Del Mar Seaside Ridge Battle: Builder's Remedy vs Coastal Act - What Pacific Beach Developers Need to Know

A high-stakes legal battle is unfolding in Del Mar that could reshape coastal development strategy for builders throughout San Diego County. Developer Carol Lazier's proposed 259-unit Seaside Ridge apartment complex at 929 Border Avenue has triggered intervention from California Attorney General Rob Bonta, who in December 2025 accused the city of "bad faith" refusal to process the application. The dispute centers on whether state housing laws—specifically the builder's remedy provision—can override the California Coastal Act and Del Mar's certified Local Coastal Program. For builders working in Pacific Beach, La Jolla, and other coastal communities, this case offers critical lessons on navigating the collision between aggressive state housing mandates and coastal environmental protections.

What Is the Del Mar Seaside Ridge Development Dispute?

The Seaside Ridge project proposes a 259-unit apartment complex on a 6.9-acre north bluff site overlooking Del Mar Dog Beach, including 85 affordable housing units. Developer Carol Lazier submitted the preliminary application in October 2022—crucially, several months before Del Mar received certification for its housing element from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). Lazier argues this timing qualifies the project for California's builder's remedy, a provision that allows housing projects to bypass local zoning when submitted to cities without certified housing elements. Del Mar has repeatedly rejected the application as "incomplete," citing missing elements including rezoning applications and coastal development permits. On January 6, 2026, Del Mar formally requested an in-person meeting with the Attorney General's office to clarify the dispute and explain the city's position.

Why Did Attorney General Rob Bonta Get Involved in This Case?

In December 2025, Attorney General Bonta sent a warning letter to Del Mar stating that "the City's conduct to date could be seen as a deliberate attempt to avoid an adjudication regarding the applicability of the Housing Accountability Act's Builder's Remedy provisions." The AG's intervention signals an aggressive statewide enforcement pattern targeting coastal cities perceived as obstructing housing development. With Assembly Bill 712 taking effect January 1, 2026, the stakes escalated significantly. AB 712 entitles developers who prevail in housing lawsuits to reasonable attorney's fees and court-imposed fines against agencies—$10,000 per housing unit or a minimum $50,000 per violation for smaller projects. If an agency violates the same statute multiple times in one housing element cycle, courts must multiply the fine by five. This creates substantial financial risk for cities that resist builder's remedy applications, even when legitimate coastal protection concerns exist.

Does Builder's Remedy Override the California Coastal Act?

This is the central legal question—and it remains unresolved. Under builder's remedy (Government Code Section 65589.5), jurisdictions without substantially compliant housing elements cannot use zoning or general plan standards to disapprove housing projects meeting affordability thresholds. As of January 2025, those thresholds are: 7% extremely low-income, 10% very low-income, or 13% lower-income units. However, the Seaside Ridge project is "wholly inconsistent" with Del Mar's certified Local Coastal Program, according to city officials. Del Mar maintains that state housing laws do not preempt the Coastal Act, and that projects must comply with both frameworks. The developer disagrees, arguing state housing law takes precedence. Courts have not definitively resolved this conflict, making Seaside Ridge a potential landmark case. The outcome will determine whether builder's remedy can serve as a tool to overcome coastal restrictions—or whether coastal protections remain superior to housing mandates.

What Role Does the California Coastal Commission Play in This Battle?

Even if builder's remedy applies, any rezoning of the 929 Border Avenue site requires approval from the California Coastal Commission. After the Commission certifies a Local Coastal Program (LCP), most coastal development permit authority is delegated to cities and counties. However, the Commission retains appellate authority over development between the sea and the nearest public road, within 300 feet of beaches or bluff tops, and within 100 feet of streams or wetlands. The Seaside Ridge site sits on Del Mar's north bluff overlooking the ocean, placing it squarely within the Commission's jurisdiction. This creates a multi-agency approval gauntlet: the developer must satisfy state housing law requirements, obtain city approval, secure rezoning from the Coastal Commission, and obtain coastal development permits. Del Mar's position is that the builder's remedy application is premature because the developer hasn't submitted the necessary coastal rezoning and permit applications—a "completeness" dispute that triggered the AG's intervention.

What Are the Specific Application Completeness Issues Del Mar Cited?

Del Mar has consistently maintained that Seaside Ridge's application is incomplete, citing missing critical elements. The city requires coastal development permits, rezoning applications, and compliance with the certified Local Coastal Program before it can deem a coastal zone application complete. The developer argues these requirements themselves violate builder's remedy protections—that requiring coastal approvals upfront defeats the purpose of bypassing local zoning. This chicken-and-egg dispute highlights a strategic lesson for coastal builders: application completeness standards become battlegrounds when state housing law meets coastal regulations. The 22nd District Agricultural Association (Del Mar Fairgrounds operator) has also raised concerns, noting that Del Mar identified the 929 Border Avenue property as a backup housing site if fairgrounds negotiations fail. The parties have an agreement to negotiate affordable housing at the fairgrounds through April 2026, adding time pressure to resolve the Seaside Ridge dispute.

How Does This Impact Pacific Beach and La Jolla Coastal Development?

The Seaside Ridge precedent directly affects builders in Pacific Beach, La Jolla, Bird Rock, and other San Diego coastal communities navigating similar conflicts. Pacific Beach already broke ground on a project that breached San Diego's 30-foot coastal height limit—a 60-unit affordable housing development at Rose Creek Village expected to open late 2026. That project demonstrates state housing law's growing power to override local coastal restrictions. However, the Del Mar battle reveals the risks: protracted litigation, AG investigations, and uncertain outcomes when builder's remedy collides with Coastal Act protections. For La Jolla and Pacific Beach builders considering large coastal projects, the strategic calculus includes: evaluating whether your city's housing element was certified when you submit applications; structuring affordable housing components to meet builder's remedy thresholds (now 7-13% depending on income levels); preparing comprehensive applications including all coastal permits to avoid "incompleteness" disputes; and budgeting for potential multi-year approval processes involving city councils, the Coastal Commission, and possible AG enforcement.

What Should Coastal Builders Monitor as This Case Develops?

The outcome of Del Mar's requested meeting with the Attorney General's office will signal whether negotiation is possible or litigation inevitable. Developer Carol Lazier filed a new lawsuit in October 2025, and the legal battle continues in San Diego County Superior Court. Key developments to watch include: whether Del Mar processes the Seaside Ridge application or faces court-ordered approval; how the Coastal Commission rules on any rezoning request; whether AB 712's new penalty structure (effective January 2026) pressures Del Mar to settle; and whether courts establish clear precedent on builder's remedy preemption of the Coastal Act. For builders in La Jolla's Bird Rock bluffs, Pacific Beach's Crystal Pier coastal zone, and Mission Beach boardwalk areas, this case is a real-time education in navigating the collision between California's aggressive housing production mandates and decades-old coastal environmental protections—a conflict that will define coastal development strategy for years to come.