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
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 a 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 applicant has also submitted plans that show widening the existing access drive to meet the Napa County Road and Street Standards.
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 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
body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
PROPOSED ACTIONS
That the Planning Commission:
1. Adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration based on Findings 1-7 in Attachment A and
2. Approve Use Permit Modification No. P19-00386-MOD, based on recommended Findings 8-12 in Attachment A and subject to the recommended Conditions of Approval in Attachment B.
DISCUSSION:
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 to allow the following:
A. COMPONENTS NECESSARY TO REMEDY EXISTING VIOLATIONS:
1) Recognition of by-appointment tours and tastings for a maximum of 24 visitors per day and no more than a maximum of 65 visitors per week, and
2) Recognition of by-appointment tours and tastings hours of 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m.
B. EXPANSION BEYOND EXISTING ENTITLEMENTS:
1) Construction of a new 1,065 sq. ft. hospitality building;
2) Convert approximately 267 sq. ft. of floor area within the main residence to winery storage;
3) Production operations Monday through Saturday from the hours of 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM;
4) By-appointment Tours and Tastings for a maximum of 22 visitors per day Sunday through Friday and a maximum of 44 visitors per day on Saturdays;
5) Use of a patio shared by the proposed hospitality building and the existing single-family residence for outdoor tastings and wine consumption pursuant to Business and Professions Code Sections 23358, 23390 and 23396.5.; and,
6) Three (3) new parking spaces near the proposed hospitality building
The applicant has also submitted plans that show widening the existing access drive to meet the Napa County Road and Street Standards.
Staff has reviewed the request for 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 believe the necessary findings for the modification can be made and recommends approval of the request as proposed and subject to conditions.
Staff prepared an Initial Study that evaluated the potential environmental impacts of the proposal as presented by the applicant which includes the expansions and new uses beyond existing entitlements. As described in Resolution No. 2018-164 adopted by the Napa County Board of Supervisors on December 4, 2018, the subject application was found to be substantially conforming. Accordingly, the County may use the winery’s existing operations as the environmental baseline for the CEQA analysis related to this application. Staff determined that the applicant’s proposal would not have any potentially significant environmental impacts and recommends adoption of the Negative Declaration.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION: 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
PROJECT INFORMATION:
Owner/Applicant: Sheldon Richards, Paloma Vineyard, 4013 Spring Mountain Road., St. Helena CA 94574 (707) 963-7504, info@palomavineyard.com
Representative: Scott Greenwood-Meinert, Coblentz Patch Duffy & Bass, LLP., (415) 772-5741, sgreenwood-meinert@coblentzlaw.com
Parcel Size: 17.11 acres
Zoning: Agricultural Watershed (AW)
General Plan Designation: Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space (AWOS)
Application Filed: March 27, 2019 (Status Determination); Use Permit Application submittal: September 23, 2019. Resubmittals: September 8, 2021, September 5, 2024, May 15, 2025, December 19, 2025, January 28, 2026, and February 5, 2026
Deemed complete: January 5, 2026
Existing Development: The project site is currently developed with the existing winery, winery accessory structures and infrastructure such as tanks, a pump house, wastewater facilities, access routes, etc., a single-family residential structure, an accessory dwelling unit (ADU), an accessory residential structure, and approximately 10 acres of vineyards.
WINERY CHARACTERISTICS
Approved and Proposed Winery Characteristics
Approved Winery Building Size: 3,613 sq. ft
Existing Winery Building Size: 5,352 sq. ft.
Proposed Winery Building Size: 4,676 sq. ft.
Approved Winery Development Area: No information was provided in the original use permit submittal information or subsequent modifications identifying winery development area as defined by Napa County Code (NCC) §18.104.210.
Existing Winery Development Area: 6,200 sq. ft.
Proposed Winery Development Area: 5,538 sq. ft.
Approved Winery Coverage Area: Previous Staff reports calculated a coverage of 3,484 sq. ft. (Use Permit #98368.) This would have increased to 3,613 sq. ft. based on Use Permit Modification #99439. However, no information was provided identifying winery coverage area as defined by NCC §18.104.220.
