Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council upholds planning commission on 2339 Edgewater Way, denies neighbors' appeal
Summary
After hearing applicant, neighbors and technical staff, the council denied an appeal and ratified the Planning Commission approval of a coastal development permit for work at 2339 Edgewater Way by a 4–2 vote; two councilmembers dissented.
The City Council on July 28 denied an appeal seeking to overturn the Planning Commission’s approval of a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for redevelopment at 2339 Edgewater Way, ratifying the commission’s findings after a lengthy hearing with project presentations, public testimony and technical questioning.
Planning staff opened the item by describing three project components: removal of unauthorized railroad ties, an emergency coastal stabilization permit already implemented after a 2023 landslide, and a proposed re‑development that includes a two‑story primary residence, an accessory dwelling unit and a pool. The staff presentation listed six appeal topics raised by the appellant — including FAR/FARC calculations, alleged encroachments, unresolved design board comments, utility pole relocation, fire access and plan inconsistencies — and concluded the CDP was supported by the local coastal plan and was exempt from an environmental review in this instance.
Neighbors and the appellant argued the proposal represented "mansionization" on the bluff, raised concerns about bluff stability and the intensity of development near the cliff edge, and sought stricter setbacks and conditions. The applicant’s representative, Jared Goren of Vanguard Planning, walked council through the emergency stabilization work, peer geotechnical reviews, and a revised site plan that establishes a 38‑foot bluff setback for new construction and removes an unauthorized retaining structure.
Council members questioned geotechnical methods, bluff setback determinations and fire department access; Fire Chief Brian De Julio confirmed that both properties would retain 16‑foot wide vehicle access for the first 150 feet to accommodate pre‑connected hoses and engines. After deliberation, Councilmember Armon moved to deny the appeal and adopt a resolution upholding the Planning Commission’s decision; the motion passed 4–2, with Councilmembers Santa María and Snedon recorded in dissent.
Council instructions included ensuring that outstanding design review conditions be addressed prior to final project approval and requiring coordination with utility providers for any pole relocations. The council then recessed and later reconvened to continue other business.
