Napa Pipe dreams: Residents, planners gather to share ideas for south county site
By JILLIAN JONES
Register Staff Writer
November 19th, 2009
October 25th, 2009
October 5th, 2009
September 27th, 2009
September 23rd, 2009
September 18th, 2009
September 9th, 2009
November 25th, 2009
November 23rd, 2009
November 22nd, 2009
November 21st, 2009
Charged with creating their ideal project for the Napa Pipe site, several dozen people gathered Wednesday night for the first in a series of workshops on the controversial south county development proposal.
Participants at the special Napa County Planning Commission meeting — held at the Napa County Office of Education — were asked to brainstorm, “What makes a successful neighborhood?”
Planning specialist and Napa Pipe consultant Reid Ewing kicked off the workshop addressing the benefits of compact developments like the one proposed at Napa Pipe. High-density developments reduce reliance on cars, improve air quality and build a sense of community, he said.
Ewing stressed the benefits of developments with a range of housing types, activities within walking distance and access to a variety of transit options — all elements of the 2,600-home proposal for Napa Pipe.
Following Ewing’s presentation, Napa County Planning Director Hillary Gitelman divided the crowd into four groups to discuss the design of their own neighborhoods and to brainstorm ideas for Napa Pipe. Each group was joined by a planning commissioner — Planning Commission Chairman Bob Fiddaman was absent — and a member of planning department staff.
A handful of Napa Pipe architects joined the discussion, as did several Napa Pipe supporters. A few opponents from the group Get A Grip on Growth attended Wednesday’s meeting.
The results of the brainstorming session were remarkably similar to the project proposed at Napa Pipe.
Groups called for a mixed-use development with affordable housing within walking distance of restaurants, offices and mom-and-pop shops. They asked for parks, bike paths and community centers.
The development should take advantage of the railway that runs through the property, groups said, and should have some light industrial use.
Young people spoke Wednesday to the need for entertainment and activities that go later than
7 p.m. Several called for art studios and other creative gathering spaces.
Alex Lydon, 23, the founder of Wandering Rose, a local arts organization, showed up with two of his friends to represent young prospective home-buyers. “We’re here because we heard this was affordable housing that’s aimed at our demographic,” Lydon said. “We want to be part of making sure the development happens.”
Elaine Markovich, another Napa Pipe supporter, said she and her husband wanted to add their voices to the mix. “We live in Napa, we love Napa, and we want to make sure Napa continues to be the community we want to live in,” she said.
While Napa County Planning Commissioner Matt Pope commended the enthusiasm of participants, he noted that the proposal must still undergo an environmental impact review before a final decision is made.
“This process cannot be a substitute for, of course, the EIR,” he said. “Certainly, pending those and other conclusions, while (Wednesday’s) meeting was enjoyable … it could all be rendered academic.”
Critics of the project, including officials from the city of Napa, have said it is too large. Slow-growth activist Eve Kahn from Get A Grip on Growth called Wednesday’s meeting “very informative,” but took issue with the fact that Napa Pipe consultants participated in the discussions, putting their ideas on the board along with the rest.
“I think the people who are paid by the developer shouldn’t be participants,” she said. “They should never be viewed as speaking for the community.”
Pope agreed, “Obviously, that shouldn’t be considered as unbiased input.”
Napa Pipe developer Keith Rogal responded that consultants made up only a small number of participants Wednesday; and that they never explicitly said what should be at Napa Pipe.
Rogal said Kahn’s group has only a couple of active members and that their regular appearance at meetings and in coverage of Napa Pipe skews perceptions about the project. “Their voices drown out a vastly larger number of people who don’t know to go to public hearings,” he said, “but they’re starting to speak up.”
The next Napa Pipe workshop will take place at 6 p.m. on April 8 at the Napa County Office of Education, 2121 Imola Ave., Napa.
Dedicated to “Neighborhood character and design,” the meeting will take ideas from Wednesday’s meeting and incorporate them into an overall design. Later meetings will delve into more technical topics, such as water and traffic.
People who missed Wednesday’s meeting can still e-mail their ideas to STRIPPI@co.napa.ca.us.
Design award
Meanwhile, Napa Pipe reached another milestone in the design process. The U.S. Green Building Council awarded the Napa Pipe plan a preliminary gold rating in its LEED (Leadership in Energy and Environmental Design) for Neighborhood Development program.
Though typically focused on buildings, the LEED certification program now ranks neighborhood developments in terms of smart growth, urbanism and green building. If Napa Pipe is approved in its current state or with slight modifications, the project will advance to the second stage of certification. After it is constructed, it will would qualify for the third and final stage of LEED for Neighborhood Development certification.
“We spent a quarter of a million dollars just on the associated studies to investigate, plan, and document how (these) best practices and innovations in sustainability would be integrated into our design,” Rogal said. “Now that they have been validated by the world’s leading green building rating organization, we would be ready to make them binding commitments, integrated into the proposed project’s approvals.”
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.
GET REAL wrote on Mar 20, 2009 6:38 AM:
Paddy wrote on Mar 20, 2009 7:04 AM:
nwnapan wrote on Mar 20, 2009 7:31 AM:
First - Did any of the critics (not withstanding those mentioned) of Napa Pipe who routinely post on this site attend this meeting to voice their concerns?
Second - Regarding the consultants input: Pope agreed, “Obviously, that shouldn’t be considered as unbiased input.” That's specious logic as none of the input is unbiased. You're either for the project or you not. Either way you're biased. Do you think Get a Grip came in with a bipartisan attitude? "
epicuria wrote on Mar 20, 2009 8:20 AM:
5th generation napan wrote on Mar 20, 2009 8:59 AM:
valleylocal wrote on Mar 20, 2009 9:09 AM:
Project707 wrote on Mar 20, 2009 9:12 AM:
There are more than a "few, just say no folks" that you only think of. Anyone that understands the increased traffic, stresses on the current infrastructure, and current downturn of the economy know that this is just a profit incentive project for Rogal and his investors. Even Rogal himself said that he has to build more units than Napa needs or wants to make a profit.
Until we stand up against the big money he's throwing at this project, this will ultimately go down as the largest error the city will ever agree to make and spend billions correcting itself later. "
Paddy wrote on Mar 20, 2009 9:24 AM:
I'm not always able to make these meetings. I hold 2 jobs, raising 4 children and find myself pretty busy. Is that ok with all of you? I don't think it excludes me from making comments about what a bad idea Napa Pipe is to our community. In fact, I have more of a stake with the next generation of home buyers looking to live in a nice town; not the congested quagmire proposed here. "
Paddy wrote on Mar 20, 2009 9:37 AM:
I really don't know where epi lives but when did Napa become boring? There is nothing going to be built on Napa Pipe that will change that. I've not seen, or heard, anything to bolster a solution for "boring" and I've seen the plans. Bored people are bored people. Nothing you can build will cure that.
There is no drawbridge today, but the fifedom being proposed will make a few very rich at the expense of the majority. Once this is a done deal they will be the ones pulling up the drawbridges to their new castles and revel in the mess left behind. "
That's Me wrote on Mar 20, 2009 10:03 AM:
I can see it now: a high-end gated neighborhood of seven-figure mansions with boat docks, a place most of us will never see, a "resort style living" development of second (third, whatever) homes for rich retirees and out of towners.
What a vision! It must be one that Get a Grip on Growth shares, because that is what they will get. The developer will make money either way. "
5th generation napan wrote on Mar 20, 2009 10:40 AM:
reader wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:15 AM:
Putting in rail transportation to Napa College, downtown Napa and up-valley, to start with, and a promise to dedicate funds to continue extension of rail service southward, does bring me closer to consideration. Road traffic is a primary concern. "
Paddy wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:58 AM:
Make no mistake about it, no matter what the starting price is for the units proposed at Napa Pipe on day 1 that price will escalate after the first year and continue to escalate until were exactly where it's perceived we are now.
This is not the right geographic location for this type of development and taxpayers are going to be saddled with far too much of the cost to schools, streets and infrastructure. "
LuvsTrains wrote on Mar 20, 2009 12:08 PM:
It is the folks not at meetings. These are the folks that leadership works for and hard at work they should be! I expect the folks behind the housing plan better make sure they get a move on for this need and get this going . We can't allow us to ignore what this valley needs to face, we have allowed for years in the valley to succeed in this industry, wine industry. Leadership has always accommodated their needs ....yet we cannot take care of the folks, that make this industry?
Don't shove units around town that really can't do the job of healthy lifestyle the government is reaching to.
Folks that work hard and say "what is that they are trying to build in the old site at Napa Pipe?" a project that can offer an opportunity for individual or family, who wish to live in new community with affordable housing option. Allowing family to reap benefits of mixed use lifestyle.
Were getting over our heads with Traffic, traffic is noticeable and everywhere folks, every city nationwide. But the voters of this County, refuse to assist. So, we build and can't stop it, you better hope design works.
Get grip folks should start assisting NCTPA folks, pressure the voters and wine industries to assist our regional problem were all responsible for. OUR TRAFFIC, not Napa pipes.
Does get a grip voice, have idea of life in a mixed use? Show me where in Napa is there a mixed use living that sets the example of why Napa Pipe's LEED ND project would not work here. the need to provide and improve lifestyles. "
5th generation napan wrote on Mar 20, 2009 12:32 PM:
Project707 wrote on Mar 20, 2009 12:39 PM:
reason-ator wrote on Mar 20, 2009 12:46 PM:
I also reject the idea we need to provide lifestyles, or improved lifestyles.
Can someone provide me with a reason we need to provide anybody anything ? Is it because the State insists we provide housing as THEY see fit ?
There are plenty of places to provide mixed-use areas. The Central Valley, along with other areas, has tons of land. We do not. And we don't owe anybody anything.
If someone says we do, please explain why. "
MP wrote on Mar 20, 2009 1:02 PM:
5th generation napan wrote on Mar 20, 2009 2:09 PM:
An I have a good idea of what housing prices are here, but I like Mr. Rogal to tell me what he is envisioning the housing prices to be for the 3500 or 2800 or 800 houses he is proposing.
Frankly lets face it, once that property is gone its gone. Napa does need to attract other industries here. You know why ABAG is mandating housing here, its because there are huge industry bases in Richmond, Oakland, East Bay, and other area's where people dont want to live. So, they get the work and the tax base, and make us supply the housing element. Maybe that's why so many commute from Napa. It was different when we commuted 20 min from here to Mare Is, Kaiser, Basalt, but now people are commuting 1 to 2 hours to the bay area.
So tell me again why its wrong to entise industry to our town and work here? Pollution, well Green and LEED also apply to industry as well. When Chevron followed the envrionmental requirements they actually made more money by becoming more energy efficeient and lowering their overhead cost. Grass roots industry being built today is nothing like what was built even 10 years ago. It can be a win win situation if as much energy is put into finding the right industry for Napa pipe location and not fighting about an unsustainable housing project. If Mr. Rogal presented X industry with good paying jobs as part of the project (like an anchor business for a mall) and provided support housing in addition I'd be more incline to support him. Right now its Him recouping investors money. "
manxkat wrote on Mar 20, 2009 3:48 PM:
Keith Rogal wrote on Mar 20, 2009 6:00 PM:
Once more for the record: we have committed, publicly, and for more than four years, to provide for a school site at Napa Pipe or adjacent to it, IF the School District and their experts wish us to do so. In addition, we will pay the very substantial fees which are calculated and required under State law, to address the financial impacts of a project such as ours, on the school system. Finally, we have never asserted that there should or should not be a school on site, nor prejudged how many school age children such a neighborhood would have. I have said, literally hundreds of times by now, that while the smaller housing types we've proposed will be targeted for single persons, younger families, and empty-nesters, there will undoubtedly be some school age children there. And I have said, hundreds of times, that we would be taking the direction of those in the County who have the professional training and specific responsibility to answer such questions: specifically, the Superintendent of Schools and his staff.
I agree with Dr. Ewing, and with you, if this is your position, that it is wonderful to have a school right in one's neighborhood. I'd like to think we could both acknowledge, however, that the decision as to where our School District wants their facilities, is not up to me or to you. "
That's Me wrote on Mar 20, 2009 6:06 PM:
2. Why was there no call for a school at Sheveland Ranch? And what problems have been created by the lack of said school? "
That's Me wrote on Mar 20, 2009 6:08 PM:
epicuria wrote on Mar 20, 2009 6:20 PM:
GET REAL wrote on Mar 20, 2009 6:22 PM:
manxkat wrote on Mar 20, 2009 7:00 PM:
American Canyon developers slithered through and failed to provide the adequate infrastructure for the homes they built and now Napans are paying for 30 years by bonded taxes on their homes and businesses for a $150 million high school.
It is obvious to me that you need to provide at least 6 schools at a likely cost of $400 million dollars.
Napa Pipe will house as many people and the combined population of St. Helena and Calistoga, each of which has a complete school district - you are offering nothing.
Just who do you think should pay the $400 million cost for the schools that your development will require? Napans?
Or, is it your plan that 2,000 children should crowd into the existing Napa schools and that their parents should create traffic jams taking them and picking them up from school every day?
Developers pay school impact fees which according to NVUSD staff is inadequate to provide the schools needed for new development. I am a member of the Measure M&G bond oversight committee and I see the costs of new and refurbished schools and the cost of land.
I can tell you clearly that Napans will not allow you to stuff us with the $400 million dollar cost of the schools your development will require. "
manxkat wrote on Mar 20, 2009 7:12 PM:
Just wondering if you could answer my 2 questions. "
rogers wrote on Mar 20, 2009 7:23 PM:
Perhaps in larger metropolitan cities where an extensive public transportation system already exists, but that is not the case in Napa and most of California. It appears that even in the poorest households of Napa, there are at least 2 cars. Workers have to get to work, whether it is across town or out of town.
I question the lofty visions of turning the current rails or river into some kind of new public transportation. Talk is cheap. Let's see who will be enlisted to jump on board here and provide this new public transportation and at what cost? And what will it do? Take people into downtown Napa a mere 2 miles down the road, and how often will it run?
Don't believe it! It will be expanded Vine transportation at added cost to all local taxpayers. And I bet there will still be at least 2 cars per household. The fact that you pile this many people on top of one another does NOT build a "sense of community".
At least apartment buildings can restrict the number of people living in a space. There would be no such limitation here. If three families decide to move in together for whatever reason, that's their choice, not their neighbors or management.
High density construction only adds to frustration when no one can find a place to park the car they require to drive to work. We have seen this already in so much of Napa's dense infill housing.
I would prefer that the City of Napa put this one on hold. "
cpslowine wrote on Mar 20, 2009 7:30 PM:
Also- I work for a large employer located in the Napa Airpark and I am one of the few that actually live in Napa. Most commute in from other areas because they feel they can get a better value and quality of life outside of Napa. I dislike commuting, so I pay a premium to live in Napa close to a job and industry that I love. Do I have a better quality of life? Not really, but I do have more time to sit at home with nothing to do because I only have a 10 minute ride to and from work. Napa is beautiful, has low pollution and a lack of tacky chain restaurants, but that does not provide a community like Napa Pipe. Napa Pipe could provide a progressive neighborhood that could improve my quality of life and that is why I support it. "
Keith Rogal wrote on Mar 20, 2009 8:02 PM:
The Carneros Inn development has 24 homes, not several hundred. No children have are resident at the Inn (although it's nice when they visit). As a result, no one would ever have imagined a school as being something relevant to the Inn development.
In addition, you assert, completely incorrectly, that we "didn't pay for any highway improvements to Highway 12". In fact, we paid in excess of $1 million in highway improvements.
You are clearly very interested in the project, and have many concerns. You also - and I mean no rudeness or disrespect in saying so - are simply not well-informed and keep passing judgment based on wrong information. I'd like to encourage you to take off the blogger mask for a while, and just make a reservation to come on one of my site tours. Or if the time isn't convenient for you, send us an email to talk@aHomeforNapans.com or phone us at 707-237-5300 with some times that might work for you, gather some other concerned friends and neighbors to pepper me in person with all the questions and suggestions you have. People generally find it useful to meet on site, but I'd be glad to meet at a local restaurant as well, like Boon Fly or Gillwoods, or somewhere up valley if you prefer. The issues and choices facing Napa around housing and traffic are complex and important, and worthy of substantive, open dialogue, not just 300 word back-and-forth volleys under assumed names in a little square text box on our computer screens. "
epicuria wrote on Mar 20, 2009 8:51 PM:
manxkat wrote on Mar 20, 2009 9:35 PM:
I have personally asked Mr. Rogal to his face about providing for schools and I have personally asked the foremost architecht in front of Mr. Rogal why there are no schools planned for Napa Pipe. There still is no satisfactory answer.
