NVR Logo
Getting to know Napa Pipe
The Napa Pipe property as seen from the air in August 2008. The owners of the property are set to unveil an informational initiative to educate people about the 3,200 home Napa Pipe development proposal. J.L. Sousa/Register | Buy photos
Developer plans informational push as project moves ahead
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
Save and Share Share
Convincing the public, take two.

Napa County residents’ mailboxes are once again going to be used by Napa Redevelopment Partners to promote a proposal for 3,200 homes at the Napa Pipe site, months after a close election deluged voters with material.
Sometime this month, the development group plans to launch an outreach program to educate residents about its Napa Pipe proposal by mail, Web, e-mail, newspaper ads and — more intimately — walking tours of the 152-acre Napa Pipe site.

The Napa Pipe proposal — complete with townhomes, restaurants, light industrial space and 44 acres of parks — is the largest single development proposal in Napa County history and a source of strain between the city of Napa and the county. While the project is firmly in the county, it borders the city, raising concerns about what kind of impact it might have on city services.
The two government entities set up a city-county study group to look at Napa Pipe’s initial reports on traffic, water and other issues. Drafts of those reports are tentatively slated to be released to the public in October.

Napa County Planning Director Hillary Gitelman told the Napa County Planning Commission earlier this month that the county plans to label Napa Pipe as a potential residential site in the housing element of the county’s General Plan, which must be completed in the coming months.
The Napa County Board of Supervisors is scheduled to receive a report from Napa Redevelopment Partners’ leader Keith Rogal on Tuesday, going over what each of the three phases of the Napa Pipe proposal would look like. According to a county staff report, each phase would take about three years to complete, with complete buildout in 2020.

Every year, the estimated construction includes 215 to 285 market-rate units, and 55 to 70 affordable units.

Rogal said he was expecting Napa Redevelopment Partners to host two walking tours per week for the next eight weeks. A Web site laying out all the details is expected to be up later this month.
24 comment(s)

jwk wrote on Sep 10, 2008 6:55 AM:

" We are overgrown enough.. COuldn't we get this project put on the back burner for at least 5 years? That would be sufficient time for all the other major projects to be completed. And maybe no more new homes would help existing vacancies and lost market values of 25 to 25% to recoup a bit. DO we really need 3,000 + new homes and another Hotel?? Plus in five years I'll be retiring and getting the heck out of this once Beautful town which is NOW nothing but a Tourist Trap!!!!! "

noblindershere wrote on Sep 10, 2008 6:58 AM:

" I would love to see this vacant area be used in an appropriate way, 3,200 units sounds like a lot. I'm sure many of them will be weekend homes for visitors to Napa and hopefully some will be uses for the working class. I love the idea that there is going to be a 44acre park. We have very few parks that have access to the River that have a nice running trail. I see this being a great opportunity for the county of Napa and I'm sure the Rogul group has thought out everything. The biggest concern I have is how is it going to effect our schools. Tons of children will be living in those units that are considered affordable....the closest school to that area are Snow, Shearer and Phillips...not very close. Would love to see the plan on a walking tour. "

marine1/1 wrote on Sep 10, 2008 8:37 AM:

" NO,NO,NO. . .  There is NO WATER to be building anything right now and especially not anything of this side.Keith Rogal has already published his water findings,and according to him,there is an endless amount of ground water in Napa. That must be why the city is trying to sue the state over water rights right now. If we loose this law suite, we are already in trouble, but developer Keith Rogal can only see building more and more without the resources. He just wants to leave that issue for someone else to deal with at a later time.You can expect to hear alot more lies comming from reports put out about the Napa pipe development, including so called affordable housing.All this guy cares about is getting his way,collecting his money and not caring when all the water,city services,flooding or any other problem arises. Please look into this very carefully for yourself. Don't let this happen. It can and must be stopped!!!!!! "

BKF wrote on Sep 10, 2008 8:45 AM:

" Growth is inevitable. It must be planned for. It is state law to accommodate for population growth by providing housing according to the Regional Housing Needs Allocation.

The City of Napa is required to provide over 2,000 new homes of varying affordability by the end of this Housing Element cycle. Napa County as a whole must provide over 3,700 new homes, so this project seems to meet City and County of Napa goals. "

napagirl76 wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:04 AM:

" They can spend millions and millions of dollars trying to sway me into thinking this is a good project. But it would be a waste of money. 3200 homes... lets average that to 4 people per house hold, thats 12,800 people living there. Where do these families plan on sending their childeren? to already over crowed napa schools? where do they plan on getting their water? from resivors around town that are already below capacity? or from a well sitting under napa pipe? Im sure that waters clean and healthy! (can you see my eyes rolling) Traffic getting in and out of south napa is bad enough and backed up daily things well get worse if these homes are built. longer time sitting in traffic and more wear and tear on our roads that are already crumbling under us. Why would we want homes being built for the weekenders? they show up friday night, go wine tasting all day saturday then drive back to their second home drunk. Napa does no need a project like this, napa can not handle a project like this. i hope that the city and county realize that a project like this would be BAD for napa. The only good thing i read is 44 acres of parks... we do more of those why not build sport fields for our kids. why not build a dog park with a large off leash are. why not just put a large park there and bring the 4th of july fireworks back to a open park instead of a crowed down town? just a thought. "

hawkins707 wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:13 AM:

" I'm with you JWK, this town is going to be a mess in another five years, I'm jumping ship next year and don't plan on returning. It is such a shame what is happening. With its geographical location, Napa should be a nice place to live. "

Paddy wrote on Sep 10, 2008 9:16 AM:

" With hundreds of homes in foreclosure and Dey L.P. closing it's doors this is not the right time to begin any significant housing development.

