This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Jessica Gannon:
Mr. Gibbs is going to use the restroom. While he's doing that, we can introduce the project and give ex parte. So this is now the... We saved the best for last. This is the 1560 Bluebird Canyon Drive.
Speaker 2:
It's right here.
Jessica Gannon:
I'll give my ex parte.
Speaker 2:
Okay.
Jessica Gannon:
I did a site visit with Steve Cortani, David Parker, I spoke with Peter Gromman, I've received numerous communications with many of the people in the Bluebird community, including Morningside and I've read every single one of your emails.
MJ Coveny:
I met with Steve Cortani and David Parker at the site.
Jessica Gannon:
Mrs. Thalman.
Thalman:
I'm trying to remember one of the other people.
Louis Weil:
Okay, I got mine. Hold on. I spoke with William Horner, Peter Gromman, Marsha Stallworth, Eileen Slaura, Susan Witten, Steve Cortani, David Parker. Yeah, this is same.
Thalman:
Mr. Gibbs, ex parte.
Mr. Gibbs:
Let's see, I met with Dave Parker and Steve Cortani. I spoke to Mary Fargus, I met with Marsha Stallworth who represented Kathy and John Romita. I met with Peter Gromman, I met with William Horner and I met with Susan Witten.
Thalman:
And I met with Steve Cortani, David Parker, William Horner, Susan Witten. And there was another lady and I can't remember. She was the former planning commissioner.
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Jessica Gannon:
All right.
Louis Weil:
Chair, can I acknowledge one thing?
Jessica Gannon:
Yes, please do my a favor.
Louis Weil:
Just want to welcome, good to see you're back. It's been a long time. When I started on the board, Nancy was up here, but it's nice to see you back.
Jessica Gannon:
And when I started on the board as well. Nice to see you again.
Thalman:
40 years since I've hired.
Jessica Gannon:
And you look a lot more relaxed than you did when you were up here.
Nancy Csira:
Thank you. Are you ready for my presentation?
Jessica Gannon:
I'm ready for your fabulous presentation.
Nancy Csira:
Sure. Thank you. This is item 5.8. It's a request for design review, a coastal development permit and a revocable encroachment permit for a new single-family dwelling on a vacant building site at 1560 Bluebird Canyon Drive, lot B it's called in the R-1 low density zone.
Next slide please. This is the site plan shown in blue. It is a lot split, lot A is on the slide to the left with one house next to that and then vacant lots on all the other sides, so it is surrounded by vacant lots. And then the bottom is the street frontage seen from Bluebird Canyon Drive. It's very steep. Next slide please.
Design review is required for the new structure, the vehicular access, elevated decks, grading, retaining walls, a spa and landscaping. Coastal development permit is required for the new single-family dwelling and the revocable encroachment permit is required for walls, stairs, irrigation, drainage and lighting. The site plan is shown there and the front rendering shows the driveway, which is a unique design for hillside development, although there are other driveways in the neighborhood that have long driveways.
Next slide please.
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
These are the one repeat slide of the renderings and three other renderings and we can go back to this if needed during the presentation in the deliberation if necessary. And slide four please.
The design review criteria that the board should comment on is access, design, articulation, general plan compliance, landscaping, lighting and glare, neighborhood compatibility, privacy and view equity. And then a final slide, we heard from some neighbors and staff requests that the design review board ask questions of staff and the applicant team, take public comments and then deliberate on the project components to give direction for a future hearing continued to a date certain. And that concludes my comments and I'm available for questions.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you Ms. Sarah. Thank you. Board, do you have questions for staff? MJ Coveny:
I have one quick question and I know you gave it to us, Nancy, in the staff report, but you had done some comparison. Can you reiterate the lot size for this property and then the size of the build? This is 1560, so the lot area is 85, I think I found it.
Nancy Csira:
Yes. The lot area, the subject property is 8,582 square feet and then the square footage of the home. Is that what you're asking?
MJ Coveny:
Yes, please.
Nancy Csira:
The square footage living area is 3598.
MJ Coveny:
All right, and then I know we had had something before us before 1536, that lot area was 13,866? Nancy Csira:
Yes.
MJ Coveny:
Okay.
Nancy Csira:
Right. So the three lots that were compared in the staff report were just to try and show neighborhood compatibility of things that you have seen recently.
MJ Coveny:
That's perfect. That was very helpful, thank you.
Nancy Csira:
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Okay.
Jessica Gannon:
Any other questions to staff?
Thalman:
I have a quick question, Nancy. On the geo report, and I know it looks like it's for the entire parcel. On the limitations, I think there's the last part of the... It says that this... Site geo-technical conditions may alter after time. The recommendations presented in this are only valid for a time period of one year from the report date. The report date is August 22nd, 2024.
Nancy Csira:
Right, so on a vacant lot, you need a geological report or sometimes the city would accept a feasibility study just to say that a lot, something could be built on that and then when they go to building plan check, they'll resubmit the plan at that time with the report at that time.
Thalman:
Okay. Thank you.
Jessica Gannon:
Good question. Any other questions? No? All right, Mr. Parker.
Mr. Parker:
Slide up please.
Jessica Gannon:
You have the five minutes.
Mr. Parker:
I want to start the slideshow. That's not the first one, that's the last one. There we are. Okay. Good evening board members. I'm David Parker, architect for this project. We are pleased to present it to you tonight. Can I have the next slide please? I want to thank everyone for meeting with us, all the board members and staff as well. We are presenting a 3,600 square foot two-story home with a tucked under two-car garage on an 8,500 square foot lot. Our design is the result of careful and rigorous planning and an analysis.
Next slide. From the start, we were committed to a completely code compliant project with no variances, neighborhood compatible and adherent to all design guidelines. Our meetings with staff and engineers established the location of the driveway, garage and home. Next slide. The driveway and garage location are designed to enhance safety by allowing a turn around at the garage with a nose out vehicle exiting onto the narrow street. The driveway was engineered to minimize grading and the garage located above the street to avoid a variance for vertical separation from the home. We adhere to city guidance to create a driveway leading to an uphill garage with direct access to the house. Next slide.
This slide shows a previous project. Prior to our beginning we met with planner Chris Dominguez, who advised us that this underground garage design was a key blocking issue and directed us to use an on- This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
grade driveway to access the garage and home like the neighbors to the west. Next slide. The home is not excessively cut into the slope and follows the topography in both directions. The home rests on the only flat-graded area, which is at the top, is well-articulated and a textbook hillside guidelines compliant design. The applicant requested a soft modern style as currently designed. The ample turnaround can accommodate one or two additional cars. Next slide.
This map of the area shows the two homes to the west, which each have a driveway leading to an uphill garage and two homes to the east, which are sitting on the top of the lot. Our sighting follows this pattern of development. Next slide. The houses across the street face downhill on very small lots and should not be compared to ours. As the properties move east, they become larger and have comparable floor areas. Next slide. Our project size is neighborhood-compatible with several homes on Bluebird Canyon. There are six houses in yellow which are over 3,000 square feet and three of them in red are larger than ours. Next slide.
We provided a city-mandating parking space on the street right of way. The driveway brings the garage close to the home and the resulting retaining infrastructure improves hillside stability and controls water runoff. Our design complies with all the codes and guidelines, no variances, is well-articulated and neighborhood compatible. We comply with all the fire codes and our fire excess plan was approved. And finally, we believe we have a well-designed home that will enhance the neighborhood. Now I'd like to introduce my client, Mr. Durnays.
Mr. Dyrnaes:
Evening everyone. Thank you for hearing us tonight. It was a challenging project when we looked at it before we even bought the property. We knew that getting up 28 feet onto the 60% of buildable area was a difficult task and Total Engineering did a lot of work to really come up with a model that worked and ultimately there are a lot of benefits that come out of that even though there's some articulation issues that have been raised. In particular, the structural support of those caissons going in at the grade level is incredibly important to improve the stability of the hill. There's no structural support in there now from the original cutting of that hill. And more importantly, the biggest mass down there at the street is the parking area that's mandated. We have no choice for that retaining wall that's sitting there.
Ultimately, we've gotten a lot of feedback recently. We didn't get much early on. We've tried to talk to a lot of the neighbors, but only this last fall we started getting reasonably material feedback and the real meaningful feedback is coming from the people directly across the street, and we factor a lot of that in which we'll see in a bit.
One of the biggest challenges we had was the staff report recently came back and a lot of the things that are in there, especially the comparison to the other ones on Morningside, were just surprising. Can you keep the thing up? Anyway, in there I put in some comparisons to those projects and across the board for those approvals... Go forward like four slides. I basically looked at our project compared to the other ones that were recently approved and in all dimensions were better. In the case of the size of the home, we're only 150 square feet bigger than Mr. Riyahi's home at 1526 and this set of pictures here is directly out of the staff report are properly scaled to show the proper height of the homes from the finished floor garage.
Jessica Gannon:
And in conclusion?
Mr. Dyrnaes:
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
In conclusion, we want the input from the staff here. We've certainly gotten a lot of info from the neighbors that we think makes sense. There's a lot of additional noise coming from the Morningside team, which we think is somewhat appropriate for our project and we have compared it to the local one, which was direction you gave to the Morningside people last spring that they should focus locally on the Morningside street. So we're focused on Bluebird, not Morningside.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you for your comments. At this time, any member of the public, which to speak on, what is this address? 1560 Bluebird Canyon Drive? How many are there of you that are going to speak. Can everyone come to the front and take the chairs up front? Pam Adams:
Hello.
Jessica Gannon:
Hello. I need to see how many people are going to speak. Everyone that's coming to the front is going to speak? Okay, we'll limit comments to two minutes please. You can start. Yes, thanks.
Pam Adams:
Can you hear me?
Jessica Gannon:
I can hear you.
Pam Adams:
Okay, thank you. Pam Adams. I live on Morningside Drive. Good evening members of the Design Review Board. I am opposed to this applicant's project at 1560 Bluebird Canyon Drive. I guess it's called Parcel B.
First, it has been expressed multiple times to Design Review Board and the city of Laguna Beach to look at the projects on this knoll that this project is proposing as part of a whole. This knoll development will see not the original four structures that were originally planned for many years, but a minimum of seven structures due to impart the California's SB Law allowing lots to be split into separate and smaller parcels. This only increases the density in this very fragile area and is a very high fire hazard area as well.
The applicant's architect has designed a sterile structure with massive glazing and light metal to sit on the top of the knoll. This is another design from the same architect but a different applicant attempting to ignore previous feedback from the Design Review Board, the neighborhood residents and the design guidelines in this area. It is not compatible in mass and scale, it is light intrusive from extensive glazing and lightness of materials and the extensive nonpermeable hardscape that will generate noise intrusions across the canyon.
The visual character of the neighborhood will not be preserved or enhanced by this project. In my opinion, it does not represent a design to be built into the knoll and it needs to be denied with major changes. Thank you for your time and consideration.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please. Don't be shy.
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
William Horner:
Hi, I'm William Horner. I'm at 1565 Bluebird, that's Caddy Corner from the project. It's the kind of old wood A-frame. I've had some good conversations with David, obviously recognize his right to build. I think I have my concerns fall into two buckets. One is just general neighborhood compatibility, mass integration into the topography of the slope and excessive glazing. I think my primary concern is the public way on that stretch of Bluebird is a pretty cherished thing by neighbors. We walk our dogs there daily, we're having conversations in our front yard. We know that there's no expectation of complete privacy from our front yards or from the public way. We think that there's probably a better balance and we could find some win-win solutions in terms of two-way screening, suggesting potentially using different balcony materials other than glass, potentially raising sill heights on windows and reducing the extent and size of windows. I think it would strike a better balance.
The second category is more things specific to our property. I think primarily it's kind of a strange concern, but essentially our master bedroom and Christine, I think you took some photos of it. There's weird acoustics off of my neighbor Peter's yard where essentially noise travels down the ridge line, echoes between the houses and filters into our master bedroom. If you look at it from a distance perspective, it doesn't make a lot of sense, but essentially we can make out anything that's heard or said up there. So our primary concern there is the large balcony, which opens the door to large social gatherings on the rooftop. We'd love for you and your wife to have a nice space to sit out there. We'd probably appreciate that being reduced in size a little bit. I'm done expecting you to have big parties but you never know what the future resident may do.
Thank you. And then I think the other big thing is light pollution. I tried to actually capture it with a photo. You can't because it's so dark. We appreciate what you've done in terms of window shading on timers, we support that. We just ask that the board consider the angles from any shielded lights or soffit lighting, because we're about 47 feet below the project from the street and we're aware that even shielded lights may kind of direct right down. Thank you.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you for your comments. The next speaker please.
Tim Kane:
Hello, I'm Tim Kane. I live at 1515 Morningside and being here for six hours or five and a half hours is almost worth it, Christine, to see you. It's really nice that you're sitting back here and it's a pleasure to see you. One of the things that the applicant brought up was comparing himself to Riyahi's home. That house was approved here at DRC and I think it's a matter of perspective. The neighborhood got together and appealed that and it was voted unanimously by city council that it was inappropriate for the neighborhood and it was too large and sets the precedent for too large of a home.
When the lots keep getting divided, this lot is about a 40% coverage. This lot is located on a piece of property that's about an acre and a half big. It's now been subdivided into six lots and maybe it's subdivided into more. You take 40% over an acre and a half, that's 25,000 square feet of new homes that would be going across the street from us. So looking at it as one lot as a perspective of, oh, doesn't sound bad, 3000 foot lot, 40% coverage, not a big deal. Looking at 25,000 square feet of new home is another perspective and I think that's a perspective that the city council took and the city council thought that it was inappropriate, that it was just too big. So I would urge you to take the perspective of the city council. Thank you.
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you for your comments. Next speaker, please
Speaker 13:
Thank you for visiting the property. Almost everybody was there and I spoke with you. I appreciate this.
The proposed project, the home is big. The square foot number that was given, 3,500 and change does not include the garage. The average home in that area, it's approximately 1,600 to 2,700 square feet, so this is significantly larger. The style doesn't fit at all. It's glass and concrete and the neighborhood is wellestablished and totally different. I live directly below the project, the street is 18 feet wide. To do the massive excavations, it'll block traffic, it'll block access, it'll create a safety issue. So there are, according to the applicant, I don't know if the number is true, it'll take 170 truckloads to get the excavations out.
Now on top of it, this here is lot B, lot A right next to it is going to come up pretty soon and it has exactly the same issues. So my suggestion is these two projects should be combined into one hearing because the same issues will come up, and in its current form I do not approve of the proposed building. Thank you.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you. Thank you for your comments. Next speaker please.
Marcia Stallworth:
Hello, I am Marcia Stallworth and I'm here for the Romitas. They are out of the country again and can't make it unfortunately, so I'm sorry that I'm here, but they still have not been receiving any notifications of what's been going on here. I did put in a change of address because they did move from one residence to another residence. I did that last year, I think it was October. Once I came down here, I spoke to Kathy. She asked me to come down here to be here on their behalf.
Yesterday, went over to the county recorder's office and tried to locate the assessor. I got a telephone number, called the assessor, I made multiple telephone calls with no response. I don't know when they'll get back with me to verify the address. I did speak with Julie, I think it was in the office earlier today before she left and she said that I gave her my contact information and she would do some research on it for me and let me know what's going on in regards to their address and trying to resolve the problem why they're not getting any notification about anything that's going on.
They're very good people. I don't think that they would be dishonest about the fact that they aren't receiving notifications, but it's been ongoing ever since everybody started to do stuff here. David has been the only one that we've been in contact with that has given us some insight as to what's been going on and that's why I'm here today.
They do seem to... Well, they haven't seen the property, they don't know what the flags are. They don't really know the impact of anything that's going on around there. In my conversations with Kathy, she has said that she's very interested in hiring professionals to come out there and investigate their property, investigate the impact that the surrounding property's proposed projects would have on their project or on their property. Initially I think that maybe the narrow setback on the east side is a concern of theirs and potentially blocking view and the wall that they would be looking at. But other than that, I think that everybody, it would be nice if everybody could build on their property and be happy and be good neighbors.
Jessica Gannon:
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Thank you for your comments.
Marcia Stallworth:
Okay, thank you.
Jessica Gannon:
Next speaker please.
Susan Whitin:
The city staff report and the many letters from our neighbors document the multiple ways that this proposed house does not meet the DRB guidelines and land use policy requirements and is incompatible with the neighborhood. The driveway and retaining walls are especially impactful as is the amount of glazing on this two-story house sitting on the top of the knoll, some 51 feet above the street at its highest point. I'd like to talk about quality of life in a neighborhood and a community. To start, none of the expected seven houses that will be built on the knoll will be built in isolation. The houses are tightly packed together on contiguous lots, on a steep landform, even a flat piece of land with this density and easy construction access, none of which this has, would be challenging to develop. Because of SB9, project plans for these lots are all being submitted to the city more or less at the same time in a land rush mode.
When will there be further investigation of the geology to answer longstanding questions about the stability of the south-facing slope and the ancient landslide on top of the knoll at the edge of 1560 Bluebird. 1560 Bluebird is not only a residential project, it also requires road widening and utility pole relocation projects. How long is the approval process likely to take for all of this work and what is the construction period for all of this work, factoring in the inaccessible location? This challenging situation is exacerbated by the absence of comprehensive planning and a lack of consideration of development impacts. And as a result of the lack of comprehensive planning, the two houses that have been approved were appealed to City Council. Comprehensive planning would've made a difference.
Further, part of a planning effort would also include construction management. That is determining the number of years of construction for each project overlaid with sequencing of multiple projects under construction at the same time using the same access routes.
Jessica Gannon:
And in conclusion? Sorry.
Susan Whitin:
And finally, as mentioned earlier this evening, while City Council, not DRB legislates construction and safety-related issues, the actual action of this scale of development is not neighborhood-compatible.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you.
Richard Bellier:
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Hello. Richard Bellier, 1494 Morningside Circle. I think a big thing that the design review board needs to realize is that the only reason he's building that convoluted driveway is because he wants to build a big glass lighthouse on the top of the Knoll. So I want to get back to my original considerations with the Riyahi development and that is to minimize the massive structures that all these developers want to build on the seven or eight lots that exist there with SB9, a way to help this whole situation out is to excavate into the hillside.
Not everything has to be on the top of the knoll and it's an eyesore. So I'd really appreciate some sort of concerted effort to view this whole development in a whole and not piecemeal with each of these individual developers trying to build the biggest house on the lot. So thank you.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you for your comments. Next speaker.
Speaker 17:
Hello. My husband and I have reviewed the project and studied the plans in detail. We understand that unlike the other two projects on Morningside, this project has gone through the planning department and gone through the process of the management review process to get direction and work with the planners right from the beginning. After reading the staff report in public comments, I felt compelled to come and talk about this wonderful couple. They are not developers. They've lived in this community for over 25 years. What I really want you to understand is what these wonderful people, particularly David has done for our community. It's thanks to his leadership and drive and tenacity that Rim Rock Canyon is not being developed right now. He led and stopped a developer who wanted to build nine massive homes in that canyon and almost got away with it and it was because of him that that stopped.
Well, he did that forsaking his own view, but in the greater good of protecting the Canyon. And that's an important thing for us to understand of who we're dealing with. Who wouldn't want wonderful people like that? They were willing to step up and do something for us, foregoing their own view and having to deal with everything that was involved in that. This home is 100% compatible with Laguna Beach General plan, Municipal code, hillside guidance. They're not asking for any variances. It's not impacting any of you, nor is it impacting anybody's privacy. This is a wonderful family and I would implore you to approve the project and please neighbors, embrace them. They're really wonderful people.
Jessica Gannon:
Thank you for your comments. Anyone else? All right, you have three minutes for rebuttal.
