Hotel proposed for near Highway 29 and First Street
By KEVIN COURTNEY
Napa Valley Register
2 p.m. A 16-room inn with a three-story waterfall is being proposed for a key location at the entrance to downtown Napa.
The waterfall, which would be lit at night, would become a landmark for motorists turning off Highway 29 at First Street, said architect Chris Craiker.
The inn is planned for the vacant quarter-acre lot at the northeast corner of California Boulevard and First.
In 2005, property owner Charles Gonzales of Menlo Park got city approval for a nine-room, Craftsman-style inn on the site. The inn was never built.
“Unfortunately, nine rooms just didn’t pencil out,” Craiker said. “It takes 16 rooms to make it work.”
The new design calls for eight hotel rooms and eight extended-stay units with kitchens, with a manager’s unit tucked into the fourth-floor attic.
To accommodate parking, ground-level spaces for 17 vehicles would be topped by two floors of guest rooms at the Clay Street side of the property. The entrance would be off of Walnut Street.
The waterfall would be an eye-catcher, creating a “ceremonial entry to Napa,” Craiker said.
Mindful of environmental concerns, Craiker said “waterfalls have come a long way. They can be energy conserving.” The cascade would be powered by high-efficiency, low-energy pumps, he said.
The Planning Commission will review Craiker’s pre-application proposal Thursday night at City Hall.
Craiker’s design runs up against General Plan limits on building mass at that location, city planner Kevin Eberle said. The earlier design for nine rooms was close to the maximum allowed site coverage, he said.
To avoid this restriction, Craiker is suggesting that the eight proposed extended stay suites be considered as single occupancy residences, not hotel units.
Next week’s discussion is expected to focus on technical issues such as these, said Marlene Demery, the city’s interim planning manager. Until they are settled, Craiker cannot submit a final design for staff review, she said.
Craiker describes the new design as Craftsman, but with a contemporary flair. The facade of the lower two stories would be covered with stone squares, with stucco on the third story. Metal roofing would clad the attic.
The 2005 design called for a smaller building, described at the time as looking like a “large home.”
The new design, with 16 guest rooms, will function more as an “inn” than a motel, Craiker said. It will have the accouterments of a B&B, including a breakfast room and on-site manager, he said.
In his written description of the project, Craiker called it a “high quality, luxury facility.”
Craiker, who said he had a small ownership interest in the project, operated the 1801 Inn at Jefferson and First streets for seven years in the 1990s.
The entrance to downtown at First Street and Highway 29 is destined to have more tourist-serving amenities, he said. California Boulevard between First and Second streets is zoned for a hotel. A 46-room project was approved for the site in 200. The project was never built, but the permit remains valid, Eberle said.
Embassy Suites, which occupies the north end of the freeway exit, has submitted an application to add some 40 additional rooms close to the intersection, Eberle said.
Two small inns are located at California and Second Street.
The goal of the story comments section at NapaValleyRegister.com is to have an open, thought-provoking, civil community forum for all issues.
What gets your comment posted?
• Staying on topic
• Keeping your comment to 300 words or less
• Avoiding name-calling
• Addressing your comments to the message rather than the messenger
What gets your comment deleted?
• Personal attacks
• Derogatory remarks
• Name-calling of any sort
• Going off-topic
• Hate speech
• Racially-insensitive comments
• Implying guilt of a subject in a crime story before there is a court verdict
• Posting e-mail addresses
• Posting comments of a commercial nature
• POSTING WITH ALL CAPITAL LETTERS
• Linking multiple comments together with "to be continued..." to get around the 300 word limit.
The fine print
- Comments are either approved or denied. We do not edit comments.
- You are welcome to modify and resubmit a denied comment.
- Comments may take several hours to be posted.
- Comments posted are those of the writer, and do not necessarily reflect the opinion of NapaValleyRegister.com, its employees or its parent company.
- Do you have information on a story? Please go to our
virtual newsroom to send us a news tip.
- If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact
online@napanews.com or add a comment indicating you have an issue and our moderators will review the comment in question.
bornin74 wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:21 PM:
NNNNNNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOO "
diehard4ever wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:28 PM:
kevin wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:28 PM:
4gnapan wrote on Mar 13, 2008 2:59 PM:
common sense wrote on Mar 13, 2008 3:16 PM:
funnyme wrote on Mar 13, 2008 3:30 PM:
caligirl wrote on Mar 13, 2008 4:23 PM:
MyInput wrote on Mar 13, 2008 5:01 PM:
Let's hope that the Planning Commission does a thorough job of architectural review. Since the City is considering a green building ordinance that will address energy efficiency and other conservation measures in buildings, the water element should fall by the wayside - where it belongs. By the way, decorative waterfalls, in a semi-arid climate like Napa's, lose a significant amount of water through evaporation - a complete waste of a valuable community resource. "
someguyinnapa wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:23 PM:
that intersection is difficult enough for people (Napans included) to negotiate. most don't realize that a right turn is ok after a stop on a red light from 1st east to Cal south... there is even a sign!
now it will be even more difficult as tourists inadvertanly drive the wrong way on 1st trying to make a left onto walnut!
get real!
once again, the tourists win...
what a flippin joke! "
areyouserious wrote on Mar 13, 2008 6:29 PM:
Oh, wait! Remember the clock tower?
Well, that fountain fell victim to boxes of laundry detergeant dozens of times. Just wait Craiker... your VERY CLEAN fountain will overflow with bubbles as soon as it is built! I guarantee it! There is nothing else for kids to do around here.
Besides, another B&B/Inn... Are You Serious?
