Napa, CA – A proposed luxury glamping resort in Napa has hit a significant roadblock after the City Council narrowly voted against the plan following an intense, five-hour debate that stretched into the early hours of the morning. The proposal, for a 12½-acre site along Milliken Creek near Silverado Trail, was pitched by property owner Parry Mead-Murray in partnership with AutoCamp, a company known for its upscale outdoor lodging experiences. The resort would have featured up to 100 high-end camping trailers, yurts, and tents, along with five permanent buildings, trails, and recreational areas.
Despite a last-minute attempt to scale back the project in response to concerns, the City Council ultimately voted 2-3 against approval. Mayor Scott Sedgley and Councilmember Bernie Narvaez expressed their support for the development, which they viewed as an economic boon for Napa, predicting it would bring significant tax revenue and attract a new wave of tourism. However, the majority of the council was not swayed by these arguments.
Councilmembers Mary Luros, Beth Painter, and Chris DeNatale raised substantial concerns about the project, particularly around zoning, environmental impacts, and infrastructure strain. Their opposition was rooted in fears that the resort, operating as a commercial business in a residential zone, would set a dangerous precedent. These concerns were amplified by the potential risks posed by wildfire hazards, increased traffic congestion, and the project’s proximity to flood-prone areas.
Luros, while acknowledging the project’s economic potential, questioned whether it would fit within the city’s existing zoning regulations. Napa’s municipal code does not currently account for glamping resorts, and Luros argued that such an intense commercial venture might be more akin to a hotel, which would not be allowed in a low-density residential area. “How commercial is the operation? How intense is the use?” Luros asked during the meeting. “Do we want to set a precedent of allowing intense commercial uses within single-family residential areas?”
In addition to zoning issues, concerns over traffic were highlighted by several council members, with particular focus on Silverado Trail, a popular yet narrow route. Some feared the influx of visitors to the resort would exacerbate existing congestion, especially without necessary road improvements. As a response, the developers proposed adding a northbound left-turn lane to ease traffic flow, but this compromise failed to gain traction with the council.
Another significant point of contention was the fire risk in the area, a concern underscored by Napa’s history of devastating wildfires. Councilmember Painter raised doubts about whether the glamping units could be safely situated in a region vulnerable to wildfires. Despite AutoCamp’s plans to relocate units in response to changing conditions, Painter expressed skepticism about the project’s safety measures. “We need to ensure that any non-residential use is compatible with the surrounding residential area,” Painter said. She suggested that the resort might need to scale back further, potentially eliminating wood-burning fires to reduce the fire risk.
While supporters of the project argued that Napa could benefit from this new form of tourism, which combines outdoor experiences with luxury accommodations, the council ultimately concluded that the potential benefits did not outweigh the concerns raised. The failure to approve the scaled-down version of the plan means the future of The Grange Campground remains uncertain for now.
The debate over the luxury glamping resort underscores a larger conversation in Napa about how to balance the region’s world-renowned appeal as a wine country destination with the needs and desires of its residents. While the project’s proponents see it as a way to revitalize local tourism, the opposition has emphasized the importance of maintaining the area’s residential character and ensuring any new development aligns with the city’s long-term vision for sustainable growth.
As the council moves forward, it is clear that the tension between economic development and residential preservation will continue to shape the future of Napa’s evolving landscape.