Steve Kawaratani:
Maria, before you start my clock, could you queue up the slide where we left off, Wendy? And while we're waiting during all this time meeting with all you folks, I forgot that it's my dad's 106th birthday today. He's not alive, but I'm wishing him a happy birthday.
Jessica Gannon:
But he was a staple in Laguna Beach.
Mr. Gibbs:
He shares a birthday with my ten-year-old son.
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Steve Kawaratani:
Ah, awesome. Wendy, could you scroll?
Mr. Dyrnaes:
A couple more, yeah.
Steve Kawaratani:
Okay, one more. Okay, thank you. Good evening, board and staff. My name is Steve Kawaratani representing the project. Thanks again for meeting with me this week. I know I was involved with quite a few projects. The board is tasked with reviewing this application and it is a vacant and buildable lot and you've heard this evening a bunch of competing public interests and a whole lot of hype. The site includes a knoll that has been previously disturbed and it does not contain high-value habitat.
This evening you'll be considering the pattern of development, the design review guidelines, the general plan and safety. We understand that while the project may not be approved this evening, we look forward to your comments. If you look at the first slide, the driveway and garage are highlighted in blue and it begins 10 feet back of the right of way and 10 feet up from the paving, and this is depicted in yellow. Just to create the public parking space, we have to have a 12-foot retaining wall. That is how steep this property is. The driveway we're proposing does not require a variance and it allows for direct access into the proposed residence. It also provides for two additional parking spaces and a nose-out exit of vehicles on a street with limited sight line. This concept limits grading. It's as mandated by the general plan and furthermore establishes conformance to the hillside guidelines.
Over 50% of the buildable site depicted in green is on the knoll. Next slide please. The driveway was designed by a licensed civil engineer whose professional opinion is the driveway is sited in the optimal location. The four neighboring properties to the south have all placed their homes on the ridge. Next slide. This is our updated rendering, which shows proposed modifications when we come and see you next time. And this is the addition of trees and vines, lowering of the walls for feasible and reduction of glazing. This application and the proceeding to on Morningside and subsequent projects are owned by four different applicants. While it probably would've been advantageous and probably warrantedMr. Gibbs:
You can go up even to Temple Hill, you're not going to find this house. Maybe you might find one in a particular community, but I don't see it up there. It needs to be changed. It almost needs to be started from scratch. I think it's developable. Now, in looking at these homes, all of these homes, if you look, you don't see a four or five-story building because you're going to see that with the retaining walls and all this stuff. These are setback homes, long driveways, much like Susan Witten's driveway. You hardly see her home there. I'm not sure, candidly, 150 foot driveway works on such a steep slope hill because to do that you're got to create these immense retaining walls and basically a face of building. I think there's a way that you can use the top of the slope and conform to the contour of the hillside.
And at the same time I say that, it may take more excavation. I realize that, I get that. And also I think like the other homes on Morningside, I think the driveway and the garage, I just don't see that it's feasible to do a long winding driveway. I think you almost need a garage like the other two places have on the street level with the house going up. But I'm willing to see, I mean David, I know how you feel about this, but when you come back, if you feel that we're all wrong or you can't redesign a less massive structure, more incompatible with the character of the neighborhood. Do your best, and you may find that we may go along with it and we may not. David, you came up with a lot of creative houses since I've This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
been on the board. This is a tough nut for sure. Some lots are easier to develop than others, but you just can't come in and put a massive structure like that in a neighborhood that doesn't have that, that's not compatible.
With respect to the deck, it's a huge deck on top there. I think the glazing creates innumerable privacy, light and glare issues. I read Nancy's staff report on the light and glare issues, particularly with all the homes looking down. I think her concerns there are valid and I share them. And the last point is I think you have a right to build a house there for sure. I think it is going to take excavation that's not going to be pleasant for the neighborhood. I'm very concerned about the road, but I think that given that you're entitled to build something there, it's something that the impacts minimized on the neighbor, but what you presented before is just doesn't work for me. So those are my comments.
