Del Mar City Council
May 19, 2026

5/15/2019
§ Location of all existing Torrey Pine and Monterey Cypress trees onsite and within 10 feet on neighboring properties. Indicate if the trees will be removed or retained. If the site is within the Commercial or Open Space Overlay Zones, indicate the location of all existing trees, regardless of the species.
§ Location of off-street parking and loading facilities, and provide appropriate dimensions § Location of all driveways, access roads and curb cuts § Indicate the dimensions and the type of construction material § Project in the FEMA floodway or floodplain, note the Base Flood Elevation § Location of all exterior mechanical equipment
• Architectural Plans
Floor Plans Shall Include:
§ Scale and North Arrow
§ Floor area ratio (FAR), including exempted areas
§ Square footage of each room and level
§ Square footage of all proposed decks
§ Designation for each room’s use
§ Lines and labels indicating alignment of Cross-Sections Building Elevations Shall Include:
§ Accurate drawings to depict the proposed finished building appearance, consistent with the Site and Floor Plans. Elevations are not to be conceptual.
§ 3D views of colored elevations that accurately depict height and mass of proposed developments. 3D views should depict all sides of property.

Note: (3D depictions are ONLY needed for projects that have gone through a Citizen Participation Program (CPP) process, include a new structure, and/or a remodel of 50% or more is being proposed.)
§ Label Elevations as North, South, East and West
§ Existing and proposed windows shall be properly dimensioned on elevations. § Proposed and existing grades adjacent to the structure(s) § Floor elevations and building heights relative to the City Benchmark § Maximum elevation of all major building points, including ridge lines § Lines, chimneys and other roof penetrations e.g., solar, skylights, mechanical equipment, etc. § Location, height and materials of walls, fences and hedges in relation to the Elevation of Adjacent Grade. The tops and bottoms of walls/fences/hedges shall be indicated. Projects that include retaining walls shall accurately depict mentioned design guidelines on a Wall Detail Plan sheet. § Exterior mechanical equipment and the proposed screening § Building material and color including the roof material, window and door trim and accent materials § For new basements, the line of the basement from all elevations with proposed ceiling heights and adjacent proposed and existing grades.

Building Sections Shall Include:
§ Structural height dimensions
§ Drawing through the structure and adjacent grade at critical points in at least two directions § If a basement is proposed, provide a detailed Section indicating the dimensions and heights for the basement ceiling, top of floor above, lightwells, and adjacent proposed and existing grades.

Roof Plan Shall Include:
§ Maximum elevations of all roof ridgelines
§ Location of all skylights (Operable or Non-Operable), solar panels, and chimneys § Topographical lines adjacent to structure
§ Note that the Roof Plan may be used as the basis for a Story Pole Plan Exterior Lighting Plans Shall Include:
§ Floor Plans showing all existing and proposed exterior lights § Photo key map linked to the type of light fixture
§ Manufacturer specification sheet for each type of proposed exterior lighting fixtures § Specification sheet shall show maximum wattage, lumen output, and Kelvin rating § All lighting shall be oriented in a downward direction and/or be shielded from adjacent sites, public right of way or otherwise limit lighting levels to the property itself 40 May 19, 2026 Item 8

5/15/2019
• Drainage and Grading Plans
Note: the City Engineer reviews both types of plans on essentially the same criteria; however, Grading Plans will have added requirements for bonding, a Soils Report, and increased Plan Check fees) Shall include:
§ Date prepared
§ Scale and north arrow
§ Street names
§ Right-of-way and property lines
§ All existing and proposed contours (at 2’ intervals)
§ Existing grade elevations of adjacent properties
§ If walls are proposed, show elevations for T.O.W. and B.O.W. (at outer face where it meets grade) § Wall subdrains and discharge locations
§ Source of topography and survey date
§ Cut and fill areas colored or shaded
§ Amounts of cut and fill in cubic yards
§ A benchmark or reference elevation located on the site § Size and type of existing trees
§ Maximum driveway slope
§ Drainage indicated by arrows in the direction of flow § Existing drainage facilities
§ Proposed drainage facilities (size, material, and invert elevation) § Permanent post-construction BMPs
§ Temporary construction BMPs (including both erosion and sediment control measures) § Existing and proposed easements
§ Existing and proposed water and sewer services
§ Required notes as follows:
o An additional permit is required by the City of Del Mar, Public Works Department for the improvements in the public right-of-way; such as for driveway, sidewalks, etc. o Soil removed from site and placed within the City of Del Mar requires additional Grading or Land Conservation Permits.
o All Contractors and Sub-contractors must have a valid City of Del Mar Business License prior to the performance of any work (Ord. #234).
o No grading shall occur outside the limits of the approved grading plan unless prior written authorization is obtained from the City and the owners of any other affected properties.

Grading Plan Sections:
o Section cuts through the site at critical cut and fill areas o Show existing and proposed contours
o Show any existing or proposed buildings
• Best Management Practices (BMP) Site Plan
BMP Site Plan shall be attached to the Stormwater Checklist or included in the Stormwater Management Plan (SWMP)
Shall include:
§ Clear distinction between existing and proposed impervious area (shown graphically, and also with a numeric summary)
§ Site design BMPs
§ Source control BMPs
§ Treatment control BMPs
• Landscape/Irrigation Plan
Shall meet the standards outlined in Chapter 23.60 of the Del Mar Municipal Code (Water Efficient Landscapes) and;
Shall Include:
§ Scale and North Arrow
§ Plants which are proposed and existing plants to be retained onsite for each planting zone § An estimate of the yearly amount of irrigation (supplemental) water in gallons required to maintain each zone
§ Alphabetical listing of plant species using botanical and common names 41 May 19, 2026 Item 8
5/15/2019
§ Number and container size of each species to be planted § Mature heights of all species
§ Indication of landscape maintenance responsibility (Private or Common) § Percentage of site devoted to turf (maximum 15% of site allowed) § Total square footage of all landscape areas
§ Percentage of site devoted to landscape
§ Minimum landscape requirements per design guidelines
§ Approximate location of irrigation lines and heads
§ Proposed trails, walks, fences, and walls (freestanding and retaining walls shall be clearly differentiated)
§ Parkway planting and irrigation
§ Areas to be paved for parking or driving, differentiated from areas intended for Landscape Planting or Hardscape
§ Calculation of site devoted to landscaping
§ Percentage and type of native landscaping
§ Identity all existing protected trees (e.g. Torrey Pine, Monterey Cyprus, etc.) and locations of such trees.
42 Page
May 19, 2026
7 of 7
Item 8
5/15/2019
Project Data Summary Table
(TO BE INCLUDED ON COVER SHEET OF PLANS) INCLUDED ON ARCHITECTURAL PLANS Project Information
Project Address:

Assessor’s Parcel Number (APN):

Zoning Designation:

Overlays:

Community Plan Land Use Designation:

Property Owner Name:

Agent Name:

City Application # / Project Name:

Scale Of Plans:

Date Of Submittal:

Project Description
Scope Of Work:

Lot Size & Site Coverage
All Figures Shall Be In
Sq. Ft., Unless
Otherwise Noted
Existing Proposed Max Allowed
(if applicable)
Total % Of Lot
(if applicable)
Lot Size (gross):

Lot Size (net):

Gross minus street
easements or private
road easements
serving 5+ properties
% of Lot
Coverage:

Does not include
paved areas, pools, or
items less than 30
inches above grade
Complete
Footprint of
Home:
(including garage &
roof overhangs)
43 May 19, 2026 Item 8
5/15/2019
Lot Size & Site Coverage
All Figures Shall Be In
Sq. Ft., Unless
Otherwise Noted
Existing Proposed Max Allowed
(if applicable)
Total % Of Lot
(if applicable)
Basement:

Garage:
1st Floor:
2nd Floor:

Balconies:

Total Impervious
Surfaces:

Driveway:

Walkways:

Decks:

Patios:

Other:
(pools, tennis court,
water features, etc.)
Total Permeable
Surfaces:

Driveways:

Walkways:

Decks:

Patios:

Total Landscaped
Area:

Landscaping in
Front Yard
Setback:
(maximum 50%
hardscape allowed)
Landscaping in
Street Side
Setback (corner
lot):
(maximum 50%
hardscape allowed)
Percentage of Site
Devoted to Turf:
(maximum 15% of site
allowed)
Minimum
Landscape
Requirements Per
Design Guidelines:
44 May 19, 2026 Item 8
5/15/2019
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) *FAR is calculated from net lot size Existing Square Feet: Sq. Ft. Square feet / Lot Area (net): % New Square Feet: Sq. Ft. Square feet / Lot Area (net): % Total Square Feet: Sq. Ft. Square feet / Lot Area (net): % EXEMPT Structures: Floor Area Ratio (FAR) *FAR is calculated from net lot size Type of Exempt Structure And
Location (Please List Below)
Exempt Sq. Ft. Square feet / Lot Area (net)
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
%
Parking
Total Parking Required:

Total Parking Provided:
# of Outdoor Spaces Provided:
# of Garage Spaces Provided:

Basement Area
Total Basement Area (sq. ft.):

Portion Exempt From FAR (sq. ft.):

Basement FAR Calculation (sq. ft.):

Building Setbacks
Required Existing Proposed
Front 1st Floor:

Front 2nd Floor:

Left Side 1st Floor:

Building Setbacks
Required Existing Proposed
Left Side 2nd Floor:

Right Side 1st Floor:

Right Side 2nd Floor:

Rear 1st Floor:

Rear 2nd Floor:

Corner Lot: q Yes q No
Flag-Shaped Lot: q Yes q No
Heights
Existing Proposed
Building Height:

Structure Height Above Average Adjoining
Grade:

Structure Height Above Lower of Existing -orFinished Adjoining Grade:
45 May 19, 2026 Item 8
5/15/2019
Heights
Proposed Max Allowed
Max Apparent Height:

Max Horizontal Run:

Plate Height Existing Proposed
1st Floor:
2nd Floor:

Basement:

Outdoor Structures:

Accessory Structures:

Attached Structures:

Decks and Balconies
Location of Decks and Balconies (Please List
Below)
Existing Sq. Ft. Proposed Sq. Ft.

Engineering Data Questionnaire
Existing (Sq. Ft.) Proposed (Sq. Ft.) Net Change (Sq. Ft.) Impervious Surfaces in Square Feet:
(total excluding pools and spas)
q Increase q Decrease
Roof Surface Area in Square Feet:
q Increase q Decrease
Grading & Excavation In Cubic Yards (Cut & Fill)
Total Cut (C.Y.):

Net Cut Understructure (C.Y.):

Total Fill (C.Y.):

Max Exposed Retaining Wall Height (Ft.):

Height of Fence on Retaining Wall (Ft.):

Modified Vehicular Access (Driveways): q Yes q No
Proposed Subterranean Improvements
Greater Than Two-Feet in Depth Within
Five-Feet of Property Line:
(basements, footings, pools, spas, etc.)
q Yes q No
Proposed Improvements Within TenFeet Measured From The Top of an Existing Bluff or Top of Slope:
q Yes q No
Proposed Impact of Existing Drainage
Courses:
(redirecting, blocking, etc.)
q Yes q No
Known Geological or Soils Issues or
Sensitivities:
(sliding, faulting, erosion, etc.)
q Yes q No
46 May 19, 2026 Item 8
5/15/2019
Other Components To Plans
Air Conditioning Units: q Yes q No
*If YES, please include air conditioning unit manufactures specifications.

Also, please demonstrate adequate sound attenuation and visual screening measures for the proposed air conditioning units. *Please Note: The air conditioning unit must comply with DMMC Section

9.20.090, the City’s Noise Ordinance, which allows a maximum of 40 decibels between the hours of 10pm and 7am, and 50 decibels between 7am and 10pm, at all property lines.

Lighting: q Yes q No
*If YES, please include Lighting Plans.

Swimming Pool or Spa: q Yes q No
*If YES, please include pool/spa equipment manufactures specifications.

Also, please demonstrate adequate sound attenuation and visual screening measures for the proposed air conditioning units. *Please Note: The pool/spa equipment must comply with DMMC Section

9.20.090, the City’s Noise Ordinance, which allows a maximum of 40 decibels between the hours of 10pm and 7am, and 50 decibels between 7am and 10pm, at all property lines.

Skylights: q Yes q No
*If YES, please include a skylight film specifications sheet, which allows a maximum of 10% visible light transmission (VLT).

Outdoor Fire Feature: q Yes q No
Outdoor Sound:
(tv, speakers, etc.)
q Yes q No
47 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description
Affordable Housing and Coastal Resource Protection
SB 330 Preliminary Application Status
Pursuant to Senate Bill (SB) 330, a Preliminary Application was submitted to the City of Del Mar (the City) on October 4, 2022 for Seaside Ridge, a 259-unit housing development project (the Project). The City assigned PDA22-001 to the application. On October 14, 2022, the City confirmed receipt of the application and provided an invoice for payment of the fee. On October 17, 2022, the fee was submitted to the City and processed, thereby commencing a 180-day submittal deadline for a formal development submittal due by Saturday, April 15, 2023. Pursuant to SB 330, a vested right to the regulatory framework, codes and fees as of October 17, 2022, carry forward for the Seaside Ridge project.

Summarized Project Description
Seaside Ridge is a Housing Development Project, processed pursuant to AB 1398, with 49% of base zone units designated as affordable (42 lower income units, 43 moderate units, 88 market units) qualifying for 50% density bonus with 24% lower income set aside of base zone units (86 bonus units), for a total of 259 apartment rental units [(Govt Code §65583(g)(1)&(4)]. The Project provides much needed housing for Del Mar in all income ranges, including households with moderate, low, very low, and extremely low income, and gives equitable access to coastal resources. . The project includes a public park (operated by Seaside Ridge), ample lateral and vertical public access and onsite public parking, and increased blufftop setbacks for above/below grade structures to account for coastal hazards and to ensure sufficient lateral blufftop public access is accommodated. Seaside Ridge complies with the City’s objective design standards per the City’s Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone (HEI-OZ).

The project, which is conveniently located near major transportation corridors and in close proximity to large employment centers in Sorrento Mesa and Carlsbad, features a scaled design sensitive to the coastal bluff and ensures public safety through improved pedestrian and bicycle circulation. The actions of the State to create an expedited path for this land to become part of the solution to our worsening housing crisis is a welcome opportunity to make a meaningful impact for those who cannot otherwise afford to live in this special area of our region, such as police officers, firefighters, nurses, teachers and service industry workers. Not only does Seaside Ridge deliver real housing opportunities for people with varying incomes, it will help bring the City into compliance with the law.

Seaside Ridge would help the City of Del Mar comply with state law by providing housing opportunities for a range of income groups. The project would fulfill 78% of the City’s immediate need for 54 lower income units on vacant sites in the 6th housing cycle and well over 100% of the City’s moderate-income need.
48 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description, Affordable Housing & Coastal Resource Protection

Expanded Project Description
§ Housing Development Project, processed pursuant to Assembly Bill (AB) 1398 (2022), with 49% of its 173 base zone units designated as affordable representing 85 affordable units and 88 market-rate units [Govt Code §65583(g)(1)&(4)].
§ The 85 affordable units includes 42 lower income units and 43 moderate income units. In compliance with AB 491 (2021), occupants of lower-income and moderate units occupants will have the same access to the common entrances, areas and amenities as the occupants of the market-rate housing units. Further, lower-income and moderate units will not be isolated to a building, a specific floor, or an area on a specific floor. § The 42 lower income units include two extremely low, two very low, and 38 low-income units comprised of (8) studio, (25) 1 bedroom (BDs), (6) 2BDs, and (3) 3BDs ranging from 480 square feet (sf) to 1,296 sf.
§ Due to 24% of its base zone units set aside for lower income, the Project qualifies for a 50% density bonus with three concessions [Govt Code §65915(f)(1)]. The additional 86 market rate units help subsidize the costs to develop 85 affordable units. The total number of apartment rental units including density bonus units is 259. § The 259 rental units include (18) Micro, (68) studios, (116) 1BDs, (46) 2BDs and (11) 3BDs ranging from 400 sf to 1,520 sf, with an average unit size of 764 sf. § Project provides much needed housing for Del Mar in all income ranges, including households with moderate, low, very low, and extremely low income and gives equitable access to coastal resources,. The project provides 78% of the City’s need for 54 lower income units on vacant sites in the 6th Cycle and well over 100% of the City’s moderate income RHNA need.
§ Achieves the spirit of the California Coastal Commission’s Statewide Interpretive Guidelines on Affordable Housing in the Coastal Zone, dated May 5, 1981: “Meaningful access to the coast requires housing opportunities as well as other forms of coastal access... If the coast is not to exclude the less affluent members of society and become an exclusive enclave of the wealthy, affordable housing must be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.”
§ Project includes:
o Public park operated by Seaside Ridge with ample vertical/lateral public access around the property including two vertical accessways to the property’s bluff frontage, a 50’-0”-wide lateral blufftop accessway, and 25 onsite public parking spaces. The lateral blufftop access is designed to ensure lateral blufftop access to the general public remains in the event of extreme coastal hazards. o Public access signage throughout property including wayfinding, regulatory (e.g., park open sunrise to sunset), and educational.
49 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description, Affordable Housing & Coastal Resource Protection

o Increased blufftop setbacks above and below grade structures that meets a minimum factor of safety of 1.5 (FS 1.5) and 1.1 for static and pseudostatic conditions, respectively. An additional 33 feet was added to the blufftop setback to account for bluff retreat from projected erosion over the life of the project. The additional 33 ft setback considered an accelerated erosion rate due to projected sea level rise using a conservative, low probability of occurrence scenario. An additional setback was added to the above calculation for consistency with Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, to accommodate for coastal hazards, and to ensure sufficient lateral blufftop public access is maintained over the Project’s life. As such, the Project includes a FS 1.5 + 33 feet, plus an additional minimum 95-foot setback for belowgrade structures (bluff to parking garage) and FS 1.5 + 33, plus an additional minimum 17-foot setback for above-grade structures (bluff to first grouping of above-grade structures). The first westernmost grouping of above-grade structures is designed such that removal is possible in the event of extreme coastal hazards. o Design assuming no reliance on shoreline devices (e.g., seawalls, revetments, rip-rap barriers, etc).
o Onsite irrigation and meteoric water collected via storm drain system and conveyed easterly away from the bluff. Since there will be an increase in impervious surfaces on the property (e.g., buildings, flatwork, etc.) compared to the existing condition, surface infiltration of water and the potential adverse effects of those conditions on bluff stability will be greatly reduced. Implementation of drought-tolerant vegetation in the Project’s landscape plan with minimal irrigation is provided. o Voluntary public access easements, deed restriction, and notice to be recorded on the property’s title to further protect coastal resources in compliance with the Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act and the City’s Local Coastal Program:
1) Offer to voluntarily record two public access easements on title as follows:
§ 10-foot-wide irrevocable offer of dedication for public access, passive recreational uses, and continual public access path dedicated to the City of Del Mar. The dedication alignment is generally north-to-south along the bluff frontage at the westerly portion of the site. Said dedication may migrate landward over time in the event the top and toe of the coastal bluff migrates. § 10-foot-wide revocable offer of dedication for temporary public access, passive recreational uses, and continual public access path dedicated to the City of Del Mar. The dedication alignment is generally east-to-west between Camino del Mar and the coastal bluff to align near the northern boundary of the site. The termination of said dedication may migrate landward over time in the event the top of the coastal bluff migrates. The dedication is 50 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description, Affordable Housing & Coastal Resource Protection

temporary until such time lateral north-south blufftop access is established to the north vertical accessway at the terminus of Border Avenue and to the south at the James Scripps Bluff Preserve Trail. Said temporary dedication shall automatically terminate upon the adjacent property owner’s future dedication of the permanent public access.
2) Offer to voluntarily record a notice on title that:
§ Identifies the property is located in the certified Del Mar Local Coastal Program Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone, is located in an area identified to be hazardous or may become hazardous in the future, and that the property is potentially vulnerable to erosion and other hazards influenced by sea level rise.
§ Acknowledges owner responsibility for maintenance and repair of drainage and erosion control systems pursuant to a detailed maintenance program.
§ Acknowledges to provide notice of (a) and (b) shall be provided in all real estate disclosures.
3) Offer to voluntarily record a deed restriction on title that:
§ Forfeits all rights to future installation of shoreline protection devices, unless otherwise permitted by the City of Del Mar or ordered by a regulatory agency or a court of competent
jurisdiction.
4) Offer to voluntarily include the following as conditions in the entitlement:
§ Property owner acknowledges and agrees to assume the risks of injury and damage from such hazards in connection with the permitted development.
§ Property owner agrees to unconditionally waive any claim of damage or liability against the City of Del Mar and California Coastal Commission, its officers, agents, and employees for injury or damage from such hazards.
§ Property owner agrees to indemnify and hold harmless the City of Del Mar and California Coastal Commission, its officers, agents, and employees with respect to approval of the project against any and all liability, claims, demands, damages, costs (including costs and fees incurred in defense of such claims), expenses, and amounts paid in settlement arising from any injury or damage due to such hazards.
51 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description, Affordable Housing & Coastal Resource Protection

o 449 vehicular parking stalls comprised of 25 onsite public spaces, 316 onsite resident spaces, 65 onsite guest parking spaces, and 43 additional surplus spaces to ensure onsite parking capacity is maintained and on-street access to nearby coastal resources is protected. Due to the Project’s vehicular and emergency access requirements to Camino del Mar, six on-street parking spaces will be removed and replaced onsite at a 4:1 ratio (25 public spaces proposed). As designed, the Project does not request the use of reduced parking ratios under State Density Bonus allowances [Govt Code §65915(p)(1)].
o Adherence to nearly all objective design standards in the City’s certified Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone (HEI-OZ), including an average unit size less than 1,000 sf in the Project (average of 764 sf proposed). An elevator for use by the general public and residents is required in the front yard setback to provide mandatory ADA access to the site, with buildings setback ten-feet from the front property line (concession requested to reduce setback). o Nine buildings comprised of single and two-story up to four stories, with one fivestory section exposed, over a parking podium/garage consisting of three levels.

