ATCH 12 – CHC Staff Report (03-23-2023) — Napa City Council, May 2, 2023 (part 1 of 2)

Community Development Department – Planning Division
1600 First Street + P.O. Box 660
Napa, CA 94559-0660
(707) 257-9530
_________________________________________________________________________________________________

CULTURAL HERITAGE COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
MARCH 23, 2023
AGENDA ITEM 7.A File No. PL23-0002 – OLD SONOMA ROAD MIXED USE COA I. GENERAL INFORMATION

PROJECT
SUMMARY:

Certificate of Appropriateness application for renovations and modifications to three historic buildings at the former Health and Human Services Buildings at 2344 Old Sonoma Road. These renovations are a historic component of a larger mixed-use project on the remaining portion of the site.

LOCATION OF
PROPERTY:
2344 Old Sonoma Road
APN: 004-291-015
GENERAL PLAN: Residential Mixed Use
ZONING: Public, Quasi-Public (PQ-P)

HISTORIC
RATING:

Historic Resource Inventory – Local Landmark (LLM)

APPLICANT /

PROPERTY
OWNER:

Napa Community Real Estate Fund
608 North Fair Oaks Avenue, #126
Pasadena, CA 91103
Phone: (626) 403-4663
Ext: 111
STAFF
PLANNER:

Michael Allen, Senior Planner Phone: (707) 257-9530
ATTACHMENTS: ATCH 1 – Draft Resolution

ATCH 2 – Project Description

ATCH 3 – Project Plans

ATCH 4 – Historic Analysis

ATCH 5 – NRHP Registration Form
II. RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Cultural Heritage Commission recommend the City Council adopt a resolution approving a Certificate of Appropriateness for the Old Sonoma Road Mixed Use Development at 2344 Old Sonoma Road and determining that the project is compliant with CEQA Section 15183.

ATTACHMENT 12
III. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Applicant, Napa Community Real Estate Fund, requests a Certificate of Appropriateness for renovations and modifications to three Local Landmark buildings that face the curve of the historic crescent driveway at the former Health and Human Services facility at 2344 Old Sonoma Road.

These renovations are a historic component of a larger mixed-use project on the remaining portion of the site, as shown below in Figure 1, Location Map. The property features the remaining buildings of the Napa County Infirmary and was listed as the Napa County Infirmary Historic District in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register District) as well as in the California Register of Historical Resources and features three buildings and one contributing feature (crescent driveway) designated as Local Landmarks on the City’s Historic Resources Inventory.

FIGURE 1
Location Map
The overall project proposes mixed-use featuring mixed-income residential with a total of between 155 and 162 for-sale housing units and community serving commercial, as further described in Attachment 2, Project Description and shown in Attachment 3, Project Plans.

Old Sonoma Road
Walnut Street
Gesford Street
Monroe Street
ATTACHMENT 12
The National Register District boundary is identified by the yellow rectangle shown above in Figure 1. It includes three contributing buildings (Buildings 2 (A), 3 (B) and 4 (C)) 1and the contributing crescent-shaped driveway and lawn and three non-contributing buildings (Buildings 5, 6 and 8). As shown on page 3 of Attachment 3, within the Historic District boundary, the Applicant is proposing to modify and reuse the three contributing buildings, remove all three non-contributing buildings and construct two (2) non-contributing residential buildings. Of the three contributing buildings, the Applicant will modify and reuse two (2) dormitory buildings (Buildings 2 (A) and 4 (C)) as six (6) townhouse units, and modify and reuse the hospital/infirmary building (Building 3 (B)) as a commercial building with community-serving uses. Of the two new buildings that will be constructed within the boundary of the National Register District, one of these (called the Crescent Building) will occupy the former location of the non-contributing Building D that will be demolished. The other new building (called the Carriage Building) will be situated behind (northwest) Buildings A and B. The Carriage Building will include three townhomes and the Crescent Building will include three townhomes and one flat.

Pursuant to Napa Municipal Code (NMC) Section 15.52.070(D)(2), major alterations to a Local Landmark including removal and replacement of original windows, substantial exterior rehabilitation, and the construction of any new primary structures requires Cultural Heritage Commission approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness. The Certificate of Appropriateness is the only entitlement subject to Cultural Heritage Commission review.

Per Napa Municipal Code (NMC) Section 15.52.070.E.3. when a project subject to a Certificate of Appropriateness requires additional discretionary approvals from Planning Commission or City Council, the CHC makes a recommendation to City Council, which is the final decision-maker for the entire project.

IV. SITE CONTEXT & HISTORY
The approximately 8.59-acre Project site is located on the north side of Old Sonoma Road approximately 750 feet west of Jefferson Street at the former site of the Napa County Health and Human Services (HHS) Campus. Currently, there are eleven (11) buildings and six (6) modular units improved by existing landscaped areas, walkways, and surface parking areas. The site is adjacent to single-family residential and Napa Christian School campus to the north, single-family residential to the east, Old Sonoma Road and singlefamily residential to the south, and Walnut Street and the Napa County Juvenile Justice Center to the west.

The Project site contains the remaining buildings of the Napa County Infirmary and was listed as the Napa County Infirmary Historic District in the National Register of Historic Places on June 4, 2018, and also listed in the California Register of Historical Resources pursuant to 4851(a)(2) of the Public Resources Code and designated as a Local Landmark (LLM) on the City’s Historic Resource Inventory. 1 Buildings are identified with a numeral (1,2, 3..) on the site plan, sheet 3 of Attachment 3, but with a letter, (A, B, C, D1, D2) on the individual elevation plans.

ATTACHMENT 12
As described in Attachment 4, Historic Analysis, the (National Register) district boundary is generally rectangular in shape and includes the following contributing buildings: the hospital/infirmary building listed as Building B, the men’s and women’s dormitory buildings listed as Buildings A and C, respectively, and the crescent-shaped driveway and lawn in which the buildings are oriented. The district also includes three non-contributing buildings described as Building D, E, and F that were added in the 2000’s. The northern portion of the parcel was not included in the district boundary. See Attachment 4, Historic Analysis, and Attachment 5, NRHP Registration Form for details on the historic attributes.

V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
As part of the larger mixed-use Project, the Applicant proposes the demolition of nine existing non-contributing buildings and the construction of six new condominium buildings and eight new single-family residences and the rehabilitation and reuse of the three historic buildings (hospital/infirmary and the men’s and woman’s dormitory buildings). Since the purview of the Commission is the portion of the Project located within the National Register District, the discussion below is primarily focused on the proposed work within the National Register District boundary.

As shown in Attachment 4, Project Plans, proposed work within the National Register District boundary includes the rehabilitation of the three contributing buildings, removing three non-contributing buildings, preserving the crescent shaped driveway and lawn, and constructing two new non-contributing but compatible buildings.

The standards in the State Historical Building Code would be applied to preserve the character-defining features of the contributing buildings, while converting them to new uses, updating mechanical systems, and providing reasonable access to the physically disabled.

The contributing buildings would be preserved in their entirety maintaining building heights and shapes, roof forms and details, fenestration patterns, and stucco walls.

Original features would be repaired as necessary using recognized methods. A key component of the Project would be removing insensitive alterations and restoring missing features to improve the historic character of the contributing buildings. This work would include removing non-original vinyl sashes, slab doors, composition roof shingles, mechanical equipment, and Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) ramps and restoring clay tile roofs, wood window sashes and basement vents, front and back porch configurations, and wood paneled doors.

New features required for the new uses would be located on rear (north) facades, which are not visible from Old Sonoma Road.

The following provides a brief description of proposed improvements to each of the three (3) historic buildings (Building A, B, and C), followed by corresponding figures showing existing and proposed elevations. Further, there is a discussion on the two new noncontributing structures, and a summary of other required entitlements.

Due to the large number of Figures provided, all figures are provided after the text for ease of review and reference.

ATTACHMENT 12
A. Historic Buildings
Dormitory Building “A”
As shown in Figure 2 through Figure 5, proposed renovations would include the following:
• removal of ramps, stairs, pipe railing, and windows at entry porch • new concrete stair and railing at front entry;
• removal of asphalt shingles and restoration of tile roof; • repair of rafter tails and integral gutter;
• restoration of windows with new wood to match divided lights; • restoration of entry porch archways at the rear of the building; • new entry doors and transom at window location on back of the building ; • new stair and raised deck at each unit on back of building; • three new dormers on back of building to match original one on the front; • uncovering of infill windows and installation of new wood windows to match; • repair of basement window vents; and
• infill of Juliette balcony at existing door opening.

Infirmary Building “B”
As shown in Figure 6 through Figure 9, proposed renovation would include the following:
• removal of ramps, stairs, pipe railing, and windows at entry porch; • provide new concrete stair and railing at front entry; • removal of asphalt shingles and restoration of tile roof; • repair of rafter tails and integral gutter;
• restoration windows with new wood to match divided lights; • new entry doors and transom to unit at existing window location; • uncovering of infill windows and installation of new wood windows to match; • repair of basement window vents;
• removal of non-conforming mechanical equipment and screens on roof and elsewhere; removal of infill wall at back of building;
• new/expanded raised porch at back of building;
• removal of existing ramp at back of building;
• repair/refinish existing stone foundation;
• locate HVAC equipment below deck; and
• new raised wood deck and ADA ramp.

Dormitory Building “C”
As shown in Figure 10 through Figure 13, proposed renovation would include the following:
• removal of ramps, stairs, pipe railing, and windows at entry porch; • new concrete stair and railing at front entry;
• removal of asphalt shingles and restoration of tile roof; • repair of rafter tails and integral gutter;
• restoration of windows with new wood to match divided lights; ATTACHMENT 12
• restoration of entry porch archways at the rear of the building; • new entry doors and transom at window location on back of the building ; • new stair and raised deck at each unit on back of building; • three new dormers on back of building to match original one on the front; • uncovering of infill windows and installation of new wood windows to match; • repair of basement window vents; and
• infill of Juliette balcony at existing door opening.

B. Non-Contributing Buildings Carriage Building “D1” and Crescent Building “D2” As shown in Figure 14 through Figure 20, the remaining new structures, which include 8 condominium buildings and 8 single-family homes are beyond the National Register District boundary and are therefore subject to Design Review by the Planning Commission, and City Council. However, the plans have been included as part of Attachment 3 for context.

It is important to note that Carriage Building “D1” and Crescent Building “D2”, are technically within the boundary of the National Register District. Therefore, they are considered to be non-contributing buildings. As shown in Figures 14 through Figure 20, these structures are intended to complement the historic structures. The scale, and materials of these buildings are similar to those that are adjacent to it.

C. Project Entitlements
Although the purview of the Cultural Heritage Commission is to provide feedback and a recommendation related to the historical component of the greater Project, the following provides context by describing other project entitlements required of the Project.

Project entitlements would include a Master Plan District, Tentative Subdivision Map/Condominium Map, Design Review Permit and Certificate of Appropriateness to allow the Mixed Use, Residential and Commercial project on the historic Napa County Infirmary site. A summary of each requested entitlement is provided below.

Master Plan District (MP)
A MP District is proposed for the creation of development standards (setbacks/lot coverages/building heights) for the new proposed structures as well as mixed uses (commercial uses proposed in the hospital/infirmary building with residential condominium uses in the two dormitory buildings) and for the mix of residential condominiums and single -family homes.

The MP district would establish a zoning district tailored to the proposed development which is necessary since although the subject property has a new “Residential Mixed Use” land use designation under the 2040 General Plan, the Zoning Ordinance has yet to be updated and the site currently remains zoned, Public-Quasi Public (PQ-P). The Master Plan District Zoning Amendment is subject to Planning Commission and City Council review and approval.

ATTACHMENT 12
Tentative Subdivision Map
A Tentative Subdivision Map is required to subdivide the 8.59-acre site into 8 single family lots and 12 common space parcels, which would be further subdivided for condominium purposes. The tentative subdivision map is subject to Planning Commission and City Council review and approval.

Design Review Permit
A Design Review Permit is required for the new structures that are located outside of the National Register District area. The Design Review Permit is subject to Planning Commission and City Council review and approval.

Certificate of Appropriateness
A Certificate of Appropriateness is required for work on a Local Landmark (and National Register property). The COA is subject to Cultural Heritage Commission review and includes review of the proposed rehabilitation to the historic structures and the two new structures within the National Register District boundary. The Certificate of Appropriateness is subject to Cultural Heritage and City Council review and approval.

D. Figures
The following figures are provided for reference and correspond to the above text. Below is a table of contents for each figure for reference.
• Figure 2: Dormitory Building (A) – Existing South Elevation • Figure 3: Dormitory Building (A) – Proposed South Elevation • Figure 4: Dormitory Building (A) – Existing North Elevation • Figure 5: Dormitory Building (A) – Proposed North Elevation • Figure 6: Infirmary Building (B) – Existing South Elevation • Figure 7: Infirmary Building (B) – Proposed South Elevation • Figure 8: Infirmary Building (B) – Existing North Elevation • Figure 9: Infirmary Building (B) – Proposed North Elevation • Figure 10: Dormitory Building (C) – Existing South Elevation • Figure 11: Dormitory Building (C) – Proposed South Elevation • Figure 12: Dormitory Building (C) – Existing North Elevation • Figure 13: Dormitory Building (C) – Proposed North Elevation • Figure 14: New Non-Contributing “Carriage” Building (D1) – East Elevation • Figure 15: New Non-Contributing “Carriage” Building (D1) – West Elevation • Figure 16: New Non-Contributing “Carriage” Building (D1) – N./S. Elevation • Figure 17: New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – West Elevation • Figure 18: New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – East Elevation • Figure 19: New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – South Elevation • Figure 20: New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – North Elevation ATTACHMENT 12
FIGURE 2
Dormitory Building (A) – Existing South Elevation
FIGURE 3
Dormitory Building (A) – Proposed South Elevation
FIGURE 4
Dormitory Building (A) – Existing North Elevation
ATTACHMENT 12
FIGURE 5
Dormitory Building (A) – Proposed North Elevation
FIGURE 6
Infirmary Building (B) – Existing South Elevation
FIGURE 7
Infirmary Building (B) – Proposed South Elevation
ATTACHMENT 12
FIGURE 8
Infirmary Building (B) – Existing North Elevation
FIGURE 9
Infirmary Building (B) – Proposed North Elevation
FIGURE 10
Dormitory Building © – Existing South Elevation
ATTACHMENT 12
FIGURE 11
Dormitory Building © – Proposed South Elevation
FIGURE 12
Dormitory Building © – Existing North Elevation
FIGURE 13
Dormitory Building © – Proposed North Elevation
ATTACHMENT 12
FIGURE 14
New Non-Contributing “Carriage” Building (D1) – East Elevation FIGURE 15
New Non-Contributing “Carriage” Building (D1) – West Elevation ATTACHMENT 12
FIGURE 16
New Non-Contributing “Carriage” Building (D1) – North/South Elevation FIGURE 17
New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – West Elevation FIGURE 18
New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – East Elevation ATTACHMENT 12
FIGURE 19
New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – South Elevation FIGURE 20
New Non-Contributing “Crescent” Building (D2) – North Elevation VI. ANALYSIS
A. General Plan
The property is located within the Residential Mixed-Use 2040 General Plan Designation and PQ-P, Public, Quasi-Public Zoning District. The Residential Mixed-Use designation prioritizes residential development with associated neighborhood-scale retail and office space. In addition to a mix of housing types, other uses like live/work units, artist studios and businesses that are less than 10,000 square feet are permitted. The proposed Project would be consistent with this intent as it would provide a mix of housing types and would provide commercial uses within suites that are less than 10,000 square feet. Also, the proposed Project would be consistent with the following applicable General Plan Goal:
• Historic Resource Goal HCR-1: Preserve and enhance Napa’s historic recourses. Encourage rehabilitation and adaptive reuse, as well as sensitive, context-compatible infill design.

ATTACHMENT 12
The Project would enhance the integrity of the National Register District by rehabilitating the three contributing buildings, removing the three non-contributing buildings, preserving the crescent shaped driveway and lawn, and constructing two new non-contributing but compatible buildings. The three contributing buildings would be rehabilitated in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards.

Character-defining features of the contributing buildings would be preserved, while adapting them to new commercial and residential uses. The contributing buildings would be preserved in their entirety maintaining building heights and shapes, roof forms and details, fenestration patterns, and stucco walls removing insensitive alterations and restoring missing features to improve the historic character of the contributing buildings.

This renovation would include removing non-original vinyl sashes, slab doors, composition roof shingles and restoring clay tile roofs, wood window sashes and basement vents, front and back porch configurations, and wood paneled doors.

B. Zoning
Consistent with the recent adoption of the 2040 General Plan and the new Residential Mixed-Use (RMU) designation, it is anticipated the forthcoming Zoning Ordinance Update will include a new mixed-use district to be consistent with the RMU designation. As this affordable housing project is being processed ahead of the Zoning Ordinance update, it’s requesting a zoning amendment to a Master Plan District. The zoning amendment will be subject to review of the Planning Commission and City Council.

C. Historic Preservation Ordinance
NMC Chapter 15.52 (Historic Preservation) establishes regulations applicable to properties designated as Local Landmarks. The proposed Project work must be found consistent with the requirements outlined in NMC Chapter 15.52 for Local Landmarks and for work within Local Landmark Districts. In order to evaluate the project’s consistency with local and state requirements, the Applicant hired a preservation architect to evaluate the project based on various standards. The report was prepared by Teresa Grimes and is titled “Certificate of Appropriateness, The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road” and dated December 21, 2022 (see Attachment 4). This memo provided information sufficient to make the findings required for a Certificate of Appropriateness.

D. Secretary of the Interior Standards
The following is a listing of the Secretary of the Interior standards for the rehabilitation of historic properties standards followed by Staff’s analysis of how the standards have been satisfied based on the Applicant’s historic report (Attachment 4).

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces and spatial relationships.

The property was originally constructed as the Napa County Infirmary; however, it has not been used for that purpose since 1962. Between 1962 and 1973, the property was used as a licensed nursing facility for the elderly. In 1973, the facility closed, and the property was converted into an alcohol and mental health services facility.

ATTACHMENT 12
That facility closed in 2016. The proposed Project will convert Buildings A and C into residential condominiums; three units in each building. Building B will be converted into an event space, café, and community arts center. These new uses will require minimal changes to the character-defining features of the contributing buildings. Most of the changes involve adding new dormers on the rear (north) roofs of Buildings A and C to allow for the use of the attic spaces. Additionally, a few window openings on the rear facades of Buildings A, B, and C will be lowered and converted into doorways. The crescent shaped driveway and lawn will continue to provide vehicular circulation and open space, respectively. The Crescent Building will be the only new building that is clearly visible from Old Sonoma Road. It will replace a non-contributing building that is not compatible with the historic character of the property. As discussed further under Standard 9, the Crescent Building is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the contributing buildings.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

The Project complies with Standard 2 because the historic character of the contributing buildings and landscape feature as well as the district as a whole will be retained and preserved. The Project does not propose the removal of any of the character defining features described above. The demolition activity described above is limited to the removal of noncontributing buildings and non-original materials and features such as roof shingles, vinyl windows, and ADA ramps.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place and use.

Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

The use of architectural features or elements from other buildings is not proposed as part of the Project. The contributing buildings rather than other buildings have been used as the source of inspiration for minor alterations on the rear (north) facades of the contributing buildings. Therefore, the Project complies with Standard 3. As discussed further under Standard 9, the new buildings within the boundary of the district have been designed to be compatible but distinguishable as new.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

The Project complies with Standard 4 because none of the alterations to the contributing buildings after 1962 have acquired historic significance in their own right. These changes were made to improve the building’s mechanical systems and to provide accessibility, but without regard for aesthetics. These changes have diminished the integrity of the contributing buildings and the Project proposes to reverse these changes to improve the historic and architectural character of the district.

ATTACHMENT 12

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

The contributing buildings are fairly simple in design and construction, which reflects their institutional use as a poor farm, their Mission Revival style that lacked ornamentation, and (in the case of Building B and alterations to Buildings A and C) their period of construction during the Great Depression. Some of the distinctive features such as wood sash windows and clay tile roofs have been removed and will be restored by the Project.

The most distinctive construction technique within the district is the use of reinforced concrete construction in Buildings A and C, which will be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

The only feature that is deteriorated is the cut stone, which is primarily exposed along the foundation and small sections of the east and west facades of the 1897 portion of Building B. The stone has been painted, which captured moisture. As a result, the outer surface is spalling, which has accelerated the weathering. The precise treatment of the stone has not been determined. A qualified building materials conservator will be retained to further assess the condition of the stone and recommend a treatment ranging from preservation to consolidation and replacement. At a minimum the stone will be preserved, which means the paint will be removed and a new permeable coating will be applied to stop future decay. In addition, some stone units have fallen from the west facade as a result of seismic activity.

To address both the fallen stones and the structural condition of the remaining stones, the architect and structural engineer have devised a solution that includes reinforcing the existing building walls with shotcrete installed on the interior side of the walls, and then attaching the existing stone (including stones that have fallen and will be re-installed) to the new shotcrete structure using reinforcing steel and epoxy. Other features such as the stucco walls and wood rafter tails are in good to fair condition and will be repaired as necessary.

As discussed under Standard 5, some of the features are missing. These include wood sash windows, clay roof tiles, and front (south) and rear (north) porch configurations and details. New wood sashes have been designed to match the few original ones that remain as well as the historic drawings and photographs. Clay tile roof tiles have been selected to resemble the historic drawings and photographs. Front and rear porches have been designed to match the historic drawings and photographs.

In Buildings A and C, the current front steps will be removed, the lower portions of the front and rear walls will be preserved, and new front and rear steps will be created. On the front porches, the non-original vinyl windows will be removed, and the wood windows restored to the 1934 design. On the rear porches, the non-original infill will be removed so the arched openings can be restored. In Building B, the main entrance to the 1934 portion of the building is essentially intact; however, the arched openings have been infilled with vinyl windows.

ATTACHMENT 12
The vinyl windows will be removed to restore the original open porch. On the rear, the corridor that connects the 1934 and 1897 portions has been infilled and the access was reconfigured with an ADA ramp. These non-original features will be removed. However, there are no historic drawings or photographs of the north façade. The original configuration of the corridor is evident from the physical evidence, but the design is unknown. As discussed under Standard 9, the new railing is simple in design, which is in keeping with the Mission Revival style of the building.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible. Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

Any chemical or physical treatments deemed necessary for the repair and restoration of historic materials and features will be conducted in accordance with National Park Service standards and guidance using the gentlest means possible. No treatments that cause damage to historic materials will be used.

8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

The Project will require ground disturbing activities, but mostly outside the boundary of the district. The Courtyard Buildings will be constructed on top of a semi-subterranean parking garage, which will be approximately 7’ below grade. The Redwood Building, Crescent Building, Carriage Building, and single-family houses will require excavations for footings 2’ to 3’ below grade. The 2012 EIR for the proposed Napa County Health and Human Services Agency Campus Project did not identify any previously recorded archaeological resources of significance on the property. In the event of the discovery of archaeological resources during construction, established protocols will be followed to ensure the appropriate documentation and protection.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

The Project does not propose any new additions to the contributing buildings. Exterior alterations are proposed to the rear (north) facades of Buildings A, B, and C. The new doorways will require the removal of only small segments of stucco walls. The original wood doors have five panels, while the doors in new openings have three panels.

Similarly, the new dormers will penetrate the rooflines; however, the historic material (clay tile) is already missing. The new dormers will match the size of the original dormers, but the windows will be different. The original dormers have three multipaned windows, while the new windows will have single panes. Therefore, this new work will not destroy significant amounts of historic materials that could not be restored and will be subtly differentiated from the old. The decks associated with the new entrances on Buildings A and C and the corridor on Building B will be simple in design and construction to complement but not mimic the Mission Revival style.

ATTACHMENT 12
The new construction within the boundary of the district principally includes the Carriage Building and Crescent Building. Only the Crescent Building will be clearly visible from Old Sonoma Road. The Carriage Building as well as the Courtyard Buildings, Redwood Building, and single-family houses will not be visible from Old Sonoma Road (see Figure 19). In any case, all of the new construction is based upon Northern California architectural traditions. The Carriage Building and Crescent Building were specifically designed to be compatible with the massing, size, and scale of the contributing buildings.

Instead of Mission Revival, the new buildings will take their ques from the Shingle Style because the buildings that once stood in these general locations were wood frame and wood clad with pitched roofs. The new buildings will be clad in cementitious siding with wood trim and details, the fenestration will consist of wood windows, the foundations and porches will be stone, and the roofs would be clad in asphalt shingles.

10.New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

All elements of the Project have been designed in a manner that is reversible. The Project does not propose any additions to the contributing buildings. As discussed under Standard 9, minor alterations are proposed to the rear (north) facades of Buildings A, B, and C. If the new doorways and dormers were removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the contributing buildings would be unimpaired. The doorways will require openings in the walls and the dormers will require openings on the roofs. The walls and roofs could be easily restored to their original configurations with little if any physical or visual impact to the contributing buildings. The new construction with the boundary of the district principally includes the Carriage Building and Crescent Building. Although they are designed as permanent improvements, in the abstract they could be easily removed in the future without impairing the integrity of the district because they are free standing.

VII. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Staff recommends that the Cultural Heritage Commission forward a recommendation to the City Council determining that the Project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21083.3 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because it would be consistent with the development density and use characteristics established by the 2040 General Plan, as analyzed by the City of Napa General Plan Update Final EIR (SCH #2021010255), and all required findings can be made, as follows:

1. The Project is consistent with the development density established by existing zoning, community plan or general plan policies for which an EIR was certified.

The Project would develop a mixed-use development consistent with the use types and residential densities envisioned for the site by the 2040 General Plan.

2. There are no project specific effects which are peculiar to the Project or its site, and which the 2040 General Plan EIR failed to analyze as significant effects.

The subject property is not significantly different than other properties in the surrounding area, and there are no project specific effects which are peculiar to the Project or its site.

ATTACHMENT 12
The Project site is located in an area developed with similarly sized institutional and residential lots with associated accessory uses. The property does not support any peculiar environmental features, and the Project would not result in any peculiar effects.

3. There are no potentially significant off-site and/or cumulative impacts which the 2040 General Plan EIR failed to evaluate.

The Project is consistent with the density and use characteristics of the development considered by the 2040 General Plan EIR. The EIR considered the incremental impacts of the Project and no potentially significant off-site or cumulative impacts have been identified which were not previously evaluated.

4. There is no substantial new information which results in more severe impacts than anticipated by the 2040 General Plan EIR.

No new information has been identified which would result in a determination of a more severe impact than what had been anticipated by the 2040 General Plan EIR.

VIII. REQUIRED FINDINGS
To approve a Certificate of Appropriateness, the decision-making body must make findings pursuant to NMC 15.52.070 (F)(3). These findings relate to consistency of the Project with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, the Historic Preservation ordinance, and Historic Design Guidelines.

Staff has listed each finding and provided a summary analysis of how the project may be found consistent with the findings. These findings are also provided in the draft resolution (see Attachment 1, Draft Resolution).

1. The project preserves, enhances or restores the exterior architectural features of the local landmark.

The Project would enhance the integrity of the Local Landmark designated buildings by rehabilitating the three contributing buildings, removing the three non-contributing buildings, preserving the crescent shaped driveway and lawn, and constructing two new non-contributing but compatible buildings. The three contributing buildings would be rehabilitated in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards. Characterdefining features of the contributing buildings will be preserved, while adapting them to new commercial and residential uses. The contributing buildings would be preserved in their entirety maintaining building heights and shapes, roof forms and details, fenestration patterns, and stucco walls removing insensitive alterations and restoring missing features to improve the historic character of the contributing buildings. This renovation would include removing non-original vinyl sashes, slab doors, composition roof shingles and restoring clay tile roofs, wood window sashes and basement vents, front and back porch configurations, and wood paneled doors.

ATTACHMENT 12

2. The project will not result in a substantial adverse change to the integrity of the local landmark or its major exterior character-defining features.

The Local Landmark buildings will be preserved in their entirety maintaining building heights and shapes, roof forms and details, fenestration patterns, and stucco walls removing insensitive alterations and restoring missing features to improve the historic character of the contributing buildings. As such, there will be no substantial adverse change to integrity of the Local Landmark buildings.

3. The project will not adversely affect the special character or special historic architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the local landmark.

The historic character of the contributing buildings and landscape feature as well as the district as a whole will be retained and preserved. The Project does not propose the removal of any of the character defining features described above. Any demolition activity is limited to the removal of noncontributing buildings and non-original materials and features such as roof shingles, vinyl windows, and ADA ramps.

4. The project is consistent with the applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

The Project is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation of Historic Properties in that the property will undergo exterior renovations which will enhance the property while not damaging or destroying character-defining features of the historic property.

5. The project is consistent with applicable historic guidelines.

The project has been reviewed against the universally applicable Napa Abajo/Fuller Park Historic District Design Guidelines and has been found to be in conformance with the guidelines. Consistent with the guidelines, existing primary entrances remain clearly defined by restored entry porch archways at the rear of the buildings and new stairs and rails on the front entries. Most all existing fenestration locations will be retained, and new wood windows will replace non-historic vinyl windows that had replaced original windows.

6. The project will not negatively impact the integrity of a cultural landscape through alteration of special organization, landscape feature, circulation patterns, or small scale features that are character defining features of the resource.

The spatial orientation of the three historic infirmary buildings around the historic crescent shaped driveway and lawn/open space will remain intact in its’ historic configuration.

However, the lawn will be slightly reduced to meet sustainable water use requirements but will still include approximately 20,000 square feet of lawn.