I and the people of Napa have 4 school bonds on our homes now for the next 30 years because AMCAN developers failed to provide schools and because NVUSD and Napa College failed to maintain the school facilities entrusted to them.
We will not pay for more neglect nor mismanagement of our schools nor poor planning nor developers sliding through the lack of planning.
We have multiple layers of elected and appointed school officials in this community all making 6 figure incomes and princly retirement packages - but they are somehow mute when it comes to Napa Pipe. They are somehow ignorant of the debacle of American Canyon - eventhough they have been in office over 10 years and in my estimation responsible for failing to require adequate school facilities or raise the consciousness of Napans adequately so that people could take charge.
Instead of meeting with Mr. Rogal a better idea would be to put the following question to a vote of the people of the NVUSD, "Should Napans have to buy schools for Mr. Rogal?" "
manxkat wrote on Mar 20, 2009 9:43 PM:
The Napa Pipe Development shall be required to enter into a Community Develpment Agreement (Mello-Roos) in which the developer and the homeowners pay for and provide all municipal services such as schools, police, fire, sewer, water, city services such that there is no financial impact for any reason on the existing Napa community. Require Napa Pipe to have private streets, a gated entry and a HOA that manage the project. If the property taxes collected are insufficient for municipal authorities then Napa Pipe and its property owners would agree to adjust its fees as necessary to continue a "no financial impact" on the local community.
I would agree with this! "
napat wrote on Mar 20, 2009 9:46 PM:
As it is, we have to schedule doctor visits to Kaiser Vallejo at certain times in order to avoid the horrible traffic tie ups. I hate to think of what would happen in a personal emergency trying to get to the hospital! Until AC builds access roads or CalTrans builds overpasses, this Napa Pipe Dream must not be built. Remember, folks, the Trancas underpass at Hwy. 29 took 40 years to be built.
Yes, there are a lot of us GGG members who do not go to these publicity meetings. The deceptive KNN mailings confused a lot of people.
Napa has historically been high priced as has St. Helena. Also, I'm curious about all those empty condos on California Blvd. across from Lucky. They either are or soon will be low priced housing. "
cpslowine wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:16 PM:
"Once more for the record: we have committed, publicly, and for more than four years, to provide for a school site at Napa Pipe or adjacent to it, IF the School District and their experts wish us to do so. In addition, we will pay the very substantial fees which are calculated and required under State law, to address the financial impacts of a project such as ours, on the school system. Finally, we have never asserted that there should or should not be a school on site, nor prejudged how many school age children such a neighborhood would have. I have said, literally hundreds of times by now, that while the smaller housing types we've proposed will be targeted for single persons, younger families, and empty-nesters, there will undoubtedly be some school age children there. And I have said, hundreds of times, that we would be taking the direction of those in the County who have the professional training and specific responsibility to answer such questions: specifically, the Superintendent of Schools and his staff."- Keith Rogal
Also- Won't property taxes cover municipal needs such as roads, fire and police? How does your home property cover these costs? Are Napa Pipe residents expected to not pay taxes? I think not. We all pay our part. "
Keith Rogal wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:20 PM:
cpslowine wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:21 PM:
Paddy wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:23 PM:
I've never imagined this but I would have to consider moving away from a town I now love and volunteer in. It will be too sad to watch what will happen to Napa if this development were to be approved. "
Paddy wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:31 PM:
That is not satisfactory. The vast majority of those funds will be coming out of the taxpayer's pockets and will increase with every school bond that is passed. So far, we've been very generous in voting for bond measures to improve our schools but that will change as Rogalville slams us with thousands of new students for which Rogalville did not BUILD schools.
