Will homes ever be built at Wild Cherry Canyon? Decision on property could come this week
The future of about 2,400 acres of land near Diablo Canyon nuclear power plant may be decided on Thursday in San Luis Obispo County Superior Court.
Wild Cherry Canyon, which consists of five parcels of rolling oak woodlands just northwest of Avila Beach, is leased by Eureka Energy Co., a subsidiary of PG&E that holds the development rights, and subleased to Pacho Limited and San Luis Bay Limited partnerships, which are managed by developer HomeFed Corp., which would handle any building on the property.
It’s one part of the 12,000-acre Diablo Lands that surround the PG&E power plant.
The lease of that property is in question, and a judge will rule Thursday whether the property will continue to be controlled by HomeFed’s partnerships, or, in essence, handed back over to Eureka Energy.
At the center of the matter is whether HomeFed’s partnerships actually have any legal right to continue leasing the property — with the key question being whether the current lease is for agricultural use or not.
In 1968, the partnerships’ lease for Wild Cherry Canyon was drawn up to be valid for 99 years, with the option to renew the lease for another 99 years.
But California Civil Code 717 says that no lease for agricultural purposes is valid if it extends for longer than 51 years.
The partnerships argue in court documents that the lease was never intended for agricultural use — even though it has been used primarily for cattle grazing for the last 50 years. Plus, the land is zoned by the county as agricultural land, thus allowing the cows to graze there.
Should the court rule in its favor on Thursday, HomeFed intends to develop at least part of the Wild Cherry Canyon property.
What developers have planned for Wild Cherry Canyon
HomeFed’s website says that the company “has identified and continues to contemplate several potential development options that range from a few ranchettes to visitor-serving uses in support of conservation interests in the Irish Hills to a mixed-use project that would develop approximately 10 percent of the property, leaving the balance in perpetual open space.”
In January 2018, developers announced plans to build 15,000 homes on the Wild Cherry Canyon site, which sent shockwaves through the Avila Beach community.
However, two years earlier, the partnerships were advised by Eureka Energy that future development ideas may not be feasible because their lease was “potentially” subject to the 51-year limitation set for in civil code section 717, according to court documents.
Fast forward to August 2018, and HomeFed sent a letter to Eureka Energy — included in court documents — that said it would like to renew its 99-year lease at Wild Cherry Canyon, which was set to expire in 2067. At the time, the company was allegedly not aware that the lease could be subject to the 51-year limitation, which would set the lease expiration date at Dec. 26, 2019, according to court documents.
Eureka Energy advised HomeFed in a subsequent letter in 2018 that it rejects its notice to renew the Wild Cherry Canyon lease because of the 51-year limitation, court documents say.
So, in March of 2019, HomeFed’s partnerships filed a civil lawsuit against Eureka Energy asking for a judge to determine whether the lease is indeed subject to the 51-year limitation, or the 99-year terms set forth by the original lease.
San Luis Obispo County Superior Court Judge Ginger Garrett is set to issue a final decision on Thursday.
Should either party — Eureka Energy or the partnerships — dispute Garrett’s decision, then the matter may go to trial later this year.
Future of Wild Cherry Canyon land conservation may rest on court’s decision
Wild Cherry Canyon consists of thousands of acres of nearly pristine coastal land that has been the center of several multi-million dollar land purchase attempts by conservation organizations over the past two decades.
The property has been appraised at between $21 million and $26 million over the years. Although conservation agencies such as the American Land Conservancy and The Nature Conservancy, partnering at times with California State Parks and the California State Coastal Conservancy, have attempted to buy the property in the past, the deals have fallen apart.
The original inhabitants of the land, the Northern Chumash, are very interested in the conservation of Wild Cherry Canyon, according to Mona Tucker, chair of yak tityu tityu yak tiłhini Northern Chumash Tribe of the San Luis Obispo County and Region.
“Wild Cherry Canyon — the Pecho Coast — as far as cultural importance, it’s quite high,” Tucker told The Tribune. “And I think Californians would like to see that history preserved.”
Kara Woodruff — a senior policy adviser for Sen. John Laird but speaking as a member of the Friends of Wild Cherry Canyon, a group of local residents and visitors who advocate for the conservation of the land — said that the group is neutral on the outcome of Thursday’s court decision.
“Either way, we hope to work with the entity or entities that prevail and purchase their land interests for public ownership, conservation and sustainable public access, including a coastal trail stretching from Avila Beach to Montana de Oro,” Woodruff wrote to The Tribune in a text message.