ATTACHMENT 12
IX. PUBLIC NOTICE
Notice of the scheduled public hearing was provided by US Postal Service to all property owners within a 500-foot radius of the subject property on February 22, 2023. Notice of the public hearing was also published in the Napa Valley Register on February 24, 2023 and provided to people previously requesting notice on the matter at the same time notice was provided to the newspaper for publication. These notices were for the regularly scheduled March 9, 2023 Cultural Heritage Commission meeting. However, at that meeting, the project was continued to a special March 23, 2023 meeting. The Applicant was also provided a copy of this report and the associated attachments in advance of the public hearing on the project.

X. PUBLIC COMMENT
As of this writing, no public comments have been received.

XI. ALTERNATIVES TO RECOMMENDATION

1. Continue the application with direction for project modifications and allow the Applicant an opportunity to prepare a revised proposal.

2. Recommend denial of the Certificate of Appropriateness to the City Council.

ATTACHMENT 12
RESOLUTION NO. R2023-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

NAPA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS FOR MAJOR

ALTERATIONS TO A LOCAL LANDMARK LOCATED AT
1221 SEMINARY STREET AND DETERMINING THAT THE

ACTIONS AUTHORIZED BY THIS RESOLUTION ARE

EXEMPT FROM CEQA
WHEREAS, on January 4, 2023, Napa Community Real Estate Fund (“Applicant”) submitted an application (File No. PL23-0002) for a Certificate of Appropriateness pursuant to Napa Municipal Code (“NMC”) Section 15.52.070 (“Certificate of Appropriateness”) and related entitlements for alterations to three Local Landmark buildings and construction of two new non-contributing buildings within the National Register District on the former Health and Human Services property (the “Project”) located at 2344 Old Sonoma Road (APN: 004-291-015) (“Site”); and WHEREAS, the Cultural Heritage Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on March 23, 2023, on the Certificate of Appropriateness, at which time the Cultural Heritage Commission heard a presentation by Staff and took public testimony, and thereafter closed the public hearing and where they subsequently recommended that the City Council approve the Certificate of Appropriateness; and WHEREAS, the City Council has considered all information related to the Certificate of Appropriateness Application, as presented at the public meetings of the City Council identified herein, including any supporting reports by City Staff, and any information provided during public meetings.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Napa as follows:

Section 1. The City Council hereby determines that the potential environment effects of the Project are exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15183 because the Project is consistent with the development density and use characteristics established by the 2040 General Plan, as analyzed by the City of Napa General Plan Update Final EIR (SCH #2021010255) certified by the City Council on September 20, 2022 (“GP EIR”); there are no environmental effects that (1) are peculiar to the Project or the Site, (2) were not analyzed as significant effects in the GP EIR, (3) are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts which were not discussed in the GP EIR, or (4) are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of substantial new information which was not known at the time the GP EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse impact than discussed in the GP EIR.

ATTACHMENT 12
Section 2. The City Council hereby makes the following findings for approval of the Certificate of Appropriateness in accordance with NMC Section 15.52.070(F):

A. The project preserves, enhances or restores the exterior architectural features of the local landmark.

The Project will enhance the integrity of the Local Landmark designated buildings by rehabilitating the three contributing buildings, removing the three non-contributing buildings, preserving the crescent shaped driveway and lawn, and constructing two new non-contributing but compatible buildings. The three contributing buildings will be rehabilitated in compliance with the Secretary of the Interior Standards.

Character-defining features of the contributing buildings will be preserved, while adapting them to new commercial and residential uses. The contributing buildings will be preserved in their entirety maintaining building heights and shapes, roof forms and details, fenestration patterns, and stucco walls removing insensitive alterations and restoring missing features to improve the historic character of the contributing buildings. This renovation will include removing non-original vinyl sashes, slab doors, composition roof shingles and restoring clay tile roofs, wood window sashes and basement vents, front and back porch configurations, and wood paneled doors.

B. The project will not result in a substantial adverse change to the integrity of the local landmark or its major exterior character-defining features.

C. The project will not adversely affect the special character or special historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the local landmark.

The historic character of the contributing buildings and landscape feature as well as the district as a whole will be retained and preserved. The Project does not propose the removal of any of the character defining features described above. Any demolition activity is limited to the removal of noncontributing buildings and nonoriginal materials and features such as roof shingles, vinyl windows, and ADA ramps.

D. The project is consistent with the applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

ATTACHMENT 12
E. The project is consistent with applicable historic design guidelines.

F. The project will not negatively impact the integrity of a cultural landscape through alteration of spatial organization, landscape features, circulation patterns, or smallscale features that are character defining features of the resource.

The spatial orientation of the three historic infirmary buildings around the historic crescent shaped driveway and lawn/open space will remain intact in its historic configuration. However, the lawn will be slightly reduced to meet sustainable water use requirements but will still include approximately 20,000 square feet of lawn.

Section 3. The City Council hereby approves the Certificate of Appropriateness as defined on the revised plans date stamped January 4, 2023, (“Plans”), subject to the following conditions of approval:

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT – PLANNING DIVISION

1. The Planning Manager is authorized to determine whether the Applicant is in compliance with the requirements of the Certificate of Appropriateness.

2. The Certificate of Appropriateness authorizes alterations to the three Local Landmark buildings and the construction of two non-contributing buildings within the National Register District that face the curve of the historic crescent driveway on the Site in accordance with the Plans as modified by these conditions of approval. These renovations are a historic component of a larger mixed-use project on the Site.

3. The plans submitted for building permits shall conform substantially to the Plans received on January 4, 2023.

4. Archaeological monitoring shall occur during all site ground disturbing activities.

Prior to commencement of such activities, the Applicant shall provide a letter to the Planning Division identifying the firm and personnel who will be conducting the monitoring, along with a scope of work.

5. The historic report, “Certificate of Appropriateness, The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road” and dated December 21, 2022, prepared by Teresa Grimes, shall be kept on the Site for review by visitors and guests.

ATTACHMENT 12

6. All conditions of approval shall be printed verbatim on one of the first three pages of all the working drawing sets used for issuance of Building Permits (architectural, structural, electrical, mechanical and plumbing) and shall be referenced in the sheet index. The minimum font size utilized for printed text shall be 12 point.

7. All exterior lighting on the Site shall be properly shielded and directed downward to preclude glare conditions that might impact adjacent properties or public streets.

8. The plans submitted for a Building Permit shall identify the locations of all mechanical and utility equipment, including transformers and backflow devices.

9. The Applicant shall repair deteriorated exterior historic features rather than replace them where reasonably feasible. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of an exterior distinctive feature, the new feature shall match the old in design, color, texture and materials to the greatest extent feasible. Replacement of missing exterior features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence. Photographs and a narrative explanation of required replacements shall be provided to the Planning Manager for review and approval prior to issuance of a certificate of occupancy.

10. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials shall not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if necessary, shall be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

11. All mechanical and utility equipment, including transformers and backflow devices must be screened and/or integrated into a building structure. Screens shall not be used where they would disproportionately increase the mass of the building or introduce elements that are inconsistent with the high level of design quality reviewed as part of this approval. Because transformers and backflow prevention devices are regularly maintained and tested, screening is required to meet certain criteria for the accessibility and visibility. Landscaping and screening of devices must be installed prior to issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy for the Project.

12. Construction activities shall be limited to specific times pursuant to NMC Section

8.08.025 which limits construction activities to 7:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m. Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 4:00 p.m. on weekends or legal holidays, unless a permit is first secured from the City Manager (or his/her designee) for additional hours. The Ordinance further states that there will be: no start-up of machines nor equipment prior to 8:00 a.m., Monday through Friday; no delivery of materials nor equipment prior to 7:30 a.m. nor past 5:00 p.m., Monday through Friday; and no servicing of equipment past 6:45 p.m., Monday through Friday.

ATTACHMENT 12

CITY GENERAL CONDITIONS

13. The plans submitted for improvement plan review and Building Permit review shall include a written analysis specifying how each of the conditions of approval have been addressed or incorporated into either the improvement plan set or building plan set.

14. Unless otherwise specifically provided in this resolution, each condition of this approval shall be satisfied prior to the first to occur of: (a) approval of a final map (if this resolution includes the approval of a tentative subdivision map or tentative parcel map), (b) issuance of a building permit, or (c) commencement of any use of land that is authorized by this resolution. An improvement agreement between the City and the Applicant (and landowner, if different) that obligates the Applicant to complete specified conditions of approval will be deemed to be a satisfaction of those specified conditions if: (i) the agreement is accompanied by required security for faithful performance and labor and materials, and (ii) the agreement is approved as to substance by the City Engineer, and approved as to form by the City Attorney.

15. No use authorized by this permit may commence until after the Applicant executes any required permit agreement.

16. Applicant shall pay all applicable fees and charges at the required time and at the rate in effect at time of payment (in accordance with the City’s Master Fee Schedule; see individual departments regarding the timing of fee payment requirements).

17. Applicant shall design and construct all improvements and facilities shown on any approved tentative map, site plan, or other documents submitted for permit approval, and with the plans and specifications submitted to and approved by City, to comply with the General Plan, any applicable Specific Plan, the Napa Municipal Code (NMC), City ordinances and resolutions, the "Standard Specifications" of the Public Works and Fire Departments, as well as any approved tentative map, site plan or other documents submitted for permit approval and with the plans and specifications submitted to and approved by City.

18. The time limit within which to commence any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasiadjudicative decision made by the City is governed by Section 1094.6 of the Code of Civil Procedure, unless a shorter limitations period is specified by any other provision. Under Section 1094.6, any lawsuit or legal challenge to any quasiadjudicative decision made by the City must be filed no later than the 90th day following the date on which such decision becomes final. Any lawsuit or legal challenge, which is not filed within that 90-day period, will be barred.

19. To the full extent permitted by law, the Applicant shall indemnify, defend, release and hold City, its agents, officers, and employees from and against any claims, suits, liabilities, actions, damages, penalties or causes of action by any person, including Applicant, for any injury (including death) or damage to person or property or to set aside, attack, void or annul any actions of City, its agents, officers and employees, ATTACHMENT 12
from any cause whatsoever in whole or in part arising out of or in connection with (1) the processing, conditioning or approval of the subject property; (2) any failure to comply with all applicable laws and regulations; or (3) the design, installation or operation of project improvements and regardless whether the actions or omissions are alleged to be caused by City or Applicant so long as City promptly notifies Applicant of any such claim, etc., and the City cooperates in the defense of same.

20. If the Applicant is not the owner of the subject property, all agreements required to be executed by the City must be executed by the Owner(s) as well as the Applicant.

21. The conditions of Project approval set forth herein include certain fees, dedication requirements, reservation requirements and other exactions. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(1), these conditions (and mitigations) constitute written notice of the statement of the amount of such fees and a description of the dedications, reservations, and other exactions. You are hereby notified that the 90-day period in which you may protest those fees, the amount of which has been identified herein, dedications, reservations and other exactions have begun. If you fail to file a protest complying with all the requirements of Section 66020, you will be legally barred from later challenging such exaction.

22. Violation of any term, condition, mitigation measure or Project description relating to this approval is unlawful, prohibited and a violation of the Napa Municipal Code and can result in revocation or modification of this approval and/or the institution of civil and/or criminal enforcement and/or abatement proceedings.

23. Project approval would not have been granted but for the applicability and validity of each and every one of the specified mitigations and conditions, and if any one or more of such conditions and mitigations is found to be invalid by a court of law, this Project approval would not have been granted without requiring other valid conditions and/or mitigations consistent with achieving the purpose and intent of such approval.

24. The Certificate of Appropriateness is subject to the expiration provisions of NMC Section 17.68.170 and may be extended in accordance with the requirements of NMC Section 17.68.130.

Section 4. This resolution shall become effectively immediately upon adoption.

I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was duly and regularly adopted by the City Council of the City of Napa at a regular meeting of said City Council held on the ___ day of ______ 2023 by the following roll call vote:

AYES:

ATTACHMENT 12
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

RECUSED:

ATTEST: ________________________________________
Tiffany Carranza
City Clerk
Approved as to form:

Michael W. Barrett
City Attorney
ATTACHMENT 12

THE CRESCENT
2344 Old Sonoma Road
Project Description
The proposed project is an approximately 193,000 sq. ft. multi-family development on an 8.6-acre site located on Old Sonoma Road and Walnut Street in the City of Napa. The project is a mixed-income residential project with a total of up to 162 for-sale housing units, of which up to 154 will be condominium units and 8 will be single-family homes (labelled "E" on the attached Site Plan). The Developer is requesting approval to rezone the property from PQ-P, Public, Quasi Pubic to MP:CMU, Master Plan: Crescent Mixed Use in order to be consistent with the new General Plan designation.

The condo housing types include up to 40 stacked flats (labelled "A"), 101 courtyard condos ("B1", "B2", & "B3"), 6 townhouse units in the two historic Dormitory buildings (“C1” and “C3”), and 7 units in two new buildings adjacent to the historic buildings ("D1" and "D2"). The center historic building (“C2”), the former Infirmary Building, will be rehabbed and converted to community-serving commercial uses. Each of the residential condo units will have private laundry facilities and storage areas.

To the north of the project site is the playground for the Napa Christian School, a single-family neighborhood is east and south of the site, the County Juvenile Justice facility is southwest of the site, and multi-story residential buildings are across Walnut Street to the west.

The site has a number of distinct features, such as a crescent-shaped open space along Old Sonoma Road, and several tall mature redwood trees scattered throughout the site. The site also has three historic buildings dating from 1897 that face the curve of the Crescent; these buildings plus the Crescent open space are listed on the National Register of Historic Places. The project is carefully designed to leverage the presence of these beautiful features.

The project is organized around a network of continuous open spaces. A newly configured Elm Street, with two travel lanes and curbside parallel guest parking, marks the site’s northern edge; Elm Street turns due south near the site's eastern boundary to intersect with the Crescent. Numerous pathways and greens, carefully located to preserve most of the existing redwoods, create diverse planted open spaces around which the various buildings are located.

The three historic buildings are reused and reprogrammed. The central structure ("C2") is a commons building with community-serving café, art studios, and event spaces. The two historic buildings on either side of the central building ("C1" and "C3") will be adaptively reused as residential units, with three units in each building. The units in the historic buildings will be parked in the semi-subterranean garage. Two new buildings extend the fabric of the historic buildings with more residential units. One of these (called the Crescent Building, labelled as "D2") is sited where the Crescent Drive intersects with Old Sonoma Road. The other new building (called the Carriage House, labelled as "D1")) serves as a transition between the historic buildings and the courtyard condos; this building serves as a reminder of the former Superintendent’s cottage, which was also sited behind the historic buildings at one time. The Carriage House will include three townhomes, and the Crescent Building includes three townhomes and one flat.

The Carriage House residents will park in the semi-subterranean garage, while three of the Crescent Building residents will have a separate driveway off of Old Sonoma Rd. that leads to private parking at the rear of each unit, one unit will park on the crescent drive.

The eastern edge of the project site includes eight new single-family detached homes (labelled "E"). The density, massing, and siting of these homes is compatible with the adjacent single-family neighborhood east of the project. These homes are parked in individual garages located at the middle or rear of these lots, with access directly from the fronting street. These houses are generally two stories tall. All of the ATTACHMENT 12
single-family homes have inviting porches, recalling the character of the finest single-family neighborhoods of the region.

Walnut Street to the west is lined with a new stacked flats residential building (called the Redwood Building, labelled "A"). This building has similar height and massing as the multi-family buildings across Walnut Street; the building's exterior shingles are compatible with the project's courtyard condos to the east. The Redwood Building is 3- and 4-stories tall, with up to forty 1-BR & 2-BR units organized around a central atrium. This building is parked in an at-grade podium, and has units on the ground floor facing the large redwood grove open space to its east.

The center of the site has three courtyard condo buildings 2-4 stories high (labelled "B1", "B2", and "B3").

They sit atop a semi-subterranean parking garage with 241 parking spaces. These three buildings are designed as hybrids of stacked flats and walkup townhouses, all arranged around beautiful communal courtyards. Buildings "B2" and "B3" are organized around a central green on axis with the central historic building ("C2"). Four-story single-loaded stacked flats define both sides of this green; the rest of the buildings are a series of townhouses entered from the courtyards. Building "B1" is entered from Elm Street via a large courtyard that preserves existing redwood trees, and is also designed with a combination of stacked flats and townhouses.

There are a number of important concepts worth noting in the design of this project:

1. The project prioritizes the creation of a beautiful public space network.

2. The project conserves important natural features of the site, including the redwood trees and the Crescent green.

3. The project exemplifies how adaptive reuse of historic buildings and new development can fit together to make great places.

4. The project shows how new development can respond to its immediate adjacencies. The residents of the single-family neighborhood to the east are respected by building the singlefamily units at the eastern portion of the project site. By contrast, the 3- and 4-story residential building along Walnut Street is a direct response to the height of the buildings on the other side of the street.

5. The project demonstrates the wisdom of using a variety of housing types – from courtyard housing to single-family homes. This not only offers architectural variety, but also brings diverse products and living choices for the community. The project also includes a mix of homeownership opportunities for households at a variety of income levels.

6. The project demonstrates the importance of contextual building massing. Highest massing on this site is located in the center of the site, so as to be practically unnoticeable from the surrounding streets and neighboring lots. The four-story wings of the courtyard housing buildings constitute less than a third of the overall building footprint, and are situated along large greens, thereby lining the new streets with two- and three-story house-form buildings.

7. The project shows how a rich neighborhood character can be generated via a variety of frontages such as porches and stoops.

The project aspires to show how new development can respect the architectural traditions of a region and place. As seen in the precedent images and character study sketches, this project endeavors to generate an architectural image that stems from the Napa vernacular – with sloping roofs, deep porches and trellises, and a variety of regional materials such a shingles, siding, plaster etc.

A homeowners association will be established for The Crescent and have all applicable docs reviewed by the Department of Real Estate and recorded (as necessary), such as CC&R’s, By-laws, HOA Budget, Articles of Incorporation, and Condo Plan. Finally, the site will have wayfinding throughout in order to provide ease of travel from one building or greenspace to the next.

ATTACHMENT 12
Landscape Design
The existing campus has approximately eighty-six (86) existing trees on the site according to the arborist report. Nineteen (19) of the existing trees are subject to the City of Napa’s Tree Protection Ordinance.

The site for the most part is relatively flat with the exception of some areas with five (5) foot elevational changes. The historical landscape uses of the campus has mainly been for health services with some small use of agriculture.

The new landscape design proposed seeks to save over fifty (50) of the existing eighty-six (86) trees, retain the historical crescent and maintain over ninety-thousand (90,000) sf of common open space for the site. There is approximately one (1) mile of new trails and walks that connect the new residential buildings, seven (7) gardens and ten (10) courtyards.

The new landscape palette will be mostly appropriate native and ornamental plant material that is sustainable to the local climate. The landscape water needs will meet the local Water Use Requirements as mandated by the State of California. Additional sustainable items included in the landscape will be; bio-retention and infiltration systems to clean and reduce storm water runoff, reduce heat island effect by planting approximately one-hundred (100) additional trees, and incorporating solar energy strategies with Photovoltaic panels on pergolas, low flow drip and smart irrigation and using appropriate trees and placement to reduce energy costs of the residential and historical buildings.

The historical crescent lawn will be slightly reduced to meet sustainable water use requirements but will still have approximately twenty thousand (20,000) square foot lawn for resident use. Seven (7) on grade gardens will incorporate various amenities such as, seating areas, jogging trails, horse shoe pits for play or bean bag toss, picnic areas, short term bicycle parking stations, free play open space and quiet contemplative areas. Ten (10) courtyards over subterranean parking will offer residents shaded spaces, communal conversation seating areas, barbequing opportunities, dining spaces and private open space patios. All of the gardens and courtyards will be accessible to the residents.

The street design is envisioned as a curvilinear narrow roadway to calm vehicular movement and enable safe use bicycles.

Site Lighting will use shielded directional LED light sources to meet the foot-candle requirements.

ATTACHMENT 12
birird
The Crescent
2344 Old Sonoma Road

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
DEC 15, 2022
ATTACHMENT 12
0 40 80 160 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
Vicinity Map

VICINITY MAP

OLD SONOMA ROAD

SPRUCE ST

CALVERA CT

WALNUT ST
C A 2 9

MONROE ST

LEGACY CT

FREDERICK DR

HARTSON ST HARTSON ST

HARTSON ST

S SEYMOUR ST

ORAN CT

S MONTGOMERY ST

GESFORD ST

JEFFERSON ST
ASH ST

MADRONA ST

STEVENSON CT

SUTTER CT

CINNAMOND ST
ELM ST

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
DN
104
106 126
128
105
127
103 129 118
125
136
133
134
135
137
138
139
140
141
142
145
124
108
112
114
143
144
146
123
121
120
107 110
111
113
115
122
109
B4
ELEV. 29.0
ELEV. 31.7
ELEV. 33.5
ELEV. 32.2
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 32.0
ELEV. 31.0
ELEV. 32.0
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 27.0
ELEV. 26.5
ELEV. 26.7
ELEV. 26.3
ELEV. 26.3
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 34.0 ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 34.0
ELEV. 36.0 ELEV. 26.5
UP
DN
UP
DN
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN
ELEV. 28.0
ELEV. 31.0
ELEV. 29.0

30.0 ELEV.

33.0 ELEV.

33.0 Draft Updated Site Plan
0 20 40 80
Parking Garage
2237 2238
2250
•
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
BUILDINGS AND USES:

HISTORIC CRESCENT: OPEN SPACE

HISTORIC DORMITORY
BUILDING A(C1*) : RESIDENTIAL USE
3 UNITS

HISTORIC INFIRMARY
BUILDING B(C2*) : COMMERCIAL USE

HISTORIC DORMITORY
BUILDING C(C3*) : RESIDENTIAL USE
3 UNITS

NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
4 UNITS ( NON CONTRIBUTING)

NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES
8 HOMES ( NON CONTRIBUTING)

NEW COURTYARD BUILDING
100 UNITS ( NON CONTRIBUTING)

NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
3 UNITS ( NON CONTRIBUTING)
* LETTER DESIGNATION USED IN CEQA
REPORT

8 5
7 6
1 2 4
3 NRHP BOUNDARY

SITE PLAN
Site Plan
ATTACHMENT 12
0 40 80 160 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
BUILDING A - DORMITORY, 2022 BUILDING B - INFIRMARY, 2022 BUILDING C - DORMITORY, 2022 Site Section

NRHP BOUNDARY

SITE SECTION

NRHP BOUNDARY

ELM STREET COURTYARD BUILDNG HISTORIC BUILDING HISTORIC CRESCENT OLD SONOMA RD EXISTING RESIDENCE ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

VIEW OF CRESCENT AND BUILDINGS A,B,C (LOOKING NORTH)

VIEW OF SITE FROM OLD SONOMA ROAD (LOOKING NORTH)

VIEW FROM SITES AT OLD SONOMA ROAD (LOOKING SOUTH)
Site Context
ATTACHMENT 12
0 20 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
awings\21016-10 HHS Site - Old Sonoma Rd Napa\21016 - Plot Plan.dwg, 12/15/2022 12:09:03 PM, station h, AutoCAD PDF (High Quality Print).pc3 Site Survey
•

NRHP BOUNDARY

SITE SURVEY
ATTACHMENT 12
0 20 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
Site - Old Sonoma Rd Napa\Email Received\GeoMaps\2022-01-07 Aerial Base\35403.dwg, 1/31/2022 9:43:38 AM, AutoCAD PDF (High Quality Print).pc3, 1:1, Station R

TREE SURVEY
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table
Ralph Osterling Consultants Page 8
P (650) 573-8733 E [email protected]

TAG SPP DBH STR HEALTH DIA CROWN COMMENTS
2201 Coast Live Oak 23/23 Fair Fair 40 Regulated
2202 Sycamore 23 Fair Good 35
2203 Pyrus9 Fair Fair 15
2204 Pyrus 13 Fair Fair 15
2205 Redwood 24 Poor Very Poor 30 Regulated
2206 Redwood 26 Good Good 35 Regulated
2207 Oak9 Fair Fair 15
2208 Oak 10 Good Good 20
2209 Pine 38 Fair Poor 45 Surface Roots
2210 Pine 39 Fair Poor 30 Surface Roots
2211 Sycamore 22 Good Good 35
2212 Sycamore 47 Fair Fair 40
2213 Palm 36 Fair Fair 15
2214 Mulberry 15 Fair Fair 15
2215 Sycamore 23 Fair Fair 25
2216 Sycamore 33 Fair Good 30
2217 Redwood 53 Good Good 45 Regulated
2218 Redwood 32 Good Good 40 Regulated
2219 Redwood 41 Good Good 40 Regulated
2220 Sycamore 36 Fair Fair 35
2221 Redwood 47 Good Good 40 Regulated
2222 Sycamore 22 Fair Fair 35
2223 Sycamore 22 Fair Fair 30
2224 Sycamore 24 Fair Good 35
2225 Sycamore 22 Fair Fair 30
2226 Sycamore 23 Fair Fair 30
2227 Sycamore 23 Fair Fair 30
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table
Ralph Osterling Consultants Page 9
P (650) 573-8733 E [email protected]

TAG SPP DBH STR HEALTH DIA CROWN COMMENTS
2228 Sycamore 30 Fair Fair 30
2229 Sycamore 30 Poor Poor 25
2230 Redwood 46 Good Good 45 Regulated
2231 Redwood 44 Good Good 45 Regulated
2232 Redwood 49 Good Good 45 Regulated
2233 Plum 27 Poor Very Poor 15
2234 Plum 31 Poor Very Poor 15
2235 Ash 11 Poor Poor 15
2236 Ash 12 Poor Poor 15
2237 Redwood 36 Good Fair 40 Regulated
2238 Redwood 39 Good Fair 40 Regulated
2239 Plum 14 Poor Poor 15
2240 Plum 11 Poor Poor 12
2241 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 12
2242 Sweet Gum9 Fair Fair 10
2243 Sweet Gum9 Fair Fair 10
2244 Sweet Gum 9 Fair Fair8
2245 Sweet Gum 11 Fair Fair 10
2246 Redwood 20 Fair Poor 30 Regulated
2247 Redwood 21 Good Fair 25 Regulated
2248 Redwood 21 Good Good 30 Regulated
2249 Redwood 22 Good Good 30 Regulated
2250 Redwood 48 Good Good 40 Regulated
2251 Deodar 39 Fair Fair 40
2252 Sierra Redwood 48 Poor Very Poor 35
2253 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 20
2254 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 15
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table
Ralph Osterling Consultants Page 10
P (650) 573-8733 E [email protected]

TAG SPP DBH STR HEALTH DIA CROWN COMMENTS
2255 Sweet Gum9 Fair Fair 10
2256 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 15
2257 Pyrus 12 Poor Poor 12
2258 Pyrus 13 Poor Poor 12
2259 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2260 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2261 Pyrus 13 Poor Poor 15
2262 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2263 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2264 Pyrus 10 Poor Poor8
2265 Pyrus 9 Poor Poor 8
2266 Pyrus 12 Fair Fair 12
2267 Pyrus 10 Fair Fair 10
2268 Pyrus 12 Fair Fair 10
2269 Sweet Gum 14 Fair Fair 25
2270 Sweet Gum 22 Poor Poor 20
2271 Sweet Gum 20 Fair Fair 35
2272 Sweet Gum 18 Fair Fair 30
2273 Sweet Gum 17 Poor Poor 30
2274 Sweet Gum 18 Poor Poor 30
2275 Sweet Gum 17 Poor Poor 30
2276 Sweet Gum 19 Poor Poor 30
2277 Sweet Gum 20 Poor Poor 35
2278 Sweet Gum 12 Poor Poor 30
2279 Sweet Gum 12 Poor Poor 30
2280 Sweet Gum9 Poor Poor 20
2281 Sweet Gum 10 Fair Fair 25
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table

TAG SPP DBH STR HEALTH DIA CROWN COMMENTS
2282 Pepper 11 Fair Fair 20
2283 Sweet Gum 16 Fair Fair 25
2284 Sycamore 27 Poor Poor 40
2285 Redwood 46 Good Fair 20 Regulated
2286 Redwood 27/16 Good Good 30 Regulated Tree Survey •

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
0 20 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

DEMO PLAN

DEMO NARRATIVE

R E M O V E N O N C O N T R I B U T I N G B U I L D I N G S

AND HARDSCAPE

PROTECT HISTORIC STRUCTURES

P R O T E C T S P E C I M E N T R E E S A S N O T E D I N

TREE SURVEY

Demo Plan

DEMO EXISTING BUILDING

DEMO EXISTING BUILDING DEMO EXISTING BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
0 20 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
DN
DN

DN DN DN DN
101
104
106 126
128
105
127
103 129 118
125
136
117 119 130 131 132
133
134
135
137
138
139
140
141
142
145
124
108
112
114
143
144
146
123
121
120
107 110
111
113
115
122
109
102 116 Xref .\Unit Plans\1BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwgXref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH A - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\1BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\1BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\1BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\1BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\1BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH B - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\2BR F A - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH B - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH B - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH B - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH B - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH B - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH B - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH D - 2202 Napa.dwg
Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH E - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH E - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH D - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH D - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH D - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH D - 2202 Napa.dwg Xref .\Unit Plans\3BR TH D - 2202 Napa.dwg ELEV. 31.0 ELEV. 28.0 ELEV. 31.0 ELEV. 31.0
DN
ELEV. 28.0
ELEV. 29.9 ELEV. 28.0
REFR
REFR

REDWOOD/FERN FOREST

EXISTING STANDS OF REDWOOD TREES TO
REMAIN. FERNS AND NATIVE PLANTS PLANTED

AS UNDER STORY

WOOD TIMBER RETAINING WALLS AND WOOD

STEPS AND GRAVEL/DG TREADS

RESAWN TREE LOGS AND STUMPS FROM

DEMOLISHED TREES

GRAVEL OR DECOMPOSED GRANITE (DG)
WALKS

DINING TABLE STUMP SEATING BENCHES MADE

FROM ONSITE MILLED DEMOLISHED TREES

HORSE SHOES, BOCCE BALL OR BEANBAG

TOSS OR CHILDERN'S PLAY AREA
2 OAK WOODLAND AND BUTTERFLY GARDEN
EXISTING STANDS OF OAK TREES TO REMAIN.

