Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use Projects topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Calistoga residents tell planning commission 1514 Washington project violated approvals, altered exterior
Summary
Neighbors at the July 23 Calistoga Planning Commission meeting said the 1514 Washington renovation proceeded with code violations, parking concerns and an exterior color scheme they say was not presented for public review; residents asked staff to explain administrative design-review steps and enforcement.
At the July 23 meeting of the Calistoga Planning Commission, two neighbors complained that renovation work at 1514 Washington Street proceeded with code violations, parking impacts and a two-tone exterior that they said was not included in approved plans.
Resident Jeffrey Stambore, 1406 Fourth Street, told the commission he was “angry,” “frustrated” and “very disappointed” in how the project has progressed. He said a “multitude of code violations” were first discovered by neighbors rather than by the planning department, and he questioned how the project’s final exterior design complied with condition of approval number 20, which requires the applicant to “work with the planning and building department through the administrative design review process to study and incorporate additional design detail referencing local architectural character, specifically the Holy Assumption Monastery.”
Stambore said the project’s approved plans did not show the two-color paint scheme now on the building and that neighbors had repeatedly raised concerns about parking in an already congested area.
Donna Higgins, 1410 Fourth Street and a neighbor, said she and Stambore had unsuccessfully pursued appeals and code review during earlier stages of the project. “All of a sudden, when the building goes up, things change,” Higgins said, adding she and others plan to learn where in the review chain design changes were permitted.
Chair Wilkes asked staff to reach out to the residents; later in the meeting he asked staff to follow up with Jeffrey Stambore and Donna Higgins to ensure “lines of communication are open.” No formal enforcement action or new administrative decision was recorded at the meeting.
Why it matters: Neighbors said the project’s alterations and enforcement history have tangible neighborhood impacts — parking, visual compatibility and trust in permitting — and asked the commission to clarify how administrative design review and condition compliance are monitored.
What the commission and staff said: The public-comment segment closed after residents spoke; commissioners then moved on to other agenda items. Chair Wilkes noted that the condition referencing the Holy Assumption Monastery was one he had requested when the project was originally approved and asked staff to investigate whether the condition was implemented as intended.
Next steps: Commission staff did not announce any immediate enforcement actions at the meeting; Chair Wilkes asked staff to contact the commenters and report back to the commission.
