Commercial). This district IS intended to pr~· for ~sand services associated with tourism.

The CV District would encourage the orderly developm~t of areas of attraction and special interest to both residents and visifon. Permitted qses would include: convenience .markets; restaurants; retail ~\~abllshments for clothes, sporting goods, books, flowers, gifts, bobbies, jewelry, ~ ~ith centers, beauty shops and salons; lawldromats and cleaners; travel asencies; and art shops, studios, and galleries. Prof essiooal offices and real estate and insurance offices would be permitted on second and third floors. Ccnditional uses ~uld include lodging and convention facilities, campgr~, muse~. theatres~ amusement fentures (e.g., skating rinks, miniat\are golf courses, bowling alleys, service stations, sports clubs and courses, bars and ilightclubs, fraternal clt:bs and lOdges, parking lots and garages, public and quasi-public buildings, and office uses permitted on upper stories when located on the ground lev2l. In addition, the proposed CV zoning ordinance would recognize that short-term opportwlities for use-of ptoperties originally devoted to indu!trial or manufacturing endeavors (such as the Hatt Building), or uses consister1t·with the emting "CL" 2oning district, are acceptable while preserving the long-t~rm direction established in the General Plan. In other ·wards, the characteristics of allowable uses is sufficiendy broad to reflect Napa's present economy and ·character as well 8$ lcr 3-tenn planning for the diStrict as envisioned in the General Plan. Again, the CV district a.nd its uses are in a droft review stage.

In addition to the City's General Plan, the City has recently adopted a concept plan for the riverfront area. For the area west of Soscol Avenue, the Napa Riverfront Plan/5/ calls for the-revitalization of the downtown riverfront tbrough preservation of historic structures, sensitive infill development, and new d~elopment along Main Street south of TI-Jrd Street and along First Street east of Main Street. The plan promotes strengthening of the image ~ vitality cf ibe downtown through enhancement of -the river as-a major integrating . feature. Ground- and lower-floor, street-front retail and commercial PJHS that extend the fabric an~htreet life of the central downtown are PfOPOHd in :the iaftd use clement, together with office and residential use~ on u(>per levels. The parcel norm of the Hatt BuUdfng is identified in the_pi.n ~ OM'-cf several

36

• CUENDU PAGI :6 2 MINUTE PAGE 1 ~ ~ 6

JIO!iSlb\e sites for a 200- to 250-room hotel conferet\ce center. The .!>Ian propo::teS cont,inuous public access on·both banks of i;he river including consmiction of a riverwalk promenade (in.conjwlcti'oo with private . dev~lopmen,t) from the proposed Central Riverfront Park (between First,.Main, and Third Streets and Soscol Avenue) to the Hatt Build,ing.

The Circulation ~lement of the Plan proposes·im31foVed sigriage directing visitors from Highway 29 and Mairi St~~e~ !Px~~ghout its length. Streetscape improvements such as roadway reconsm.zetion, new trees, ~. sidewalks, lighting and utility,relocation would upgrade Main Sti:eet ~ .. om Pearl S~eet to the Hatt Building, idtintified as a Critical CO!Jl~ent in enhancing !he image and identity of, the dollmtown. The Riverfron~ Plan identifies the problem of providing on-site.parking as a constraint to development on the narrow parcels of Lower Main Street. l.n the short-term, th.e City cool~ according to the concept plan. permit a phased approach to riverfront deuelopment, allowing on-site surface parking in the iust,phase to be later replaced by either off-site parking or on-site parking incorparated below grade with shops above. The advantage of this phased approach is that it would permit incfemental development in the tower Main Street area. A site foz: a potential parking structure is identified south of the pr~ County jail adclltioo. This concept would relocate a one-block length of Fifth Street to the north in order to position the facility immediately north of the public library and in close proximity to new riverfront development and the· Hatt Builaing.

Fmally, the plan recommends that the City leave options open for eventual construction of a new river crossing, perhaps at Main Street. or an e~on of the Third Street bridg~. The Conservation, Recreation and Open Space element of ~ plan recommends that ~ existing natural'shoreline and riparian vegetation be maintained to the grl.!atest extent possible and, similar to the land use element, recommends ~ continuous public access system along the riverfront.

The proposed Napa Mill proj~c~ is con.sistent. with the Napa General Plan as the TC designation calts for visitor-o&iented retail uses. This designation is sufficiently general (that is, thP. General Plan does no' specify a detailed list of uses) that the pyoject can be considered consistent. As noted, the project site must be rezoned,from PC to PD; this is 119t a significant change as the zoning classifications are essentially identical, and differ only as to the scale l)f project, buildbg or neighborhood, to which thev apply. The project is. cqnsistent with the proposed CV zoning. r~ly, the project is·consistent with the vision of the downtown riverfront arec:l conceptualized in the Napa Riverfront Plan. The project will preserve the historic ~rtions of the Hatt Building, ar.d the addition of the riverwalk, allowing public access 2ilong the water, Will positively link the development to the presence of the river. Retail and restaurant spaca at the ground level, and upper-level of fi~ ~es are consistent with ihe plan's recommendation. Improved circulation and signage would promote the success of the Napa Mill project and provision of a city parking garage near the site woold help alleviate the proi!!ct's deficiency in meetinff the City!s existing parking requirement. comm0n~!igbting, !J&ving and' street filmiturre along· the en.~;t"P. lengtl) of Main Street woUld 'integgte the project into the broader downtown retail area •. Renovation and adaptive r~ of the Hatt P:illding, "prominent and historit;ally impottant-fea~e of Main Street and·tlt~ City of Napa, will serve to meet the planning poUcid and goals of the Riverfrait Plan.

37

G\UNDU PACI

I I ,. '

NOTES - Land Use

111 David Cunningham, Project Sponsor, Napa NatiQQal 'Bank prqject, tele~ conversation, July 16, 1986.

IV City of Napa, General PlanvLand Use Element, 1982.

/3/ John Yost, Planning Director, Ci~ of Napa Planning Department, telephone conversaticm; July 3, 1986. ·

/4/ Charlie Woods, Principal·Planner, City of Napa Planning Department, 1ne2ting, July 11, 1986. .

151 ROMA Deslgn Group, Land Economics Group, Camp Dresser ~ McKee, Inc., and DKS Associates, Napa 'Riverfront Plan and Downtown Riverfront C:.oncept Plan, MU-ch 1986, adopted by the City of Na~ July 15, 1986.

9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal resul~ in:

a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resource?

b.

Y-cS. l;be project will use wood products, gtave!, cement, petroleum-based paving,material, paints, steel, and fossil fuel during construction. This use will have a. negligible impact on resource depletion locally and regionally, partiCularly because the H~tt Bujlding is an existing st~ture requiring only alten.ations.

After completion, the project will result in a increase in the use of electricity and ~tural gas for heating, cooling and cooking, The impact of the project on the rate of use of resources in the region will be insignificant.

Substantialdepletion of any non-renewable natural resouree?

NO. The project wijl nqt result in a substantial depletion of any non-,..renewable natural resource. Buildings C, D, E and F will incorporate enerm;-ef ijcient equipment a00 and will conform to 'fide 24 energy c;onsumption guide'1\ines.

10. Rbk of Upset. wm· the proposal involve:

a. -Risk of an explosi!m or the release of hazardous.substances (including, but not limited to,. oil, pestlcides •. chemicals, or radiation) in the event· of an accident or upset conditions? ·

YES. The proposed project is a commercial development. and will.not contain or generate hazardous waste or by-products. The proposed ~rking lot on the site, however, was the site of a gas-generating·piant, believed to date back to 'the late 1800s. ~ere are no existing records as to '!lhether the waste products were buried on-site, or hauled elsewhere. Therefore, the potential exists for hazardous materials to be located below the proposed parking lot.Ill There is also an existing subsurface gas tank located between the parking lot;and the existing Hatt Builqing. Soil samples taken ne~r the northern sicle of the building indicate th~ presence of hydrocarbons, a by-product of gasoline, which could-be

38·

CIJ.ENOAIC '-'GI

associated witll a leak in the tank, and coosidered a human health hazard (see Human Health, Item 17, below).

The subsurface gas tank will be removed prior to development oi the site. . Removal will eliminate 'future Mtential risks, and will require an Undergro~ Tank Removal permit issued by the Napa County Healtb Department. The project sponsor has agreed, as, mitigation, to comply with a request from -the Napa Comity Environment~! Health Department to condµct further investigation, priQr to project approval, to determine the extent ~i¥>il and water pollution, the type of contamination and if soil and ground wat~ clean-up is required due to the presence of the Wlderground storage tank.mt

PG&E has·identified the parking lot area as a potentially hazardous waste site because of the potential by-products of the gas-generating plant. The sponsor bas agreed, as mitigation, to tmderti:ke additional soil borings in the parking lot area to determine the e:tent of pottrntlal hazardous wastes prior to approval of a grading permit for the site~ See Item 17, Human Health, below, for further discussion of hazardous·materials and risks.

b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency ev.scuation plan?

NO. The project will include clearly ,.'isible sjgns showing evacuation routes in tbe·event of au. emergency. The project will include life ~fety measures such as sprinklers and alarms.

NOTES-Risk

11!' ~alph Htmter, R.S., Supervising,Sanitarian, Napa County Department qf Environmental Health, telephone conversation, July 18, 1986.

121 Request made in letter from Ralph Hunt.,r,.R.S., Supe~..sing Sanitarian, Napa Cou..a.t!J Department of Enviromnental flealth, to John Yost, Director, Napa City Planning Department, dated August 7, f986.

11. P9J!U!_ation. Will the proJ.?O?l alter the ·~tion. distribution, degsity, or growth. rate of the human papuI:~tion of an area? ·

NO. 11le project will have no s!gnificant effect on existing or fuN?e population pat~ems..

I

12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing housing. or create-a demand-1!!! additional housing?

YES. The project is primarily a retail commercial development that will serve existing residents and provide visitor semces and attractions. Thus; the project will neither provide new housing units nor, because of the type of workers anticipated, create a substantial aiew demand for housing in the City. There will, however, be a cwnulative impact on local housing dem~ due to the incremmtal addition of thls project to other employment-generating ~ developments in Napa. ,.,

39

C\LENO.q.R PAGI

MINUTE PAC;i

:... 6

1.~59 5

J , I •• t

~ I I

-I I j

• I a I I I I I , i

Althou!Jl'l the nwnber of project employees depends on fmalitenant mix and market demand for goods and services to be provided, th~;Sponsor has estimated employme~t levels, by use, for the _project (see ·Descripti~n of Project, Section 2). The estimate includes 91 full-time and 80 half-time employees, or the equivalent of 131 full-time jobs (assuming a 40-hour work week). f-iost of these positions,will be for unskilled or semi-skilled labor - retail shop clerks, kitchen a.'ld restaurant help, cashiers, secretaries, and µiaintenance/janitorial workers. Average wages for these wQrkers will range from minimum wage to about $17,000 annu.~ly. Skilled·positions such as ~efs, word procesSC>rs and recall shop managerS- will provide higher salaries, ranging from $12,000 to $40,000. Professional~ working in the of fices are likely to be emplnyed by=law, ~cc0W1tmg, real estate,, insurance and other rmancial and service-orient_ed enterprises. Average w~~es for these workers· will range from about $15,000 to over $50,000~

It is difficult to identify how. much employees can afford for housing because mosl.\fi>u.."!!Jlolds consist of mere than one worker. In the City of Napa's urban ~re:, the av~@ge household in 'l 985 contained 1.22 workers, according to the A\lSociation of·'~y Area Governments.Ill Thus, housing is purchasp,d or rented based en the comtih'led resources ~f the entire household wlit. In addition to waS'c~. many factors ~ffect the ablµty to:pay for housing, such as equity in a .o_rior residence, inheritances, invesh'l'lents, debt and other obligations. Consequently, households with simila~ incomes may have very different imancial abilities to pay for housing. ·z.ikewise, willingness to pay f 0I'11ousing depends on an assortment of factors sudl as demographics, personal pref crence, tax considerations and the price of other .. goods and services. Finally, housing affordability is defined within the contexf.of the particular housing market.