NEW OAKS AND NATIVE WOODLAND PLANTS AS

UNDER STORY, MILKWEED AND OTHER

MONARCH BUTTERFLY HABITAT PLANTINGS

DECOMPOSED GRANITE TRAILS AND

CONCRETE WALKS

PERIMETER FENCE AND SOLAR PANEL

PERGOLA

REAR PATIOS AND COMPOSITE DECKS FOR
CARRIAGE HOUSE AND HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.

SMALL LAWN FOR SUNBATHERS AND

PICNICKING EAST OF CARRIAGE HOUSE
4 SOUTHERN TRANSITION TRAIL

DECOMPOSED GRANITE TRAIL CONNECTOR TO

OAK WOODLAND, CENTRAL MEADOW AND
CRESCENT LAWN FROM REDWOOD FOREST.

VINE COVERED FENCE AND SOLAR PANEL

PERGOLA SCREEN ADJACENT USE
3 ELM STREET/PLACE
ROADWAY WITH INFORMAL TREE PLANTINGS.

WIDE AND NARROW PARKWAYS WITH
OCCASIONAL PARKING OR DROP-OFF AREAS.

BIORETENTION SWALES ALONG THE ROAD AT

WIDER PARKWAYS

EXISTING LARGE OAK AND WALNUT TREES TO
BE RETAINED ON ELM STREET. IN THE SOUTH

LEG OF THE STREET A REDWOOD AND CEDAR
IS BEING ADDITIONALLY RETAINED.
1 EVENT SPACE AND ART CENTER

WOOD DECKS AT FINISH FLOOR LEVEL CONNECT FRONT
AND REAR OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.

PERMEABLE PAVERS AT CRESCENT DRIVE ANNOUNCE
ENTRY AND EASTERN PLAZA. EASTERN PLAZA PROVIDES
VEHICULAR ACCESS FOR SUPPLIES. STAIRS AND RAMPS

ELEVATE GUESTS AND RESIDENTS TO DECK LEVELS
A NORTH MEADOW RETAINS TWO REDWOOD TREES.

FROM THE NORTH MEADOW A STAIRCASE AND TRELLIS

SEPARATES THE RESIDENTIAL GREAT LAWN FROM THE
HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.
5 RESIDENTIAL GREAT LAWN

TO THE SOUTH OF THE RESIDENTIAL LAWN, A VINE
COVERED "MAYBECK STYLED" PERGOLA, STAIRS AND

RAMPS CONNECT TO RESIDENTIAL LAWN TO THE EVENT
SPACE MEADOW. A LAWN AND GENTLE MOUNDED BERM
OFFERS A REDWOOD STAND IN THE GREAT LAWN.
6 EXHIBITION SPACE AND SENSORY GARDEN

EXISTING SELECT FEW OF FLOWERING PYRUS TREES AND A

MEANDERING LANDSCAPE CREATES SPACE FOR LOCAL
EXHIBITION. FRAGRANT, FLOWERING AND INTERESTING PLANT

TEXTURES REINFORCE THE SENSORY EXPERIENCE
7 CRESCENT OPEN SPACE

THE ROADWAY RISES UP TO BE A CURBLESS CONDITION AT
THE MAIN HISTORICAL BUILDING.

THE LAWN IS FLUSH WITH THE PERMEABLE PAVERS. THE

GREAT CRESCENT IS BUFFERED BY AN ORNAMENTAL GRASS
GARDEN THAT PARALLES OLD SONORA ROAD. WALKWAYS

DIRECT RESIDENTS AND VISITORS ON THE PERIMETER OF THE
CRESCENT TO MAINTAIN THE LARGE OPEN SPACE.
8 RECALLING THE HISTORICAL USES OF THE SITE AN

INFORMAL ORGANIC ORCHARD OF FRUIT AND NUT TREES
ARE PLANTED ALONG WALKS. HERB, TEAS (YERBA BUENA)

AND MEDICINAL PLANTS ARE USED AS UNDER STORY
PLANTINGS.
9 EXISTING TREES TO BE PRESERVED
10 REDWOOD TREES

OAK TREES

CEDAR TREE

AND OTHER PERIMETER TREES TO BE

PROTECTED IN PLACE

SITE LEGEND

YERBA BUENA ORGANIC ORCHARD AND

WELLNESS GARDEN
1 3
4 4
5 5
7 8
9 5

ELM STREET

OLD SONOMA ROAD
WALNUT
11/22/2022

OLD SONOMA ROAD HOUSING

HERITAGE HOUSING PARTNERS
- PARTNERS
Landscape Architecture . Planning . Urban Design
31742 Coast Highway
Laguna Beach, California
92651-6974
Tel: 949 645 9444
Fax: 949 715-7286

SITE LANDSCAPE CONCEPT
North
0 20' 40' 60'
Graphic Scale In Feet
1 2
3 Landscape Plan

LANDSCAPE PLAN
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
DN
DN
UP
DN
UP
DN
UP UP
DN
UP
01 04
C
A
02 03
B
M29
A401
A29
A401
A301
M29
A302
M29
A301 A29
A302 A29
0' - 8 3/4" 24' - 5 1/2" 28' - 1 1/2" 24' - 4 3/4" 0' - 8 3/4" 0' - 7" 23' - 8 3/4" 19' - 2 3/4" 0' - 7 1/2"
132 SF
BEDROOM #1
73 53 SF
BATH
74 253 SF

KITCHEN
76 361 SF

DINING / LIVING
77 552 SF

DINING / LIVING
78 36 SF
BATH
80 254 SF

KITCHEN
85 360 SF

DINING / LIVING
86 122 SF
BEDROOM #1
83 51 SF
BATH
82 44' - 2"
125 SF
PORCH
98 275 SF

KITCHEN
79 78' - 5 1/4"
CL

CLOSET CLOSET
97 SF
ENTRY
103
27 SF
STAIR
104
30 SF
STAIR
105
135 SF
ENTRY
106
27 SF
STAIR
107
A
G
K
J
H
L
No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:

M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
A101
Author
222.03.1-A
C1 Historic Building
2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD
NAPA, CA 94559

FIRST FLOOR PLAN
Checker

FIRST FLOOR
DN DN
01 04
C
A
02 03
B
M29
A401
A29
A401
A301
M29
A302
M29
A301 A29
A302 A29
57 SF
BATH
213
254 SF

BEDROOM
211
CLOSET
122 SF

BEDROOM
221
48 SF
BATH
222
53 SF
BATH
223
248 SF

BEDROOM
224
57 SF
BATH
232
CLOSET
56 SF
STAIR
210
73 SF
STAIR
220
56 SF
STAIR
230
254 SF

BEDROOM
231

C PROJECT M PLUS CORP
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:
29 28 27 26 25
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
A102
Author
222.03.1-A
g
2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD
NAPA, CA 94559

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
Checker
1/4" = 1'-0" A29

SECOND FLOOR
01 04
C
A
02 03
B
3' - 4" 24' - 6" 28' - 2" 24' - 5" 3' - 4"
83' - 8"
3' - 4" 23' - 9" 19' - 3" 3' - 5"
49' - 8"
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 29 28 27 26 25 1/4" = 1'-0" A29

ROOF PLAN
UNIT 1: 1,250 SF* 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH
UNIT 2: 1,425 SF* 2 BEDROOM, 2.5 BATH
UNIT 3: 1,250 SF* 2 B E D R O O M , 2 B A T H
* AREA MEASURE TO INTERIOR FACE OF WALL AT 7’-6” HEAD HEIGHT BUILDING A : PROPOSED PLANS
1 2
3 3
4 4
4 5
5 6
6 7
7 8
8 8
8 9
9 9
10 10 10 10
11 12
13 13 13
14 14

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

R E PA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

SECOND FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN
Building A Plans
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
10/18/2022 5:31:40 PM
28'-0"
28'-0"
1 2
3 3
4 4
5 5 5
5 5
6 6
6 6
6 7
7 8
8 8
9 9 9
10 10 10 10 10
10 11
12 12
13 14 14
14 13 13
5' - 3"
7/13/2022 1:10:22 PM
28'-0" 28'-0"
28'-0"

EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION
BUILDING A : EXISTING/PROPOSED ELEVATIONS

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

R E PA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION

EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION
1 2
5 1
11 12
1 Building A Elevations
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
UP
UP
UP
UP
DN
Range
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
A
B
C
D
E
F
6' - 10" 30' - 0 1/2" 32' - 8" 17' - 9 1/2" 28' - 10" 17' - 4 1/2" 14' - 7" 7' - 9" 7' - 11" 31' - 5 1/2" 14' - 0" 13' - 3"
CAFE
108

KITCHEN
109
OFFICE
110
STUDIO
114
STUDIO
115

ART STUDIO
117
DECK
106
EVENT
101
ENTRY
100
PORCH
118
WC
104
WC
105
CLOSET
102
148' - 1 1/2"
74' - 4"
WC
112
STAIR
116
STAIR
107
13' - 1 1/2"
-1'-0" LOW -0'-4" LOW
-1'-0" LOW 0'-0" LOW
-1'-0" LOW
-1'-0" LOW
0'-0" LOW
0'-0" LOW
0'-0" LOW
0'-0" LOW
OFFICE 0'-0" LOW
82 STUDIO
206
STUDIO
207

BACK OF HOUSE
208
G
K
J
H
L
No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:

M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Author
222.03.1-B
Napa Historic
Building B
2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD,
NAPA, CA 94559
Checker
DN
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
A
B
C
D
E
F
6' - 10" 30' - 0 1/2" 32' - 8" 17' - 9 1/2" 28' - 10" 17' - 4 1/2" 14' - 7" 148' - 1 1/2"
7' - 9" 7' - 11" 31' - 5 1/2" 14' - 0" 13' - 3"
74' - 4"

C PROJECT M PLUS CORP
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:
29 28 27 26 25
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
A102
Author
222.03.1-B
Napa Historic
Building B
2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD,
NAPA, CA 94559

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
Checker
3/16" = 1'-0" A25

SECOND FLOOR
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
A
B
C
D
E
F
6' - 10" 30' - 0 1/2" 32' - 8" 17' - 9 1/2" 28' - 10" 17' - 4 1/2" 14' - 7" 148' - 1 1/2"
7' - 9" 7' - 11" 31' - 5 1/2" 14' - 0" 13' - 3"
74' - 4"

C PROJECT M
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. D
F
B

PROJECT

DRAWN B

CHECKED

PERMIT N

SHEET TIT

ARCHITEC
2898 Rowe
Los Angele
C
D
E
stamp:
29 28 27 26 25
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Napa
Build
2344 OLD S
NAPA, CA 9
3/16" = 1'-0" A25

ROOF PLAN
1 2
3 4
5 5
6 7
7 8
9 9
9 10
10 10
11 12
12 R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H D E T A I L I N G

INCLUDING ARCHWAYS

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

R E PA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T A T ( E ) W I N D O W
L O C A T I O N .

R E M O V E N O N C O N F O R M I N G

M E C H A N I C A L E Q U I P M E N T A N D S C R E E N S WHERE FEASIBLE.

R E M O V E I N F I L L W A L L A T B A C K O F

BUILDING AS INDICATED

P R O V I D E N E W / E X PA N D E D R A I S E D
PORCH AT BACK OF BUILDING.

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P A T B A C K O F

BUILDING

R E PA I R / R E F I N S H ( E ) S T O N E

FOUNDATION

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

NEW ADA RAMP AND RAISED DECK
13 14
14 15
16 16
16 15

OPEN TO BELOW
BUILDING B : PROPOSED PLANS

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

ROOF PLAN
Building B Plans
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 048 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
7/13/2022 12:55:02 PM
32'-3" 27'-11"
28'-11"
11/22/2022 3:12:13 PM
123456789
10 11
12 R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H D E T A I L I N G

INCLUDING ARCHWAYS

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

R E PA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T A T ( E ) W I N D O W
L O C A T I O N .

R E M O V E N O N C O N F O R M I N G

M E C H A N I C A L E Q U I P M E N T A N D S C R E E N S WHERE FEASIBLE.

R E M O V E I N F I L L W A L L A T B A C K O F

BUILDING AS INDICATED

P R O V I D E N E W / E X PA N D E D R A I S E D
PORCH AT BACK OF BUILDING.

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P A T B A C K O F

BUILDING

R E PA I R / R E F I N S H ( E ) S T O N E

FOUNDATION

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

N E W R A I S E D W O O D D E C K A N D A D A
RAMP
13 14
15 16
BUILDING B : EXISTING/PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
7/13/2022 12:55:02 PM
32'-3" 27'-11"
28'-11"
5 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION

PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
1 2
3 4
5 6
9 10
7/13/2022 1:15:37 PM
32'-11" 27'-11"
28'-11"
022 1:15:37 PM
32'-11" 27'-11"
28'-11"

EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION
PROPOSED NORTH ELEVATION5
11 12
13 13
11 12
10 10
14 15
16 Building B Elevations
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
DN DN
P102
1 A302
M29
A301
M29
128 SF

BEDROOM
226
47 SF
BATH
225
218 SF

BEDROOM
223
253 SF

BEDROOM
212
257 SF

BEDROOM
232
49 SF
BATH
213
49 SF
BATH
231
A301 A29 A302 A29
M29
A401
84' - 3"
50' - 2 1/2"
78' - 3"
37' - 1"
60 SF
STAIR
210
CLOSET
118 SF
STAIR
220
CLOSET
CLOSET
57 SF
STAIR
230
CLOSET
A29
A401
01 02 03 04
A
B
C
59 SF
BATH
224

C PROJECT M PLUS CORP
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:
29 28 27 26 25
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
A102
Author
222.03.1-C
Napa Historic
Building C 2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD
NAPA, CA 94559

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
Checker
1/4" = 1'-0" A29

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
UP UP
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN

W D W D
W D
P102
1 A302
M29
A301
M29
A301 A29 A302 A29
M29
A401
44' - 2 1/2"
78' - 3"
438 SF
LIVING
112
170 SF

KITCHEN
113
CORR
45 SF
117
CLOSET
119 SF

BEDROOM
115
BATH
54 SF
116
97 SF
ENTRY
110
29 SF
STAIR
111
36 SF
BATH
121
567 SF
LIVING
123
238 SF

KITCHEN
125
71 SF
ENTRY
130
53 SF
BATH
131
133 SF

BEDROOM
132
22 SF
CLOSET
133
171 SF

KITCHEN
134
438 SF
LIVING
135
37 SF
CORR
136
28 SF
STAIR
138
CLOSET
A29
A401
01 02 03 04
A
B
C
125 SF
PORCH
60 0' - 7 1/2" 23' - 4" 19' - 7 1/2" 0' - 7 1/2"
0' - 7 1/2" 24' - 6" 27' - 3 1/2" 25' - 2" 0' - 7 1/2"
CLOSET
61 CLOSET
62 STAIR
63 G
K
J
H
L
No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:

M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Author
222.03.1-C
Napa Historic
Building C 2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD
NAPA, CA 94559

FIRST FLOOR PLAN
Checker
BUILDING C : PROPOSED PLANS
01 04
C
A
02 03
B
3' - 4" 24' - 6" 28' - 2" 24' - 5" 3' - 4"
83' - 8"
3' - 4" 23' - 9" 19' - 3" 3' - 5"
49' - 8"
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 29 28 27 26 25 1/4" = 1'-0" A29

ROOF PLAN
UNIT 1: 1,250 SF* 2 BEDROOM, 2 BATH
UNIT 2: 1,425 SF* 2 BEDROOM, 2.5 BATH
UNIT 3: 1,250 SF* 2 B E D R O O M , 2 B A T H
* AREA MEASURE TO INTERIOR FACE OF WALL AT 7’-6” HEAD HEIGHT 1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 3
4 4
5 6
7 8 8
8 9 9
10 10 10
13 13
14 14

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

R E PA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

SECOND FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN
Building C Plans
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
10/18/2022 5:31:40 PM
28'-0"
28'-0"
5' - 3"
7/13/2022 1:10:22 PM
28'-0" 28'-0"
28'-0"

EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 BUILDING C : EXISTING/PROPOSED ELEVATIONS

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
3 4
5 5
5 5
6 6
6 6
7 8 8
9 9
10 10 10 10
10 12
13 13
14 14

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

R E PA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING
Building C Elevations

EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION
1 2
5 1
11 12
1 ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
BUILDING A&C: RENDERED ELEVATIONS
1 1 1
1 2
2 2
2 6
3 3
3 5
4 5
4 4 4
4 2
1 3
4 5
6 MATERIALS:

CLAY TILE ROOF

SMOOTH STUCCO / OFF WHITE

BASE STUCCO / PUTTY
METAL: OIL RUBBED BRONZE
W I N D O W A N D D O O R S P T :

P U T T Y G R E E N / A LT G R E Y B L U E
CONCRETE: ACID ETCH

WOOD DECK

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
Building A&C Rendered Elevation
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
BUILDING B : RENDERED ELEVATIONS

EAST ELEVATION

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION
2 1
3 4
5 6
MATERIALS:

CLAY TILE ROOF

SMOOTH STUCCO / OFF WHITE

BASE STUCCO / PUTTY
METAL: OIL RUBBED BRONZE
W I N D O W A N D D O O R S P T :

P U T T Y G R E E N / A LT G R E Y B L U E
CONCRETE: ACID ETCH

WOOD DECK

WEST ELEVATION EAST ELEVATION
1 1
2 2
6 4
4 3
5 5 5
1 1
2 4 2
4 Building B Rendered Elevation
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Carriage Building D1: Plans
LEVEL 1
LEVEL 2
UP
UPUP
DN
DN
71' - 10"
36' - 8"
DN
40' - 8"
77' - 10"
12/14/2022 5:34:27 PM
N
PORCH
DN

PORCH PORCH
PORCH
3 THREE BEDROOM UNIT
DN

ROOM KEY

SINGLE BEDROOM UNIT
2 TWO BEDROOM UNIT
1 2 2
3 2 2
3 ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Carriage Building D1: Roof Plan
N

ROOF PLAN
77' - 8"
46' - 6"

ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS
2 SOLAR PANELS
1 C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
3 3 2 1
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Carriage Building D1: Rendered Elevations

ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS

C E M E N T B O A R D S H I N G L E

S I D I N G
1 / 2 ” V E N E E R F A C E B R I C K

S Y S T E M

P A I N T E D W O O D W I N D O W &

T R I M

C O N C R E T E

C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
2 1
3 4
5 6
11 4 9
3 8
3 3 1 2
6 10
3 1

SOLAR PANALS

P A I N T E D W O O D F A S C I A
7 8
5 ” P A I N T E D G U T T E R & 4 ”

DOWN SPOUT

PAINTED WOOD ATTIC VENT
9 10
11 2” STONE SILL / CAP

NORTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
9 3 11 2 3 8 1
11 4 7 5 3 2 6 9

WEST ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION
Carriage Building D1: Rendered Elevations

ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS

C E M E N T B O A R D S H I N G L E

S I D I N G
1 / 2 ” V E N E E R F A C E B R I C K

S Y S T E M

P A I N T E D W O O D W I N D O W &

T R I M

C O N C R E T E

C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
2 1
3 4
5 6

SOLAR PANALS

P A I N T E D W O O D F A S C I A
7 8
5 ” P A I N T E D G U T T E R & 4 ”

DOWN SPOUT

PAINTED WOOD ATTIC VENT
9 10
11 2” STONE SILL / CAP
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

NEW NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES

CARRIAGE BUILDING

EAST ELEVATION
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
8 7 6
5 New Non-Contributing Structures
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Carriage Building D1: Plans
LEVEL 1
LEVEL 2
UP
UPUP
DN
DN
71' - 10"
36' - 8"
DN
40' - 8"
77' - 10"
12/14/2022 5:34:27 PM
N
PORCH
DN

PORCH PORCH
PORCH
3 THREE BEDROOM UNIT
DN

ROOM KEY

SINGLE BEDROOM UNIT
2 TWO BEDROOM UNIT
1 2 2
3 2 2
3 ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Carriage Building D1: Roof Plan
N

ROOF PLAN
77' - 8"
46' - 6"

ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS
2 SOLAR PANELS
1 C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
3 3 2 1
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Carriage Building D1: Rendered Elevations

ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS

C E M E N T B O A R D S H I N G L E

S I D I N G
1 / 2 ” V E N E E R F A C E B R I C K

S Y S T E M

P A I N T E D W O O D W I N D O W &

T R I M

C O N C R E T E

C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
2 1
3 4
5 6
11 4 9
3 8
3 3 1 2
6 10
3 1

SOLAR PANALS

P A I N T E D W O O D F A S C I A
7 8
5 ” P A I N T E D G U T T E R & 4 ”

DOWN SPOUT

PAINTED WOOD ATTIC VENT
9 10
11 2” STONE SILL / CAP

NORTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
9 3 11 2 3 8 1
11 4 7 5 3 2 6 9

WEST ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION
Carriage Building D1: Rendered Elevations

ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS

C E M E N T B O A R D S H I N G L E

S I D I N G
1 / 2 ” V E N E E R F A C E B R I C K

S Y S T E M

P A I N T E D W O O D W I N D O W &

T R I M

C O N C R E T E

C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
2 1
3 4
5 6

SOLAR PANALS

P A I N T E D W O O D F A S C I A
7 8
5 ” P A I N T E D G U T T E R & 4 ”

DOWN SPOUT

PAINTED WOOD ATTIC VENT
9 10
11 2” STONE SILL / CAP
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
UP
UP
103' - 5"
30' - 11 1/2"
52' - 2"
12/14/2022 5:39:43 PM
DN

OPEN TO BELOW
64' - 9"
104' - 0 1/2"
12/14/2022 5:39:43 PM
Crescent Building D2: Plans
LEVEL 1
LEVEL 2
N

OPEN TO BELOW
3 THREE BEDROOM UNIT

ROOM KEY

SINGLE BEDROOM UNIT
2 TWO BEDROOM UNIT
1 2
3 2
1 2
3 2
1 ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Crescent Building D2: Roof Plan
N

ROOF PLAN
52' - 6"
103' - 0"
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
4 3
4 1
2 2 3 4
1 SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION
5 ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS

W O O D L A P S I D I N G

V E R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G

P A I N T E D W O O D W I N D O W &

T R I M

C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
2 1
3 4
5 6 P A I N T E D W O O D F A S C I A
Crescent Building D2: Rendered Elevations
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

DESIGN REVIEW
16 DECEMBER 2022
0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
Crescent Building D2: Rendered Elevations
4 4
3 1 3 5
1 NORTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
2 6
5 6 2

ASPHALTIC ROOF SYSTEM

MATERIALS

W O O D L A P S I D I N G

V E R T I C A L W O O D S I D I N G

P A I N T E D W O O D W I N D O W &

T R I M

C U S T O M P A I N T E D M E TA L

FLUE CAP
2 1
3 4
5 6 P A I N T E D W O O D F A S C I A
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

CRESCENT BUILDING

NEW NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
8 7 6
5 New Non-Contributing Structures

WEST ELEVATION
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

EXISTING DETAILS MATERIALS
1 CLAY TILE ROOF: MISSION BARRELRAISED HIP CAPSHAPED WOOD RAFTER TAILEIGHT OVER TWO DIVIDED LIGHT WINDOWEIGHT OVER FOUR DIVIDED LIGHTW I N D O W FIVE PANEL DOOR EXTERIOR / INTERIORDIVIDED LIGHT DOOR WITH TRANSOMEXTERIORSTONE BLOCK BASE : REMOVE PAINT / REPAIRMID COURSE STUCCO DETAILMETAL CRAWL SPACE VENTS 12345
CLAY TILE ROOFSMOOTH STUCCO / OFF WHITEBASE STUCCO / PUTTYMETAL: OIL RUBBED BRONZEW I N D O W A N D D O O R S P T : P U T T Y G R E E N / A L T G R E Y B L U E CONCRETE: ACID ETCH

MATERIALS AND DETAILS
2 123
3 4
4 5
5 6
6 7
7 8
8 9
9 10
10 2
34 4 ALT
5 1
BUILDING B - INFIRMARY, 1973 BUILDING C - DORMITORY, 1973 Materials
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
1 EXTERIOR
WINDOW
AND

SURROUND

EXTERIOR
WINDOW

SECTION
Historic Windows

WINDOW DETAILS
(E) STUCCO OVER CONCRETE
(E) BELT COURSE
(E) REDWOOD SILL PTD

N E W P T D W O O D W I N D O W

TO MATCH EXISTING HISTORIC
T.M COBB OR EQUIV

N E W D I V I D E D L I G H T T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G

HISTORIC DIVISIONS

WINDOW LUG TO MATCH EXISTING HISTORIC

NEW PTD INTERIOR WOOD TRIM

TO MATCH EXISITING HISTORIC
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 7
7 1
2 3
4 5
5 3
6 DOUBLE HUNG - JAMBLINER

HORIZONTAL SECTION
Drawings & Specifications contain confidential information that are the property of T.M. Cobb Millwork Division DOUBLE HUNG – HIDDEN BALANCE and may not be reproduced or used without written permission by the Owner

VERTICAL SECTION
Drawings & Specifications contain confidential information that are the property of T.M. Cobb Millwork Division and may not be reproduced or used without written permission by the Owner ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

EXTERIOR
DOOR
AND

SURROUND

EXTERIOR
DOOR

SECTION

INTEROIR
DOOR
ONLY

INTERIOR
DOOR
AND

SURROUND
Historic Doors

DOOR DETAILS
(E) STUCCO OVER CONCRETE
(E) REDWOOD JAMB PTD

NEW PTD WD WOOD DOOR

T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G H I S T O R I C
T.M COBB OR EQUIV

D I V I D E D L I G H T

T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G H I S T O R I C
NEW 5 PANEL PTD WOOD DOOR

T O M A T C H E X I S T I N G H I S T O R I C
T.M COBB OR EQUIV

NEW PTD INTERIOR WOOD TRIM

TO MATCH EXISTING HISTORIC
1 1
2 4
2 3
4 5
6 4 5
3 6
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 0 4 8 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

NEW NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
New Non-Contributing Structures

NON CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
7: COURTYARD CONDO BUILDING

SOUTH ELEVATION

NON CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
6: SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
8 7 6
5 NORTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 1

MEMORANDUM
Teresa Grimes | Historic Preservation
[email protected]
323-868-2391
Date: December 21, 2022
For: City of Napa, Planning Division
Subject: Certificate of Appropriateness, The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road ______________________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION
A development project (Project) called The Crescent has been proposed for the former site of the Napa County Health and Human Services Campus (Project Site, see Figure 1). The 8.65-acre Project Site is located at 2344 Old Sonoma Road and is occupied by eleven buildings and six modular units, which are surrounded by landscaped areas, walkways, access roads, and surface parking areas. The Project Site is bounded by single-family houses and the Napa Christian School campus to the north, single-family houses on Gesford Street to the east, Old Sonoma Road to the south, and the Napa County Juvenile Justice Center and Walnut Street to the west.

Figure 1: Location of Project Site dashed in red (Google Earth, 2022) Old Sonoma Road
Walnut Street
ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 2 The southeastern portion of the Project Site contains the remaining buildings of the Napa County Infirmary and was listed in the National Register of Historic Places (National Register) on June 4, 2018 (see Figures 2 and 3). Properties listed in the National Register are automatically included in the California Register of Historical Resources (California Register) and defined as mandatory historical resources by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Changes to the property are regulated by Municipal Code Section 15.52, which states the alteration, demolition, or relocation of any listed historical resource requires a Certificate of Appropriateness. The findings required for the approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness include compliance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (Standards). This memorandum was prepared for the Certificate of Appropriateness application for The Crescent Project proposed by the Napa Community Real Estate Fund, LP (Applicant).

Figure 2: Location of Project Site dashed in red and National Register District boundary highlighted in yellow (Google Earth, 2022)
Teresa Grimes | Historic Preservation (TGHP) was retained by the Applicant to review the schematic design plans for the Project to ensure that the proposed changes are consistent with the Standards. She fulfills the qualifications for a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations, Part 61. Her résumé is included in Attachment A.

Old Sonoma Road
Walnut Street
ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 3

METHODOLOGY
In preparing this memorandum, TGHP performed the following tasks:
• Reviewed existing information on the property including the National Register Form. • Researched the construction history of the property to fill information gaps in the existing information.
• Conducted a site visit on January 3, 2022, to assess building conditions and to identify character-defining features.
• Provided advice to the Project Team on compliance with the Standards. • Reviewed the attached schematic design plans prepared by Project M+ and dated December 15, 2022 for compliance with the Standards (see Attachment B).

DEVELOPMENT HISTORY
The property evolved over time with buildings constructed, demolished, relocated, and altered between 1869 and 1997. The development history below is based upon the 2017 National Register Form and supplemented with published sources in local newspapers, Sanborn maps, aerial photographs, architectural drawings, and historic photographs.

