By Cassandra Reinhart | LB Indy
A decision to require homeowners to seek city approval before making stylistic changes to their homes turned into a battle over property rights at the City Council meeting Tuesday, Feb. 28.
“It’s important to recognize what this policy change does not do; it doesn’t require you to come in if you want to change the color of your house,” said council member Bob Whalen. “It’s changing the materials, changing the styles.”
The new “piecemeal” policy means that if a homeowner now wants to significantly alter the look of their home they will need to seek the approval of planners and possibly notice their neighbors about a Design Review Board hearing.
It is aimed at eliminating homeowners or contractors who have, over time, “piecemealed” small home renovation projects without having to go through the city’s Design Review process. Those in favor of the stricter rules say when the small piecemeal projects are looked at as a comprehensive renovation plan, they have often resulted in a significant change to the look of a home, all done piece by piece and thus avoiding Design Review Board evaluation.
“We are trying to make it better, save our neighborhoods from changes that were unexpected and uncontrolled,” said former mayor Ann Christoph at the meeting.
Under the new policy, community development administrators will determine whether or not a “style” change exists under proposals such as a change to a roof, adding new or expanding existing windows or changing the style of more than half of the front of a home. Style change examples would include going from stucco to vinyl siding, replacing a shingle roof with a metal one, and whether adding a new window where none existed will significantly alter or impact neighbors.
“If you want to pop in a big new window where one didn’t exist previously, that’s a different situation. That could significantly impact a neighbor looking across,” Whalen said.
Re-roofing a home with the same materials, re-painting or replacing existing windows in the same frame with ones of the same type would not be subject to scrutiny. If the city finds no style change issues, and there are no neighbor complaints, a homeowner’s permit is approved. If issues are found, or if neighbors complain, the project goes to administrative design review and then could ultimately also have to go through full Design Review Board approval.
“Over the last two years I have seen a slow erosion of the property rights of people in this town,” Jennifer Welsh-Zeiter, president of the Laguna Taxpayers Association, said at the meeting. “This is one more example of property rights being taken away from individuals and given to the government.”
Welsh-Zeiter was one of 16 people speaking on the policy change at Tuesday’s meeting: nine opposed the measure and seven supported it.
The council’s 3-2 vote was also divided.
The dissenters were council members Kelly Boyd and Steve Dicterow. “It’s overreach for me, it is micromanaging by the city,” Dicterow said. “For me, this is where the line needs to be drawn that it is violating property rights. It just shifts the balance where there is too much power in the hands of neighbors.”
Resident T.C. Borelli, in a letter to the Indy, blames the root of the current influx of circumventing of the design review process on the 1993 fire. He says in a rush to rebuild Laguna Beach, the city loosened building codes, leaving loopholes that contractors and homeowners have been using, and abusing, ever since.
“By modifying existing building codes the city created a situation where the Design Review process could be circumvented,” Borelli writes. “The city was flooded with opportunist contractors and developers, who, among other breaches of the building codes, mansionized homes in direct violation of the spirit and the character of Laguna Beach.”
Supporters at the meeting say the policy ultimately protects Laguna Beach, and its designation as a Historic American Landscape.
“We are being invaded by a group of people called venture capitalists,” said resident Pete Fielding, deriding investors who make over homes they never intend to occupy. “They hire an engineer and an architect and an attorney and come in and make convincing stories and get the interior finished and it passes all the regulations we have.”
Many expressed concerns about the financial impact of the policy change on residents applying for approval. Current Design Review Board fees for project approval can reach around $1,000, while permit approvals are only based on the value of a project.
“With this comes the added costs of drawn plans, fees to the city, one or two address listing costs and if the project is kicked to full Design Review Board the costs just accelerate,” said Laguna Beach architect Marshall Ininns. “One neighbor could wreak havoc on your project. A simple administrative hearing could be kicked to a full Design Review Board hearing by having one neighbor complain.”
The council voted to implement and test out the policy change for six months (taking effect in about 30 days) with a report on its impact on staff work load then.
The council also took the public’s financial concerns into consideration and voted to waive the design review fee during the trial period.
Some at the meeting said the entire Design Review Board process needs re-evaluation.
“I understand the policy idea is to put a Band-Aid on things and help fix things, but the irony that the piecemealing you are trying to prevent is being taken into account via a piecemeal process,” said architect Anders Lasater. “And I wonder if that is really the way you intend to do it.”
Correction:
The story ‘Piecemeal’ Policy Prompts Property Rights Debate” in the March 3 edition incorrectly identified Jennifer Welsh-Zeiter. She is no longer affiliated with the Laguna Beach Taxpayers Association.
