Clearlake council denies tribal appeal, upholds 22-lot Danco subdivision

Clearlake '024 'The Clearlake City Council on Thursday voted 5-0 to deny an appeal by the Koi Nation of Northern California and to uphold the Planning Commission's Dec. 18, 2023 approval of a 22-lot subdivision proposed by Danco Communities on a roughly 30-acre city-owned parcel.

The decision came after a staff presentation and testimony from Koi Nation representative Mister Chisholm, who argued that the city's AB 52 consultation was premature and that the mitigated negative declaration (MND) did not adequately address tribal cultural resources. "The city prematurely declared consultation was complete without considering the Koi Nation's expertise," Chisholm said, urging additional mitigation including a designated on-site reburial location, a timeline to register the site with the California Register of Historical Resources, tribal monitoring of ground-disturbing activities and incorporation of the tribe's proposed protocols.

City staff and the project consultant, identified in the record as Dr. White of Subterra Heritage Resource Investigations, reported that fieldwork and archival research identified two newly discovered areas of concern and several isolated artifacts. According to staff's summary, Dr. White determined one area (referred to in the record as Site 02) is potentially eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources and recommended design measures to avoid impacts, including a 35-foot buffer. "The project has been designed to avoid any impacts to this potentially eligible resource," staff said, and staff outlined mitigation measures (Cultural 1'6 and Tribal Cultural Resources 1'4) and a tribal monitoring policy intended to ensure any unexpected discoveries would be handled so impacts remain less than significant.

Mister Chisholm said confidential maps and expert declarations submitted by the tribe show at least three identified cultural-resource locations within the project footprint and argued the city should either continue consultation to finalize mitigation or prepare an environmental impact report (EIR). "Proceeding with the current MND is just simply not an option," he said, while also stating the tribe is willing to work with the city to reach a solution that allows housing to proceed.

Chris Dart, president of Danco Communities, said the company intends to resurrect a plan previously approved in 2006 and to begin infrastructure work first, estimating about one building season to complete initial road and utility work. Dart said the developer had invested in studies and design work and expressed a willingness, in his understanding, to cover the cost of tribal monitoring so that the project could proceed without city-borne expense.

During council deliberations members repeatedly said they had reviewed Dr. White's report and other materials in the record, and several described the updated MND and proposed mitigation as adequate under CEQA. Council members asked staff clarifying questions about monitoring, the confidential map showing sensitive areas and differences between the current proposal and the 2006 approval. One council member noted the city prepared the subsequent MND "out of an abundance of caution" rather than relying solely on the older document.

Council Member Saluton moved to adopt Resolution 2024-03, denying appeal APCC 23-02 and upholding the Planning Commission's approval of subdivision SD2022-1 (tentative map PM2022-01 and corresponding mitigated negative declaration); Vice Mayor Overton seconded. The clerk called the roll: Slotin, Purdock, Kramer, Overton and Mayor Claffey voted aye and the motion passed. The council adjourned the special meeting immediately afterward.

The record supplied to the council includes Dr. White's cultural resources investigation report, tribal submissions and confidential maps provided to staff and decision-makers. The council's action upholds the Planning Commission's environmental finding and moves the project forward subject to the mitigation measures described in the adopted environmental document.

Next procedural steps: the city approved the resolution at the special meeting and the project proponents indicated they intend to proceed with infrastructure work; the council did not direct additional environmental study at the time of the vote.