TABLE I
Year Event
1869 The County establishes an infirmary on a 20-acre parcel; Beeby Robinson & Son construct the first building.
1880 circa A bird’s eye view drawing shows the infirmary building oriented toward a crescent shaped driveway and lawn, and a water tower and ancillary building on the north (see Figure 4).
1890 circa A cross-gabled hay barn is constructed to the north and a superintendent’s cottage to the east of infirmary building.
1897 The County funds a new stone hospital building (west portion of Building B). 1901 The Sanborn Map documents the stone hospital building on the west, the infirmary building in the center, and the superintendent’s cottage on the east; the components are connected on the north by a corridor. The hay barn and water tower are to the north (see Figure 5).
1910 The Sanborn Map shows more detail and subtle changes, but no major alterations since 1901 (see Figure 6).
1912 The County hires William H. Corlett to prepare plans for men’s (Building A) and women’s dormitories (Building C) (see Figures 7 to 8). The superintendent’s cottage is moved further east.
1924 The Sanborn Map documents the stone hospital building on the west. The use is labeled hospital and the building has a front gabled roof and projecting front porch. The infirmary building in the center is the same as before; however, it is now shown as two stories. The use is labeled kitchen and dining room. The ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 4

TABLE I
Year Event
superintendent’s cottage is relocated to the east of Building C. The water tower on the north is gone. There are three new ancillary buildings around the hay barn on the north including a laundry (see Figure 9).
1934 The County receives funds from the Civil Works Administration to remodel the two-story center building (Building B) to match Buildings A and C. The 1897 stone hospital building is retained but altered. The front (south) porch is removed and replaced with a 14’0” x 29’ x 6” enclosed addition (see Figure 10).

The 1869 infirmary building is demolished and replaced with a new building. A colonnade is constructed between Buildings B and C. In addition, the front (south) porches of Buildings B and C are altered (see Figure 11). It appears that some of the 1934 improvements are based upon undated drawings by architect C.L. Hunt (see Figure 12).
1949 The Sanborn Map documents the stone building is preserved, but the remainder is demolished and replaced (Building B). The ancillary buildings include the superintendent’s cottage on the east and the three buildings on the north (see Figure 13). The hay barn is now labeled “Helps Quarters.” 1953 The Napa County Social Welfare Department constructs a new building at 2261 Elm Street.
1962 The institution becomes a licensed nursing facility for the elderly. The building interiors are altered to accommodate non-ambulatory patients. 1970 The proposed re-roofing plan indicates clay roof tiles will be replaced with asphalt shingles (see Figure 14).
1973 The institution closes as convalescent home because the buildings no longer meet State code. The County converts the property into an alcohol and mental health services facility and the name changes to Napa County Health and Human Services. Building A becomes a dining room and a crisis center; Building B becomes administrative offices, a conference room, and activity room; and Building C becomes overnight accommodations for male and female patients.

Historic photographs show the front porches of Buildings A, B, and C have been enclosed by this time, but original windows remain (see Figures 15 to 16). 1995 The County adopts a new master plan for the property (see Figure 17). At this time, there are 12 buildings including six older buildings. The remainder are modular buildings.
1997 Buildings A, B, and C are renovated including new restrooms and ADA ramps; four new modular buildings are added; two existing modular buildings are moved; the hay barn is dismantled, and materials re-used in a new animal barn at Connolly Ranch; the maintenance building and superintendent’s cottage are demolished, the colonnade that once connected Buildings B and C is also demolished.
2000s The wood windows in Buildings A, B, and C are removed and replaced with vinyl windows between 1997 and 2012.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 5

TABLE I
Year Event
2014 The stone hospital building (west portion of Building B) is damaged in the South Napa earthquake.
2016 The Health and Services Agency moves to a new location and the buildings are vacated.

SUMMARY OF NATIONAL ELIGIBLITY
Boundary and Contributing Resources
The property was listed in the National Register in 2018 as a district under Criterion A and Criterion C. The district boundary is generally rectangular in shape and includes the 1897/1934 hospital/infirmary building (Building B) as well as the 1912 men’s and women’s dormitory buildings (Buildings A and C), which are oriented around the crescent shaped driveway and lawn. In addition to these three contributing buildings and one contributing feature, the district includes three non-contributing buildings (Buildings D, E, and F) that were added in the 2000s.

The northern portion of the property was not included in the district boundary. It historically included farmland and ancillary buildings that supported the operation of the County Infirmary; however, it was redeveloped by the Health and Human Services Agency from the 1950s through the 2000s and does not retain historic character.

Figure 3: Boundary map from National Register Form (2017) ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 6 Significance
The district is significant under Criterion A at the local level for its association with the development of Napa County’s government institutions during the nineteenth century and the subsequent expansion of local government in response to population growth. The period of significance begins in 1912 with the construction of the men’s and women’s dormitory buildings (Buildings A and C) flanking the hospital/infirmary building (Building B). Why the period of significance on the National Register Form did not begin in 1897 with the construction of the stone hospital building (west portion of Building B) is unclear. The period of significance ends in 1962, when the County Infirmary ceased to function. The district is also eligible at the local level for its architecture from the period between 1912 and 1934. The three buildings and crescent shaped driveway and lawn are linked by plan and use and form a physical record of earlytwentieth century institutional architecture. The 1912 buildings designed by master architect W. H. Corlett1 represent an early use of reinforced concrete construction and are the first regional examples of a progressive cottage plan institution. They are also excellent examples of Corlett’s ability to blend utilitarian considerations such as fireproof construction and costconsciousness with aesthetically distinctive buildings with Mission Revival style features.

Alterations
The National Register Form noted the following alterations that were confirmed by the investigations conducted for this memorandum:
• The removal of the clay roof tiles and replacement with composition shingles on all three contributing buildings.
• The removal of the wood sashes and replacement with vinyl sashes on all three contributing buildings. However, window openings were not re-sized and a few original wood sashes remain.
• The enclosure of the arched front (south) porches on all three contributing buildings. • The removal of front (south) entrance doors on all three contributing buildings. • The removal of back (north) porches on Buildings A and C.2 • The removal of front and back steps and the addition of ADA ramps on all three contributing buildings.
• The addition of mechanical equipment and a screen on top of Building B. • The surrounding new development including institutional buildings on the north and residential buildings on the east.

The National Register Form states that the three contributing buildings appear to retain much of their original interior fabric, but the investigation conducted for this memorandum found 1 The summary statement of significance attributes the 1934 portion of Building B to Corlett, but the narrative makes clear that he was not the architect.
2 Not noted on National Register Form.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 7 that was not the case. Floor plans have been reconfigured and materials have been replaced repeatedly.

Integrity
Notwithstanding the alterations noted above, the National Register Form found the district retains all seven aspects of integrity: location, setting, design, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association.

CHARACTER-DEFINING FEATURES
Character-defining features are the architectural components that contribute to a building's sense of time and place. Preservation Brief No. 17: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character notes:

A complete understanding of any property may require documentary research about its style, construction, function, its furnishings, or contents; knowledge about the original builder, owners, and later occupants; and knowledge about the evolutionary history of the building. Even though buildings may be of historic, rather than architectural significance, it is their tangible elements that embody its significance for association with specific events or persons and it is those tangible elements both on the exterior and interior that should be preserved.3
The character-defining features of contributing buildings can be generally grouped into three categories: the overall visual character, the exterior materials and craftsmanship, and the interior spaces, features, and finishes. The relative importance of character-defining features depends on the level of craftsmanship, visibility, and integrity. The character-defining features of the National Register District are listed below:

Overall Visual Character
• Crescent shaped driveway and lawn
• Orientation of contributing buildings to driveway
• Collection of individual buildings
• Residential feeling despite institutional use
• One story height
• Raised basements
• Rectangular forms (Buildings A and C)
• Irregular form (Building B)
• Reinforced concrete construction (Buildings A and C)
3 Lee H. Nelson, "Preservation Brief #17: Architectural Character: Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character,” US Department of the Interior, National Park Service, Cultural Resources,

1. ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 8 • Mission Revival style
• Steeply pitched hipped roofs
• Symmetry of south facades (Buildings A and C)
Exterior Materials and Craftsmanship (Buildings A, B, and C) • Lightly textured stucco walls
• Cut stone foundation (Building B)
• Overhanging eaves
• Exposed carved rafter tails
• Dormers
• Belt courses between basements and first floors
• First floor window openings
• Basement vent openings
• Wood window frames, sills, and sashes remaining in a few locations Interior Spaces, Features, and Finishes (Buildings A, B, and C) • None
PROPOSED PROJECT4
Introduction
The proposed Project will demolish nine existing buildings, rehabilitate three existing buildings, and construct six new condominium buildings and eight new single-family houses. The three rehabilitated buildings are the three buildings (Buildings A, B, and C) that contribute to the National Register District. Among the demolished buildings are the three non-contributing buildings (Buildings D, E, and F) to the National Register District (see Figure 3).

It should be noted that the proposed Project changes the naming conventions for the three contributing buildings from Buildings A, B, and C to Buildings C1, C2, and C3. For the sake of simplicity, this memorandum uses the existing naming conventions. The central Building B will be adaptively reused as a community-serving café, art studios, and event spaces. Buildings A and B will be adaptively reused as residential units, with three units in each building.

Two new buildings will be constructed within the boundary of the National Register District.

One of these (called the Crescent Building) will occupy the former location of the noncontributing Building D that will be demolished. The other new building (called the Carriage Building) will be situated behind (northwest) Buildings A and B. The Carriage Building will include three townhomes and the Crescent Building will include three townhomes and one flat. 4 Project description provided by the Applicant.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 9 The center of the Project Site will be occupied by three more new buildings with 101 condominium units constructed on top of a semi-subterranean parking garage. These buildings will be two to four stories in height and arranged in courtyard configurations (Courtyard Buildings). A small portion of one of these Courtyard Buildings is located within the National Register District boundary. The eastern edge of the Project Site will include eight new singlefamily houses, three of which will be within the boundary of the National Register District. The height, scale, design, and massing of these houses creates a transition between the new Courtyard Buildings to the west and the adjacent single-family neighborhood to the east. The Project will also include a new three- and four-story building with 40 condominium units to the northwest. This building (called the Redwood Building) will be accessed from Walnut Street and is not located within the boundary of the National Register District. Residential units on the Project Site will total 162 units. See Attachment B for the proposed Project plans.

Building Design Features
The goals that lead to the design of the proposed Project included enhancing the integrity of the National Register District, creating new housing that blends into the neighborhood organically, and rehabilitating the three contributing buildings in compliance with the Standards.

The integrity of the National Register District will be enhanced by rehabilitating the three contributing buildings, removing the three non-contributing buildings, preserving the crescent shaped driveway and lawn, and constructing two new non-contributing but compatible buildings.

A variety of new residential buildings will be constructed throughout the remainder of the Project Site with a mixture of unit sizes and affordability levels. Building types will include courtyards, townhouses, triplexes, and single-family houses. The architectural styles of the new buildings reflect the architectural vocabulary of Napa and complement the architecture of the three contributing buildings. The site plan was developed around mature trees to avoid a regimented pattern. To ensure that the Project blended into the neighborhood, the Applicant retained two different architecture firms who each brought their own aesthetic viewpoint to the Project.

The three contributing buildings will be rehabilitated in compliance with the Standards. The State Historical Building Code will be used to preserve the character-defining features of the contributing buildings, while converting them to new uses, updating mechanical systems, and providing reasonable access to the physically disabled. The contributing buildings will be preserved in their entirety maintaining building heights and shapes, roof forms and details, fenestration patterns, and stucco walls. Original features will be repaired as necessary using recognized methods. A key component of the Project will be removing insensitive alterations and restoring missing features to improve the historic character of the contributing buildings.

This work will include removing non-original vinyl sashes, slab doors, composition roof shingles, ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 10 mechanical equipment, and ADA ramps and restoring clay tile roofs, wood window sashes and basement vents, front and back porch configurations, and wood paneled doors. New features required for the new uses will be located on rear (north) facades, which are not visible from Old Sonoma Road.

Sustainability
The Project will include solar panels on most of the new buildings and Energy Star appliances and low flow plumbing fixtures throughout. Electric Vehicle (EV) chargers will be provided in the parking garage. The single-family house will have laundry to landscape graywater systems installed.

Open Space and Landscaping
The landscape design will retain over 50 of the existing 86 trees, retain the crescent shaped open space, and create over 90,000 square feet of common open space for the Project Site. The Project will include approximately one mile of new trails and walks to connect the new residential buildings, seven gardens, and ten courtyards.

The new landscape palette will predominately include appropriate native and ornamental plant material that is sustainable to the local climate. The landscape water needs will meet the local Water Use Requirements, as mandated by the State of California.

Additional sustainable features in the landscape include:
§ installation of bio-retention and infiltration systems to clean and reduce storm water runoff,
§ planting up to 100 additional trees to reduce heat island effect, § inclusion of solar energy Photovoltaic panels on pergolas, § installation of low flow drip and smart irrigation, and § installation of appropriate tree types and placement to reduce energy costs of the buildings.

The existing crescent shaped open space will be slightly reduced to meet sustainable water use requirements but will still include approximately 20,000 square feet of lawn for resident use.

Seven on grade gardens will incorporate various amenities such as, seating areas, jogging trails, horseshoe pits for play or bean bag toss, picnic areas, short term bicycle parking stations, free play open space and quiet contemplative areas. Ten courtyards constructed over the parking garage will offer residents shaded spaces, communal conversation seating areas, barbequing opportunities, dining spaces and private open space patios. All of the gardens and courtyards will be accessible to the residents.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 11 SECRETARY OF THE INTERIOR’S STANDARDS
The required findings for the approval of a Certificate of Appropriateness are based upon Municipal Code Section 15.52.070 (F) (2):
b. The project does not adversely affect the special character of historic, architectural, or aesthetic interest or value of the local landmark district; and c. The project is consistent with the applicable Secretary of the Interior’s Standards; and d. The project is consistent with applicable historic design guidelines. (O2015-15, 12/15/15)
The Standards were issued by the National Park Service and are accompanied by Guidelines for four types of treatments: Preservation, Rehabilitation, Restoration, and Reconstruction. The most common treatment and the one that applies to the proposed project is rehabilitation.

The definition of rehabilitation assumes that at least some repair or alteration of the historic property will be needed in order to provide for efficient, ongoing use; however, these repairs and alterations should not damage or destroy materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the property's historic character.

It is important to note that the Standards are not intended to be prescriptive, but instead provide general guidance. They are intended to be flexible and adaptable to specific project conditions to balance continuity and change, while retaining materials and features to the maximum extent feasible. Their interpretation requires exercising professional judgment and balancing the various opportunities and constraints of any given project. Not every Standard necessarily applies to every aspect of a project, nor is it necessary to comply with every Standard to achieve compliance as a whole.

In accordance with Municipal Code Section 15.52.070 (F) (2) (c) the Project is analyzed below for compliance with the Standards for Rehabilitation.

Standard 1. A property will be used for its historic purpose or be placed in a new use that requires minimal change to the defining characteristics of the building and its site and environment.

Building B will be converted into an event space, café, and community arts center. These new uses will require minimal changes to the character-defining features of the contributing buildings. Most of the changes involve adding new dormers on the rear (north) roofs of Buildings A and C to allow for the use of the attic spaces. Additionally, a few window openings ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 12 on the rear facades of Buildings A, B, and C will be lowered and converted into doorways. The crescent shaped driveway and lawn will continue to provide vehicular circulation and open space, respectively. The Crescent Building will be the only new building that is clearly visible from Old Sonoma Road. It will replace a non-contributing building that is not compatible with the historic character of the property. As discussed further under Standard 9, the Crescent Building is compatible with the massing, size, scale, and architectural features of the contributing buildings. Therefore, the Project complies with Standard 1.

Standard 2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of historic materials or alteration of features and spaces that characterize a property will be avoided.

Standard 3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use.

Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or architectural elements from other buildings, will not be undertaken.

Therefore, the Project complies with Standard 3. As discussed further under Standard 9, the new buildings within the boundary of the district have been designed to be compatible but distinguishable as new.

Standard 4. Most properties change over time; those changes that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

As previously stated, the district is significant in different contexts with different periods of significance. The period of significance under National Register Criterion A is 1912 to 1962 and the period of significance under National Register Criterion C is 1912 to 1934. The Project complies with Standard 4 because none of the alterations to the contributing buildings after 1962 have acquired historic significance in their own right. These changes were made to improve the building’s mechanical systems and to provide accessibility, but without regard for aesthetics. These changes have diminished the integrity of the contributing buildings and the Project proposes to reverse these changes to improve the historic and architectural character of the district.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 13 Standard 5. Distinctive features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

The Project complies with Standard 5. The contributing buildings are fairly simple in design and construction, which reflects their institutional use as a poor farm, their Mission Revival style that lacked ornamentation, and (in the case of Building B and alterations to Buildings A and C) their period of construction during the Great Depression. Some of the distinctive features such as wood sash windows and clay tile roofs have been removed and will be restored by the Project.

The most distinctive construction technique within the district is the use of reinforced concrete construction in Buildings A and C, which will be preserved.

Standard 6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and other visual qualities and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary, physical, or pictorial evidence.

The only feature that is deteriorated is the cut stone, which is primarily exposed along the foundation and small sections of the east and west facades of the 1897 portion of Building B.

The stone has been painted, which captured moisture. As a result, the outer surface is spalling, which has accelerated the weathering. The precise treatment of the stone has not been determined. A qualified building materials conservator will be retained to further assess the condition of the stone and recommend a treatment ranging from preservation to consolidation.

At a minimum the stone will be preserved, which means the paint will be removed and a new permeable coating will be applied to stop future decay.

In addition, some stone units have fallen from the west facade as a result of seismic activity. To address both the fallen stones and the structural condition of the remaining stones, the architect and structural engineer have devised a solution that includes reinforcing the existing building walls with shotcrete installed on the interior side of the walls, and then attaching the existing stone (including stones that have fallen and will be re-installed) to the new shotcrete structure using reinforcing steel and epoxy (see Figure 18).

Other features such as the stucco walls and wood rafter tails are in good to fair condition and will be repaired as necessary.

As discussed under Standard 5, some of the features are missing. These include wood sash windows, clay roof tiles, and front (south) and rear (north) porch configurations and details.

New wood sashes have been designed to match the few original ones that remain as well as the historic drawings and photographs. Clay tile roof tiles have been selected to resemble the historic drawings and photographs.

Front and rear porches have been designed to match the historic drawings and photographs. In Buildings A and C, the current front steps will be removed, the lower portions of the front and ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 14 rear walls will be preserved, and new front and rear steps will be created. On the front porches, the non-original vinyl windows will be removed, and the wood windows restored to the 1934 design. On the rear porches, the non-original infill will be removed so the arched openings can be restored.

In Building B, the main entrance to the 1934 portion of the building is essentially intact; however, the arched openings have been infilled with vinyl windows. The vinyl windows will be removed to restore the original open porch. On the rear, the corridor that connects the 1934 and 1897 portions has been infilled and the access was reconfigured with an ADA ramp. These non-original features will be removed. However, there are no historic drawings or photographs of the north façade. The original configuration of the corridor is evident from the physical evidence, but the design is unknown. As discussed under Standard 9, the new railing is simple in design, which is in keeping with the Mission Revival style of the building.

For all of the reasons discussed above, the Project will comply with Standard 6.

Standard 7. Chemical or physical treatments, such as sandblasting, that cause damage to historic materials will not be used. The surface cleaning of structures, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

Standard 8. Significant archeological resources affected by a project will be protected and preserved. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

The 2012 EIR for the proposed Napa County Health and Human Services Agency Campus Project did not identify any previously recorded archaeological resources of significance on the property. In the event of the discovery of archaeological resources during construction, established protocols will be followed to ensure the appropriate documentation and protection. Therefore, the Project will comply with Standard 8.

Standard 9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials that characterize the property. The new work will be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the massing, size, scale, ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 15 and architectural features to protect the historic integrity of the property and its environment.

The Project complies with Standard 9. The Project does not propose any new additions to the contributing buildings. Exterior alterations are proposed to the rear (north) facades of Buildings A, B, and C. The new doorways will require the removal of only small segments of stucco walls.

The original wood doors have five panels, while the doors in new openings have three panels.

The decks associated with the new entrances on Buildings A and C and the corridor on Building B will be simple in design and construction to complement but not mimic the Mission Revival style.

The new construction within the boundary of the district principally includes the Carriage Building and Crescent Building. Only the Crescent Building will be clearly visible from Old Sonoma Road. The Carriage Building as well as the Courtyard Buildings, Redwood Building, and single-family houses will not be visible from Old Sonoma Road (see Figure 19). In any case, all of the new construction is based upon Northern California architectural traditions. The Carriage Building and Crescent Building were specifically designed to be compatible with the massing, size, and scale of the contributing buildings. Instead of Mission Revival, the new buildings will take their ques from the Shingle Style because the buildings that once stood in these general locations were wood frame and wood clad with pitched roofs. The new buildings will be clad in cementitious siding with wood trim and details, the fenestration will consist of wood windows, the foundations and porches will be stone, and the roofs would be clad in asphalt shingles.

Standard 10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

The Project complies with Standard 10. All elements of the Project have been designed in a manner that is reversible. The Project does not propose any additions to the contributing buildings. As discussed under Standard 9, minor alterations are proposed to the rear (north) facades of Buildings A, B, and C. If the new doorways and dormers were removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the contributing buildings would be unimpaired. The doorways will require openings in the walls and the dormers will require openings on the roofs.

The walls and roofs could be easily restored to their original configurations with little if any physical or visual impact to the contributing buildings. The new construction with the boundary of the district principally includes the Carriage Building and Crescent Building. Although they are designed as permanent improvements, in the abstract they could be easily removed in the future without impairing the integrity of the district because they are free standing.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 16

RECOMMENDATIONS
• An experienced practitioner should be consulted regarding the specific treatment of the cut stone in Building B.
• Test patches of selected cleaning, paint removal, or consolidation methods for the cut stone in Building B should be conducted in discrete locations prior to widespread use. • Sandblasting or any other abrasive cleaning methods should not be used to prepare or clean exterior stucco in Buildings A, B, or C.
• At the completion of the Project, the National Register District should be amended to exclude the single-family houses and the portion of the Courtyard Building within the boundary following National Register Bulletin 15, Guidelines for Selecting Boundaries.

CONCLUSION
After reviewing the schematic design plans prepared by Project M+, TGHP has concluded that the Project will comply with the Standards. The character-defining features of the district will be retained and, in some cases, restored. The proposed alterations are limited to those necessary for the change of use and for improving the functionality, accessibility, and safety of the contributing buildings. The non-contributing buildings that will be demolished diminished the historic character of the district. With one exception, the new non-contributing buildings will not be clearly visible from Old Sonoma Road. The new non-contributing buildings are consistent with the historical development pattern of the district and compatible with the architecture of the contributing buildings.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 17 Figure 4: Bird’s eye view, circa 1880.

Figure 5: Sanborn Map, Sheet 26, 1901.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 18 Figure 6: Sanborn Map, Sheet 33, 1910.

Figure 7: Building C, South Elevation William H. Corlett, 1912.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 19 Figure 8: Building C, West Elevation William H. Corlett, 1912.

Figure 9: Sanborn Map, Sheet 33, 1910.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 20 Figure 10: Building B Floor Plan, C.L. Hunt, 1934.

Figure 11: Building A Floor Plan, C.L. Hunt, 1934.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 21 Figure 12: Proposed Plot Plan, C.L. Hunt, circa 1934.

Figure 13: Sanborn Map, Sheet 3, 1949.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 22 Figure 14: Re-roofing plan, E.R. Pierce, 1970.

Figure 15: Building B, South Façade, 1973.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 23 Figure 16: Building C, South Façade, 1973.

Figure 17: Master Plan, 1995.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 24 Figure 18: Proposed treatment of cut stone in Building B. 02 (E) STONE WALL

REMOVE PAINT VIA NON

DESTRUCTIVE PROCESS

NEW SHOTCRETE WALL PER
STRUCT. MECHANICALY ATTACH

TO (E) STONE WALL
NEW 1/2" PLASTER FINISH

PRIME AND PAINT PER SPEC
NEW 5/8" GYP BD CEILINGP

PRIME AND PAINT PER SPEC

NEW WD CEILING JOIST PER
STRUCT
NEW BASE BD.

PRIME AND PAINT PER SPCE
(E) WD FRAMING TO REMAIN
(E) WD SUB FLOOR TO REMAIN

NEW FINISH FLOOR PER SPEC
NEW CONC. FOOTING

PER STRUCT
(E) WD ROOF JOIST TO REMAIN
NEW 1/2" ROOF SHEATHING

NEW CLAY TILE ROOF
(E) ROOF VENT

TO REMAIN
NEW 1/2" ROOF SHEATHING

LINE OF (E) CEILING REMOVED
(E) RAFTER TAIL

REPAIR AS NEEDED
ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa 25 Figure 19: Sight Line Studies, Moule & Polyzoides Architects, 2022. 39 Courtyard Condos
ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A ATTACHMENT A - Resume
ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A TERESA GRIMES | Historic Preservation [email protected] 323-868-2391
Teresa Grimes has 30 years of experience in the field of historic preservation. She is widely recognized as an expert in the identification and evaluation of historical resources having successfully prepared dozens of landmark and historic district applications for a wide variety of property types. Teresa graduated from the University of California with a Master of Art degree in Architecture and has worked in the private, public, and non-profit sectors.

Maintaining a leadership role from inspection to completion, Teresa has overseen numerous rehabilitation and adaptive reuse projects as well as expertly guided property owners through the process of securing Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credits and Mills Act Historic Property Contracts. She has managed the preparation of historic structure reports and worked with architects and engineers to comply with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.

Educational Background Professional Experience
• M.A., Architecture, University of
California, Los Angeles, 1992
• B.A., Political Science, University of
California, Los Angeles, 1986
• Teresa Grimes | Historic Preservation,
Principal, 2020 - Present
• GPA Consulting, Principal Architectural
Historian, 2009-2020
• Christopher A. Joseph & Associates, Senior
Architectural Historian, 2006-2009
• Teresa Grimes | Historic Preservation,
Principal, 1999-2005, 1993-1994, 1991-
1992
• Historic Resources Group, Architectural
Historian, 1994-1998
• Getty Conservation Institute, Research
Associate, 1992-1993
• Los Angeles Conservancy, Preservation
Officer, 1988-1991
Qualifications
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s
Professional Qualifications Standards for
history and architectural history pursuant
to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36
CFR Part 61, Appendix A.

Professional Activities
• Pasadena Heritage Board Member,
2008-2012
• Highland Park Heritage Trust, Board
Member, 1996-1998
• West Hollywood Cultural Heritage
Advisory Board, 1990-1994
Federal Rehabilitation Tax Applications
• Bank of Italy Building/Nomad Hotel, 649 S. Olive Street, Los Angeles, 2015-2018 - Managed Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service. • Breakers Hotel, 200 E. Ocean Boulevard, Long Beach, 2018 – Managed Part 1 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application.
• Casa de Rosas, 2600 S. Hoover Street, Los Angeles, 2017-2020 - Managed Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Elks Lodge No. 99, 607 S. Park View Street, Los Angeles, 2019-Ongoing – Managed Part 1 and Part 2 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit applications, working with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinating approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Equitable Building, 6253-63 Hollywood Boulevard, 1999-2000 – Prepared Part 1 and Part 2 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application. Project was sold to developer who did not qualify for program. • Executive Office Building, Old Warner Brothers Studio, 5800 Sunset Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2001-2002 - Prepared Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service. • Gerry Building, 910 S. Los Angeles Street, Los Angeles, 2001-2004 - Prepared Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Hoover Hotel, 7035 Greenleaf Avenue, Whittier, 1999-2002 - Prepared Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Hotel Rosslyn Annex, 112 W. 5th Street, Los Angeles, 2011-2014 - Managed Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Kerckhoff Building and Annex, 121 E. 6th Street, Los Angeles, 2001-2007 - Prepared Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Nirvana Apartments, 1775 N. Orange Drive, Los Angeles, 2018 – Managed Part 1 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application.
• Normandie Hotel, 3600 W. 6th Street, Los Angeles, 2011 – Managed Part 1 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application.
• Old City Hall, 715 Marin Street, Vallejo, 2011-2014 - Managed Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Old Masonic Temple, 707 Marin Street, Vallejo, 2011-2014 - Managed Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• San Fernando Building, 400 S. Main Street, Los Angeles, 1999-2003 - Prepared Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.
• Santa Fe Coast Lines Hospital, 610-30 S. St. Louis Street, Los Angeles, 2005 - Prepared Part 1 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A • Sears, Roebuck & Company National Distribution Center 2650 E. Olympic Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2005 - Prepared Part 1 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application. • Textile Center Building, 315 E. 8th Street, Los Angeles, 2004 - Prepared Part 1 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application.
• Western Pacific Building, 1023 S. Broadway Los Angeles, 2015 - Managed Part 1 Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application.
• Young’s Market Company Building, 1610 W. 7th Street, Los Angeles, 2002-2006 - Prepared Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit application and National Register nomination, worked with architects and engineers on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, monitored construction, coordinated approvals with State Office of Historic Preservation and National Park Service.