Go beyond offering " to provide for a school site at Napa Pipe or adjacent to it". Actually pay for the construction of the schools themselves. Then pay for the infrastructure and pay for all road improvements required to move cars and bodies through that bottleneck. Then we'll listen to your proposal. "
NVR Brian Kennedy wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:31 PM:
Keith Rogal wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:38 PM:
When you are able to find the time to attend one of our site tours, I think you will be pleased to learn that such an approach is, in fact, is exactly what we are committed to doing. I agree whole-heartedly. As you suggest, Community Facilities Districts and Home Owner Associations are excellent financial tools which are often used to ensure new developments have reliable services, and pay their own way. And in fact, we committed several years ago to using those very tools, and this is something I speak of in all of our public presentations. I and our team would look forward to discussing these issues in more detail, in a public forum soon, with you and any other interested parties. "
cpslowine wrote on Mar 20, 2009 11:44 PM:
LuvsTrains wrote on Mar 21, 2009 12:56 AM:
Are we in the correct county? Try 600 or slightly more, not over 1,000 that's for sure.
Take half that count away, cause the parents of this school have proven they prefer to put there children in private/ chartered schools. "
reason-ator wrote on Mar 21, 2009 1:01 AM:
He knows I am against his project. I have continually criticized his business tactics as deceptive. I have also suggested that he and his group are here to reap profits and leave us with a mess. I have suggested that he is an excellent salesman, who will lead us into believing he is promising just about anything, when I believe he really wants to spend as little as possible while deceiving us into believing this project will do all except possibly cure cancer. I also have suggested much more uncomplimentary tactics and promises, and yet he comes here to defend himself.
I am impressed that he has come here to defend himself. I believe it is a calculated decision as part of process to manipulate and deceive in order to get this project approved with as little compromise as possible.
I STILL believe all of this to be true, and I doubt he will change my mind. I understand that this is part of a sales tactic, and yet I know this is unpleasant for him.
He and his partners made a gamble when they purchased this property, and now they are in a position that they have to do as much as possible in order to keep from losing money. It is not a pleasant part of this process, but I commend him for taking on this almost mandatory, but undesirable task. It can't be easy.
I am impressed. But I still am firmly convinced that his project will be a big mistake for everyone except those who will profit from it.
Thanks for subjecting yourself to this, sir. It can't be easy. "
Paddy wrote on Mar 21, 2009 8:59 AM:
"Your search for properties in All Napa County from $0 to $300,000 returned 122 results."
LuvsTrains - If the average family has 2.6 children than let's go with the original proposal of over 3000 units times 2 children.... 6000 children.
It's critical we look at worst case scenarios when designing instead of optimal case because in my experience optimal case rarely happens, worst case is often the norm. "
LuvsTrains wrote on Mar 21, 2009 11:18 AM:
Do count for AC schools, the 4, Napa Junction ES, Donaldson, Canyon Oak and AC Middle and then see population count.
yes we should seek worst case, but your numbers are way off! and not all folks in NP will have children and if this is a critical point in designing. You bet it should count.
Maybe I'll just point to a mixed use developement in Napa Junction. There are only 216 units with affordable housing on site. Only 30-40 children come out of this complex. Not the 561 your count would be. "
winewoman wrote on Mar 21, 2009 12:42 PM:
Would it be more cost effective for the city to buy those empty condos across from Lucky and make those "affordable housing"? Just asking.
I'm with Reason-ator, "I also reject the idea we need to provide lifestyles, or improved lifestyles."
What is affordable housing? Put a number on it. How is it determined? Who defines what affordable housing is - in number.
What about the people who already live here and who commute out of town to find work? Why aren't we courting industry so that current residents can work closer to home? Has anyone thought about the fact that the "affordable housing" demographic is transient? Waitstaff, housekeepers, groundskeepers, tasting room staff - they move around, are transient, don't stay in the same place for 20 years. Affordable/low income housing is transient.
I appreciate that Paddy and Reason-ator and Manxkat are asking questions. Wouldn't we be a bunch of fools to follow the herd - and not ask the hard questions? "
sotto voce wrote on Mar 21, 2009 3:37 PM:
NP will just deteriorate into a ghetto. Think Westwood, Collier and Shetler. There is even a Nuisance Ordinance in Napa promulgated for the late Ed Keith. Do we want another ordinance in honor of Rogal?
Do we ever learn? "
manxkat wrote on Mar 21, 2009 4:45 PM:
In the "comment guidelines" which we all are required where it says "What gets your comment deleted" it states "posting e-mail addresses". But, maybe, sotto voce your comments like mine have a history of political disagreement with the NVR staff.
Freedom of speech therefore is not free for all it is only free to those who agree with the politics of the NVR staff with the censor pen. "
NVR Brian Kennedy wrote on Mar 21, 2009 5:02 PM:
sotto voce wrote on Mar 21, 2009 7:56 PM:
http://74.205.120.199/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=251&Itemid=343
Pretty grim, don't you think?
So now that you know who your neighbors will be, would you want to live there? Retired folk, it is NOT Napa Yacht Club! You Young Turks, Rogal is not thinking about you and your skating rink! He is addressing DINKs - Double Income young professionals without kids.
Besides, Rogal has not addressed toxic waste on the site.
Don't be fooled! "
jasonjac wrote on Mar 22, 2009 6:17 PM:
LuvsTrains wrote on Mar 22, 2009 7:09 PM:
You are correct. Folks need to stop in to Carneros Inn and see for themselves. The uniqueness of the Inn and cottages is absolutely worth the tour. My children enjoyed the visit. The fact that the Napa Valley landscape blends so well with this project, it is proof for me that I can count on it that there is hope for 1025 Kaiser Road.
Definitely, a Touch of Class!
The Market stole my visits from Starbucks! "
winewoman wrote on Mar 22, 2009 9:31 PM:
epicuria wrote on Mar 22, 2009 9:52 PM:
A good part of the world was built by developers who risked capital to realize their market objectives, and make our environment both more appealing and more useful. But somehow here in Napa the ~d~ word is anathema. The Good Old Boys who pine for the Good Old Days are only interested in throwing wrenches into the workings of the evaluation system. They have nothing positive to contribute. Just more and more kvetching. Fortunately, as the old saying goes, the dog barks, but the caravan moves on "
epicuria wrote on Mar 23, 2009 8:35 AM:
winewoman wrote on Mar 23, 2009 8:49 AM:
Don't blame the "good old boys" for throwing wrenches in the workings - I think you'll find the people asking questions here are highly educated, worldly and have probably seen these types of projects come and go before. "
5th generation napan wrote on Mar 23, 2009 8:50 AM:
winewoman wrote on Mar 23, 2009 12:46 PM:
epicuria wrote on Mar 23, 2009 6:27 PM:
For those with an open mind, click through on some of the links on this list: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Examples_of_New_Urbanism .
Though most of the projects described are larger in scope they share a philosophy of human habitat that, ironically, embraces the values of some of NP's critics. "
Paddy wrote on Mar 23, 2009 9:38 PM:
If you want to live in a community that celebrates 3000 home develepments and the horrific smog, traffic and crime that accompanies it move to Los Angeles, San Bernadino, Riverside and Orange Counties. They'd LOVE to have you and you'd love their spirit. "
Keith Rogal wrote on Mar 24, 2009 12:08 AM:
As to the issue of habitat and species preservation, which Paddy raises - Paddy and I share that goal. There is absolutely no way to preserve and protect open space and wildlife if we do not choose to reuse long-ago paved and industrialized properties like Napa Pipe, and instead continue low-density of the type Paddy describes (eg San Bernadino, or for that matter, Fairfield, or many neighborhoods much closer). "
5th generation napan wrote on Mar 24, 2009 8:18 AM:
sotto voce wrote on Mar 24, 2009 1:44 PM:
I called the number you listed, but the message said there were no site tours currently planned.
So when is the next one? "
5th generation napan wrote on Mar 24, 2009 2:30 PM:
winewoman wrote on Mar 24, 2009 3:49 PM:
Keith Rogal wrote on Mar 25, 2009 10:54 AM:
katiem wrote on Mar 25, 2009 3:26 PM:
geo wrote on Mar 26, 2009 1:21 PM:
Paddy wrote on Mar 27, 2009 7:38 AM:
I'm sure over time they will have to add razor wire as projects like Napa Pipe are built in order to keep out the gangs and punks such developments typically attract. Mr. Rogal won't want to spoil Carneros Lodge's attraction (whatever that might be) with the project he intends to slam down the city of Napa's throat. "