Napa Pipe Development Moves Forward

Napa County will seek further negotiation with City of Napa officials on the long-pondered development proposal. The Napa Pipe public hearing is set to resume Feb. 5, with a follow-up meeting in May.

Napa County's highest governing board gave its blessing to an environmental document assessing the proposed Napa Pipe development, moving the project forward after a five-hour public hearing at the Napa Valley Opera House Monday.

The Napa County Board of Supervisors delayed a vote on other decisions that would usher the project forward, to allow time for further talk with the city on issues such as how police and fire services would be provided, water and possible annexation of the land into the city.

Before the supervisors voted, they fielded comments from about 60 Napa County residents urging approval of the project or voicing concerns about its potential impacts.

It was the board's first public look at the proposed development, although the project has gone through studies, hearings and workshops since it was originally proposed in 2007.

Napa Redevelopment Partners, helmed by Carneros Inn developer Keith Rogal, is asking to build 700 to 945 homes on an industrial area south of Napa and to the east of the Napa River. The plan includes a school, hotel, retail space and most recently, a Costco.

The supervisors are the final gatekeepers to the project's approval, although Napa city officials hold a hand in moving it forward. The proposal calls for the city to provide water and other services for the project. There have been suggestions that the land could ultimately be annexed into the city.

City and county officials have reached a stalemate in their conversations, however, with city officials questioning the details of its proposed role.

Meanwhile, the developers are tiring, saying they have strived to adapt the project after input from citizens and government officials along the five-year process.

"We have reached the point at which we need to move forward with the development ... or take no for an answer and move on," said developer Keith Rogal.

Some commenters supported the idea of bringing Costco Napa Pipe, saving them trips and keeping sales tax dollars at home. Others who spoke vied for more affordable housing.

Project opponents feared Napa Pipe would have negative impacts on traffic, water and increase flood risk. Here are some of the comments aired before the board:

  • Napa resident Janet Mendelsohn said Napa Pipe is a poor fit for Napa's entryway: "I see you as our last hope for preserving what so many people love about this valley," she told the supervisors.
  • Carol Caie, who moved to Napa two years ago, said Napa Pipe would be an improvement to the existing industrial landscape. "It's an eyesore, and I don't understand how it can be left that way for so long when the rest of the valley is so absolutely beautiful," she said.
  • Longtime Napa land-use activist Ginny Simms said approving the project would be like giving the developer a "blank check." Despite sacrifices the county would make in higher traffic, she worries it would not result in housing for the county's low and very low income residents. "The words are wandering and not exactly a guarantee, she said of developer promises.
  • Longtime Napa resident Ralph Price urged the supervisors to "put shovels in the ground" after the many years the project has been under consideration, saying Napa Pipe will bring financial stability for the county, use less water than the current industrial site and decrease traffic.

County supervisors expressed support for the general idea of the project, but had a few concerns about some of its details.

One of the Napa Pipe's biggest stumbling blocks has been how it would get the water needed for all the proposed site's uses.

Supervisor Keith Caldwell said the county has a long-standing policy not to use groundwater for urban projects. The current proposal includes a clause that would allow it to tap groundwater in certain drought conditions.

Supervisor Mark Luce said he supports an alternate proposal that would rezone 20 acres of the land for development instead. Developers said they wouldn't pursue the project if that was the option the board selected.

In addition to approving the environmental document Monday, supervisors scheduled another hearing for Feb. 5, when staff will come back with answers to some of their questions.

They also set a future meeting for May 14. This will allow 120 days to iron out further negotiations between the city, county and the developer before supervisors consider how they will rezone the property for development.


  • County Supervisors Approve Napa Pipe Environmental Impact Report 
  • Napa Pipe: Yes or No?
  • Michael Haley: Napa Pipe Comment for January 14 meeting of the Board of Supervisors
  • What Really Happened at the Napa Pipe Meeting?
  • Letter: "Napa Pipe is Bad for Students"
  • County Holds Hearings on Napa Pipe
  • Comment Period Extended on Napa Pipe Report
  • Luce “Happy" to Keep Napa Pipe Industrial
  • New Napa Pipe Hearings Set
  • Where Do You Stand on Napa Pipe?
  • How Big Should Napa Pipe Be?
  • Was Law Broken at Napa Pipe Meeting?
  • Many Voices Expected at Napa Pipe Hearing
  • Napa Pipe Vote Postponed
  • Napa Pipe Plan Divides County Planners
  • Napa Pipe Hearings Canceled as Developers Revise Proposal
  • Napa Pipe Returns to Planning Commission

Stay Patched in! Follow Napa Valley Patch on Twitter | Like Napa Valley Patch on Facebook | Sign up for the daily email with links to the latest news | Got something to say? Start a blog and share your views.

Louisa Hufstader (Editor) January 15, 2013 at 05:58 PM
Belle, you can read the environment impact report on the countyofnapa.org website - search for "Napa Pipe DEIR full document." I am trying to add the pdf to this article, but it's 19 megabytes and loading very slowly.
MICHAEL P WILSON "Independent Kid" January 15, 2013 at 06:16 PM
We should stop calling it Napa Pipe. What will the new name of the project be?
Belle (Orchid Lady) January 15, 2013 at 06:25 PM
OK thanks Louisa!
Belle (Orchid Lady) January 15, 2013 at 06:28 PM
Louisa, I noticed my comment isn't showing up...did I perhaps misplace it?
Louisa Hufstader (Editor) January 15, 2013 at 06:56 PM
Belle - I'm seeing other observations about missing comments on Patch, but I am not sitting on anything unapproved right now. Michael - The owners are calling it Napa Pipe on Facebook and A Home for Napans online: https://www.facebook.com/NapaPipe, http://ahomefornapans.com/
Belle (Orchid Lady) January 15, 2013 at 07:14 PM
I may have put it on the letter from the Green Party, but you answered me (originally) on this thread. Oh, well! Time to get my day started. Maybe I will post a flyer asking if anyone has seen any "comments" in the Lost and Found....>smiles<.
Belle (Orchid Lady) January 15, 2013 at 07:22 PM
Sorry, if I posted the same thing several times, my tablet is acting up again....:/
Keri Brenner (Editor) January 16, 2013 at 12:25 AM
Nice job on this story, Alisha! Very well done.....kudos!
Darcelle Pollastrini January 16, 2013 at 01:58 AM
I like Costco Commons
Louisa Hufstader (Editor) January 16, 2013 at 02:15 AM
Agreed. Welcome to Patch, Alisha. We are happy to have you join us.
MICHAEL P WILSON "Independent Kid" January 16, 2013 at 04:26 AM
Belle Kick that POS out the window
Mpineda January 16, 2013 at 08:25 PM
We need a Costco! that is it.
Mpineda January 16, 2013 at 08:25 PM
We need a Costco! that is it.
SF49ers January 17, 2013 at 04:06 AM
how about a nice brew-pub
Alisha Wyman January 24, 2013 at 04:53 AM
Thank you very much! I'm happy to be a part.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something