Overall massing is broken down into multiple, smaller buildings set in a framework of public spaces to provide scale transitions and human-scale experiences. Buildings and site designs with an open-air environment with ample coastal view corridors shared by visitors, residents, and the general public. Fire lane access is provided around and through the site.
o Building heights range from 24 feet up to a maximum height of 56 feet on the east portion of the site, measured to the top of mechanical equipment screening and existing/finished grade, whichever is lower. Buildings are terraced from west to east to provide a scaled visual transition from the coast inland. Taller buildings are clustered to the center and east portions of the site.
o Architectural designs and landscape features are sensitively designed to Del Mar and include colors, materials, and details that draw from and enhance the natural oceanfront setting.
o 235,002 sf (0.78 FAR) of residential space above a 161,257 sf, three-level underground parking podium (0.54 FAR), for a total square foot development of 396,259 sf (total FAR of 1.32).
o Lot coverage of 112,546 sf (37.4%).
o Public improvements for required access to Camino del Mar in order to facilitate ingress and egress to the Project, public and ADA access via an elevator and walkway at Project Site frontage, and public safety improvements for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles. Six on-street public parking spaces will be removed and replaced onsite and public street improvements will be made at two locations on Via de la Valle at Cedros Avenue and Valley Avenue. Additionally, grading, retaining walls, hardscape, landscaping, a vehicle bridge for continued access to the neighboring property at 52 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description, Affordable Housing & Coastal Resource Protection

101 Border Avenue, utility and stormwater connections will be included west of the developed Camino del Mar roadway and in the public right-of-way. As described in the Project’s Transportation Analysis, traffic improvements include:
1) Camino Del Mar / Project Driveway: Provide an exclusive southbound rightturn lane, a northbound left-turn lane and associated intersection improvements.
2) Via De La Valle / Cedros Avenue: Install a traffic signal at the Via De La Valle / Cedros Avenue intersection and hardwire coordinate the signal with the Highway 101 / Via de la Valle intersection.
3) Via De La Valle / Jimmy Durante Boulevard (Valley Avenue): Provide an exclusive westbound right-turn lane at the Via De La Valle / Jimmy Durante Boulevard intersection and a westbound bike lane (between the right turn lane and the through lane).
§ Seaside Ridge adds units to every category of the City’s 6th Cycle RHNA requirement as follows:

Income Category 6th Cycle RHNA Need Proposed Project
Extremely Low Income
(0-30% AMI*) 18 2
Very Low Income
(30-50% AMI) 19 2
Low Income**
(51-80% AMI) 64 38
Moderate Income
(81-120% AMI) 31 43
Above Moderate Income
(Above 120% AMI) 31 174
*Area Median Income (AMI) in 2022 for San Diego County is $106,900 (https://www.sandiegocounty.gov/sdhcd/rental-assistance/income-limits-ami/). **Does not include an additional 12 carryover units from the 5th Cycle. § The Project’s vacant parcels are identified in the City’s adopted 6th Cycle Housing Element as candidate housing sites (sites 1e and 1f in North Bluff Border Avenue Properties) to meet at least 54 of the 101 units assigned to the meet the City’s lower income RHNA need on vacant parcels. As such, the subject candidate sites will be administratively rezoned into the City’s HEI-OZ to a range of 20 to 25 dwelling units per acre, with ‘by-right’ approval required for any project with 20 percent low-income housing to fulfill the city’s lower income need on vacant parcels. The Project includes 24% of its base zone units (based on 25 units per acre) for lower-income households, with an additional 25% of its base zone units for moderateincome households for a total of 49% if its base zone units set-aside for affordable housing. 53 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description, Affordable Housing & Coastal Resource Protection

To-date, the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element has been adopted locally as part of the City’s Community (General) Plan but has not received certification by the State of California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Seaside Ridge is a housing development project processed pursuant to AB 1398 with at least 49% of its base zone units designated for lower income and moderate income households (Govt Code §65583(g)(4)]. § Project includes the following requests under State Density Bonus law:
o Project requests a 50% density bonus by providing 24% of the base zone units for lower-income (42 units), resulting in 86 density bonus units. o Project qualifies for three concessions as summarized below. Concessions result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to a project that allow for the development of affordable housing.
1) Increase in maximum lot coverage from 20% to 37.4% [DMMC §30.10.070(C)(4)]. This concession allows the development to spread across the site with lower heights, while still maintaining sufficient bluff setbacks, in lieu of development with greater heights and added infrastructure costs. 2) Decrease in vehicle stall depth from 20 ft to 18 ft for parking stall layouts [DMMC §30.80.060(A)(1)-City Parking Lot Layout Standards]. This concession allows the development to provide a utilize adequate stall sizes in parking lots/garages and reduces the need to expand the subterranean parking garage laterally with added development costs.
3) Reduction in the minimum front yard setback from 20 feet to 0 feet [DMMC §30.10.070(C)(1)(a)] for an ADA accessible elevator and associated infrastructure and 20 feet to 10 feet for east building in compliance with the HEI-OZ [DMMC §30.92.040(B)(1)(a)]. This concession allows the development of a mandatory ADA accessway to the project site due to onsite grade and path of travel, thereby reducing the need to create an engineered system of ramps at maximum ADA slope, and allows the east building to spread into the setback by 50%, while still maintaining fire access requirements in the site, in lieu of having to develop another story on the building with added infrastructure costs to relocate the units.
o Project requests four waivers from City development standards. Waivers provide necessary relief from development standards that would otherwise physically preclude the development of affordable housing as part of an overall project. 1) Increase in maximum building height from 14 feet (BSC-OZ) to a maximum height of 56 feet (which includes shielding of mechanical units on rooftops) [DMMC §30.10.070(C)(2), §30.10.080, §30.52.080(A), §30.86.110(A)]. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically precludes the development of the project and associated affordable units.
54 May 19, 2026 Item 8
March 30, 2023
Seaside Ridge Project Description, Affordable Housing & Coastal Resource Protection

2) Increase the maximum FAR from 0.125 (R1-40) to 1.32 (separated between a

0.78 FAR for residential development and 0.54 for parking garages) [DMMC §30.10.070(C)(3)]. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically precludes the development of the project and associated affordable units.
3) Increase in maximum number of stories above grade from two (R1-40) to five (on average three or less) [DMMC §30.86.110(A)]. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically precludes the development of the project and associated affordable units. 4) Allowance for construction on steep slopes within the public right-of-way to facilitate required vehicle and pedestrian ingress/egress to the public street (Camino del Mar), as-needed utilities, and improvements for continued access to adjacent property. Steep slopes are not located onsite but immediately east of the Project site in the public right-of-way location. As such, the steep slopes are not located in the respective R1-40 zone, BSC-OZ, or HEI-OZ. However, in the event the City considers its restriction on steep slope development applies in the City’s right-of-way, there is no feasible alternative siting which eliminates or substantially reduces the need for such construction or grading. Construction on steep slopes is minimized to the greatest extent feasible commensurate with preserving the physical characteristics of the site [DMMC §30.52.060(A)(1-5), §30.92.040(B)(1)(c), §30.92.050(F)]. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically preclude the development from providing required vehicle and pedestrian access between the Project site and the public street (Camino del Mar), including ADA and emergency access, as-needed utilities, and improvements for continued access to the adjacent property at 101 Border Ave. The improvements would be constructed in a manner to minimize the improvements to the greatest extent feasible. 55 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -1-
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
501 West Broadway, 19th Floor
San Diego, California 92101-3598
619.338.6500 main
619.234.3815 fax
www.sheppardmullin.com

MEMORANDU M
To: Matthew Bator, AICP, Principal Planner Date: March 30, 2023 From: Whitney A. Hodges File Number: 47WF-354402
cc: Karen Brindley, Planning Director
Re: Legal Justification for Seaside Ridge Entitlement Application (Reference Application No. PDA22-001)
On behalf of Carol Lazier, applicant of the Seaside Ridge project (the “Project”), we appreciate the opportunity to submit the following justification related to the Project’s entitlement application, which is being submitted concurrently with this memorandum.

The Project, located on 6.91 acres at 929 Border Avenue in the City of Del Mar1 (the “Project Site”), will include: (i) forty-two (42) lower-income units, forty-three (43) moderate-income units, and 174 market-rate units, for a total of 259 dwelling units; (ii) 449 onsite vehicular parking stalls,
2 comprised of 316 resident spaces, twenty-five (25) public spaces, sixty-five (65) guest parking spaces, and forty-three (43) additional surplus spaces to ensure onsite parking capacity is maintained and on-street access to nearby coastal resources is protected; (iii) twenty-six (26) motorcycle parking stalls; (iv) twenty-three (23) bicycle stalls; (v) public trail access around the north and western permitter of the Project Site; (vi) a public blufftop park managed by the ultimate property management company; and (vii) amenities for project residents and guests, including space for indoor use (e.g., business center, community gathering, fitness, administrative, services) and exterior spaces such as a pool and spa and passive outdoor areas. The Project will total 396,259 square feet of development and approximately thirty-eight percent (38%) lot coverage. The Project will include nine (9) buildings between one (1) and five (5) stories, on top of a 3-story partially-subterranean/subterranean parking. Overall massing will be broken down into multiple, smaller buildings set in a framework of public spaces to provide scale transitions and human-scale experiences. Buildings and site designs provide an open-air environment with ample coastal view corridors. The Project Site will be accessible to Camino del Mar and include public improvements to facilitate ingress and egress, including a public elevator with American with Disabilities Act (“ADA”) complaint access at the frontage of the Project Site and replacement public parking, as well as public safety for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.
1 Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 298-241-06, 298-241-07 and 299-030-14. 2 Nine (9) ADA accessible spaces, twenty-three (23) spaces designed for electric vehicles, and twenty-six (26) spaces designed for clean air vehicles.
56 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -2-
A preliminary application for the Project was submitted on October 4, 2022 (“Preliminary Application”) pursuant Senate Bill (SB) 330.3
As part of this Preliminary Application, this office
submitted a memorandum identifying the legal authority to substantiate the Preliminary Application. This memorandum is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein.

The Project, as described above, will require the administrative approval of the following (collectively, “Project Approvals”):
• Rezone to apply the Housing Element Implementation Zone (“HEI-OZ”) • Coastal Development Permit (“CDP”)
• Boundary Adjustment
• Long-Term Major Encroachment
• Tree Removal Permit
These Project Approvals, and evidence supporting approval of such, are discussed below in further detail. The issuance of these Project Approvals is ministerial and not subject to review under the California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”).

I. Implementation of HEI-OZ
A. Assembly Bill 1398 Requires the Project Site to Be “Upzoned.” Assembly Bill 1398 (“AB 1398”) requires a local government that fails to adopt a housing element that the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) has found to be in substantial compliance with state law within 120 days of the statutory deadline to rezone the sites identified in the housing element update no later than one (1) year from the statutory deadline for the adoption of the housing element. AB 1398 prohibits a jurisdiction that adopts a housing element more than one (1) year after the statutory deadline from being found in substantial compliance, as described above, until required rezoning is completed, as specified. (Govt. Code § 65583(c)(1)(A).)
If a local government fails to complete the rezoning by the deadline, a local government may not disapprove a housing development project, nor require a conditional use permit, planned unit development permit, or other locally imposed discretionary permit, or impose a condition that would render the project infeasible, if the housing development project: (A) is proposed to be located on a site required to be rezoned pursuant to the program action required by that subparagraph; and (B) complies with applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(1).) For purposes of this provision, a housing development project is defined as a residential development having at least 49% of the housing units for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4).) The resultant application shall be for design review and shall not constitute a “project” for purposes of CEQA. (Id.) Any subdivision of sites shall be subject to the Subdivision Map Act (Govt. Code §§ 66410 et seq.). (Id.)
The City of Del Mar (“City”) does not have a compliant Sixth Cycle Housing Element Update (“6th Cycle”). There is no evidence HCD determined the City’s 6th Cycle was in substantial compliance in advance of the deadline imposed by AB 1398. In fact, HCD issued a response 3 For purposes of SB 330, the Preliminary Application was “deemed complete” as of October 17, 2022. The Project, as presently proposed, does not represent a twenty percent (20%) change in number of units or square footage of construction. Therefore, pursuant to Government Code section 65589.5(c), the Project shall be subject to the ordinances, policies, and standards adopted and in effect as of October 17, 2022. 57 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -3-
letter to the City dated March 21, 2022 (“2022 Response Letter”). This 2022 Response Letter determines that the 6th Cycle is still deficient, and, at no point, does the letter make a finding of substantial compliance. This position was most recently restated in a subsequent response letter dated January 13, 2023 (“2023 Response Letter”). Specifically, this 2023 Response Letter states that the 6th Cycle will “meet the statutory requirements of State Housing Element Law once it has been revised and re-adopted to comply with the above requirement.” The letter goes on to state:

Pursuant to Assembly Bill 1398 (Chapter 358, Statutes of 2021), a jurisdiction that failed to adopt a compliant housing element within one year from the statutory deadline cannot be found in compliance until rezones to make prior identified sites available or accommodate a shortfall of sites pursuant to Government Code section 65583, subdivision (c) (1) and Government Code section 65583.2, subdivision (c) are completed. As this year has passed, if any future rezonings are necessary, the housing element will be out of compliance and will remain out of compliance until any necessary rezonings have been completed.
(Emphasis added.)
The 6th Cycle identified the Project Site in its vacant candidate sites inventory for upzoning as part of its “Program IE.” Presently, under the Housing Element Law and AB 1398, the City does not have a compliant 6th Cycle and has not “upzoned” a sufficient amount of identified candidates sites. Therefore, the City is required to rezone the Project Site as identified in the 6th Cycle. This will require the implementation of the HEI-OZ over the Project Site.

B. Implementation of HEI-OZ on the Project Site (“Rezone”) is an Administrative Action Not Subject to CEQA.

On March 21, 2021, the City approved an ordinance for the creation of the HEI-OZ, which will allow for a residential density range of twenty (20) to twenty-five (25) dwelling units per acre (“20-25 du/ac”) of “by right” multiple dwelling unit development when an affordable unit component is included. “By right” means that the City cannot apply subjective or discretionary review when processing development applications. Thus, that these types of projects would not be subject to the City’s Design Review process or reviews by the City’s Design Review Board, Planning Commission, or City Council.

The HEI-OZ is the City’s implementation mechanism for rezoning certain parcels pursuant to Housing Element programs. The HEI-OZ could be applied to parcels throughout the City via rezone actions in the future as necessary to implement the City’s Housing Element and comply with State law. The HEI-OZ is a zoning tool that can be used to specify allowances and standards on a specific parcel(s) when subject to certain State-required rezone programs in the Housing Element pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2 (h) and (i). The HEI-OZ could be applied to parcels throughout the City via rezone actions processed in the future as necessary to implement the City’s Housing Element requirements. The HEI-OZ is certified as part of the City’s Local Coastal Program (“LCP”) and codified as a part of Del Mar Municipal Code (“DMMC”) Chapter 30.92 and identifies the areas of applicability. The HEI-OZ does not apply to any property until a rezone action is formally processed. All rezone actions to apply the HEI-OZ to a parcel(s) will be subject to an administrative level ministerial approval process where submitted development applications will be reviewed for compliance with the published development standards and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting criteria. 58 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -4-
The HEI-OZ identifies the process for permit approval, development standards, and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements that would be required of all new development on a parcel located within the HEI-OZ. Pursuant to State law, rezone programs in the HEI-OZ will be subject to an administrative, ministerial approval process where submitted development applications will be reviewed for compliance with the published development standards and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting criteria.

Consistent with Government Code section 65583(g)(4), the Project includes forty-nine percent (49%), or eight-five (85) of its 173 base units, designated as affordable consistent. Additionally, the Project is consistent with nearly all objective design standards in HEI-OZ, with the exception of the front yard setback requested as a concession authorized under the State Density Bonus Law (Govt. Code §§ 65915 et seq.) (“SDB Law”), including an average unit size of 764 square feet which is less than the HEI-OZ required 1,000 square-foot average unit size standard. 4 Therefore, pursuant to Government Code sections 65583(g)(1), the City cannot deny the application for implementation of the HEI-OZ on the Project Site. Moreover, the application and approval must be processed ministerially, and will not trigger CEQA review. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4).)
C. Applicable Development Standards Allow for Accommodations of State Density Bonus Law
The development standards applicable to the Project shall be in accordance with the applicable base zone and overlay zones applying to a parcel(s) and all applicable objective provisions of DMMC Title 30, unless otherwise indicated in DMMC Chapter 30.92 or where necessary to comply with Federal and State law. Through project reviews in the HEI-OZ, the City must meet applicable Federal and State law requirements while accommodating a project design that can meet the required density range of 20-25 du/ac and local development standards to the extent feasible; however, projects may require “accommodation” by the City. HCD indicated the best example to refer to for understanding this expected local accommodation process is set forth in the State’s Density Bonus (“SDB”) Law regulations for “waivers” and “concessions.” Given the provision of affordable housing, the Project qualifies for a fifty percent (50%) density bonus under the SDB Law due to a twenty-four percent (24%) lower-income set aside. The set aside authorizes eight-six (86) bonus units for a total of 259 apartment rental units. The Project includes requests under SDB three (3) concessions and four (4) waivers pursuant to Government Code section 65915(p)(1). The Project no longer requests reduced parking ratios pursuant to SDB Law.

The concessions identified below will result in identifiable and actual cost reductions to a project that allow for the development of affordable housing. The Project includes the following concessions as authorized by the SDB Law:
1) Increase in maximum lot coverage from twenty percent (20%) to 37.4%. This concession allows the development to spread across the Project Site with lower heights, while still maintaining sufficient bluff setbacks, in lieu of development with greater heights and added infrastructure costs.
4 For the developments standards the Project is not incompliance with, the Project is seeking waivers and incentives authorized under the State Density Bonus Law and as discussed in Section I.C. 59 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -5-
2) Decrease in vehicle stall depth from twenty (20) feet to eighteen (18) feet for parking stall layouts. This concession allows the Project to provide adequate stall sizes in parking lots/garages and reduces the need to expand the subterranean parking garage laterally with added development costs.
3) Reduction in the minimum front yard setback from twenty (20) feet to zero (0) feet for an ADA accessible elevator and associated infrastructure, and twenty (20) feet to ten (10) feet for east building in compliance with the HEI-OZ. This concession allows the development of a mandatory ADA accessway to the project site due to onsite grade and path of travel, thereby reducing the need to create an engineered system of ramps at maximum ADA slope, and allows the east building to spread into the setback by fifty percent (50%), while still maintaining fire access requirements within the Project Site, in lieu of having to develop another story on the building with added infrastructure costs to relocate the units.

The waivers identified below provide necessary relief from development standards that would otherwise physically preclude the development of affordable housing as part of an overall project. The Project includes the following waivers as authorized by the SDB Law:
1) Increase in maximum building height from fourteen (14) feet to a maximum height of fifty-six (56) feet, which includes shielding of mechanical units on rooftops. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically preclude the development of the Project and associated affordable units. 2) Increase the maximum floor area ratio (“FAR”) from 0.125 to 1.32. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically preclude the development of the Project and associated affordable units. 3) Increase in maximum number of stories above grade from two to five. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically preclude the development of the Project and associated affordable units. 4) Allowance for construction on steep slopes within the public right-of-way to facilitate required vehicle and pedestrian ingress/egress to the public street (Camino del Mar), as-needed utilities, and improvements for continued access to adjacent property.

Steep slopes are not located onsite but immediately east of the Project Site in the public right-of-way location. As such, the steep slopes are not located in the respective zone or overlays. However, in the event the City considers whether its restriction on steep slope development applies in the City’s right-of-way, there is no feasible alternative siting which eliminates or substantially reduces the need for such construction or grading. Construction on steep slopes is minimized to the greatest extent feasible commensurate with preserving the physical characteristics of the Project Site. This waiver provides relief from a City development standard that would physically preclude the development from providing required vehicle and pedestrian access between the Project Site and the public street (Camino del Mar), including ADA and emergency access, as-needed utilities, and improvements for continued access to the adjacent property at 101 Border Avenue. The improvements would be constructed in a manner to minimize the improvements to the greatest extent feasible.
60 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -6-
II. Administrative CDP
A. Approval of the Administrative CDP is an Administrative Action Not Subject to CEQA.

An administrative Coastal Development Permit (“CDP”) would be required for the proposed Project.

Following approval of the HEI-OZ, the ordinance was sent to the California Coastal Commission (“CCC”) for final certification. The CCC considered the HEI-OZ during its meeting on May 11, 2022, and made certain amendments. The City approved these amendments on May 16, 2022 and June 6, 2022 (Ordinance No. 989). The CCC accepted these amendments July 13, 2022.

Specific to development under the HEI-OZ, DMMC section 30.75.080(E) states the City’s Planning Director is the Issuing Authority for an administrative CDP, which is identified as a ministerial permit. The Planning Director must approve a CDP application in the HEI-OZ if the proposed housing development is consistent with the requirements of the City’s certified LCP.

As proposed, DMMC section 30.75.140 states the required findings for permit approval and further clarifies that no local public hearing can be required.

The Project includes forty-nine percent (49%) of its base units designated as affordable (85 of 173 rental units) consistent with Government Code section 65583(g)(4). Therefore, pursuant Government Code sections 65583(g)(1), the City cannot deny the application for administrative CDP. Moreover, the application and approval must be processed ministerially, and will not trigger CEQA review. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4).)
B. A Local Coastal Program Amendment is Not Required
Implementation of the HEI-OZ on the Project Site would not require an additional Local Coastal Program (“LCP”) amendment. Pursuant to Ordinance No. 989, as certified, the overlay zone could be applied to parcels throughout the City via rezone actions in the future as necessary to implement the City’s Housing Element and comply with State law. The applicable LCP amendment, which approved the application of the HEI-OZ to any property identified in the 6th Cycle, was already processed and certified (as amended) by the CCC. The processing of the HEI-OZ into the LCP was intended to include the sites identified by the 6th Cycle, as identified in the May 11, 2022 CCC staff report:

The LCP amendment would also apply the new HEI-OZ zone to two existing parcels, known as “Watermark,” which fulfills the obligations of Program 2G of the City’s 5th Housing Element Cycle. These two parcels are vacant lots that were identified by the City as its “adequate sites” to support the development of affordable housing in the prior 4th Cycle Housing Element, but because no action was taken by the City during that time to implement the housing program on those sites or to otherwise identify and process approval of an equivalent replacement with sufficient density, the City is required to process this action through Program 2G as part of its 5th Cycle. While Program 2G required the rezoning of only two parcels, the City created the new overlay in anticipation of applying it to various parcels during the City’s 6th Housing Element Cycle (2021- 2028). These include, but are not limited to, up to six parcels along Border Avenue/North Bluff and up to three vacant parcels at the south end of Stratford Court.
61 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -7-
(Emphasis added.)
Any change to the LCP would be limited to the inclusion of the Project Site into the table included in the LCP that identifies the parcels subject to the HEI-OZ. This change is de minimis and would be implemented by the CCC Executive Director pursuant to Coastal Act. (Pub. Res.

Code § 30514(d).)
III. Boundary Adjustment
The Subdivision Map Act provides several avenues by which previously subdivided lands may be merged, recombined, or resubdivided. Cities and counties may provide, by ordinance, for the voluntary merger of contiguous parcels held in common ownership. (Govt. Code § 66499.20.3.) Voluntary merger procedures vary from jurisdiction to jurisdiction, but most require some level of administrative review and approval. All must require the recordation of an instrument evidencing the merger. The voluntary merger procedure does not permit the adjustment, reconfiguration, or creation of any new exterior property lines, but merely permits the combining of existing parcels.

