Dillon: Thumbs down on PUC plan
By JESSE DUARTE
For the Register
If Pacific Union College decides to go forward with its proposal to create a 591-unit housing development in Angwin, it will do so without the support of Supervisor Diane Dillon.
The Upvalley representative on the board told St. Helena Chamber of Commerce members the project is too big and lacks the support of the Angwin community.
“My position on this currently is that 600 housing units is way too many, and I do not support this,” she said.
Dillon said she supports the 200 affordable units planned for Angwin in the current General Plan. “The college already has that ability, but what’s on the table now is too big,” she said.
The college and its development partner, Triad Communities, have not formally submitted a proposal, saying the project will continue to evolve as planners receive input from the community. In its current form, the development requires several rezonings that would have to be approved by the board of supervisors.
Dillon was also concerned that Angwin residents have not wholeheartedly embraced the project.
“I think it’s very important that we all, and especially the supervisor for the district, support that community,” she said. “We don’t want to go down the path where we end up with another community like American Canyon.”
American Canyon has been one of the fastest-growing cities in the state, and is making on-going efforts to address traffic and infrastructure problems related to the growth.
Dillon said there are two current issues affecting Angwin: the adjustments to the “urban bubble” in the new draft General Plan for Napa County and the college’s development proposal.
The draft General Plan contains several options relating to Angwin’s urban bubble, which allows ag land within it to be rezoned without triggering a countywide Measure J vote often needed when land is proposed to be redesignated from agriculture to some other purpose.
In its current form, the project does not require a Measure J vote. But one of the options in the draft General Plan would redraw the bubble in a way that would essentially require the college to redesign the project if it wishes to avoid a Measure J vote.
Though the college and Triad eventually will have to prepare an environmental impact report for the project, Dillon told the audience to watch for the new General Plan’s own EIR, which will examine the potential impacts of Angwin growth on traffic throughout the area.
“There are aspects of the General Plan EIR that will have an impact on what PUC and Triad are able to do with their project,” she said.
The Chamber of Commerce will sponsor a presentation of the draft General Plan by Napa County Planning Director Hillary Gitelman at 6 p.m. on Thursday, March 22, at Vintage Hall.
Dillon added that the county is pursuing funding from the Federal Aviation Administration to help purchase the PUC-owned Angwin Airport. It is within the college’s power to sell the airport to a third party, and Dillon said many in the county would like to see it preserved. PUC officials have said they will consider selling the airport only to those buyers who will continue to put it to its current use, as opposed to redeveloping the site for some other purpose.
All comments will be screened and may take several hours to be posted.
• Keep comments clear, concise and focused on the topic in the story.
• Comments exceeding 300 words will not be posted.
• Refrain from personal attacks, degrading comments or remarks that do not add to a constructive dialogue.
• Comments implying suspects in crime-related stories are guilty before they have been proven so in a court of law will be deleted.
• Do not post e-mail addresses or links except for pages on Napavalleyregister.com or government Web sites.
• Comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined.
• Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.
• If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact dross@napanews.com or bkennedy@napanews.com
For further information on the comment guidelines,
click here.
Oh Please Diane wrote on Mar 5, 2007 10:11 AM:
Buzzy wrote on Mar 5, 2007 10:37 AM:
To: Oh Please Diane wrote on Mar 5, 2007 11:23 AM:
Tom wrote on Mar 5, 2007 12:29 PM:
Lack of Planning wrote on Mar 5, 2007 2:10 PM:
Michael H. wrote on Mar 5, 2007 3:54 PM:
191 Units Done Deal wrote on Mar 5, 2007 4:45 PM:
Not county's responsibility wrote on Mar 5, 2007 5:45 PM:
Two faced wrote on Mar 5, 2007 7:36 PM:
To Not County's Responsibility wrote on Mar 5, 2007 7:46 PM:
Right decision... wrote on Mar 5, 2007 8:38 PM:
mahatma wrote on Mar 5, 2007 8:43 PM:
It's interesting wrote on Mar 5, 2007 9:18 PM:
Response "to not..." wrote on Mar 5, 2007 9:46 PM:
Also to not County's responsibility wrote on Mar 5, 2007 10:44 PM:
To also to.... wrote on Mar 6, 2007 12:14 PM:
Face Reality wrote on Mar 6, 2007 1:35 PM:
Good Plan wrote on Mar 8, 2007 11:01 AM:
Uh... wrote on Mar 8, 2007 11:24 PM:
To 'Uh' wrote on Mar 9, 2007 10:55 AM:
Response to Uh wrote on Mar 9, 2007 11:11 PM:
Uh Uh Uh wrote on Mar 10, 2007 7:17 PM:
response to: uh uh uh wrote on Mar 11, 2007 7:02 PM:
Uh Uh Uh wrote on Mar 11, 2007 8:59 PM:
Tired Commuter wrote on Mar 13, 2007 7:50 PM:
Oh, these things I pray wrote on Mar 13, 2007 11:27 PM:
Dear Tired Commuter wrote on Mar 14, 2007 10:39 AM:
Sing Along wrote on Mar 17, 2007 11:00 PM: