Mendocino County planning staff reviewed recommended conditions for a proposed minor subdivision of a 0.59-acre parcel at 399 Ralph Betcher Drive in Hopland during the Subdivision Committee’s Jan. 9, 2025, meeting.

The subdivider, Penelope Winnet, has applied under case MS20240002 to split the lot into two parcels of about 0.22 acres and 0.36 acres. Committee staff said they will forward the recommended conditions to the Mendocino County Planning Commission, which will set final conditions if the subdivision is approved.

Russ Ford, of Mendocino County Planning and Building Services, opened the review by listing the recommended conditions that staff will include in the parcel map and staff report. Ford said the committee’s list is advisory and “these are not final, and these are still gonna be worked into the staff report by Marco,” referring to staff planner Marco Rodriguez.

Staff highlighted several standard and site-specific conditions. Planning staff put a note requirement on the map to limit external lighting to downcast fixtures and to notify future buyers that the property sits within 300 feet of an agricultural preserve and may be subject to typical agricultural nuisances. They also flagged cultural-resource protections: "in the event that any archaeological resources are encountered during development, work in the immediate vicinity shall be halted until all requirements of the ARC chapter in the Mendocino County Code have been satisfied," Ford said.

Environmental and hazard-related conditions include a requirement to contact the Mendocino County Air Quality Management District before ground-disturbing work to determine whether an asbestos dust‑mitigation plan is needed, and a note that the entire parcel lies in FEMA Zone A. Ford said a flood‑hazard report must include the 10‑year flood line and that development in the floodplain will be subject to the county’s floodplain regulations; staff added that no toxic or hazardous materials shall be stored in the designated buffer or floodplain area.

For California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) compliance, staff cited the CDFW filing fee associated with environmental determinations and noted the fee amount as $3,018.75. The committee also discussed a draft condition capturing CDFW recommendations for wildlife‑friendly fencing, removal of non‑native invasive species, and use of locally appropriate plant species for any future landscaping; staff described that condition as a recommendation that may be refined before Planning Commission review.

Environmental Health Program Manager Melissa Hernandez told the committee that because the parcel is served by Hopland utilities, the applicant will need a will‑serve letter for water and sewer from the district.

Transportation staff, represented by Alex Acquira, described site access and private‑road issues. Acquira said documentation is required to show a 60‑foot access easement from the public road to the parcels, that all easements be shown on the recorded map, and that natural drainage courses be depicted as easements where applicable. He reported the private approach from McMillan Drive onto Ralph Betcher Drive does not meet county corner/approach radii standards and that the subdivider will need to obtain a Mendocino County Department of Transportation encroachment permit to make any edge or flare work in the county right of way. Acquira also said the private road name and site addresses must be shown on the parcel map and that the existing handmade wooden sign should be replaced with a county‑standard reflective street sign.

Applicant Penelope Winnet asked whether she should begin improvements now; transportation staff advised waiting until the Planning Commission has taken action because the commission sets the final conditions. Ford and Acquira noted that, if approved, the applicant would generally have two years from initial approval to complete conditions, with up to two 18‑month extensions available for a fee.

Staff planner Marco Rodriguez told Winnet he will prepare the environmental determination (initial study/CEQA review) and a staff report and will contact her after the committee meeting with the recommended condition list. Ford estimated a Planning Commission hearing might be scheduled roughly within three months.

No formal vote to approve the subdivision or to adopt conditions occurred at the committee meeting; the committee reviewed and agreed to forward the recommended conditions to the Planning Commission for final determination.

Less urgent administrative items followed; staff and the applicant agreed to continue coordination by email and meetings with the project’s contractor to refine estimated costs and timing.

Ending note: The committee closed the item after completing the condition review and said they will adjourn the Subdivision Committee meeting and continue related pre‑application discussions offline as needed.