The Project is requesting a voluntary lot merger to consolidate the three (3) existing lots into one (1) contiguous lot. DMMC section 24.70.030(a) specifies that the Director of Planning and Community Development shall serve as the issuing authority on the application for such a “Boundary Adjustment,” meaning this application is processed administratively.

The Project includes forty-nine percent (49%) of its base units designated as affordable (85 of 173 rental units) consistent with Government Code section 65583(g)(4). Therefore, pursuant Government Code sections 65583(g)(1),the City cannot deny the application for the boundary adjustment. Moreover, the application and approval must be processed ministerially, and will not trigger CEQA review. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4).)
IV. Administrative Encroachment
The Project will include public improvements for required access to Camino del Mar in order to facilitate ingress and egress to the Project, public and ADA access via an elevator and walkway at Project Site frontage, and public safety improvements for pedestrians, bicycles, and vehicles.

Six on-street public parking spaces will be removed and replaced onsite and public street improvements will be made at two locations on Via de la Valle at Cedros Avenue and Valley Avenue. Additionally, grading, retaining walls, hardscape, landscaping, a vehicle bridge for continued access to the neighboring property at 101 Border Avenue, utility and stormwater connections will be included west of the developed Camino del Mar roadway and in the public right-of-way. These improvements will encroach upon City-owned public right-of-way at Camino Del Mar and Via de la Valle, requiring a long-term, major encroachment permit pursuant to DMMC section 23.28.030. Under DMMC section 23.28.070(B), such a permit requires a vote from City Council during a publicly-noticed hearing.

The Project includes forty-nine percent (49%), or eight-five (85) of its 173 base units, designated as affordable consistent with Government Code section 65583(g)(4). Therefore, pursuant Government Code sections 65583(g)(1), the City must process the application for the encroachment permit as a ministerial approval contrary to DMMC under the doctrine of preemption, and this application is not subject to CEQA. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4).) Moreover, the City cannot deny the application. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4). All proposed improvements in the City’s public right-of-way are mandatory to effectuate the development of the housing development project.
62 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -8-
V. Tree Removal Permit
The Project requires a tree removal permit for the removal of Torrey Pine and Monterey Cypress trees. Pursuant to an Arborist Report prepared by Rappaport Development Consulting Services, last updated, on September 13, 2022, the Project Site currently has one dead Torrey Pine, 30 dead Monterey Cypress and 14 living Monterey Cypress trees in very poor health. The Arborist Report concludes that all of the dead or dying trees satisfy the City’s criteria for tree removal (DMMC section 23.50.080(C)(1)). This permit, which is to be processed by the Planning Director, is ministerial.

The Project includes forty-nine percent (49%) of its base units designated as affordable (85 of 173 rental units) consistent with Government Code section 65583(g)(4). Therefore, pursuant Government Code sections 65583(g)(1), the City cannot deny the application for the tree removal permit. Moreover, the application and approval must be processed ministerially, and will not trigger CEQA review. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4).) VI. The City Cannot Make Findings To Deny The Project Application The City can only deny the Project if it makes written findings, based upon a preponderance of the evidence in the record, as to one of the following:

1. The City has adopted a 6th Cycle in substantial compliance with the Housing Element Law, and that the City has met or exceeded its share of regional housing need allocation for the planning period.

2. The Project would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health or safety and there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households. As used in this paragraph, a “specific, adverse impact” means a significant, quantifiable, direct, and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies, or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete. Inconsistency with the zoning ordinance or general plan land use designation shall not constitute a specific, adverse impact upon the public health or safety.

3. The denial of the Project or imposition of conditions is required in order to comply with specific state or federal law, and there is no feasible method to comply without rendering the development unaffordable to low- and moderate-income households or rendering the development financially infeasible.

4. The Project is proposed on land zoned for agriculture or resource preservation that is surrounded on at least two sides by land being used for agricultural or resource preservation purposes, or which does not have adequate water or wastewater facilities to serve the Project.

5. The Project is inconsistent with both the City’s zoning ordinance and general plan land use designation as specified in any element of the general plan as it existed on the date the application was deemed complete, and the City has adopted a 6th Cycle that is in substantial compliance with the Housing Element Law.
(Govt. Code § 65589.5(d).)
63 May 19, 2026 Item 8
SMRH:4853-5269-4618.3 -9-
As demonstrated above, the City does not have a 6th Cycle in effect that has been deemed by HCD to be in substantial conformance with the Housing Element Law. Therefore, the City cannot make findings 1 or 5. As demonstrated by the materials provided concurrently with this memorandum, the City cannot make a finding that the Project would have a specific, adverse impact upon public health or safety. The preponderance of the evidence in the record demonstrates the contrary – this project will actually promote the health and safety of the community. There are no state or federal laws that require the City to deny the Project. In fact, state law actually requires the City to approve the Project in compliance with AB 1398.

Moreover, the Project will “affirmatively further fair housing” by truly integrating and balancing living patterns between the market-rate and affordable units, in accordance with AB 686. (Govt.

Code §§ 65584(e), 8899.50(a)(1).) Additionally, the Project achieves the spirit of the California Coastal Commission’s Statewide Interpretive Guidelines on Affordable Housing in the Coastal Zone, dated May 5, 1981, which states “[m]eaningful access to the coast requires housing opportunities as well as other forms of coastal access... If the coast is not to exclude the less affluent members of society and become an exclusive enclave of the wealthy, affordable housing must be protected, encouraged, and, where feasible, provided.” Therefore, the City cannot make finding 3. Lastly, the Project Site is presently zoned residential. Therefore, the City cannot make finding 4.
64 May 19, 2026 Item 8
Exhibit A

65 May 19, 2026 Item 8
Sheppard, Mullin, Richter & Hampton LLP
501 West Broadway, 19th Floor
San Diego, California 92101-3598
619.338.6500 main
619.234.3815 fax
www.sheppardmullin.com
October 3, 2022

LEGAL AUTHORITY SUPPORTING DEVELOPMENT APPLICATION FOR SEASIDE RIDGE The submitted Senate Bill (SB) 330 Preliminary Application is for a housing development project1 (“Project”) located on two 6th Cycle candidate housing sites identified in the City’s North Bluff area. The Project includes 49% of its base units designated as affordable (85 of 173 rental units comprised of 42 lower income units, 43 moderate units, and 88 market units) consistent with Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4), and qualifies for 50% density bonus due to a 24% lower income set aside. The set aside authorizes 86 bonus units for a total of 259 apartment rental units (Govt Code § 65583(g)(1)&(4). The Project includes requests under State Density Bonus Law for 86 bonus units, three concessions (lot coverage, vehicle stall depth, and steep slopes), three waivers (FAR, height, and stories), and parking ratios per Govt Code § 65915(p)(1).

The Project provides much needed housing for Del Mar in all income ranges and gives equitable access to coastal resources, including households with low, very low, and extremely low income. As the site is situated on the City’s North Bluff, it is sensitively designed and includes ample lateral and vertical public access, onsite public parking, and increased blufftop setbacks for above/below grade structures to account for coastal hazards and to ensure sufficient lateral blufftop public access is accommodated in compliance with the City’s Local Coastal Program and Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act. The housing development project meets all objective design standards per the City’s certified HEI-OZ (DMMC Chapter 30.92).

The following analysis provides the background and authority State Housing Law for the submitted Project and SB 330 Preliminary Application
This memorandum is intended to identify the legal authority supporting the application related to development of Seaside Ridge (the “Project”). Further, this memorandum will supplement the Project application, which requests issuance of an administrative rezone, Coastal Development Permit, Boundary Adjustment, encroachment permit and tree removal permit.

I. Housing Accountability Act and the Housing Crisis Act The Housing Accountability Act (Govt. Code §§ 65589.5 et seq.) authorizes local governments to require housing development projects to comply with objective, quantifiable, written development standards, conditions, and policies that are appropriate and consistent with meeting the jurisdiction’s share of regional housing needs under Government Code section 65583. (Govt. Code § 65589.5(f)(1)–(2).) “Objective” development standards, conditions, and policies are those that involve “no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and being uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official.” (Govt. Code § 1 “Housing development project” is defined as a use consisting of any of the following: (i) residential units only; (ii) mixed-use developments consisting of residential and nonresidential uses with at least twothirds of the square footage designated for residential use; and/or (iii) transitional housing or supportive housing. (Govt. Code § 65589.5(h)(2)).
66 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

65589.5(h)(8); Cal. Renters Legal Advocacy & Educ. Fund v. City of San Mateo (2021) 68 Cal.App.5th 820.)
As amended by Senate Bill 330 (the ”Housing Crisis Act” or “SB “330) and Senate Bill 8 (“SB 8”), for the period of 2020–2034, the applicable objective standards, conditions, and policies (i.e., general plan, community plan, specific plan, zoning, design review standards, development impact fees, and other exactions) may only be those that were adopted and in effect when an applicant submits a “preliminary application” under Government Code section 65941.1, which sets forth the list of information that a local government may require for a preliminary application. (Govt. Code § 65589.5(o)(1).) These rules apply to a housing development project that submits a preliminary application prior to January 1, 2030. Within 180 days after submitting a preliminary application, the applicant must submit a complete application, as defined under the Permit Streamlining Act, consistent with Government Code sections 65940, 65941, and 65941.5. An application for a housing development project is “deemed complete” under the Housing Crisis Act when the applicant submits a preliminary application that includes the information identified in Government Code section 65941.1(a), along with payment of the applicable permit processing fee. (Govt. Code § 65589.5(h)(5).) A housing development project must be deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provisions “if there is substantial evidence that would allow a reasonable person to conclude that the … project or emergency shelter is consistent, compliant, or in conformity.” (Govt. Code § 65589.5(f)(4).) If a local jurisdiction determines that a housing development project is inconsistent with an objective standard, it must give applicants written notice and an explanation of the basis for inconsistency. (Govt. Code § 65589.5(j)(2)(A).) Such notice must be provided within thirty (30) days after the project application is deemed complete if the project has 150 units or less, or within sixty (60) days of that date if the project has more than 150 units. (Govt.

Code § 65589.5(j)(2)(A).)
Government Code section 65589.5(d) further imposes limits on a city’s or county’s ability to either deny a housing development that includes affordable housing or to impose conditions on either in a manner that renders the project infeasible for development of very low-, low-, or moderate-income units.2
II. Housing Element Law
Enacted in original form in 1969, the Housing Element Law (Govt. Code §§ 65580 et seq.) requires that all cities and counties in California engage in detailed planning for their residential needs by including housing as an element of their comprehensive plans. The housing element process is intended to focus the attention of city policymakers on identifying land sites for housing, and on policy actions that would make it easier or less expensive to provide additional 2 “Housing for very low, low-, or moderate-income households” means that either: (A) at least 20 percent of the total units shall be sold or rented to lower income households; or (B) 100 percent of the units shall be sold or rented to persons and families of moderate income [as defined], or persons and families of middle income. (Govt. Code § 65589.5(h)(3).)
67 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

housing units. The Housing Element Law requires that the housing element include, among other things, an inventory of land suitable and available for residential development.

When the inventory in an agency’s housing element does not identify sites sufficient to meet the agency’s share of the regional housing needs assessment at all income levels without rezoning, the housing element must identify sites that can be developed for housing within the planning period. (Govt. Code § 65583(c)(1).) The housing element must commit to rezone sites to make up any shortfall between the amount of low- and very-low-income units identified in the inventory and the needs assessment. The rezoning must allow owner-occupied and rental multifamily residential “use by right.” (Govt. Code § 65583.2(h).) “Use by right” sites must meet statutory minimum density standards. Development of “use by right” sites for low- and very-lowincome residential uses do not require discretionary agency approvals or review that would constitute a “project” under California Environmental Quality Act (Pub. Res. Code §§ 21000 et seq.) (“CEQA”). (Govt. Code § 65583.2(i).)
Once a local update has been drafted, California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”) reviews it to gauge whether the plan can enable the targeted number of units — including specific amounts of housing for households of very low, low, moderate, and “above moderate” incomes. If so, HCD certifies the housing element. If not, the jurisdiction may change its plan to incorporate HCD’s suggestions. If the element is adopted without satisfying HCD’s concerns — or fails to be updated at all — the city or county is regarded as noncompliant. That judgment limits its eligibility for certain state and federal funds for affordable housing and renders it more vulnerable to lawsuits that can halt development in the community.

There have been frequent conflicts between state and local policymakers over housing element compliance.

Assembly Bill 1398 (“AB 1398”) requires a local government that fails to adopt a housing element that the HCD has found to be in substantial compliance with state law within 120 days of the statutory deadline to complete the rezoning of sites identified in the housing element update no later than one (1) year from the statutory deadline for the adoption of the housing element. AB 1398 prohibits a jurisdiction that adopts a housing element more than one (1) year after the statutory deadline from being found in substantial compliance, as described above, until required rezoning is completed, as specified. (Govt. Code § 65583(c)(1)(A).) If a local government fails to complete the rezoning by the deadline, a local government may not disapprove a housing development project, nor require a conditional use permit, planned unit development permit, or other locally imposed discretionary permit, or impose a condition that would render the project infeasible, if the housing development project: (A) is proposed to be located on a site required to be rezoned pursuant to the program action required by that subparagraph; and (B) complies with applicable, objective general plan and zoning standards and criteria. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(1).) For purposes of this provision, a housing development project is defined as a residential development having at least 49% of the housing units for very low-, low-, and moderate-income households. (Govt. Code § 65583(g)(4).) The resultant application shall be for design review and shall not constitute a “project” for purposes of CEQA. (Id.) Any subdivision of sites shall be subject to the Subdivision Map Act (Govt. Code §§ 66410 et seq.). (Id.)
68 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

In response to AB 1398, the California Legislature passed Senate Bill 197 (“SB 197”). However, SB 197 does not apply to extend the timeline for approval. Instead, SB 197 amends the Government Code to read:
…, a local government shall have three years and 120 days from the statutory deadline in Section 65588 for adoption of the housing element to complete any rezonings required by subparagraph (A) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (c) of Section 65583 and subdivision (c) of Section 65583.2 if all of the following apply:
(1) The statutory deadline in Section 65588 for adoption of the sixth revision of the housing element was in the 2021 calendar year
(2) The local government failed to adopt a sixth revision of the housing element that the department had found to be in substantial compliance with this article within 120 days of the statutory deadline in Section 65588 for adoption of the housing element.
(3) The local government adopts a sixth revision of the housing element and the department finds the adopted element to be in substantial compliance with this article within one year of the statutory deadline established pursuant to Section 65888 for adoption of the housing element. (Govt. Code § 65583.4(a) [emphasis added].) The City of Del Mar (“City”) does not meet criteria (3). Instead, SB 197 was intended to help out cities and counties with the October 15, 2021 statutory deadlines. These jurisdictions are limited 191 out of 197 cities and counties within the Southern California Association of Governments (LA, OC, Riverside, San Bernardino, Ventura, Imperial).

The City’s statutory deadline was April 15, 2021 – meaning the one (1) year grace period provided by SB 197 would have terminated on April 15, 2022 (well in advance of the passage of this bill). Therefore, SB 197 cannot provide the City additional time to come into compliance with the Housing Element Law before it would be required to rezone identified sites.

A. City of Del Mar’s 6th Cycle
The City’s draft 6th Cycle of the Housing Element (“6th Cycle”) includes Program 6G to develop objective design standards that would be located in Del Mar Municipal Code (“DMMC”) Title 23.

The goal of this program would be to apply objective design standards to all multiple dwelling unit development subject to “by right” allowances, including those authorized by: (i) Government Code Section 65583.2 (h)-(i); and (ii) State Density Bonus law.

The 6th Cycle identified the North Bluff as part of its “Program IE.” Implementation of Program IE is intended only as a contingency in case the City’s preferred strategy – Program 3A – to secure an agreement with the 22nd District Agricultural Association to build at least fifty-four (54) units for lower income households at the State Fairgrounds, including all regional housing needs assessment (“RHNA”) units assigned for extremely low-income households, is not obtained within thirty-six (36) months of adoption of the Housing Element.

The below table was included in the 6th Cycle.
69 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

Residential Capacity no Sites to be Rezoned Under the Contingency Program Site Number/Name Gross Acreage Potential Units at 20-25 du/ac Lower Income Above Moderate
North Bluff Boarder
Avenue Properties

12.39 47-61 200-250
South Stratford
Properties

4.94 19-25 80-99
Total 17.33 66-86 280-349
Below is the timeline of relevant events related to the processing, and rejection by HCD, of the City’s 6th Cycle.

Date Action or Event

3.25.2021 City Council adopted the 6th Cycle to replace the prior 5th Cycle Housing Element (“5th Cycle”).

4.15.2021 5th Cycle planning period ends and the 6th Cycle planning period begins. This is the statutory deadline for adoption of the 6th Cycle.

7.9.2021 HCD submitted letter to the City stating the 6th Cycle required revisions to comply with the Housing Element Law prior to HCD making a finding of substantial conformance.

8.13.2021 Deadline set by AB 1398 for HCD to find City’s 6th Cycle in substantial conformance with Housing Element Law. If this deadline is not met, the City is required to complete rezoning of the inventory sites identified in the 6th Cycle prior to 4.15.2022.

12.13.2021 City Council re-adopted the 6th Cycle following revision to address HCD Comments

3.21.2021 HCD submitted letter to the City stating the 6th Cycle required revisions to comply with the Housing Element Law prior to HCD making a finding of substantial conformance.

4.15.2022 Deadline set by AB 1398 for City to rezone its inventory sites identified in the 6th Cycle. If this deadline is not met, HCD cannot make a finding that the City’s 6th Cycle is in substantial conformance until the requisite rezoning occurred.

4.21.2022 City has not addressed March HCD letter. City has not completed requisite rezones. City has not adopted 6th Cycle despite finding of non-compliance.

Important to note, HCD issued a response letter to the City dated March 21, 2022 (“Response Letter”). This Response Letter determines that the 6th Cycle is still deficient, and, at no point, 70 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

does the letter make a finding of substantial compliance. As recently as August 25, 2022, HCD issued a letter of inquiry (“Letter of Inquiry”) to the City requesting that the City provide a specific timeline for submitting an updated draft housing element and obtaining compliance with the State Housing Element by September 25, 2022. Per HCD’s compliance tracker, nothing further has been submitted by the City since the issuance of the March 21, 2022 Response Letter.

Presently, under the Housing Element Law and AB 1398, the City does not have a compliant 6th Cycle. Therefore, the City is required to rezone the North Bluff sites as identified in the 6th Cycle.

B. Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone
On March 21, 2021, the City approved an ordinance for the creation of the Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone (“HEI-OZ”), which will allow for a residential density range of 20- 25 dwelling units per acre (“du/ac”) of “by right” multiple dwelling unit development when an affordable unit component is included. “By right” means that the City cannot apply subjective or discretionary review when processing development applications. This means that these types of projects would not be subject to the City’s Design Review process or reviews by the City’s Design Review Board, Planning Commission, or City Council.

Following approval of the HEI-OZ, the ordinance was sent to the California Coastal Commission (“CCC”) for final certification. The CCC considered the HEI-OZ during its meeting on May 11, 2022, and made certain amendments. The City approved these amendments on May 16, 2022 and June 6, 2022 (Ordinance No. 989). The CCC accepted these amendments July 13, 2022.

The HEI-OZ is the City’s implementing mechanism to rezone certain parcels pursuant to Housing Element programs. The HEI-OZ could be applied to parcels throughout the City via rezone actions in the future as necessary to implement the City’s Housing Element and comply with State law. The HEI-OZ is a zoning tool that can be used to specify allowances and standards on a specific parcel(s) when subject to certain State-required rezone programs in the Housing Element pursuant to Government Code Section 65583.2 (h) and (i). The HEI-OZ could be applied to parcels throughout the City via rezone actions processed in the future as necessary to implement the City’s Housing Element requirements. The certified HEI-OZ is codified as a part of DMMC Chapter 30.92 and identifies the areas of applicability. The HEI-OZ does not apply to any property until a rezone action is formally processed. All rezone actions to apply the HEI-OZ to a parcel(s) will be subject to an administrative level ministerial approval process where submitted development applications will be reviewed for compliance with the published development standards and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting criteria.

The HEI-OZ identifies the process for permit approval, development standards, and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting requirements that would be required of all new development on a parcel located within the HEI-OZ. Pursuant to State law, rezone programs in the HEI-OZ will be subject to an administrative, ministerial approval process where submitted development applications will be reviewed for compliance with the published development standards and mitigation, monitoring, and reporting criteria. More specifically, an administrative Coastal Development Permit (“CDP”) would be required for proposed development. 71 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

Specific to development under the HEI-OZ, DMMC section 30.75.080(E) states City’s Planning Director is the Issuing Authority for this type of administrative, ministerial permit. The Planning Director would approve a CDP application in the HEI-OZ if the proposed housing development is consistent with the requirements of the City’s certified LCP. As proposed, DMMC section

30.75.140 states the required findings for permit approval and further clarify that no local public hearing can be required. Once a final decision is made, the Planning Director’s decision must be reported to the Executive Director of the CCC within five (5) working days and to any interested parties who request notice in writing. As proposed, public notice will be provided in accordance with DMMC section 30.75.120.

The development standards applicable to proposed development in the HEI-OZ shall be in accordance with the applicable base zone and overlay zones applying to a parcel(s) and all applicable objective provisions of DMMC Title 30, unless otherwise indicated in DMMC Chapter

30.92 or where necessary to comply with Federal and State law. Through project reviews in the HEI-OZ, the City must meet applicable Federal and State law requirements while accommodating a project design that can meet the required density range of 20-25 du/ac and local development standards to the extent feasible; however, projects may require “accommodation” by the. HCD indicated the best example to refer to for understanding of this expected local accommodation process is set forth in the State’s Density Bonus (“SDB”) Law regulations for “waivers” and “concessions.”
Implementation of the HEI-OZ would similarly not require an additional LCP amendment.

Pursuant to Ordinance No. 989, as certified, the overlay zone could be applied to parcels throughout the City via rezone actions in the future as necessary to implement the City’s Housing Element and comply with State law. The applicable LCP amendment, which approved the application of the HEI-OZ to any property identified in the 6th Cycle, was already processed and certified (as amended) by the CCC. The processing of the HEI-OZ into the LCP was intended to include the sites identified by the 6th Cycle, as identified in the May 11, 2022 CCC staff report:

The LCP amendment would also apply the new HEI-OZ zone to two existing parcels, known as “Watermark,” which fulfills the obligations of Program 2G of the City’s 5th Housing Element Cycle. These two parcels are vacant lots that were identified by the City as its “adequate sites” to support the development of affordable housing in the prior 4th Cycle Housing Element, but because no action was taken by the City during that time to implement the housing program on those sites or to otherwise identify and process approval of an equivalent replacement with sufficient density, the City is required to process this action through Program 2G as part of its 5th Cycle. While Program 2G required the rezoning of only two parcels, the City created the new overlay in anticipation of applying it to various parcels during the City’s 6th Housing Element Cycle (2021-2028). These include, but are not limited to, up to six parcels along Border Avenue/North Bluff and up to three vacant parcels at the south end of Stratford Court.
(Emphasis added.)
72 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

III. State Density Bonus Law
The State Density Bonus (“SDB”) Law (Govt. Code §§ 65915 et seq.) is a mechanism which allows developers to obtain more favorable local development requirements in exchange for offering to build or donate land for affordable or senior units. The SDB Law provides developers with powerful tools to encourage the development of affordable and senior housing, including up to a 50% increase in project densities for most projects, depending on the amount of affordable housing provided, and an 80% increase in density for projects which are completely affordable.

