Del Mar City Council Meeting Agenda
Del Mar Town Hall
1050 Camino del Mar, Del Mar, California
September 22, 2025 City Council Meeting
INFORMATION RECEIVED
AFTER THE COUNCIL AGENDA
WAS DISTRIBUTED
(“Red Dots”)
1 Robert Silva
From: Joseph Smith <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, September 19, 2025 2:34 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red Dot for Item 7 Seaside Ridge - Sept 22 Council Follow Up Flag: Flag for follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Mayor and Council, I’m submiƫng some comments for you to consider over the weekend:
PresentaƟon Time: City has limited our verbal comments to 3 minutes total despite our request to have 3 minutes each for both applicant and appellant. Please use your discreƟon to allow, at minimum, 3 minutes each for the applicant and appellant.
Preliminary ApplicaƟon & 20%: Between the Prelim ApplicaƟon and follow up CDP applicaƟon, the project increased
17.1% to account for more public parking in the project. The City has disagreed with this calculaƟon based on a clerical error in the applicaƟon. However, a clerical error does not account to an increase. HCD appears to agree as reflected in its December 2024 leƩer. In that leƩer, HCD reminds the City that it is obligated to process projects submiƩed while out of housing element compliance, which appears to apply specifically to Seaside Ridge given my understanding that only one housing development was submiƩed while the City’s housing element was out of compliance, and that project is Seaside Ridge.
Environmental SensiƟvity: Seaside Ridge submiƩal included several studies prepared by qualified experts including biological, cultural, paleontological, hydrologic, geotechnical and sea level rise/bluff erosion. View simulaƟons were also provided. No sensiƟve plants or animal species were found and the project enƟrely avoids the coastal bluff. The site is not a floodway, floodzone or near a sensiƟve lagoon unlike the Fairgrounds and based on the studies. The composiƟon of north bluff is very different and way stronger than south bluff. No public views are being blocked by development and the project complies with all objecƟve standards in the City’s HEI-OZ, including the MMRP requirements.
Program 3A: The Program requires a binding agreement with the 22nd DAA. Why does the ENRA keep geƫng represented on record by the 22nd DAA Board and CEO that there is no obligaƟon to proceed with housing under the ENRA? Since the ENRA is not a binding agreement, the City is required to rezone its vacant sites under state law. You should also be aware of Govt Code 65583(g)(4) which states that when a project with at least 49% affordability (base zone units) is submiƩed, it must be processed by-right if the city did not carry out its rezoning within the statutory mandate. This law is separate from and in addiƟon to Builders remedy, and was included in the Seaside Ridge housing development applicaƟon.
LCP Amendment: It is the City’s responsibility to amend its LCP to rezone its sites and inappropriate to transfer that burden onto an applicant for a housing development applicaƟon under Builders Remedy and/or Govt Code 65583(g)(4).
Rezoning & CEQA: The City can now rely upon a recently signed state law under SB 131 that statutorily exempts a city’s rezoning acƟon to meet its RHNA obligaƟon. This is in addiƟon to the exisƟng statutory exempƟon for LCP amendments.
As noted above, the Project is designed to avoid environmental impacts and can benefit from these recent legislaƟve efforts to streamline housing in accordance with the City’s Housing Element.
September 22, 2025 Item 7
2 See you on Monday,
Joseph
Joseph D. Smith, AICP | Principal
California Coastal Works
(619) 943-1337 | [email protected]
www.californiacoastalworks.com
September 22, 2025 Item 7
1 Leslie Carrillo
From: carol lazier <[email protected]>
Sent: Saturday, September 20, 2025 4:42 PM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Item 7 for Sept 22 Council Red Dot
Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I have owned the Seaside Ridge property for 25 years and in that time have contemplated how it could best serve the community.
I believe that the highest and best use for this property today is affordable housing. Del Mar does not need more multi-million-dollar single family homes on the bluff. Del Mar does need more affordable housing.
I care very deeply about the lack of affordable housing. Everyone should have access to safe, highquality housing. It’s the foundation for health, opportunity and dignity. Stable housing unlocks access to education, jobs, transportation and other vital resources that allow individuals and families to thrive, regardless of income level. Seaside Ridge would be a wonderful mixed-income community.
