TO: Napa County Planning Commission
FROM: Brian D. Bordona; Director of Planning Building and Environmental Services
REPORT BY: Sean Trippi; Supervising Planner
SUBJECT: Paloma Vineyard Use Permit Modification (P19-00386-MOD)
RECOMMENDATION
title
SHELDON RICHARDS / PALOMA VINEYARD / USE PERMIT MAJOR MODIFICATION NO. P19-00386-MOD & EXCEPTION TO THE NAPA COUNTY ROAD & STREET STANDARDS
CEQA Status: Consideration and possible adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. According to the proposed Mitigation Negative Declaration, the proposed project would not have any potentially significant environmental impacts after implementation of mitigation measures for Biological Resources. This project is not on any lists of hazardous waste sites enumerated under Government Code Section 65962.5.
(State Clearinghouse Number #2026020369)
Request: This application was submitted to participate in the County's Code Compliance Program as described in Resolution No. 2018-164 adopted by the Napa County Board of Supervisors on December 4, 2018. The proposal is to modify an existing winery Use Permit and subsequent modifications to recognize and approve the following items that are out of compliance with the permitted entitlements: daily visitation and hours of operation for visitation. In addition, the application also seeks to expand its entitlements to construct a new hospitality building; convert an portion of the existing main residence for winery storage; change hours of operation for production activities; modify visitation; allow on-site wine consumption pursuant to Business and Professions Code Sections 23358, 23390 and 23396.5.; and, add parking. The request also includes an exception to the Napa County Road & Street Standards (RSS) for portions of the existing on-site driveway.
The project is located on an approximately 17.11-acre site within the AW (Agricultural Watershed) zoning district with a General Plan land use designation of AWOS (Agriculture, Watershed, and Open Space) at 4013 Spring Mountain Road, St. Helena, CA 94574; APN: 022-150-008.
Staff Recommendation: Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approve the Use Permit Modification and Exception to the Napa County Road & Street Standards (RSS) subject to the recommended conditions of approval.
Staff Contact: Sean Trippi, Supervising Planner, (707) 299-1353 or sean.trippi@countyofnapa.org
Applicant Contact: Sheldon Richards, Paloma Vineyard, 4013 Spring Mountain Road, St. Helena CA 94574 (707) 963-7504, info@palomavineyard.com
Applicant Representative Contact: Scott Greenwood-Meinert, Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass, LLP., (415) 772-5741, sgreenwood-meinert@coblentzlaw.com
CONTINUED FROM THE MARCH 18, 2026, PLANNING COMMISSION HEARING
body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROPOSED ACTIONS
That the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration based on Findings 1-7 in Attachment A;
2. Approve the Exception to the Road and Street Standards, based on recommended Findings 8 & 9 in Attachment A and subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment B; and,
3. Approve Use Permit Modification No. P19-00386-MOD, based on Revised Recommended Findings 10-14 in Attachment A and subject to the Revised Recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment B.
DISCUSSION:
This item was presented at the March 18, 2026, Planning Commission hearing. At the conclusion of the hearing, the item was continued to a date certain of May 20, 2026, to allow the applicant and staff to review a possible exception to the road and street standards, revisit groundwater use and perform a well pump test if time allows, and address vineyard replanting. The March 18, 2026, staff report and attachments are available via the following link:
https://napa.legistar.com/LegislationDetail.aspx?ID=7943405&GUID=EBBA18E8-425E-45BB-8F01-355686B69A12&FullText=1
This application was submitted to participate in the County's Code Compliance Program as described in Resolution No. 2018-164 adopted by the Napa County Board of Supervisors on December 4, 2018. The request is for approval for a modification of the previous project approvals for an existing 10,000 gallon per year winery as discussed in the March 18, 2026, staff report.
Staff has reviewed the request for an Exception to the RSS and the major modification to the winery use permit to recognize and approve existing violations and the supplemental request to expand operations at the winery beyond existing entitlements. Staff found the requests for recognition and expansion to be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and applicable General Plan policies. Staff believes that the necessary findings for the modification can be made and recommends approval of the request as proposed and subject to conditions.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: Consideration and possible adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration. According to the proposed Mitigation Negative Declaration, the proposed project would not have any potentially significant environmental impacts after implementation of mitigation measures for Biological Resources. This project is not on any list of hazardous waste sites enumerated under Government Code Section 65962.5.
BACKGROUND AND DISCUSSION
Road Exception Request - As mentioned above, the applicant has submitted a request for an Exception to the RSS. The request would minimize earthwork to prevent impacts on Spring Mountain Road, protect several White Oak and Pine trees, maintain the integrity of an existing road bench, avoid potential geotechnical instability, and avoid earthwork on steep slopes. Further, the neighboring property owner in Sonoma County is unwilling to expand the easement to allow the roadway to be widened but is willing to allow the installation of turnouts as shown on the plans associated with this request. The areas of improvement outside the existing legal easement will need to be formally recorded prior to grading permits being issued.