The SDB Law is about more than the density bonus itself, however. It is actually a larger package of incentives intended to help make the development of affordable and senior housing economically feasible. Other tools include reduced parking requirements, and incentives and concessions such as reduced setback and minimum square footage requirements.

The amount of the density bonus is set on a sliding scale, based upon the percentage of affordable units at each income level, as shown in the attached chart. Please note that maximum density bonus amounts for very low, lower and moderate income housing were increased by legislation approved in 2020.

In addition to the density bonus, the city or county is also required to provide one or more “incentives” or “concessions” to each project which qualifies for a density bonus. A concession or incentive is defined as:
• A reduction in site development standards or a modification of zoning code; or architectural design requirements, such as a reduction in setback or minimum square footage requirements; or
• Approval of mixed use zoning; or
• Other regulatory incentives or concessions which actually result in identifiable and actual cost reductions.

The number of required incentives or concessions is based on the percentage of affordable units in the project:

Number of
Incentives/Concessions
Very Low Income
%
Low Income
%
Moderate Income
%
1 5% 10% 10%
2 10% 17% 20%
3 15% 24% 30%
4 100% Low/Very
Low/ Mod.
(20% Moderate
allowed)
100% Low/Very
Low/ Mod.
(20% Moderate
allowed)
100% Low/Very
Low/ Mod.
(20% Moderate
allowed)
73 May 19, 2026 Item 8
October 3, 2022

A development qualifying for a density bonus also receives two additional forms of assistance which have important benefits for a housing project:
• Waiver or Reduction of Development Standards. If any other city or county development standard would physically prevent the project from being built at the permitted density and with the granted concessions/incentives, the developer may propose to have those standards waived or reduced. The city or county is not permitted to apply any development standard which physically precludes the construction of the project at its permitted density and with the granted concessions/incentives. The city or county is not required to waive or reduce development standards that would cause a public health or safety problem, harm historical property, or would be contrary to law.

The waiver or reduction of a development standard does not count as an incentive or concession, and there is no limit on the number of development standard waivers that may be requested or granted.
• Maximum Parking Requirements. Upon the developer’s request, the city or county may not require more than the following parking ratios for a density bonus project (inclusive of parking for persons with disabilities):

Studio 1 space
1 bedroom 1 space
2 bedroom 1.5 spaces
3 bedroom 1.5 spaces
4 bedroom 2.5 spaces
74 May 19, 2026 Item 8

Revised 9/12/2014
City of Del Mar Planning Department
Supplemental Questionnaire
CDP – COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
CDP ______ - _________ Project Address: _________________________________________________ Related Permit: ____________________________________ Owner (Last Name): ______________________ Supplemental Questions
The following questionnaire shall be prepared for a CDP request. Please answer the following as completely as possible. Attach additional sheets if necessary. Mark “N/A” for any questions that do not apply to your project.

1. Is the project site located within the Coastal Commission Appeal Jurisdiction? □ NO □ YES
If YES and the project site is located seaward of the first public roadway, describe how the proposed development is consistent with and implements the Public Access provisions (Chapter 30.61) of the City’s Local Coastal Program (LCP)–Implementing Ordinances.
_______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________

2. Does your project include the construction, replacement, or improvement to a shoreline protective device (e.g., seawall or revetment)?
□ NO □ YES
If YES, describe how the proposed development is consistent with and implements the Beach Overlay Zone (Chapter 30.50) and Setback Seawall Zone (Chapter 30.51) of the City’s LCP–Implementing Ordinances. _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ 929 Border Avenue, Del Mar Lazier ✔
Project voluntarily provides first time, new public bluff-top access to entire property bluff frontage and creates first time, new significant and panoramic scenic vistas of the Pacific Ocean on a property where such views or public access does not currently exist. Development of the project site does not trigger the public access requirements in DM LCP 30.61.060 as the site: 1) does not contain a historically used or informal access; 2) does not contain access acquired through use or legislative authorization; 3) does not result in public access mitigation via bluff top access; and 4) does not contain planned trail segments or access on the DM LCP Figure IV-A (Public Access Trails). Public access in the project is being voluntarily provided by the owner including dedicated vertical access from the street to the bluff, and a dedicated lateral bluff top access area via rolling dedication for use by the general public. Due to the project's vehicle and emergency access requirement to the public right-of-way, six public metered on-street parking spaces will be removed and replaced on-site at a 4:1 ratio (24 onsite spaces provided for use by the general public), in addition to an ADA-accessible elevator and sidewalk from Camino del Mar sidewalk into the project site with wayfinding coastal access signage. ✔ Project is designed assuming no reliance on shoreline devices (e.g., seawalls, revetments, rip-rap barriers, etc). Project proposes an ample bluff top setback that exceeds the min 40' setback in Del Mar's Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone (DM LCP 30.55.080) and Coastal Act policies and guidance to account for bluff erosion rates and projected sea level rise. In compliance with DM LCP 30.55.090, project includes an extensive geotechnical report that includes bluff erosion rates and projected sea level rise. Recommended setback provides 1.5 factor of safety + additional 33' setback to account for bluff erosion and project sea level rise + an additional 17' setback to first row of buildings to be conservative and provides additional area for lateral public access to migrate inland if ever necessary via rolling dedication. Buildings with deeper foundation systems, such as the parking garage, are sited further east on the parcels. 75 May 19, 2026 Item 8

Revised 9/12/2014

3. Will your project be visible from a public vantage point (e.g., bluff, beach, trail, or public street)? □ NO □ YES
If YES, describe how the proposed development is consistent with and implements Public View protection policies IV-22 through IV-27 of the City’s LCP Land Use Plan (LUP) (see pages 78-79 of the LUP). _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________

4. Is your project located on a site with identified wetland resources? □ NO □ YES
If YES, describe how the proposed development is consistent with and implements the Lagoon Overlay Zone (Chapter 30.50) of the City’s LCP–Implementing Ordinances and LUP. _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ _______________________________________________________________________________________ Owner or Owner’s Agent Certification
I certify that the information provided on this questionnaire is accurate to the best of my knowledge. I understand that additional information may be needed to process my request and, if any of the information provided herein is found to be in error or deficient, the application may not be deemed complete, may be rejected, or may constitute grounds for revocation of any approval issued. ________________________________________________________ _______________________ Signature (Owner or Owner’s Agent) Date
________________________________________________________ Print Name
✔
1) IV-22: Project voluntarily provides first time, new public bluff-top access to entire property bluff frontage and creates first time, new significant and panoramic scenic vistas of the Pacific Ocean on a property where such views or public access does not currently exist. 2) IV-23: Project is not located between 15th St to south city border, but project creates panoramic public views and provides first-time public lateral access along the entire width of a coastal bluff top in a sensitively designed public access area. 3) IV-24: Public views of the ocean through and/or over the project site are not visible from Camino Del Mar due to topography. 4) IV-25: Project not located near Los Penasquitos Lagoon; preserving/restoring views of San Dieguito Lagoon not applicable. 5) IV-26: Project not located on Jimmy Durante Blvd or San Dieguito Dr; preserving/restoring views of San Dieguito Lagoon not applicable. 6) IV-27: Project complies with the City's HEI-OZ objective design standards and creates panoramic public views on the City's North Bluff. ✔ One of the parcels includes a small segment east of Camino Del Mar (CDM bifurcates the parcel), whereby the small segment is located in the the Lagoon Overlay Zone. No development is proposed on the small segment and will remain in existing condition. The remaining parcels to be developed are located west of CDM and not located in the Lagoon Overlay Zone. 3/30/23 Manuel Nieto Authorized Agent per Item 6) Letter Authorization 76 May 19, 2026 Item 8
From: Joseph Smith [email protected]
Subject: FW: Seaside Ridge - Fees
Date: March 3, 2023 at 6:27 AM
To: Manuel Nieto [email protected]
Cc: Whitney Hodges [email protected], Carol Lazier [email protected], Brian Guiltinan [email protected] Manuel,
In order to demonstrate we will have submitted a full and complete application (and avoid any delay on the City’s part), I am recommending we submit a check with the CDP submittal package in the amount of $26,740.70. Of this amount, $10,609 is a deposit and the rest are fees. As we discussed, the City does not have specific fees for this type of HEI-OZ project so we will do our best to estimate what fees are reasonable. Following submittal, Planning can inform you if any other fees are due or whatever.

Please include a breakdown of the fees below along with the check so the City understands what we are submitting for. I would suggest the statement read:
“The current City of Del Mar Fee Schedule (Planning/Engineering) does not list fees for a by-right Housing Development Project subject to the City’s HEI-OZ. In lieu, a check is provided with the application package in the amount of $26,740.70 for the following reasonable fees and deposit amounts based on the Fee Schedule as published:
$310 Administrative Coastal Development Permit
$535 Administrative Tree Removal Permit
$1,823 Administrative Encroachment Permit – Long-term/Major $3,450 Administrative Boundary Adjustment with Cert of Compliance $10,609 Administrative Zoning Code Amendment – Change of Text to Add Parcel to HEI-OZ – this is a DEPOSIT
$1,220 Engineering Review – Project Application/Ministerial $578 Engineering Review – Preliminary SWMP/Ministerial
$345 Engineering Review – Prelim Stormwater Checklist/Ministerial $1,257 Engineering Review – Boundary Adjustment Cert of Compliance/Ministerial $6,613.70 Engineering Review – Grading Plan (10K cy or more): $4,488 for the first 10,000 cy + $29 for each add’l 1,000 cy or fraction thereof [Breakdown: 83,300 cy total = $4,488 (10K cy) + $2,125.70 (73,300 cy @ $29 per 1K cy) = $6,613.70] Copying Carol, Brian and Whitney as FYI.

Joseph
From: Joseph Smith <[email protected]>
Date: Tuesday, February 28, 2023 at 7:01 AM
To: Manuel Nieto <[email protected]>
Subject: Seaside Ridge - Fees
Manuel, here’s a breakdown of fees but not all these are confirmed:

Initial fees to anticipate with CDP submittal:
77 May 19, 2026 Item 8
$310 Coastal Development Permit – Administrative
$535 Tree Removal Permit/Administrative
$1,823 Encroachment Permit – Long-term/Major/Administrative $3,450 Boundary Adjustment with Cert of Compliance /Administrative $1,220 Engineering Review – Project Application/Ministerial $578 Engineering Review – Preliminary SWMP/Ministerial
$345 Engineering Review – Prelim Stormwater Checklist/Ministerial $1,257 Engineering Review – Boundary Adjustment Cert of Compliance/Ministerial However, depending on legal guidance through the process, there are other fees that may be required but these would all be done administratively. Here’s a list of potentials:
$10,609 Local Coastal Program Amendment
$10,609 Zoning Code Amendment – Change of Text (HEI-OZ implementation) – this is a DEPOSIT
$10,609 General Plan Amendment
$1,006 Land Conservation Permit – Administrative
The City will also require additional fees usually charged post-approval:
$0.35/sqft (gross area) Construction License Tax (think of this like a DIF) $2,688.21/unit Regional Transportation Congestion Improvement Program (RTCIP) $451/unit Fire Dept Mitigation Fees
$6,760 Planning Plan Check & Inspection
$3,514 Clean Water Construction Inspection Fee (High Priority Construction Projects) Other Engineering fees are hard to understand, but there will be several. I’m just not sure when/how much Engineering will charge. Here’s a range of fees that could be charged:

Grading Plan Review (10K cy or more): $4,488 for the first 10,000 cy + $29 for each add’l 1,000 cy or fraction thereof (83,300 cy total = $4,488 (10K cy) + $2,125.70 (73,300 cy @ $29 per 1K cy) = $6,613.70
Improvement Plan Review ($1M or more): $15,887 plus 0.75% of value of improvements, $32,579 minimum
SWPPP Review (Multi-Fam): $265 + $286 each add’l unit
Final SWMP: $923
Final Stormwater Checklist: $461
Drainage Plan (More than 10K sf affected area): $2,716 + $0.05 for each add’l sqft over 10K sf
Inspection of Improvements ($1M or more): $13,542+0.25% of value of improvements over $1,000,000
Joseph D. Smith, AICP | Principal
California Coastal Works
(619) 943-1337 | [email protected]
www.californiacoastalworks.com
78 May 19, 2026 Item 8
1050 Camino Del Mar, Del Mar, California 92014-2698. Telephone: (858) 755-9313.Fax:
(858) 755-2794 www.delmar.ca.us
April 27, 2023
Manuel Nieto
2717 Via de la Valle
Del Mar, CA 92014
Sent via U.S. Postal Service and Email to [email protected] SUBJECT: Preliminary Review of Application CDP23-008 and Associated Materials Submitted for the Proposed 259 Multi-Unit Residential Development and Density Bonus Request (referred to as “Seaside Ridge”) at 929 Border (APN #’s 298-241-06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14).

Subject Site Land Use and Zoning:

Parcel Land Use Zone* Overlay Zones*
298-241-06 Very Low Density
- Residential
R1-40 Coastal Bluff; Beach;
Bluff, Slope, Canyon
298-241-07 Very Low Density
- Residential
R1-40
Floodway
(East of CDM)
Coastal Bluff; Beach;
Bluff, Slope, Canyon;
Lagoon;
299-030-14 Very Low Density
- Residential
R1-40 Coastal Bluff; Beach;
Bluff, Slope, Canyon
*Del Mar Municipal Code Title 30 (Zoning), specifically the Chapters for these Zones and Overlay Zones, constitutes the applicable Local Coastal Program (LCP) Implementing Ordinances (IO) for the subject properties.

Dear Mr. Nieto:

The City of Del Mar Planning and Community Development Department has reviewed the subject Application and its entitlement materials, the legal supporting memorandum, and all technical studies which were submitted on March 30, 2023 and the City has now determined that the Application is deemed to be INCOMPLETE and contrary to the Applicant’s legal representations is not supported by law.

Attachment E
79 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

In summary, the Project involves a 259-housing unit project located on an environmentally sensitive bluff that supports habitat for numerous coastal species, that serves as a major scenic view corridor, that has and will be subject to continuous erosion as a result of climate change, that provides major linkages for the public to access coastal resources and has very constrained vehicular access. Given the high likelihood that the proposed project will have significant unmitigable environmental and public health impacts there is no foundation in law that waives away the California Coastal Act or the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

The fundamental fatal flaw in the Application is that it provides no information needed to address California Coastal Act protected resources and further fails to provide enough information to begin impact evaluation under CEQA.

Contrary to the Applicant’s legal position, both CEQA and the California Coastal Act do apply to the Seaside Ridge project. This is clearly stated in CA Gov. Code Sec. 65589.5 (e):
“Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local agency from complying with the *** California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section be construed to relieve the local agency from making one or more of the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).

Additionally, the protection of coastal resources is clearly protected under the Density Bonus Act and the CA Coastal Act is clearly not “superseded” under the CA Gov. Code Sec. 65915 (m):
“This section does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with this section and Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code.” (CA Gov.

Code Sec. 65915(m)).

The relevance to CEQA and the Coastal Act were all but ignored in the Application and before the City can proceed with the appropriate project review the City requires the following information that is more fully described below.

Here, the subject project proposal and development application follows the Preliminary Development Application (PDA22-001) submitted to the City on October 4, 2022. On October 14, 2022, the City issued a determination letter that indicated the City’s adopted 80 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

Housing Element identifies a sufficient inventory of sites with correct zoning and capacity to meet the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) without the requirement to rezone properties. The 6th Cycle Housing Element is in substantial compliance with Housing Element law. That is why the City’s preliminary application determination letter also indicated the proposed development is inconsistent with the current zoning and density designation and identified the required entitlement applications that would be required if the proposed housing development application was submitted to the City in the future. The following applications for the required discretionary entitlements were identified: General Plan (Community Plan) Amendment; Rezone; Local Coastal Program Amendment; Environmental Assessment; Design Review Permit; Conditional Use Permit; Coastal Development Permit; Land Conservation Permit; Boundary Adjustment; Long-Term Major Encroachment Permit; and Tree Removal Permit.

Moreover, the following applications, materials, fees, and comments must be addressed and resubmitted in order for the application to be deemed complete:

1. The Preliminary Application is Deemed Not Submitted
Preliminary Development Application PDA22-001, submitted to the City of Del Mar on October 4, 2022, has been substantially revised in a manner that exceeds the square footage of the construction by greater than 20 percent. (See: CA Gov. Code Sec. 65941.1(c)).
“After submittal of all of the information required by subdivision (a), if the development proponent revises the project such that the number of residential units or square footage of construction changes by 20 percent or more, exclusive of any increase resulting from the receipt of a density bonus, incentive, concession, waiver, or similar provision, the housing development project shall not be deemed to have submitted a preliminary application that satisfies this section until the development proponent resubmits the information required by subdivision (a) so that it reflects the revisions.

For purposes of this subdivision, “square footage of construction” means the building area, as defined by the California Building Standards Code (Title 24 of the California Code of Regulations).” (CA Gov. Code Sec. 65941.1(c)).

The Preliminary Development Application proposed a Housing Development Project consisting of 308,968 “square-feet of construction.” Now, the subject Coastal Development Permit (CDP) application materials propose a Housing Development Project consisting of 396,259 square-feet of construction. The additional square footage appears to be the result of adding a new level of parking structure.

Both the preliminary and development entitlement proposals for the subject Housing Development Project calculated square footage inclusive of density bonus units/construction areas. Therefore, the increase represents a change in “building area,” as defined by the California Building Standards Code, of 28 percent, which exceeds the allowance provided by the Government Code cited above. Therefore, pursuance to the cited Code, PDA22-001 application must be resubmitted to reflect the revisions to the project’s “building area.” This substantial increase in building area results in the preliminary 81 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

application being void until such time that applicant resubmits the information required by CA Gov. Code Sec. 65941.1 (a) which is consistent with the Coastal Act and in this case the City’s LCP.

2. The “Builder’s Remedy” Does Not Apply
The City’s adopted 6
th Cycle Housing Element is in substantial compliance and identifies sufficient inventory of sites with correct zoning and capacity to meet the City’s RHNA without the requirement to rezone properties. The City is not relying on the subject properties to meet its RHNA obligation. The Applicant’s two (APNs 298-241-06 & 298- 241-07) of the three project site parcels are included as part of a contingency program that will only take effect in April 2024 if the City is unable to successfully implement the 6 th Cycle Housing Element Program 3A.

The City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element has met all statutory obligations and all substantive programs have always remained intact throughout the California Department of Housing and Community Development’s (HCD) deliberative process. The comments received from HCD during the Housing Element review cycle were requests for additional data or clarifying requests none of which required the City to change any programmatic features contained in the City’s Housing Element.

Moreover, given that substantial changes to the Seaside Ridge Project have occurred and because the present-day application has been deemed incomplete the assertion that Builder’s Remedy applies is simply incorrect. Therefore, for the Applicant to assert that this large-scale housing project located in an area of sensitive coastal resources may be approved through a ministerial process is a misapplied interpretation of the law.

Additionally, the application materials are inconsistent with the determination and process described above. It is the determination of the City there is no obligation for the City to process the subject proposed housing development as a ministerial project and the applications and materials described below are required for the City to process the proposed project.

3. The Project is Inconsistent with Local Coastal Program (LCP), Land Use, and Zoning
Given the project’s proposed density, heights, scale, location, and its likely environmental consequences there is no aspect of the proposed project that is consistent with the Coastal Act or the City’s zoning regulations.

All properties within the City of Del Mar are located within the Coastal Zone, accordingly the City’s Local Coastal Program (“LCP”) is the implementation arm of the California Coastal Act. The City’s LCP is the controlling standard for development of the North Bluff properties. Therefore, each proposed housing development in the City requires processing of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) and each CDP must demonstrate consistency with the City’s certified LCP and the other provisions of the California Coastal Act. In order for the City to issue a CDP approval for a proposed housing development in the subject location, the City must process the CDP application in accordance with the 82 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

City’s certified LCP and Coastal Act. This requires the City to make findings that the development is consistent with the allowed land uses and density, zoning, and additional Coastal Zone criteria to ensure protection of the public health and safety, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, public scenic views, and coastal access as identified in the City’s certified LCP. In accordance with the certified LCP and Coastal Act, the proposed development requires local processing and approval of a discretionary CDP application where the final local decision on the CDP would be subject to appeal to the California Coastal Commission.

The LCP standard of review for the proposed coastal development housing project includes the zoning and density standards of the R1-40 base zone and the resource protection criteria of multiple overlay zones including the Beach Overlay, Coastal Bluff Overlay, Lagoon Overlay, and Bluff, Slope and Canyon Overlay Zones. These referenced LCP standards for the subject property are the same standards that apply to this property per the City’s adopted General Plan (Community Plan), Housing Element, and Zoning Code. Missing from the Application are the studies and documents that would allow the City to determine if the project is consistent with these elements of LCP and its supporting standards. The City cannot proceed with evaluating the project without these studies and documents.

Moreover, it is important to understand that the City’s Community Plan and more importantly its certified LCP Land Use Plan designates the proposed North Bluff development site as “Very Low Density Residential” land use, this designation is “intended to allow single family development that preserves an open character on land within areas that include steep slopes, bluffs and/or canyons.” As specified in the City’s Zoning Code and certified LCP implementing zoning, all property with this very lowdensity residential land use designation is zoned “R1-40”, which allows for one (1) residential dwelling unit per net acre of land. Proposed development in this location is also subject to compliance with resource protection criteria in accordance with applicable overlay zones. These same “very low density” land use, zoning, and resource protection standards apply to other similarly situated properties that are in proximity to the proposed development.

Therefore, the proposed project is direct conflict with existing density and development standards contained in the City’s LCP. And clearly there is no legal or regulatory authority that would allow the City’s General Plan, Zoning Code, or certified LCP allowing an applicant self-assign a new regulatory process or create new base residential densities of 25 dwelling units per acre. Nowhere in all the recent changes in housing laws is it found that applicants can make up their own regulatory processes in order to facilitate project approval. Here, the Applicant is required to submit an application that reflects the discretionary actions needed to amend the existing LCP and related land use/zoning density standard (one dwelling unit per net acre).

