Thanks to a high legal threshold for yanking a winery's use permit, cult winemaker Jayson Woodbridge can continue to make wine at his Crystal Springs Road facility, but with a raft of new restrictions designed to curtail what planners view as a history of illegal activity.

Napa County's planning commission on Wednesday held a marathon hearing about possible revocation of the use permit for One True Vine Winery first issued last July. Commission members also sought an apology from Woodbridge, who stopped short of the mea culpa some commissioners thought would be appropriate.

"I don't understand how you can do anything but revoke his permit to the full extent possible," said neighbor Christopher Cole, who recounted a number of alleged violations including breaches of the county's conservation ordinances and dumping of cave spoils.

"He has a history of code violation," said Cole. "There's no intent of good will."

Even Commissioner Bob Fiddaman, in voting to allow Woodbridge to continue his One True Vine business said, "The potential is here for this to be an enforcement issue for a long time. I hope I'm wrong."

Woodbridge's attorney, Tom Carey, said he thinks Fiddaman is, "wrong, wrong, wrong." He emphasized the enforcement mechanisms put in place will assure the winery's future compliance.

At the beginning of the session, commissioners went behind closed doors to discuss the potential legal ramifications of their action. They emerged and held a public hearing -- going past their self-imposed 5 p.m. curfew -- before adopting a strict new set of standards for One True Vine. Even Woodbridge had left the building by the meeting's conclusion.

He did offer an olive branch to Commissioner David Graves who Woodbridge earlier sought to exclude from participation because of a possible conflict of interest. The commission and Board of Supervisors, however, did not agree with Graves' recusal.

As to the rest of the apology, Woodbridge said he regretted the time wasted and under pressure from Commissioner Jim King, finally said, "I'm sorry for my infractions."

Woodbridge also exchanged some verbal barbs with neighbor Robert Moeckly who said, "Since this gentleman moved in, our life has been irreversibly degraded," and said communication between the warring factions had been less than adequate but said he did find a box of wine and a letter from Woodbridge on his doorstep at one point.

Woodbridge accused Moeckly of perjuring himself and told him he could be guilty of a felony, but that issue quickly fizzled.

What Graves described as a very difficult and unprecedented process finally led to the adoption of more than 30 tough conditions including the "payback" of 10,295 gallons of wine illegally produced last year. Woodbridge will have to reduce production over a three year period until that is made up.

The winemaker was also accused of running an illegal bottling operation in St. Helena last year.

Other conditions imposed include reduced hours, especially for generator operation, restricted traffic flow and additional landscaping.

All five commissioners expressed a desire to be tough with Woodbridge but acknowledged the law could be interpreted to say he had a vested right to his operation since he had spent a lot of money on construction and had secured the use permit as part of a discretionary act on the part of the commission.

Fiddaman was perhaps most adamant saying the granting of that permit is the only action he has taken as a commissioner that he looked back upon as a mistake.

Graves compared Woodbridge's actions with the concept of hubris in Greek tragedy, a blatant disregard for the rights of others.

While the matter can be appealed to the Board of Supervisors, neither side appeared to want to move in that direction.