To achieve the same overall practical effect of the Napa County Road & Street Standards (NCRSS) for commercial roads, the project proposes widening the entry gate to allow two vehicles to pass, converting drainage ditches to drivable swales, widening the first curve after the entry gate to provide 26-feet of clearance through the curve, the installation of signage directing motorists to yield to oncoming emergency vehicles, driveway widening and installation of intervisible turnouts where practical, and management of vegetation to maintain line of sight.
The Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) analyzed the potential impacts of a full-width driveway compliant with the RSS and determined that impacts would be less than significant. The requested Exception to the RSS is within the scope of the MND and will not create any new impacts that were not previously discussed.
The request has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and Fire Marshal’s Office and staff determined that with the proposed improvements and formal recordation of additional easement areas, the roadway will facilitate safe fire department access concurrently with safe civilian evacuation and has demonstrated same overall practical effect as the Fire Safe Regulations as conditioned in the Engineering Division’s Road Exception Evaluation memo, dated May 5, 2026.
Groundwater Availability/Use - RSA+ prepared a revised Water Availability Analysis (WAA), dated May 7, 2026. According to the WAA, due to disease, Paloma Vineyards is currently undergoing a replant program which is expected to occur over a ten-year period and will require additional water use while the vines become established which is discussed below.
An application for vineyard replanting is required per the County’s Conservation Regulations (County Chapter 18.108) however one has not been submitted at the time of publication of this report. The vineyard replanting has been forwarded to other internal divisions within PBES for further review.
As noted in the WAA, the winery owner intends to incorporate water conservation measures to reduce water use throughout the winery to reduce water use for the vineyards.
Tier 1: The table below includes water use assumptions per the previous WAA shown in parentheses and the revised WAA. According to the revised WAA, the existing groundwater usage is estimated at 7.449 af/yr. The proposed project would decrease groundwater use by approximately 1.739 af/yr resulting in an overall water usage of 5.71 af/yr due to water savings practices and water conservation measures discussed in the previous staff report. As noted above, the applicant will be replanting vineyards over a ten-year period. During that ten-year period, groundwater irrigation is estimated at 0.50 af/ac-yr. Once the vines are established, groundwater use would be reduced to 0.35 af/ac-yr. which is reflected in the table below. If vineyard irrigation continued to use 0.50 af/ac-yr. once the vines were established proposed usage would be 7.391 af/yr which is still below existing water usage and groundwater recharge.
|
Usage Type |
Existing Usage (af/yr) |
Standard Usage (af/yr) |
Proposed Usage (af/yr) |
|
Vineyard |
|
|
|
|
Irrigation |
(1.114) 5.605 |
(0.760) 3.924 |
(0.760) 3.924 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Winery |
|
|
|
|
Process Water |
0.258 |
0.258 |
0.147 |
|
Domestic Water |
0.086 |
0.139 |
0.139 |
|
Residences |
1.50 |
1.50 |
1.50 |
|
Total Use (AF/YR) |
(2.958) 7.449 |
(2.657) 5.821 |
(2.546) 5.710 |
|
Groundwater Recharge (AF/YR) |
12.99 |
12.99 |
12.99 |
The winery, as part of its entitlement, would include the County’s standard condition of approval, below, requiring well monitoring as well as the potential to modify/alter permitted uses on site should groundwater resources become insufficient to supply the use. The proposed project would result in a slight decrease in the demand for groundwater supplies and therefore would not interfere with groundwater recharge or lowering the local groundwater level.
Conditions of Approval - Improvements to the access drive are required to be completed prior to any increases in visitation beyond the existing level and construction of the proposed hospitality building. Staff recommends a condition of approval requiring submittal of a grading permit by December 31, 2026, and completion of roadway improvements by October 15, 2028. Standard conditions of approval do not allow the use of the main residence or other non-winery buildings for winery activities, except for winery related storage within a portion of the main residence, as proposed herein. Use of the main residence for tastings would be required to cease upon approval of this use permit modification. (See Attachment B - COA 4.5)
Public Comments - At the time of publication of this staff report no new public comments have been received.
Decision Making Options:
Pursuant to BOS Resolution No. 2018-164, Staff has provided separate decision-making options for the components of the project necessary to remedy the existing violation and the new expansions beyond existing entitlements for the winery Use Permit Modification.
Decision Making Options Regarding Remedying Existing Winery Use Permit Violations:
Option 1 - Approve Applicant's Proposal
Disposition - This option would result in approval of the existing visitation levels and visitation hours of operation. Widening the access drive would be required to be completed by October 15, 2027, or the winery would have to operate within its existing entitlement.