Mills Act Applications
• 20 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, 2019 - Managed Mills Act application. • 26 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, 2019 - Managed Mills Act application. • 1111 N. Los Robles Avenue, Pasadena, 2013 - Managed Mills Act application. • 1121 N. Los Robles Avenue, Pasadena, 2013 - Managed Mills Act application. • 1145 Arden Road, Pasadena, 2020 – Prepared Mills Act application. • Bartlett Building, 215 W. 7th Street, Los Angeles, 2016 – Managed Mills Act application. • Edison/El Rey Building, 48 S. Raymond Avenue, Pasadena, 2012 – Managed Mills Act application. • Elks Lodge No. 99, 607 S. Park View Street, Los Angeles, 2020 – Managed Mills Act application including Historic Structure Report.
• Foreman & Clark Building, 701 S. Hill Street, Los Angeles, 2018 – Managed Mills Act application. • Four Gables Apartments, 8250-64 Fountain Avenue, West Hollywood, 2019 - Managed Mills Act application. • Gerry Building, 910 S. Los Angeles Street, Los Angeles, 2002 – Prepared Mills Act application. • Grand Central Market, 317 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, 2020 – Prepared Mills Act application. • Gray Building, 824 S. Los Angeles Street, Los Angeles, 2002 – Prepared Mills Act application. • Hellman Building, 401-11 S. Main Street, Los Angeles, 2002 – Prepared Mills Act application. • Hindry House, 718 Prospect Boulevard, Pasadena, 2012 – Managed Mills Act application. • Joannes Brothers Company Building, 800 Traction Avenue, Los Angeles, 2019 – Managed Mills Act application including Historic Structure Report.
• Kerckhoff Building and Annex, 121 E. 6th Street, Los Angeles, 2005 - Prepared Mills Act application. • Kozy Knook Court, 830 Brooks Avenue, Pasadena, 2013 - Managed Mills Act application. • M.J. Connell Buildings 1, 2, 3 & 7, 716-24 S. Los Angeles Street, Los Angeles, 2002 - Prepared Mills Act application.
• M.J. Connell Buildings 4, 5 & 6, 738-46 S. Los Angeles Street, Los Angeles, 2002 - Prepared Mills Act application.
• Million Dollar Theater, 307 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, 2020 - Managed Mills Act application. • Sears, Roebuck & Company National Distribution Center 2650 E. Olympic Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2006 - Prepared Mills Act application.
• Taft Building, 1680 Vine Street, Los Angeles, 2012 - Prepared Mills Act application. • Textile Center Building, 315 E. 8th Street, Los Angeles, 2004 - Prepared Mills Act application.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A Secretary of the Interior’s Standards Compliance
• 533 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, 2013 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, and recommended treatment in compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• 1000 Avondale Road, San Marino, 2011 - Conducted fieldwork and research, evaluated building as potential historical resource based upon national, state, and local criteria, identified character-defining features, and recommended treatment in compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • 2200 Union Avenue, Los Angeles, 2021 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of two historical resources in Flower Drive Historic District, reviewed relocation and rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards and HPOZ Preservation Plan, and prepared memorandum for Categorical Exemption.
• 2500 W. 6th Street, Los Angeles, 2010 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, reviewed rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption. • 4174 Pico Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2010 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, reviewed rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption. • 6399 Wilshire Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2015 - Conducted fieldwork and research, evaluated building as potential historical resource based upon national, state, and local criteria, identified character-defining features, and recommended treatment in compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • 9465 Wilshire Boulevard, Beverly Hills, 2014 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features, reviewed tenant improvement plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, prepared memorandum for Certificate of Appropriateness. • Alexandria Hotel, Los Angeles, 2006 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features, reviewed rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.
• American Society of Cinematographers Clubhouse, Los Angeles, 2002 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features, reviewed rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption. • Buck Studios, 2626 Lacy Street, Los Angeles, 2019 – Managed preparation of memorandum reviewing rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Clark Hall, Scripps College, Claremont, 2019 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features, reviewed rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, prepared memorandum for Certificate of Appropriateness.
• Coca Cola Building, 963 E. 4th Street, Los Angeles, 2014 - Conducted fieldwork and research, evaluated building as potential historical resource based upon national, state, and local criteria, identified characterdefining features, and recommended treatment in compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Commonwealth Nursery, Griffith Park, Los Angeles, 2014-2016 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and co-authored report for Categorical Exemption.
• Hillcrest Motor Company, 7001 Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2013 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A • Hooper Center, Webb Schools, Claremont, 2018 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified characterdefining features, reviewed rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, prepared memorandum for Certificate of Appropriateness. • Hotel Rosslyn, Los Angeles, 2006 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, reviewed rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.
• House of Hope, City of Hope, Duarte, 2010 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features, reviewed adaptive reuse plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, prepared memorandum for Certificate of Appropriateness.
• Kimberly Service Yard, Scripps College, Claremont, 2019 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features, reviewed plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, prepared memorandum for Certificate of Appropriateness. • Loyola High School, Los Angeles, 2004 – Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of the historic buildings on campus, and prepared design guidelines for new construction. • Max Factor Building, 1600 N. Highland Avenue, Los Angeles, 2011 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.
• Municipal Ferry Building, Port of Los Angeles, San Pedro, 2019 – Managed preparation of memorandum reviewing rehabilitation plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Musicians Union Building, 817 Vine Street, Los Angeles, 2017-2020 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.
• Sears, Roebuck and Company, Hollywood. 5609 Santa Monica Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2018 - Conducted fieldwork and research, evaluated building as potential historical resource based upon national, state, and local criteria, identified character-defining features, and recommended treatment in compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Seven Seas Building, 6902 Hollywood Boulevard, Los Angeles, 2008 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.
• Silver Lake Reservoir Master Plan, Los Angeles, 2020-21 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of cultural landscape, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and co-authored technical reports for Master Plan.
• Singleton Estate, 384 Delfern Drive, Los Angeles, 2016 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of cultural landscape, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.
• Tokio Florist/Sakai-Kozawa Residence, 2718 Hyperion Avenue, Los Angeles, 2020-Ongoing - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource and cultural landscape, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, participated in community outreach, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption. • Villa Carlotta, 5959 Franklin Avenue, Los Angeles, 2015-2019 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, participated in community outreach, and co-authored report for Categorical Exemption.
• United Artist Theater, 933 S. Broadway, Los Angeles, 2011-2013 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and prepared report for Categorical Exemption.
• Willys-Knight Building, 425 W. 11th Street, Los Angeles, 2013 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features of historical resource, advised on compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, coordinated approvals with Office of Historic Resources, and co-authored report for Categorical Exemption.
• W. M. Keck Science Center, Scripps College, Claremont, 2020 - Conducted fieldwork and research, identified character-defining features, reviewed addition plans for compliance with Secretary of the Interior’s Standards, prepared memorandum for Certificate of Appropriateness.

Preservation Treatment Plans and Historic Structure Reports • Ahmanson Bank & Trust, Beverly Hills, 2018-2019 – Co-conducted fieldwork, managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memorandum with recommendations and findings.
• Athens Park Aquatics Facility, Los Angeles County, 2020 – Managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Bradbury Building, Los Angeles, 2016-2017 – Managed preparation of Tenant Improvement Guidelines which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Braly Building/Continental Building, Los Angeles, 2019 –Managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memorandum with recommendations and findings.
• Charles H. Bevis Duplex, Los Angeles 2019-2020 - Managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Charlotte Chase Apartments, Los Angeles 2019-2020 - Managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Elks Lodge No. 99, 607 S. Park View Street, Los Angeles, 2020 – Managed preparation of Historic Structure Report summarizing significance of building, chronicling construction history, and identifying characterdefining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Farmers & Merchants Bank Building, Los Angeles 2017 - Managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Hollywood Roosevelt Hotel, Los Angeles 2017 - Managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Hughes Industrial Historic District, Los Angeles, 2010 – Managed project, co-conducted fieldwork and research, co-authored Historic Resource Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed specific project plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memoranda with recommendations and findings.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment A • I. Magnin & Company Department Store, Los Angeles 2017-Ongoing - Co-conducted fieldwork and research, managed Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memorandum with recommendations and findings.
• Jay Littleton Ball Park, Ontario, 2018-2019 – Managed preparation of Historic Structure Report summarizing significance of property, chronicling construction history, and identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • Joannes Brothers Company Building, Los Angeles, 2017-2018 – Managed preparation of Historic Structure Report summarizing significance of building, chronicling construction history, and identifying characterdefining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards. • John Anson Ford Theatres, Los Angeles, 2013-2017 – Co-conducted fieldwork and research, managed Historic Structure Report summarizing significance of building, chronicling construction history, and identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Los Angeles Stock Exchange, Los Angeles, 2017-2018 – Co-conducted fieldwork and research, managed Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying interior character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memorandum with recommendations and findings.
• Point Fermin Light House, Los Angeles, 1999 – Conducted fieldwork and research and prepared architectural description, statement of significance, and construction history for Historic Structure Report. • Security Trust and Savings Bank Building, Los Angeles, 2020 – Co-conducted fieldwork and research, managed Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed interior demolition plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memorandum with recommendations and findings.
• Sweeten Hall, Rancho Cucamonga, 2019 – Co-authored Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Westlake Theater, Los Angeles 2018 – Managed preparation of Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment in compliance the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards.
• Wholesale Produce Market, Los Angeles, 2007 – Conducted fieldwork and research and prepared, Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memorandum with recommendations and findings.
• Wilshire Tower, Los Angeles, 2020 – Co-conducted fieldwork and research, managed Preservation Treatment Plan which included identifying character-defining features with recommendations for treatment, reviewed interior demolition plans for Secretary of the Interior’s Standards compliance, and prepared memorandum with recommendations and findings.

ATTACHMENT 12
Memorandum – The Crescent, 2344 Old Sonoma Road, Napa Attachment B ATTACHMENT B – Schematic Design Plans
ATTACHMENT 12
birird
The Crescent
2344 Old Sonoma Road

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
DEC 15, 2022
ATTACHMENT 12
400 80 160 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
Vicinity Map

VICINITY MAP

OLD SONOMA ROAD

SPRUCE ST

CALVERA CT

WALNUT ST
C A 2 9

MONROE ST

LEGACY CT

FREDERICK DR

HARTSON ST HARTSON ST

HARTSON ST

S SEYMOUR ST

ORAN CT

S MONTGOMERY ST

GESFORD ST

JEFFERSON ST
ASH ST

MADRONA ST

STEVENSON CT

SUTTER CT

CINNAMOND ST
ELM ST

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

30.0 ELEV.

33.0 ELEV.

33.0 Draft Updated Site Plan
0 20 40 80
Parking Garage
2237 2238
2250
•
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
BUILDINGS AND USES:

HISTORIC CRESCENT: OPEN SPACE

HISTORIC DORMITORY
BUILDING A(C1*) : RESIDENTIAL USE
3 UNITS

HISTORIC INFIRMARY
BUILDING B(C2*) : COMMERCIAL USE

HISTORIC DORMITORY
BUILDING C(C3*) : RESIDENTIAL USE
3 UNITS

NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
4 UNITS ( NON CONTRIBUTING)

NEW SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCES
8 HOMES ( NON CONTRIBUTING)

NEW COURTYARD BUILDING
100 UNITS ( NON CONTRIBUTING)

NEW RESIDENTIAL BUILDING
3 UNITS ( NON CONTRIBUTING)
* LETTER DESIGNATION USED IN CEQA

REPOR T

8 5
7 6
1 2 4
3 NRHP BOUNDARY

SITE PLAN
Site Plan
ATTACHMENT 12
400 80 160 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
BUILDING A - DORMITORY, 2022 BUILDING B - INFIRMARY, 2022 BUILDING C - DORMITORY, 2022 Site Section

NRHP BOUNDARY

SITE SECTION

NRHP BOUNDARY

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

VIEW OF CRESCENT AND BUILDINGS A,B,C (LOOKING NORTH)

VIEW OF SITE FROM OLD SONOMA ROAD (LOOKING NORTH)

VIEW FROM SITES AT OLD SONOMA ROAD (LOOKING SOUTH)
Site Context
ATTACHMENT 12
200 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

NRHP BOUNDARY

SITE SURVEY
ATTACHMENT 12
200 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

TREE SURVEY
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table
Ralph Osterling Consultants Page 8
P (650) 573-8733 E [email protected]

TAG SPP DBH STR HEALTH DIA CROWN COMMENTS
2201 Coast Live Oak 23/23 Fair Fair 40 Regulated
2202 Sycamore 23 Fair Good 35
2203 Pyrus 9 Fair Fair 15
2204 Pyrus 13 Fair Fair 15
2205 Redwood 24 Poor Very Poor 30 Regulated
2206 Redwood 26 Good Good 35 Regulated
2207 Oak 9 Fair Fair 15
2208 Oak 10 Good Good 20
2209 Pine 38 Fair Poor 45 Surface Roots
2210 Pine 39 Fair Poor 30 Surface Roots
2211 Sycamore 22 Good Good 35
2212 Sycamore 47 Fair Fair 40
2213 Palm 36 Fair Fair 15
2214 Mulberry 15 Fair Fair 15
2215 Sycamore 23 Fair Fair 25
2216 Sycamore 33 Fair Good 30
2217 Redwood 53 Good Good 45 Regulated
2218 Redwood 32 Good Good 40 Regulated
2219 Redwood 41 Good Good 40 Regulated
2220 Sycamore 36 Fair Fair 35
2221 Redwood 47 Good Good 40 Regulated
2222 Sycamore 22 Fair Fair 35
2223 Sycamore 22 Fair Fair 30
2224 Sycamore 24 Fair Good 35
2225 Sycamore 22 Fair Fair 30
2226 Sycamore 23 Fair Fair 30
2227 Sycamore 23 Fair Fair 30
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table
Ralph Osterling Consultants Page 9
P (650) 573-8733 E [email protected]

TAG SPP DBH STR HEALTH DIA CROWN COMMENTS
2228 Sycamore 30 Fair Fair 30
2229 Sycamore 30 Poor Poor 25
2230 Redwood 46 Good Good 45 Regulated
2231 Redwood 44 Good Good 45 Regulated
2232 Redwood 49 Good Good 45 Regulated
2233 Plum 27 Poor Very Poor 15
2234 Plum 31 Poor Very Poor 15
2235 Ash 11 Poor Poor 15
2236 Ash 12 Poor Poor 15
2237 Redwood 36 Good Fair 40 Regulated
2238 Redwood 39 Good Fair 40 Regulated
2239 Plum 14 Poor Poor 15
2240 Plum 11 Poor Poor 12
2241 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 12
2242 Sweet Gum 9 Fair Fair 10
2243 Sweet Gum 9 Fair Fair 10
2244 Sweet Gum 9 Fair Fair 8
2245 Sweet Gum 11 Fair Fair 10
2246 Redwood 20 Fair Poor 30 Regulated
2247 Redwood 21 Good Fair 25 Regulated
2248 Redwood 21 Good Good 30 Regulated
2249 Redwood 22 Good Good 30 Regulated
2250 Redwood 48 Good Good 40 Regulated
2251 Deodar 39 Fair Fair 40
2252 Sierra Redwood 48 Poor Very Poor 35
2253 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 20
2254 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 15
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table
Ralph Osterling Consultants Page 10
P (650) 573-8733 E [email protected]

TAG SPP DBH STR HEALTH DIA CROWN COMMENTS
2255 Sweet Gum 9 Fair Fair 10
2256 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 15
2257 Pyrus 12 Poor Poor 12
2258 Pyrus 13 Poor Poor 12
2259 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2260 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2261 Pyrus 13 Poor Poor 15
2262 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2263 Pyrus 11 Poor Poor 10
2264 Pyrus 10 Poor Poor 8
2265 Pyrus 9 Poor Poor 8
2266 Pyrus 12 Fair Fair 12
2267 Pyrus 10 Fair Fair 10
2268 Pyrus 12 Fair Fair 10
2269 Sweet Gum 14 Fair Fair 25
2270 Sweet Gum 22 Poor Poor 20
2271 Sweet Gum 20 Fair Fair 35
2272 Sweet Gum 18 Fair Fair 30
2273 Sweet Gum 17 Poor Poor 30
2274 Sweet Gum 18 Poor Poor 30
2275 Sweet Gum 17 Poor Poor 30
2276 Sweet Gum 19 Poor Poor 30
2277 Sweet Gum 20 Poor Poor 35
2278 Sweet Gum 12 Poor Poor 30
2279 Sweet Gum 12 Poor Poor 30
2280 Sweet Gum 9 Poor Poor 20
2281 Sweet Gum 10 Fair Fair 25
APPENDIX A – Tree Survey Table

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
200 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

DEMO PLAN

DEMO NARRATIVE

R E M O V E N O N C O N T R I B U T I N G B U I L D I N G S

AND HARDSCAPE

PROTECT HISTORIC STRUCTURES

P R O T E C T S P E C I M E N T R E E S A S N O T E D I N

TREE SURVEY

Demo Plan

DEMO EXISTING BUILDING

DEMO EXISTING BUILDING DEMO EXISTING BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
DEMO

EXISTING

BUILDING
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
200 40 80 2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039 [email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
DN
DN

REDWOOD/FERN FOREST

EXISTING STANDS OF REDWOOD TREES TO
REMAIN. FERNS AND NATIVE PLANTS PLANTED

AS UNDER STORY

WOOD TIMBER RETAINING WALLS AND WOOD

STEPS AND GRAVEL/DG TREADS

RESAWN TREE LOGS AND STUMPS FROM

DEMOLISHED TREES

GRAVEL OR DECOMPOSED GRANITE (DG)
WALKS

DINING TABLE STUMP SEATING BENCHES MADE

FROM ONSITE MILLED DEMOLISHED TREES

HORSE SHOES, BOCCE BALL OR BEANBAG

TOSS OR CHILDERN'S PLAY AREA
2 OAK WOODLAND AND BUTTERFLY GARDEN
EXISTING STANDS OF OAK TREES TO REMAIN.

NEW OAKS AND NATIVE WOODLAND PLANTS AS

UNDER STORY, MILKWEED AND OTHER

MONARCH BUTTERFLY HABITAT PLANTINGS

DECOMPOSED GRANITE TRAILS AND

CONCRETE WALKS

PERIMETER FENCE AND SOLAR PANEL

PERGOLA

REAR PATIOS AND COMPOSITE DECKS FOR
CARRIAGE HOUSE AND HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.

SMALL LAWN FOR SUNBATHERS AND

PICNICKING EAST OF CARRIAGE HOUSE
4 SOUTHERN TRANSITION TRAIL

DECOMPOSED GRANITE TRAIL CONNECTOR TO

OAK WOODLAND, CENTRAL MEADOW AND
CRESCENT LAWN FROM REDWOOD FOREST.

VINE COVERED FENCE AND SOLAR PANEL

PERGOLA SCREEN ADJACENT USE
3 ELM STREET/PLACE
ROADWAY WITH INFORMAL TREE PLANTINGS.

WIDE AND NARROW PARKWAYS WITH
OCCASIONAL PARKING OR DROP-OFF AREAS.

BIORETENTION SWALES ALONG THE ROAD AT

WIDER PARKWAYS

EXISTING LARGE OAK AND WALNUT TREES TO
BE RETAINED ON ELM STREET. IN THE SOUTH

LEG OF THE STREET A REDWOOD AND CEDAR
IS BEING ADDITIONALLY RETAINED.
1 EVENT SPACE AND ART CENTER

WOOD DECKS AT FINISH FLOOR LEVEL CONNECT FRONT
AND REAR OF HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.

PERMEABLE PAVERS AT CRESCENT DRIVE ANNOUNCE
ENTRY AND EASTERN PLAZA. EASTERN PLAZA PROVIDES
VEHICULAR ACCESS FOR SUPPLIES. STAIRS AND RAMPS

ELEVATE GUESTS AND RESIDENTS TO DECK LEVELS
A NORTH MEADOW RETAINS TWO REDWOOD TREES.

FROM THE NORTH MEADOW A STAIRCASE AND TRELLIS

SEPARATES THE RESIDENTIAL GREAT LAWN FROM THE
HISTORICAL BUILDINGS.
5 RESIDENTIAL GREAT LAWN

TO THE SOUTH OF THE RESIDENTIAL LAWN, A VINE
COVERED "MAYBECK STYLED" PERGOLA, STAIRS AND

RAMPS CONNECT TO RESIDENTIAL LAWN TO THE EVENT
SPACE MEADOW. A LAWN AND GENTLE MOUNDED BERM
OFFERS A REDWOOD STAND IN THE GREAT LAWN.
6 EXHIBITION SPACE AND SENSORY GARDEN

EXISTING SELECT FEW OF FLOWERING PYRUS TREES AND A

MEANDERING LANDSCAPE CREATES SPACE FOR LOCAL
EXHIBITION. FRAGRANT, FLOWERING AND INTERESTING PLANT

TEXTURES REINFORCE THE SENSORY EXPERIENCE
7 CRESCENT OPEN SPACE

THE ROADWAY RISES UP TO BE A CURBLESS CONDITION AT
THE MAIN HISTORICAL BUILDING.

THE LAWN IS FLUSH WITH THE PERMEABLE PAVERS. THE

GREAT CRESCENT IS BUFFERED BY AN ORNAMENTAL GRASS
GARDEN THAT PARALLES OLD SONORA ROAD. WALKWAYS

DIRECT RESIDENTS AND VISITORS ON THE PERIMETER OF THE
CRESCENT TO MAINTAIN THE LARGE OPEN SPACE.
8 RECALLING THE HISTORICAL USES OF THE SITE AN

INFORMAL ORGANIC ORCHARD OF FRUIT AND NUT TREES
ARE PLANTED ALONG WALKS. HERB, TEAS (YERBA BUENA)

AND MEDICINAL PLANTS ARE USED AS UNDER STORY
PLANTINGS.
9 EXISTING TREES TO BE PRESERVED
10 REDWOOD TREES

OAK TREES

CEDAR TREE

AND OTHER PERIMETER TREES TO BE

PROTECTED IN PLACE

SITE LEGEND

YERBA BUENA ORGANIC ORCHARD AND

WELLNESS GARDEN
1 3
4 4
5 5
7 8
9 5

ELM STREET

OLD SONOMA ROAD
WALNUT
11/22/2022

OLD SONOMA ROAD HOUSING

HERITAGE HOUSING PARTNERS
- PARTNERS
Landscape Architecture . Planning . Urban Design
31742 Coast Highway
Laguna Beach, California
92651-6974
Tel: 949 645 9444
Fax: 949 715-7286

SITE LANDSCAPE CONCEPT
North
0 20' 40' 60'
Graphic Scale In Feet
1 2
3 Landscape Plan

LANDSCAPE PLAN
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

KITCHEN
76 361 SF

DINING / LIVING
77 552 SF

DINING / LIVING
78 36 SF
BATH
80 254 SF

KITCHEN
85 360 SF

DINING / LIVING
86 122 SF
BEDROOM #1
83 51 SF
BATH
82 44' - 2"
125 SF
PORCH
98 275 SF

KITCHEN
79 78' - 5 1/4"
CL

CLOSET CLOSET
97 SF
ENTRY
103
27 SF
STAIR
104
30 SF
STAIR
105
135 SF
ENTRY
106
27 SF
STAIR
107
A
G
K
J
H
L
No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:

M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
A101
Author
222.03.1-A
C1 Historic Building
2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD
NAPA, CA 94559

FIRST FLOOR PLAN
Checker

FIRST FLOOR
DN DN
01 04
C
A
02 03
B
M29
A401
A29
A401
A301
M29
A302
M29
A301 A29
A302 A29
57 SF
BATH
213
254 SF

BEDROOM
211
CLOSET
122 SF

BEDROOM
221
48 SF
BATH
222
53 SF
BATH
223
248 SF

BEDROOM
224
57 SF
BATH
232
CLOSET
56 SF
STAIR
210
73 SF
STAIR
220
56 SF
STAIR
230
254 SF

BEDROOM
231

C PROJECT M PLUS CORP
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
Checker
1/4" = 1'-0" A29

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

REPA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

SECOND FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN
Building A Plans
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION
BUILDING A : EXISTING/PROPOSED ELEVATIONS

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

REPA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION

EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION
1 2
5 1
11 12
1 Building A Elevations
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

KITCHEN
109
OFFICE
110
STUDIO
114
STUDIO
115

BACK OF HOUSE
208
G
K
J
H
L
No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:

C PROJECT M PLUS CORP
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
Checker
3/16" = 1'-0" A25

SECOND FLOOR
01 02 03 04 05 06 07 08
A
B
C
D
E
F
6' - 10" 30' - 0 1/2" 32' - 8" 17' - 9 1/2" 28' - 10" 17' - 4 1/2" 14' - 7" 148' - 1 1/2"
7' - 9" 7' - 11" 31' - 5 1/2" 14' - 0" 13' - 3"
74' - 4"

C PROJECT M
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. D
F
B

PROJECT

DRAWN B

CHECKED

PERMIT N

SHEET TIT

ARCHITEC
2898 Rowe
Los Angele
C
D
E
stamp:
29 28 27 26 25
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Napa
Build
2344 OLD S
NAPA, CA 9
3/16" = 1'-0" A25

ROOF PLAN
1 2
3 4
5 5
6 7
7 8
9 9
9 10
10 10
11 12
12 R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H D E T A I L I N G

INCLUDING ARCHWAYS

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

REPA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T A T ( E ) W I N D O W
L O C A T I O N .

R E M O V E N O N C O N F O R M I N G

M E C H A N I C A L E Q U I P M E N T A N D S C R E E N S WHERE FEASIBLE.

R E M O V E I N F I L L W A L L A T B A C K O F

BUILDING AS INDICATED

P R O V I D E N E W / E X PA N D E D R A I S E D
PORCH AT BACK OF BUILDING.

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P A T B A C K O F

BUILDING

R E PA I R / R E F I N S H ( E ) S T O N E

FOUNDATION

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

NEW ADA RAMP AND RAISED DECK
13 14
14 15
16 16
16 15

OPEN TO BELOW
BUILDING B : PROPOSED PLANS

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

SECOND FLOOR PLAN

ROOF PLAN
Building B Plans
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0”
N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H D E T A I L I N G

INCLUDING ARCHWAYS

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

REPA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T A T ( E ) W I N D O W
L O C A T I O N .

R E M O V E N O N C O N F O R M I N G

M E C H A N I C A L E Q U I P M E N T A N D S C R E E N S WHERE FEASIBLE.

R E M O V E I N F I L L W A L L A T B A C K O F

BUILDING AS INDICATED

P R O V I D E N E W / E X PA N D E D R A I S E D
PORCH AT BACK OF BUILDING.

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P A T B A C K O F

BUILDING

R E PA I R / R E F I N S H ( E ) S T O N E

FOUNDATION

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

N E W R A I S E D W O O D D E C K A N D A D A
RAMP
13 14
15 16
BUILDING B : EXISTING/PROPOSED ELEVATIONS
7/13/2022 12:55:02 PM
32'-3" 27'-11"
28'-11"
5 EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION

PROPOSED SOUTH ELEVATION
1 2
3 4
5 6
9 10
7/13/2022 1:15:37 PM
32'-11" 27'-11"
28'-11"
022 1:15:37 PM
32'-11" 27'-11"
28'-11"

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
DN DN
P102
1 A302
M29
A301
M29
128 SF

BEDROOM
226
47 SF
BATH
225
218 SF

BEDROOM
223
253 SF

BEDROOM
212
257 SF

C PROJECT M PLUS CORP
A
G
K
J
H
L
24 23 22 21 20 19 18 17 16 15 14 13 12 11 10 09 08 07 06 05 04 03 02 01 No. DATE ISSUED FOR
F
B
PROJECT NO:

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
Checker
1/4" = 1'-0" A29

SECOND FLOOR PLAN
UP UP
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN
DN

W D W D
W D
P102
1 A302
M29
A301
M29
A301 A29 A302 A29
M29
A401
44' - 2 1/2"
78' - 3"
438 SF
LIVING
112
170 SF

KITCHEN
113
CORR
45 SF
117
CLOSET
119 SF

BEDROOM
115
BATH
54 SF
116
97 SF
ENTRY
110
29 SF
STAIR
111
36 SF
BATH
121
567 SF
LIVING
123
238 SF

KITCHEN
125
71 SF
ENTRY
130
53 SF
BATH
131
133 SF

BEDROOM
132
22 SF
CLOSET
133
171 SF

DRAWN BY:

CHECKED BY:

PERMIT NO:

SHEET TITLE:

ARCHITECT
2898 Rowena Ave Suite 102
Los Angeles, CA 90039
T 323 284 8921
www.projectmplus.com
C
D
E
stamp:

M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Author
222.03.1-C
Napa Historic
Building C 2344 OLD SONOMA ROAD
NAPA, CA 94559

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

REPA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING

FIRST FLOOR PLAN

SECOND FLOOR PLAN ROOF PLAN
Building C Plans
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
10/18/2022 5:31:40 PM
28'-0"
28'-0"
5' - 3"
7/13/2022 1:10:22 PM
28'-0" 28'-0"
28'-0"

EXISTING NORTH ELEVATION
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 BUILDING C : EXISTING/PROPOSED ELEVATIONS

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
3 4
5 5
5 5
6 6
6 6
7 8 8
9 9
10 10 10 10
10 12
13 13
14 14

R E M O V E ( E ) R A M P S S T A I R S A N D P I P E
RAILING TYP.

R E M O V E ( E ) I N F I L L W I N D O W S A T ( E )

ENTRY PORCH

R E S T O R E W O O D W I N D O W S A T E N T R Y

P R O V I D E N E W C O N C R E T E S T A I R A N D

RAILING AT FRONT ENTRY
R E M O V E ( E ) A S P H A LT S H I N G L E S .

R E S T O R E T I L E R O O F P E R H I S T O R I C
I M A G E S . R E PA I R R A F T E R T A I L S A N D
INTEGRAL GUTTER AS REQUIRED.

R E S T O R E ( E ) W I N D O W S . N E W W O O D

W I N D O W S T O M A T C H ( E ) D I V I D E D

LIGHTS, OVERHEAD OPERATION

R E S T O R E E N T R Y P O R C H A R C H W A Y S A T
THE REAR OF THE BUILDING.

