Both a California appeals court and a San Diego Superior Court judge sided with environmentalists in their long-running challenge to the controversial Fanita Ranch development in Santee, California.
SAN DIEGO (CN) – A massive housing development project in the city of Santee, California, is in jeopardy after two different judges in two separate courts ruled in favor of environmental groups that oppose the project.
of Fanita Ranch Project has been rigorously challenged by Santee residents and environmental groups since it was first proposed in 2017 by developer HomeFed.
But opponents of the project said the city has repeatedly and flagrantly violated its own regulations, as well as state zoning and environmental regulations.
or San Diego Superior Court Judge AND an appellate court panel both denied approvals for the Fanita Ranch project in two separate but related cases Thursday.
Attorney John Buse, of the Center for Biological Diversity, said the rulings should send a strong message to the city of Santee.
“Badly planned projects that increase wildfire risks can no longer be justified given our climate reality,” Buse said in a written statement to Courthouse News. “The court’s recent opinions are a strong rebuke against cities and developers who try to circumvent state zoning and environmental laws.”
of Center for Biological Diversity says Fanita Ranch is located in a Very High Severity Fire Danger Zone, which is the most dangerous designation in California. In addition, the site is home to numerous species of sensitive insects, such as the Quino checkerspot butterfly, the California cap, and the Crotch’s digger bee.
“The San Diego Basin deserves safe and sustainable development,” Buse said. “I hope this finally puts an end to Fanita Ranch.”
The project was planned to develop just over 3,000 residential units on 2,600 acres of land north of Santee, about 15 miles northeast of San Diego. In addition to housing, the project was planned to include a school, 80,000 square meters of commercial space, as well as parks and open spaces.
Although the city’s general plan only allowed for 1,395 housing units in the Fanita Ranch area, the city approved an amendment in 2020 to more than double the amount of housing. However, the amendment was opposed immediately after the citizens submitted a petition for a referendum.
Santee citizens also passed a ballot initiative in November of that year to require approval for any development that would increase residential density more than the general plan allows.
But in 2021, the city created another solution. It passed an ordinance to create its Core Housing Program, which would approve certain projects certified by the city without a public hearing. After HomeFed submitted a plan that the courts determined was essentially identical to the earlier project, it was considered a Core Housing Project in 2022 and approved.
The plaintiffs sued the city and HomeFed for violating California’s planning and zoning laws, the California Environmental Quality Act and the state’s election code. San Diego Superior Court Judge Katherine Bacal agreed that the city violated all four laws.
HomeFed appealed the decision, but the Court of Appeals mostly upheld Bacal’s decision.
The appeals court found that the city’s Core Housing Program considered projects consistent with its master plan based on a points system rather than an actual analysis of development requirements in the plan.
“Instead, the city merely ‘deemed’ the 2022 project viable because it was certified as a Core Housing Project under criteria that are different from the policies and mandates set forth in the general plan,” wrote Truc Do of the California Court of Appeals. “Furthermore, both the city and HomeFed have essentially admitted that the development proposed in the 2022 project lacks consistency with the overall plan.”
He will be joined by Fourth District Associate Judge Julia Kelety and Fourth District Judge David Rubin.
In a separate but related case in San Diego Superior Court, also presided over by Bacal, the plaintiffs also sued the city of Santee. The plaintiffs say the city failed to analyze the project’s CEQA impacts in light of the 2025 Palisades fire, improperly approved bonus incentives and approved a project that conflicts with the city’s general plan.
Although Bacal dismissed the plaintiffs’ CEQA claims, it ruled in their favor on the remaining land use claims.
Buse said he was very pleased with the appeal decision and the Supreme Court decision.
“It’s up to the developers how they want to move forward with a project that has been repeatedly denied by the courts,” Buse said. “But if there is a future version of Fanita Ranch that violates local and state laws, then we will continue to challenge it.”
Neither HomeFed nor the city of Santee immediately responded to requests for comment.
Subscribe to our free newsletters
Our weekly newsletter Closing arguments provides the latest on ongoing trials, major litigation and decisions in courts around the US and the world, while monthly Under the lights feeds legal dirt from Hollywood, sports, Big Tech and the arts.