Given that the County used the winery’s existing operations as the environmental baseline for the CEQA analysis related to this application, no potential adverse environmental impacts have been identified with this project proposal. Furthermore, County divisions and departments have reviewed the proposal and are in support of the applicant’s request. There would be no groundwater or wastewater impacts associated with winery operations and this request was found to be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and applicable General Plan policies. However, widening the access drive would be required to be completed by October 15, 2028, or the winery would have to operate within its existing entitlement.
Action Required - Follow the proposed action listed in the Executive Summary. If conditions of approval are to be amended, specify conditions to be amended at the time the motion is made. This option has been analyzed for its environmental impacts, and the project was found to have less than significant impacts.
Option 2 - Revised Project Request - Reduce Unpermitted Existing Operations
Disposition - This option allows the Planning Commission to reduce uses on the property by decreasing the winery's existing unpermitted operations that exceed the permitted levels of their entitlements. Any decrease from existing visitation, but still above entitled visitation would require widening the access drive.
Given that the County used the winery’s existing operations as the environmental baseline for the CEQA analysis related to this application, no potential adverse environmental impacts have been identified with this applicant’s project proposal. If the Planning Commission elects to pursue this option, the recommended conditions of approval would need to reflect the revised components such as visitation, marketing, and/or employee numbers.
Action Required - Follow proposed actions listed in the Executive Summary and amend scope and applicable conditions of approval to reduce the existing operations. The item may need to be continued to a future date if significant revisions to the recommended conditions of approval are desired.
Option 3 - Deny Applicant's Proposal - Return to Levels in the Permitted Entitlements
Disposition - This option would deny applicant’s proposal to remedy existing violations and would require the applicant to operate the winery in compliance with its existing entitlements. In the event the Commission determines that the project does not or cannot meet the required findings for the granting of a Use Permit Modification, Commissioners should identify what aspect or aspects of the project are in conflict with the required findings. State Law requires the Commission to adopt findings, based on the General Plan and County Code, setting forth why the proposed Use Permit modification is not being approved.
Action Required - Commission would make a motion to deny the project.
Option 4 - Continuance Option
The Commission may continue an item to a future hearing date at its own discretion.
Decision Making Options Regarding Additional Expansion Beyond Existing Conditions:
Option 5 - Approve Applicant's Proposal (Staff's Recommendation)
Disposition - This option would result in approval of increased weekly visitation beyond their approved entitlements and their existing out of compliance levels. Physical improvements would include construction of a new hospitality building, conversion of an area within the existing main residence to winery storage, and additional parking spaces. This option would also allow on-site consumption in designated areas. This option would include widening the access drive prior to implementation of the proposed winery operational change and physical improvement.
The CEQA analysis evaluated this request; no potential environmental impacts have been identified with this project proposal. Furthermore, County divisions and departments have reviewed the proposal and are in support of the applicant's request. There would be no groundwater or wastewater impacts associated with winery operations and this request was found to be consistent with the Zoning Ordinance and applicable General Plan policies.
Action Required - Follow the proposed action listed in the Executive Summary. If conditions of approval are to be amended, specify conditions to be amended at the time the motion is made. This option has been analyzed for its environmental impacts, and the project was found to have less than significant impacts.
Option 6 - Revised Project Request
Disposition - This option allows the Planning Commission to reduce all or some components of the requested expansion to visitation beyond those necessary to remedy the existing violations. No potential environmental impacts have been identified with this applicant’s project proposal. If the Planning Commission elects to pursue this option, the recommended conditions of approval would need to reflect the revised visitation, marketing and/or employee numbers.
Action Required - Follow proposed actions listed in the Executive Summary and amend scope and applicable conditions of approval to reduce the existing operations. The item may need to be continued to a future date if significant revisions to the recommended conditions of approval are desired.
Option 7 - Deny Applicant’s Proposal
Disposition - This option would deny applicant’s proposal to expand winery visitation beyond what was approved and necessary to remedy existing violations as well as other proposed winery operations and physical improvements. This option would result in no expansion beyond approved levels.
In the event the Commission determines that the project does not or cannot meet the required findings for the granting of a Use Permit Major Modification, Commissioners should identify what aspect or aspects of the project are in conflict with the required findings. State Law requires the Commission to adopt findings, based on the General Plan and County Code, setting forth why the proposed Use Permit modification is not being approved.
Action Required - Commission would make a motion to deny the applicant’s proposal to expand the project.
Option 8 - Continuance Option
The Commission may continue an item to a future hearing date at its own discretion.
SUPPORTING DOCUMENTS
A. Revised Recommended Findings
B. Revised Recommended Conditions of Approval and Final Agency Approval Memos
C. Request for an Exception to the Napa County Road and Street Standards prepared by RSA+,
dated April 30, 2026
D. Revised Civil Drawings prepared by RSA+, dated April 24, 2026
E. Revised Water Availability Analysis prepared by RSA+, dated May 7, 2026