One Redondo — AES Power Plant Waterfront Redevelopment

Ask a question to begin.

The appeals court invalidated Redondo Beach's housing element in October 2025; the city adopted a new one that HCD certified in May 2026. The developer settled one of six suits against the city in March 2026; five remain.

Leo Pustilnikov and SLH Investments acquire the 50-54 acre AES Redondo Beach Generating Station site for approximately $150 million. The plant was required by state regulations to close by the end of 2023 due to the ban on once-through ocean cooling.

Leo Pustilnikov files a preliminary application under SB 330 for One Redondo — the first Builder's Remedy application filed anywhere in Southern California. The application proposes approximately 2,300+ residential units (later expanded to ~2,700), 540 affordable units, a hotel, office space, retail, and 22.5 acres of public park on the former AES power plant site. Mayor Pro-Tem Nehrenheim's immediate reaction: "The drawing is absurd."

The Redondo Beach City Council becomes the first city council in California to vote to explicitly ban Builder's Remedy applications. Governor Newsom and AG Bonta begin preparing a lawsuit.

Community Development Director Brandy Forbes issues the first incompleteness determination for One Redondo, citing missing coastal development permit materials, Charter City requirements, and CEQA compliance.

Governor Gavin Newsom, Attorney General Rob Bonta, and the California Department of Housing and Community Development file a lawsuit against the City of Redondo Beach for its ban on SB 9, ADU, and Builder's Remedy applications. The city is ordered to process SB 9 and ADU applications.

The Redondo Beach City Council votes to uphold the incompleteness determination and denies the developer's appeal. The city's position: Charter City argument requires a popular vote; application lacks Coastal Act compliance materials; Builder's Remedy does not apply.

YIMBY Law files a lawsuit against Redondo Beach alleging the city violated state housing law by denying the One Redondo Builder's Remedy application. Rafa Sonnenfeld: "Redondo Beach has ignored state law as well as their own municipal code. These homes must be approved."

In New Commune DTLA and Leonid Pustilnikov v. City of Redondo Beach (22TRCP00203), Judge Ronald Frank denies the developer's petition, finding that the city substantially complied with housing element law when the council adopted its element on July 5, 2022, before HCD's Sept. 1, 2022 certification.

The AES Redondo Beach Generating Station closes permanently. The plant, operational since 1907, is now shuttered. The 50-acre site begins decommissioning and is now entirely vacant — a blank slate on the Los Angeles waterfront with no approved development plan.

Judge James Chalfant denies a petition by Pustilnikov's New Commune DTLA (23STCP00426) over Ten21, a separate 30-unit builder's remedy project at 1021 N. Harbor Drive, across the street from the power plant site. He finds that the developer could invoke the builder's remedy but could not ignore the city's certified Local Coastal Program, which does not allow housing on that parcel. Two of Pustilnikov's suits over the power plant site are stayed in April 2024 pending the appeal, and on July 30, 2026 the Court of Appeal upholds the city's denial of Ten21.

The California Second District Court of Appeal issues its ruling in New Commune DTLA LLC v. City of Redondo Beach (B336042), finding that Redondo Beach's Housing Element violates state law. The ruling means the city's Housing Element is invalid — potentially reopening Builder's Remedy eligibility for One Redondo and other projects.

At its Jan. 28 conference the California Supreme Court denies review in New Commune DTLA v. City of Redondo Beach (S294028) and denies a request to depublish the opinion, leaving the Oct. 10, 2025 ruling in place.

Pustilnikov agrees to dismiss, with prejudice, a $120 million suit he and developer Ely Dromy filed claiming the city engaged in a multi-year scheme against the property. Five other suits by the site's owners remain pending.

HCD finds the housing element the council adopted earlier in May in compliance. City Attorney Joy Abaquin-Ford: "The city is not subject to Builder's Remedy with the newly certified Housing Element."