P R O V I D E N E W E N T R Y D O O R S A N D

T R A N S O M T O U N I T S A T ( E ) W I N D O W

LOCATION ON BACK OF BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W S T A I R A N D R A I S E D

D E C K A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

P R O V I D E N E W D O R M E R S T O M A T C H
( E ) A T E A C H U N I T O N T H E B A C K O F

BUILDING

U N C O V E R I N F I L L W I N D O W S W H E R E

F E A S I B L E , P R O V I D E N E W W O O D

WINDOW TO MATCH (E)

REPA I R B A S E M E N T W I N D O W V E N T S T O

MATCH (E)

LOCATE HVAC EQUIPMENT BELOW DECK

I N F I L L J U L L I E T E B A L C O N Y A T E X I S T I N G

DOOR OPENING
Building C Elevations

EXISTING SOUTH ELEVATION
1 2
5 1
11 12
1 ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

EXISTING DETAILS MATERIALS
1 CLAY TILE ROOF: MISSION BARREL

RAISED HIP CAP

SHAPED WOOD RAFTER TAIL

EIGHT OVER TWO DIVIDED LIGHT WINDOW

EIGHT OVER FOUR DIVIDED LIGHT

W I N D O W

FIVE PANEL DOOR EXTERIOR / INTERIOR

DIVIDED LIGHT DOOR WITH TRANSOM

EXTERIOR
STONE BLOCK BASE : REMOVE PAINT / REPAIR

MID COURSE STUCCO DETAIL

METAL CRAWL SPACE VENTS
1 2
3 4
5 CLAY TILE ROOF

SMOOTH STUCCO / OFF WHITE

BASE STUCCO / PUTTY
METAL: OIL RUBBED BRONZE
W I N D O W A N D D O O R S P T :

P U T T Y G R E E N / A LT G R E Y B L U E
CONCRETE: ACID ETCH

MATERIALS AND DETAILS
2 1
2 3
3 4
4 5
5 6
6 7
7 8
8 9
9 10
10 2
3 4
4 ALT
5 1
BUILDING B - INFIRMARY, 1973 BUILDING C - DORMITORY, 1973 Materials
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
BUILDING A&C: RENDERED ELEVATIONS
1 1 1
1 2
2 2
2 6
3 3
3 5
4 5
4 4 4
4 2
1 3
4 5
6 MATERIALS:

CLAY TILE ROOF

SMOOTH STUCCO / OFF WHITE

BASE STUCCO / PUTTY
METAL: OIL RUBBED BRONZE
W I N D O W A N D D O O R S P T :

P U T T Y G R E E N / A LT G R E Y B L U E
CONCRETE: ACID ETCH

WOOD DECK

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION

WEST ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
Building A&C Rendered Elevation
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022
BUILDING B : RENDERED ELEVATIONS

EAST ELEVATION

NORTH ELEVATION

SOUTH ELEVATION
2 1
3 4
5 6
MATERIALS:

CLAY TILE ROOF

SMOOTH STUCCO / OFF WHITE

BASE STUCCO / PUTTY
METAL: OIL RUBBED BRONZE
W I N D O W A N D D O O R S P T :

P U T T Y G R E E N / A LT G R E Y B L U E
CONCRETE: ACID ETCH

WOOD DECK

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

NEW NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES

CARRIAGE BUILDING

EAST ELEVATION
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
8 7 6
5 New Non-Contributing Structures
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

CRESCENT BUILDING

NEW NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
8 7 6
5 New Non-Contributing Structures

WEST ELEVATION
ATTACHMENT 12
2898 ROWENA AVENUE #102 — SILVER LAKE, CA — 90039
[email protected] — 323.284.8921 — PROJECTMPLUS.COM 840 16
1/8” = 1’-0” N

OLD SONOMA ROAD, HOUSING

NAPA, CA

CERTIFICATE OF APPROPRIATENESS
15 DECEMBER 2022

NEW NON-CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
New Non-Contributing Structures

NON CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
7: COURTYARD CONDO BUILDING

SOUTH ELEVATION

NON CONTRIBUTING STRUCTURES
6: SINGLE FAMILY DWELLINGS
•

NRHP BOUNDARY
8 7 6
5 NORTH ELEVATION

EAST ELEVATION
ATTACHMENT 12
NPS Form 10-900-a
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
0MB No. 1024-0018
Name of Property
National Register of Historic Places County and State
Continuation Sheet Name of multiple listing (if applicable) Section number --- Page 1
Supplementary Listing Record
NRIS Reference Number: SG100002380 Date Listed: 6/4/2018 Property Name: Napa County Infirmary
County: Napa State: CA
This Property is listed in the National Register of Historic Places in accordance with the attached nomination documentation subject to the following exceptions, exclusions, or amendments, notwithstanding the National Park Service certification included in the nomination documentation ,{?//l/ c,}r/zmJ . Signat&eo( A6 Keeper Date of Action
~ ====== /, =============================================================== Amended Items in Nomination:

Classification:

The Resource Count total for contributing resources should read: 4.

The block for Previously Listed in the National Register should read: 0 Functions:

The Historic Functions should read: Domestic-Institutional Housing; Health Care-Hospital; and GovemmentGovemment Office.

Significance:

Engineering is removed as an area of significance.
[The current documentation does not support the significance of the buildings' use of reinforced concrete construction as a unique engineering advancement. The context is best characterized under the comprehensive umbrella of Architecture.

Geographical Data:

The correct acreage should read: 3 acres
The Verbal Boundary Description is amended to add: See Figure 1. [Revised Figure 1 is attached] The CALIFORNIA SHPO was notified of this amendment.

DISTRIBUTION:

National Register property file
Nominating Authority (without nomination attachment)
ATTACHMENT 12
Point
Point
0 United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service/ National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 0MB No. 1024-0018
Napa County Infirmary Historic District Napa, California Name of Property County and State
Photo #27 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0027)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building showing view into kitchen, camera facing south Photograph 27 of 30
Photo #28 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0028)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building from southwest showing original window casing and baseboards, camera facing northeast
Photograph 28 of 30
Photo #29 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0029)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building from west showing rear porch, camera facing east Photograph 29 of 30
Photo #30 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0030)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building from east showing small bedroom, camera facing west
Photograph 30 of 30
200'
Boundary and Coordinate map
Sections 9-end page 38
Point
4 Point
3 ATTACHMENT 12
NPS Forni 10-900
United States Department of the Interior
National Park Service
0MB No 1024-0018 5G ~ 2 3 i 'j
National Register of Historic Places Registration Form
This fonn is for use in nominating or requesting detenninations for individual properties and districts. See instructions in National Register Bulletin, How to Complete the National Register of Historic Places Registration Form. If any item does not apply to the property being documented, enter "NIA" for "not applicable." For functions, architectural classification, materials, and areas of significance, enter only categories and subcategories from the instructions

1. Name of Property
Historic name: Napa County Infirmary
Other names/site number: ----- Name of related multiple property listing:

NIA
(Enter "NI A" if property is not part of a multiple property listing

2. Location
Street & number: 2344 Old Sonoma Road
City or town: Napa State: CA County: Napa
Not For Publication: D Vicinity: D

3. State/Federal Agency Certification
As the designated authority under the National Historic Preservation Act, as amended, RECEIVED 228
MAR 2 3 2018
NAT. AEGIS7lR OF H/STORJC
TIONAL, - SERVrcE
I hereby certify that this L nomination _ request for determination of eligibility meets the documentation standards for registering properties in the National Register of Historic Places and meets the procedural and professional requirements set forth in 36 CFR Part 60.

In my opinion, the property _lL meets _ does not meet the National Register Criteria. I recommend that this property be considered significant at the following level(s) of significance:
_national statewide _,X_Iocal
Applicable National Register Criteria:
...X...A _B _x__c _D
Signature of certifying official/Title:
~ ''ca lif ornia Historic Preservation Officer
Date
State or Federal agency/bureau or Tribal Government
In my opinion, the property _meets_ does not meet the National Register criteria.

Signature of commenting official:

Title:
1 Date
State or Federal agency/bureau
or Tribal Government
ATTACHMENT 12
National Park Service/ National Register of Historic Places Registration Form NPS Form 10-900 0MB No. 1024-0018
Napa County Infirmary Historic District
Name of Property

4. National Park Service Certification
{1yreby certify that this property is:
pentered in the National Register
_ determined eligible for the National Register
_ determined not eligible for the National Register
_ removed from the National Register
_ other (explain:) ________ _

5. Ownership of Property
(Check as many boxes as apply.)
Private: D
Public - Local Q
Public - State D
Public - Federal D
Sections 7 page 2
Napa, California
County and State
Date of Action
ATTACHMENT 12
Category of Property
(Check only one box.)
Building(s)
District
Site
Structure
Object
Number of Resources within Property
(Do not include previously listed resources in the count) Contributing Noncontributing
_____3________ ______3______ buildings
_____1________ _____________ sites
_____________ _____________ structures
_____________ _____________ objects
______7_______ _____________ Total
Number of contributing resources previously listed in the National Register _________ ____________________________________________________________________________

6. Function or Use
Historic Functions
(Enter categories from instructions.)
__HEALTH CARE/public hospital, nursing home
GOVERNMENT/county infirmary-poor farm
Current Functions
(Enter categories from instructions.)
__ VACANT/NOT IN USE_________________
□ x
□
□
□
□
ATTACHMENT 12
_____________________________________________________________________________

7. Description
Architectural Classification
(Enter categories from instructions.)
_LATE 19TH AND EARLY 20TH CENTURY REVIVALS – Mission
_LATE VICTORIAN – Queen Anne_
Materials: (enter categories from instructions.)
Principal exterior materials of the property:

Foundations: concrete
Walls: Stucco, sandstone
Roofs: Asphalt shingle
Other: Wood, brick
Narrative Description
(Describe the historic and current physical appearance and condition of the property. Describe contributing and noncontributing resources if applicable. Begin with a summary paragraph that briefly describes the general characteristics of the property, such as its location, type, style, method of construction, setting, size, and significant features. Indicate whether the property has historic integrity.)
______________________________________________________________________________ Summary Paragraph
The Napa County Infirmary Historic District Consists of three hospital and dormitory buildings arranged facing a crescent-shaped drive. The district is sited on the north side of Old Sonoma Road roughly 1.5 miles southwest of downtown Napa. The mixed-use neighborhood lies just east of the freeway, and is characterized by modest-sized single family residences on the side streets, most of which were constructed over the course of the twentieth century. Old Sonoma Road (formerly the highway leading to Sonoma) is an arterial street and features institutional and commercial development, including Juvenile Hall immediately west of the Infirmary, apartments, a storage warehouse, a school, and a small shopping center. The historic district itself has 3 contributing resources including the Men’s Building, Hospital, and Women’s Building. The reinforced-concrete buildings feature Mission architecture including hipped roofs with wide eaves, dormers, and decorative shaped rafter tails; smooth stucco cladding; and some arched window openings. They are arranged to face the crescent-shaped front drive, which is landscaped with grass and a row of street trees. The district retains integrity of location, design, setting, materials, workmanship, feeling, and association. _____________________________________________________________________________ Narrative Description
Site Overview
Napa County Infirmary was established in 1869 on what was then a 20-acre parcel west of Napa’s city limits. The site chosen was on the road to Sonoma about 1.5 miles from the small, densely developed downtown, and the neighborhood was farmland with a few scattered houses.

ATTACHMENT 12
Beeby Robinson & Son constructed the first building on the site. Napa County Infirmary was the only public institution that offered help to the indigent, and was largely self-sufficient since the inmates grew most of their own food on the expansive property.

In July 1897, County Supervisors funded a new a two-story stone hospital building at the site.

From the late-nineteenth century through the early decades of the twentieth century, the number of inmates at the County infirmary fluctuated from about 40 to about 50. Most were elderly, many mentally ill and a number physically and/or mentally disabled.

In 1912, the Napa County Supervisors appropriated $15,000 for expansion, and in February the authorized William H. Corlett to draw up plans for two detachable cottages. In April 1912, Corlett presented drawings for separate Men’s and Women’s Buildings, “substantial concrete structures” that would be arranged to flank the main building and to face the already-existing curved drive into the property. The buildings appear to have been inspired by the “cottage plan” for hospitals, asylums, and orphanages that gained popularity in the late nineteenth century as an attempt to provide a more home- or village-like environment for institutionalized people. The Weekly Calistogian described the single-story buildings as having broad verandahs, sunny dormitories, and modern bathrooms. The architecture was to be Mission style, with tiled roofs.1 By 1929, the County had still not constructed the new main hospital building that had been planned on the site since 1910. Finally, in early 1934, the federal government funded a project to convert the old 2-story main building into a 1½ -story structure that matched the two “new” cottages.
2 The Infirmary continued to serve 40-50 residents through the 1930s and 1940s. During the 1950s, the institution’s poor farm function began to decline as Social Security and other federal benefits reduced the number of indigent local people that the County needed to care for.

Meanwhile, fewer elderly people were cared for at home, so its function as a convalescent hospital for the permanently bedridden had become more important. The County began discussing whether the Infirmary should be permanently shuttered, or whether it should become licensed as a nursing home. By 1960, it had 60 residents.3 In 1962, the County Infirmary became a licensed nursing facility for the elderly. Use of the County Infirmary as a convalescent home was phased out in 1973. The old buildings no longer met state nursing home codes, and the County dispersed its 42 remaining patients. The County 1 United States. Bureau of the Census, “Paupers in Almshouses,” Government Printing Office, Washington: 1915, 48; Napa Weekly Journal, 16 October 1910, 5; Architect and Engineer, “Prospective Country Work,” October 1910, 95; Napa Weekly Journal, 16 February 1912. 2 The Weekly Calistogian, 18 March 1924, 1, 22 February 1929, 2, 1 November 1929; Napa Daily Journal, 15 December 1933, 1, 31 December 1933, 1.
3 The Weekly Calistogian, 22 February 1935, 1, 1 March 1935, 1; U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1930, 1940; Napa Register, 13 August 1971, 3A; Napa Register, 20 July 1983, 12; Napa Register, “County Infirmary Falls into Public Spotlight,” 26 November 1960, 2.

ATTACHMENT 12
converted the campus to alcohol treatment and mental health services buildings, and its name was changed to Napa County Health and Human Services.4
Current Conditions and Character-defining Features
The site is characterized by the curving drive that encloses the landscaped crescent-shaped area adjacent to the sidewalk, and the three early-twentieth century buildings oriented toward that drive. The large lawn with row of street trees at its southern edge is the most visible element of the district for passersby. There are additional small areas of lawn, shrubs, and trees near the Mission-style buildings. The buildings themselves feature low horizontal massing (although they are 1 ½ stories above raised basements); smooth stucco cladding; and hipped roofs with wide eaves, shaped rafter tails, and decorative dormer windows. The center building (Building B) has complex modified U plan formed by two attached buildings: a symmetrical hipped-roof main volume connected by a passageway to an older building with a rear gable-on-hip. Buildings A and C, which are oriented non-orthogonally to the east and west ends of the curving drive, are symmetrical and identical to one another in form and massing. The three buildings are united by site plan with their non-orthogonal orientation to the crescent landscape feature, simple Mission architectural features, and reinforced concrete construction.

Constructed in 1912 and 1934, the buildings represent Napa County’s need to bring its only public charitable institution up to date in order to meet the needs of a growing indigent population and conform to changing institutional standards in the twentieth century. They are groundbreaking local examples of two important architectural trends: cottage-plan institutional development and use of reinforced concrete in building construction. All three were purposebuilt for use at the Napa County Infirmary (informally known as the poor farm) during the Period of Significance.

Character-defining features of the Historic District:
• Crescent-shaped landscaped area
• Non-orthogonal site plan oriented to curved drive
• Reinforced concrete construction
• Mission architectural features:
o Hipped roof with wide eaves, shaped rafter tails, and decorative dormers o Smooth stucco cladding
o Low horizontal massing
o Arched openings
• Cottage Plan institutional features:
o Low-slung residential-scale buildings
o Informal domestic-style building elements (porches, dormer windows) o Site layout inspired by unplanned rural villages
o Separate residential buildings for men and women
4 Napa Register, “Infirmary is Given a License,” 5 December 1962, 1; “Supervisors Ponder Infirmary Conversion,” 2 May 1973, 1.

ATTACHMENT 12
Contributing Resources

1. Men’s Building (Building A)

2. Hospital/Dining Room Building (Building B)

3. Women’s Building (Building C)

4. Crescent Drive
District Integrity
The integrity of the Napa County Infirmary Historic District is assessed below by assessing the seven principal aspects of integrity that affect its significance. Note that although the oldest portions of the Hospital Building date to 1897, it retains integrity to its 1934 remodeling.

Location
The Historic District retains integrity of location. The industrial core of the site retain its original relationship with the waterfront. Buildings remain in their historic locations, retaining their original spatial relationships within the site, including the Manager’s Residence which is behind the industrial area on the hillside.

Design
The Historic District’s design is most strongly expressed through the grouping of three buildings around the crescent lawn. The east and west buildings (Men’s Building and Women’s Building) were designed by important local architect W.H. Corlett and completed in 1912. They represent a very early use of reinforced concrete construction, which was technologically innovative during this period and not commonly adopted in Northern California until the 1920s. Corlett demonstrated a practiced architect’s ability to blend the utilitarian qualities of this extremely durable material with fashionable Mission architecture, creating a complex to house Napa’s elderly and indigent that was an attractive as well as extraordinarily disaster-resistant. The center building was extant when Corlett designed his dormitory buildings, and was remodeled in the 1930s to match their Mission design. The spatial relationships between the buildings and the crescent drive as well as their low massing demonstrate the first regional development of a cottage plan institution, a progressive form of building plan later adopted by the Napa Asylum and Sonoma Home. Changes over its century of use have resulted in partial loss of Mission design features such as tiled roofs, wood-sash windows, and some arched openings. However, the buildings retain their horizontal massing, domestic scale, smooth concrete or stucco cladding, and decorative features such as dormer windows and shaped rafter tails. In addition, they retain their non-orthogonal layout facing the crescent drive, an important feature of cottage plan institutional architecture. Therefore the buildings retain integrity of design despite some alterations.

Setting
The area around the Historic District gradually developed as a residential neighborhood during the twentieth century, resulting in some loss of the historic rural setting outside the Infirmary grounds. The infirmary grounds themselves, however, has retained the open quality that dates to the property’s nineteenth century origins as the poor farm. The buildings are set well back from Old Sonoma Road and oriented to the driveway that curves around the crescent-shaped lawn, a ATTACHMENT 12
landscape feature that has defined the entrance to the property since at 1880 or earlier. The Historic District therefore retains sufficient integrity of setting to convey its significance.

Materials
The Historic District has suffered some loss of integrity of materials, most notably wood-sash windows and tile roofs. The reinforced concrete construction of the buildings (which was groundbreaking for Napa County when they were built) has been retained, along with stucco cladding, cut stone construction and decorative shingle siding at the rear of the hospital building, and some original wood sash windows. Interior materials such as baseboards, mouldings, and window casings have all been retained. Despite some significant losses, the district strongly conveys its historic identity as a cottage plan public institution through its materials.

Workmanship
The Historic District retains integrity of workmanship across periods and styles of construction.

The 1912 buildings are examples of early reinforced concrete workmanship with use of Mission style architecture that demonstrates high levels of mastery. The hospital/dining room building exhibits both the Victorian-period workmanship of its oldest (northwest) section and 1930s-era workmanship for the portions of the building near the drive. The periods of workmanship exhibited in these buildings express the span of the site’s heritage.

Feeling
The Historic District strongly evokes the feeling of a historic cottage plan institution. The oldest surviving features (rear of hospital building and crescent drive) alongside the 1912 and Depression-era buildings express the site’s historic function and development over half a century. The Historic District’s integrity of location, design, setting, materials, and workmanship combine to express the site’s theme of a county infirmary.

Association
The Historic District retains integrity of association as a county infirmary. It operated continuously as a home for the elderly and indigent from the 1870s through the early 1962. (Its later uses after the end of the period of significance were also associated with public social services and health care.) Contributing resources on the site are associated with its earliest development as well as subsequent important periods of change and expansion that marked its history through the late twentieth century.

Resource Descriptions
All resources located within the boundaries of the Napa County Infirmary Historic District are described in the following narrative.

HISTORIC DISTRICT CONTRIBUTORS
District contributors, which are described below, were constructed between 1897 and 1934.

Men’s Building (1912)
ATTACHMENT 12
Physical Description
The 1 ½-story rectangular-plan building is located near the western boundary of the site, and is oriented toward the curved drive that encloses the crescent-shaped lawn between the Infirmary Buildings and Old Sonoma Road. Its composition shingle roof is hipped, with three hipped-roof dormers, wide eaves, and decorative shaped rafter tails. The dormers are fitted with an assemblage of two four-light wood-sash windows flanking a six-light center window, and their small hipped roofs have their own diminutive shaped rafter tails. Tall rectangular windows are paired or in groups of three on the first floor, and have been fitted with vinyl replacement sash.

Small horizontal windows at the basement level are directly below first-floor windows, and retain original four-light wood sash. The building is clad is smooth plaster stucco, with a simple beltcourse around the entire building separating the first floor from the raised basement. The main entryway is centered on the southeast elevation and fitted with a partially-glazed metal door. It is accessed via a set of concrete steps with metal balustrade. A secondary entrance on the northeast elevation has a similar door and has an accessible ramp with horizontal railing. There is a third entrance at the western corner of the northwest (rear) elevation, which is accessed via a set of wooden steps. Three arched openings at the rear elevation have been infilled.

Interior: Interior access is limited due to earthquake damage and the abandonment of the property, but where accessible the building retains much of its original interior fabric. Dropped acoustic ceilings and fluorescent lights have been installed, but the unpretentious “home-like” decorative elements associated with cottage plan institutional architecture remain: wooden baseboards, simple decorative window casings, paneled wood doors, and wood sash transoms over some doors.

Historic Use
The site was in use as a County Infirmary beginning in 1869. The Men’s Building was purposebuilt in 1912 to house male residents of the County Infirmary in accordance with the progressive tenets of cottage plan institutional architecture, which advocated separate residential buildings for men and women with domestic scale and style. It originally had a sitting room, three large dormitory rooms, three small bedrooms, and shared bathroom facilities. The building remained in use as a dormitory for men through 1962.

Hospital/Dining Room Building (1897, 1934)
Physical Description
The 1 ½-story building is at the center of the site, flanked by the Men’s and Women’s Buildings and oriented toward the top of the curved drive. Its compound plan forms an irregular “U” with the rectangular-plan 1897 hospital building at the west and the larger square-plan 1934 building at the east connected by a rear corridor. Its composition shingle roof is hipped except for a gable at the rear of the old hospital wing. The 1934 section of the building was designed to match the architectural features of the 1912 Men’s and Women’s Buildings. It has a hipped roof with a parapet that shields large HVAC equipment from view on its flat top, three hipped-roof dormers, wide eaves, and decorative shaped rafter tails. The dormers are fitted with an assemblage of two four-light wood-sash windows flanking a six-light center window, and their small hipped roofs have their own diminutive shaped rafter tails. Tall rectangular windows on the first floor have ATTACHMENT 12
been fitted with vinyl replacement sash, except at the rear (north) elevation, where several retain original eight-over-four wood sash. There are occasional vents rather than windows at the basement level. The building is clad is smooth plaster stucco, with a simple beltcourse around the entire building separating the first floor from the raised basement. The main entryway is centered on the south elevation in a projecting entry volume with its own hipped roof. It is accessed via double-sided stops enclosed in a low parapet and fitted with a partially-glazed metal door topped by an arched transom. The door is flanked by two arched windows. There are similar windows on the east and west elevations of the entry volume. There is a secondary entrance, accessed via a set of concrete steps with metal balustrade, on the east elevation, near adjacent to a hipped-roof projecting volume. The rear portion of the east elevation is obscured by small flat-roofed storage and electrical buildings. A partially enclosed porch at the rear of the building features three original wood sash windows. It is accessed via doors at the east and west.

The east door is accessed via a set of wooden steps and is fitted with an original partially glazed wood panel door. A long accessible ramp leads to the west entryway to the porch. There is a small projecting mechanical room at ground level with its own gabled roof and a paneled wood door. A similar mechanical room at the west elevation (which faces the small courtyard formed by the rear connecting wing and old hospital building) has a partially glazed wood panel door.

The old hospital building was substantially remodeled and enlarged in 1934 to match the other buildings and features a hipped roof with decorative shaped rafter tails, tall rectangular windows, and smooth stucco cladding. The building retains integrity to the 1934 remodeling. Its main entryway is centered on the south elevation and fitted with a partially-glazed metal door.

Concrete steps lead to the door from the west, with an accessible ramp from the east. In contrast to the other buildings, it rests on a cut stone foundation, which reveals its nineteenth-century origin. The west elevation is stucco clad on its south end and cut stone from about 15 feet back to the projecting volume at the northwest corner of the building. Some of the stone has fallen away since the 2014 earthquake. The projecting volume has a hipped roof that ties into the main roof, stucco cladding, and cut-stone foundation. At the north, the original 1897 gable end above the lower hipped roof features Victorian-period decorative elements: decorative shingle siding, dentil molding at the cornice, and paired two-over-two wood sash windows. Interior: Interior access is limited due to earthquake damage and the abandonment of the property, but the 1934 section of the building appears to retain much of its original interior fabric despite rearrangement of spaces over the decades. Dropped acoustic ceilings and fluorescent lights have been installed, but the unpretentious “home-like” decorative elements associated with cottage plan institutional architecture remain: wooden baseboards, simple decorative window casings, paneled wood doors, and wood sash transoms over some doors.

Historic Use
The west section of the building was in use as a hospital beginning in 1897, when it was constructed, and continued in that use after the 1934 remodel. The larger section to the east appears to have replaced the even older original main building. It became the dining room and main administration building in 1934 when it was constructed and remained in use until 1962.

Women’s Building (1912)
Physical Description
ATTACHMENT 12
The 1 ½-story rectangular-plan building is located near the eastern boundary of the site and is oriented toward the curved drive that encloses the crescent-shaped lawn between the Infirmary Buildings and Old Sonoma Road. Its composition shingle roof is hipped, with three hipped-roof dormers, wide eaves, and decorative shaped rafter tails. The dormers are fitted with an assemblage of two four-light wood-sash windows flanking a six-light center window, and their small hipped roofs have their own diminutive shaped rafter tails. Tall rectangular windows are paired or in groups of three on the first floor, and have been fitted with vinyl replacement sash.

Historic Use
The site was in use as a County Infirmary beginning in 1869. The Men’s Building was purposebuilt in 1912 to house female residents of the County Infirmary in accordance with the progressive tenets of cottage plan institutional architecture, which advocated separate residential buildings for men and women with domestic scale and style. Although original interior plans have not been discovered, its footprint is identical to the Men’s Building. Therefore, it is likely that it originally had a sitting room, three large dormitory rooms, three small bedrooms, and shared bathroom facilities. The building remained in use as a dormitory for women through 1962.

Crescent Drive
Physical Description
The three contributing buildings on the site are oriented toward a curving drive that encloses a crescent-shaped landscaped area adjacent to the street. The drive is paved with asphalt, and bounded on both sides with perpendicular parking area. It is planted with lawn, and row of mature trees marks the boundary between the lawn area and the sidewalk.

Historic Use
The site was in use as a County Infirmary beginning in 1869. The crescent drive and the landscaped area it encloses are the oldest extant features of the site, and appear on historic maps dating from the 1880s. The drive was used for carriages and wagons approaching the buildings, ATTACHMENT 12
and the landscaped area provided a buffer between the buildings and the street and open space for the residents.

HISTORIC DISTRICT NONCONTRIBUTORS
Building D (Adult Mental Health)
The T-shaped single-story building has a flat roof and vertical-groove plywood siding. It was installed c2000 to house the County’s emergency psychiatric services. It was constructed outside the Period of Significance and is unrelated to the property’s historic use as a County Infirmary.

The modular building is not architecturally significant. For these reasons, the building is a noncontributor to the historic district.

Building E (Quality Improvement)
The rectangular-plan single-story building has a very low-pitch gabled roof and vertical-groove plywood siding. It was installed c2000 to provide additional office space for Napa County Health and Human Services. It was constructed outside the Period of Significance and is unrelated to the property’s historic use as a County Infirmary. The modular building is not architecturally significant. For these reasons, the building is a noncontributor to the historic district.

Building F (Next Step Vocational Program)
The rectangular-plan single-story building has a flat roof and vertical-groove plywood siding. It was installed c2000 for use as offices for a vocational program at Napa County Health and Human Services. It was constructed outside the Period of Significance and is unrelated to the property’s historic use as a County Infirmary. The modular building is not architecturally significant. For these reasons, the building is a noncontributor to the historic district.

ATTACHMENT 12
_________________________________________________________________

8. Statement of Significance
Applicable National Register Criteria
(Mark "x" in one or more boxes for the criteria qualifying the property for National Register listing.)
A. Property is associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of our history.

B. Property is associated with the lives of persons significant in our past.

C. Property embodies the distinctive characteristics of a type, period, or method of construction or represents the work of a master, or possesses high artistic values, or represents a significant and distinguishable entity whose components lack individual distinction.

D. Property has yielded, or is likely to yield, information important in prehistory or history.

Criteria Considerations
(Mark “x” in all the boxes that apply.)
A. Owned by a religious institution or used for religious purposes

B. Removed from its original location
C. A birthplace or grave
D. A cemetery
E. A reconstructed building, object, or structure
F. A commemorative property
G. Less than 50 years old or achieving significance within the past 50 years Areas of Significance
(Enter categories from instructions.)
___HEALTH/MEDICINE___
__ SOCIAL HISTORY _
___ARCHITECTURE ___
___ENGINEERING ___
x
x
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
□
ATTACHMENT 12
Period of Significance
__1912 – 1962 _____
___________________
___________________
Significant Dates
__1912______ _____
__1934____________
__1962________ ___
__ ________ ___
__ ________ ___
Significant Person
(Complete only if Criterion B is marked above.)
___________________
___________________
___________________
Cultural Affiliation
___________________
___________________
___________________
Architect/Builder
__W.H. Corlett, Architect _
__E.W.Doughty, Contractor____
__E.W. Arnitz, Construction Supervisor___
Statement of Significance Summary Paragraph (Provide a summary paragraph that includes level of significance, applicable criteria, justification for the period of significance, and any applicable criteria considerations.)
Napa County Infirmary Historic District is eligible for the National Register of Historic Places under Criteria A and C. Napa County Infirmary is significant at the local level as a district that represents a distinctive entity in which institutional requirements were blended with aesthetic considerations to produce an attractive campus. The Historic District is significant under Criterion A at the local level for its association with the development Napa County’s government institutions during the nineteenth century and the subsequent growth of local government in response to population growth. The period of significance begins in 1912 with the construction of the two reinforced-concrete dormitory buildings flanking the main buildings on the site. The period of significance ends in 1962, when the institution ceased to function as a County Infirmary after the establishment of state and federal assistance programs lessened the need for locally funded charity medical care. The Historic District is also eligible at the local level for its ATTACHMENT 12
architecture for the period between 1912 and 1934. The three buildings and crescent landscape feature are linked by plan and use and form a physical record of early-twentieth century institutional architecture. Its 1912 and 1934 buildings, designed by renowned local architect W.

