A flock of Napa County residents buzzed through the Napa Pipe property Wednesday night, during one of a series of walking tours designed to educate the public about the controversial proposal for the south county site.

“Where we’re standing right now would be the last of a network of parks,” developer Keith Rogal told the crowd of 38, stretching his arms across the industrial land.

Standing at the other end of the 154-acre property, Rogal said, “Where we are now — the dry docks — is what we really think of as the center of this neighborhood.”

Participants squinted into the distance as if straining to envision a bustling new neighborhood where aging industrial equipment currently dots the skyline.

Under the proposal by Rogal’s Napa Redevelopment Partners, the Napa Pipe site would feature 3,200 townhomes as well as retail and industrial activity on land that once served as a Kaiser Steel plant, where ships and the bones of skyscrapers were manufactured.

The Napa County Board of Supervisors voted to study the residential project in 2007, and a series of reports on related environmental issues are expected in coming weeks.

The proposal for what would be the largest development of its kind in unincorporated county land has met with fiery opposition from some residents. City of Napa officials in particular have expressed concerns that a huge residential development just outside the city of Napa could siphon away resources and strain services. In June, Napa Pipe proponents poured $1.4 million into defeating a ballot measure that would have killed the proposal.

Rogal, however, painted a prettier picture of the development Wednesday night, beckoning the crowd to imagine a lively neighborhood with restaurants, hotels, a corner store and outdoor movie theater. At the river’s edge, he described what could be a saltwater swimming pool, a boat house for a rowing club and a dock for kayaking and canoeing. Residents could hop on a rail car or travel via water taxi into downtown Napa.

“You can kind of get a sense of what a pleasant spot it could be,” Rogal told the group.

Rogal said the walking tours — Wednesday marks the third so far — provide locals the opportunity to ask questions in a more informal format than at a traditional public meeting.

“This is a really important project for the future of the community, and people deserve to understand it fully,” he said. “People cannot make an intelligent assessment … without being here.”

Rogal said invitations went out by mail to all registered voters in Napa County. About 120 people attended the first three tours, he said, and another 160 are signed up for tours in November. Rogal said he will continue to offer tours as long as residents express interest.

Mike Fisher, a board member for the St. Helena Chamber of Commerce, said he signed up for the walking tour so that he could learn more about the project, which he feels could affect residents countywide.

“I’m curious,” he said. “The proposal is huge, and I just wanted to be more educated so if it ever comes to the point where I have to decide if I support it, I know what I’m talking about.”

Chris Smalley, who lives in Napa just across the river from Napa Pipe, wanted to know if the proposal had all of the elements of a sustainable community.

“Is there a local place to get fresh foods? Do people not have to drive out? What about the flood plain?” she asked.

“I’d like to hear the issues directly from the person,” she said.

Many members of the tour group had already made up their minds about Napa Pipe, and wanted to see in-person the project they said they support.

“I think it’s a really good idea,” William Moore of Napa said, calling it a “sensible solution” to the county’s housing needs. Moore, who served as the project director for residential development at Mare Island, said Napa Pipe is a “similar project but smaller.”

John Sensenbaugh, a resident of Napa, admitted he had some concerns about the size of the proposal.

“Three thousand (homes) sounds like a lot,” he said, “but I never saw (Napa Pipe) before.”

After 45 minutes plodding through the site, Sensenbaugh said, “You don’t appreciate how big this area is without seeing it.”

At the end of the tour, Rogal led the group through a PowerPoint presentation, stressing in particular the needs of the commuting workforce and the county’s imbalance between housing and jobs.

He addressed concerns about issues such as traffic, noise and the availability of services. Studies on these issues by independent consultants are under way and expected shortly.

In response to one question about the possible annexation of the property to the city of Napa, Rogal said, “Personally, I don’t anticipate (annexation).”

If, after the project is built, the community decides to pursue a vote to annex the land, “that’s fine. Right now, there’s no particular reason to look that way.”

Rogal noted that “the plan has a lot of specificity,” but stressed that it is “not because it is the final plan.” The current level of details, he said, allows the project to be analyzed while the community continues to provide input.