A quarter century... plus one more month: Harper Canyon project vote postponed.

Following a steady stream of written comments that came to the county prior to the County Board of Supervisors meeting on Tuesday April 15, the hearing for the long-awaited and controversial Harper Canyon/Encina Hills project has been postponed to May 20.

The residential project—a 344-acre subdivision with 17 lots ranging from 5 to over 23 acres—is proposed by Harper Canyon LLC for the Highway 68 corridor off San Benancio Road, bordered by Toro County Park and less than a mile south of Fort Ord National Monument. In the works for more than 24 years, the project has faced numerous setbacks due to environmental concerns.

At Tuesday’s meeting on April 15, various community and environmental groups were present to give public comment on the project, which was back before the County Board of Supervisors for a vote on whether it now meets specific environmental requirements outlined by the Sixth District Court of Appeal in 2021. The project has been on pause in recent years due to its failure to adequately address wildlife corridors in the environmental impact report.

The Board agreed to postpone the vote, honoring a request from the applicant for more time to review and respond to comments submitted prior to and leading up to the hearing.

“In light of the lateness and breadth of the comments that were made, I think it's appropriate to the staff and the applicant to be given time to analyze those and meet with the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and see what could be done,” said attorney Michael Cling on behalf of the developer, Harper Canyon LLC.

Written comments were submitted by groups including CDFW, the Meyer Community Group, the Center for Biological Diversity, Big Sur Land Trust, and Pathways for Life, along with a few individuals. Across the board, concerns focused on the project's potential impacts to critical wildlife habitat in the region.

Rachel Saunders, vice president of conservation for the Big Sur Land Trust, reiterated points from the organization’s letter, saying, “It’s located in one of the most important wildlife corridors in this region, and we have found that the final supplemental environmental impact report is deficient in many ways.”

“With the continuance, we would hope that the proponent and the county staff would meet with the Department of Fish and Wildlife to try and address the concerns that were raised there,” Saunders added. Representatives from CDFW were present at the meeting, announcing they would make themselves available to assist Monterey County staff in months leading up to the new scheduled date.

Richard Rosenthal, an attorney representing the Meyer Community Group—comprising residents who live in the area—disagreed with the delay: “The applicant has had the opportunity, as has staff, to communicate with Fish and Wildlife, which is the major opponent of this project. They weren’t even mentioned in the staff report. So I think a continuance is not called for, and I would like the matter heard today.”