The project site is an environmentally sensitive coastal bluff location, and the proposed development is of a scale that is in substantial conflict with the existing density and development standards that apply to the subject property and adjacent properties. The 83 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

project’s land use and zoning inconsistencies and potential to result in significant environmental impacts, including impacts to similarly situated adjacent properties, have not been sufficiently analyzed, addressed, or disclosed in the application. All CEQA documentation will have to be provided (as addressed in the below) in addition to the requirements of the City’s LCP. Until such time the application will remain incomplete.

4. “Administrative Rezone” is Inconsistent with California Law Rezoning a property through the addition of an applicable overlay zone is a legislative act pursuant to Government Code Section 65854 et seq. However, the submitted project application materials request approval of a rezone action through an administrative approval process that does not exist and would be contrary to State law. The Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone (HEI-OZ) is currently only applicable to one site (two legal lots) in the City of Del Mar, commonly known as the “Watermark” property. In order for the HEI-OZ to be applied to the proposed project site as proposed, a discretionary rezone action, consistent with the above-cited State code and DMMC Section 30.86.220, must be processed for adoption by the City Council. This also would require processing of an associated General (Community) Plan Amendment and Local Coastal Program Amendment to establish consistency between the land use and zoning.

The applicant must also include proposed revisions and justifications for applicable LCP and Community Plan Goals and Policies (all proposed sections of the respective documents) and must submit proposed revised land use maps and LCP/Community Plan text revisions.

5. Applications Required for the Proposed Project for Compliance with the City’s Local Coastal Program
Given the project’s lack of compliance with the City of Del Mar Local Coastal Program (LCP), to proceed with the project as currently proposed, the following is a list of applications that must be submitted to the City. The estimated fee or deposit that would be associated with each application is also identified. Please note that the listed deposit and fee estimates are only accurate until June 30, 2023. a) Rezone Application – As stated above, a rezone is a legislative action that cannot be performed administratively. Therefore, your application request for an “Administrative Rezone” is rejected. The subject property is not eligible for “by right” housing development. Use and applicability of the HEI-OZ for implementation of the Housing Element is at the discretion of the Del Mar City Council and is not required, by ordinance or otherwise. If you would like to apply for a legislative action to rezone the subject site properties (APN 298-241-06, 298- 241-07, & 299-030-14), then please prepare a separate letter of request to accompany the Uniform Development Application that provides the request, justifications for the rezone, and proposed findings for approval as are required in accordance with DMMC Section 30.86.220 (C). Exhibit shall also be prepared and submitted that identifies existing zoning designations and proposed zoning designations.

Required Deposit: $10,609
84 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

b) Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) – Rezoning of the subject site would require an LCPA, adopted by the City Council, and Certified by the California Coastal Commission. Proposed/revised text revisions and map exhibits of the City’s LCP are required with an LCPA application submittal.

Required Deposit: $10,609
c) General (Community) Plan Amendment (GPA) – Amendment of the City’s General (Community) Plan is required for any changes to the Very Low Residential Density Land Use Designation (located in the North Bluff District) to allow - multi-unit development on lots identified with the Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 298-241-06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14. Proposed/revised land use maps and Community Plan text revisions are required with the application submittal.

Required Deposit: $10,609
d) Environmental Assessment Application – The proposed project is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, an Environmental Assessment (EA) application is required to determine the appropriate level environmental review that would be required for the project.

Required Deposit: $1,000 (Additional funds will be required once a consultant from the City’s on-call environmental consultant list has been contracted to perform the Initial Study). To facilitate the processing of the re-submitted application additional technical information/reports will be required regarding the following areas of environmental concern:
• Public Coastal View Impact Analysis
• Air Quality Impacts
• Energy Conservation and Impact Analysis
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Including during construction • Hazards and Hazardous Materials Usage and Impacts
• Noise Impact Analysis
• Full Paleontological Report
• Tribal/Cultural Resources Impact
• Climate Change Impacts to the North Bluff
• Environmental Justice Analysis
• Proposed Roadway Impact Analysis
• Public Coastal Access Impact Analysis
• Conformity with LCP Impact Analysis
Upon completion of the Initial Study, additional technical reports and/or information may be required.
e) Design Review Permit Application – Discretionary Design Review Permit approval is required for all development in the City of Del Mar not otherwise exempted. As it is the City’s determination that the subject Housing Development Project is not 85 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

subject to the provisions of AB 1398, discretionary development applications and approvals are required in accordance with DMMC Chapter 23.08. The Applicant shall submit an unaltered City of Del Mar Design Review Permit Submittal Checklist.

Required Application Fee: $11,049
Required General Plan/Zoning Code Update Charge (10%): $1,104.90 DRB Public Notice Fee: TBD at time of application submittal f) Due to the project site’s location in the Beach Overlay Zone, Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone; and the Bluff, Slope and Canyon Overlay Zone, and Lagoon Overlay Zone, as well as the proposed grading that would be involved with the proposed access to the development, the following discretionary permit applications would also be required under the provisions of the current LCP:
i. Conditional Use Permit Application – Required due to the project site’s location within the Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone and the Bluff, Slope and Canyon Overlay Zone. Include a slope analysis for eastern slopes adjacent to the property, where project-related grading and improvements are proposed.

Required Application Fee: $2,522
Planning Commission Public Notice Fee: TBD at time of submittal ii. Coastal Development Application – A CDP Supplemental questionnaire was submitted on March 30, 2023. However, it should be noted as discussed above, that pursuant to the City’s current LCP provisions, the appropriate Coastal Development Permit for the project as submitted would be discretionary, not administrative. The required Application Fee for the appropriate CDP type would be: $3,095.
iii. Land Conservation Permit Application
Required Application Fee: $3,095
g) Tree Removal Permit Application
Identify the number of trees to be removed, the species, age, and location of all trees.

Required Application Fee: $535
h) Boundary Adjustment/Certificate of Compliance Application Required Fees: $3,450 (Planning Application Fee)
$1,257 (Engineering Review Fee)
TBD (Public Notice Fee, determined at time of submittal)

6. Disposition of Materials and Fees Submitted on March 30, 2023 Written materials submitted to the City via email on March 30, 2023, indicate that the project submission includes requests for: an Administrative Coastal Development Permit; 86 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

Administrative Encroachment Permit; an Administrative Boundary Adjustment Permit; an Administrative “Rezone;” and an Administrative Tree Removal Permit.

City of Del Mar application forms for the Encroachment, Lot Line (Boundary) Adjustment, and Tree Removal Permits were not included in the submitted materials. The City does not have an application form for an “Administrative Rezone,” as such a process does not exist under State law. Therefore, the Planning Department will not consider any of those applications as being “submitted.”
Based on the preliminary review comments provided in this letter, the only valid application forms submitted for the subject project are the Uniform Development Application and the required Coastal Development Permit Supplemental Questionnaire.

However, as previously indicated, that application would need to be processed as a discretionary CDP, appealable to the City Council and the Coastal Commission, and be consistent with the City’s Local Coastal Program, and it is not consistent as currently submitted. Once the application is deemed complete, the proposed project entitlements (applications noted above) will be processed concurrently.

Given that the project materials submitted on March 30, 2023, for the subject development project are significantly incomplete and the project itself is not consistent with the City’s Local Coastal program, the City is returning the $26,740.40 check (check # 054 in the amount of 26,740.70) you remitted in association with the project submittal.

It is recommended that, given the complexity of the project and amount of entitlement applications required, that the applicant schedule an appointment with Planning Department staff to review all materials prior to submittal. Upon submittal/resubmittal of the of applications and materials requested in this completeness review letter, and following the City’s standard application submittal process, the staff will provide an itemized fee/deposit invoice for your review and payment at that time.

7. Additional Review/Comments Pertaining to the Project Plans, Reports and Other Submitted Materials
The following comments and requests for information have been prepared in the event the entitlement applications, materials, and fees as described above are resubmitted and the project is processed in accordance with the City determinations stated in this letter.

DESIGN PLANS
General

1. Include Conceptual Landscape and Irrigation Plans, designed in accordance with Del Mar Municipal Code Chapter 23.60 (missing with this submittal)

2. Provide details (specification sheets) for all exterior HVAC equipment and pool/spa related mechanical equipment.

Cover Sheet (A-0.0)

3. Provide lot area verification each of the lots included in the project site by the licensed project engineer or surveyor.
87 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

4. The word “Density” is misspelled.

5. “Parking” tables for multi-unit project plans need to include unit/bedroom count information to provide verification of appropriate required parking in accordance with DMMC Section 30.80.030(B)(1).

Cover Sheet (A0.1)

6. Revise Minimum Landscape Requirements to be pursuant to City of Del Mar standards, not the City of San Diego.

Site Plan (A0.1)

7. Provide City Benchmark information (not just a reference to the civil plan).

8. Provide locations and dimensions of all easements (existing and proposed).

9. Call out pools and spas. Identify locations of associated mechanical equipment.

10.Depict and call-out any off-site Torrey Pine and/or Monterey Cypress trees. located within 10 feet of the project site boundary.

11.Provide drive aisle width dimension in outdoor parking area.

12.Provide typical parking space length and width dimensions.

13.Depict and identify Fire Lane Access #2.

Site Access Plan (AS-1.1)

14.Provide all drive aisle dimensions; identify access road cul-de-sac radius

15.Provide scale and north arrow

16.Label as “Fire Access” Plan
Floor Plans (All)

17.Per DMMC Section 30.80.030(B)(2)(c), identify locations of guest parking spaces on appropriate floor plans.

18.Spell out and provide abbreviations for parking space types in parking legend, then ensure abbreviation consistency on parking plan.

19.Provide typical parking space length and width dimensions.

20.Parking garage plans must provide drive aisle dimensions, proposed locations of clean energy vehicle spaces, location of proposed charging equipment; and bicycle spaces

21.For individual model floorplans, provide how many of each model will be included in entire development. This may also be supplied in table format.

Architectural Elevations (All)

22.Provide dimensions of proposed windows on all elevations. A properly keyed window schedule may be used in lieu of providing the dimensions on elevation drawings.

23.Continuously depict both the existing and finished grades as they appear adjacent to the building(s).

24.Provide floor and roof elevation heights per City benchmark on all building elevations. For all major roof elements, including the low and high elevations heights for sloped roof structures.
88 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

25.Call out HVAC screening structures.

26.For basements and subgrade garages, depict an outline of the subgrade structure on all elevation views and call out the elevation of that floor level. The depiction can be provided in the form of a dashed outline of the level.

27.Include (separate) fencing elevations drawings.

28.Depict and call-out the height of rooftop mechanical screening structures.

Structural height from top of roof and total elevation heights should be shown.

Building Sections (All)

29. Provide existing grade depictions and heights on all building sections.

Roof Plans (A-1.5)

30.Depict maximum elevations of all roof ridgelines and roof edges.

31.Provide existing and proposed topographical contour lines on the plan.

32.Call out actual rooftop HVAC mechanical equipment, not just screening, and provide requested equipment specifications (see comment #2 on pg. 11 of this letter).

ENGINEERING/CIVIL PLANS AND RELATED DOCUMENTS

33.DMMC Section 30.52.110(A) requires a detail slope analysis for all areas subject to a Conditional Use Permit within the Bluff, Slope, and Canyon Overlay Zone.

This includes the eastern bluff for which grading (excavation) is proposed as part of the project, regardless of its location within public right-of-way. Provide this information with any future submittal.

34.Bluff failures in the location of the “gazebo” foundation have occurred since 2016, as recently as March 2023. These failures should be reflected in geotechnical evaluations.

PROJECT DENSITY AND BASIS OF DENSITY BONUS CALCULATIONS AND

DENSITY BONUS JUSTIFICATION AND EXHIBITS

35.As indicated earlier in this letter, the City’s existing LCP/LUP and Community Plan identify allowed density of the subject property to be one (1) dwelling unit per (net) acre. Project materials indicate a net acreage of 6.91, which would be a maximum density of 7 single family dwellings. This base density is that level of development that is currently allowed in the City’s LCP. Therefore, all bonus density calculations should be premised on the base densities contained in the City’s certified LCP and should not be based on an inapplicable overlay zone.

36.The “Preliminary Programmatic Level Cost Estimate” does not appear to support or validate the $13,997,450 project saving if all concessions were granted by the City. The narrative that appears before the calculations prepared by Hennie Degenaar and dated March 28, 2023, appears to greatly inflate the project savings.

What is required is a reasonable evaluation of each concession and its project savings. How the project savings were specifically calculated is required. The report should be an unbiased evaluation of project saving for each individual concession and not advocate for the project. Upon resubmission for any project, 89 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

the Applicant will be required to demonstrate how each project savings is supported. The blanket statement that the market rate homes will help subsidize the affordable homes should be demonstrated. The studies submitted should not be “preliminary” but should be made final.
** The following items must be resubmitted:
- All required forms and applications, and
- All other requested materials emailed to [email protected]. - An electronic iteration (PDF) of the project plan-set - A written response to each of the comments provided in this letter - Submittal of all fees as identified herein (upon receipt of City invoice) If you have any questions, please contact me via phone at (858) 755-9313, ext. 1158, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Matt Bator, AICP
Principal Planner
Attachments:
• October 14, 2022, City of Del Mar Letter -SB 330 Preliminary Development Application Determination, 929 Border Ave.
• Check # 054 in the amount of $26,740.70 (Check included with document sent via U.S. Postal Service)
90 May 19, 2026 Item 8
1050 Camino Del Mar, Del Mar, CA 92014 | 858.755.9313 | www.delmar.ca.us October 14, 2022
Manuel Nieto
2717 Via de la Valle
Del Mar, CA 92014
RE: SB-330 Preliminary Development Application (929 Border Ave.) Dear Mr. Nieto:

This letter serves to confirm receipt of your Preliminary Development Application (PDA) pursuant to California State Senate Bill 330 (SB-330). The PDA has been assigned the application number “PDA22-001.” Please refer to PDA22-001 for any inquiries related to the application process or project. Included with this letter is an invoice for the required $393 application review fee. Staff has reviewed your application, checklist, and associated submittal materials for a 259-unit housing development project with a density bonus request to be located at 929 Border Avenue, in the City of Del Mar. Pursuant to the stipulations of SB-330, upon payment of the required application fee, PDA22-001 will be deemed “submitted;” thereby, commencing a 180-day submittal timeline of any and all development entitlement applications required for the project described within PDA22- 001.

This letter also serves to notify you that the City of Del Mar is not in agreement with the proposed legal basis by which the project has been designed. It is the City’s position that the submitted application request is not consistent with the current zoning and density allowances for the property located at 929 Border Avenue. The City’s adopted Housing Element identifies a sufficient inventory of sites with correct zoning and capacity to meet the City’s RHNA without the need to rezone properties.

Therefore, please note that upon receipt of any future submittal of development applications for the project described in your Preliminary Development Application submittal, the City will find the submittal to be inconsistent with the City’s General (Community) Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program (LCP). In order to proceed with the proposed project as currently Zoned, the following applications must be submitted:
• General (Community) Plan Amendment
• Rezone Application
• Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA)
• Environmental Assessment Application
• Design Review Permit Application
91 May 19, 2026 Item 8
Manuel Nieto
October 14, 2022

• Conditional Use Permit Application
• Coastal Development Application
• Land Conservation Permit Application
• Boundary Adjustment Application
• Long-Term Major Encroachment Permit
• Tree Removal Permit Application
Please let me know if you have any questions.

Sincerely,
Matt Bator, AICP
Principal Planner
Enclosure - Application Fee Invoice for PDA22-001
92 May 19, 2026 Item 8
{Client Files/4630/67/DOC/S0731235.DOCX}
1050 Camino Del Mar, Del Mar, California 92014-2698. Telephone: (858) 755-9313.Fax:
(858) 755-2794 www.delmar.ca.us
June 30, 2023
Manuel Nieto
2717 Via de la Valle
Del Mar, CA 92014
Sent via U.S. Postal Service and Email to [email protected] SUBJECT: Second Review of Application CDP23-008 and Associated Materials Submitted for the Proposed 259 Multi-Unit Residential Development and Density Bonus Request (referred to as “Seaside Ridge”) at 929 Border (APN #’s 298-241-06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14).

Dear Mr. Nieto:

Thank you for your resubmittal of materials associated with the above-cited entitlement, received by the City on June 1, 2023. The City of Del Mar Planning and Community Development Department has reviewed the submitted materials and responses to the comments and requests provided in the City’s initial review letter dated April 27, 2023. Staff have reviewed the requested new information and have determined that the subject Application continues to be INCOMPLETE for reasons more fully described below. In order to be deemed “complete” the following issues still must be addressed to the satisfaction of the Planning and Community Development Director. Here and in consultation with the City Attorney, the City will also address the legal positions taken by the legal representative for the Seaside Ridge Project (“Seaside”). It is important to note from the outset that an Applicant cannot dismiss the requirements of the California Coastal Act, California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), or modify local municipal codes by their own motion.

Nor may an Applicant develop their own permit fee structure under the faulty legal premise that the City’s California Coastal Commission certified Local Coastal Program does not apply to the Seaside Ridge project site. Required fees total $39,088.00 and must be submitted for the City to continue the review process. The City will timely and effectively review and process the Seaside Ridge project once deemed complete. The Applicant must recognize the City’s Coastal Commission certified LCP applies to the site, and the City’s Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone (HEI-OZ) does not apply to the proposed project site, and that an Applicant cannot prescribe their own permit fee schedules.

Moreover, an LCP amendment requires additional application materials that are not set out in the Government Code and these Coastal Act documents are needed before the Application can be deemed complete.

Attachment F
93 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

In sum, the Seaside project does not comply with the density or the coastal resource protection standards found in the City’s certified LCP and therefore the LCP must be amended to accommodate the proposed high-density 259 housing unit project. And because amending the LCP is a discretionary act, full CEQA review is required.

Regarding the Applicant’s requested reliance on the HEI-OZ, the Overlay Zone was adopted by the City and approved by the Coastal Commission to apply to one specific site location (comprised of two legal parcels). Neither of these parcels included the Seaside Ridge parcels. A legislative action by the Del Mar City Council to rezone the Seaside Ridge project site to utilize the HEI-OZ would be necessary and would also require CEQA compliance and Coastal Commission approval.

Finally, because the project has increased by more than 28% from the time that the original Preliminary Application was filed, that application is ineffective in applying the processing benefits of SB 330. Moreover, the Builder’s Remedy only applies at the time that an application is deemed complete, and the subject application remains incomplete.

1. The Preliminary Application is Deemed “Not Submitted” Because the Project Increased More Than Twenty Percent (Repeated Comment)
The Seaside Ridge project has increased building area and has been substantially revised by more than 28% from the Preliminary Application. The April 27, 2023 correspondence from the City stated that Preliminary Development Application PDA22-001, submitted on October 4, 2022, had been substantially revised to include an entirely new parking level that caused the project to exceed the preliminary square footage of proposed construction by more than 20 percent. The October 2022 Preliminary Development Application proposed a Housing Development Project consisting of 308,968 “square-feet of construction.” However, the Coastal Development Permit (CDP) application materials submitted to the City on March 30, 2023, proposed a Housing Development Project consisting of 396,259 square-feet of construction. Under SB 330, this significant increase to the building area results in the Preliminary Application being ineffective.

Your response claims that the building area growth was a result of a “clerical error.” This assertion is unfounded and is not supported by the record or the application materials submitted to the City, which include the State-required “checklist.” This assertion also runs counter to the original project description, which failed to take in account two large areas of planned construction. These two construction areas, along with the added garage level represent a change in the “building area” as defined by the California Building Standards Code. Applying the Building Standards Code results in an overall increase in buildable area of 28 percent. As a consequence, the project exceeds the allowance provided by the Government Code.

Your response claims that these additional areas were accurately described in the October 2022 data tabulation form found on Plan Sheet A-0.0. However, this data was un-tabulated and the proposed building area was provided to the City in three key areas: (1) The narrative project description contained in the construction plans; (2) the separately submitted three94 May 19, 2026 Item 8 CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

page “Expanded Project Description;” and (3) the SB 330 Preliminary Development Application form/checklist. Moreover, the record demonstrates that the Preliminary Development Application submitted to the City described the Housing Project as consisting of “308,968 square-feet of buildings.” None of above-mentioned documents reflect a clerical error, because they are consistent in reflecting the 308,968 square-feet of building area proposed to the City as the preliminary project’s total square footage, complete with a representative Floor Area Ratio calculation based on that number.

2. The Seaside Application Misapplies and Misstates State Housing Laws, CEQA, the California Coastal Act, and the Application of the City’s HEI-OZ (Repeated Comment)
The City has reviewed the Applicant’s response to this comment as originally provided on April 27, 2023, continues to disagree as explained below, and therefore, cannot “administratively” process the project as requested.

Similar to the above, this section responds to the legal position provided on June 15, 2023 concerning how the Seaside housing project should be processed. Your resubmittal information again asserts that State Housing laws allow for complete and total nondiscretionary approval of their Project without regard to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the California Coastal Act. In addition, the resubmittal claims that City of Del Mar Municipal Code Chapter 30.92, “Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone (HEI-OZ),” applies to the Seaside Ridge project. As the City does not agree with these legal theories, the Seaside application remains incomplete. Here, we address why these legal conclusions are incorrect and why they continue to impede the timely processing of the Seaside project. To be clear, it is the City’s intent to timely and efficiently process the Seaside Application upon receipt of the requested information noted within this letter, which would enable the application to be deemed complete.

In sum, State law provides that the Builders Remedy only applies when an application is deemed complete and that State Housing laws have not exempted or superseded the application of the California Coastal Act or the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). Additionally, the Del Mar Municipal Code Section 30.92.020 does not apply to the proposed project site parcels as a matter of right because it is not included in the Areas of Applicability as required by the Code. (See below analysis).

The City’s HEI-OZ Does Not Apply to Seaside Ridge Project Site A foundational premise of the Project’s legal justification materials is that the City’s HEIOZ applies to the proposed project site parcels and, as previously stated, it is the City’s determination that it is clearly not the case. City of Del Mar Municipal Code Section

30.92.020 defines the “Areas of Applicability” which has very limited application. This Code provision only includes two parcels and neither involve the North Bluff Seaside site.

DMMC Sec. 30.92.020 only applies to two specific parcels: APN: 299-100-47-00 and APN: 299-100-48-00. Both of these parcels are commonly referred to as the “Watermark Housing Project” site and both are located in the North Commercial zone, which has no applicability to the North Bluff. As previously stated, the HEI-OZ ordinance and Zoning 95 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

Map would have to be amended to include the proposed project site in order for the objective criteria of that Chapter to apply for this project application.

Moreover, expanding or amending the application of DMMC Sec. 30.92.020 is a legislative act that is vested with the City Council. Amending this section of the Municipal Code first requires the adoption of a new ordinance by the City Council and requires amending the City’s Local Coastal Program. These legislative acts are foundational to amending the Code and all involve discretionary actions, public notice, and public hearings.

