" I'm sure Napa County isn't the only one that is battling the states antiquated laws regarding development. Why not take on the state as a consortium to seek change?

Keep litigation out of rational and reasonable development decisions and let counties decide for themselves how they want to grow. "

" The official Environmental Impact Report has only just begun - how can she possibly "criticize the county’s draft environmental report for its new housing plan" when the environmental report hasn't even been done yet? They just had the community input meetings asking for suggestions/concerns/etc from the community (including the city) and asking for what everyone wanted to see studied in the EIR.

Our city officials have shown over the last few years that they are not good at planning for growth in our city. Just look at all the neighborhoods being disturbed with out of character in-fill projects. We do not need these same city officials messing up Napa Pipe too - our best hope for a beautiful mixed use community that does not pave over our beautiful ag land. "

" To say that the County's selection of Napa Pipe as a possible housing site is motivated by the speculation of private land developers is a completely irresponsible statement and one that I am shocked to hear coming from a government official.

The City needs to tone the rhetoric down. The only reason the Supervisors are heading toward this is that the County needs the housing.

Her statements are replete with misrepresentations.

Maybe it is because Dana Smith has only been here a short time and does not recall that before the site was even sold the Supervisors told all bidders that they were considering housing on the site because that is what the county needed.

The General Plan Steering Committtee of which I was a member spent two years trying to figure out the best place to put housing in the county and that is what we came up with. None of us were speculative developers, in fact many of us have ties to the wine industry where we were looking to preserve agriculture as our highest priority.

The county needs worker housing, we need to get as many of the 20,000 plus cars a day coming in in the morning to work off the road as we can.

To be honest, the City's militant attitude about Napa Pipe surprises me. They must recognize the need for housing in the County. The County has tried to work that out with them, but the process failed. Stuffing the city full of infill isn't exactly an attractive option either.

The City needs to face the fact that it cannot totally control what the county is doing. A law suit would not serve the citizens of Napa at all. "

" So now, how many players do we have in this mess that we have to negotiate a compromise with ? City, County, State, the developer- have I missed any ?

What a mess. I felt before that we should leave it like it is. I feel even more strongly that way, now.

Because in the end, nobody is going to be happy. So why bother spending any money if nobody is going to be happy.

What a cluster-mess this is turning out to be.

So what is the closest Fire Station response time to Napa Sue-er Pipe ? "

" FUBAR! This is beginning to sound more and more like the AIG "retention" bonuses. "

" Napa needs more homes desperately but the council and other greedy homeowners do not want development. Slow and steady growth over a sustained period of time will allow for growth without reducing home values and will increase tax revenue from property taxes...now we have a mega-project that will help with tax revenue but does not help with judicious growth. "

" napablogger writes: "...Supervisors told all bidders that they were considering housing on the site because that is what the county needed"

There's the problem. THAT Board of Supes decided, on their own, that they wanted something without any regard for what their constituents wanted. That's where they made the first and worst mistake and now we're dealing with it.

And the millions and millions of dollars a very few will make is at the expense of all of us who have called Napa home for generations. That is not acceptable. "

" Put in a fifty acre wal-mart. End of controversy. "

" gorillaz, I'm not sure Napa needs more homes. Especially "desparately".

I mean, if we put in a zillion new homes, it may bring down the prices of our homes enough to make them affordable, but I don't want that.

But there are a bunch of homes around here for sale, and nobody's buying them. We obviously don't need them THAT bad.

But I think I'm on record already as being opposed to this, aren't I.

And I might not be so opposed if it hadn't been for the shady, sleazy, and border-line-dishonest back-door way we are having this rammed down throats.

And I think Napa Sue-er Pipe was funny...... "

" There are already enough empty homes in Napa...why should we build more? There's an economic nightmare on the horizon and I do not understand where Napa thinks they are going to get funding for this project. Affordable housing? My home is now worth 2ook less than when I bought it...there's your affordable housing! "

" I think the area should go over to City jurisdicition and the development especially low cost housing should be built. Let the County take care of the Agricultural areas... "

" Paddy, that is the Supervisors job, to make plans for the future and to know what is going on and what the needs are. And they do know far more than say the writers on the two blogs today about the needs of the county.

These blogs are a mass of misinformation and false, unsubstantiated accusations.

The Supervisors all thought we needed housing, and they know far more about what is going on with the county than just about anyone here, myself included.

What does that tell you, that they are just caving in to a greedy developer, or that the bloggers in here haven't a clue about planning or what is actually happening in Napa?

Paddy, I dont' know why you are so dead set on no one else being able to live here, but 1976 is gone and it will never be back. "

" Magnum and all, the housing crisis is temporary compared to the time frame we are dealing with here. We are talking about housing being planned and built over the next 15 years. The housing crisis will be over in two years.