Rental housing is the most afi'rtJrdable type oi. housing in Napa. 'With a low vacancy rate of about 2.5% for all housing wit..\lin the Napa urban limit line/2/ ((ive percent is generally considered a normal vacancy rate, so anything below that represents a tight ~ing market), there already exists a competitive c:onditicr..l for i~g 5Uitable and affordable hou.c;ing. Although the·projecrwiU not .create a significant new demand for housing, tbere will be gJ:eater competition for available housing units with employment growth ilian without it.

NOTES--Housing

/1/ Association of Bay Area Governments. Projections '85, July 1985.

121 Dave Neivelt, Associate Planner, City of Napa, te!ep(.!>lle convers.."ltion, September 9, ~~ -

13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result.in:

a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement?

YES. The project will generate a ~otal of about 3,165 vehicle trips em.1s (vte) per day. or the total. vte, about 300 will occur during the p.m. peak-~"\lr; 155 will be in-bound toward the site and 145 will be away from the site. The. project will-not have a significant effec~ on increased traffic· congestion·~ the area. Appendix A contains a c:omplete discussion of traffic.impacts.

'\

40

\\

CAlENOAIP... .. • .• : s I Ml~UTE ·~~E 1 5 6 Q

. "' . ' . ' . . ~ . ~ • 'I' w r • • ~"' ... , .... , • • '" ' .~ • " " _. ' 1

' • , ' • I •

. :: .... ' - ·. ' ' ' ' -_· , '_ . ~ . . . - ... ' . - -.. : ' '

' '

b. Eff 2cts on ex;sting p;uking facilities, or demand for new parking?

YES. Under the City's parking requirement, the project is requh·ed to provide 406 spa_ces. As designed, however, the parking lot would provide only 94 on-site spaces; this would result in a deficit of 312 spaces. A lot designed to city code standards would accommodate 68 vehicles. Paddng deinand from the project is estimated to be substantially less than 406 spaces. Appendix A contams-a complete disCUS!ion of par~ demand and impacts. The sponsor proposes sevetal measmes to mitigate the deficit in on-site parking'(see mitigation discussion).

c. Substantial impar.t upon existing transportation systems?

NO. The project will not impact service levels'~~-g~arby intersections. With additional traffic from this project and the Napa,Na~onal::Bank project, located two bloc:ks ncnth of the site at the southeast corner orfllird/Main Streets, intersections in the vicinity of the site will continue t~ operate at e~celient to very good levels of service.

As mitigation, the project will include its own shuttle to serve remote parking faGillti~s. Appendix A contains the sponsor's proposed-shuttle program. The Napa City Bus Lines has sufficient capacity to accommodate anyJncreases in ridership that the·ptoject will create.

d. Alterations to-present patbm:is of circulation or movement of people and/or ~? .

YES. The southern portion of the lot to be used for project parking is c;V...rrently USl?d as an informal throughw;.y from Brown Street to Main Street. _ ()r,ce the prc•ject parking· tot is in use this will no longer be PQSSible. The proje~;t sponsor ~ re~uested an abandonment or lease a·-angement with the City from Brown Str4?et between Division and Fifth Streets to provide additional project parking. The effects of this street closure are discussed in Apnendix A. The project sponsor also has requested an abandomner.t OJ lease --angement for the portion of Fifth and Main Streets abutting the Hatt Building l\J provide additional project parking. As these are not through-streets circulation wiU,not be altered.

e. Alterations to waterborne, ail or air traffic?

f.

NO. There will be no impa~ts on water, rail or air transportation.

Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehi~les, bicyclists or pedestrians?

NO. The project will increase potential traffic conflicts at the intersections of ?-{ain/Fif th Streets and Fifth/Brown Streets, as these intersectiOhS have no controls. In accordnace with warrants in the California Department.of Transportation Manual, the-project s~r has agreed to provide stop signs at these int:~rsections ~o mitigate thesP. conflicts. If Brown Strtet is clcr..ed (see Appendix A),~qo stop sign wilJ be need'!cl at the Fifth/Brow Stteets inter~ctiQO..

41

CAUNOAR PAOE

M!~Lll.EPA~I ........... ~ .... ._-::::: ....

•

' -1)7

14. POOllc !:'.!rvices. Will the proposal haue an effect upon, or result in a nied for new or altered sovenunental services in ~of the .fo!h'lwing .areas: -

a. Fire motectlon?

NO. The City ...,r Napa Fire Q,epartment serves the site area. The Mf'ln Fire Station, located about one-half mile from the site, ~s a response time of about two mh)utes to the site. The site .has several wiique featuren, from. a -f"irefigiltJ.rg starulpoint, such as the age of the existing,structi.ires and its riverfront location which leaves craly two ~ides for firefighting access. The project will add incrementally to the level of demand for fire and medical seruices provided by the Cit!) Fire Department. Tqe Fire Department has indicated, however, that impacts.to the department could be mitigated by compliance with the Unlfom1 Building Code, the Uniform:Fire Code, and other Fire Deimrtm(?fit requirements.Ill The applicant will be required, for example, to construct an-adequate iue hydrant syst~, . .jnstall mi automatic ~prinkler system, provide 24-hour f°ll'e0monitoring, inclt.Kiing sensors ind al~, aw\ ~ply with Fire Department design leview comments.

b. Pol~ce protection?

c.

d.

e.