Existing Winery Coverage Area: 48,876 sq. ft. or 6.6% of 17.11-acre parcel (maximum allowed: 25 percent or approximately 15 acres)
Proposed Winery Coverage Area: 52,455 sq. ft. or 7.0% of 17.11-acre parcel (maximum allowed: 25 percent or approximately 15 acres)
Approved Production Facility: 5,271 sq. ft.
Existing Production Facility: 5,271 sq. ft.
Proposed Production Facility: No change
Approved Accessory/Production Ratio: 0%. No accessory use approved under use permit or prior mods
Existing Accessory/Production Ratio: 1,739 sq. ft. or 33% (maximum allowed: 40 percent)
Proposed Accessory/Production Ratio: 1,063 sq. ft. or 20% (maximum allowed: 40 percent)
Approved Production Capacity: 10,000 gallons per year over any three years not to exceed 12,000 gallons in any one year. The winery operation is to be an Estate Bottled winery
Existing Production Capacity: No change
Proposed Production Capacity: No change
Approved Number of Employees: One (1) part-time employee plus the two (2) owners who live on the parcel.
Existing Number of Employees: No change.
Proposed Number of Employees: No change.
Approved Visitation: Tours and Tastings limited to prior appointments only and a maximum of two (2) visitors per day
Existing Visitation: By-appointment Tours and Tastings for a maximum of 24 visitors per day and no more than a maximum of 65 visitors per week.
Proposed Visitation: By-appointment Tours and Tastings for a maximum of 22 visitors per day Sunday through Friday and a maximum of 44 visitors per day on Saturdays
Approved Marketing Program: one event per year with a maximum of 50 guests and two events per year with a maximum of 25 guests. Food for events would be provided by a licensed catering company. All market activity shall end by 11:00 p.m.
Existing Marketing Program: No change
Proposed Marketing Program: No change
Approved Days and Hours of Operation: 7:00 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. six (6) days a week (Use Permit #98368 Application submittal materials)
Existing Days and Hours of Operation: No change
Proposed Days and Hours of Operation: 7:30 a.m. to 5:30 p.m. Monday through Saturday
Approved Days and Hours of Visitation: 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. Monday through Sunday
Existing Days and Hours of Visitation: 8:00 a.m. to 6:00 p.m. Monday through Sunday
Proposed Days and Hours of Visitation: No Change
Approved Parking: Eight
Existing Parking: No change
Proposed Parking: Three new parking spaces for a total of 11 parking spaces on-site
Setbacks
Required Property Line setbacks: 20 feet
Existing Property Line setbacks: The existing winery structure exceeds 20 feet from side and rear property lines (approximately 55-feet to the nearest property line)
Proposed Property Line setbacks: The proposed hospitality building exceeds 20 feet from side and rear property lines (approximately 99-feet to the nearest side property line)
Required Road setback: 300 feet from Spring Mountain Road
Existing Road setback: Winery Building: Approximately 494-feet from the centerline of the road
Proposed Road setback: Hospitality Building: Approximately 729-feet from the centerline of the road
Adjacent General Plan Designation / Zoning / Land Use:
Properties in the vicinity of the project site range in size from just under an acre to just over 47 acres. Surrounding uses include single-family homes, vineyards, and a number of producing wineries (Vineyard 7 & 8, Domaine Charbay, Guilliams, Schweiger Vineyards, Robert Keenan Winery, Philip Vineyard, Barnett Vineyards, Smith Madrone, Sherwin Family, Lokoya, and 3646 SMR Vineyard). Undeveloped areas are generally heavily wooded.
North: Agriculture, Watershed and Open Space (AWOS) / Agricultural Watershed (AW) / vineyards, wineries, rural residential and open space.
South: County of Sonoma / AW / rural residential and open space
East: AWOS / AW / vineyards, wineries, rural residential and open space
West: County of Sonoma / AW / vineyards, rural residential and open
Nearby Wineries located within one (1) mile of the project - There are 11 wineries within one mile of the project.
