Napa County supervisors deny appeal of revised Walt Ranch vineyard climate plan

The Napa County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday took the first step toward denying an appeal against recent court-ordered adjustments to the climate action plan for the Walt Ranch vineyard project.

The 3-2 vote, with Diane Dillon and Brad Wagenknecht opposed, comes about five years after the board originally certified the environmental impact report for the project on the 2,300-acre property between Napa and Lake Berryessa. That touched off legal battles in county and state courts, which earlier this year kicked the project’s greenhouse gas mitigation plan back to the county to fix how the removal of 14,281 trees would be offset.

Changes were approved administratively in September, and on Oct. 1 the Center for Biological Diversity appealed that decision.

The county’s EIR, which was certified in December 2016 and triggered the lawsuits, called for no less than 248 acres of oak woodland habitat to be permanently set aside on the property, resulting in an estimated offset of 27,528 million tons of carbon dioxide–equivalent emissions.

The revision approved by county staff this past September involved setting aside 124 acres on slopes no steeper than 30% for 33,580 native trees, including the planting of 17,000 trees. That would be in addition to setting aside 525 other acres on the property for other protected species.

Ahead of the Tuesday hearing, the project proponents proposed to focus the planting in the roughly 1,000 acres of the property burned in the 2017 Atlas and 2020 Hennessey wildfires. Surveys of trees on the property in May and November found that of the 236,203 trees, one-quarter in the Atlas burn area and half those in the Hennessey footprint wouldn’t survive, or 96,512 trees, according to Ascent Environmental.

The revision also includes a conservation easement of at least 1,000 acres, up 47% from what was in the 2016 plan. Much of those easements would be contiguous and for oak woodlands.

Based on objections raised in the appeal, the plan was updated to follow the state standard for verifying 80% survival of planted trees after seven years. That would up the initial planting of trees by nearly 600.

Supervisor Ryan Gregory said the replanting plan could be a model for other Napa County development projects.

“This is an opportunity to try out a planting program at a very large scale, with lots of resources behind it,” Gregory said. “And I would prefer to replant trees lost from development in Napa County, as opposed to conserving existing trees. So if this develops a path for doing that more and more in the future, I think that would be a great outcome.”

Dillon said she couldn’t support the denial of the appeal.

“My biggest concern here is that we don't have seven years. We don't have 20 years. We don't have 30 years. We have to do things now,” she said just before the vote. “My preference would be to put aside the conservation land and do the retreeing, replanting.”

The Center for Biological Diversity wasn’t happy with the revised plan.

“The supervisors could’ve and should’ve required a lot more from Walt Ranch developers. Instead, the community will have to suffer from the harmful effects of losing thousands of trees for new vineyards,” said Ross Middlemiss, an attorney at the Center for Biological Diversity, in an email statement. “It didn’t have to be this way. This destructive method of developing Napa is clearly unsustainable.”

The supervisors are set to vote on the appeal denial and the revised plan on Feb. 8, 2022.

The center is reviewing its options after the Tuesday vote. Middlemiss told the Business Journal that the Napa County Superior Court must still find that updated addendum of the EIR that includes the revised mitigation measures, complies with the 1st Court of Appeals decision last year on that plan.

Jeff Quackenbush covers wine, construction and real estate. Before the Business Journal, he wrote for Bay City News Service in San Francisco. He has a degree from Walla Walla University. Reach him at jquackenbush@busjrnl.com or 707-521-4256.

—

Correction, Dec. 20, 2021: Brad Wagenknecht joined Diane Dillon in dissenting.

Update, Dec. 15, 2021: The revision also includes a conservation easement of at least 1,000 acres, up 47% from what was in the 2016 plan. Much of those easements would be contiguous and for oak woodlands.