Questioning the premise of the Angwin eco-village

By Duane Cronk

The Triad corporation of Seattle has posted on its Web site an elegant presentation of the 380-unit subdivision it proposes for Angwin. It presents it as an eco-village, so beautiful that it will capture national attention.

Napa County planners and supervisors and the taxpayers of Napa County need to keep their eyes wide open on this one.

I will address just two aspects, and others will perceive features which are merely foolish or outright wrong.

First, this whole presentation is based on a fallacy. Triad states that the Angwin eco-village will be in the tradition of the eco-village concept which goes back for centuries. In this concept, people of a certain set of values came together to share much in common. They were philosophically driven together. They were idealistic.

The people who buy the houses in the Triad subdivision will not share common philosophies. They will buy here, in this particular place, simply because they need a house close to the college or the hospital or the culinary institute, because they are looking for a second home or because they are retired. They will not be hippies.

The eco-village will feature electric vehicles running up and down the hill to the big city of St. Helena on a “frequent” schedule. Does anyone out there believe that PUC students, who are enjoying their first automobile, will give it up and ride the bus so that they can enjoy an hour between classes at the coffee shop? Does anyone believe that the retired guy who has bought a $700,000 house in the eco-village will give up his Lexus to share a seat on the bus?

There are places where this concept has worked, usually in urban settings. But it will not work for this location so remote from almost everything.

Second, let’s look at the concept of Local Preference Housing. The Web site describes a program of rewarding people who can find jobs close by with discounts from their homeowners assessment. (First off, Triad cites the assessment at $7,200 for someone buying a $750,000 house. But $7,200 is nearly as much as the county property tax. Does that not raise an eyebrow?) The new eco-village resident who finds work in local Angwin or Deer Park would be forgiven 90 percent of his or her assessment of $7,200. Now you tell me, how many workers here earn enough to buy a $750,000 house? Certainly not college faculty and hospital workers. So, like the electric bus idea above, this is another one of those ideas which sound so grand but are unrealistic.

There is no question but that the eco-village concept is idealistic, a bit socialistic, perhaps, in its requirements that residents share much in common. Or, share the common cost in their homeowner dues. But it fails on all of the real considerations that concern Napa County planners, supervisors and taxpayers.

First, it would be built on prime agricultural soils that have been farmed for nearly 100 years. Development on such land is against all county General Plan policy.

Second, it would increase the population of Angwin by 43.5 percent and it does not take a rocket scientist to know that some of those impacts would be very negative.

Third, it would turn the rural setting for this village into a housing development in the very heart of Angwin. Why should all Angwin property owners be asked to give that up for the benefit of the two guys who own Triad corporation in Seattle?

On some locations, the eco-village would be a thrilling possibility. On this remote site, it would be an environmental disaster.

(Cronk lives in Angwin.)

Napa Valley Register Copyright © 2009