Parcel History:
July 7, 1999 - The Planning Commission approved the original Paloma Vineyard (aka Richards Vineyard or Richards Winery) Use Permit #98368-UP. This approval entitled a new, 10,000 gallon per year winery to be constructed in two phases consisting of a 1,600 sq. ft. cut and cover barrel storage building (Phase 1) and a 1,693 sq. ft. winery building with a 1,720 sq. ft. crush pad (Phase 2). The approval also included tours and tastings for two visitors per day by prior appointment only and a marketing plan with one event per year with a maximum of 50 people and two lunches per year with a maximum of 25 people. Outdoor facilities could be used for marketing activities which were to end by 11:00 PM, but not for tours and tastings. Hours of operation were limited to 7:30 AM to 4:30 PM, six days a week, excluding marketing activities. In addition to the owners, the winery was approved for one part-time employee. The application indicated that there were eight on-site parking spaces.
April 7, 2000 - The Zoning Administrator approved Use Permit Modification #99285-MOD for the winery to relocate the cut and cover barrel storage building above ground attached to the 1,693 sq. ft. building and a 320 sq. ft. building addition, resulting in a 3,613 sq. ft. winery building. The request also included reducing the crush pad from 1,720 sq. ft. to 1,330 sq. ft. and providing a cover over the crush pad.
May 5, 2000 - The Zoning Administrator approved Use Permit Modification #99285-MOD which was a request to rescind Use Permit Modification #99285-MOD. The approval resulted in a revision of the design and phasing of the winery with no change to the floor area identified above, except this action did not include the reduced crush pad.
Code Compliance History:
Existing Entitlement:
June 24, 2019 - The Director issued a status determination (P19-00120) detailing that, as established under Use Permit #98368 and its subsequent modifications, Paloma Vineyards is a 3,613 sq. ft., 10,000 gallon per year winery limited to a maximum of two (2) visitors per day, a marketing program allowing one (1) marketing event per year with a maximum of 50 guests and two (2) marketing events per year with a maximum of 25 guests, (2) one part time employee in addition to the [two] owners and hours of operation from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m.
(note: The Status Determination letter indicated the hours of operation were from 7:30 a.m. to 4:20 p.m. which was a typographical error, the correct hours are 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. per the original use permit approval letter (#98368-UP) dated July 12, 1999, condition of approval #2)
Existing Entitlement Summary
1) Annual wine production of 10,000 gallons
2) A one-story 3,613 sq. ft. winery building with a 1,720 sq. ft. crush pad
3) A maximum of two (2) visitors per day for tours and tastings by appointment only
4) A marketing program allowing one (1) marketing event per year with a maximum of 50 guests and two (2) marketing events per year with a maximum of 25 guests with catered food. All market activity shall end by 11:00 p.m.
5) One part time employee in addition to the owners
6) Hours of operation from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (six days per week - days of the week were not identified - per the original use permit application #98368-UP)
7) Eight (8) on-site parking spaces (per the original use permit application #98368-UP - a parking area was identified near the production building on the site plan)
After the Status Determination, this application was submitted to participate in the County's Code Compliance Program as described in Resolution No. 2018-164. Pursuant to that Resolution, a site inspection was conducted by Code Compliance, Planning, and Fire staff on April 23, 2019, to identify any potential health and safety issues, as well as, to review the existing use and proposed changes. As a follow-up to the site inspection, a notice regarding apparent code violations was issued to the property owner by the Code Enforcement Division on June 19, 2019. Life safety issues included a number of Fire and Building Code issues such as, non-operational emergency lights, securing tanks, extension cords with approved protective covers, among other items. All items noted in the apparent code violation notice of June 19, 2019, have been addressed and the code enforcement division cleared the project to continue with the compliance program on April 15, 2020.
Discussion Points:
Setting - The project is located on a 17.11-acre parcel, approximately 3.25 miles northwest of the City of St. Helena, with the western and southern boundaries of the parcel abutting Sonoma County. Elevations on the property range from 2,020 feet above mean sea level (msl) to 2,205 feet above (msl.) The parcel is dominated by approximately 10-acres of vineyards with some edge communities of Douglas-fir and mixed oak woodland. The project parcel includes the existing winery, winery accessory structures and infrastructure such as tanks, a pump house, wastewater facilities, access routes, etc., a single-family residential structure, an accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and an accessory residential structure. The winery was established under Use Permit #98368 on July 12, 1999, by the Napa County Planning Commission.
Winery Proposal - 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: increased daily and weekly visitation and hours of operation for visitation.
In addition, the application also seeks to expand its entitlements to:
1) construct a new 1,065 sq. ft. hospitality building;
2) convert existing approximately 267 sq. ft. of floor area within the main residence to winery storage;
3) modify production operations Monday through Saturday from the hours of 7:30 AM to 5:30 PM;
4) modify by-appointment Tours and Tastings for a maximum of 22 visitors per day, Sunday through Friday and a maximum of 44 visitors per day on Saturdays;
5) use a patio shared by the proposed hospitality building and an existing single-family residence for outdoor tastings and wine consumption pursuant to Business and Professions Code Sections 23358, 23390 and 23396.5.; and,
6) provide three (3) new parking spaces near the proposed hospitality building
Hospitality Building - The proposal includes construction of a new 1,065 sq. ft. hospitality building attached to, or adjoining the existing main residence. The original use permit did not include an area designated for winey tasting. Tastings are or have been conducted within the main residence. The proposal includes a request to use an existing patio shared by the proposed hospitality building and an existing single-family residence for outdoor tastings and on-premise wine consumption.
Visitation and visitation hours - The original Use Permit authorized tours and tastings by appointment for two (2) visitors per day. Approved hours of operation for the winery were from 7:30 a.m. to 4:30 p.m. (six days per week - days of the week were not identified - per the original use permit application #98368-UP). The approved hours of operation did not differentiate between production of hospitality/administrative functions.
The applicant is requesting recognition of by-appointment visitation for tours and tastings for a maximum of 24 visitors per day, maximum of 65 per week between the hours of 8:00 a.m and 6:00 p.m.
The applicant is requesting an expansion beyond the existing unpermitted levels for a maximum of 22 visitors/day Sunday through Friday and 44 visitors on Saturdays.
No impacts were identified in the Initial Study/Negative Declaration associated with the requested increases to visitation and marketing activities.
Access/Traffic - The parcel is accessed via a private access drive off Spring Mountain Road. The project plans show widening the access drive to meet the commercial standards of the County’s Road and Street Standards (RSS). The request has been reviewed by the Engineering Division and Fire Marshal’s Office and has approved the proposed widening as conditioned (see discussion of Conditions of Approval, below.)
The County maintains a set of Transportation Impact Study Guidelines (TIS Guidelines) that define situations and project characteristics that trigger the need to prepare a TIS. The purpose of a TIS is to identify whether the project is likely to cause adverse physical or operational changes on a County roadway, bridge, bikeway or other transportation facility, to determine whether the project should be required to implement or contribute to improvement measures to address those changes, and to ensure that the project is developed consistent with the County’s transportation plans and policies.
Per the County’s current TIS Guidelines, a project is required to prepare a TIS if it generates 110 or more net new daily vehicle trips. Based on the County’s winery trip generation assumptions, the proposed project would be expected to generate 26 daily trips on weekdays (a net increase of 18 trips) and 41 trips on Saturdays (33 net), including seven new trips during the weekday p.m. peak hour and 19 during the Saturday p.m. peak hour, compared to permitted conditions. The trip generation does not exceed 110 net new daily trips; therefore, the project is not required to prepare a traffic impact study (TIS). However, the project included a Traffic Impact Study (TIS) prepared by W-Trans, dated January 28, 2026, to address any potential access and/or safety issues. The TIS concluded that the proposed roadway volumes did not warrant the requirement for a left-turn lane at the project entry and adequate sight distance is available at the project driveway onto Spring Mountain Road.