Your point is irrelevant. "

" Uh...Napablogger, regarding your first paragraph - Should the city refrain from telling the truth?

Even if someone in County Planning, on the Steering Committee, or on the board of supervisors made verbal promises to the developers, they are empty promises unless they are in writing by decision makers 'allowed' to make those decisions. The Steering Committee is 'advisory' of sorts, but certainly not hired decision makers. Just because they make a suggestion doesn't mean it takes any precedence.

No one owes these developers anything. How can there be a lawsuit when guarantees that industrial property zoning will be changed to R1 are lacking. Be very very careful about any information you feed Rogal. Any hint that the BOS's might give him what he wants might be used as legal leverage. If he's trying to threaten lawsuit based on ABAG housing conformity, I can't even begin to imagine what other lawsuit he might pull the county into.

Regarding the comment in the article, "attorneys for Napa Pipe suggested the city’s housing plan may not comply with state law" - Are they for sure talking about ABAG? Can developers sue to make an area comply with ABAG? Geeze, I commented on this on another thread several months back. I never thought it could become quite so transparent, though. It's like saying "give us what we want or we're going to tattle on you". ABAG and developers work hand in hand to spread cancer style growth. We've got to just so "no"? I mean, what can ABAG take away from the county? Maybe we should just let them take it away. I'll bet that the consequences of non compliance are less the paying for all of the longterm infrastructure costs for such massive developments. "

" The forces of light vs. the forces of darkness. The obstructionists, while roaring loudly, are a small minority. But then so are those who support sound planning. Napa just doesn't have the sophistication it takes to work with a developer with the vision of Keith Rogel.

Napablogger--yours is a lonlely path at the moment. But keep on injecting good sense into this skirmish. While the reason haters will go on with their vitriolic eruptions, you keep the focus where it should be, on the merits of the project, and on the record not on the sky which seems to some about to fall. "

" vocal, no the city should not refrain from telling the truth.

My beef with Smith is using terms of propaganda like slamming the developer for greed, and also slamming the Supervisors for caving in to the greed she just manufactured. It's propaganda and does not help the situation. I expect better than that from high level government officials.

The reason the government and community should consider Napa Pipe or not is whether it will meet the needs of the community, not whether somebody has a personal opinion about developers.

It's true that what the Supervisors said was not in writing, and it is also true that they can decide at any time now to change it. But my main point is that they said it because that is what the community needs, housing, and that is the only reasonable place to put it.

The city is trashing Napa Pipe and talking today about permitting yet another major hotel. You tell me, where in the world are we going to put all those workers that they will need? Not in 300 units at Napa Pipe.

Napa Pipe is going to sell out so fast it will make your head spin. That is how bad the need is here. "

" It’s apparent that some believe that they can ‘save’ us from ourselves. They don’t seem to have a historical perspective on previous attempts at major development efforts that have been voted on and voted against by an overwhelming majority over the past 20 years. This includes attempts to develop Wild Horse Ranch and Stanley Ranch.

Any thought that I am in a minority regarding a desire to curb massive development is a fallacy. In fact, the groundswell has begun to curb huge projects that might have made sense in the 19th century but are detrimental in the 21st…According to a Reason Foundation article,

“Northern California’s experience illustrates how growth-management tools such as urban-growth boundaries can be used by political interest groups to stop new development. In Sacramento County, an urban-service area is being converted into a growth boundary via political resistance to new development even though infrastructure is provided privately. A proposed 5,000 home development in the Tassajara Valley in Contra Costa County…was withdrawn as a result of local resistance despite a projected regional housing deficit of 34,000 homes by 2020. County elected officials are considering reducing existing growth boundaries to prevent further development.”

There are tools. There is precedence. We’ll continue to stand against those who want to destroy the greatest aspects of Napa Valley for the benefit of so very few. One person’s "obstructionist" is another person’s visionary. I’m grateful to live in a valley of so many visionaries. "

" Those who fear growth lump all large scale projects together. The proposed Napa Pipe community, which incorporates a variety of innovative land use practices, has nothing in common with the Stanly Ranch and Wild Horse Ranch projects. Bringing up these poorly conceived projects only obfuscates the issues.

Those who seek to pull up the draw bridge or return to some simpler time are content with a boring blue collar town. Some of us want more for Napa, and Rogel's plan contributes toward this objective. But without a constituency, he'll never reach liftoff. "

" Epi - Napa Pipe comparison to Stanley Ranch and Wild Horse Ranch developments is very fitting. Traffic concerns between Napa Pipe and Wild Horse are similar in the number of entry and exit points. At least Stanley Ranch traffic, though backing up hwy 29 would have had options.

The 19th century mentality of build on every mountain, pave every field is now giving way to 13th century comparisons. My guess is the only drawbridge in Napa is in someone's imagination. "