H. Corlett and constructed by E.W. Doughty and E.W. Arnitz, represent a very early use of technologically innovative reinforced concrete building construction and are the first regional examples of a progressive cottage plan institution. They are also excellent examples of Corlett’s ability to blend utilitarian considerations such as fireproof construction and cost-consciousness with aesthetically distinctive buildings with Mission architectural features. ______________________________________________________________________________ Narrative Statement of Significance (Provide at least one paragraph for each area of significance.)
Background:

City of Napa
The Napa Valley was originally the home of Patwin people, who had a permanent town named Suscol along the Napa River before the arrival of Europeans, and Asochimi or Wappo people. In 1843, General Mariano Vallejo received Rancho Suscol from the Mexican government. The 84,000-acre rancho stretched from the vicinity of Suscol all the way south to the sites of Vallejo and Benicia. Nathan Coombs laid out Napa City (originally just a few blocks on the west side of the Napa River) in early 1848, and the town soon boasted a general store, grist mill, and saloon.

A transitional period of military rule followed, but California’s prospects of statehood were cemented after the Gold Rush in 1849 brought tens of thousands of American citizens to California. By 1850 steamships were navigating the Napa River and Napa County was established as one of the original California Counties. American farmers in Napa and Sonoma first focused on grain production before shifting to fruit-growing.5 In 1864, the railroad was extended to Napa County. Wheat was the most important crop in the early days of Napa’s agricultural industry, and the first winery opened in the 1870s. The climate and soil were ideal for grapes and wineries proliferated in the Napa and Sonoma areas. As the county seat and head of navigation for the Napa River, the City of Napa was the center of business and government for Napa Valley, and the town expanded during the last decades of the nineteenth century. Phylloxera decimated the wine business around the same time, but by the turn of the century the pest had been contained. Nevertheless, during much of the early twentieth century fruit orchards were the most important crop in the region. The area around Downtown Napa continued developing outward in the first decades of the twentieth century. Prohibition had a devastating effect on the local economy, which had already become heavily wine-based by the 1920s. However, the production of alcohol, though stunted, continued throughout the era, and the tourism industry developed at this time as illegally produced liquor combined with sunny weather drew day-trippers up from San Francisco. World War II brought an influx of workers to 5 Stephen Powers, Tribes of California, Berkeley: University of California Press, 1976, 196; Lyman L. Palmer, History of Napa and Lake Counties, California, San Francisco: Slocum, Bowen, & Company, 1881, p.335; David Gardner, “Suscol, In Napa County: An Historic Report, 1835 – 1977,” unpublished manuscript.

ATTACHMENT 12
the Mare Island Naval Shipyard to the south, and population in Napa exploded as a result, almost doubling between 1940 and 1950.6
The popularity of Napa Valley wine tourism continued to grow over the next decades and was firmly cemented by the 1970s, but much of the industry shifted north, bypassing the city of Napa. Napa’s downtown declined. Redevelopment efforts began at the start of the decade; in this era in Napa, they focused largely on demolition. For the next several decades, the downtown area would struggle through cyclical periods of renewal and deterioration as commercial development happened continually in other parts of town and revitalization attempts had unintended consequences. However, flood control projects gradually took over as the force shaping downtown Napa, beginning in 1998 (periodic flooding of the Napa River had been an issue since Napa’s early days, and a severe flood in 1986 had devastated local businesses and killed three people). Over the course of the last decades, the city’s extensive flood control work has reshaped the Napa River and Napa’s downtown.7
Napa County Infirmary
Prior to construction of the Infirmary on Old Sonoma Road, a small building known as the County Hospital served the poor and sick near First Street and the Napa River. The Napa County Infirmary was established in 1869 on the current site, which was then a 20-acre parcel west of Napa’s city limits. The site chosen was on the road to Sonoma about 1.5 miles from the small, densely developed downtown, and the neighborhood was farmland with a few scattered houses.

The Board of Supervisors created a special tax to fund the Infirmary, and purchased the parcel in early 1869. They selected Beeby Robinson & Son to construct the first building on the site, which cost about $9,000 and was complete that summer. Research has not revealed illustrations or photographs of this original building, but it appears to have been wood-frame with two stories and a front porch. Dr. W. Stillwagon was one of the first County Physicians, and received a salary of $1,000 a year. John Kean was Superintendent, and earned $900 annually. These positions turned over frequently during the Infirmary’s first decades. County infirmaries were virtually the only government institution that assisted indigent elderly and ailing people in nineteenth-century California. The Napa County Infirmary was largely self-sufficient, and the inmates grew most of their own food on the expansive property. Informally referred to as a “poor farm,” the Infirmary was a catchall destination for “the sick, the insane, the destitute, the aged, and the homeless unfortunates.” In its first years, it generally cared for between twelve and fifteen patients at a time. The number of people it served and the expense of running it increased 6 William F. Heintz, Wine Country: A History of Napa Valley, The Early Years: 1838 – 1920, Santa Barbara: Capra Press., 1990, 40; Frank A. Leach, Recollections of a newspaperman: A Record of Life and Events in California, San Francisco: Samuel Levinson, 1917, 59; Donald S. Napoli, National Register of Historic Places Registration Form, Napa Abajo/Fuller Park Historic District,1996, Section 7, 2; Ibid., 4; Page & Turnbull, Inc., Historic Context Statement and Detailed Property Survey for the Soscol Gateway/East Napa Neighborhood, Prepared for Napa Community Redevelopment Agency, 2009, 3; Weber, Lin, Roots of the Present: Napa Valley 1900 to 1950, St.

Helena, California: Wine Ventures Publishing, 2001, 148 – 175; Ibid., 262 – 263; William James Ketteringham, “The Settlement Geography of the Napa Valley,” Master’s thesis, Stanford University, 1967, 196. 7 David Kernberger, Mark Strong’s Napa Valley, St. Helena: Historic Photos, Publishers, 1978, 21, 23 – 25; Lauren Coodley, The Transformation of an American Town, Charleston: Arcadia Publishing, 2003.

ATTACHMENT 12
year by year during the late nineteenth century. By 1894, its population of inmates had grown, and a Grand Jury recommended rigid enforcement of the requirement that able-bodied residents of the institution work the farm. It also recommended refusing accommodation to anyone whose family could care for them. The institution was costing the County about $3,400 a year, with $1,440 going to the Superintendent’s salary.8
Criterion A: Development and Use of Napa County Infirmary In July 1897, County Supervisors decided to add a hospital building to the site. The contract for the new building went to Newman & Wing, a company that built many of Napa County’s stone bridges. Constructed of ashlar masonry, the building looked had decorative shingle siding and dentil molding at its gables, with a porch at the front. It was sited about 50 feet west of the original building. The new building’s purpose was to isolate contagious inmates from those who were not ill and to secure the violently insane (who would be held briefly before transfer to the Napa Asylum). It had a dormitory, operating room, sun bath, bathroom, and cells for the mentally ill. Its residents were commonly referred to as “inmates,” and indeed people were sometimes sentenced to periods of confinement, often when suspected of mental illness. The two-story wood-frame original building at the center of the site was retained, and continued in use as a dining room and probably day rooms and additional dormitory space. By 1901, the two adjacent buildings had been joined by a corridor at the rear, and there was also a small addition at the stone hospitals northwest corner.9
From the late-nineteenth century through the early decades of the twentieth century, the number of inmates fluctuated from about 40 to about 50. Most were elderly, many mentally ill and a number physically and/or mentally disabled. A handful of patients died in the infirmary each year – for example 9 in 1897. Quintus C. Fly became its superintendent in 1889, and served in the role until 1909. Prior to running the Infirmary, the Missouri native had farmed in Napa County, which was probably good training for operating the working farm at the infirmary. In 1900, Fly lived on the superintendent’s residence on Infirmary property with his wife Lizzie and son Boon. The 42 inmates in his charge were all white, and the majority were elderly men:
retired laborers and farmers who lacked the resources to live independently. During this period, the main building was enlarged, fire escapes added for safety, a stone building constructed, and operating rooms added. In 1909, the Board of Supervisors did not renew Fly’s contract, replacing him with Edward L. Webber. Webber was 28 years old, and the son of County Supervisor J.L.

Webber of Yountville. He appears to have held the post until 1913, when Irving Gamble took over the position.10
8 Thomas Jefferson Gregory, History of Solano and Napa County California, Historic Record Company, Los Angeles:
1912, 145; Weekly Calistogian, 7 January 1898, 1; Napa Register, “The Infirmary,” 30 October 1891; Napa Daily Journal, 17 July 1894.
9 Weekly Calistogian, 23 July 1897.
10 Thomas Jefferson Gregory, History of Solano and Napa County California, Historic Record Company, Los Angeles:
1912, 847-848; U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1900; U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1910; Napa Register, 12 March 1913, 1, 2 April 1909, A3, 14 April 1912, A3.

ATTACHMENT 12
In 1910, the County Infirmary housed 47 people, a majority of whom were foreign-born.

Its population had diversified as it grew: there were 10 women and 2 people recorded as “colored” in the institution. Napa County Supervisors began studying the question of whether another new infirmary building was required in 1910. The two dormitory buildings that resulted from this process (the buildings oriented toward the crescent drive) were constructed during Webber’s brief tenure as Superintendent. In October Architect and Engineer announced that Napa County was considering plans for the County Infirmary. By 1912, the County had appropriated $15,000 for the expansion, and in February the Board of Supervisors authorized William H. Corlett to draw up plans for two detachable cottages. In April 1912, Corlett presented drawings for separate Men’s and Women’s Buildings, “substantial concrete structures” that would be arranged to flank the original wood-frame building (1869) and the adjacent stone hospital building (1897) and to face the already-existing curved drive into the property. The Weekly Calistogian described the single-story buildings as having broad verandahs, sunny dormitories, and modern bathrooms. The architecture was to be Mission style, with tiled roofs.11 The buildings appear to have been inspired by the “cottage plan” for hospitals, asylums, and orphanages that gained popularity in the late nineteenth century as an attempt to provide a more home- or village-like environment for institutionalized people. Corlett’s new infirmary buildings were 1 ½ stories over a raised basement (compared to the more vertically-massed older buildings on site) and featured domestic-style details like dormer windows and verandahs. Their unusual non-orthogonal layout and orientation toward the crescent drive rather than the street was an innovation (the buildings they replaced had been laid out in a straight line and faced the street) that suggested an unplanned rural village. Initial bids for construction of the two cottages came in between $19,000 and $20,000, and the Board of Supervisors decided to request new drawings in order to keep the project within its $15,000 budget. The Supervisors awarded the contract to E.W. Doughty in July, apparently after materials were altered and Doughty submitted a bid of $13,399. By August, construction was underway and Superintendent Webber’s residence was being moved to make room for the two cottages. The following March, Corlett reported to the Board of Supervisors that construction on the two cottages was complete except for the toilets.12 Ervine W. Doughty was a well-established local contractor by the second decade of the twentieth century. Active between the late 1890s and about 1930, he constructed many of Napa’s bestknown and most enduring buildings. He was born in Maine 1868, and relocated to Napa while still in his teens, where he initially worked as a carpenter. He married Emma Elkington about 1896, and the couple had a son and a daughter. Doughty built the Noyes Mansion, Hunter-Prouty house and many other large residences in Napa. Napa commercial and institutional buildings credited to Doughty include St. Mary’s Episcopal Church, the Goodman Library, the Southern Pacific Depot, and the Napa Register block. He also built dormitories at the University Farm 11 United States Bureau of the Census, “Paupers in Almshouses,” Government Printing Office, Washington: 1915, 48; Napa Weekly Journal, 16 October 1910, 5; Architect and Engineer, “Prospective Country Work,” October 1910, 95; Napa Weekly Journal, 16 February 1912.
12 Carla Yanni, The Architecture of Madness: Insane Asylums in the United States, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis: 2007, 79; Weekly Calistogian, 24 May 1912, A3; Napa Daily Journal, 21 July 1912, 5, 6 August 1912, 1; Napa Daily Journal, 13 March 1913, 2.

ATTACHMENT 12
(UC Davis) and worked at UC Berkeley. A local history published in 1926 credits him with designing many residential projects, praising his “artistic turn of mind.” He constructed many of Corlett’s designs including the 1909 Napa High School building and the Napa County Hall of Records. Working in concrete appears to have been a specialty: in addition to Corlett’s notable Infirmary and Hall of Records buildings, Doughty built his own house of concrete in 1918.13 Charles Steere succeeded Webber as Superintendent about 1914. Steere had been an attendant as well as a store operator at the Napa Asylum and worked in a grocery store before taking the leadership role. By 1920, there were still about 50 residents (or inmates) at the infirmary. The population was still dominated by elderly white men; there were also a few women, a couple of young men, and four Chinese men. Well over half of the residents were foreign-born. The Chinese were most numerous, but there were also Canadians and immigrants from nearly every country in Western Europe. Charles Steere’s wife Annie was the Infirmary Matron. The couple lived on the property behind the Infirmary buildings with their two teenage daughters, and one of the Infirmary nurses boarded with them. A decade later, the number and demographic profile of the inmates had altered very little.14
In 1924, a grand jury called the main infirmary building (the original 1869 wood-frame building at the center of the site) a firetrap and called for its replacement. By 1929, the County had still not constructed the new main hospital building that had been planned on the site since 1910. The Weekly Calistogian denounced it as antiquated, a firetrap, and a menace to its residents, and called for a $50,000 bond to construct a new building. A Grand Jury came to the same conclusion near the end of the year, finding the Infirmary clean and well-run but calling the main building a “disgrace,” “dark and dingy,” and “inconvenient.” Despite the economic malaise caused by the worsening Great Depression, the Napa Daily Journal called again for a new infirmary building in 1933. Finally, on the last day of the year, the Napa Daily Journal reported that renovations of the main building were about to begin.15 The old main building was to be replaced by a 1 ½ -story structure that matched the two “new” cottages, which were by this time 20 years old. The project budget was $14,000, feasible due to federal aid provided under the auspices of the Civil Works Administration (CWA), one of the many federal job-creation programs of the era. The County of Napa would furnish $5,000 worth of materials and a construction supervisor, while the CWA would fund $2,500 in materials and 27 men to perform the work. After two decades of delay, the work was scheduled to begin only two days after the announcement. E.W. Arnitz, local building contractor, was in charge of the project, which was to be completed by April. In the 1920s, he formed Coffield & Arnitz with his father-in-law, which operated in Napa for decades. The hospital building Newman & Wing had 13 California Great Register of Voters, Napa, 1890; Anthony Kilgallin, Napa, an Architectural Walking Tour, Arcadia Publishing, Chicago: 2001, 65; San Francisco Call, “Start Work on New School,” 7 February 1909, 37:5; Building and Engineering News, “Contracts Awarded,” 16 June 1916, 16; Woodland Daily Democrat, 28 May 1908, 4; Harry Lawrence Gunn, History of Napa County, S.J. Clarke Publishing Co., Chicago: 1926, 466 – 467. 14 Napa City Directory, 1912; U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1910, 1920, 1930. 15 The Weekly Calistogian, 18 March 1924, 1, 22 February 1929, 2, 1 November 1929; Napa Daily Journal, 15 December 1933, 1, 31 December 1933, 1.

ATTACHMENT 12
constructed in 1897 to the west of the original main building was retained and remodeled. Its south elevation retained only its cut-stone foundation; hipped roof, stucco cladding, and windows were remodeled to match the 1912 buildings. The rear of the 1897 hospital building kept its Victorian-period gabled roof, cut-stone walls, and embellishments. The 1869 wood-frame main building was demolished and replaced with the current building: lower in height and with a larger footprint. The new building, like the one it replaced, was connected by a rear corridor to the 1897 hospital, allowing them to function as two wings of a single building. The new wing was Mission style like the 1912 buildings, with a front veranda, stucco walls, and hipped roof with dormers. Treatment for ill residents remained in the smaller west wing and the rear corridor.

The new center building held the kitchen and dining room as well as cells for violent or mentally ill residents.16
Research has not revealed plans or elevations for the 1934 construction. The vernacular, ad hoc characteristics of the hospital wing, with its Mission façade and Queen Anne north and west elevations, suggests that construction supervisor Arnitz prepared the plans based on practical considerations, remodeling the front to match the rest of the complex while frugally retaining existing footprint and materials. The main wing is a more cohesive design, with all four elevations matching materials and decorative elements of the restrained 1912 Mission buildings.

Corlett may have prepared the plans in 1912 when he designed the other buildings, since the project was originally planned to be completed shortly after the dormitory buildings. Another possibility is that C.L. Hunt designed the 1934 main building. Clifford Leroy Hunt (1882-1967) worked as an architect in Napa between the 1920s and 1957, on projects including St. Mary’s Episcopal Church and the Downtown Merrill’s and Gordon buildings. Hunt prepared undated plans for a new main building that were never constructed, and remodeled the Infirmary dormitories c1936 in a project that enclosed the front verandas and changed the original arched openings to rectangular windows. Hunt also designed interior remodels, but they were limited in scope, changing the configuration of bathroom stalls but not the layout of interior rooms. About this time, a covered walkway with colonnade was constructed to connect the main building to the Women’s Building.17
Budgetary limitations meant that conditions were spartan at the County Infirmary for both residents and staff. The institutional environment was also shaped by widespread ambivalence about government-funded charity: most members of the public wanted to make sure people were not starving in the streets, but they also wanted to be certain the poor were not coddled or encouraged to rely on the County. The work requirement for able-bodied residents was just one manifestation of this somewhat conflicted ideology. In the late 1920s, only two meals were served each day, although both were substantial, with a stew or hash along with plenty of bread and fruits and vegetables grown on the property. Pans filled with prepared food were set directly 16 Napa Daily Journal, 31 December 1933, 1; Weekly Calistogan, 19 January 1934, 1; U.S. Census, Napa, California, 1930; Napa City Directories, 1926, 1948.
17 C.L. Hunt, “Plot Plan,” undated drawings on file at the Napa County Building Department; C.L. Hunt, “Alterations to Napa County Infirmary Building,” undated drawings on file at the Napa County Building Department; Bright Eastman, DPR 523 Forms, The Napa County Infirmary Crescent Buildings, 6 February 1997; Napa Register, “Death Claims C.L. Hunt at Age of 85,” 2 February 1967, 2.

ATTACHMENT 12
on the floor for service, apparently because there was no better place for them. Critics complained that the heating system did not function properly, and the buildings were cold in winter. The cells for the violently insane were located inside one of the cottages, which meant that the elderly residents were frequently disturbed. In the mid-1930s during the Great Depression, the Infirmary’s mission expanded to caring for pregnant women who lacked financial resources. Attendant Marie Price, who worked at the institution in the 1950s and 1960s later recalled working 7AM-Noon and then 4PM-7AM the same day – a 24-hour hour shift with one four-hour break. She also recalled inmates wearing ill-fitting cast-off clothing, taking one bath a week, eating donated venison seven days a week, and seeing maggots and ticks on the food before it was served.
18 By 1929, the Steeres were still running the County Infirmary with two helpers, and the expense for each inmate was between $17 and $21 a month. By this time, there were 54 mostly elderly inmates, nine of whom were women. Although the number of inmates remained stable between 1920 and 1930, the number of residents under 50 increased along with the number of women. In 1935, the Board of Supervisors elected George C. Gosling to succeed Steere (who was by this time 66 years old) as Infirmary Superintendent after Steere was accused of intemperance and neglecting his duty. Gosling’s background was working as a bank teller, and he was in his midthirties. During Gosling’s first year of management annual operating costs were $19,000. A decade later, at the end of World War II, the facility cost $26,920 to operate. The number of residents continued to remain stable at about 50. In the late 1940s, a Social Welfare Building and Health Center were constructed toward the rear of the parcel along Elm and Walnut streets.

During the 1950s, the institution’s poor farm function began to decline as Social Security and other federal benefits reduced the number of indigent local people that the County needed to care for. And the large, new buildings needed to administer these programs had covered much of the open land on the property, which had formerly been used to grow vegetables and keep milk cows. Meanwhile, fewer elderly people were cared for at home, so its function as a convalescent hospital for the permanently bedridden had become more important. The County began discussing whether the Infirmary should be permanently shuttered, or whether it should become licensed as a nursing home. By 1960, the year Gosling retired from the Infirmary, it had 60 residents. Operating costs were $92,000 a year. Dr. Fred Heegler was County Physician.19 In 1962, the County Infirmary became a licensed nursing facility, allowing it to receive state and federal funds rather than relying completely on local taxes for its budget. The facility had to hire a licensed vocational nurse, improve cleanliness by adding new medicine cabinets and a sterilizer, and improve fire safety in the buildings. Changes were made to the buildings to allow easier care of non-ambulatory patients – the doors were all changed to swing outward, and the doors in the Women’s Building widened to accommodate rolling beds. The facility had 80 beds at this point. Use of the County Infirmary as a convalescent home was phased out in 1973. The 18 The Weekly Calistogan, 1 November 1929; Napa Register, “Government ran on Paperwork,” 4 September 1994, 7D, “No Sympathy for Inmates in Napa Jail,” 26 August 1985, 13. 19 The Weekly Calistogian, 22 February 1935, 1, 1 March 1935, 1; U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1930, 1940; Napa Register, 13 August 1971, 3A; Napa Register, 20 July 1983, 12; Napa Register, “County Infirmary Falls into Public Spotlight,” 26 November 1960, 2.

ATTACHMENT 12
old buildings no longer met state nursing home codes, and the 42 remaining patients dispersed.

The County planned to convert the three buildings to alcohol treatment and mental health services buildings, and estimated that the project would cost $50,000. For the next several decades, the site served as Napa County’s Health and Human Services Campus. Several alterations were performed beginning in 1997: ancillary buildings including the barn and superintendent’s house were demolished, the c1936 colonnade was demolished, primary entry doors were replaced with metal doors, accessible ramps constructed, new rear doors were added, a handful of rear windows were infilled, and many wood sash windows were replaced with vinyl sash. Changes to interior plans were presumably made about the same time, but many of the small bedrooms and offices in the original layout have survived. Although research did not reveal complete details of interior rearrangements, the buildings have retained much of their interior fabric (wood panel doors, window casings, baseboards) while being reconfigured for different uses over the decades. Large modular buildings with flat roofs and vertical-groove plywood siding were brought to the site c2000 and placed to the east, west, and north of the historic buildings grouped around the crescent.20
Criterion A Conclusion
Napa County Infirmary is significant for its role in the development and growth of Napa County and its governmental institutions. From the time the site on Old Sonoma Road was established as a poor farm in 1869 through the end of World War II, it was the only publicly-funded charity institution in the County. It served as a home for the local indigent population when they were too old or too sick to work and did not have family to care for them, and it had a secondary function as a place of incarceration for mentally ill patients before commitment or people accused of minor crimes. The Cottage Plan buildings grouped around the crescent drive and lawn convey Napa County voters’ desire to provide decent and dignified – but not luxurious – accommodation for those who had no other means of support during the nineteenth and early twentieth century. The site remained in use as the primary public charity for the indigent and infirm after World War II, gradually transitioning to caring solely for the elderly until it became a convalescent hospital in 1962. Even after its use as a County Infirmary ended, it remained an important site for local social services until 2016, when the County moved its Health and Human Services to a new location. The site conveys its significance as a public infirmary that was in use for nearly 150 years.

Criterion C: Architecture and Design
William H. Corlett
William H. Corlett (1856 – 1937) was born on the Isle of Man, the second son of Jane Callister and William Patrick Corlett. His mother Jane died when young William was very young, and his father moved the family to the United States in the early 1870s. After living briefly in Chicago, the Corletts settled in Napa in 1875 where they eventually established a planning mill and lumber yard. W.H. Corlett apparently became an architect as a way of offering additional services through the family business and encouraging the sale of wood products. After their 20 Napa Register, “Infirmary is Given a License,” 5 December 1962, 1, “Supervisors Ponder Infirmary Conversion,” 2 May 1973, 1.

ATTACHMENT 12
father’s retirement, W.H. Corlett and his older brother Robert took over operation of the lumber business. By 1904, it was the largest lumber yard in Napa County. The family was wealthy, locally prominent, and engaged in civic affairs. W.H. Corlett served three terms on the city council, was a member of the school board for eleven years, and was a Mason as well as a member of the I.O.O.F. lodge. W.H. Corlett married New Brunswick native Cassie Greenfield in 1887. Children William G., Jessie, Harry, and Edith were born between 1887 and 1901. Daughter Jessie, an accomplished cellist, died in the 1918 influenza pandemic at the end of World War I. William G. Corlett followed his father into architecture and designed several notable twentieth century buildings.21
In 1880, (the year W.H. Corlett was naturalized as a U.S. citizen) W.P., Robert, and W.H.

Corlett all gave their occupations as carpenter, while brother Caesar Corlett was a tanner. The family used their carpentry skills to start a planing mill in 1882. In 1887, the Enterprise Planing Mill moved to Third Street near the Napa River, where it had a two-story building and occupied nearly an acre. In the early years of the mill, patriarch W.P. was in charge while his sons John, Robert, and W.H. were learning the business. Caesar had become an engineer by 1891, and operated the company’s machine works. By 1895, W.H. and Robert were managing the business and had 45 employees. They manufactured building supplies like doors, wood window sashes, blinds, and mouldings. John and Caesar Corlett continued to work for the planing mill as employes.22
W.H. Corlett’s first commissions (such as Napa’s Oddfellows hall) appear to have been designed under the auspices of the Enterprise Planing Mill when his father was still in charge of the business. By 1888, Corlett gave his occupation as architect rather than carpenter, although he also represented himself as the proprietor of the planning mill for many years.

Research has revealed no evidence that he attended a formal architectural school. W.H. Corlett had a Class A contractor’s license, and Corlett Bros. constructed many of his designs as well as buildings designed by other architects. In 1911, he bought his brother Robert’s interest in the lumber business and became sole owner. Corlett began his long career as an architect working in Victorian styles such as Queen Anne and Italianate that made liberal use of scrolled brackets and other ornamental wooden features. His earliest known work is Napa’s ornate Oddfellows Hall, built in 1877 and demolished a century later. The Wulff House (1885), Manasse Mansion (1886), Migliavacca House (1890), and Noyes Mansion (1902) are landmark examples of his domestic work. All are located in the City of Napa and NRHP-listed, and are among the most elaborate local houses of the era. Corlett also designed interior features of banks and public buildings throughout Napa Valley, a notable example of which is the interior white cedar woodwork in the Goodman Library. The majority of his known extant buildings are in the City 21 Leigh Hadley Irvine, A History of the New California: Its Resources and People, Lewis Publishing Co., New York, Chicago: 1905, 986-987; U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1880, 1900, 1910. 22 U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1880; San Francisco Call, “Napa, A Thriving Manufacturing Center,” 25 March 1895.

ATTACHMENT 12
of Napa; however, his career has not been systematically studied, and he is likely to have been the designer of many more buildings than those documented.23 During the twentieth century Corlett expanded his design idiom to include Early Modern architectural styles such as Art Deco and Prairie, which tended to be more streamlined and less decorative. He also worked in historicist styles like Mission that were popular during that era.

Corlett’s designs, which continued to include commercial and institutional buildings as well as numerous residences, made an indelible imprint on Napa County’s built environment. The Alexandria Hotel (c1904), St. Helena Public Library (1907), and Napa County Hall of Records (1916) are NRHP-listed examples of his use of Mission and Mediterranean revival elements.

The Hall of Records and the NRHP-listed Franklin Station Post Office (1933) are Corlett’s best-known works. The post office possesses unique features such as its elaborate cornice with rams- head motif and is acknowledged as the most prominent example of the Art Deco style in Napa County.24
Constructed after he had amassed 35 years of design experience in 1912, the Napa County Infirmary buildings are examples of Corlett’s fully-mature twentieth-century work. The choice to use Mission architecture allowed him to produce economical yet attractive buildings to house the public charity. Restrained examples of the style, they lack the expensive decorative excess of the Victorian period as well as the exuberant shaped parapets usually found on Mission buildings. Corlett used symmetry, careful proportions, and simple decorative elements like arched openings, dormers, and shaped rafter tails to create the clean and elegant buildings.

Corlett was a local and regional pioneer in the use of reinforced concrete, and particularly advanced at blending the utilitarian qualities of this technologically sophisticated material with elegant architectural design.

Reinforced Concrete Construction in Napa County
Concrete reinforcement was invented in the mid-nineteenth century, but the first reinforced concrete buildings in Northern California were not constructed until the mid-1880s. Use of steel to add tensile strength to brittle concrete was still quite rare at the turn of the twentieth century, and virtually unheard of in rural areas like Napa County. Builders began patenting reinforcement systems, which were eventually victims of their own success when concrete reinforcement became common in the 1920s. After the 1906 San Francisco earthquake, engineers and builders began to aggressively advocate for the use of reinforced concrete, which provided better fireproofing and increased structural stability than traditional materials offered. Although Napa papers reported on the movement to build with reinforced concrete, the first known local use of reinforced concrete was a bridge on Soda Springs Road completed in late 1906. Its use for local buildings took several more years, and the Infirmary is one the earliest buildings in Napa County 23 California Great Register of Voters, Napa, California, 1888; Lewis Publishing Company, Memorial and Biographical History of Northern California, Lewis Publishing Company, Chicago: 1891, 748; U.S. Census Records, Napa, California, 1920; Napa Daily Journal, 10 October 1901, 3; Napa Register, 6 April 1883. 24 National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, Noyes Mansion, Prepared by Donald Napoli, 25 March 1992.

