Over 20 plus years, I built and remodeled two Laguna homes as owner/builder and understand the Community Development department & Design Review (DRB) processes well. Recent work at my neighbor’s property worries me that past Design Review decisions and the DRB process itself are being undermined.
After starting an unpermitted deck extension, code enforcement red-tagged my neighbor. They submitted a deck extension permit application that contained verifiably false statements of the existing deck and requested extension sizes. City Planning failed to verify existing conditions or review city files and then issued a building permit without a mandatory Design Review. Most concerning is the city files included a 2008 DRB approval (DR 08-045) for a prior deck extension.
A second code enforcement complaint stopped the work again and started the Design Review process (DR 23-0707). Unfortunately, the city’s public notice used the applicant’s false extension request size. Inexplicably, the city allowed the applicant to resume work again and make material progress on the project before stopping ahead of the DRB meeting. The DRB naturally viewed the applicant with a sympathetic eye when evaluating the economics of approval vs. denial.
DRB process requires a Staff Report to be prepared, and, in this case, it relied on false application data and manipulated relevant facts from the city record. This included referring to irrelevant, hand-modified topographic drawings with no dimensions to justify that the existing deck had already been built 2 or 3 feet past the 2008 approved size. The process violations and Staff Report manipulation is abuse of authority and violates their charter to issue a factual, unbiased Staff Report. Further, it appears the Community Development Director personally oversaw Planning and Building activities in this case and swayed the DRB decision for the applicant.
With no property changes since the Board must follow its charter to show deference to 2008 DRB approval. In this case, they were unduly influenced by Planning and, without justification to revise the 2008 approved limits, violated their charter. City Council is reviewing this approval on July 25. Anyone relying on past Design Review decisions to invest in their home should attend and/or contact council members to express serious concern.
Design Review should be an objective arbitrator of neighborhood privacy and view equity issues; a civil forum to ensure neighbors remain amicable throughout the process of development in our community. Without it, legal battles will ensue.
David Dyrnaes, Laguna Beach
 processes well. Recent work at my neighbor’s property worries me that past Design Review decisions and the DRB process itself are being undermined. ){kind=link}
You state: “Further, it appears the Community Development Director personally oversaw Planning and Building activities in this case and swayed the DRB decision for the applicant.”
This is more than worrying. It’s unacceptable and alarming! IMO, a termination is in order.
As what happened at that Marlin street home, according to neighbors, I would not be surprised if the Community Development Director got his marching orders from the City Manager.