The San Diego County Board of Supervisors on Wednesday adopted a resolution opposing the annexation of a housing development into the city of Chula Vista amid concerns over public safety and fire protection.
The Otay Ranch Village 13 sits on 1,869 acres of unincorporated land, located a quarter mile east of Chula Vista City Limits, and 6 miles east of the community of Jamul. Last September, the property ownership, Lakeview 1 LLC and Lakeview 2 LLC, c/o Baldwin and Sons and Moller Otay Lakes Investments, LLC, submitted an application to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO) for its consideration of annexation of the territory into the City of Chula Vista.
According to county officials, the Otay Village 13 project includes up to 1,938 dwelling units, including 1,881 single-family units and 57 multi-family units; up to 40,000 square feet of neighborhood-serving commercial; 25.1 acres of public & private parks; a 6.1-acre homeowners park facility; 9 miles of community trails and pathways; and a total of 860 acres of open space, plus an additional 76.4 acres of internal open space. The project also includes a fire station and a Sheriff substation, as well as a 16.6-acre resort site with a 200-room hotel with outdoor plazas, and conference areas.
Construction was anticipated to occur over approximately eight to 10 years in response to market demands and in accordance with phase improvements to roads, public utilities, project utilities, and infrastructure.
The Chula Vista City Council voted 5-0 during a Nov.1, 2022 council meeting to approve a resolution in support of the property owner’s application to LAFCO for the annexation of the property to the City of Chula Vista.
The resolution was met with letters of opposition by the Chula Vista Firefighters Union, CAL FIRE Union 2881, and Deputy Sheriff’s Association, expressing opposition to the annexation.
According to a board letter submitted by County Board of Supervisors Chairwoman Nora Vargas, annexation by the city of Chula Vista will impact residents of the project area surrounding unincorporated areas, and the city of Chula Vista.
Supervisor Vargas wrote if the annexation is approved, the stations will not be built and levels of service will be impacted. She also cited infrastructure concerns with the annexation of the City of Chula Vista.
“The proposed annexation area is not contiguous with the existing boundaries of the City of Chula Vista; therefore, as currently proposed, annexation will create a City of Chula Vista island in the unincorporated area of the County of San Diego,” reads the board letter.
Additionally, the proposed annexation would result in the loss of property taxes annually for the County and the San Diego County Fire Protection District. The Village 13 project is estimated to generate a total of $18.24 million in annual property tax revenue at project buildout, with $2,218,713 allocated to the County General Fund and $1,094,400 allocated to the San Diego County Fire Protection District.
Supervisors Joel Anderson and Jim Desmond, who are also San Diego County LAFCO commission members — with Desmond serving as chairman — recused themselves from Wednesday’s 3-0 vote and left the meeting chamber.LAFCOs are political subdivisions responsible for providing regional growth management services for California’s 58 counties and are made up of locally elected officials.
Supervisor Nora Vargas serves as an alternate member and Stephen Whitburn, a San Diego City Council member, serves as vice chairman.
During the board meeting, Nick Lee, a Baldwin and Sons executive said there is no proposal to remove fire or sheriff’s stations. He said he wanted to discuss the issue further with county leadership before it is reviewed by LAFCO.
Cal Fire Unit Chief Tony Mechman said if the annexation went through, there would be no guarantee that a fire station would be built as part of Village 13, and surrounding communities are already underserved.
Mecham added the proposed annexation would result in project revenue going solely to the city of Chula Vista, while the county would still be responsible for battling wildland fires.
Vargas said while she understands the developers’ request and the need for more housing, “this is a very high-fire zone.”
“I’m not sure at this time that is something I can support,” Vargas added.
