The :UR combination district classification is intended to identify those properties inside the sphere of influence of a city as adopted by LAFCOM and a city-adopted urban limit, such as the city of Napa's RUL, whose continued or future urbanization, subject to Section 18.100.030, is contingent upon annexation to the city, as indicated in Napa County general plan policies.

(Ord. 1082 § 3, 1995: Ord. 883 § 1 (part), 1988: Ord. 762 § 1 (part), 1984: prior code § 12398)

In :UR districts the following uses are allowed:

A.

Any use allowed without a use permit in the principal zoning district with which the :UR district is combined other than a telecommunication facility;

B.

Residential care facilities that require the issuance of a use permit prior to commencing operations and all child day care centers shall be permitted upon the granting of a use permit if the principal zoning district with which the :UR zoning district is combined authorizes the establishment of a child day care center or residential care facility, providing a use permit is first secured;

C.

Except as otherwise provided in subsection (A) or (B) of this section, or in Section 18.100.030, additional development shall not be permitted. In all such cases, annexation to an incorporated city shall be required.

(Ord. 1097 § 48, 1996; Ord. 943 § 2, 1990: Ord. 883 § 1 (part), 1988: Ord. 842 § 1, 1987: Ord. 816 § 17, 1986: Ord. 762 § 1 (part), 1984: prior code § 12398.1)

A.

Notwithstanding subsection (C) of Section 18.100.020, nonresidential development in the county shall be permitted even though the parcel is included within the :UR zoning district in the following circumstances:

1.

In the case of development which requires the issuance of a use permit, if the approving officer or body, in addition to making the findings required by Section 18.124.070, finds that:

a.

The proposed development is consistent with the general plan and zoning policies of the city that would be applicable were the same development proposed to be located within the city; and

b.

A reasonable annexation request has been made and denied within one year of the use permit application being filed; and

c.

No reasonable use of the property exists should the uses that require the issuance of a use permit in the primary zone continue to be prohibited.

2.

(Reserved.)

3.

In the case of telecommunication facilities, if the commission has made all the findings required under Section 18.124.070 and subsection (A)(1)(a) and (b) of Section 18.100.030 and has issued a use permit for the proposed facility.

B.

For purposes of subsection (A) of this section, a reasonable annexation request shall be deemed to have been made if a complete application to annex the property has been filed with LAFCO or the city and rejected by either entity within one year prior to the date of the application. However, in such a case the development standards imposed as a condition of the permit shall be substantially the same as those required by the city for similar types of development.

C.

No development application shall be deemed complete and accepted for filing by the county until the applicant has provided evidence to the county that an informational copy of the same application has been filed with the city and the city has determined that were the application for a similar development in the city, the application would be considered complete.

D.

If, within sixty days of an application for a use permit being deemed complete by the county and accepted for filing, the city requests that conditions be attached to the issuance of the use permit, the county will ensure that conditions substantially similar to those recommended by the city are imposed unless the county standards are more restrictive than the conditions recommended by the city.

(Ord. 1097 § 49, 1996: Ord. 1082 § 4, 1995: Ord. 916 § 4, 1989: Ord. 883 § 1 (part), 1988: prior code § 12398.2)

(Ord. No. 1370, § 30, 3-20-2012)

A.

No parcel located partially or entirely within the unincorporated area of the county, contiguous to a city limit, and not within the adopted sphere of influence of a city, shall be adjusted into a parcel located within the city absent annexation.

B.

No parcel that is currently entirely within the unincorporated area of the county shall be adjusted in such a manner so that the reconfigured parcel is partly in the unincorporated area of the county and partly in a city or another county.

(Ord. 1082 § 5, 1995)