Thalman:
I'll keep it short, I'll keep it short, David. I think you've heard quite a bit. I did hear from the neighbors that, and I was not there for the hearing on Morningside and I believe the architect was Chris Prelitz and it seemed that the neighborhood seemed to really like the design and they were happy with the size, the scope. So I don't know if that's a place to start for this.
Jessica Gannon:
It got appealed.
Thalman:
It did get appealed? Oh. Okay. That's neither here nor there, but I think it was an acceptable design for that particular area. As far as it's like I just think you have to start all over from what I'm hearing from everybody else. At first with the driveway, when I started looking at it, I thought, well, this is safer than having a driveway where you back out onto the street, which I understand that. I think it's just a little bit too long for this group. Now, you're going to have to come back, I won't be here, I'm off the board the end of March. So whether my comments will have any weight or bearing on this doesn't really make any difference. But I think if you listen to my colleagues, I agree with most of what they said after hearing some of the feedback. I think there's some good design elements to it. Too much decking, the glazing I didn't have a big deal with that. I didn't have a big issue with that because we discussed the whole materials that you can use now that are not reflective and don't emit light. So there's changes in technology and materials, which I think could be incorporated, but I don't think there's anything else I could say that would help at this point. But I just encourage you to of course work with the neighbors as well.
Jessica Gannon:
And I'll go into that. Are you finished with your comments? Thalman:
Yeah.
Jessica Gannon:
Okay. No, I'll go next. I support the driveway. It's not the popular feeling here. So what if you compromise maybe to bring the program down that first corner, the first switchback. Maybe look at putting the garage lower on the hillside down there. So you still have, because I'm thinking of a safety This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
issue, the other houses on Morningside, those people can drive off of Bluebird and park and turn around and enter Morningside again facing forward. And they're asking you to propose a garage where you're pulling into the garage off of Bluebird. And that's just not adequate, it's not safe for the community, it's not safe for the property owners. So I would approve a driveway, maybe look at considering just instead of two switchbacks, just one driveway switchback. He's a talented architect, he'll figure it out.
It's an engineering problem.
It's an engineering problem?
Mr. Dyrnaes:
Engineering did this, there's no way to do it any other way.
Jessica Gannon:
Yeah, and the fact that it doesn't require a variance, I love that this home is being, because on one hand we're saying build a home that doesn't create a variance. And then on the other hand we're like, you need a variance for your garage or what's the variance that you would need for it? Mr. Dyrnaes:
Height separation from the building.
Jessica Gannon:
Okay, yes. So yeah, so putting the garage down on the street would create a variance. I love that some would say that your materials are fire resistant, forward-thinking, fire resistant. So I'm fine with the materials and a privacy impact, view equity. Your landscape was adequate, but this sounds like it's going to come back. So I think at the end of the day you just got to figure out how to work that driveway.
Mr. Dyrnaes:
It's impossibleJessica Gannon:
Well, you guys will be creative, I'm sure.
Mr. Dyrnaes:
... when we designed this.
Jessica Gannon:
Mr. Weil.
Louis Weil:
We're still in deliberation. I follow the rest of the board in that I think the biggest problem is the way the access has been derived on this. And we saw a project earlier tonight that was done by one architect a couple of years ago that was a complete flop and then a new architect comes in and really redoes it in a absolutely mind-boggling way that fits all the criteria and fits everything. It takes the right group of people with the right kind of mindset to solve this problem. The access doesn't work. It's three times longer than some of the ones we've considered already. The rise between where the street grade level This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
is and where the finished floor of the garage is three to four more times from where the others take access in comparison. It would've been helpful to have more of a collaborative effort on defining this neighborhood, but we have to take each project individually and face it on its merits and work that way.
I think staff not agreeing on seven of the 16 criteria is a bad start. We really got to rely on going back to staff with where the right recommendations are to get and follow some of that because I have in my six years, I mean most of them have two, three or a couple or one view equity, but to have six and general plan compliance being that drastically out of character, that's problematic. And that's not something I've seen very often come through the board. And I've seen six years of projects that have been hairier than this one, to be honest.
