Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coastal Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Mendocino County approves revised Dialba cabin remodel after Coastal Commission concerns
Summary
The Mendocino County Coastal Permit Administrator on Sept. 25 approved a revised coastal development permit for James and Denise DiAlba to remodel an existing cabin, adopting a mitigated negative declaration and imposing conditions to limit impacts to environmentally sensitive habitat areas.
The Mendocino County Coastal Permit Administrator on Sept. 25 adopted a mitigated negative declaration and approved a revised coastal development permit (case CBP 2023-0009) for James and Denise DiAlba to remodel an existing cabin, the administrator said at a hearing.
County staff planner Liam Crowley told the administrator that the applicant withdrew a proposed new single-family residence after the California Coastal Commission staff raised concerns in a March 15, 2024 letter about environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA), regulatory takings, project alternatives, mitigation measures and CEQA compliance. Crowley said the revised application enlarges the existing cabin with a second floor, attached decks and garage decks, roof-mounted solar panels, a water storage tank, an outdoor kitchen and a gravel hammerhead turnaround to meet CAL FIRE standards.
The change matters because the property lies entirely within ESHA or ESHA buffers. Crowley said the original proposal would have caused a little over 3,000 square feet of direct impacts to ESHA; the revised plan avoids direct impacts but would place about 1,300 square feet of development within ESHA buffers and cause roughly 2,100 square feet of temporary impacts to Pacific reedgrass meadow and Bishop pine forest from installation of leach fields. To address Coastal Commission concerns, staff said it conducted a revised takings and alternatives analysis and concluded the revised project is the least environmentally damaging feasible alternative that would avoid a regulatory taking.
County staff recommended and the administrator approved multiple conditions to reduce habitat impacts. Those conditions listed in the staff report include a deed restriction limiting future use of the property, pre-construction biological surveys, avoidance of wildlife breeding seasons, removal of invasive plants, measures to allow natural recruitment of Bishop pine seedlings, annual reporting, installation of low symbolic fencing near ashes, and a prohibition on rodenticide use on the parcel. Crowley recommended adoption of a mitigated negative declaration and approval “in accordance with the findings and conditions of approval in the staff report.”
Architect Kelly Grimes, representing the applicants, thanked staff for their work. “It’s been a long slog to get to this point,” Grimes said. Applicants James and Denise DiAlba also thanked Mendocino County Planning and Building and Liam Crowley for their assistance.
No members of the public spoke on the item. The administrator noted two appeal periods: 10 calendar days to the Mendocino County Board of Supervisors and 10 business days to the California Coastal Commission. The administrator said the permit would usually become effective in about 30 days if no appeals are filed, at which point the applicants may apply for building permits.
The record for case CBP 2023-0009 will include the staff report, the March 15, 2024 California Coastal Commission staff letter (attachment KK), the county’s mitigated negative declaration and the findings and conditions adopted by the Coastal Permit Administrator.
