Heber Water Review Stalls 1,610-Home McCabe Ranch II Project
Planning Commission • Imperial CountySeptember 23, 2026
Locunity is an independent informational service and is not an official government page for this commission. All information is sourced from public footage and an analysis of official agendas with the aid of responsible, fact-checked AI. to report an error or omission.
The largest housing proposal on the Imperial County Planning Commission's Sept. 23, 2026, agenda hit a wall over water. Commissioners voted 8-0, with one abstention, to continue the 1,610-home McCabe Ranch II project near Heber after the local utility district said it had never reviewed the project's water supply assessment. The project will return only after it is re-noticed.
- McCabe Ranch II continued indefinitely after Heber Public Utility District sought a postponement over the unreviewed water assessment
- 1,610 homes, 12.3-acre school site proposed on 351 acres within the existing 2,300-unit plan cap
- Neighboring rancher presses developer on McCabe Road widening, power poles and his irrigation headgate
- Gateway storage yard declared a public nuisance on a 9-0 vote, with 45 days to clean up
McCabe Ranch II Waits on Heber's Water Call
The basics: The commission heard five linked items together: the water supply assessment, a supplemental final environmental impact report (EIR), a mitigation monitoring program, Specific Plan Amendment No. 1, and Tentative Tract Map #00994. A water supply assessment is a state-required analysis, under SB 610 and SB 221, of whether a water supplier can serve a large development.
Why it matters: The project would phase in 1,610 homes and a school site near Heber over about 14 years. Planning Director Jim Minnick said Heber's utility, not the Imperial Irrigation District (IID), holds the key to that water.
Where things stand: Applicant McCabe Ranch Realty's tentative map covers Phases 1-3 of the 2010 McCabe Ranch II Specific Plan. It includes 1,079 single-family and 531 multifamily units, plus parks and detention basins. Christina Willis, President of Willis Environmental Planning, said the map leaves 690 units for a separately owned Phase 4 and changes no boundaries, general plan uses or intensity.
"This project maintains the specific plan's overall residential cap of 2,300 dwelling units," said Willis.
The supplemental EIR found significant impacts in several areas. Willis said mitigation brings those impacts below significance. The EIR drew seven comment letters, none of which triggered recirculation. Dennis Moser of Moser Ventures Planning and Architecture, representing the applicant, said his client controls roughly 70% of the plan's land area.
The other side: Madeline Dessert, General Manager of Heber Public Utility District (HPUD), said her agency had not reviewed or approved the assessment. She also said the annexation needed to bring the project into HPUD's service area had not been submitted to the Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO).
"We request that any ruling on the McCabe Ranch II project be postponed until a water supply assessment and service area plan have been reviewed and formally approved by Heber Public Utility District," said Dessert. She later added that "neither water provider are recommending approval."
Tom DuBose of DuBose Design Group, representing the applicant, said his team had worked with HPUD's consultant and expected a review by month's end. Asked by Planning Commission Chair Rudy Schaffner what the pending service area plan affects, DuBose said, "It only holds up the final step at LAFCO for the annexation to HPUD."
"I would request that we do not hold up the process of this tentative map and amended specific plan and supplemental EIR for when their service area plan gets finally adopted," said DuBose. Annette Leon of DuBose Design Group estimated demand at about 1,000 acre-feet over 20 years.
Minnick sided with the utility. "The water authority in this particular case would be Heber Public Utility District," he said, recommending a continuance.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: A commissioner moved to table the project until the applicant reaches agreement with HPUD on the assessment. The chair treated the motion as a continuance.
- Vote: For: 8 (Chair Schaffner and Commissioners Kalin, Cabanas, Gallegos, Medina, Wright, Dunn and Hinojosa); Against: 0; Abstain: 1 (Commissioner Gutierrez)
The delay hands HPUD significant leverage over the project's timeline. The applicant and future buyers wait, and the project cannot reach the Board of Supervisors until the commission makes a recommendation.
What's next: "This project stands continued, not date certain, so it will be re-noticed," said Minnick. Residents should watch for a new hearing notice once HPUD acts.
Rancher Seeks Answers on Road and Water
Why it matters: Large subdivisions often reshape the roads and canals around them. Mike Pavo, a third-generation rancher north of McCabe Road, came to find out what that means for his land.
Where things stand: Pavo said he does not oppose the project. He fears eminent domain takings, relocated IID power poles, and the loss of his headgate and water rights. "I'm here mostly for water rights," he said.
Pavo asked whether McCabe Road would be widened. DuBose said project conditions "require the project to take care of upgrading McCabe Road," meaning four lanes along the project frontage. He added, "Our plans are to stay inside of that existing right-of-way, period."
DuBose said design details will come at the final map stage. He offered to meet with Pavo and referred him to the IID Water Department on irrigation questions.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: No action was taken on Pavo's concerns before the continuance. His testimony shows that neighboring agricultural landowners have a stake in how the off-site improvements are designed.
What's next: "It will go to the Board of Supervisors if it gets approved today," Schaffner told Pavo before the vote. Minnick said the Board of Supervisors makes the ultimate decision and that new notice will be given.
Gateway Storage Yard Declared a Nuisance
Why it matters: Staff said it brings violations to the commission only after other compliance efforts fail. This vote moves Notice of Violation #01943 toward legal action.
Where things stand: Planner I Stephanie Mas said the case opened in April 2024. It involves storage of semi-trucks, trailers, cargo containers, tires and other items on Lot 3 of Tract 942 (APN 059-363-012) in Gateway of the Americas, zoned Gateway Industrial. Mas said three of the four letters staff mailed to the owner were returned.
Adjacent owner Oscar Lin described the effects next door. "He's parking his trucks, his trailers and all his junk on my lot without my permission," said Lin. "We're practically chewing the dust that he produces."
Minnick advised Lin to fence his lot. "You can call the sheriff and have the vehicles towed," he said. He cautioned that "only a judge can actually impose fines," and said court action could take months to a year.
Decisions and stakeholder impacts: Commissioners declared the property in violation of the County Land Use Ordinance and a public nuisance. The motion sets a 45-day abatement period and authorizes county enforcement and a lien if the owner does not comply.
- Vote: For: 9; Against: 0
What's next: If the property is not cleaned up within 45 days, staff can abate it and place a lien on it. Court action is the likely next step if the violation remains unresolved.
Minor Items
- Minutes: Commissioners approved the Sept. 9, 2026, meeting minutes, 9-0.
Looking ahead: McCabe Ranch II returns only after HPUD rules on the water assessment and the county re-notices the hearing. The commission's recommendation then goes to the Board of Supervisors.