Planning commission offers early support for Cliff Family Winery redevelopment concepts, flags setback and storage issues

The Planning Commission on Jan. 20 held an extensive pre‑submittal review of a proposed redevelopment of the Cliff Family Winery site at 1709 Main Street (file PL25036). The project team presented a conceptual plan for a 1.5‑acre mixed-use site within the Highway 29 specific plan that would retain two existing buildings, remove five structures and construct five new buildings including a ~3,500 sq ft restaurant, ~2,800 sq ft restaurant-support building, ~1,100 sq ft piazza support, and a ~2,700 sq ft office/patio building oriented toward an outdoor piazza.

Staff identified two topics for early commission guidance: (1) whether the commission would support an administrative determination or variance to permit an 18–20 ft front setback where the MU district sets a maximum 10 ft setback, and (2) whether the commission would support pursuing a zoning-code amendment to allow on‑site storage in the mixed-use and central business districts with a conditional use permit to serve integrated projects.

Senior Planner Jackie O'Neil explained the key constraint: a 10‑foot public utility/water easement along the Main Street frontage that restricts permanent obstructions and reduces buildable depth. O'Neil argued the easement and the site's surrounding pattern of nonconforming setbacks could justify relief; she also pointed to municipal code 17.34.0.08(d) as a potential administrative path if the community development director found an "unusual circumstance." Director DeRosa and public works staff said the mixed‑use standard (maximum 10‑ft setback) replaced a prior minimum setback and that the Highway 29 specific plan nevertheless encourages active frontages and pedestrian engagement.

Applicant representative Scott Gay described operational goals for the site: activating the Vine Trail, consolidating parking to the rear, and providing support buildings for seasonal storage, restrooms and deliveries. Gay said an operational reason for a larger front setback is to provide safe, calm space for Vine Trail users to pull off and access the piazza. He also described two prior high-pressure water-line leaks in front of the property and emphasized the practical need for unobstructed access to infrastructure. "We actually, for the second time, sprung a leak in the water line that, was outside in front of the property," Gay said, describing a quick emergency response that reinforced the easement constraint.

Commissioners generally expressed support for an administrative flexibility to allow a larger setback in this case given the utility easement and surrounding nonconforming frontages; several commissioners said they would welcome staff consulting the city attorney and the zoning-code consultant to confirm an administrative approach versus a variance. Commissioners also voiced support for pursuing a zoning‑code amendment to permit on‑site storage as an accessory use with a conditional use permit (subject to design review and operational linkage across on‑site businesses — staff suggested allowing up to 30% of combined floor area for accessory uses). The commission emphasized the importance of neighborhood outreach and asked staff and the applicant to work with existing tenants (including Azteca Market and other on-site tenants) to minimize surprises.

No formal action was taken — the session was a pre‑submittal feedback meeting — but staff said it would reach out to city legal counsel and expected to bring a zoning‑code amendment for on‑site storage to the commission within upcoming meetings. The applicant said it aims to reach a demolition permit in 2026 if entitlements and financing proceed on schedule.

Next steps: staff will consult legal counsel on the administrative-setback provision, bring a proposed zoning ordinance amendment for on‑site storage to the commission in the coming months, and coordinate neighborhood outreach when a formal application is filed.