~. The proposed proj~ct itself will net r~t in a significant increase in derMnd.Ll-0r police protection setvic~ ,However, the project, together-with other growth in the City, will ~dd ~.crementally to the level of p(>lice pfotectien required city-wide. Thf current ratio of·officers in the Napa Ponce Deparfm~J~! t.) populatipn is about 1.3:1, which is below that recommended by the International Associatton of Chiefs of Police, 1.7:1./2/

Typkal calls which mitrht be generated by the project0 would inclUC.:e daytime shoplifting, nighttime Burglaries, credit card thefts and c;>eca~ional iistutbance ca~. Thi prcject wiltbe required to be built in conformance· with c~ty suididar~·including pedest.rian sid~walks. The proj~ct will coordirute esta~lsh."llent of seCtp"ity techriiquPs, such as burglar alarms and l,Jeks, with the Police Department. ·

Schools?

NO. The project will be retail and offic..e uses catering to tourists and existing residents and will therefore not contribute to school enrollmenu.

~or other recreational facilities?

NO. The project will primarily cater to tourists already Visiting Napa at)~ fA\erefore will not in.:rease use of local parks or recreational facilities. 1:t will, ~wever, provide the amenity of a .riverwalk along the eastern and S®f.hem ~icl·111 of the site. -

Maintenance of public facilities, including roads?

YES. The project will generate additioml trips· to the site a?ea and on,adjacent city streets which will addln~"mentally to the,need.for maintenance of-such streets.

A partion Qf tt~e,property taxes and retailsales tux revenues generated by the C~"!lpleted prAject wm t>e distfibuted to the City's generm fund; part of 'dle!ie fund.i will be used by lhe City for street main~enaqc~. Therefqre, the "°ject's

42

• CAUNOAR PAGE

, MINuTnAGI

-·

68

f.

Incremental tnqease in the cost of ~intaining streets in the site area will have an insignificant-effect on the t,~tal cost of roadmalntenan~e required by tfue City.

OtHJ' ,gpvemmental services?

NO. No other services will be required or be affected by this project.

NOTES - ServiC25

111 Jim-Luce, Fire Marshall, Napa F'ue Department, tele~e conversatioo, July 17, 19f!G.

121 Lieutenant Berg, Napa Police Deparnnent, telephone cooveuation, July 18, 1986.

15. Energy. Will the,o/tiposat result in:

a. Q.se of substantial arnowits of fuel or energy?

NO. Construction of the]rtoject's retaU, restaurant and office uses will result in sllsftt increases in the conswnption of-petroleu.in fuels, electrical energy, and natuial gas; however, the project can easily be served by existing utilities and 5ources of supply. Buildings C, D, E ancf F will incorporate energy-efficient P.quipment and ar.d will cooform to Title 24 energy consumption guidelines. The project vJl have a negligible ef feet on the amount of energy conswned in the Napa urban area. -

b. Substantial increas~1mand Upq!'! existing SOU!\'".:!,S of energy, or require the development of new SOtrices of enerroi?

NO. See 1tc~· ~.a; above.

16. Utilities. Wm the proposal result in a-need for new sy.stems, or substantial alterations to the followinq utilities:

a. Power or natural gas?

NO. PG&E has indicated that existing power (gas and ele'Ctric) transmission ~ and supplies to the s;i-e area is c:rlequate to serve the1 site.Ill l'Mref ore, the project will not result in significant impzcts to gas or '~lectrie serv.ices supplied by PG&E.

b. ~unications syste~?

NO. Existing ~elephone lines adjacent to the site ean ser:ve \the project. No alterations to the existing system will'be required.

e. ~?

NO. Existing six-inch lines in Main and Fifth Streets could accommodate the proje~t. Existing City water supplies are adequate to serve the pr->posed project./21

The at>fllicant will be req_uired to construct all on-site improvements and utility, systems. The design of water mains must be in accordance with City of Napa

43

f,ALENDAI PAGI

MINUTEPAGI

69 1b63

I , •• I I ., j

j

i i tit

-a ----.. fl

-

engineering specifications",and the City will:have design review of the proposed improvements.

d. Sewer or septic tanks?

NO. The site is served by the Napa 5anitaticm District (NSD); a four-inch on-site line serves the·existL"g IJ-Jilding. This four-inch line will have to,be u~ded to six inches. Connection will be made to the main 16-inch sewer trunldine located' at the corner of Fifth and Main Streets.

The NSD treatment plan has a capacity of 15.4 million gallons per day (mgd) and eurrently operates at a fiow rate of approximately 7 .7 ms<l~ The station ~rently operates well below capacity and, depending ori development trends, -Could adequately serve the District up to the year 2000./3/ The increases in flow generated by the project will not be significant. Project fiows will, however, add incrementally to flows and impacts on sewer servir,e in the area.

e. St'Orm water drainage?

NO. Existing storm drainage lines run south on Main Street to Fifth, west on Fif dl to .Brown Street, and south on Brown Street adjacent to th~ p1·oposed parking lot. ·Storm dr<;.mage on-site will be extended onto these existmg·lines 111hich are believed t.1 .,.3ve adequate capacity./2/ Therefore, no substantial alteration of the Cit!)'s stCJ?m drainage system will be required.

.,

f. Solid waste and disposal?

NO. Construction debris will be hauled by the cuntractor or l~al waste collection service to an appropriate desi~ted landfill site. After project completion, waste disposal will be provided by a local collei:tion company. The project will not substantially alter the collection of oolld waste or lts·dlsposal in landfills in the Napa area.

NOTES·- Utilities

111 Dick Stotard,;Customer Services, PG&E, telephone conversa:ion, Jully 18, 1986.

121 Richard S:uecllert, Assistant City Engineer, Napa Public Works Dep-artment, telephone conversation, July 17, 1~6.

131 .J~ Baker, Office Manager, Napa Sanitation District, telephone c~versation, J~dy11·7, 1986.