The reason I asked about the knoll is one of the guidelines in environment says avoid building on the knolls, avoid building on the ridge lines. In some cases you can't avoid at all because you have to respect the property rights. There is a property that will be built here. It is a buildable lot, I recognize that and I've worked really hard as being a board member for years to make sure that those buildable rights exist for the property owners, but they have to do it in the right way and in the right spirit.
I've only given this book back out to two other applicants. I heavily advise you reread this thing, it's a digital copy, download it, read it front to back. It means a lot, not only for your neighbors but the community at large. And I've seen projects that have ripped the community apart because they start at the wrong spot. I think you know what I'm talking about and you've seen other projectsJessica Gannon:
I think someone's trying to have a popularity contest.
Louis Weil:
No, it's not. We justJessica Gannon:
But the applicant is experienced.
Louis Weil:
We got to get through this.
Jessica Gannon:
We'll get through it. Stop slapping them on the head with the book, the DRB book. It's insulting.
Louis Weil:
I've given it to two other applicants and they've come back with major reworks and it's worked each time and those projects got approved. My point is, there's an approvable project here. This is not that project. Environmental context is wrong, general planning compliance is wrong, glazing is wrong. The height coming out of the rising from the ground with the major parts of the structure isn't compatible at all. Neighborhood compatibility is drastically wrong. I need a full redo and that's where I'll leave it. And I'm recommending a table to a date uncertain.
Jessica Gannon:
That seems logical.
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Mr. Gibbs:
Chair, may I make one additional quick comment?
Jessica Gannon:
Yes, please.
Mr. Gibbs:
I agree with Louis, I think it's a buildable lot. I think this could be one of the toughest, if not the toughest lot to build on that I've come across in my almost two years on the board. I think it needs kind of like, okay, let's look at it from a different angle and address what you've heard, which is basically mass scale reduction. And not the actual necessarily only, but the appearance. So anyway, that's my final comment.
Jessica Gannon:
And I'd like to, I'm in agreement with the board, but there was an attacking on Mr. Parker that I don't appreciate.
MJ Coveny:
Well, you know David Parker, but this, it's a bigger story and I'll talk to you about it offline, but I also want to make sure that we're clear that I think this is a buildable lot. I just think that every lot can't maximize out and it has to work within the confines of the community and the lot's restrictions. That's all I was saying.
Jessica Gannon:
The comparison, just so you know, you have a fabulous architect there. The comparison that Louis Weil just made was for a property in North Laguna that had a house already built on it. It's apples and oranges. Bananas, it's bananas. This lot is a steep hillside. There's a lot of challenging aspects to this lot.
It's nothing compared to the lot that Brea Anshana just brought to us this evening. No, it was the comparison of Brea Anshana's lot to this one.
Louis Weil:
Chair. I'll move to table the project.
Jessica Gannon:
Okay, I'll second that.
Mr. Gibbs:
You second it?
Jessica Gannon:
I'll second that.
Mr. Gibbs:
All right, let's vote.
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
Speaker 19:
Table the project with date uncertain. Board member Gibbs.
Mr. Gibbs:
Yes.
Speaker 19:
Board member Weil.
Louis Weil:
Yes.
Speaker 19:
Chair person Thalman.
Thalman:
Yes.
Speaker 19:
And Chair Gannon.
Chair Gannon:
Yes.
Speaker 19:
Thank you. Motion passes toJessica Gannon:
Can we get clarification on the motion for Mrs. Coveny? MJ Coveny:
No, no. I was just wondering what Christine was saying.
Louis Weil:
Kathy, the motion was just to table it.
Mr. Gibbs:
To table it, and I think the point isLouis Weil:
There's not really a difference between tabling and continuing to a date uncertain. They're free toMr. Gibbs:
This transcript was exported on Jul 17, 2025 - view latest version here.
January 23 2025 (Completed 07/17/25)
Transcript by Rev.com
I think the message is redo, so I think that's the appropriate...
Jessica Gannon:
Its the appropriate thing to do, yes. Thank you. Anything else on the agenda for this evening or can we adjourn?
Mr. Gibbs:
I hope we can adjourn.
Jessica Gannon:
That is all. All right. We are adjourned to February 13th, 2025.