CA - The dueling environmental reports behind Del Mar’s proposed 259-unit Seaside Ridge housing project
Another proposed blufftop development in Del Mar, another set of dueling environmental reports from the applicant and an advocacy group opposed to large-scale projects on the site.
The applicants for Seaside Ridge, a 259-unit housing development, submitted a 261-page geotechnical report in March that analyzes the conditions of its proposed location on a three-parcel, 6.9-acre property site owned by Carol Lazier on the north bluff. It concluded that the site “can be developed as planned.”
A 47-page study funded by a local group called Friends of Del Mar North Bluff was released in July. It raises multiple red flags for constructing that large of a project on the property, but also acknowledges an extensive set of limitations in how it reached those conclusions.
A similar debate over the condition of the north bluff played out in the leadup to the March 2020 election, when Del Mar voters rejected a ballot measure for the Marisol hotel project on the same property.
Meanwhile, Seaside Ridge and the city of Del Mar are in a yearlong standoff over whether construction will proceed at all.
City Hall has rejected multiple applications, most recently on Sept. 26. But the applicant believes Seaside Ridge should be eligible to move forward as a by-right project, meaning it can override local zoning restrictions, because Del Mar did not have a certified housing element at the time Seaside Ridge applicants first submitted their application in October 2022.
One-third of the units at Seaside Ridge would be reserved for low- to moderate-income households, which the applicants say will help Del Mar meet its state-mandated goal of 113 new affordable housing units by 2029. City officials have pointed to their recently approved housing element, which has a plan to meet that goal without Seaside Ridge.
The Friends of Del Mar North Bluff study, completed by Evans, Colbaugh, and Associates, starts off by stating that the report “is not a ‘third party’ review for the purposes of approval or denial of the referenced plans; rather it presents our findings and opinions of perceived geotechnical engineering shortfalls with the referenced plans and reports.”
It mentions issues with the project’s setback line, the rate of bluff retreat, and sea level rise as some of the mitigating factors for building 259 units of housing.
“I’m picking at them, but that’s what we came to do,” E. David Colbaugh, president and engineer at ECA, said in an interview. “Not stir the pot, just bring up in my mind shortfalls, if you will.”
The end of the report includes a section on its limitations: “We have not performed any detailed site exploration, laboratory testing or stability analyses to substantiate any of the information presented in the referenced reports. The information and resulting conclusions presented above may change if additional information is provided for review.”
