La Mesa council denies appeal and approves 73‑unit Jericho Road townhomes with added parking, drainage and traffic study conditions

The La Mesa City Council on May 13 denied an appeal of the Planning Commission decision and approved a 73‑unit townhome project proposed for 9407 Jericho Road, with conditions the council added after extensive public comment and neighbor testimony.

The action resolves an appeal from nearby residents who argued the rezone, density and driveway access would be unsafe and incompatible with the predominantly single‑family neighborhood. Councilmember Genevieve Casares moved to deny the appeal; the motion passed 4‑1 (Casares, Suzuki, Vice Mayor Dillard and Mayor Rapistaff voting yes; Councilmember Lothian voting no).

Why it matters: The project would change the site’s land‑use and zoning from single‑family (R1/urban residential) to multi‑unit (R3/multiple unit residential), enabling 73 for‑sale townhomes — 8 of them restricted to moderate‑income households — on a 3.49‑acre site near the Amaya trolley station. Supporters framed the proposal as “missing middle” for‑sale housing that helps La Mesa meet state housing goals; opponents said the site’s single vehicular access, steep grades and limited on‑street capacity will endanger neighbors and overwhelm local streets.

Staff and applicant presentations Staff told council the project had undergone environmental review under CEQA and that an initial study resulted in a mitigated negative declaration with required mitigation measures. The planning report said technical reviews for traffic, drainage, sewer and fire access found impacts could be mitigated and that the site’s proposed density (about 20.9 units per acre) fit the multiple‑unit residential designation the applicant requested.

Meritage Homes representatives said the design includes nine three‑story buildings, two‑car garages for each unit and on‑site guest parking for visitors. Applicant representative Louisa Lehi said the company had conducted outreach and that the project meets the city and state standards; she told council, “we support the findings presented by staff and recommend denial of the appeal.”

Opposition from neighbors Dozens of residents and property owners testified against the project at the public hearing, citing traffic, parking, drainage and visual impacts. Appellant Carlos Drago told council the proposal was a “square peg entering a round community hole” and asked council to “please maintain the zoning at 9407 Jericho to R1 and build responsibly.” Neighbors described narrow local streets, a steep Jericho Road approach and recurrent runoff and seepage problems downslope on Amaya Drive.

Council action and conditions Council voted to deny the appeal and then took the separate entitlements in sequence. The council adopted the mitigated negative declaration and mitigation monitoring program, approved the requested general plan amendment, introduced the rezoning ordinance to change the property to R3, approved the site development plan and approved the tentative tract map for airspace subdivision. The Council also ratified the Design Review Board recommendation.

Because of the neighborhood concerns raised during the hearing, council added specific conditions to the site development approval: the developer will reconfigure the tot‑lot area to expand on‑site guest parking from five spaces to ten; install stormwater capture/drainage measures and additional catch basins as required by the city engineer to reduce runoff to downhill properties; and provide a follow‑up traffic analysis to the city within approximately one year of occupancy (timing to be tied to final occupancy or a comparable milestone) to evaluate neighborhood effects and trigger city traffic‑calming or other remedies if warranted.

What the approvals do and do not do Councilmembers emphasized the narrow scope of the appeal process: the council reviewed the Planning Commission record, staff analysis and testimony and determined that the legal findings supporting the Planning Commission action were met. The approvals do not yet authorize construction permits; the developer must meet conditions, submit final engineering, and comply with mitigation measures before receiving building permits or occupancy.

Next steps and follow‑up • The project will proceed to final engineering and permit review with the added conditions; the city engineer and public works will review stormwater and catch‑basin locations. • A traffic study will be submitted and reviewed after substantial occupancy as specified in the council order; if the study shows unanticipated neighborhood impacts, the city’s Neighborhood Traffic Management Program was identified as the mechanism for evaluating traffic calming. • The project will establish a homeowners association to manage common areas and enforce parking rules in the community.

Residents who testified were given the council’s direction to work with staff and the developer on implementation details; councilmembers encouraged staff to monitor claims of drainage and sight‑distance issues as plans move forward.