City, county reach accord on battling urban sprawl By KEVIN COURTNEY Register Staff Writer The Napa City Council and the county Board of Supervisors unanimously approved a plan Tuesday to protect agriculture and fight urban sprawl by concentrating future housing within the city limits. Putting aside years of discord, the two boards said they could see a future where the city and county have a common policy for housing, tourism, shared revenues and industrial growth at the airport. There were hugs and handshakes after council members and supervisors approved the agreement that is portrayed as ushering in a new era of cooperation between parties that had often been at odds. But there is a cloud over this golden age. Before it becomes a reality, the county must also sign a similar agreement with the American Canyon City Council, which is slowly reviewing the deal. "It appears they'll get around to it," predicted Councilman Harry Martin, who said he had been in conversation with his American Canyon counterparts. If American Canyon balks, that could scuttle the county's new memorandum of understanding with the city of Napa. The county needs both Napa and American Canyon to agree to take much of the county's share of the region's assigned affordable housing in order to win state approval of its housing plan. Because it lacks a certified housing plan, the county is being sued by lawyers who threaten to shut down development in the unincorporated areas until the county makes a stronger effort to house people who work here. Brad Wagenknecht, chairman of the Board of Supervisors, said the county would likely still try to salvage elements of the deal with Napa if negotiations with American Canyon failed. Under the agreement, Napa would take 664 housing units -- 80 percent of them low and moderate income -- now assigned by regional planners to the county. American Canyon is being asked to take 394 homes. Napa would not necessarily grow any faster, but it would have to verify that it had an adequate amount of land properly zoned to handle this added housing allocation. Initially, the county would give Napa $1 million for parks, roads and sidewalks and agree to commit $4 million in land and cash for a parking garage next to the county's Administration Building. Starting in July 2006, Napa would receive an annual payment for each unit of housing built inside the city for which the county got state credit. This would help defray the costs of city services. The county would also make the city an equal voice in planning industrial development around the airport so that it does not compete with tourism plans for downtown Napa. Both the board and the council had to make adjustments to win unanimous votes from their members. Because Martin insisted that any reference to a proposal for a new redevelopment project on Soscol Avenue be deleted, the council agreed to take this touchy subject up at another time. Supervisors agreed to defer discussion of a request by the Napa County Grape Growers Association and the Napa County Farm Bureau that state regulators be asked to honor the county's agricultural policies when assigning future housing quotas. While saying he agreed with the spirit of this request, Supervisor Bill Dodd said he didn't want to put any wording into the agreement that would raise red flags with state officials. The city got county assurance that it would pay whatever the city pays to maintain the new garage. Councilman Dave Crawford had wanted the county to commit to begin making payments immediately for any housing built between now and 2006 for which the county got state credit. He backed off after county officials said the city was getting $5 million worth of county contributions for parks, roads, streets and a garage for housing that would likely be built over the next three years even if there were no housing deal. Kevin Courtney can be reached at 256-2217 or at kcourtney@napanews.com