17.

a.

~ He~lth. Will the proposal result in:

CTeatiot~.of any. health hazard or potential health hazud (excluding mental health)? ·

NO. The proJ)\.'\Sed prolect is a commer,. tal development and will not create new health hazards. The sit~, howeuer, contains an old subsurfitce gasoline tank located between h'!.e existing Hatt Building and proposed parkiing lot, and the· parking lot was the site of a·~gas gene:ating pla.Jlt in the late UlOOs (see Risk of Upset, Item 10, above~~ Mitig~tion measures included as part ·of t~ project will elimina~e any t>otential'~z~rd.

44

• C-.ALENOAR PAGE

MINUTE PACE

- rlo 1564' -

b. Exposure of people to potential he~lth·hazards?

NO. As Oiscussed in Item 10, above, soils borings will be conducted to establish 1the presence of bnardous materials or c~t,mninated soils •. If necessary. this material will be removed for dispoMJ at an approved site. Such removal will be coordinated with the County Health Department.

Removal of the existing subsurface gas tank and potentially hazardous materi81s under the proposed parking lot will !>e a positive impact because it will eliminate potential risks to hwnan health.

18. Aesthetics •. Will the proposal result in the ol>struction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will lhe proposal result in the creation of an · aesthetically offensive site open to public view?

NO. The Hiatt Building is clearly visible to the public as it is adjacent to two public streets, Main and Fifth. Its tall silos and the wooden structure between them are visible at some distance. from north of the site, the building is visible along Main Street and from the First and Third Street bridge.J over the Napa River. From the east side~of the river, the site is visible from certain vantage points '1nobstructed by industrial buildings, tall tre~s and dense vegetation. FroJU the south, the Hatt Building can be se~.!l from the Brown Street and ~ivers&? Drive approaches and, from ~e west, from the Fifth Street approach. The building is only partially visible to\patrons of the City/County Library as the el)trance is on Division Street and the library's parking l9t is shi~lded by the library building itself. The site is visible to fJersons working at or visiting the CoWltY Hall of Justice ~ its-parking lot is diagonally across Fifth Street from the site.

Because the Hatt Building is an existing structure, the prf;)jec~ will not obstruct any scenic vistas or other public views. Views from upper stories-of the County building will be partially obstructed by t4e addition of partial second and third stories to the Hau Building. Altzration5 r.&st be in keeping with the b1lilding's architectural style and original materials (see Item 20.b, below). The project as proposed calls for a landscaped parking lot, with trees and shrubs planted' along the perimeter and within the interior of the lot. To the extent that existing vegetation (par~icularly taller trees) will be removed from the parking lot site to-accommodate~additional parking; a negative visual effec~ will be introduced. (Measures propose!l to-initigate parking impacts would eliminate interior landscaping from the lot.)

The -Jlddition of the riverwalk around the eastern and-soutfoen-t sides of the building v.-U~,Provide an amenity to the area allowing views to and along the riv~. ·

19. R2creation. Will th2 proposal result in an imect upon the quality o~ quantity of existing recreational op1>9~ttmities?

~

NO. The project wm not create a demand for new recreational opportunities. not '11ill it impact existing ones. Indeed, it will provide a destination,point for vis!tors and resieenttl of Napa and will oJfer the amenity of the riverwalk, opening up views of the river to Napa Mill ·patrons.

45

CALENDAR PACI : f 1 ' 1565

• • ,,, ,, ii j

-j

:t I ... I

a.

b.

Clllltural Resources

wm the proposal resn.lt in the alteration of or the destruction of a prehistoric i?HiiStoric archaeological site?

NO. The entile Napa Valley was occupi.;d by:early Native Americans.Ill No !ul~wn arc:haeo~ical remains exist on the projecf site or in the irrimediate vicinity according to the Napa County environmental sensitivity maps. Yet because the river atea was impurtant for Indian activities, it is possible that ~~ r~mrun,s e~t.121 The soils of the site have been disturbed by previous ~nvity. Gradi.ng.imd earth,moving will occur on the parking lot site to prepare it tor paving. This ,f.lttrcel contains fill to a minimum depth of three feet. The ~or~ agreeq 'tt;>-.~t with a qualified archaeologist in the event any ~uhunu·r~ces imnmcountered .to mitigate any l)Otential impacts.

~ll tha'PW .•• sat rerult in adverse ical or aesthetic effects ,to a orehistoric ~ hlStoric ~. · • din$?, structure; or obiecr?

MA YBf;. Th~ '~tt Bµllding/~/ 1$ a ·complex of four contiguous brick structures built-~·udng- the late 19th Century. Main Street, iVhich once also carried the

· ·~it{la~ tr~ck$ t~town, :fWlS along the front of the building, terminating at the Napa. ~Uver.., The st~e.et ~~er crossed- the river but the railroad was carried ~~ ·ttte d.ver ~t this,po!nt on~ b;:idge. The Hatt 6uilding was thus ide~lly -~ted~to ta.~~·adtl'imta~'of~h r~lxoad and riverboat transportation.