3. A Local Coastal Program Amendment Is a Required Action for the Approval of the Seaside Project
Because the Seaside project is located on the North Bluff and because the HEI-OZ does not apply to this site a Local Coastal Program Amendment is necessary. The North Bluff (including the proposed project site) is wholly within the Coastal Zone and Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act states that cities are to prepare a Local Coastal Program (“LCP”) which is certified by the California Coastal Commission. The LCP is the planning implementation arm of the California Coastal Act. (CA Public Resources Code Div. 20 Sec. 30200). As such, the City’s LCP is the controlling standard for development of the Seaside Ridge project site. The LCP’s development standard calls for very low-density development in order to minimize impacts to sensitive coastal resources found at this bluff-top location.

To further comply with the Coastal Act, a “Coastal Development Permit (CDP)” must be issued for all new development with the foundational standard being that the CDP is consistent with the requirements found in the City’s LCP. Therefore, each proposed housing development in the City requires processing of a CDP which must demonstrate consistency with the City’s certified LCP along with the other provisions of the California Coastal Act. The assertion that an administrative CDP is warranted because the HEI-OZ applies to the proposed project site is contrary to the City’s Coastal Commission certified LCP and is not accepted by the City without an amendment to the HEI-OZ ordinance, Zoning Map, and LCP.

4. The North Bluff Property is Not Needed to Meet the City’s RHNA The assertion that development of the Applicant’s property with the proposed project is needed in order for the City to meet its Regional Housing Needs Assessment (“RHNA”) is inaccurate. The City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element clearly identifies several properties in the City, including the State Fairgrounds site as adequate sites that meet RHNA obligations consistent with State Housing Law.

Chapter 4 of the 6th Cycle Housing Element defines the City’s obligations to meet the RHNA. The Applicant’s property is addressed in this Chapter as a contingency site not as a candidate site, there the Housing Element states:

Housing Program 1E: Rezone of Vacant North Bluff and/or South Stratford Properties (This contingency program is required only if Program 3A is 96 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

not timely implemented). (Emphasis added). The Housing Element proposes to develop at least 54 affordable units on the State Fairgrounds property through a binding agreement with the State (Program 3A). By April 2024, the City must either achieve a binding agreement or implement this rezone program. For this rezone program, the City Council will take action to consider which sites to rezone (of the nine total sites listed in Program 1E) as needed to address the deficit of 54 lower income affordable units.

The rezone action would be addressed by applying the Housing Element Implementation Overlay Zone to accommodate development of housing at 20-25 dwelling units per acre “by right” per Government Code Sections 65583.2(h) and (i). The rezone action will apply to as many of the nine candidate sites on the North Bluff and/or South Stratford as necessary to demonstrate sufficient capacity to meet the City’s RHNA for lower income units. Implementation of this contingency program is anticipated to address the City’s RHNA and fair housing needs for extremely low-income households in a manner that will integrate lower income units into the overall development and demonstrate connectedness to the greater City of Del Mar community.

Timeframe: By April 2024, the City must either achieve a binding agreement or implement this rezone program. Timely implementation of Program 3A (Fairgrounds Housing) by April 2024 will release the City of the requirement to carry out the Program 1E contingency rezone.

Responsible Agency: City of Del Mar, State of California General Services Department, 22nd District Agricultural Association, and California Coastal Commission
Funding Sources: City General Fund (target FY23 & 24)
Projected RHNA Accommodation: 54 lower income dwelling units, including extremely low-income units.

Here, the proposed project site is not a “candidate site,” it is instead a “contingency site” and is only required in the event that the binding agreement with the State is not in place by April 2024. HCD recognized this approach and approved this in its May 31, 2023, determination that the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element is in “substantial compliance” with State Housing Element laws. Further, as part of that determination, HCD required more robust monitoring and reporting to ensure that the Fairgrounds site is not only achievable but can be timely implemented.

5. State Housing Laws Do Not Supersede the California Coastal Act The Applicant’s legal argument not only misapplies the City’s Municipal Code and Coastal Commission certified LCP, but it also neglects to recognize that all State Housing laws remain protective of environmental and coastal resources. The State did not allow its 97 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

mandated housing programs to override the State’s long lineage of protecting coastal resources and sensitive environmental habitats. Each housing law clearly states that neither the California Coastal Act nor CEQA is to be superseded.

The legal analysis submitted to the City specifies that the proposed project is not subject to full CEQA review, nor is it subject to the California Coastal Act. This ignores the mandates of the Coastal Act and CEQA, resulting in the City’s finding that the application is incomplete. In accordance with CA Gov. Code Sec. 65589.5 (e), which is cited below, both CEQA and the California Coastal Act do apply to the Seaside Ridge project. “Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local agency from complying with the *** California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section be construed to relieve the local agency from making one or more of the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).

Additionally, protection of coastal resources is clearly safeguarded under the Density Bonus Act and the California Coastal Act is not “superseded” under the CA Gov. Code Sec. 65915 (m), which states:
“This section does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the Applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with this section and Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code.” (CA Gov.

Code Sec. 65915(m)).

6. The Builder’s Remedy Does Not Apply to an Incomplete Application The Builder’s Remedy only applies when an application is deemed complete. (CA Gov.

Code Sec. 65589.5(h)(5)). The Seaside application remains incomplete due to the mistaken belief that the LCP, as the implementation vehicle of the California Coastal Act, does not apply to the project. For the proposed project site, it is the LCP that defines the density standards and is the controlling Coastal Act standard that cannot be unilaterally waived. Moreover, it is not an Applicant that decides which parts of the California Coastal Act applies to their project, it is the City and ultimately the California Coastal Commission that enforces the mandates of the Coastal Act.

The applications, studies, documents, and verifications of data that the City has requested directly relate to its obligation to carry out the mandates of the California Coastal Act. As stated in the City’s prior incomplete letter, numerous studies are needed, information 98 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

requires validation, information clarifications are needed, and correct fees need to be paid. With these missing elements the application will not be deemed complete until these foundational documents are delivered and correct fees are paid.

7. Applications Required for Compliance with the City’s Local Coastal Program due to Non-Applicability of the HEI-OZ
Given the project’s lack of compliance with the City’s certified LCP and the City’s determination that the HEI-OZ does not apply to the project site, the documents listed below are required along with deposit of the correct fees associated with these discretionary actions: (Note that the listed deposit and fee estimates will be effective on July 1, 2023).
a) Rezone Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – As stated above, a rezone is a legislative action that cannot be processed administratively. Therefore, your application request for an “Administrative Rezone” is rejected and subject property is not eligible for “by right” housing development. Use and applicability of the HEIOZ for implementation of the Housing Element is at the discretion of the Del Mar City Council and is not required, by ordinance or otherwise. If you would like to apply for a legislative action to rezone the subject site properties (APN 298-241- 06, 298-241-07, & 299-030-14), then please prepare a separate letter of request to accompany the Uniform Development Application that provides the request, justifications for the rezone, and proposed findings for approval as are required in accordance with DMMC Section 30.86.220 (C). Exhibit shall also be prepared and submitted that identifies existing zoning designations and proposed zoning designations.

Required Deposit: $10,925 (This is an initial working deposit; additional funds may be required as deemed necessary)
b) Local Coastal Program Amendment (Has Not Been Submitted) – Rezoning of the subject site would require an LCPA, adopted by the City Council, and Certified by the California Coastal Commission. Proposed/revised text revisions and map exhibits of the City’s LCP are required with an LCPA application submittal.

Required Deposit: Included with the above-required Rezone deposit. c) General (Community) Plan Amendment (Has Not Been Submitted) – Amendment of the City’s General (Community) Plan is required for any changes to the Very Low Residential Density Land Use Designation (located in the North Bluff District) to allow - multi-unit development on lots identified with the Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 298-241-06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14. Proposed/revised land use maps and Community Plan text revisions are required with the application submittal.

Required Deposit: Included with the above-required Rezone deposit. d) Environmental Assessment Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – The proposed project is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality 99 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

Act (CEQA). The Project is inconsistent with the California Coastal Act and the City’s certified LCP. Therefore, a discretionary Local Coastal Program Amendment is required in order for the Project to be found consistent with the existing LCP.

Accordingly, an Environmental Assessment (EA) application is required to determine the appropriate level environmental review that would be required for the project.

Required Deposit: $1,090 (Additional funds will be required once a consultant from the City’s on-call environmental consultant list has been contracted to perform the Initial Study). To facilitate the processing of the re-submitted application additional technical information/reports will be required regarding the following areas of environmental concern:
• Public Coastal View Impact Analysis
• Air Quality Impacts
• Energy Conservation and Impact Analysis
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Including during construction • Hazards and Hazardous Materials Usage and Impacts
• Noise Impact Analysis
• Full Paleontological Report
• Tribal/Cultural Resources Impact
• Climate Change Impacts to the North Bluff
• Environmental Justice Analysis
• Proposed Roadway Impact Analysis
• Public Coastal Access Impact Analysis
• Conformity with LCP Impact Analysis
Upon completion of the required Initial Study, and in order to address significant environmental impacts, additional technical reports and/or information may be required.
e) Design Review Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – Discretionary Design Review Permit approval is required for all development in the City of Del Mar not otherwise exempted. As it is the City’s determination that the subject Housing Development Project is not subject to the provisions of AB 1398, discretionary development applications and approvals are required in accordance with DMMC Chapter 23.08. The Applicant shall submit an unaltered City of Del Mar Design Review Permit Application and Submittal Checklist.

Required Application Fee: $11,380
Required General Plan/Zoning Code Update Charge (10%): $1,138 DRB Public Notice Fee: To be determined and required at the time of public notice distribution.
100 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

f) LCP Environmentally Protective Overlay Zones Apply to the Project Site Because the project site is located in the Coastal Commission approved Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone, the Bluff, Slope and Canyon Overlay Zone, and Lagoon Overlay Zone, as well as the proposed grading that would be required to adequately access to the housing units, the following discretionary permit applications are required under the provisions of the current and certified LCP:
i. Conditional Use Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) Required Application Fee: $2,595
Planning Commission Public Notice Fee: To be determined and required at the time of public notice distribution.
ii. Coastal Development Application – A CDP Supplemental questionnaire was submitted on March 30, 2023. However, as previously indicated in the City’s incomplete letter dated April 27, 2023, the Coastal Development Permit required for this project is a discretionary permit, not administrative permit. The required Application Fee is: $3,185.
iii. Land Conservation Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) Required Application Fee: $3,185
g) Tree Removal Permit Application (Application Submitted) Required Application Fees are due: $550
h) Boundary Adjustment/Certificate of Compliance Application (Has Not Been Submitted)
Required Fees: $3,550 (Planning Application Fee)
$1,490 (Engineering Review Fee)
TBD (Public Notice Fee, determined at time of submittal) Total Fees Owed: $39,088. In accordance with the City’s Planning and Engineering Fee Schedules, payment of these fees is required for the continued review and processing of the Seaside permit applications.

8. The following items must be resubmitted:
- All required forms and applications, and
- All other requested materials emailed to [email protected]. - A written response to each of the comments provided in this letter - Submittal of all fees as identified herein (upon receipt of City invoice) 101 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter

If you have any questions, please contact me at (858) 755-9313, ext. 1158, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Matt Bator, AICP
Principal Planner
102 May 19, 2026 Item 8
1050 Camino Del Mar, Del Mar, California 92014-2698. Telephone: (858) 755-9313.Fax:
(858) 755-2794 www.delmar.ca.us
September 26, 2023
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Manuel Nieto
2717 Via de la Valle
Del Mar, CA 92014
SUBJECT: Third Review of Application CDP23-008 and Associated Materials Submitted for the Proposed 259 Multi-Unit Residential Development and Density Bonus Request (referred to as “Seaside Ridge”) at 929 Border (APN #’s 298-241-06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14).

Dear Mr. Nieto:

Thank you for your resubmittal of materials associated with the above-cited entitlement, received by the City on August 28, 2023. The City of Del Mar Planning and Community Development Department, along with the City Attorney, have reviewed the submitted materials and responses to the comments and application status determination provided in the City’s second application status letter dated June 1, 2023. While the Applicant has submitted some of the items previously identified as required, such as Boundary Adjustment Application materials, associated fees, and the application processing fee for a Tree Removal Permit, most of the of the previously required items, including specific entitlement applications, information, and fees were not submitted to the City and therefore, it is staff’s continued determination that the subject Application is INCOMPLETE. The Applicant must submit the documentation requested by this Incomplete Letter and the two previous Incomplete Letters to gain “Complete” status. Additional justifications for this determination, which were provided in the City’s June 1, 2023, application status are reiterated below along with a listing of the information that would be required for the City to deem the project complete and process the proposed development project. Further, given the Applicant’s continued reliance on legal positions not supported by the City, a response to the Applicant’s legal counsel has been prepared by the City Attorney’s Office and provided as “Attachment A” to this letter.

It is the City’s continued position that the subject development project cannot be processed as proposed for the following reasons, as previously indicated and explained in the Incomplete letters provided by the City on April 27, 2023, and June1, 2023. • The Preliminary Application is Deemed “Not Submitted” Because the Project Increased More Than Twenty Percent (Repeated Comment)
103 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #3

• The City’s HEI-OZ Does Not Apply to Seaside Ridge Project Site • A Local Coastal Program Amendment, Community Plan Amendment, and Rezone Is a Required Action for the Approval of the Seaside Project • The Builder’s Remedy Does Not Apply to an Incomplete Application Applications, Materials and Fees Still Required:

Given the project’s lack of compliance with the City’s Community Plan, Zoning Designations, and certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) and the City’s determination that the HEI-OZ does not apply to the project site, the documents listed below are required along with deposit of the correct fees associated with those discretionary actions. Please note, while the Tree Removal Permit and Boundary Adjustment applications and required materials/fees have been filed with the City, they are part of the project as a whole under CEQA and the project is deemed incomplete until all items identified below are submitted to the City.
a) Rezone Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – As stated in previous reviews, a rezone is a legislative action that cannot be processed administratively. Therefore, your application request for an “Administrative Rezone” is rejected and subject project parcels are not eligible for “by right” housing development. Use and applicability of the HEI-OZ for implementation of the Housing Element is at the discretion of the Del Mar City Council. If the Applicant would like to apply for a legislative action to rezone the subject site parcels (APN 298-241-06, 298-241-07, & 299-030-14), then please prepare a separate letter of request to accompany the Uniform Development Application that provides the request, justifications for the rezone, and proposed findings for approval as are required in accordance with DMMC Section 30.86.220 (C). Exhibit shall also be prepared and submitted that identifies existing zoning designations and proposed zoning designations.

Required Deposit: $10,925 (This is an initial working deposit; additional funds may be required in accordance with the City’s adopted Fee Schedule). b) Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (Has Not Been Submitted) – Rezoning and modifying the land use designation of the subject site would require an LCPA, adopted by the City Council and Certified by the California Coastal Commission. Proposed/revised text revisions and map exhibits of the City’s LCP are required with an LCPA application submittal.

Required Deposit: Included with the above-required Rezone deposit. c) General (Community) Plan Amendment (Has Not Been Submitted) – Amendment of the City’s General (Community) Plan is required for any changes to the Very Low Residential Density Land Use Designation (located in the North Bluff District) to allow - multi-unit development on lots identified with the Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 298-241-06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14. Proposed/revised land use 104 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #3

maps and Community Plan text revisions are required with the application submittal. Required Deposit: Included with the above-required Rezone deposit. d) Environmental Assessment Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – The proposed project is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Project is inconsistent with the California Coastal Act and the City’s certified LCP. Therefore, a discretionary Local Coastal Program Amendment is required in order for the Project to be found consistent with the existing LCP.

Accordingly, an Environmental Assessment (EA) application is required for the City to determine the appropriate level environmental review that would be required for the project.

Required Deposit: $1,090 (Additional funds will be required once a consultant from the City’s on-call environmental consultant list has been contracted to perform the Initial Study). To facilitate the processing of the re-submitted application additional technical information/reports will be required regarding the following areas of environmental concern:
• Public Coastal View Impact Analysis
• Air Quality Impacts
• Energy Conservation and Impact Analysis
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Including during construction • Hazards and Hazardous Materials Usage and Impacts
• Noise Impact Analysis
• Full Paleontological Report
• Tribal/Cultural Resources Impact
• Climate Change Impacts to the North Bluff
• Environmental Justice Analysis
• Proposed Roadway Impact Analysis
• Public Coastal Access Impact Analysis
• Conformity with LCP Impact Analysis
Upon completion of the required Initial Study, and in order to address significant environmental impacts, additional technical reports and/or information may be required.
e) Design Review Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – Discretionary Design Review Permit approval is required for all development in the City of Del Mar not otherwise exempted. As it is the City’s determination that the subject Housing Development Project is not subject to the provisions of AB 1398, discretionary development applications and approvals are required in accordance with Del Mar Municipal Code (DMMC) Chapter 23.08. The Applicant must submit an unaltered City of Del Mar Design Review Permit Application and Submittal Checklist.
105 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #3

Required Application Fee: $11,380 Required General Plan/Zoning Code Update Charge (10%): $1,138. DRB Public Notice Fee: To be determined and required at the time of public notice distribution.
f) LCP Environmentally Protective Overlay Zones Apply to the Project Site Because the project site is located in the Coastal Commission approved Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone, the Bluff, Slope and Canyon Overlay Zone, and Lagoon Overlay Zone, as well as the proposed grading that would be required to adequately access the housing units, the following discretionary permit applications are required under the provisions of the certified LCP:
i. Conditional Use Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) Required Application Fee: $2,595
Planning Commission Public Notice Fee: To be determined and required at the time of public notice distribution.
ii. Coastal Development Application – A CDP Supplemental questionnaire was submitted on March 30, 2023. However, as previously indicated in the City’s incomplete letter dated April 27, 2023, the Coastal Development Permit required for this project is a discretionary permit, not administrative permit. A new CDP Supplemental Questionnaire without reference to the HEI-OZ. The required Application Fee is: $3,185.
iii. Land Conservation Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) Required Application Fee: $3,185
Total Fees Owed: $33,498. In accordance with the City’s Adopted Planning and Engineering Fee Schedules, payment of these fees is required for the City to process the proposed Seaside Ridge project.

The following items must be submitted to [email protected]:
- All required forms, applications, and other requested materials - A written response to each of the comments provided in this letter - Submittal of all fees as identified herein (upon receipt of City invoice) If you have any questions, please contact me at (858) 704-3643, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Matt Bator, AICP
Principal Planner
Attachment A – City Attorney Legal Response
106 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #3

Attachment A – City Attorney Legal Response
Introduction
Put forth in Seaside Ridge’s three application submissions are a number of legal propositions that are proffered to distort the legal requirements found in current housing laws. These arguments were also provided to HCD in a formal complaint alleging that the City of Del Mar failed to meet its responsibilities under housing laws. Upon it completing its complaint review process, HCD declined to further investigate Seaside’s allegations. We believe the Seaside Ridge legal positions are without merit.

In the above Incomplete Letter, the City of Del Mar has responded to Seaside Ridge’s third attempt to process their application by ministerial actions, and it is therefore apparent that it is actually Seaside Ridge’s legal position that is a significant barrier to moving the project forward, not the City.

As a result, our Office provides the following brief analysis.

In short, the Coastal Act has not been superseded by the State’s housing laws, there is no legal support for an administrative amendment to the City’s LCP, and there is simply no legal process for the issuance of an administrative Coastal Development Permit for a project that is inconsistent with the City of Del Mar’s LCP. Contrary to Seaside Ridge’s assertions, the Planning and Community Development Director has not been delegated the authority to amend ordinances and apply the HEIOZ to the Seaside Ridge project site. Despite these legal short comings, it appears that Seaside Ridge would rather litigate these issues instead of adhering to the current state of law and, as a result, the project is likely to languish in the courts for years versus the timelier avenue of following the standard procedures for ordinance and LCP amendments.

We strongly encourage the Applicant to submit the documentation requested by this Incomplete Letter and the two previous Incomplete Letters provided to the Applicant.

In summary, the application proposes a 259-housing unit project located on an environmentally sensitive bluff that supports habitat for numerous coastal species, serves as a major scenic view corridor, and has and will be subject to continuous erosion as a result of climate change. Additionally, the Seaside Ridge project location provides a major linkage for the public to access coastal resources and the site is unlikely to accommodate the significant vehicular traffic generated by the project. Given the possibility that the proposed project will have significant unmitigable environmental and public health impacts there is no foundation in law that erodes the application of the California Coastal Act or the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”).

Nowhere in housing law is the Coastal Act subservient to housing projects. Yet, the Applicant continues to believe that they can self-determine what provisions of the Coastal Act applies to their project.

The Applicant has continued to self-invent a Coastal Commission and City approval process that is simply non-existent and certainly not consistent with the California Coastal Act.

The Applicant continues to argue that the HEI-OZ applies to the Seaside Ridge project when it clearly does not. Of the many flaws in Applicant’s legal reasoning is that they, as a developer, have the right to invent the administrative process required under the California Coastal Act and self-determine what provisions of the Coastal Act apply to the Seaside Ridge project. Nowhere in State housing law does the legislation abolish the application of the California Coastal Act nor does the legislation allow for an applicant to choose what elements of the California Coastal Act do or do not apply to a housing project. Nor may an applicant by their own motion avoid a clearly defined legislative process of applying a new zoning classification to a project site. For the HEI107 May 19, 2026 Item 8 CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #3

OZ to apply to the project, the City Council must amend its HEI-OZ ordinance and apply it to the properties that make up the project site. Neither of these legislative actions are discretionary, nor do they qualify for legislative exemptions, therefore, environmental review under CEQA is mandated.

The New Parking Level
The Applicant states that the City has ignored certain application materials and that it is the City’s role to correct faulty or inconsistent documents found in the application materials. (Applicant’s Response Letter Aug. 28, 2023, Pg. 3).

It is not the role of the City to correct errors made by an applicant. As stated in the City’s second “Incomplete Letter” there was no error in calculating square footage stemming from the addition of a new parking level. The new parking level appeared in several areas of Applicant’s plans and as a result, the project grew more than 28% from the time the plans were originally submitted. Moreover, contrary to the Applicant’s assertions, the City carefully reviewed the submitted materials, as it does in every review process, and as a result it was clear that a new parking level was added to the project.

In a stark contradiction, the Applicant at the same time now asserts that the change in density, from adding a new parking level, is now a sought after wavier under the Density Bonus Act. This post rationalization is not supported by the previously submitted wavier and concession requests. We do, however, concur with the Applicant’s statements that the Seaside project is likely to cause significant increases in on-street parking resulting in impacts to public access to coastal resources and would therefore be inconsistent with the City’s LCP and the Coastal Act.

