Supervisors deny Lilac Hills Ranch

With a divided vote, the San Diego County board of supervisors denied the Lilac Hills Ranch project June 24.

A 4-1 vote, with Jim Desmond opposed, denied the general plan amendment, specific plan, rezone, tentative parcel maps, Major Use Permit and site plan for the proposed Lilac Hills Ranch development. The four supervisors who voted for denial cited a combination of fire risk and deviation from the county's general plan.

"This project is too intense and too dangerous," Supervisor Dianne Jacob said.

Desmond preferred to refer the project back to staff so that vegetation clearing issues could be resolved.

"We want to protect ourselves from wildfires," he said.

Accretive Investments had filed a request to initiate general plan amendment proceedings in November 2009. The county supervisors were in the process of updating the general plan, and when the update was approved in August 2011, the Lilac Hills Ranch land was not changed so the allowed density remained at 110 dwelling units.

Property owners whose zoning requests were denied during the general plan update were informed about the possibility of seeking a subsequent general plan amendment, and Accretive submitted a general plan amendment application in April 2012.

In September 2015, the county's planning commission voted 4-3 to recommend with conditions the approval of the general plan amendment, specific plan, rezone, tentative map, Major Use Permit, and habitat loss plan for 608 acres on the Bonsall/Valley Center/Escondido border.

The project proposed 1,746 residences consisting of 903 single-family detached homes, 164 single-family attached homes, 211 mixed-use residential units, and 468 age-restricted dwellings within a neighborhood designated for senior citizens along with 90,000 square feet of commercial office space, a 50-room country inn, a 200-bed group care facility, a recycling facility, a water reclamation facility, a new fire station if not a remodel of the California Department of Forestry and Fire Protection's existing Miller Station, a site for a K-8 elementary school, 25.6 acres of public and private parks, and 104.1 acres of biological open space.

Accretive also proposed a general plan amendment to change the land use category from semi-rural to village while revising the Valley Center and Bonsall community plan texts to add the proposed village.

The planning commission's conditions included the necessary funding to build a new fire station or expand the Miller station, a community facilities district to fund a three person crew at the fire station, providing the land and funding the construction of a new elementary school at a location to be determined, a 30-foot buffer on West Lilac Road with a 2.2C classification (2.2C has an eight-foot shoulder, 2.2F has a two-foot shoulder), treatment plant improvements to be made no later than the first 100 homes, the commercial village to be built no later than completion of the first 1,000 homes, and a 25 mph design speed on Mountain Ridge Road.

The 2015 Environmental Impact Report found that some significant impacts could not be mitigated, although county staff recommended a finding of overriding considerations including the school site, recreational benefits, and low-income and moderate-income housing along with the tax revenue and employment economic benefits.

The property borders the Valley Center-Pauma Unified School District and the Bonsall Unified School District. Since most of the development in the Valley Center-Pauma Unified School District was to be age-restricted, the majority of school-age children in the Lilac Hills Ranch area would have attended school in the Bonsall Unified School District.

Because a general plan amendment, specific plan and rezone were involved, the proposal needed approval by the board of supervisors, which requires three votes in favor.

The Fair Political Practices Commission issued an opinion that Supervisor Bill Horn was required to recuse himself because of the proximity of Lilac Hills Ranch to the property he owns. Accretive was uncertain whether the 2015 proposal would receive the support of three of the other four supervisors and opted to collect signatures to place Lilac Hills Ranch on the ballot as an initiative.

Because measures approved by a voter initiative can only be modified by another ballot measure, some of the planning commission conditions were omitted to maximize flexibility. Accretive sought 10 waivers from county road standards to avoid the need for eminent domain, and the county's Department of Planning and Development Services was supportive of seven.

The ballot measure included all 10 waivers. The initiative was also circulated before August 2016, when the Bonsall Unified School District approved a school facilities agreement between Accretive and the school district which included the requirement for Accretive to build an elementary school, so Proposition B did not include that agreement.

The county's voters rejected Proposition B in the November 2016 election. That election also replaced Supervisor Dave Roberts with Kristin Gaspar. Gaspar subsequently appointed Michael Edwards to the planning commission to replace Peder Norby, who cast one of the votes against recommending approval of the project.

Village Communities took over the Lilac Hills Ranch project and, in June 2017, Village Communities submitted updated traffic studies and other information, a revised greenhouse gas emissions technical study, and an updated specific plan. In June 2018 the planning commission voted 4-1, with Michael Seiler opposed and two members absent, to send the project directly to the board of supervisors without a separate hearing since no substantial changes to the previous proposal warranted a new planning commission hearing.

In December 2016, the Deer Springs Fire Protection District contracted with the San Diego County Regional Fire Authority for fire prevention services including evaluation of proposed projects. The SDCRFA reviewed Lilac Hills Ranch in 2019 and identified fire safety concerns, most notably the risk of entrapment.

Concerns about evacuation and the ability of firefighters to have ground to fight fires led to a January 2020 request for a 20-foot fuel modification easement on both sides of West Lilac Road between the northwest project entrance and Covey Lane.

"It exceeds what we feel is an acceptable level of risk," SDCRFA fire chief Tony Mecham said.

Easement agreements from more than four dozen property owners would have been needed, and Village Communities only obtained written letters from nine property owners. Those letters are not binding, so no easement agreements were obtained.

"The easements are just overburdening, and it doesn't seem like the right way to go," Desmond said.

Mecham noted that an easement would have given the fire service the right to clear brush in case a written agreement is rescinded by the property owner or due to a change in ownership.

"It's the applicant's responsibility to move forward to guarantee the fuel modification in perpetuity," he said.

Lilac Hills Ranch returned to the planning commission June 12 with a county staff recommendation for denial due to the fire concerns, although a motion not to deny passed on a 5-2 vote with Michael Beck and Yolanda Calvo opposed.

"The fire risk is more than just this easement issue," Jacob said.

For Gaspar, it all came down to safety of residents who would call Lilac Hills home.

"We cannot allow any increased risk of entrapment along our roadways," Gaspar said. "More work needs to be done to ensure the safety of our residents."