Gimme a break all ready! When will this town be for the people that live here and not the tourists? "
musikluvr wrote on Mar 13, 2008 7:57 PM:
wrkngmm wrote on Mar 13, 2008 8:20 PM:
NapaCitizen wrote on Mar 13, 2008 9:12 PM:
We don't need landmarks, we read street signs, have GPS and
many other ways to find our way.
But, with the planning geniuses who approve this crap will undoubtedly buy anything that gives the City more occupany taxes. "
yamamama wrote on Mar 13, 2008 10:14 PM:
jwk wrote on Mar 14, 2008 5:24 AM:
valleygal wrote on Mar 14, 2008 6:01 AM:
I am not necessarily against another hotel, but that property is the wrong location, it is already busy enough at that intersection. "
cathyodom wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:08 AM:
make napa better wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:22 AM:
jeepracer10 wrote on Mar 14, 2008 9:52 AM:
Concerned Citizen wrote on Mar 14, 2008 12:53 PM:
Straight Talk wrote on Mar 14, 2008 2:34 PM:
If you are opposed to something, please say what it is that you support. In this case, clearly the owner is not going to settle for an empty lot. If not an Inn, is it better to build more houses there? And if so, would there be much difference between the proposed Inn? "
Concerned Citizen wrote on Mar 14, 2008 7:39 PM:
jimmie wrote on Mar 14, 2008 11:43 PM:
Firewater wrote on Mar 15, 2008 7:19 AM:
Go back to the drawing board. "
common sense wrote on Mar 15, 2008 7:54 AM:
Straight talk wrote on Mar 15, 2008 8:08 AM:
My point was simply that name calling is a little "third grade" and referring to the people who will ultimately plan and approve any project for that area "Deaf, dumb and blind" doesn't help anyone. "
kbf wrote on Mar 15, 2008 8:22 AM:
opiniagirl wrote on Mar 15, 2008 9:28 AM:
Rob C wrote on Mar 15, 2008 9:39 AM:
Anyone stick their head out the window and gauge the economic climate? How many hotels proposed during the last boom of the late 90's didn't get built after the bust? How long has the town center been moribund?
Calm down people. "
jeepracer10 wrote on Mar 15, 2008 10:10 AM:
opiniagirl wrote on Mar 15, 2008 10:20 AM:
Please do not offend Third Graders; they know better than to call names! =) "
reader wrote on Mar 15, 2008 12:28 PM:
A water fall running down the side of a shingled craftman style? No, No, No, it doesn't work. Sleek and modern it might work. This drawing looks like a bathroom accident, in more ways than one. "
Mykdgirl54 wrote on Mar 15, 2008 1:03 PM:
Im sick of all the hotels, proposed hotels, inns, B&B's. It makes NO SENSE to build them when there is NOTHING TO DO in this town. How about revitalizing downtown with outdoor shopping (ala downtown walnut creek style) How about more parks, perhaps with outdoor stages for music festivals? (i.e. jazz festival in S.F.) Call me crazy but these idea seem like better revenue and options for not only tourists dollars, but locals as well! "
youngblood wrote on Mar 15, 2008 5:12 PM:
MyInput wrote on Mar 15, 2008 5:59 PM:
Concerned Citizen wrote on Mar 15, 2008 8:49 PM:
Straight Talk, I believe the comment went something like this: "Deaf, dumb and blind. That seems to be how our planners, councilmembers and city staffers approach such projects." Let me reiterate: APPROACH such projects. This is not name calling.
Any 3rd grader would recognize this.
There is nothing, at all, wrong w/proposing a green area for this parcel, one which serves neighbors. In fact, the area could really use such an area. Lots of small neighborhoods have small parks in fact, in newer housing proposals; this is a requirement of the of the developer/contractor. Not at all off the grid when considering the big picture. Two million dollars for this parcel? I think not. That seems a bit of a bloated figure. Way overvalued; particularly in today's economy.
So, I suggest; rethink your comments; they don't fly. "
DeeJay wrote on Mar 15, 2008 10:59 PM:
napablogger wrote on Mar 16, 2008 12:35 AM:
Concerned Citizen wrote on Mar 16, 2008 11:38 AM:
Not a bad idea, at all.
Taking a lunch time rest or just a moment's relaxation among greenery has never been a bad thing.
Oh, and, btw; I didn't explain my position as clearly as I wished. I don't support the idea of eminent domain in this case but, it is not unheard of. I do see that the city could actually spend some funds in a positive way by providing a park...(also, there are several small parks right downtown; one is near Mervyns, another just north of there..and more...)
Too bad some can't see the forest or the trees.
"
angrytoo wrote on Mar 17, 2008 9:38 AM:
14obama wrote on Mar 18, 2008 9:51 AM:
If I want to rent out my place to tourists,by God I Will ! Ain't no hypocrite gonna stop me ! You mean to say that you can bring "out of towners" with big bucks in and allow THEM,to have rights to the Whole concession,but, Not We the People of Napa ? Maybe we should prepare to defend ourselves from this kind of invasion.
Almost All of the comments here are from "Plastic People" who believe Napa should be like any other black topped,ticky-tacky,urban sprawl with all of the franchise stores and restaurants. Too late Now,Napa ! We ALL blew it ! The capitalists pigs win again,but,they always lose in the end.
Too bad they don't Know it ! "
14obama wrote on Mar 18, 2008 10:05 AM:
napagirl1960 wrote on Mar 18, 2008 11:20 AM:
Common Sense wrote on Mar 18, 2008 1:29 PM:
4gnapan wrote on Mar 18, 2008 11:55 PM:
Thats about as imaginative as a .. oh heck, I cannot come up with a metaphor...
thats not a Waterfall... thats a "water feature"... about as exciting as the one at Target in Gasser plaza..
why is 9 rooms not enough? Greed Factor is soooo annoying. "