OPENPUBLICA · PUBLIC MEETING RECORD
Record of Proceedings

Napa Cultural Heritage Commission Public Hearing on Landmark B&B and Historic Signage - May 14, 2026

City CouncilThursday, May 14, 2026
BodyNapa, California
SessionCity Council
DateThursday, May 14, 2026
StatusFILED
Video Record
0:00 / 1:22:35
Transcript — Verbatim
0:00

Myra, did you have any members of the public guided comment cards or not?

0:05

Thank you.

0:06

All right.

0:06

Moving on to item number five.

0:09

Any member of the publication during the public hearing functions required.

0:12

The Civing reviewing item Natural Heritage Commission meeting.

0:20

Times any anything add that we have before us.

0:24

I wasn't at the approve this consent.

0:26

I was uh I was out of so I would abstain for the two separate of the minutes.

0:32

Only running the audites for that.

0:34

Do them separately.

0:35

So right on the is there a motion.

0:40

Very good.

0:40

And we have a second.

0:41

I'll second.

0:42

Excellent.

0:43

And all in favor?

0:45

Aye.

0:46

Aye.

0:48

Aye.

0:49

And I recuse myself.

0:51

Very good.

0:51

Thank you.

0:52

The next item is 5B for our next motion required for our minutes.

0:58

And this is from the meeting minutes from March 12th, 2026.

1:04

And uh Commissioner Tuwica must abstain.

1:07

Um other commissioners, do you have any comments at the time for these minutes?

1:12

No.

1:15

Anyone else any comments for the minutes?

1:18

Very good.

1:19

All right.

1:20

Then at this time, do I have a motion to approve the minutes as noted?

1:25

I make a motion to approve the minutes for the March 12, 2026 meeting.

1:30

Thank you.

1:31

Do I have a second?

1:32

I second it.

1:33

Very good.

1:34

All in favor?

1:35

Aye.

1:36

Abstain.

1:37

Yeah.

1:37

And aye.

1:38

All right.

1:39

Very good.

1:40

Moving on.

1:41

Um item six is consent hearings, but seeing none, we'll move on to the item number seven, public hearings and appeals.

1:51

These are items that are formally presented to the Cultural Heritage Commission and provide an opportunity for members of the public.

1:57

Oh, let's get the nomenclature correct here.

2:01

Uh to comment.

2:02

Applicants or appellants are allowed 10 minutes to present testimony at the beginning of the public hearing, and if needed, five minutes to present rebuttal at the end of the public hearing.

2:13

All other speakers will be limited to three minutes.

2:16

Tonight we have uh item 7A 845 Jefferson Street Bed and Breakfast Certificate of Appropriateness, and then moving on to a different item after that.

2:28

So at this point, we will now hear a report.

2:33

Oh, I can read what the uh actual project is into record.

2:38

Uh so item 7a is 845 Jefferson Street Bed and Breakfast Certificate of Appropriateness, an application for certificate appropriateness to allow major modifications to a local landmark with contributing status to the first in Jefferson potential historic district, including installation of windows, doors, and railings, also the relocation of existing doors and windows, and the restoration of missing historic features, including a chimney, unoriginal wind and unoriginal windows.

3:11

The property is located within the commercial OC and traffic impact TI overlay zoning districts, and at this time staff has determined that the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act of the CEQA guidelines, which exempts the operation repair maintenance permitting, leasing, licensing, and minor alterations of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use, and section 15331, which exempts the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of Interior Standards for the treatment of historic properties.

4:02

The recommended action staff recommends the Cultural Heritage Commission will forward a recommendation to the City Council to adopt a resolution to approve the certificate of appropriate to allow alterations to this local landmark within a potential historic district and determining the project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, otherwise known as CEQA.

4:23

So now I think we can have our staff report.

4:26

Good evening, everybody.

4:27

I'll be presenting on the proposed project at 845 Jefferson Street.

Discussion Breakdown — Share of Meeting
Historic Preservation█████████████████████████████████████████████85%
Procedural███████13%
Housing2%
Summary of Proceedings

Napa Cultural Heritage Commission Public Hearing on Landmark B&B and Historic Signage - May 14, 2026

This regular meeting of the Napa Cultural Heritage Commission on May 14, 2026, covered two main agenda items: a certificate of appropriateness for major modifications to a local landmark at 845 Jefferson Street to convert it into a bed and breakfast, and discussion of a signage program for the Napa Bajo Fuller Park National Register District. The commission also heard public comment and discussed preservation topics during commissioner comments.

Consent Calendar

  • The commission approved the minutes from the March 12, 2026 meeting. One commissioner recused themselves from the vote on that set of minutes.

Public Comments & Testimony

  • Maureen Tripp (438 Coombs Street) addressed the commission in support of expanding the historic district signage program. She urged the commission to forward a funding request to the city council, noting that the Riverside Drive paving project (planned for 2027) could be a potential funding synergy and suggested possible private and grant funding sources.
  • No public comments were received for the 845 Jefferson Street bed and breakfast item.

