Napa County resolves Sinskey winery visitation requests – Napa Valley Register

Robert Sinskey Vineyards winery and Napa County have found common ground in a case that illustrates how local wine world rules can sometimes be confusing.

Wineries have county-approved use permits outlining how much wine they can make and how many visitors and employees they can have, among other things. But things aren’t always black-and-white.

Robert Sinskey and county officials looked at the visitation numbers on his winery’s permit and reached different conclusions. The Napa County Planning Commission couldn’t sort the matter out during a hearing in December.

“I am thoroughly confused about the numbers at this point,” Planning Commissioner Andrew Mazotti said at the time.

So winery and county officials went back to work. On Wednesday, the Planning Commission ruled the winery can have 75,348 guests annually between tastings and events, with a weekly cap of 1,449.

This time, the commission wasn’t presented with a barrage of different numbers.

“When I look at this, it’s very clear to me what is being asked,” Commissioner Dave Whitmer said.

Robert Sinskey Vineyards winery is located on 11.8 acres at 6320 Silverado Trail, east of Yountville. The original use permit allowing the winery to be built dates back to 1987.

Sinskey on Dec. 2 came to the Planning Commission under the county’s compliance program to remedy violations at his winery. Among other things, county reports said the winery was far exceeding the 63,708 guests annually its permit allowed.

But a mix of by-appointment tastings, no-appointment tastings and four types of events complicated the matter. Consultant Katherine Philippakis described the situation to commissioners in a recent letter.

Robert Sinskey Vineyards in 2010 updated its use permit. The winery believed it secured the right to have 75 daily by-appointment visitors, in addition to its previous rights for 132 daily non-appointment visitors and a 50-person seminar five days a week.

Winery officials in 2019 discovered that the updated use permit made it appear that the 75 by-appointment visitors were part of the 132 non-appointment visitors. Also, the seminars couldn’t be held on days when the winery had other by-appointment visitors.

This language was inconsistent with winery officials’ recollection and understanding of the 2010 permit and inconsistent with the way the winery has operated since 2010, Philippakis wrote.

Sinskey Vineyards brought the matter to county staff. County staff supported the interpretation that yielded the lower visitation number, which would leave the winery in violation of its permit unless it changed operations or revised the permit.

Sinskey at the Dec. 2 Planning Commission meeting described his goal in trying to resolve the matter. He wanted the flexibility to deal with visitor flows that can vary greatly from day-to-day.

“We’re not trying to do this type of business every single day,” he said. “We’re looking to take advantage of the situation when we can so we can be economically viable.”

Winery officials and Planning Commissioners seemed satisfied with the eventual outcome.

“I really appreciate Mr. Sinskey and his team came back with a very fine-tuned, clear plan that I feel very comfortable with,” Commissioner Megan Dameron said on Wednesday.

The commission also allowed the winery to use a cave for visitation and to have 36 full-time employees and six part-time employees.

WATCH NOW: VIEW THE AMAZING BUTTERFLY JUNGLE

SEE NAPA’S FACES AND PLACES