~ . th~·od~tj $t~m:turn. Buildi.'f!J A, 'is a 60..:foot by 1oo~f0ot twO-story brick ~triaH:~1;krmg comtru~t~d~for Cap tam· Albert Edwart Hatt's feed and grain J'llilQ~g ~ss. It occupfa~ the extreme northwest corner of~ the property. The·Ja~de of t~ building tias e Ja}se-frontt stepped parapet and contains a ~ge m-.m_e a."ld·date stone in raised letters near the top reading "A. Hatt -18Stttt The·I:~rle sty!·? ~f the--bt.dlcling,·l.4i typical for buildings of the time and, ~or.thy uf nQte* L! dun i~·bri~ were made on the site from Napa River chay. Sevei'til lar~·~4ing doors ~pen'« 3-both Fifth and.Maia Streets. The upper stoty is a.~~ge ~g!e r~ with,a·hard~ floor which is um.WJally patterned. This·r~n;"~ od~y~d as a ~ting-rink and has also been used as a dan!=e fl~ a.·itHmsk~t~U coort.otter the years; f~int outlines of the painted ·basketball coutt can~ seen.. ,

lluilding B to the south ~ btdlt in 1886-1887 with architect~e similar to the original building. It has-.a stepped para~t ~nd loading.dock. There·is. however, ,~c...,lame and ~te ·plate. A large.metal canopy, attached to the second story ivall? cove~ ,t,be loadfng dock ;uea of both Bl.til<lin.ss A .and B. The loading area is a·iai~ed·sume and cionerete- dock and si,dewa.lk encircling the structure.on the no+m and west street frontages. The first floor 9f the building was intend~d for ~~·~a ~arehouse. The second £1oor,.dfsi~d for. w;e as a meeting ball, '\Uas .µsed for an ~ory during 1901~ .Qurfng this year. th~ pressed tin wainscoting w~;adQed. "the ,.floor nt;1w cont~ins turn-ot-the-centmv milling equipment.

Two f,be-story·¢:iick addit~ons, '&Udings C araj,D, were' ee:qstructf#d at the rear and tt>\the east of· the 9rlter :ptructur~s. Al~11ough no pretise date of c~t!11cti9fi has been·documen~d, photcgtaphic;: evidencq, ihflicates~th~ addit1qrt,S were made bs!twe~n 1890 ~nd 1905. 1,i:iese buf,2r~b};gs·dcu;~~zt have the arclUter;tural cletail f~cUn the two·f!adier,buildings. 'the new.additions provided greatly lncreased waubouse ~·stora9e space.

. ' {

46

. Finally, two hay and grain buildings were constructed adj~C'3it 10 ;imd·$~d~·of , the original Hatt Building in thf! 1930. Th.'J~eade$1 0! ~ 1~.ter,

1

bulimngs :were carUinutm'll~ construcrAB or brick, antl 'are .compatiblt With the origina~ complex. The hay building was destroyed ~ fire m l.~9 :on,d t~P~4:ed wi~?.1 a gluecHaminated wood fra~e roof stmc.ture·~ith·ea111~t~tt(tilt--l~l!' ¢alts ir.l'.1960.

, , , ·I" , , Minor alterations to tl;le original Cl)mplex include. of~~ ·ren;r.deling (lQ\74);! · exterior Rndblasting to remoye painted advertising st~~U~73l~;und1·itban~in"~ the Windows cm.&Udinsrll:from a.?'(tWld arch to a flat m"Ch·taate ~own). Most recf.ntly, the stt11cture was used tw the Napa Feed and Ranch ·,Supply, but , is·turrently not used for commercial purp(:)ses. '

•When he Wilt the Hatt Building in 1884, Capt~in Hatt ~.already a noted .' merchant in the·Oi~~rof Napa. Expanding bt:tsiness ~used1

him t¢ 'bilild the Hatt 1

Building. Workb;g with six other men, he made the bricl<$. hims~l:f1!fs-om,~pa · River c!ay. Original plans only called for the building to be one'-story iil' , · , height. Modified to 1wo stories as the wt.tlls went up, ,the,"comple~ grew ·ta~idlY,, , over the next few years. The Hatts sold the building in about 1912. Th~ ~.tt " : 'Building compl~lC, still in use for its original business purposes through ~ · , mid-19705, iS th~ ·best remaining ex~ple of 19th Century waterfront industria! df!fle!opment1n Napa. Located at dl.e head of navigation op.·the Napa River, a majot'lugbway of commerce between the deve,loping agriQ.dtural region of the , Napa V~lley and the San Francisco area, the City Gf Napa'$ ti~etf.>ater locatlon favo?ed local economic growth and served as a, bre?tk-in-bulk point for shipping. The Hatt fainily was actively involved in river commerce and tnmsportation for its.own business as well as for other.s~ Hatt's o~ratioh·was important in milling local grain and p:oviding feed ,for livestock on the larg~

I •,

agricultural operations in the area. As the regional agricultural base A brcudened, Hatt's business,expanded rapidly and. soon became ardmi)ortant ., industry in the local mea's economy. Through the last decade it was a virtually unaltered representative of the Cjty's early waterfront industry". 'ijte H'.att complex is also the largest brick industrial building remainin3 in tM City of Napa.

" ,, On August 12, 1974, Buildings A and R were listed on the National Register o! Historic Plnces, an inventory of histori~lly significant resources maintained by the U.S. Department of Interior's Natianal Park Service. nus designation was marfe on the re":ommendation of the Stafe"Office of Historic Pre~rvation~ Oil Aprft.3, 1979, ia~entire complex of si:l buildings was designated Landmark Priority by the Napa City Council./4/

This designation means that a structure/she/feature has "$ignificant aesthetic, architectural, historic, or cultural value to the City. n~olitiop should be strongly discouraged, uses should be limited to those wfu,~-~ compatible with the physica!,characteristics of the structure, and alterations should be compatibl~ with the original design and materials used in the structure." Two findings are required for this designation:

1. The structure/site/f~ature is a good example of a particular architectural style of period or is representative of significant historical development of the City, [and)

2. Demoliticm of the structure/site/£ eature would represent a GUbs~ntial loss of the Cit-J's heritage.

47 CAllNDMC PAGI

M!NUTE,ACE 1S67

., '

e I

•• I I

The project will include renovation of the exterior portions of Buildings A and B; the metal cnnopjes and loading docks will be retained. The second floors of these buildings, contaiiling the ha:dwood· floor ~nd tin wainscoting will be reno11-at2d. In Buildings C, D and E, the brick walls will be retained, as will 0the ev..sting""truss,es in Buildings D and E. The existing 80-foot high silos and roof top tin structure will be retaine~:and the interiors .of the silos will be modified consistent with the new !!timmercial use of the building, i.e., for retail space and an elevator. Some q-.:iginal granary equipment from the mi~ will be publicly displa!l{?d.