HEI-OZ
As stated in the previous Incomplete Letters, the HEI-OZ ordinance was drafted specifically for the property known as the “Watermark Site.” The objective design standards were also specifically tailored to impose design standards for the that specific development site.. In fact, the ordinance specifically identifies the application of the ordinance to two specific Assessor Parcel Numbers (“APN”). These APNs are directly tied to the Watermark site, not the North Bluff property where the proposed Seaside Ridge project is situated. Expanding the application of the HEI-OZ to the Seaside Ridge project would require public notice, CEQA review, public hearings, findings, and ordinance. In short, it is a discretionary legislative process that has not been uprooted by State housing laws. Again, while the Applicant has self-determined that no new significant environmental impact would result from this action, it is not the role of a lead agency to predetermine the outcome of the environmental review process. While we agree with Applicant that HEI-OZ could be used to apply to other housing site locations, that does not abdicate the City’s legislative process or the requirements of CEQA.

Finally, the Applicant now asserts that the City’s Planning Director can by her vested powers apply the HEI-OZ to the project site. And while this is certainly a creative interpretation of the City’s Planning Director authority it is not the case. Further, given that the HEI-OZ was drafted to apply to the Watermark parcels and the specific circumstances and location of that development site, the HEI-OZ would have to be revised to apply to the Seaside Ridge site, address its design issues, and ensure conformity with other applicable overlay zones that ensure protection of coastal resources. The City Council has not delegated this legislative authority to City staff, nor would it be lawful to do so.
108 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #3

Adherence to the LCP
There are significant density differences between the Seaside Ridge project and the City’s existing LCP. The LCP clearly identifies the North Bluff site as a low-density single-dwelling residential community. When the City and the Coastal Commission approved the City’s LCP, both agencies recognized that the North Bluff is surrounded by sensitive coastal resources, provides public access to significant coastal resources, determined that public parking is limited, and that public views should remain protected. These foundational planning goals are inapposite to what has been proposed by the Seaside project. The Seaside Ridge project is a high density, mutidwelling project, with a combination of market rate homes and homes priced for lower-income households which could result in significant impacts to sensitive coastal resources, impede public access to coastal resources, and block public viewing areas. In order for the Seaside Ridge project to be found consistent with the City’s LCP an amendment would be necessary. Amending the City’s certified LCP is a legislative action requiring CEQA review, City Council approval, and Coastal Commission certification.

We strongly disagree that an applicant can propose mitigation measures designed to address a few coastal resource protection issues and then self-certify that the project is consistent with the California Coastal Act. Again, State legislation does not disregard the mandates of the California Coastal Act, and, in fact, in passing the most recent legislation the legislature again codified the importance of the California Coastal Act. This premise is clearly stated in CA Gov.

Code Sec. 65589.5 (e):
“Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local agency from complying with the *** California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Neither shall anything in this section be construed to relieve the local agency from making one or more of the findings required pursuant to Section 21081 of the Public Resources Code or otherwise complying with the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000) of the Public Resources Code).

Additionally, the protection of coastal resources is clearly protected under the Density Bonus Act and the California Coastal Act is clearly not “superseded” under the CA Gov. Code Sec. 65915 (m):
“This section does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with this section and Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code.” (CA Gov. Code Sec. 65915(m)).

CEQA and the California Coastal Act were all but ignored by the Applicant’s most recent response. Until the Applicant complies with the documentation and processing fees required for an amendment to the City’s LCP, the application will remain incomplete. 109 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #3

Contrary to Applicant’s assertions, there is simply no “Administrative Coastal Development Permit” process available for amending an LCP. While it certainly would be beneficial and expeditious for a developer of a project to self-determine what provisions of the Coastal Act apply to their project, that is not how housing law, the California Coastal Act, or CEQA is written. Further, given the stark density difference between the current LCP and the density found in the Seaside Ridge project, an amendment to the LCP is mandated by the California Coastal Act.

The amendment of the City’s LCP is a discretionary action that requires CEQA review and given the likelihood of significant environmental impacts that may be generated by the Seaside Ridge project, legislative exemptions are not warranted. And while the Applicant has declared that all environmental impacts have been reduced to a level of insignificance, this developer position is not binding on a lead agency. The role of a lead agency is to independently determine if the project may result in any significant environmental effects and independently review those impacts. Neither the City nor the Coastal Commission can abdicate these independent reviews and abide by the determinations made by an applicant.

Unfortunately, Seaside Ridge’s third set of legal responses is highly misleading, misstates applicable law, and is devoid of documentation requested by the City. To remedy these shortcomings, it is advisable for the Applicant to provide the documentation requested by the City. The City will in turn diligently process the application consistent with the City’s Community Plan, Municipal Code, State housing laws, the California Coastal Act, and CEQA.

Ralph T. Hicks
Assistant City Attorney
City of Del Mar
110 May 19, 2026 Item 8
1050 Camino Del Mar, Del Mar, California 92014-2698. Telephone: (858) 755-9313.Fax:
(858) 755-2794 www.delmar.ca.us
December 20, 2023
VIA EMAIL AND U.S. MAIL
Manuel Nieto
2717 Via de la Valle
Del Mar, CA 92014
SUBJECT: Fourth Review of Application Materials Submitted for CDP23-008 (Proposed 259 Multi-Unit Residential Development and Density Bonus Request, referred to as “Seaside Ridge”) at 929 Border (APN #’s 298-241- 06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14).

Dear Mr. Nieto:

Thank you for the November 22, 2023 fourth resubmittal of materials associated with the above-cited entitlement. The current submittal and the three previous submittals continue to be unresponsive to the documentation requested by the City. The Applicant continues to provide argumentative legal analysis instead of providing the documentation required to process the subject project. As a result, the City of Del Mar Planning and Community Development Department and the City Attorney have reviewed the submitted materials listed below and determined the subject Application continues to be INCOMPLETE.

November 22, 2023, Application Materials Submitted to the City:

1. Cover Letter

2. Legal response to the City’s September 26, 2023, Incomplete Status Determination On December 11, 2023, the City Attorney’s Office sent via certified mail/email, a response to the Applicant’s legal response (listed as #2 above). For your convenience, the City Attorney’s letter is again included as Attachment A. For the Applicant to receive a “Complete” status for this project, they must submit the documentation requested as follows in this Incomplete Letter and the previous (September 26, 2023) Incomplete Letter. As indicated in previous correspondence, the project materials submitted thus far will be deemed filed but will remain Incomplete until the project entitlement materials identified in this status letter are submitted. These materials are required in order for the City to fully evaluate the proposed project in accordance with City regulations and to assess potential environmental impacts as required by the California Environmental Quality Act and the California Coastal Act.
111 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #4
December 20, 2023

Applications, Materials and Fees Still Required:

Given the project’s lack of compliance with the City’s Community Plan, Zoning Designations, and certified Local Coastal Program (LCP) and the City’s determination that the HEI-OZ does not apply to the project site, the documents listed below are required along with deposit of the correct fees associated with those discretionary actions. a) Rezone Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – As stated in previous reviews, a rezone is a legislative action that cannot be processed administratively. Therefore, your application request for an “Administrative Rezone” is rejected and subject project parcels are not eligible for “by right” housing development. Use and applicability of the HEI-OZ for implementation of the Housing Element is at the discretion of the Del Mar City Council. If the Applicant would like to apply for a legislative action to rezone the subject site parcels (APN 298-241-06, 298-241-07, & 299-030-14), then please prepare a separate letter of request to accompany the Uniform Development Application that provides the request, justifications for the rezone, and proposed findings for approval as are required in accordance with DMMC Section 30.86.220 (C). Exhibit shall also be prepared and submitted that identifies existing zoning designations and proposed zoning designations.

Required Deposit: $10,925 (This is an initial working deposit; additional funds may be required in accordance with the City’s adopted Fee Schedule). b) Local Coastal Program Amendment (LCPA) (Has Not Been Submitted) – Rezoning and modifying the land use designation of the subject site would require an LCPA, adopted by the City Council and Certified by the California Coastal Commission. Proposed/revised text revisions and map exhibits of the City’s LCP are required with an LCPA application submittal.

Required Deposit: Included with the above-required Rezone deposit. c) General (Community) Plan Amendment (Has Not Been Submitted) – Amendment of the City’s General (Community) Plan is required for any changes to the Very Low Residential Density Land Use Designation (located in the North Bluff District) to allow - multi-unit development on lots identified with the Assessor’s Parcel Numbers 298-241-06, 298-241-07, and 299-030-14. Proposed/revised land use maps and Community Plan text revisions are required with the application submittal. Required Deposit: Included with the above-required Rezone deposit. d) Environmental Assessment Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – The proposed project is subject to compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The Project is inconsistent with the California Coastal Act and the City’s certified LCP. Therefore, a discretionary Local Coastal Program Amendment is required in order for the Project to be found consistent with the existing LCP.

Accordingly, an Environmental Assessment (EA) application is required for the City to determine the appropriate level environmental review that would be required for the project.
112 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #4
December 20, 2023

Required Deposit: $1,090 (Additional funds will be required once a consultant from the City’s on-call environmental consultant list has been contracted to perform the Initial Study). To facilitate the processing of the re-submitted application additional technical information/reports will be required regarding the following areas of environmental concern:
• Public Coastal View Impact Analysis
• Air Quality Impacts
• Energy Conservation and Impact Analysis
• Greenhouse Gas Emissions Impacts Including during construction • Hazards and Hazardous Materials Usage and Impacts
• Noise Impact Analysis
• Full Paleontological Report
• Tribal/Cultural Resources Impact
• Climate Change Impacts to the North Bluff
• Environmental Justice Analysis
• Proposed Roadway Impact Analysis
• Public Coastal Access Impact Analysis
• Conformity with LCP Impact Analysis
Upon completion of the required Initial Study, and in order to address significant environmental impacts, additional technical reports and/or information may be required.
e) Design Review Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) – Discretionary Design Review Permit approval is required for all development in the City of Del Mar not otherwise exempted. As it is the City’s determination that the subject Housing Development Project is not subject to the provisions of AB 1398, discretionary development applications and approvals are required in accordance with Del Mar Municipal Code (DMMC) Chapter 23.08. The Applicant must submit an unaltered City of Del Mar Design Review Permit Application and Submittal Checklist.

Required Application Fee: $11,380 Required General Plan/Zoning Code Update Charge (10%): $1,138. DRB Public Notice Fee: To be determined and required at the time of public notice distribution.
f) LCP Environmentally Protective Overlay Zones Apply to the Project Site Because the project site is located in the Coastal Commission approved Coastal Bluff Overlay Zone, the Bluff, Slope and Canyon Overlay Zone, and Lagoon Overlay Zone, as well as the proposed grading that would be required to adequately access the housing units, the following discretionary permit applications are required under the provisions of the certified LCP:
i. Conditional Use Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) Required Application Fee: $2,595
113 May 19, 2026 Item 8
CDP23-008 (Seaside Ridge)
Incomplete Letter #4
December 20, 2023

Planning Commission Public Notice Fee: To be determined and required at the time of public notice distribution.
ii. Coastal Development Application – A CDP Supplemental questionnaire was submitted on March 30, 2023. However, as previously indicated in the City’s incomplete letter dated April 27, 2023, the Coastal Development Permit required for this project is a discretionary permit, not administrative permit. A new CDP Supplemental Questionnaire without reference to the HEI-OZ. The required Application Fee is: $3,185.
iii. Land Conservation Permit Application (Has Not Been Submitted) Required Application Fee: $3,185
Total Fees Owed: $33,498. In accordance with the City’s Adopted Planning and Engineering Fee Schedules, payment of these fees is required for the City to process the proposed Seaside Ridge project.

The following items must be submitted to [email protected]:
- All required forms, applications, and other requested materials - A written response to each of the comments provided in this letter - Submittal of all fees as identified herein (upon receipt of City invoice) If you have any questions, please contact me at (858) 704-3643, or by email at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Matt Bator, AICP
Principal Planner
Attachment A – City Attorney Legal Response
cc: Joshua M. Caplan, Esq.

Dylan K. Johnson, Esq.
114 May 19, 2026 Item 8
Attachment A to December 20, 2023 Seaside Ridge "Incomplete Letter" 115 May 19, 2026 Item 8
116 May 19, 2026 Item 8
117 May 19, 2026 Item 8
118 May 19, 2026 Item 8
119 May 19, 2026 Item 8
120 May 19, 2026 Item 8
1 Matt Bator
From: Imani, Mehrsa@HCD <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 15, 2023 1:36 PM
To: Matt Bator
Cc: Heaton, Brian@HCD
Subject: RE: HCD Inquiry - Seaside Ridge, Del Mar
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.

Dear Matt,
After completing its initial review of the case related to the Seaside Ridge project in Del Mar, the Housing Accountability Unit has declined to further investigate this complaint. HCD will be closing this case at this time.

Thank you,
Mehrsa
Mehrsa Imani (she/her)
Housing Policy Analyst, HCDRII
Housing Policy Development Division
Housing and Community Development
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500 | Sacramento, CA 95833 Phone: 916.693.5608 | Email: [email protected]
From: Matt Bator
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 3:59 PM
To: Imani, Mehrsa@HCD
Cc: Heaton, Brian@HCD
Subject: RE: HCD Inquiry - Seaside Ridge, Del Mar
Thank you.

Matt Bator, AICP | Principal Planner - Current Planning City of Del Mar | Planning Department
1050 Camino del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
858.755.9313 ext. 1158 | 7 858.755.2794 |  [email protected] City Hall is open for public services Monday-Thursday, from 7:30 AM- 5:30 PM and Friday from 7:30 AM- 4:30 PM.

Counter hours for Planning and Building services are Monday and Wednesday between 1:00 PM to 5:30 PM or by appointment.

Attachment G
121 May 19, 2026 Item 8
2 All remote services will continue to be provided during regular City hours. Please check our City website at www.delmar.ca.us [delmar.ca.us] for more information.

From: Imani, Mehrsa@HCD <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 3:55 PM
To: Matt Bator <[email protected]>
Cc: Heaton, Brian@HCD <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: HCD Inquiry - Seaside Ridge, Del Mar
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.

Hi Matt,
Thank you for circling back. Typically when HCD receives an inquiry, we hold separate meetings with the developer and the local agency to gather the facts and hear the narrative of how things have been unfolding. In our meeting tomorrow, our goal is to simply establish the timeline of the project’s application review process and understand if it enjoys vesting privileges. In these meetings, we don’t aim to draw any conclusions, rather to gather the facts and gain your perspective.

Hope this helps to give context, and looking forward to chatting with you and your team tomorrow.

Mehrsa
Mehrsa Imani (she/her)
Housing Policy Analyst, HCDRII
Housing Policy Development Division
Housing and Community Development
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500 | Sacramento, CA 95833 Phone: 916.693.5608 | Email: [email protected]
[twitter.com] [facebook.com]
[landlordtenant.dre.ca.gov]
From: Matt Bator <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2023 10:50 AM
To: Imani, Mehrsa@HCD <[email protected]>
Cc: Heaton, Brian@HCD <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: HCD Inquiry - Seaside Ridge, Del Mar
Hi Mehrsa,
I am just checking in to see in you have anything to share content-wise in preparation for our meeting tomorrow afternoon. Joining us for the meeting will be Karen Brindley, Planning and Community Development Director, and Ralph Hicks, Deputy City Attorney.

Thank you,
122 May 19, 2026 Item 8
3 Matt
Matt Bator, AICP | Principal Planner - Current Planning City of Del Mar | Planning Department
1050 Camino del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
858.755.9313 ext. 1158 | 7 858.755.2794 |  [email protected] City Hall is open for public services Monday-Thursday, from 7:30 AM- 5:30 PM and Friday from 7:30 AM- 4:30 PM.

Counter hours for Planning and Building services are Monday and Wednesday between 1:00 PM to 5:30 PM or by appointment.

All remote services will continue to be provided during regular City hours. Please check our City website at www.delmar.ca.us [delmar.ca.us] for more information.

From: Imani, Mehrsa@HCD <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2023 1:28 PM
To: Matt Bator <[email protected]>
Cc: Heaton, Brian@HCD <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: HCD Inquiry - Seaside Ridge, Del Mar
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.

Hi Matt,
Thank you for your quick reply. I just sent a calendar invite for 7/20 at 1pm. Feel free to share this with others on your team to be invited to this meeting. I’ll share more about the content of the meeting as we get closer to the date.

Thank you,
Mehrsa
From: Matt Bator <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 11, 2023 11:31 AM
To: Imani, Mehrsa@HCD <[email protected]>
Cc: Heaton, Brian@HCD <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: HCD Inquiry - Seaside Ridge, Del Mar
Hi Mehrsa,
Thank you for reaching out. I have been working on this submittal in consultation with the Deputy City Attorney and the Planning Director, so they would like to be in the meeting also. They also asked if you would be sending out a short agenda or an indication of the questions you may have.

The Director and I will be out of the office the rest of this week and next Monday, but we can all be available the following dates and times next week…
Tuesday (7/18) – 1:00 or 3:00 pm
Thursday (7/20) – anytime between 1:00 and 4:00 pm. This day would be preferred.

Thank you,
Matt
123 May 19, 2026 Item 8
4 Matt Bator, AICP | Principal Planner - Current Planning City of Del Mar | Planning Department
1050 Camino del Mar
Del Mar, CA 92014
858.755.9313 ext. 1158 | 7 858.755.2794 |  [email protected] City Hall is open for public services Monday-Thursday, from 7:30 AM- 5:30 PM and Friday from 7:30 AM- 4:30 PM.

Counter hours for Planning and Building services are Monday and Wednesday between 1:00 PM to 5:30 PM or by appointment.

All remote services will continue to be provided during regular City hours. Please check our City website at www.delmar.ca.us [delmar.ca.us] for more information.

From: Imani, Mehrsa@HCD <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 10, 2023 5:10 PM
To: Matt Bator <[email protected]>
Cc: Heaton, Brian@HCD <[email protected]>
Subject: HCD Inquiry - Seaside Ridge, Del Mar
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.

Dear Matt,
My name is Mehrsa and I’m a representative of HCD’s Housing Accountability Unit. As you are aware, we recently received an inquiry related to the proposed Seaside Ridge Project, in Del Mar. We have had an opportunity to review some of the material received, and as we look further into this inquiry, we would like an opportunity to speak with you to better contextualize and understand the circumstances.

Please share a few options of dates/times for a 30-minute meeting that work best with you and your team this week or next week, and I will send an MS Teams invite.

Thank you,
Mehrsa
Mehrsa Imani (she/her)
Housing Policy Analyst, HCDRII
Housing Policy Development Division
Housing and Community Development
2020 W. El Camino Avenue, Suite 500 | Sacramento, CA 95833 Phone: 916.693.5608 | Email: [email protected]
[twitter.com] [facebook.com]
[landlordtenant.dre.ca.gov]
124 May 19, 2026 Item 8
City of Del Mar
Agenda Report
________________________________________________________________________________________________________ City Council Action:

TO: Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers
FROM: Amanda Lee, Principal Planner
Karen Brindley, Planning and Community Development Director Via Ashley Jones, City Manager
DATE: May 19, 2026
SUBJECT: Update on Affordable Housing Efforts and Related Actions Including City Council Direction on Initiation of Planning and Zoning Amendments for Affordable Housing in Preparation for the 7th Cycle Housing Element REQUESTED ACTION/RECOMMENDATION:

Staff recommends the City Council receive a report on the City’s affordable housing efforts and related actions and provide direction for the initiation of amendments to facilitate affordable housing development on the North Bluff properties as part of an existing Tier 2 City Council priority work plan item for Fiscal Years 2026-2027 and 2027-2028 in preparation for the 7th Cycle Housing Element.

BACKGROUND:

The City of Del Mar is in process of implementing its current Housing Element for the 6th housing cycle, which covers years 2021-2029. The City is also planning ahead for the upcoming Housing Element update for the 7th housing cycle. The Housing Element is a required component of the City’s General Plan that must be updated every eight years. The City Council initially adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element on March 25, 2021, which was timely submitted to the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

Thereafter, the City worked closely with HCD to address items needed for final certification related to new “affirmatively furthering fair housing” policies. After a multi-year public process, the City Council re-adopted the 6th Cycle Housing Element in a noticed public hearing on April 3, 2023 (Resolution 2023-12). On May 31, 2023, HCD determined the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element to be in substantial compliance with State Housing Element Law.

HCD continues to follow the City’s implementation progress and recently confirmed the City has adequate sites in its Housing Element sites inventory and complies with State law. On January 15, 2026, HCD confirmed it expects the California 22nd District Agricultural Association (District) and City of Del Mar to agree on a final site and ground lease for affordable housing development by November 30, 2026, for implementation of the City’s 1 May 19, 2026 Item 9
City Council Agenda Report
Direction on Planning for 7th Cycle
May 19, 2026

certified Housing Element strategy to develop affordable housing on Fairgrounds property (Program 3A). Fairgrounds affordable housing remains the City’s primary means to meet its RHNA goals for lower income units. See Attachment A to review the HCD Letter.

The City’s 6
th Cycle Housing Element identifies a goal to develop at least 175 total dwelling units. A cumulative total of 135 net-new units has already been produced for the 6th Cycle, which is 77% of the City’s assigned 175-unit target. Most of these units are within the moderate- and above moderate-income categories. Given this unmet need, the City is continuing its efforts to support development of at least 113 dwelling units for households that qualify as low-income, very low-income, and extremely low-income through implementation of its adopted Housing Element strategies to facilitate affordable housing development:

Adopted Strategies Lower Income
Unit Targets
Status
Affordable Housing on
Fairgrounds Property
in Del Mar
At least 54 units Completed pre-development studies (March 2026) that identified 3 feasible sites for
affordable housing with a range of concepts
for 61-82 units for family housing or 62-128
units for senior housing
Commercial Property
Infill:
- North
Commercial
- Professional
Commercial
At least 25 units No permits for lower income units are pending.

The City is processing a draft Affordable
Housing Overlay Zone. Visual concepts will
be presented to City Council June 2026,
followed by processing of a new overlay
zone with site-specific incentives.

Watermark Affordable
Housing Project
10 units
including: 6 low,
2, very low,
2 extremely low
Building Permit for this 50-unit project is
pending issuance (2026).
941 CDM Affordable
Housing Project
2 units: low
income
Entitlement was approved for an 8-unit
mixed use project with two low-income units
(2022).

City-owned 10th Street
Site
At least 4 units City Council adopted Resolution related to Surplus Lands Act Exemption (Feb 2026).

Request for Proposals is pending (May
2026).

City-owned 28th Street
Site
At least 3 units City Council adopted Resolution related to Surplus Lands Act Exemption (April 2026).

Request for Proposals is pending (June
2026).

Residential Property
Infill:

At least 15 units No permits for lower income unit infill projects are pending. City is in process of
2 May 19, 2026 Item 9
City Council Agenda Report
Direction on Planning for 7th Cycle
May 19, 2026

- ADUs
- Condo
Conversions
- Senate Bill 9
Projects
considering additional incentives to gain
interest and participation in existing
incentive programs.