Groundwater Availability - RSA+ prepared a Water Availability Analysis (WAA), dated November 25, 2024, for the project to demonstrate that the proposed water use is not impacting groundwater in the area. The report includes Tier 1 calculations for the existing and proposed water uses, a groundwater recharge analysis, groundwater savings practices, and a Tier 3 Significant Streams Map.
According to the WAA, the winery owner proposes to reduce the number of dripline emitters for vineyard irrigation from two emitters per vine to one emitter per vine. At the time of application submittal 3,500 of 7,500 vines had been converted. Upon completion of converting all vines to one emitter the proposed water use for irrigation will be reduced by 0.35 acre-feet per year (af/yr.)
The winery owner also intends to incorporate water conservation measures to reduce water use throughout the winery that will include shutoff valves for hoses and reducing the volume of hot water for more conservative barrel cleaning practices and sweeping and handwashing floors instead of using hoses. These measures would result in four gallons of process wastewater per gallon of wine. A flow meter will be placed on the existing wastewater system to confirm the reduced flow level is achieved. These measures as well as the irrigation measures above, will be added as project conditions of approval.
Tier 1: The Tier 1 analysis considered existing uses onsite to include the existing winery, single-family residence, accessory dwelling unit, and vineyard irrigation. There are two existing wells on-site, however, only one well is in use. The existing groundwater usage is estimated at 2.958 af/yr. Based on the WAA prepared for the project, the proposed project would decrease groundwater use by 0.412 af/yr resulting in an overall water usage of 2.546 af/yr due to water savings practices and water conservation measures discussed above.
|
Usage Type |
Existing Usage (af/yr) |
Standard Usage (af/yr) |
Proposed Usage (af/yr) |
|
Vineyard |
|
|
|
|
Irrigation |
1.114 |
0.760 |
0.760 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
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 (Acre-feet per Year) |
2.958 |
2.657 |
2.546 |
|
|
|
|
|
Groundwater Recharge (Acre-feet per year |
12.99 |
12.99 |
12.99 |
Tier 2: The latest Interim Napa County Well Permit Standards and WAA Requirements require an interference analysis for any proposed increase in groundwater use occurring from project wells within 500 feet of any offsite well or 1,500 feet from any off-site spring. A Tier 2 analysis is not required for discretionary projects that use an existing well provided there is no increase in groundwater use. As discussed above, the project proposes utilizing an existing well and the project results in a decrease of water use.
Tier 3: A Tier 3 review is the County’s adopted method for complying with its duties under the public trust doctrine. According to the WAA the well serving the property is over 2,300 feet from Mill creek, the nearest significant stream, therefore further analysis is not required.
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 ground water supplies and therefore would not interfere with groundwater recharge or lowering the local groundwater level.
Wastewater System - A Wastewater Feasibility Report, dated November 25, 2024, was prepared by RSA+, detailing the existing system and its capacity to accommodate winery operations. According to the study, the project proposes ongoing use of existing systems to serve the residences on site. The existing primary residential system will be repaired and will remain to serve the residence and the increased visitation. This report demonstrates that the existing primary residential wastewater system has sufficient capacity to handle the peak visitation for a weekend day, but in order to utilize this existing system, events will require the use of portable sanitation facilities.
The existing winery system will remain to serve the winery for production and employees domestic flows at this time, but the on-site process wastewater system will either be upgraded to meet the new Winery General Order, or a Hold and Haul system will be implemented. This report demonstrates both Hold & Haul and on-site treatment of process wastewater are feasible. If an onsite system is proposed, a package treatment system will be selected that will meet all applicable State and County requirements, and treated process wastewater would then be used for vineyard irrigation. The Division of Environmental Health reviewed this report and concurred with its findings.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions - On April 20, 2022, the Bay Area Air District (BAAD) adopted updated thresholds for determining the significance of individual projects’ greenhouse gas impacts under CEQA. Under the new thresholds, proposed land use projects may be analyzed for consistency with a qualified greenhouse gas (GHG) reduction strategy in the event one has been adopted. To date, Napa County has not adopted a qualified GHG reduction strategy pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15183.5. Absent an adopted strategy, BAAD recommends that a land use project include specified minimum design elements to ensure that the project is contributing its “fair share” toward achieving the state’s key climate goal of carbon neutrality by 2045. Napa County has not adopted a qualified GHG reduction strategy or an air quality plan, therefore projects will be evaluated per the BAAD recommended minimum design elements.
