Initiative Would Limit Building in Forest : Environment: Group wants a November ballot measure imposing a 40-acre minimum lot size for development in the Cleveland National Forest.

For Duncan McFetridge, allowing private development in Cleveland National Forest is like trying to combine oil and water: It just doesn’t mix.

“We have a national forest that is in danger of being fragmented by urbanization and destroyed as a wildlife habitat,” said McFetridge, a member of Save Our Forest and Ranchlands, a countywide environmental group.

Committed to preserving open space for natural habitat, the group has announced plans to place an initiative on the November ballot that, if approved by voters, would impose a 40-acre minimum lot size for development on all privately owned lands throughout the forest.

The initiative would double the now standard 20-acre minimum lot size, which was raised from 8 acres by the County Board of Supervisors in December, said Lauren M. Wasserman, director of planning and land use for San Diego County.

McFetridge said his group’s initiative takes a comprehensive approach because it seeks to impose the 40-acre building minimum throughout the entire forest. He said there are now about 5,000 acres with an 8-acre minimum and another 1,000 acres with a 4-acre minimum.

About 55,000 of the forest’s 300,000 acres are now privately held, and 60% of the forest lies within county boundaries, McFetridge said.

Joined by about a dozen colleagues, McFetridge will attempt to attract 100 volunteers to gather the necessary signatures by the May 29 filing deadline.

The group has already filed a formal notice with the San Diego County registrar of voters to circulate petitions.

The organization needs to collect 67,000 signatures of registered voters in the county to qualify the initiative. McFetridge said he and his colleagues plan to collect 90,000 signatures.

“It is difficult, but we obviously just believe we can go out and do it,” McFetridge said.

The group’s proposal has come under fire by private landowners and developers.

“I think it’s an outrage. . . . Obviously this initiative would only apply to private holdings,” said Paul Peterson, an attorney who, along with three partners, holds title to 160 acres in Descanso where Interstate 8 intersects California 79.

Peterson said he and his partners have made plans to divide the land into 5-acre lots for residential construction.

“People have spent hundreds of thousands of dollars trying to get permits to develop the property at a greater density,” Peterson said. “My view is that, if the public feels that those private holdings should be kept as a habitat, they should buy the property.”

Peterson’s sentiments were echoed by Julie Dillon, a developer whose plans include the possibility of developing 125 homes on 5 1/2-acre residential lots in the Descanso area.

“If people want open space, they need to buy. That’s the way open space is created, by purchasing, not taking,” Dillon said.

Dillon, who described the proposed initiative as “inflexible,” said she has agreed to hold off developing her land while an unidentified group determines whether it can buy the land for public ownership.