Clearlake planning commission approves permit for adult residential care facility at 14139 Conocti Street

The Clearlake Planning Commission voted Aug. 23 to approve a conditional use permit for an adult residential care facility at 14139 Conocti (also referenced as Kenocta) Street, adopting Resolution PC 2022-15 and a categorical exemption under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Class 32.

Senior planning staff described the project as two structures—a 4,331-square-foot main care building and a 1,176-square-foot employee housing unit—with 10 parking spaces, including two ADA spaces. Staff said the facility would operate around the clock with two to three shifts and roughly three employees per shift caring for up to 12 residents. The staff report recommended approval with conditions detailed in Attachment 1 and Resolution PC 2022-15.

B April Importante, the property owner and applicant, told the commission the prior facility on the site burned five years ago and she wants to rebuild to provide needed services. "The county has only 1 facility here in the county of Clearlake, so I would like to come back and serve the community," Importante said during public comment.

Members of the public and several commissioners voiced support for the project while also pressing staff and the applicant on neighborhood impacts and project details. Alice Reese asked whether the project was an ARF (adult residential facility for ages 18–59) or a residential care facility for the elderly (60 and older). Staff answered that zoning categories do not map one-for-one to licensing labels and that the application was being processed under the city's residential care facility classification to accommodate adults of various ages who need assistance. Importante described the clients as "very independent" and said she screens placements to ensure fit.

Commissioners also questioned oak tree removal, noting that a tree removal permit is required and that replacement requirements may be exempted when a structure or required infrastructure is proposed at the tree's location. The planning staff confirmed the project did not propose earth-moving that would have waived certain archaeological protections.

Architect Gary Schmots asked about the curb, gutter and sidewalk requirement in the staff conditions; staff noted the sidewalk/curb/gutter policy is set by the City Council and codified in the municipal code, and suggested the council would be the appropriate body to change or waive that policy. Several commissioners urged keeping the sidewalk condition to improve long-term accessibility and neighborhood character.

Commissioner Williams moved to adopt Resolution PC 2022-15 approving CUP 2022-11 and CE 2022-10; Commissioner Stewart seconded the motion. The commission approved the resolution by roll call with all present commissioners voting Aye.

The planning commission record includes the project site plan, conditions of approval and the categorical exemption finding. The commission closed the public hearing and approved the permit with the condition set forth in the adopted resolution. Any appeal deadlines or next steps for building permits were not specified in the hearing record.

The commission's action was procedural: staff will incorporate the conditions adopted in the resolution, and the applicant must satisfy the checklist items and obtain required building and site permits before construction begins.