The project will be required, through Conditions of Approval, to meet relevant design standards identified by BAAD, including prohibiting the use of natural gas appliances or plumbing and compliance with the California Building Code Title 24 standards. Additionally, Conditions of Approval require implementation of the checked Voluntary Best Management Practices Measures submitted with the project application which include providing shuttle service for large marketing events, solar hot water heating, energy conserving lighting, the installation of water efficient fixtures, water efficient landscaping, implementing a sustainable purchasing and shipping program, and limiting the amount of grading and tree removal. The applicant also intends to use recycled materials, educate staff and visitors about sustainable practices, and retain biomass via pruning and thinning by chipping the material for reuse rather than burning.
Biological Resources - The property contains developed and disturbed areas including the existing winery building, agricultural and residential structures, and supporting infrastructure. The site is dominated by approximately 10-acres of vineyards with some edge communities of Douglas-fir and mixed oak woodland between the vineyards and Spring Mountain Road. The nearest blue-line stream (Mill creek) is approximately 1,860 feet north of the project site. Improvements to the existing access drive will require the removal of 12 trees (six pines, three oaks, two olive trees and one unidentified tree) and approximately 93 vines. All proposed improvements are in previously developed and/or disturbed areas. Any Oak trees removed because of the project will be replaced at a 2:1 ratio and shown on the grading plans for the Planning Division’s review and approval. Trees to be retained shall be protected during construction by fencing securely installed at the outer most dripline of the tree or trees. Such fencing shall be maintained throughout the duration of the work undertaken in connection with the winery development/construction. In no case shall construction material, debris or vehicles be stored in the fenced tree protection area.
According to the Napa County Geographic Information System (GIS) California Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB) layers, the subject property is within an area of the County that is known to have the potential for Napa false indigo (Amorpha californica var. napensis) near the eastern portion of the access drive, and Napa checkerbloom (Sidalcea hickmanii ssp. napensis) within the western portion of the site that is planted in vines (no work is proposed in this area), and Northern Spotted Owl (NSO).
To ensure impacts to protected plant species are avoided and/or reduced significantly, mitigation measures recommended for the project include pre-construction botanical surveys in conformance with California Department of Fish and Wildlife protocols. Since the project also proposes tree removal along the access drive and the site includes communities of Douglas-fir and mixed oak woodland, preconstruction bat habitat assessments, nesting bird, raptor surveys, and NSO are recommended to mitigate any potential impacts to these species. By incorporating the recommended mitigation measures impacts on biological resources would be less than significant.
Conditions of Approval - Widening the access drive to meet Road and Street Standards is required to be completed prior to any increases in visitation beyond the existing level and construction of the proposed hospitality building. Staff proposed a date of October 15, 2027, for completion of the widening. 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 - The Applicant’s attorney submitted a letter dated March 4, 2026, regarding widening the access drive. Staff has also included the plans prepared by RSA+, dated April 8, 2025, referenced in the letter (Attachment K.)
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 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, 2027, 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 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 take tentative motion to deny the project and remand the matter to staff for preparation of required findings to return to the Commission on a specific date.
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. Recommended Findings
B. Recommended Conditions of Approval and Final Agency Approval Memos
C. Initial Study / Mitigated Negative Declaration
D. Previous Project Conditions
E. Application Packet
F. Water Availability Analysis
G. Wastewater Feasibility Study
H. Traffic Impact Study
I. Graphics
J. Winery Comparison Analysis and Summary of Changes
K. Public Comments