Target: At least
113 lower
income units
As noted in the table above, the City of Del Mar is actively encouraging, facilitating, and implementing affordable housing development consistent with its certified Housing Element.

Affordable Housing on Commercial Zone Infill Properties To facilitate development of affordable housing on commercial zone infill sites, the City prepared architectural concepts and financial feasibility analysis and proformas for privatelyowned sites in the North Commercial and Professional Commercial Zones to encourage affordable housing development. Consistent with existing City Council priority work plan items, the City also prepared information related to sites that are not currently part of the 6th Cycle Housing Element (i.e., sites in City’s downtown Central Commercial and Professional Commercial Zones). In June 2026, a City consultant will present visual concepts to the City Council to facilitate input for processing of a new overlay zone with site-specific incentives.

Affordable Housing on City-Owned Properties and the Fairgrounds The City coordinated allocation of funding and consultant contracts for pre-development studies and due diligence information, preparation of architectural concepts and financial feasibility analysis and proformas, and other pre-development actions (i.e., Surplus Lands Act process) to make public land available to affordable housing developers relating to the Fairgrounds property and City-owned vacant sites on 10th Street and 28th Street. As shown in the table, Fairgrounds studies completed March 2026 identified three feasible sites located within the City of Del Mar for affordable housing with a range of concepts for 61-82 units for family housing or 62-128 units for senior housing. The City will be issuing a Request for Proposals (RFP) for the 10th Street site in May 2026 and RFP for the 28th Street site in June 2026. See Attachment B for a brief description of what is involved in the RFP process and next steps for affordable housing on the 10th Street lot in Del Mar’s Civic Center complex and City-owned vacant lot on 28th Street.

Amendments to Facilitate Affordable Housing on North Bluff Properties In addition to the City’s adopted strategies, the Council is asked to authorize initiation of potential amendments to the Community Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program and associated California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) analysis relating to vacant sites on the North Bluff, for consideration as an additional strategy that can facilitate development of lower income housing in the event the obligations and expected timing related to affordable housing at the Fairgrounds is not realized. These comprehensive planning-level amendments will also aid the City in meeting its anticipated Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) 3 May 19, 2026 Item 9
City Council Agenda Report
Direction on Planning for 7th Cycle
May 19, 2026

for the 7th Cycle Housing Element update and will allow North Bluff property owners to pursue affordable housing development in a manner that meets public safety requirements including provision of adequate access, vehicular circulation, and protection of coastal resources. If pursued, these discretionary actions will be subject to future public hearing processes to obtain a Planning Commission recommendation, City Council approval, and Coastal Commission certification.

The North Bluff is generally an undeveloped land area in the northwest corner of the City boundary with eight parcels owned by three separate private ownerships as well as two parcels that are part of the North Bluff Nature Preserve owned by the City of Del Mar for a combined total of approximately 19.3 acres. The properties are located on top of sea cliffs at an elevation above the public sandy beach and Pacific Ocean below. Members of the public utilize existing natural trails that connect the North Bluff Nature Preserve to the popular Del Mar beach.

As described in the Del Mar Community Plan (General Plan), the location is an area that contains coastal bluffs and sensitive coastal resources, including archaeological resources, and is vulnerable to geologic/seismic hazards, wave action, and erosion, which can lead to creation of sea caves at the base of the bluff and bluff failures. Vehicular circulation and parking in this area is highly constrained due to the millions of people who visit this popular beach recreation location on an annual basis and daily regional commuters who travel northsouth past this area on Camino del Mar/Highway 101. The adjacent dog beach is highly utilized and public coastal access parking along Camino del Mar is in high demand on a daily basis.

Property owners for the three distinct privately-owned site areas on the North Bluff have contacted the City and expressed strong interest in development of housing on the North Bluff at densities greater than what is currently allowed under the very low-density single dwelling unit residential designation in the Community Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program.

This Council agenda item considers property owned by Carol Lazier, the proponent of the Seaside Ridge Development proposal, as well as adjacent North Bluff properties located to the north and south. The Lazier project application is a separate item for consideration on the May 19, 2026, City Council Agenda.

The requested action reflects a proactive approach to prepare for the 7th housing cycle and is responsive to the housing development interest expressed by North Bluff property owners.

It would initiate amendments to the Community Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program to incorporate an increase in allowable density to support development of affordable housing units for lower income households as further described below.

This is a different approach and circumstance than identified in 6th Cycle Housing Element Program 1E. Here, the intent is to expedite the ability to secure new affordable housing for lower income households and increase the City’s housing stock. 4 May 19, 2026 Item 9
City Council Agenda Report
Direction on Planning for 7th Cycle
May 19, 2026

DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

The North Bluff properties are currently designated and zoned for very low density residential of one dwelling unit per acre and are limited to a maximum building height of 14 feet. These low-density standards were established to maintain a low-scale, low intensity development pattern for compatibility with the North Bluff Nature Preserve and environmentally sensitive bluff site context. Even if processing a density bonus request at the maximum density allowed per State law, the potential total dwelling unit yield is relatively low.

The North Bluff Sites Exhibit (Attachment C) identifies the location and respective ownership for the North Bluff properties and non-residential properties in proximity at a lower elevation, including the Del Mar beach and San Dieguito River/Lagoon (Floodway Zone) and Brigantine restaurant by intersection of Camino del Mar and Via de la Valle (Beach Commercial Zone).

To plan ahead for future housing needs, the requested action will allow the City Council to determine the appropriate density and heights of multiple dwelling unit structures, preferred circulation routes and access points, and objective design standards specific to the area’s sensitive coastal bluff site context. As part of this consideration, the City Council will need to consider factors related to public safety from coastal hazards on the North Bluff (i.e., geologic/seismic hazards, wave action, erosion, sea caves, and potential for bluff failures), adequate access for fire and life safety and evacuation, as well as site constraints and challenges related to coordination of access and utility connections to the two vacant sites (owned by Whalen and Lazier) and existing single dwelling unit residential estate lot (101 Border Avenue owned by El Khoury/Gilbert).

Initiation of Potential Amendments to North Bluff Land Use and Zoning Designations The 6th Cycle Housing Element identifies the following vacant site locations as contingency sites for possible upzoning should the City experience a delay in implementing the Fairgrounds Affordable Housing strategy:
• Stensrud Lazier Holding Trust 10-17-11 (Lazier): 929 Border Avenue APNs 298-241- 06 and -07 in the R1-40 zone and Bluff, Slope, and Canyon and Coastal Bluff Overlay zones (Note: This owner also owns APN 299-030-14, which is a contiguous triangular parcel of land that is 0.10 acre in size that includes the coastal bluff edge on the blufftop and extends onto the public beach at the beach elevation below.) • Delfina Del Mar Development, LLC (Whalen): APNs 298-241-29 and 298-241-34 in the R1-14 zone and APNS 298-241-35 and -36 in the R1-40 zone and APNs 298-241- 34 and -35 in the Coastal Bluff Overlay zone.

These North Bluff properties are unique properties in the City of Del Mar because they are large vacant lots that are adjacent to protected public open spaces with environmentally sensitive resources that are vulnerable to a variety of coastal hazards and public safety risks.

Because of these public safety concerns and environmental constraints, the North Bluff is 5 May 19, 2026 Item 9
City Council Agenda Report
Direction on Planning for 7th Cycle
May 19, 2026

currently designated and zoned for very low residential density in the City’s Community Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program.

Development potential: The existing regulations provide for a maximum of one dwelling unit per lot. To increase the allowable zoning base density, discretionary actions must be processed including upzoning the properties to allow a base density of 20 dwelling units per acre, which would provide additional development capacity for affordable housing. This could be accomplished by replacing the existing Community Plan and LCP land use designations and zoning regulations with a new “RM-North Zone” plan designation and zoning that allows residential development up to 20 dwelling units per acre.

Processing of the proposed amendments will require discretionary approval: The City Council is being asked to provide direction to initiate a process to create a new base zone and apply it to real property, which will require the following actions:
1) Analysis, preparation, and processing of environmental review documentation in accordance with CEQA;
2) Processing of an amendment to the Del Mar Community Plan to create a new RM North land use category and apply it to real property in the corresponding land use map exhibit that would be processed for review and recommendation by the Planning Commission and adoption by the City Council;
3) Processing of an amendment to the Del Mar Zoning Code (Del Mar Municipal Code Title 30) to create a new RM-North zoning category to implement density of 20 dwelling units per acre and include development standards (i.e., building height, setbacks, minimum lot size, etc.) that would be processed for review and recommendation by the Planning Commission and adoption by the City Council; 4) Processing of an amendment to the Del Mar Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan to create a new RM North land use category and apply it to real property in the corresponding land use map exhibit and an amendment to the Del Mar Local Coastal Program Implementing Zoning Ordinances (using the zoning criteria created in #3) and apply it to real property in the corresponding zoning map exhibit that would be processed together for review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, adoption by the City Council, and certification by the California Coastal Commission; and
5) Processing of a Rezone to apply the new RM-North zoning category to real property consistent with the corresponding zoning map exhibit that would be processed for review and recommendation by the Planning Commission, adoption by the City Council, and certification by the California Coastal Commission. 6 May 19, 2026 Item 9
City Council Agenda Report
Direction on Planning for 7th Cycle
May 19, 2026

6) Preparation of a fee recapture ordinance for the North Bluff properties to recover the City funds expended to increase housing densities on these properties, develop objective design and development standards, complete CEQA documentation, and other related costs.

FISCAL IMPACT:

There is no fiscal impact or action required by the City Council for this agenda item. If the proposed actions included in this report are directed by the City Council, funding for processing of the amendments utilizing consultant services will be included in the budget proposal for Fiscal Years 2026-2027 and 2027-2028 in an amount estimated to be $150,000.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The City prepared multiple Program Environmental Impact Reports (PEIRs) for its Housing Element implementation in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168 (Program EIR) to consider broad policy alternatives, potential impacts, and program wide mitigation measures. The requested action is consistent with the 6th Cycle Housing Element Final PEIR and Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP) certified by the City Council on October 5, 2020 (State Clearinghouse (SCH) No. 2020029064). The 6th Cycle Final PEIR is available at: www.delmar.ca.us/DocumentCenter/View/7171/Final-PEIR-91020 The City’s Housing Element planning and implementation is also covered by a separate PEIR (SCH No. 2019029058) prepared for the 5th Cycle Housing Element Programs 2E (NC zone) and 2F (PC zone). The NC/PC PEIR, which analyzed future housing in the NC, PC, and PF Zones, was certified by the City Council on September 8, 2020.

The NC/PC Final PEIR is available at: www.delmar.ca.us/Archive.aspx?ADID=1428 Future actions will require additional environmental analysis of any proposed planning and zoning amendments and project level development pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(c) to determine whether an additional environmental document must be prepared.

This will involve consideration of factors such as allowable land use, planned density, building intensity, or environmentally sensitive factors specific to the site context that may result in preparation of a new Initial Study analysis per CEQA Guidelines Section 15152 (i.e., new effects not previously examined in the PEIR) or other supplemental analysis per CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 to determine if the proposed amendments are within the scope of the certified Final PEIRs or whether there is substantial evidence of an increase in severity of previously identified effects or substantial changes in circumstances that necessitate an additional environmental document.

HOUSING IMPACT:

This agenda item relates to planning implementation of the City’s 6th Cycle Housing Element (2021-2029) and planning for the 7th Cycle Housing Element. The proposed initiation of planning amendments is intended to facilitate development of affordable housing for lower income households on the North Bluff properties.
7 May 19, 2026 Item 9
City Council Agenda Report
Direction on Planning for 7th Cycle
May 19, 2026

NEXUS TO CITY COUNCIL GOALS AND PRIORITIES:

Implementation of the project is a Tier 1 City Council priority work plan item for Fiscal Years 2026-2027 and 2027-2028.

ATTACHMENTS:

Attachment A - California Housing and Community Development Letter (January 15, 2026) Attachment B - Next Steps for City-Owned 10th Street Lot in Del Mar’s Civic Center Complex Attachment C - North Bluff Sites Map
8 May 19, 2026 Item 9
STATE OF CALIFORNIA - BUSINESS, CONSUMER SERVICES AND HOUSING AGENCY GAVIN NEWSOM, Governor

DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING AND COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT

DIVISION OF HOUSING POLICY DEVELOPMENT
651 Bannon Street, Suite 400
Sacramento, CA 95811
(916) 263-2911 / FAX (916) 263-7453
www.hcd.ca.gov
January 15, 2026
Ashley Jones, City Manager
City of Del Mar
1050 Camino del Mar
Del Mar, CA, 92014
RE: City of Del Mar’s 6th Cycle Housing Element Programs – Letter of Inquiry Dear Ashley Jones:

The purpose of this letter is to inquire about the status of the City of Del Mar’s (City) implementation of 6th Cycle Housing Element programs pursuant to Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i). The California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) sent the City a letter on May 31, 2023, finding the City’s housing element in substantial compliance with Housing Element Law. 1 This was based on,
among other reasons, the City’s commitment to implement programs according to specific timelines.

Although the City provided HCD with updates regarding implementation of its Housing Element programs on September 9, 2025, several programs with past commitment dates remain pending. HCD requests that the City provide an update on the status and timeline for implementation of the following programs:
• Program 1D (Economic Study and Affordable Housing Overlay Zone): The Economic Study was completed timely. However, the ordinance for the Affordable Housing Overlay Zone was due by December 2025. The City’s Annual Progress Report (APR) from 2024 states that the City was exploring options for use of Cycle 2 regional Housing Acceleration Program (HAP) consulting resources to facilitate public discussions and would proceed with preparation and processing of the Overlay Zone in FY2025-2026 (which began July 2025). Based on the latest update provided to HCD from the City, the ordinance is now expected to be completed by June 2026. Please provide a detailed timeline and program actions to meet new implementation deadlines (e.g., Planning Commission, City Council, and Coastal Commission hearings).
1 Gov. Code, § 65580 et seq.

Attachment A
9 May 19, 2026 Item 9
Ashley Jones, City Manager

• Program 1E (Rezone of Vacant North Bluff and/or South Stratford Properties):

This is a contingency program to be implemented if Program 3A experiences delays. Please see below under Programs 1E and 3A for the Fairgrounds Affordable Housing Project.
• Program 1I (Streamlining Incentives for Affordable Housing): The 2024 Annual Progress Report (APR) states that multiple incentives have been completed; however, it is not clear which incentives those are. Please provide an update on the incentives that have been completed.
• Program 3A (Pursue a Binding Agreement with the State to Develop Housing on the Fairgrounds Property): Please see below under Programs 1E and 3A for the Fairgrounds Affordable Housing Project.
• Program 4A (Residential Care Facilities): This program was due by December 2024. The 2024 APR states that the project was initiated in 2024 but had been on pause due to limited staff resources and that the project work was anticipated to resume and be completed by the March 2026 HAP Grant deadline. The City noted that it would process the Residential Care Facilities ordinance in compliance with state law but did not provide a timeline for adopting the ordinance. Based on the latest update provided to HCD from the City, the ordinance is now expected to be completed by September 2026. Please provide a detailed timeline and program actions to meet new implementation deadlines (e.g., Planning Commission, City Council, and Coastal Commission hearings).
• Program 4B (Emergency Shelters, Transitional Housing and Supportive Housing, Single Room Occupancy Units, and Low Barrier Navigation Centers): This program was due by December 2024. The 2024 APR states that the project was initiated in 2024 but had been on pause due to limited staff resources and that the project work was anticipated to resume and be completed by the March 2026 HAP Grant deadline. Based on the latest update provided to HCD from the City, the City will prepare and post new resource information and adopt an ordinance by September 2026. Please provide a detailed timeline and program actions to meet new implementation deadlines (e.g., Planning Commission, City Council, and Coastal Commission hearings).
• Program 4C (Shared Housing Program): This program is ongoing. The 2024 APR states that the City would receive an annual update on the services provided by a non-profit during the FY2025-2026 budget adoption process between March and June 2025. Based on the latest updates provided to HCD from the City, there are no changes to this program’s status. However, the City should provide an update on what other actions the City is taking to assist with matching tenants with existing homeowners.
• Program 6F (Vote Threshold Requirement for Future Legislative Actions Related to General Plan Amendments for Housing Element Implementation): This program is ongoing. The 2024 APR states that the City would explore whether to modify the local voting threshold from a super majority requirement for modifications to the Del Mar Community Plan to a simple majority (study and potential ordinance/public 10 May 19, 2026 Item 9
Ashley Jones, City Manager

vote) and would continue consulting with the City Attorney to ensure compliance with state law. While the City states no action is required at this time as this issue does not affect the City’s ability to implement its certified Housing Element, the City should provide a timeline for completion of the study. This program is important as the Housing Element identifies the more restrictive processing requirement as a potential constraint on development.

Programs 1E and 3A for the Fairgrounds Affordable Housing Project The City has identified Program 1E as a contingency measure, to be implemented if Program 3A cannot be implemented in a timely manner. To support Program 3A, the City has received Cycle 2 HAP Grant funds from the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) to study the development feasibility of lower-income housing at the Fairgrounds site. HCD is currently engaged in ongoing coordination with the City and the 22nd District Agricultural Association (District) to monitor this effort.

Specifically, HCD reminds the City that Program 1E is required should Program 3A’s binding agreement be suspended or terminated or should development of the Fairgrounds Affordable Housing project be rendered infeasible within the 6th cycle planning period by additional delays or extensions of key milestones. Based on the timelines provided by the City and subsequent conversations with the City and the District, HCD understands that the City must meet the following deadlines, among others, to feasibly construct affordable housing on the Fairgrounds by 2031:
• March 2026: District completes pre-development studies. • August 2026: City completes additional feasibility analysis studies (as needed). • September 2026: City prepares conceptual development program. • November 2026: City and District agree on the final development site and execute a ground lease, and City prepares RFP/RFQ and developer solicitation. • April 2027: City secures an ENRA with developer.
• September 2027: City completes CEQA, NEPA, and entitlement processes. • August 2028: City executes Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) with developer and obtains Coastal Commission approval. • June 2029: Developer secures project financing, and City executes a Lease with developer.
• June 2031: Developer completes construction and lease-up. 11 May 19, 2026 Item 9
Ashley Jones, City Manager

HCD acknowledges that some of these deadlines extend beyond those previously provided by the City and discussed in a prior technical assistance letter that HCD sent to the City on December 11, 2024.2 HCD expects the City to meet the deadlines above, with no further delays.

To confirm project feasibility within the 6th cycle planning period, HCD requests that the City confirm in writing with HCD when it achieves each of the milestones above. If the City fails to meet these deadlines, it will be required to implement Program 1E or get back on track with the remaining milestones above in order to maintain housing element compliance.

Consequences of Failure to Implement Programs
Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i), grants HCD authority to review any action or failure to act by a local government that it determines is inconsistent with an adopted housing element or Housing Element Law. This includes failure to implement program actions included in the housing element. Failure to implement actions in the programs listed above by the statutory deadline may result in HCD revoking its finding of substantial compliance with Housing Element Law.

Various consequences may apply if the City does not have a housing element in compliance with Housing Element Law, including ineligibility or delay in receiving certain state funds, referral to the California Office of the Attorney General, court-imposed financial penalties, the loss of local land use authority to a court-appointed agent, and the application of the “builder’s remedy.”3
Conclusion
Housing elements are essential to developing a blueprint for growth and are a vital tool to address California’s prolonged housing crisis. Accordingly, state law has established clear disincentives for local jurisdictions that fail to comply with Housing Element Law.

To ensure the City continues to meet the 6th cycle update requirements for a substantially compliant housing element, the City must submit any adopted ordinances or resolutions, or documentation that demonstrates that housing element program commitments have been met, to HCD for review.
4 HCD understands the City has many commitments and recognizes the challenges of implementation. HCD will consider any written response before taking further action authorized by Government Code section 65585, subdivision (i), including issuance of a Corrective Action Letter and removal of HCD’s finding of housing element compliance. 2 City of Del Mar Technical Assistance Letter available at:
www.hcd.ca.gov/sites/default/files/docs/planning-and-community/HAU/del-mar-he-ta-121124.pdf. 3 Gov. Code, §§ 65585, subds. (i)(1)(C), (j), (l)(1); 65589.5, subds. (d)(6), (h)(11). 4 Gov. Code, § 65585. 12 May 19, 2026 Item 9
Ashley Jones, City Manager

Please provide a written response to this inquiry by February 13, 2026. If you have any questions or would like to discuss the content of this letter, please contact Linda Ly at [email protected] and Mao Lee at [email protected].

Sincerely,
Melinda Coy
Housing Accountability Unit Chief
13 May 19, 2026 Item 9
Attachment B
Next Steps for City-Owned 10th Street and 28thStreet Housing Sites The City is issuing separate Request for Proposals (RFP) to potential developers for the 10th Street site (May 2026) and 28th Street site (June 2026). The RFP will serve as an invitation for qualified development teams to submit proposals to partner with the City to build affordable housing on City-owned property. Since this will be the first time the City has issued an RFP specific to development of affordable housing, this exhibit is intended to be educational as to the RFP process and next steps for affordable housing on City owned property. Below is a description of what will be included in the 10th Street RFP, with the subsequent RFP for 28th Street being very similar as to format and content.

The 10th Street RFP will include the following:
• General information about the City of Del Mar and 10th Street site location • Objective to build 4 to 8 units of lower income units in a two-story structure • Services requested include preparation of pre-development studies, preliminary site plans, financing proposal, environmental document, and permit plans • RFP deadline to submit proposals in June 2026, and anticipated timing for interviews and City selection of development team by September 2026
• Requirements for proposal format and procedures for timely submittal • Evaluation criteria, that will be used to help the City select the best development team based on value, approach, and capability
The City Council will formally select a development team (target August 25, 2026) and enter into an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement (ENA) with the developer. The ENA will establish a good-faith negotiating period (i.e., 12 to 18 months) and timeline for developer completion of pre-development plans, studies, CEQA, and permit processing. Examples of predevelopment studies include biological and cultural resource surveys, soils report, stormwater/drainage plan, scenic view analysis, and noise study. The ENA will not obligate the City to approve a project or enter into a lease.

The City Council discretionary permit approval decisions will not be appealable to the Coastal Commission. After discretionary permit approvals are issued and prior to building permit issuance, the City will prepare and process a Housing Agreement and Development Agreement with the developer subject to review by the Planning Commission and final approval by the City Council. The terms for a ground lease will also be negotiated, targeting a lease term of approximately 57- to 75-years.

Prior to project construction, the developer will be responsible for securing project financing to enable closing of the real estate transaction. Subject to negotiations, the City will contribute the land and some funding (i.e., loans or grants) to the project financing as necessary for project success.
14 May 19, 2026 Item 9
298-241-34-00
298-241-29-00
298-241-35-00
298-241-36-00
298-241-06-00
298-241-07-00
298-214-07-00
299-030-14-00
Attachment C
15 May 19, 2026 Item 9