Council denies La Jolla Shores subdivision appeal after neighbors raise drainage and easement concerns; conditions tightened

The San Diego City Council voted unanimously on May 19 to deny an appeal of the La Jolla Shores subdivision (PRJ 1085883) and to affirm the Planning Commission’s approval while strengthening permit and tentative‑map conditions to address drainage and maintenance concerns raised by downstream residents.

Staff presentation: Veronica Davison, project manager with the Development Services Department, summarized the project and supporting technical reviews. The project would consolidate three parcels into six residential lots, demolish an existing 5,958-square-foot dwelling and construct new single-family homes and one accessory dwelling unit (seven units total). Staff said geotechnical and preliminary drainage studies demonstrated the site’s suitability and noted the Planning Commission’s December approval and PEIR addendum review.

Appellants’ concerns: Counsel for the appellants, Anna Ludtke of Higgs Fletcher & Mack, told the council that a third‑party engineer retained by neighbors had identified substantive deficiencies in the drainage and grading reports. Ludtke said the project’s proposed discharge could be roughly 6.7 cubic feet per second — “approximately 50 gallons of water per second” — creating concentrated flow into Calle Frescota and La Jolla Shores Drive without a downstream hydraulic analysis. The appellants also argued the Calle Frescota parcel is privately owned in undivided fee by several co‑owners and that written consent for work within that private right‑of‑way had not been demonstrated.

Applicant response: Applicant representatives said they had engaged in multiple community meetings, revised plans in response to comments and accepted staff’s updated conditions addressing the technical points raised. Architect Brian Will said families forming the LLC were not a developer syndicate but homeowners who had participated in the design process; counsel and the applicant’s civil engineer said ministerial engineering review by the city engineer would address remaining technical design details such as pump sizing, hydraulic calculations, and inlet capture analysis.

Council action and conditions: Councilmembers asked for clarity about owner disclosures and why ministerial plans had callouts for letters of permission that were later removed. After deliberation, the council voted to deny the appeal and adopt the staff recommendation, including four modified conditions and two new conditions (one for the tentative map and one for permit condition 50) to require finalized, stamped hydraulic plans, pump redundancies and explicit maintenance and encroachment agreements before ministerial approvals proceed. The motion carried unanimously.

Council President Lacava said the new and revised conditions strengthened the approval to the point that he could make the required findings. The council directed the city attorney to prepare the appropriate resolutions and to ensure the additional conditions are enforceable during ministerial engineering review.