This property is not even zoned for the development they are requesting and they have the audacity to "move ahead"?! This continues to be thrown in the face of Napa despite the clear message that has been sent, and will continue to be sent, that infrastructure, water, schools are insufficient and traffic throughout Napa County will become more of a nightmare than it is today.

I agree with JWK. This is no longer the town that made Napa such a phenominal place to live.

If you developed Yosemite as you are Napa the affect would be similar. What a horrible waste of God's beauty that has been appreciated and loved by so many for so long for the financial benefit of a very few.

The drain of the spirit of Napa will continue as the influx of, whoever, creates a wasteland of fleeting opportunity. "

marine1/1 wrote on Sep 10, 2008 10:24 AM:

" The school issue is a very good one. Included in this should be an elementary school and a new middle school that Napa is in desperate need of. With the population growth, new schools are always left off the table. I don't want to see any part of this Napa Pipe development go through but city leaders only care about their bottom line ...MONEY and tax dollars. Rogal needs to be accountable for the new schools as part of his development plan. That should be part of his responsibility to the community. I would rather see more commercial industries use that space since it is already zoned for that and get more Napa residents jobs. All we keep hearing about is businesses packing up and leaving. We need more local jobs in industry for local people. With some tax insentives that other states are offering, I'm sure the Napa Pipe area would look good to another big industry company.It has rail road and river access for barges. Keith Rogal does not need to build over three thousand homes out there. Once we loose that area and have it re-zoned, it could not be used for industry use again. Stick to your Mervyns project Keith. We have to many homes sitting vacant from foreclosures already. I do like the idea of a park and maybe a river trail that goes back towards Napa. NO to big building and developers that keep trying to turn Napa into another San JOse. "

Bill wrote on Sep 10, 2008 10:27 AM:

" Assuming that BFK’s figures are correct it does not make sense to put all housing needs in the Napa Pipe basket.

The current regional housing need allocation is in the neighborhood of 569 affordable units in the time frame of 2007 to 2014. From the Napa county housing element up date.

A project this large is simply not called for by the state only the pressure Mr. Rogal and his operatives put on the community.

Most units will not be affordable and no government planning has yet addressed the concerns of the City of Napa. This site is in play because the County as in the Board of Supervisors is playing dodge ball with this site. They hope to abandon their responsibility in one blow. "

tazzmaster wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:00 AM:

" NO MORE HOUSE'S. PUT THE FAIR GROUND'S OUT THERE OR BUILD A WATER PARK OR A BIG SPORT'S COMPLEX. BUT NO MORE HOME'S NAPA IS BIG ENOUGH. THEY CAN'T EVEN TAKE CARE OF WHAT THERE IS NOW. "

vocal-de-local wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:11 AM:

" I share the same concerns as most of the other posters here.

With Dey closing, certainly to be followed by an exodus of other businesses, middle income jobs will diminish. The primary employers in Napa City/County will be those that support infrastructure (government jobs), medical jobs (note that many physicians are now joining Kaiser and that our local hospital struggles partly because of the demographics here), and of course, the wine industry (whose corporate leanings will increasing skim the wages of the middle class). Also include the hospitality industry (who will provide a minimum amount of wages to those who cannot afford to live in Napa).

A region that cannot provide strength to a middle class is bound to be unhealthy. Napa will be top heavy in retirees, vacationers and low wage workers dependent on social services and crowded into existing Napa homes.

So instead of Napa dealing with the diversification of industry, their solution is developing Napa Pipe and providing support housing for predominately low wage workers? There are few jobs left in Napa to support the prices these homes will demand. Where will these people work? How about the limitations on the amount of people who can be crowded into each living unit?

Someone needs to be truthful about this: these living units will be targeted toward which income level? There are too few middle class jobs left in Napa so I will assume if their target audience is "middle class" we are looking at a bedroom community; if targeted toward "low income" it will become an out of sight, out of mind dumping place for our low income hospitality workers (do you think their lack of medical insurance and other needs will be addressed by their employers? Who pays?) "

Native74 wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:16 AM:

" "Napa County Planning Director Hillary Gitelman told the Napa County Planning Commission earlier this month that the county plans to label Napa Pipe as a potential residential site in the housing element of the county’s General Plan, which must be completed in the coming months."