Discussion Items

7A – 845 Jefferson Street Bed and Breakfast Certificate of Appropriateness

  • Staff presented the project, which seeks a certificate of appropriateness for modifications to a local landmark with contributing status to the potential First and Jefferson historic district. Alterations include window and door replacements, chimney reconstruction, porch restoration, and addition of railings and an ADA lift. The project is exempt from CEQA under Sections 15301 and 15331. Staff recommended approval.
  • Applicant Michael Clark (6160 Washington Street, Yountville) presented his plans, noting he is a fifth-generation Napa native. He highlighted the home’s prairie style architecture, damage from the 2014 earthquake, and intent to restore missing historic features. He requested an exception to continue nonconforming parking to preserve the historic garage.
  • Commissioners praised the sensitivity of the proposal and asked about paint colors and window scheduling. Commissioner McKinney noted discrepancies between the window schedule and elevations and requested the applicant update the plans for clarity. Commissioner McKinney also suggested exploring the Mills Act for tax relief.
  • The commission closed the public hearing and voted on the item.

8A – Napa Bajo Fuller Park National Register District Signage Program

  • Staff reported that the commission had directed this item to be agendized. The signage program was originally developed in 2012, with designs finalized in 2017. Only the Calistoga Avenue Local Landmark District has received signs so far. Staff presented costs: approximately $19,000–$20,000 for standard signs, $38,000–$40,000 for double-sided signs. Informational monument signs were deemed costly and difficult to site. Staff recommended the commission discuss and potentially forward a funding request to the city council.
  • Public comment: Maureen Tripp again spoke, urging momentum for the project and noting the upcoming Riverside Drive paving project as a potential funding opportunity.
  • Commissioner discussion included debate over whether the design (featuring an anchor) appropriately represents the Napa Bajo area. Commissioner Towica expressed concerns that the anchor did not reflect the district’s history of bankers and store owners, and suggested separate signs for Napa Bajo and Fuller Park. Other commissioners (Commissioner Van Giesen, McKinney) noted the extensive prior work and approval by council, warning that redesign would cause years of delay and require new funding. The commission clarified that the item is to request council funding for already-approved plans.
  • The commission closed public comment and proceeded to a vote.

Key Outcomes

  • Item 7A: The commission unanimously voted to forward a recommendation to the City Council to adopt a resolution approving the certificate of appropriateness for 845 Jefferson Street, with the condition that the applicant update the window and door schedule and ensure clarity before building permit issuance. The motion passed with all commissioners voting aye (one commissioner noted they had toured the property and met the applicant, disclosed accordingly).
  • Item 8A: The commission voted 3-1 to forward a recommendation to the City Council to allocate funding for the already-approved signage program for the Napa Bajo Fuller Park district. Commissioner Towica voted nay, citing concerns about the anchor design not reflecting the district. The recommendation includes a request to find a funding source and reinstate the project implementation.

Commissioner Comments and Reports

  • Commissioner Wesson proposed exploring a vacancy tax on historic properties to address deterioration, but staff noted legal and enforcement challenges, including the need for council action and potential ballot measures.
  • Staff reported that a draft historic clearance application form for window replacements is being developed to standardize approvals, and will be brought back for discussion at a future meeting.
  • Commissioner Van Giesen requested an update on the status of the Thomas Earle house; staff noted the property is being marketed for sale but the entitlements require the historic house to be reconstructed if sold.
  • Commissioner Van Giesen also asked about historic stones from the First Street bridge that were stored off-site; staff agreed to check with public works for their location and potential reuse.
  • The commission discussed the need for educational outreach, including possible workshops and ensuring funding for a commissioner to attend the California Preservation Conference (next year in San Jose). Staff will follow up on conference attendance funding.
  • Commissioners thanked staff and the public for their participation.

Meeting Transcript

Myra, did you have any members of the public guided comment cards or not? Thank you. All right. Moving on to item number five. Any member of the publication during the public hearing functions required. The Civing reviewing item Natural Heritage Commission meeting. Times any anything add that we have before us. I wasn't at the approve this consent. I was uh I was out of so I would abstain for the two separate of the minutes. Only running the audites for that. Do them separately. So right on the is there a motion. Very good. And we have a second. I'll second. Excellent. And all in favor? Aye. Aye. Aye. And I recuse myself. Very good. Thank you. The next item is 5B for our next motion required for our minutes. And this is from the meeting minutes from March 12th, 2026. And uh Commissioner Tuwica must abstain. Um other commissioners, do you have any comments at the time for these minutes? No. Anyone else any comments for the minutes? Very good. All right. Then at this time, do I have a motion to approve the minutes as noted? I make a motion to approve the minutes for the March 12, 2026 meeting. Thank you. Do I have a second? I second it. Very good. All in favor? Aye. Abstain. Yeah. And aye. All right. Very good. Moving on. Um item six is consent hearings, but seeing none, we'll move on to the item number seven, public hearings and appeals. These are items that are formally presented to the Cultural Heritage Commission and provide an opportunity for members of the public. Oh, let's get the nomenclature correct here. Uh to comment. Applicants or appellants are allowed 10 minutes to present testimony at the beginning of the public hearing, and if needed, five minutes to present rebuttal at the end of the public hearing.

SUMMARIZED BY OPENPUBLICA AI
TRANSCRIPT VIA PUBLIC VIDEO
openpublica.com