These renovations and use of the building·as a visitor-9estination,point and gathering place for local residents will be cons~tent with its Lall<Jmark Priority designation by the Ci!y of Napa. Uses will be compatible with ·the physical characteristics of the structW'e and alterations will be c001patiJ;>le with original design and materials used. .Preservation and adaptive re.use 6 .. the buiJding will promote the overall architectural, historic and cultural value of the Hatt Building to the City of Napa.

Given its national register status, alterations to the Hatt ~ding must ·be consistent with the Secretary of Interior's "Standards for 1...!habilitation and Guidelines for R~habilitating Historic Buildings" as well. (By submitting thi..s project for Interior's certification, the <lp~licant would receive the federdl historic reha!>ilitation investment tax credits provided by the Ecopomic Recovery Act of 1981.) The State Office of Historic Pieservatioai has informally reviewed the proposed project to ensure c6mpliance with;-the Secretary.of Interior's standards. This office found that "~·;!o•:c:!lopers and architects have presented a very exciting rehabilitati9n pr6P9Sal whicl:;. is sensitive to the fal>ric of the two historic s~ructures."/5/

c. Daes the proposal have the potential to cause physical change u~ch would affect uni_rrcfe--.ithnic cultural values?

NO. The project will not affect ani. ?thnic c:ultur~l values.

d. Will the proJ>O?a1 restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potenttat tiilpact .uea?

NC'. There are no emting religious or sacred uses ~ociated with use of the project site.

NOTES - Cultural Resourc~s

Ill Napa General Plan, pp. 204-205 as··quoted in <;:ommunity Planning Services, filrium of Napa Environmental Initial Study, June 1984.

121 Will Selleck, LocaLAgency Formation Commission (LAFCO) Analyst, C,ounty of Napa, telephone conversation, July 30, 1986.

131 Information regarding the historical significance of the Hatt Building is de~ived from landmark evaluation forms submitted to the U.S. Department of Interior /'National Park Service for consideration of listing the structure on the National Register Qf Historic Places and to the City of Napa I Landmark Preserv.ntion Advisory &ard for consideration of a landmark·,status designation. These forms are on file and a~llable for revie·Jt at the City of Nzjpa Planning Department, Community Services Building, 1600 First St~eet, Napa, California.

48

CALENDAR PAGE 7 4_ ~!NUTE PAGE - 1 5 6 8

/4/ Allee Carey, architect1 San Francisco, telep~~ne conversation, July 15, 1986.

151 Letter from Stead R. Craigo, A.~.h., Supi!rvisor, Registration C~rtificatic;m Uni~, ... Sta;e Office of Historic Preservation, to John Yost, PlaMing Director, City of Napa, .., dated June 5, 1986.

21. Mandatory Findings of Significance.

a. Does the project have the potenttal to degrade the quality of the environment. substantially reduce the habitat of a,fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife pop~.!!!2!1 to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or r_;utrict the range of a rare or en<Wlgered plant or anima~. 4>r eliminate importar:t examples of the major periods of Ced if ornia history or prehistory? · ·

.NO. See detailed responses to Items 1-20, above.

b. Does the prcje-t~: have the potential to achieve short-term. to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environm__fil!! is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time while lon~tenn impacts will endure well into the future.)

·' -

Nt>. See detailed responses to Items 1-20, above.

c. Dees the project have impacts which are. indivicfually limited, but cumulatively con.caiderable? (A ru-~iect may impact or ~wo.or more separate res6urces where the impact on each resource iii. relatively 3mall. -..but "1here the effect cf the total of these impacts on, the eilvifonmerit is significant.)

NO. Minor'impacts which might be cumulative (such as traffic, perking, noise" geotechnic.-31 and ,hyciro!ogic) have been discussed above and their ef rec ts shown to be mitigated in the following ~ection. Other project-related cwnulative impects will be imignificant.

d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, 'either directly or indirectly?

NO. No adverse effects on ~ beings will be caused by the project.

49 - 75

• ' • • • • •

• • I I

--> '

B. MITIGATION MEASURES

The responses to the checklist form ha·ue identified po substantial wunitigable ad11erse impacts to the environment which would result from construction or operatiQD of the project. The City may therefore el~ct to file a mitigated Negative Declaran"'on. In this case, the ~ponsor has agreed to perform the following:

1.

2.

3 •

Earth Conditions

- fu prevent soil loss a.i.d Pe>tential runoff impactz during and immediately after construction, the parking lot iite will be tilled and a silt fence planted. Water will be,sprinkled over bare, ~rndectareas ~' least twice daily to CO!ttrol wind erosion and. eliminate dust •

- All project-related gradi11g, trenching, backfilling, and compaction operations will be conducted in accordance with city design specifications •

- The sponsor has agreed to.eliminate the proMSed plaza and iu retainipg wall support structure. With no river bank modifi::ation in this area, Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10 Permits and a-California Depmtment·of F"J.Sh and Game Stream Alteration Agreement will.not Qe required for the plaza.

- Project construction will conform to the seismic design provisions of the 1-985 Uniform Building Code.

Air Quality Conditions

- The project sponsor will require the t;Onstructior. contractor to w.et down the site twice ~ day during construction to reduce particulates by about SO'Jr..

- The project sponsor will-require the contractor to maintain and ope~at~ c:Onstruction equipment in such a~wa!r l5 to minin\i2e exhaust emissions.

Water Conditions

- All project-related drainage improvements <both on- and off-site) will be designed and constructed !)Ufsuant to city engineering specifications.

Paved surfaces will be r~gulady swept to remove urban rtm0f f pollutant accumulations, particularly before the onset of the rainy season.

- To mimmize water consumption, low-volume flush toilets will be installed ~ landsca::iJlg will feature native, drought-resistant -species requiring minimal irrigation.