Oh nice...so when are the public hearings on this going to take place? No on N really bungled this one up. I wish Rogal would stick to the Mervn's complex and not Napa Pipe. "

napaao wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:59 AM:

" NO NO NO NO NO "

5th Generation Napan wrote on Sep 10, 2008 12:11 PM:

" I will not even get into how stupid putting houses in at Napa Pipe would be. Rather, I would only have hoped someone had both money AND brains would come into our community and NOT housing developers.
Mare Island should never have been closed. I could actually see a functioning blue collar naval site there building Coast Guard Ships for the navy. The Coast Guard just accepted the first new cutter built in over 30 years. They made the comment that they NEED new ships to meet the Homeland security issues of today. I cannot think of a better location than Napa Pipe to do what it was originally designed to do. BUILD ships. Mare Island and Kaiser built Napa, NOT the tourist or wineries. They have always been here (tourist and wineries) and they always will be. But lets get some people thinking of our community first. 3000 houses to what support Dey Labs that just said "screw Napa"? We need to start building OUR community the way we use to, BY BUILDING PRODUCTS AGAIN!!!! "

musikluvr wrote on Sep 10, 2008 1:34 PM:

" I don't want to get to know Napa Pipe because I know I am going to have to pay to provide schools for them, police for them, fire protection for them, buy new roads to provide solutions for the traffic they cause. I already know they will excessively tax our short water supplies and overtax our sewage treatment plant - without paying adequately to provide for their impacts on this community "

shareathought wrote on Sep 10, 2008 1:42 PM:

" How about a bus or shuttle, for visitors from town, over the next 8 weeks? "

Cadence wrote on Sep 10, 2008 2:21 PM:

" Now, now, folks. Be open-minded!
The county has voted and the majority of Napans see no problem with this new town. The majority were SO easily duped by the last round of slick mailers - they believe that their affordable housing mandates will be taken care of into forever, that there is UNLIMITED water, that these units will become homes for their offspring, never mind JOBS for those offspring, that schools, and services will be paid for by the new residents, that the new residents will be sailing to their mortgage-paying jobs via water taxis, and most importantly - let's be blunt - that it will keep growth and congestion away from their own parts of the county.
The majority are wrong on all counts.
But gee, the siren songs on those slick mailers will work their magic again.
I think some ancient Greeks actually welcomed a lovely "gift" of a Trojan horse, too. Turns out they were as wrong as the current residents of Napa, poor saps. "

B-Side wrote on Sep 10, 2008 4:28 PM:

" I like that some of the land will be used for light industial. More jobs is always a good thing. But regardless of what happens there we need to contend with the traffic issue. Napa road access is so vastly limited and the traffic we have now is a nightmare. Napa has become the land of a thousand traffic lights. "

reader wrote on Sep 10, 2008 4:52 PM:

" I hope this means no commuter suburb in Angwin will be built now. Anyone foolish enough to think that PUC and Hospital service workers will be able to afford to live up there deserves to be disappointed. Doctors and Professors can already afford to buy there. The least expensive homes in Napa county are abundant and for sale right now, in Angwin. "

Joe B wrote on Sep 10, 2008 7:57 PM:

" I think the crystal ball went sour on this project. Hard to get excited about a pipe yard community in a deflating economy. Too much at stake for the investors, so the promotions won't stop. They will have to piece meal this thing together over the next decade+. That won't be enough to take the shine off for the promise of tax revenue. "

TheWholeTruth wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:07 PM:

" Congratulations to the highly financed no on N group. Lets see how much public hearings count against a few more million dollars of political juice, bias consultants reaching nonsensical conclusions and a local government in a love fest with Napa Redevelopment Partners. We lost our vote so the citizen's opinion will no longer count on Napa Pipe. Go ahead, make Keith’s day, write your concerned County Supervisor.

But wait, remember, N was NOT about Napa Pipe. Duh!!!

Good Luck Napa "

make napa better wrote on Sep 10, 2008 11:53 PM:

" I think tazzmaster has it right.

Build a waterpark or some sort of theme park or even put the fairgrounds out there. they could do plenty of good with that land instead of building housing, restaurants, and a park that we already have too much of (minus the park).

We also should build something for these tourists to do in the evening. I get a ton of guests that want something fun to do in the evening. We could build a ton of revenue if we only put in something else there. "

CASEY wrote on Sep 15, 2008 12:06 PM:

" NO NO NO Why more houses? There are sooooo many forclosed properties right now what do we need with 3,200 more
homes. Napa pipe is stupid. Look what happened to American Canyon. It's a misable bowel of obstruction. "

14obama wrote on Sep 19, 2008 3:18 PM:

" Sorry ! "We the people" will decide what is built here ! More condos,more people,more people,more crime,more crime,new jails.new jails,more people ! Looks like we're you know what ! I told ya a long time ago,"Give em an inch and they'll take a mile" ! Now they have their foot in the door,Big Time. Keep sittin on your duffs and there'll be more. Nobody cares anymore ! Greed runs rampant ! "

Comment Guidelines
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.
Search:
Web Search Powered
By Yahoo! Search
Napa Valley Register on Facebook
Copyright © 2009 Napa Valley Publishing, a member of Lee Enterprises, Inc.
Terms of Use | Privacy Policy