Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Coastal Archaeology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Design review for 31502 Coast Highway continued after questions on archaeological sensitivity and street/gate history
Summary
Design Review 25‑025 and Coastal Development Permit 25‑0258 for 31502 Coast Highway were continued to Oct. 9 to give staff time to investigate public concerns about potential archaeological resources and to allow the applicant to respond to neighborhood comments about scale and view impacts.
Get email alerts on the Coastal Archaeology topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
The board continued Design Review 25‑025 and Coastal Development Permit 25‑0258 for a proposed new single‑family home at 31502 Coast Highway to the Oct. 9 meeting following public comment raising two distinct concerns: (1) a recently circulated claim about possible archaeological (shell midden) resources near the property, and (2) neighborhood objections about the scale and view impacts of the proposed house.
Staff told the board the site is disturbed in prior years and that a related parcel across the street had a limited shell midden identified in an older study, but staff said they would research the issue and report back before the next hearing. The board asked staff to confirm whether the fair argument standard for CEQA analysis is implicated by the new submissions and to check the record of prior approvals and permits for the gate and access easements near the site; neighbors asked the board to address gate and access encroachment history during the continuation.
The application proposes a 3,500‑square‑foot single‑family residence with decks and spa, two‑car garage and about 1,000 square feet of elevated decks. Staff recommended approval, subject to standard conditions and required right‑of‑way improvements on Monterey Street; the applicant said the house is proposed to match neighborhood materials and massing. Several neighbors spoke in opposition citing potential view loss from lower cottages across Monterey and the nearby block; other neighbors and the board’s staff site reviews noted the immediate neighborhood includes larger homes and the property is not believed to contain protected coastal resources per staff’s preliminary review.
The board continued the item to Oct. 9 to allow staff to investigate the archaeological question and to give the applicant time to respond to neighborhood concerns and to return with any plan adjustments.