Our project along with affordable housing at the racetrack would help alleviate Del Mar’s housing challenges. With Seaside Ridge, fewer affordable units would be needed downtown, preserving its charm and character.
Our application is complete according to housing laws and must be processed according to HCD.
I initiated this project 3 years ago and assumed we would be much further along in the process.
Please look at our project with fresh eyes. It is a win-win for Del Mar and Seaside Ridge.
Carol Lazier
September 22, 2025 Item 7
1 Leslie Carrillo
From: Brad Walters <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2025 11:56 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Seaside Ridge red dot
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organizaƟon. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Council,
I expect that Staff’s determinaƟon on Seaside Ridge will be upheld tonight and that the project’s future will conƟnue to be decided in the courts.
Even so, I want to register my overall support for the project.
Housing affordability is the defining challenge of our region. Every new affordable home maƩers, and Seaside Ridge would deliver dozens at a site that can easily accommodate them. It really is that simple.
And it does so without relying on uncertain outside factors like the increasingly tenuous Fairgrounds negoƟaƟons, or what private homeowners decide to charge for their ADUs.
Nothing in the record suggests this site is unsuitable. In fact, it seems ideal: easy freeway access via a primary thoroughfare, direct bus connecƟons to major job centers (close to the Solana train staƟon, too), and it’s a natural fit as the southern bookend to the exisƟng stretch of condos along Sierra Avenue and Highway 101.
OŌen the undercurrent against adding new housing is that it will make condiƟons a liƩle worse for current residents. I can’t see how this project, situated where it is, would have any such ill effects.
Along with the agenda materials, the Red Dot leƩer from the city’s previous Director of Planning and Community Development (if I’m not mistaken) seems to outline a clear path for project approval if the City decides that’s the path it wants to take. Given his previous record with the City, his decision to work with the project should give all of us peace of mind.
Del Mar has a choice: It can lean on the law to support this project, or it can lean on the law to oppose it.
Whatever happens tonight, I’m hopeful Seaside Ridge will eventually break ground as proposed.
Brad Walters
Straƞord Ct.
September 22, 2025 Item 7
1 Leslie Carrillo
From: Mark Rittenbaum <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2025 11:53 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Red dot- item 10 UD financing
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organizaƟon. Do not click links or open aƩachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear Council Members and City Staff,
Firstly I want to commend staff on their execuƟon with IBank , with very aƩracƟve interest rates.
I concur with and want to reinforce Council’s earlier direcƟon to borrow only amounts needed to fund Crest Canyon and Straƞord Court North, notwithstanding these aƩracƟve financing terms. I do not support borrowing for any other districts, as I believe it is not financially prudent, nor worth the cost/benefit.
I trust staff’s recommendaƟon as to the amounts to borrow for these 2 districts has a sufficient conƟngency reserve, and hope staff will speak to this point at the meeƟng. Also, with the substanƟally lower borrowing amount than previously anƟcipated, hopefully the assets that will need to be pledged against the loan will be reduce, in line with the loan amount. Again, I would urge staff to speak to this important point. UlƟmately the City’s overall borrowing capacity will be limited by its cash flows and its assets that can be pledged.
Respecƞully,
Mark RiƩenbaum
SerpenƟne Dr
Del Mar
Sent from my iPhone
September 22, 2025 Item 10
1 Leslie Carrillo
From: Nancy Stoke <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, September 22, 2025 11:57 AM
To: City Clerk Mail Box
Subject: Council ITEM 10 on 9/22/25
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Honorable Mayor and Council Members,
I write to encourage you to not delay until Spring 2026 the Next Steps for the 25th St and Beach Colony Undergrounding projects.
I appreciate the careful modelling being done to manage Measure Q Funds and borrowed funds, and applaud your efforts. I understand, however, that design work and review is taking close to three times longer than the actual construction has taken in earlier districts, and I encourage you to not delay starting the Beach Colony and 25th St Districts design work.
I also raise a question not covered in the City Council Agenda Report:
What are the priorities for the use of the borrowed funds (as needed) and Measure Q funds with both the undergrounding and Shores Park projects being done concurrently? If we happen to run short of funds for some unforeseen reason and can’t do both, what criteria will be used to determine which project will proceed and which will be put on hold until the funding shortage is resolved?
Thanks for all of your good work. Respectfully Submitted, Nancy Stoke
September 22, 2025 Item 10