ATTACHMENT 12
to use reinforced concrete. The material’s qualities, like structural strength and fire-resistance, would have been important functional innovations for housing elderly and infirm residents, and Corlett was able to blend these utilitarian qualities with design sophistication. With their hipped clay-tile roofs, arched openings, and smooth stucco cladding, the Infirmary buildings can be seen as precedents for Corlett’s much grander Napa County Hall of Records in Downtown Napa’s Courthouse Plaza. Constructed in 1916 to complement the adjacent nineteenth-century courthouse, the building was NRHP-listed in 1992. The Hall of Records has previously been cited as an early example of reinforced concrete construction, which did not gain broad acceptance among builders until 1917, when steel shortages caused by World War I spurred its widespread adoption. Prized for its utilitarian qualities and used for industrial construction, its aesthetic potential was rarely fully exploited even as its use in new buildings exploded. By the 1920s, reinforced concrete was used widely across the U.S. for a variety of building types.25 Cottage Plan Institutional Design
The 1912 Infirmary buildings represent an early local and regional use of the Cottage Plan for institutional design. Although the first cottage plan almshouse in the U.S. was constructed in the 1850s, the congregate model of housing residents in one giant and imposing building continued to dominate nineteenth century institutions including hospitals, insane asylums, and orphanages.

Known as the Kirkbride system, by the late nineteenth century the tall and extremely long buildings were criticized as failed therapeutic environments and frequently slandered as hellholes. Cottage plan institutional buildings were meant to be smaller, more informal, and less pretentious than the forbidding buildings they replaced. Their smaller size allowed residents to live in a more home-like environment. Segregation of violent or extremely disabled patients was considered an amenity for high-functioning residents. The buildings in cottage plan institutions were typically laid out along roads or paths in order to mimic the site plan of a rural village, with extensive landscaping and separate buildings for men and women arranged around a central common building holding a hospital and/or dining room. By the early twentieth century, the cottage plan was widely considered state-of-the-art for institutions of all kinds including orphanages and asylums, although because of its expense it had not been universally adopted.26 When the new Infirmary buildings were designed and constructed in 1912, Kirkbride buildings still dominated the built environment for institutions in the region. The modest-sized, locally25 John R. Dunlap, “The Engineering Magazine: An Industrial Review,” October 1904, 689; Ryan Salmon, EIT and Meghan Elliott, P.E., “The Kahn System of Reinforced Concrete,” Structure, April 2013, accessed 2 May 2017; Napa Register, 20 November 1906, 1:1; National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form, Napa County Courthouse Plaza (Hall of Records), Prepared by John Whitman, Dan Peterson, and Rebecca Yerger, 27 March 1992; S.M.

Fechheimer, “Concrete Into its Own,” Architect and Engineer, May 1918, 91; Albert Kahn, “The Architect in Industrial Building,” September 1919, 101-109. 26 Matthew A. Crenson, Building the Invisible Orphanage: the Prehistory of the Welfare State, Harvard University Press, Cambridge: 1998, 185; Carla Yanni, The Architecture of Madness: Insane Asylums in the United States, University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis: 2007, 79; Encyclopedia Americana, 1920, Insane Asylums, Cottage System or Village Plan,
https://en.wikisource.org/wiki/The_Encyclopedia_Americana_(1920)/Insane_Asylums,_Cottage_System_or_Villag e_Plan, accessed 8 August 2017; “Proceedings: Third New York City Conference of Charities and Corrections,” Albany, NY: J.B. Lyon Co., 1912, 184.

ATTACHMENT 12
funded Infirmary was never a big enough institution to have a Kirkbride-plan building, although before it had various Victorian-period buildings over its first four decades. Napa State Asylum, the large state-funded mental hospital less than two miles east of the infirmary featured oldfashioned Kirkbride-plan buildings, as did the Sonoma State Home (devoted to caring for developmentally disabled children). Agnews State Asylum in Santa Clara appears to have been the first California institution to adopt the cottage plan. Around the turn of the century there were a few cottage additions to the old asylum, but after the institution was devastated in the 1906 earthquake, it was completely rebuilt according to the progressive cottage plan. The spread-out site plan with its low buildings was the first such institution in California. Agnews’ director was interested in progressive, modern treatment of mental illness, and after the earthquake he worked to redesign the asylum according to the therapeutic principles of the cottage plan: access to light and growing plants, a home-like atmosphere, and a setting that approximated a college campus.

The loss of life at Agnews also spurred the choice of earthquake-resistant and fireproof reinforced concrete.27
Corlett’s choice of a cottage plan reinforced concrete buildings in 1912 was clearly influenced by Agnews’ influential rebuilding project, which was still underway at this time. Agnews buildings also exhibited simple Mission architecture with clay tile roofs and arched openings. The cottage plan was not adopted until decades later at the Napa State Asylum and the Sonoma State Home.

Corlett’s use of this progressive type of site plan was pioneering for the North Bay, and among its first uses in a California institution. Separation of men and women in different buildings, a central hospital and administration building, the landscaped campus, and home-like features like porches and interior baseboards as well as the massing and scale of the buildings themselves were all features of the cottage plan movement.

Criterion C Conclusion
Napa County Infirmary is significant at the local level as a district that represents a distinctive entity in which institutional requirements were blended with aesthetic considerations to produce an attractive campus. Corlett designed restrained and cost-conscious examples of fashionable Mission architecture, which were simple yet aesthetically sophisticated. He was a pioneer in bringing technologically innovative reinforced concrete construction to Napa County, and the 1912 Infirmary buildings are the first known local examples. Reinforced concrete was not widely used until the 1920s, but Corlett was apparently aware of the nascent movement to promote its use after the 1906 earthquake. The material was particularly appropriate for an institution serving the elderly and disabled: its extraordinary durability made it a cost-conscious choice, and its fireand earthquake-resistant qualities provided a greater measure of safety for people with limited mobility. Just a few years after construction of the Infirmary dormitories, Corlett designed a more elaborate and public building using reinforced concrete and Mission architecture that is a widely recognized architectural landmark: the Napa County Hall of Records. Corlett’s Infirmary buildings also represent the first regional use of Cottage Plan site design, a philosophy of institutional design intended to provide a more therapeutic home-like environment for residents.

His non-orthogonal layout skillfully integrated the nineteenth-century crescent landscape feature 27 Jacob Van Heeckeren and Liz Holmes, Agnews Insane Asylum 10-900, 1997, 8-7, 8-8.

ATTACHMENT 12
into this progressive form site plan. Larger institutions like Napa State Asylum and the Sonoma Home would adopt the Cottage Plan several decades later. The 1934 additions to the site followed the style and layout template Corlett had created two decades before, adding to the cohesion of the site as a whole.

ATTACHMENT 12
______________________________________________________________________________

9. Major Bibliographical References
Bibliography (Cite the books, articles, and other sources used in preparing this form.) Books
Coodley, Lauren. The Transformation of an American Town. Arcadia Publishing, Charleston:
2003.

Crenson, Matthew A. Building the Invisible Orphanage: the Prehistory of the Welfare State.

Harvard University Press, Cambridge: 1998.

Gregory, Thomas Jefferson. History of Solano and Napa County California. Historic Record Company, Los Angeles: 1912.

Gunn, Harry Lawrence. History of Napa County. S.J. Clarke Publishing Co., Chicago: 1926.

Heintz, William F. Wine Country: A History of Napa Valley, the Early Years; 1838 – 1920.

Capra Press, Santa Barbara: 1990.

Irvine, Leigh Hadley. A History of the New California: Its Resources and People. Lewis Publishing Company, New York, Chicago: 1905.

Kernberger, David. Mark Strong’s Napa Valley. Historic Photos, St. Helena: 1978.

Kilgallin, Anthony. Napa, an Architectural Walking Tour. Arcadia Publishing, Chicago:
2001.

Leach, Frank A. Recollections of a Newspaperman: A Record of Life and Events in California. Samuel Levinson, San Francisco: 1917.

Lewis Publishing Company. Memorial and Biographical History of Northern California.

Lewis Publishing Company, Chicago: 1891.

Palmer, Lyman L. History of Napa and Lake Counties, California. Slocum, Bowen, & Company, San Francisco: 1881.

Powers, Stephen. Tribes of California. University of California Press, Berkeley: 1976.

Weber, Lin. Roots of the Present: Napa Valley 1900 to 1950. Wine Ventures Publishing, St.

Helena: 2001.

Yanni, Carla. The Architecture of Madness: Insane Asylums in the United States. University of Minnesota Press, Minneapolis: 2007.

Directories
ATTACHMENT 12
Napa City Directory.
1912.
1926.
1948.

Government Documents
California Great Register of Voters. Napa, California.
1888.
1890.

U.S. Census Records.

Napa, California.
1880.
1900.
1910.
1920.
1930.
1940.

United States Bureau of the Census. “Paupers in Almshouses.” Government Printing Office, Washington: 1915.

Online Sources
Encyclopedia Americana. Insane Asylums, Cottage System or Village Plan. 1920. Accessed 8 August 2017.

Salmon, Ryan EIT and Meghan Elliott, P.E. “The Kahn System of Reinforced Concrete.” Structure. April 2013. Accessed 2 May 2017.

Newspapers and Periodicals
Architect and Engineer.
“Prospective Country Work.” October 1910.

S.M. Fechheimer. “Concrete Into its Own.” May 1918.

Building and Engineering News. “Contracts Awarded.” 16 June 1916.

Dunlap, John R. “The Engineering Magazine: An Industrial Review.” October 1904.

J.B. Lyon Co. “Proceedings: Third New York City Conference of Charities and Corrections.” Albany: 1912.

Kahn, Albert. “The Architect in Industrial Building.” September 1919.

Napa Daily Journal.
17 July 1894.
10 October 1901.

ATTACHMENT 12
21 July 1912.
6 August 1912.
13 March 1913.
15 December 1933.
31 December 1933.

Napa Register.
6 April 1883.
“The Infirmary.” 30 October 1891.
20 November 1906.
12 March 1913.
“County Infirmary Falls Into Public Spotlight.” 26 November 1960. “Infirmary is Given a License.” 5 December 1962.
“Death Claims C.L. Hunt at Age of 85.” 2 February 1967. 13 August 1971.
“Supervisors Ponder Infirmary Conversion.” 2 May 1973.
20 July 1983.
“No Sympathy for Inmates in Napa Jail.” 26 August 1985. “Government ran on Paperwork.” 4 September 1994.

Napa Weekly Journal.
16 October 1910.
16 February 1912.

San Francisco Call.
“Napa, A Thriving Manufacturing Center.” 25 March 1895. “Start Work on New School.” 7 February 1909.

Weekly Calistogian.
23 July 1897.
7 January 1898.
24 May 1912.
18 March 1924.
22 February 1929.
1 November 1929.
19 January 1934.
22 February 1935.
1 March 1935.

Woodland Daily Democrat. 28 May 1908.

Unpublished Sources
Eastman, Bright. The Napa County Infirmary Crescent Buildings. DPR 523 Forms. The Napa County Infirmary Crescent Buildings. 6 February 1997.

Gardner, David. “Suscol, In Napa County: An Historic Report, 1835 – 1977.” ATTACHMENT 12
Hunt, C.L.
“Alterations to Napa County Infirmary Building.” Undated drawings on file at the Napa County Building Department.
“Plot Plan.” Undated drawings on file at the Napa County Building Department.

Ketteringham, William James. “The Settlement Geography of the Napa Valley.” Master’s thesis. Stanford University: 1967.

Napoli, Donald S.

National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. Noyes Mansion. 1992.

National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. Napa Abajo/Fuller Park Historic District. 1996.

Page & Turnbull, Inc. Historic Context Statement and Detailed Property Survey for the Soscol Gateway/East Napa Neighborhood. Prepared for Napa Community Redevelopment Agency. 2009.

Van Heeckeren, Jacob and Liz Holmes. Agnews Insane Asylum 10-900. 1997.

Whitman, John, Dan Peterson, and Rebecca Yerger. National Register of Historic Places Nomination Form. Napa County Courthouse Plaza (Hall of Records). 27 March 1992. ___________________________________________________________________________

Previous documentation on file (NPS):
____ preliminary determination of individual listing (36 CFR 67) has been requested ____ previously listed in the National Register
____ previously determined eligible by the National Register ____ designated a National Historic Landmark
____ recorded by Historic American Buildings Survey #____________ ____ recorded by Historic American Engineering Record # __________ ____ recorded by Historic American Landscape Survey # ___________ Primary location of additional data:
____ State Historic Preservation Office
____ Other State agency
____ Federal agency
____ Local government
____ University
____ Other
Name of repository: _____________________________________ Historic Resources Survey Number (if assigned): _______________ ATTACHMENT 12
______________________________________________________________________________

10. Geographical Data
Acreage of Property __30________
Use either the UTM system or latitude/longitude coordinates Latitude/Longitude Coordinates (decimal degrees)
Datum if other than WGS84:__________
(enter coordinates to 6 decimal places)

1. Latitude: 38.288694 Longitude: -122.298926

2. Latitude: 38.287882 Longitude: -122.298926

3. Latitude: 38.287882 Longitude: -122.297036

4. Latitude: 38.288694 Longitude: -122.297036
Or
UTM References
Datum (indicated on USGS map):

NAD 1927 or NAD 1983

1. Zone: Easting: Northing:

2. Zone: Easting: Northing:

3. Zone: Easting: Northing:

4. Zone: Easting : Northing:

Verbal Boundary Description (Describe the boundaries of the property.) The Historic District is bounded by Old Sonoma Road on the south, by paved parking/access areas at the eastern and western borders of the site, and by a paved walkway behind the central buildings on the north.

Boundary Justification (Explain why the boundaries were selected.) The Historic District boundaries encompass the area where the contributing resources developed during the period of significance (the three buildings clustered around the crescent □ □
ATTACHMENT 12
lawn/driveway).are sited. The northern half of the property was originally part of the farm that helped support the County Infirmary, and featured buildings related to the property’s function within the period of significance including a hay barn, tool shed/workshop, supply shed, pump house, and laundry. The only permanent building on the northern part of the property is the Napa County Welfare Building, which was constructed in stages between 1952 and 1965 and subsequently altered. The County added several modular buildings, parking areas, and modern landscape features to the northern portion of the property c2000, demolishing the barn and other historic-period buildings and destroying the pastoral setting that had characterized the property since its initial development. For these reasons, the northern half of the property has been excluded from the boundaries of the Historic District.

ATTACHMENT 12
______________________________________________________________________________

11. Form Prepared By
name/title: ____Kara Brunzell, Historian and Architectural Historian __________ ____________
organization: ____Brunzell Historical_ __________________________________ street & number: __1613 B Street____________________________ city or town: _Napa_________________ state: _California____ zip code:__94559___ [email protected]___________
telephone:__707/290-2918__________
date:__5 September 2017__________
___________________________________________________________________________ Additional Documentation
Submit the following items with the completed form:
• Maps: A USGS map or equivalent (7.5 or 15 minute series) indicating the property's location.

• Sketch map for historic districts and properties having large acreage or numerous resources. Key all photographs to this map.
• Additional items: (Check with the SHPO, TPO, or FPO for any additional items.) Photographs
Submit clear and descriptive photographs. The size of each image must be 1600x1200 pixels (minimum), 3000x2000 preferred, at 300 ppi (pixels per inch) or larger. Key all photographs to the sketch map. Each photograph must be numbered and that number must correspond to the photograph number on the photo log. For simplicity, the name of the photographer, photo date, etc. may be listed once on the photograph log and doesn’t need to be labeled on every photograph.

Photo Log
Name of Property: Napa County Infirmary
City or Vicinity: Napa
County: Napa
State: California
Photographer: Kara Brunzell
ATTACHMENT 12
Date of Photographs: March & August 2017
Location of Original Digital File:

Brunzell Historical
1613 B Street
Napa, California
Description of Photograph(s) and number, including description of view indicating direction of camera:

Photo #1 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_001)
Historic District overview from southwest with Men’s Building and Hospital/Dining Room Building (left to right), camera facing southeast
Photograph 1 of 30
Photo #2 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_002)
Historic District overview from south showing Hospital/Dining Room Building across crescent lawn, camera facing north
Photograph 2 of 30
Photo #3 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_003)
Historic District overview from southwest showing Hospital/Dining Room Building and Women’s Building (left to right) across crescent lawn, camera facing northeast Photograph 3 of 30
Photo #4 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_004)
Site overview from north across crescent lawn, camera facing south Photograph 4 of 30
Photo #5 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_005)
Site overview from northeast across crescent lawn, camera facing southwest Photograph 5 of 30
Photo #6 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_006)
Men’s Building from south showing southeast (main) and southwest elevations (right to left), camera facing north
Photograph 6 of 30
Photo #7 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_007)
Hospital/Dining Room Building and Men’s Building (left to right) from northwest showing west elevation of Hospital/Dining Room Building and northeast elevation of Men’s Building, camera facing southeast
Photograph 7 of 30
Photo #8 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_008)
ATTACHMENT 12
Men’s Building from north showing northwest and northeast elevations (right to left), camera facing south
Photograph 8 of 30
Photo #9 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_009)
Men’s Building from west showing northwest and southwest elevations (left to right), camera facing east
Photograph 9 of 30
Photo #10 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0010)
Men’s Building from south showing southwest and southeast (main) elevations (left to right), camera facing north
Photograph 10 of 30
Photo #11 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0011)
Hospital/Dining Room Building from south showing south (main) and east elevations (left to right), camera facing north
Photograph 11 of 30
Photo #12 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0012)
Hospital/Dining Room Building from south showing south (main) and east elevations (left to right), camera facing north
Photograph 12 of 30
Photo #13 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0013)
Hospital/Dining Room Building from northwest showing north elevation, camera facing southeast
Photograph 13 of 30
Photo #14 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0014)
Hospital/Dining Room Building from northeast showing north elevation, camera facing southwest
Photograph 14 of 30
Photo #15 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0015)
Detail, Hospital/Dining Room Building from northeast showing gable on north elevation, camera facing southwest
Photograph 15 of 30
Photo #16 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0016)
Hospital/Dining Room Building from northwest showing north and west elevations (left to right), camera facing southeast
Photograph 16 of 30
ATTACHMENT 12
Photo #17 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0017)
Hospital/Dining Room Building from east showing east elevation, camera facing west Photograph 17 of 30
Photo #18 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0018)
Women’s Building from south showing southwest (main) and southeast elevations (left to right), camera facing north
Photograph 18 of 30
Photo #19 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0019)
Women’s Building from northeast showing southeast and northeast elevations (left to right), camera facing southwest
Photograph 19 of 30
Photo #20 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0020)
Detail, Women’s Building from southeast showing dormer on southeast elevation, camera facing northwest
Photograph 20 of 30
Photo #21 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0021)
Detail, Women’s Building from northeast showing entrance on northeast elevation, camera facing southwest
Photograph 21 of 30
Photo #22 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0022)
Detail, Main Building eaves, camera facing northeast
Photograph 22 of 30
Photo #23 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0023)
Detail, Main Building rear entrance, camera facing south Photograph 23 of 30
Photo #24 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0024)
Detail, Main Building original windows, camera facing south Photograph 24 of 30
Photo #25 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0025)
Interior, Men’s Building from north showing original door and window casing, camera facing south
Photograph 25 of 30
Photo #26 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0026)
Interior, Men’s Building from east showing hallway, camera facing west Photograph 26 of 30
ATTACHMENT 12
Photo #27 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0027)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building showing view into kitchen, camera facing south Photograph 27 of 30
Photo #28 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0028)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building from southwest showing original window casing and baseboards, camera facing northeast
Photograph 28 of 30
Photo #29 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0029)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building from west showing rear porch, camera facing east Photograph 29 of 30
Photo #30 (CA_Napa County_Napa County Infirmary_0030)
Interior, Hospital/Dining Room Building from east showing small bedroom, camera facing west
Photograph 30 of 30
Figure 1: Location Map with Latitude and Longitude (rough center of district).

N
ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 2: Boundary Map.

Figure 3: Photo Key.
7 ■ Contributors D O Non-Contributors
IE] Exterior photo
l'I Interior photo
D
■ Contributors D 0 Non-Contributors
[El Exterior photo
ti Interior photo
21 D
ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 4: Undated c1880 Bird’s Eye View of Napa showing original Infirmary buildings with crescent-shaped drive surrounded by open fields
ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 5: Sanborn Insurance Map, Napa, California, 1910 - 1897 Hospital building left of frame, original main building center, superintendent’s house right.

::IN .. f.#ll/Fl(J/f:· -~·-· ~ .~ ~-,: .rt.

Ji·
..

I
:~,~~--
fa "• >w w",
t "w .~" w' :
~
ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 6: W.H. Corlett, Front Elevation of Women’s Building, undated c1912.

Figure 7: W.H. Corlett, Roof Plan of Women’s Building, undated c1912. ·,,, ~,. ....
f '·,i;. ·
i ~i 1 I --~
' . ~ .,._
1-"-~ ,-9~-,--
.J >''.;" ;J
l: ..... ~'
--- --···-·······.--------·--------
___ I
ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 8: W.H. Corlett, Foundation Plan of Women’s Building, undated c1912.

Figure 9: W.H. Corlett, Floor Plan of Women’s Building, undated c1912.

I
,,-r
[~
; . @]
?~. ·• ! .
(!]''=
• 00
·i
~ I ,J ', I ,,
-- 1, . . ..
~ ..i.:~··r,
.5c..-ole ¼ - """le. fcx.,f
}b~~1:!:'"~.
)11.
t8-G" • ?.i--<ii
)7v;mi tcr y -~ ...
[i]
Nten~ .5iHinJ l(ooin
)al: .
-~!;·f"'f
:i;,;·. r .,·
~-'l
.i :,·
,,
·i~
9 1 r ;.~---, .Tl}
;t L , ... ,en ' )t~?---- ::-ic-']:. • ci...J, • -Cl•.,I :
' Jl<d -= r;o·,qta, < i
00 .W fl COl?Lf:Z T
,f~f, •«f -N~P"r; C6L
Wom~11.::.' 5itti'r.g R_oo,n ·
~
~ ,t~1-,•~ef
~ l\;v. . '(/
i>,!.d . r6o:n
7:4· q •e;·
ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 10: Napa Daily Journal, Enterprise Planing Mill
Advertisement, 6 June 1890.

Figure 11: William P. Corlett, from Tom Gregory’s 1912
History of Napa and Solano Counties.

Figure 12: Sanborn Insurance Map, Napa, California, 1924 - 1912 Men’s and Women’s Buildings (dormitories) are shown flanking nineteenth century buildings at center, superintendent’s house has been moved east.

CORLETT & SONS, PS.OPRD!lTOD.S

ENTERPRISE
PLA~ING MILLS llANUFAC'rURRii.S OF'
Sash, Doors, Blinds AND
MOULDINGS.

Window and Door Framss,
And ull Outside ~nd fosi, lc
li'i11lsh.

Stair Building!
S,c:cil S,3."QTins-11 Etc.~ :Ste.

Otlic\l, Store nnd Dtmk Fixt ures
to order.
r - - -
ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 13: Sanborn Insurance Map, Napa, California, 1924-1949 - Main (dining room) building has replaced original building at center and has been connected to the Women’s Building by a covered breezeway.

Figure 14: C.L. Hunt, Alterations to Napa County Infirmary Buildings, undated c1936, on file at County of Napa Building Department.
r•
<I'
• ·"'•~·•,-,i - . -.::1 -''If! .f.4,iJ. "'"t•111--,l •.c, .11 !i
""''""'~ • - -•• 1• .. .. ' --- ···• ... ·. 1, .. ""· .... " _, -,,
_,_ - NRPR .. CotJNTY INFIRMARY 1,,NW-1.III lflN«A" 1 ,..&, ii.lllff ~r w tHJtitfflNJHMI """'- firNrl'! ii~ 1-,,;w, tfliA/li, R"11 'li'f ~ n,,,« ~ .JUii , , . 111;,1,1. Ji Ml:llA" tf/#.J~ .rcow~ mlilrr .~,,..,,.MflfiN u, ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 15: Topographic Map, Napa County Infirmary Property, 1950s, showing site after development of buildings near northwest property borders, on file at County of Napa Building Department.

Figure 16: Main Building and Hospital wing with Men’s Building left of frame, 1973, on file at Napa County Building Department.

ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 17: Main Building (rear elevation) and Hospital wing with Hospital wing right of frame, 1973, on file at Napa County Building Department.

Figure 18: Hospital wing showing Victorian-period fabric at rear (north and west elevations), 1973, on file at Napa County Building Department.

ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 19: Women’s Building with colonnade left of frame, 1973, on file at Napa County Building Department.

Figure 20: Men’s Building, undated photo, early 1990s, on file at Napa County Building Department.

ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 21: Men’s Buildings and Main Building with Hospital wing center frame and crescent lawn foreground, undated photo, early 1990s, on file at Napa County Building Department.

Figure 22: Detail, main entryway, Main Building, undated photo, early 1990s, on file at Napa County Building Department.

ATTACHMENT 12
Figure 23: Women’s Building, 1999, on file at Napa County Building Department.

ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
---- ---
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12
ATTACHMENT 12

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF THE INTERIOR

NATIONAL PARK SERVICE

NATIONAL REGISTER OF HISTORIC PLACES

EVALUATION/RETURN SHEET
Requested Action: Nomination
Property Name: Napa County Infirmary
Multiple Name:

State & County: CALIFORNIA, Napa
Date Received:
3/23/2018
Date of Pending List: Date of 16th Day: Date of 45th Day: Date of Weekly List:
5/4/2018 1 :22:35 PM 4/27/2018 6/4/2018
Reference number: SG100002380
Nominator: State
Reason For Review:
_Appeal
_ SHPO Request
Waiver
Resubmission
X Other
X Accept Return
PDIL
_ Landscape
National
Mobile Resource
TCP
CLG
__ Reject
Text/Data Issue
Photo
_ Map/Boundary
Period
_ Less than 50 years
6/4/2018 Date
Abstract/Summary The Napa County Infirmary is locally significant under National Register Criteria A and C in Comments: the areas of Architecture, Health/Medicine, and Social History. Completed between 1912 and 1934, the Infirmary complex consists of three, reinforced concrete, Mission Revivalstyled buildings built by Napa County to serve as a home for the local indigent population.

Designed by prolific local architect W.H. Corlett, the Napa County Infirmary is significant for its role in the development and growth of Napa County and its governmental and social/health care institutions during the early twentieth century.

Recommendation/ Accept NR Criteria A and C.

Criteria
Reviewer Paul Lusignan
Telephone (202)354-2229
DOCUMENTATION: see attached comments : No
Discipline Historian
------------
Date 6/4/2018
see attached SLR : Yes
If a nomination is returned to the nomination authority, the nomination is no longer under consideration by the National Park Service.

ATTACHMENT 12
A Trodilion ol Stowardshlp
A Commitment lo Service
Jeffrey M. Brax
Acting County Counsel
Jeffrey M. Richard
Chief Deputy County Counsel
Jennifer Yasumoto
ChiefDepuly County Counsel

NAPA COUNTY

OFFICE OF COUNTY COUNSEL
1195 Third Street, Suite 301
Nc1pa, CA 94559
Main: (707) 253-4521
Fax: (707) 259-8220
May 4, 2018
(via e-mail)
Mr. Paul R. Lusignan
Historian, National Register of Historic Places
National Park Service
1849 C St., NW~MS 7228
Washington, DC 20240
Paul Lusirman(Zilnps.gov
RE: Extension Request for Nomination of "Napa lnfim1ary" to the National Register Mr. Lusignan:

Deputies
Silva Darbinian
Laura]. Anderson
ChrisR. Y. Apallas
Susan B. Altman
Thomas S. Capriola
Jason M. Dooley
John L. Myers
Rachel L. Ross
Kathleen L. Ayers
Shana A. Bagley
Napa County (County) is aware that your office recently received the nomination of the Napa County Infirmary to the National Register on March 23, 2018. The nomination by the California Historical Resources Commission was made over the objections of County, the property owner. County was not consulted, nor was the potential nomination discussed with County officials when the group Napa County Landmarks was preparing the nomination fonns. County was only made aware of the nomination when it received notices from the Office of Historic Preservation.

Because the nomination was made over County's objection, County requests a 30-day extension of the 45-day review period set to expire on May 7, 2018 so that it may provide additional documentation for your review. I understand County is entitled to such 30-day extension based on the authority of 36 CFR 60.12(a). 1 The extension is necessary so that Cmmty may have an opportunity to further consult with its experts and supply your office with any additional information necessary to support rejection of the nomination pursuant to 36 CFR 60.6(t).
1 (This action differs from the procedure for appeals during the review of a nomination by the National Park Sc1vicc where an individual or organiZlllion may "petition the Keeper during the nomination process," as specified in §§ 60.6(1) and 60.9(i). Upo11 receipt ofsud1 petition /he florma/ ./5-day review period will be extended/or 30 days heyofld the dare of/he petition to allow the petllioner U> provide additional doc11111entationfor revlew.)(Emphll~is added.)
Jli.~Cl:R f?.Q • .l 2.M
ATTACHMENT 12
Lusignan
April 16, 2018

Page 2 ends

Napa City CouncilMay 2, 2023

Napa City Council
May 2, 2023