Napa Valley Register :: American Canyon Eagle :: St. Helena Star :: Weekly Calistogan :: Real Estate :: Classifieds
 QUICK LINKS
 MARKETPLACE
  Jobs
  Autos
 SERVICES

Opinion > Commentary

UDP: A view from View Road
Monday, July 06, 2009

I once again would like to state my position on the Urban Design Plan. It appears that some things are being merely reconsidered while others have been completely ignored or off the table.

I applaud the small group of dedicated people who have laid the blueprint for our town’s future. However, I believe that in some areas they need to re-evaluate their vision of what that should be. When Donna Dill was on the council we had a voice who understood our concerns about the high density zoning that has existed along our back fences on View Road since the 1950s when our town was quite different in its layout. At that time there was little talk of rezoning because development was not a threat.

In the past, property owner Dana Hemberger has proposed to build high density housing if we neighbors did not agree to allow him to combine the commercial zoning and residential zoning that exists in this area. The Urban Design Plan states that “development must reflect a low intensity pattern, and must be complimentary to the neighborhood”, but “high density residential” does not complement our neighborhood.

This is a very sensitive area. We have a quiet neighborhood that is enjoyed by many residents and pedestrians, and it should have a more appropriate transition. The last project proposed, with two story, high-density structures, would have cost most of the sunlight in our yards. That is to me a major impact on the quality of life here and is most concerning.

Please reconsider this zoning to medium or low density residential so that projects that are considered here are appropriate to the neighborhood.

Additionally, I am pleased that roundabouts are being reconsidered.

These (roundabouts) could possibly work at some intersections, but not at the Silverado Trail intersection. A roundabout would keep traffic moving exactly where we want it to stop. There are far fewer accidents now that we have a 4-way stop in place, and traffic is seldom backed up, which is why a roundabout is usually considered in the first place. To say this intersection as it stands “is hazardous” is a misnomer.

People do not park “along the highway.” They park on Lake Street and cross the street from there. Cars stop. Painting crosswalks is all that truly needs to be done to accommodate pedestrians. We have a world class hiking area here which, as you know, took years to develop. A roundabout intersection would completely disrupt the quiet, rural character of the trailhead forever and there would be no going back.

The draft (UDP) states that “this gateway should accommodate bicycle/pedestrian trails which are inviting and user friendly.”

It also states, “This gateway should serve to calm and slow traffic as it enters the Resort Character Area and should easily guide the by-pass traveler to avoid the town center and to move on through the intersection. Traffic calming techniques should be employed to slow traffic.”  Roundabouts generally increase the speed of traffic at an intersection. If there were no need for pedestrians to cross perhaps a roundabout might make sense.

Bicyclists approaching a roundabout intersection would be compelled to enter a swiftly moving traffic pattern, where cars would quickly exiting the intersection in their path, putting cyclists at greater risk than if cars were required to come to a complete stop. Please remember also that we have many tourist cyclists on our roads and streets that are visiting the area for the first time and need the benefit of a slower, not faster, traffic pattern in and around town. 

The prudent and common sense course is to save the money for something that is truly needed, especially in these economic times. The Silverado Trail intersection, with painted crosswalks added, would be maintenance free, quiet and safe; hardly “hazardous,” while at the same time would meet the needs of all passing through it.

 Calistoga is at a crossroads as we move towards the future, so I hope that we carefully consider all voices and take our time to be sure that we get the plan right the first time.

Print this story   |   Email this story | Browse today's articles in this category: | Next

No comments posted.


Log in to join the conversation
*Member ID:
*Password:
Remember login?
(requires cookies)
  Forgot Your Password?
 
Comment guidelines

All comments will be screened and may take several hours to be posted.
• Keep comments clear, concise and focused on the topic in the story.
• Comments exceeding 300 words will not be posted.
• Refrain from personal attacks, degrading comments or remarks that do not add to a constructive dialogue.
• Comments implying suspects in crime-related stories are guilty before they have been proven so in a court of law will be deleted.
• Do not post e-mail addresses or links except for pages on WeeklyCalistogan.com or government Web sites.
• Comments will not be edited - they will be approved or declined.
• Comments may be used in the print edition of the newspaper.
• If you feel a posted comment has violated our guidelines, please contact dross@napanews.com or bkennedy@napanews.com
For further information on the comment guidelines, click here.
Copyright © 2010 Lee Enterprises