
Napa Abajo/Fuller Park Design Guidelines
Next Workshop:
February 19,1998, 6:30-8:30 PM
Napa Landmarks Building, 1026 First Street
Background on the District
In February 1997, Napa's oldest residential neighborhood was placed on
the National Register, with over 300 historic resources reflecting the
evolution of architectural style in Napa between 1868 and 1918. With
only a few exceptions, each building is different from any other. Grand
and modest dwellings often share the same block.
Contributing to the feeling of a pre-1919 neighborhood are the gridded
streets with sidewalks and mature trees, the arrangement of the
buildings with front and side yards, the predominantly residential uses
and the frequency of prominent homes at corner locations. The District
lies west of the Napa River and south of downtown.
November 5 Workshop Summary
On November 5, 1997, Winter & Company and RACESTUDIO conducted a public
workshop in order to help area residents identify important features,
positive trends, areas of concern and potential goals of the
neighborhood. A series of exercise sheets were used for workshop
participants to record their results, both individually and as groups.
The following results consist of the most common responses given by
workshop participants; whereas, a more comprehensive listing of results
accompany this memorandum.
In Exercise #1, when participants were asked to identify the features
which are most common to the neighborhood, seventy-nine percent (79%)
noted the landscape features. Fifty-five percent (55%) noted the area
landmarks; forty-eight percent (48%) noted the pedestrian routes and the
walkability; and thirty-eight percent (38%) noted the entries and
gateways to the neighborhood, the grid and system of alleys and the
natural features. When asked to identify three favorite features in the
neighborhood, seventy-two percent (72%) noted identified Fuller Park.
Fifty-five percent (55%) identified the giant Redwoods and thirty-four
percent (34%) identified the Napa River. When asked if any areas existed
that have special character, fifty-two (52%) of the participants noted
Franklin Street or the "Redwood District." Forty-eight percent (48%)
identified the houses along Fuller Park and only twenty-eight percent
(28%) identified the "Big Four Mansion District."
In Exercise #2, when participants were asked how houses were typically
located on their sites, fifty-five percent (55%) said that houses are
evenly setback. Thirty-eight percent (38%) noted that detached
outbuildings are located to the rear of the lot, and twenty-one percent
(21%) noted that most of the houses face the street. When asked what
distinct landscape patterns exist for individual building sites, less
than half, forty-eight percent (48%), of the participants identified the
mature, canopy trees that line the streets. Nearly as many participants
noted the prevalence of front yards with grassy lawns; whereas, only
twenty-four percent (24%) noted the uses of hedges and shrubs close to
the homes. When asked what the tradition is fro the mass and scale of
homes, fifty-five percent (55%) identified the diversity in scale"from
small cottages to grand mansions. Thirty-four percent (34%) noted the
rhythm of pitched roof forms and only seventeen percent (17%) noted the
pedestrian scale of the homes (from one to one-and-one half story). When
asked what kinds of details are typically seen on neighborhood homes,
fifty-five percent of respondents noted the articulated porches commonly
seen. Thirty-one percent (31%) noted the ornate detailing and woodwork,
and twenty-one percent (21%) noted the common use of columns and
horizontal wood siding.
In Exercise #3, when participants were asked to list three positive
trends, sixty-six percent (66%) noted all of the rehabilitation and
restoration work seen in the neighborhood. Only fourteen percent (14%)
of respondents noted the continued maintenance of homes and yards, as
well as the new young, single family homeowners. When asked to list
three building trends that are of concern, many respondents had many
unique answers. Only twenty-eight percent (28%) agreed that deferred
maintenance of homes and yards was of concern. Twenty-four percent (24%)
commented on the abundance of apartments and multi-family homes, and
twenty-one percent (21%) noted the slumlords, the poor management of
property and the vast quantity of parking.
When asked to describe their preferred future for the neighborhood,
thirty-one percent (31%) of the participants wanted to see design review
on new construction and alterations to ensure compatibility. Seventeen
percent (17%) desired better enforcement of codes and more tree-lined
streets or required planting in the right-of-way. Another fourteen
percent (14%) wanted to see a continuation of the diversity in building
stock and residents alike, as well as a down zoning or more flexibility
in zoning management.
Return to RACESTUDIO Home Page