- To minimize impacts that may ~lter the course or flow of flood waters:

a. The sponsor has agreed -to eliminate the proposed plaza and its retairUng,wall support structure. With no river bank modificad.on, Army C~ of Engineers Section 404 and Section 10-Pennits and a California Department of Fish and Game Stre~n Alteration Agreement Will not be required.for the plaza.

50

~LINPAR PAGE

MINUTE PAGE

b. The riverwalk will be rede~igned so a!i to be cantilevered from the btiilding's first floor and nwnerous-~xisting obstructions adjacent to the Hatt Building in the floodway ar.d on river bank will bf.1. removed to compensate for any impedance t1:> flood flows$ The.~e obstl'UCtions include trees and limbSt e concrete bl91 .. 'ks, wooden pylor1S and miscellaneous roots and debris.

- Allproject-relCi}tedigrading. trenching, backfilling, and compaction opPrations will be done in accor~ce with city design specifications.

4. Plant Life Conditfons

- On-site landscaping improvements·(inc1tfding irrigation systems) will conform to city design standards.

... New landscaping will renect' adaptability to the site's alluvial sells and will inG!~e native plant species where possible to maintain consistency with the elements 1Jf '··~remnant riparian (streamside} vegetation.

6. Noise Conditions.

- The sponsor will require the project cont:ractor to muffle and shield intakes and exhausts, shroud or shield impact tools, and use electric-powered rather than diesel-powered construction:equipment, as feasible.

- To reduce disturbance of res~d~nts in the project vicinity, the sponsor will limit construction activities to t~ie hc:urs of 7:00 a.m. to 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday. There will be: n'J staf£-up of machines or equipment prior to 7:30 a.m., Monday through Friday; ~o d~iivery of materials or equipment past 5:30 p.m., Monday through Friday; n~-;;.teaning oi machines of equiprheg.~ past 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday;. no servicing of equ~pment past 6:45 p\qi., Monday through Fridapqmd no construt..iion on weekends. Exceptions to these t~me restrictions may be granted by-the City Engineer for one of the followin~ reusons: (1) inclement weather affecting work, (2) emergency work, or (3) other work, if work and equipment will not create noise thaM~ay be unreasofiatily offensive to neighbors as to constitute a nuisance. The 'City Engineer mu5t be noi!!ied and give approval in advance t<' said work.

- Muffler sys1 ~ms will be h'lStalled as req_uired by current lav.1 on construction eqi~pment. Pro~r maintenance of mulfler systems will be~provided.

- Noisy stationary construction equipment such as compressors will be placed"~·Nay from deveio11ed areas ~d/or acoustical shielding will be-placed around sut."t equipment when necessary.

- Plans will be staged and equipment deS.igned· ~o produce.a minimwn amount of noise consistent· with so~ .coit5tructior41·practice. ·

- All grading and construction equipment will be turned cff when not in use.

7. Light and Glare Conditions

- To minimize obtrusive giare, exterfor lights will be 6f low wattage and will use internal lenses OJ: shields to keep light from spilling ~~to adjacent ·m.operties. Other exterior lights will be .directed onto the building and will noJ ~roduce glare A visible from off-site. 'W

51

CAUNO.\K PAGI - 77 . 1571 MINUTE PACE

I

.. I-I I I I I I ,,, I I I l l J

•• I I

- No reflective glass will be used •

13. Transportation Conditions

- Measures to mitigate traffic impacts are, fully described in Appen~ A (pages A-16 through A-22), and are hereby fully incorporated into this section of the Initial Study.

14. Public Services Co~ditions

- Fire. The applk~nt will construct an adeq:Jate fire hydrant system, install an au~omatic spricltler system, provide 24-hour fire ~'lnitoring·and comply wi~h the Fire Department design review comments, and Unifol'lll Building and Fire Safety Codes.

- Police •. The project will be built in conformance with city standard.s. The Police De_pp..rifuent will be consulted regarding establishment of security techniques, such as .. « burglar alarm system and locks.

16. Ut.!iities Conditions

- Prior to trenching within existing roadway ct.::cesi;, the project engineer will ascertain the locations of all underground utilhy systems, and wil! design the proposed subSurface-utility extensiqr..s to at!~id disrupting the servi~es of such systems. -

- Wate:r and energy·conservation measures wijl be incorporated into the project design in accordance with applicable codes.

- The applicant will be required to·pay for all O.n-si te utility lines.

17. Hazardous Materials/Human Health Conrftions

- Additional soil borings ~ill be completed on the proposed parking lot to determine the extent of potential hazardous materials. Should such materials be located on the s~te, the County Health Department would-be notified to assist in the development of a removal plan, prior to grading of the site.

- If hazardo~ materials are present on the site, in quantities that are considered a human or envirorunental health risk, the site will be cleared-of ~uspect material.

- Additional soil tests wm be conducted prior to project approval to determine the extent of soil and· water pollution and what clean-up· is necessary due to the existence qf the widerground storage tank adjacent to the -Hatt Buil~g. The subsurface. tank will be removed.prior to site development. Such·re~.<>wl will require an Underground Tank Removal permit issued by the County Health Department. -

19. Aesthetics Conditions

- At a minimwn, landscaping will be placed around the perimeter of the P!\T~ing lot .

Street furniture, lighting fixtures, signag~:-and use c;f colors and materials will be @mpatible with 1he historic landmark.

52 CALENDAR PACE 7 e M!NUT_E PAGE 1 ~j 7 2

20. Cultural Resomces Conditions

- In the event that cultural resources are encountered during construction, all construction activity will be,halted and a qualified archaeologist consulted to determine the sigltificance of the ·find and develop appropriate mitigation measures.

- The spof!Sor will comply with the ·secretary of Interior's "Standards-for Rehabilitation and Guidelines for Rehabilitating Historic Buildings" and requirements of the State Office of Historic Preservation.

53

.CAlENDAk P4<iE --