Filed lawsuit against Redondo Beach in March 2023 (with Governor Newsom and HCD) for banning SB 9, ADU, and Builder's Remedy applications. State won on SB 9/ADU. Issued a "Builder's Remedy Legal Alert" in June 2025 calling out cities for non-compliance patterns.

Filed a separate lawsuit against Redondo Beach on August 4, 2023. Policy director Rafa Sonnenfeld: "Redondo Beach has ignored state law as well as their own municipal code. Because of their actions, they don't have a compliant housing plan and the builder's remedy applies. These homes must be approved."

Filed the first Builder's Remedy application in Southern California on August 10, 2022. Paid $150M for the site. Has pursued the project through multiple city denials, a state lawsuit, YIMBY Law's separate suit, a stay of two of his suits pending the appeal in his separate Ten21 case, and an October 2025 appellate ruling on the Housing Element. "I think every developer in Redondo in the past decade can say working on the city's timeline requires incredible longevity."

First California city to vote to ban Builder's Remedy (December 20, 2022). Issued multiple incomplete determinations. Charter City argument: any major land use change at the AES site requires a citywide vote. Coastal Act argument: the application lacks required coastal development permit materials. Lost state lawsuit over SB 9/ADU ban but continued fighting One Redondo separately. Had Housing Element struck down by Court of Appeal in October 2025.

"Since Redondo Beach is a Charter City, the proposal at the AES site would fall under a major change in allowable land use, requiring it to be put to a vote of the people." Issued all incompleteness determinations. Her position on coastal zone: the developer must submit Coastal Act compliance materials before the application can be processed.

Redondo Beach residents have organized for 20+ years to reclaim the AES waterfront as parks and open space after the power plant closed. Unlike most opposition in this database, this represents a genuine and longstanding democratic community vision — not pretextual obstruction. Thousands have signed petitions and voted in advisory measures for coastal parkland.

"The city is not subject to Builder's Remedy with the newly certified Housing Element." (May 2026)

The city cited California Coastal Act compliance requirements as the basis for all incomplete determinations. The coastal zone layer is genuine: any development on the AES site requires California Coastal Commission review and Coastal Act compliance, in addition to Builder's Remedy. The February 2024 Superior Court ruling that accepted the city's Coastal Act argument came in Pustilnikov's separate Ten21 case across the street, not in a One Redondo case; the Court of Appeal upheld the city's denial of Ten21 on July 30, 2026.

Redondo Beach's multi-pronged obstruction of the first Builder's Remedy application filed in Southern California: (1) Voted to explicitly BAN Builder's Remedy in December 2022 — the first city in California to do so; (2) Issued multiple incomplete determinations citing Charter City vote requirements, coastal zone compliance, and CEQA materials; (3) Invoked the Coastal Act to require materials the developer refused to submit without Builder's Remedy recognition. The city lost the state's lawsuit on SB 9/ADU but continued fighting One Redondo. A February 2024 Superior Court ruling for the city on Coastal Act grounds came in Pustilnikov's separate Ten21 case across the street; two of his suits over this site were stayed pending its appeal, which the city won on July 30, 2026. The Court of Appeal struck down the city's housing element in October 2025, the California Supreme Court denied review on Jan. 28, 2026, and HCD certified a revised housing element on May 20, 2026; the city says the builder's remedy no longer applies. Five suits by the site's owners are pending.

Coverage of October 2025 Court of Appeal ruling. Confirms case citation: New Commune DTLA LLC v. City of Redondo Beach, B336042.

Primary source for the February 2024 Superior Court ruling against the developer on coastal zone grounds.

Coverage of YIMBY Law's August 2023 lawsuit. Contains Rafa Sonnenfeld quote.

Coverage of May 2023 city council denial. Confirms city's Charter City argument and Brandy Forbes's role.

Official state press release announcing the joint state lawsuit against Redondo Beach.

Best early profile of Pustilnikov and the Builder's Remedy legal theory. Documents the first Southern California BR filing and initial city reaction.