HARMONY GROVE — Another lawsuit has challenged the county’s decision to approve a controversial 453-unit housing development in an unincorporated community between Escondido and San Marcos.
The Elfin Forest/Harmony Grove Town Council and the Endangered Habitats League filed a lawsuit in December seeking to overturn the San Diego County Board of Supervisors’ approval of Harmony Grove Village South in October, citing wildfire safety risks and alleged violations of state and local laws.
The project, located on 111 acres south of Harmony Grove Village near the unincorporated communities of Harmony Grove, Elfin Forest and Eden Valley, would add 453 single-family and multifamily homes, 5,000 square feet of commercial and civic space, 34.8 acres of biological open space, 36 acres of common areas, four acres of parks and two miles of trails.
Supervisors unanimously approved the project with added conditions, including a requirement that the future homeowners’ association submit twice-yearly reports to the county on fuel management zones to ensure compliance with the fire protection plan.
Opponents argue that the project’s location in a very high fire hazard severity zone — in an area that has experienced multiple fires over the past few decades — and its reliance on a single access road pose risks to current and future residents.
The developer’s plans call for a new bridge over Escondido Creek with three travel lanes — two for evacuation and one for emergency vehicles — extending from Country Club Drive and Harmony Grove Road to the project’s entrance.
County officials say the plan meets fire code requirements in lieu of a second access road.
David Kovach, the project’s managing partner, told supervisors in October that the fire plan “is the gold standard.”
The latest lawsuit follows a legal challenge filed by the Sierra Club shortly after the project’s approval nearly three months ago. That lawsuit alleges the project violates the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and relies on an outdated environmental review that does not comply with current state and county standards for wildfire safety, greenhouse gas emissions, and vehicle miles traveled.
The Board of Supervisors’ approval marked the second time the project has been approved. The board first approved the development in 2018, but a court later ruled that approval violated CEQA. A 2021 appellate decision upheld concerns regarding greenhouse gas mitigation but reversed the findings on evacuation and air quality measures, deeming them adequate. The board rescinded its approval in 2022.
According to the latest lawsuit, the county was legally required to reassess fire safety under current, stricter wildfire regulations, but failed to do so, instead relying on an analysis conducted decades ago, before significant changes in state fire law and wildfire risk standards.
More than 1,200 nearby residents signed a petition opposing the project. The county also received more than 1,000 letters urging denial, and a coalition of more than 20 environmental groups — including Climate Action Campaign, SD350, Sierra Club and Wildcoast — submitted a letter in opposition.
“We cannot let political expediency or out-of-state development interests dictate the safety of our communities,” Town Council Vice Chair JP Theberge said in an announcement of the lawsuit. “The County cannot ignore modern wildfire realities or sidestep its own fire codes. This project puts future residents, first responders, and surrounding neighborhoods at unacceptable risk. The County needs to go back to the drawing board and come back with a plan that actually meets today’s safety standards.”
The lawsuit seeks to overturn the project’s approval and require full compliance with current fire safety laws before any future development at the site can proceed.
