{ "@context": "http:\/\/schema.org", "@type": "Article", "image": "https:\/\/sandiegouniontribune.noticiases.info\/wp-content\/s\/migration\/2020\/11\/13\/0000016a-fb75-d314-affb-fbf5b3260000.jpg?w=150&strip=all", "headline": "County needs to reassess wildfire risk of proposed Otay Ranch project, state AG says", "datePublished": "2020-11-12 20:00:20", "author": { "@type": "Person", "workLocation": { "@type": "Place" }, "Point": { "@type": "Point", "Type": "Journalist" }, "sameAs": [ "https:\/\/sandiegouniontribune.noticiases.info\/author\/z_temp\/" ], "name": "Migration Temp" } } Skip to content
The view from Proctor Valley Road southwest of Jamul and northeast of Chula Vista on May 14, 2019. The stretch of land is the location of a proposed 1,119-home development known as Otay Ranch Village. The area has burned about once every 18 months on average over the last century and was the scorched by the Harris Fire in 2007, one of California's most destructive wildfires ever recorded.
Joshua Emerson Smith/The San Diego Union-Tribune
The view from Proctor Valley Road southwest of Jamul and northeast of Chula Vista on May 14, 2019. The stretch of land is the location of a proposed 1,119-home development known as Otay Ranch Village. The area has burned about once every 18 months on average over the last century and was the scorched by the Harris Fire in 2007, one of California’s most destructive wildfires ever recorded.
Author
UPDATED:

California Attorney General Xavier Becerra is asking the San Diego County Board of Supervisors to hold off on a large South County development because of wildfire concerns.

In a letter submitted to the county Thursday, Becerra cautioned the supervisors against approving the Otay Ranch project before adequately addressing the increased risk of fires that the project would create.

“As we come out the other side of yet another destructive wildfire season, it has never been more important for local governments to carefully review and consider the risks associated with approving new developments in fire-prone areas,” Becerra wrote in a statement.

The Board of Supervisors is scheduled to vote on the project on Nov. 18.

Specifically, Becerra’s letter points out that this is just one of a number of large new developments within the same area and that the county failed to assess the cumulative impact on fire risk posed by placing multiple developments in “this very high fire hazard severity zone.”

In June, the Board of Supervisors voted 4-1, over the objections of local environmental groups, to approve a 1,226-home and development in Otay Ranch known as Village 14. The San Diego chapter of the Sierra Club, the Endangered Habitats League and the San Diego-based Climate Action Campaign promised to challenge the project in court.

Supervisor Nathan Fletcher was the only “no” vote on that project.

This current project, known as Village 13, proposes 1,938 residential units, 40,000 square feet of commercial space, a 200-room resort, parks and a fire station on underdeveloped land.

The location is east of State Route 125, west of State Route 94, about a quarter-mile east of Chula Vista and 12 miles southwest of Jamul. This is in the vicinity of the Village 14 project approved back in June.

Becerra wrote this letter in his capacity as Attorney General because that position oversees and enforces the California Environmental Quality Act, more commonly known as CEQA.

According to a press release, Becerra frequently files public “comment letters” that alert cities and counties of potential CEQA violations.

It is worth noting that Becerra’s comment letter doesn’t demand or require that the county take a certain course of action. Instead, it simply asks.

“We appreciate your consideration of our comments and respectfully request that you refrain from certifying the FEIR (final environmental impact report) and approving the project until the FEIR is revised accordingly,” Becerra wrote.

In the letter, Becerra also questioned the county’s reasoning for not coming up with a robust evacuation plan.

“The county essentially responds that a project — or community-specific evacuation plan — would be useless for two main reasons: (1) because fire evacuations are managed by law enforcement and fire agencies that rely on their own plans, and (2) because the evacuation events are too fluid and variable to allow for pre-emergency planning,” the letter states.

“This response misses the point,” the letter continues. “We are not asking the county to interfere with law enforcement or to prepare for every possible scenario. Rather, we are asking the county to analyze, with adequate detail, whether the project and its surrounding residents can be evacuated safely.”

Becerra noted that the current proposal is an improvement on a previous version, saying that the county has taken steps to address some of the Attorney General’s concerns.

When asked to respond to Becerra’s letter and wildfire risk concerns, county spokesman Michael Workman referred questions to the individual supervisors.

Steve Schimidt, Supervisor Diane Jacob’s spokesman, declined to comment and referred questions to either board Chairman Greg Cox or Workman.

“On the advice of county lawyers, supervisors typically don’t weigh in on land-use issues coming to the board,” Schimidt wrote. “If you haven’t already, you might want to connect with Mike Workman with county communications or the chair of the board Greg Cox.”

Supervisor Jim Desmond, through his spokesman Darren Gretler, declined to comment.

Cox did not immediately respond to requests for comment. Neither did Nora Vargas, who won the election to replace Cox on the board of supervisors.

In California, 2020 has been a record year for wildfires.

More than 4 million acres have already been burned, which is more than twice the previous record for burned land in a single year. Tens of thousands of firefighters have responded to deadly wildfires throughout the state, including the Valley Fire that burned 16,390 acres and destroyed 30 homes in East County.

The Attorney General is concerned about building in fire-prone rural areas because “numerous studies have identified that human wildlife ignition is directly tied to population growth and is an inescapable result of any development in the Wildland-Urban Interface.”

Originally Published:

RevContent Feed

Events