The trouble with Napa Pipe

It’s too big. It needs more study. It may not do enough to ease Napa County’s affordable housing crunch.

Those are the main concerns regarding Napa Redevelopment Partners’ ambitious plan for seven-story buildings and 3,200 townhomes at the 152-acre Napa Pipe property.

The Napa Pipe proposal got the Napa County Board of Supervisors excited, as the county is seeking ways of meeting state housing quotas. The board signaled it would consider a change away from industrial zoning, and that created opposition to Napa Pipe in the form of Measure N.

Appearing on the June 3 ballot, Measure N would strengthen the county’s existing 1 percent per year growth cap and 35-foot height limit on buildings, giving voters the power to accept or reject any exceptions to the rules. The measure would hamstring the current Napa Pipe proposal.

Napa Redevelopment Partners’ leader, Keith Rogal, points out that the project is far from a done deal. The group is paying for water, traffic and other studies and — Measure N or no — must present a full-blown environmental impact report for public hearings and county approval.

If Measure N is intended to kill the project, Rogal told the Register editorial board, it will misfire. His group will come up with a revised plan. (And yet, by election day Napa Redevelopment Partners may have spent the better part of $1 million to defeat Measure N.)

It is important that Napa Pipe studies are on-going. But it’s not enough. Here’s what should happen if today’s leaders want to do right by tomorrow’s residents. The county must:

• Get serious about the size of the project. Even Napa Redevelopment Partners’ natural allies among supervisors and planning commissioners say 3,200 homes are just too much. The public needs to be presented with a realistic plan.

• Test whether legal mechanisms such as deed restrictions can ensure that hundreds of Napa Pipe homes become workforce housing, not just “affordable” homes that only solve the political riddle of meeting state housing mandates. Without that, trading off the creation of thousands of market-rate homes for hundreds of so-called affordable units ought to be a non-starter.

• Host a reasoned debate about height limits. The mantra of the day is that if Napa is not to grow out, then it must grow up. OK, so what are appropriate building heights? May we decide this without 3,200 proverbial guns pointed at our heads?

• Craft a comprehensive county-wide housing policy. Napa Pipe alone could take care of our state housing mandates for years. But it is not alone. The Ghisletta property off Napa’s Foster Road may see 1,000 homes. Pacific Union College plans 380 homes in Angwin. American Canyon plans more homes. Infill projects in the cities will provide still more.

Citizens are clamoring for a prudent policy that puts our quality of life ahead of developer dreams. As proposed, the Napa Pipe project doesn’t meet the mark.

(This is the second of four editorials on Napa Pipe and Measure N. Coming Saturday: The trouble with Measure N. Sunday: The Register endorsement.)

Napa Valley Register Copyright © 2009