Laguna Beach City Council
February 24, 2026

right of way. You're not impeding into the street at all. That's access. Views, the upper bedroom or the upper section, the way you've kind of built, first of all, I think this is a great design. I should start with something positive. I think it's, originally, I thought it was a great thing in the wrong place, but now you've sort of chilled it out a little bit, kind of fitted in, and I think it's really kind of unique and fun, and I think it fits. I mean, I think you have such a point of view on one side with the Tuscany and, you know, and this, you can't, there's no way you're gonna not feel sort of like you got a little fluorescent hair there, but it's gonna be okay. I do think that the paint is still questionable. That was sort of my thing. I was a newbie when you came before the board before, so I maybe didn't articulate it very well, but I do think the color could be still adjusted. I know you wrote Cape Cod Blue, and we're not really supposed to comment on this, but it is part of the architecture in my opinion because of the way you're doing your board and batten. It's kind of tight, so it gives that sort of container feel, and then you also have it used in a different way, which is really cool, but the tightening of it gives it sort of a graphic approach, so the paint will affect how that kind of fits into the hillside. So I do look at it as more of an architectural element and a design integrity. Color, you know, I know you're looking at the Hardie boards, and that's fine. As far as a non-organic material, it's utilized throughout Laguna, and it looks like it has a barktype vibe, is that what I think you're using rather than the flat kind. But they do have colors like a Mountain Sage, and they have like a Navajo Beige, something that's a little more subtle. It's not as cool and graphic. I get what you're going for, but I think, because you have to fit into this area, you might want to consider that. But as far as view preservation, from Mr. Krasko, I said last time that I felt like it wasn't insurmountable for you to kind of give us a little bit there. I do think some of his shrubbery can be cut and cleaned up to give him a better view expanding to the right. So there is one area in his home, the lower section there, that is obscured by that extended front upper. And so I'm hoping that you can maybe just, rather than have to excavate out to move the whole house back, that you can kind of cantilever that one upper deck, that upper room, I guess it's the master and a bedroom, though. And I see you have the curving going on inside, which is cool, so I hope that doesn't structurally cause any issue, but you'd have to push, if you could push that back, I'm not allowed to tell you how much, but I think I'm about how tall? So I think that you need to give him something there. Parking, we talked about outdoor space, fine. Mass and scale, I think your mass and scale's fine. I don't have a problem with it. I think it seems to be in line with the Sottos' house, and the other house is very large in back, and the house to the south of it, no, the north of it, is very large as well, and I think yours sort of just tucks in there nicely.

And again, if you can kind of get the architectural color balanced, it will even seem less large. The white definitely going away was a big help. Your articulations there, privacy. I had 306
306 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

emailed back and forth a bit today with the owner, trying to get a sense of where those windows are, but if there is some element of, excuse me, I'm having trouble today. If there is some element of landscape that could be put in, whether it's an extended box of, you know, trees. I don't really, I couldn't quite, maybe another board member will have some input on privacy, 'cause I wasn't able to capture exactly how much that would be an active, like someone sitting at the window, looking out at Krasko's home. I didn't see any issue over at the Sottos with the addition of the trees that you have now. So I think privacy will be achieved with that slight adjustment, and that's all. I think I might have something else, but that gives you kind of a general idea, but I think you're super close. I think there's some wiggle room here, but that's it.

Chair Gibbs:

Imer?
Board member Bauta:

Thank you. I wanted to address the Sottos' wall. I think that's a feature that was there, and I don't think they should be penalized as part of this development. I understand it's in the right of way, and at some point, it was approved, it sounds like, you know, per city staff. And I think it's definitely a feature that is part of their home, and it seems like a valuable feature for their home. So I would just, wanted to present that. One of the items early on the staff presented was the volume calculation. Was that taken across the entire volume of the site? It's not so much a question but maybe just deliberation. When I got there and I looked up, you kind of get a sense for the volume, and it doesn't really appear to be being excavated as much. It seems like a lot of it is exposed. So from a mass and scale, I think there is some compatibility, but I also think that the height might need to be considered on, you know, the limitation, especially since they're asking for a variance on the height. So I think it's worth deliberating that. Those two feet could probably go a long way with some of the neighbors' concerns and, you know, just establishing kind of guidance for the project. I did have some concerns about the distinctness of the design, being that there was a photo of another design that seemed like a replica. You know, I think when you have the time to go through the Design Review Board process here in Laguna, I think there should be thoughtful consideration and time well spent going through that design. To me, that photo looked like a copy-and-paste, and I don't know to what extent we can comment on that, but I think it's worth considering because there are a lot of home builder types that would love nothing more than to do the same thing here in Laguna, just copy and paste the next project, the next project. We want to avoid that as a board, so I just wanted to establish that, but yeah, I think it makes sense to sort of put the Sottos' wall to bed tonight if we can. So he doesn't 307
307 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

have to come back to a further hearing, but I don't think I can approve this design as is currently tonight.

Chair Gibbs:

Thank you. All right, so this is definitely gonna be continued. So I'm gonna give you my views. You heard some differing views, and I'll see if I can synthesize. Your issues are parking, height, some privacy concerns, and related to height, the view issue from the Krasko house. And oh, before we, you know, put it to the continuance, all board members will be able to comment on what I have to say. So take notes if you want, make sure I'm getting this correct. Alrighty, so with respect to parking, I feel very strongly that that retaining wall needs to stay, and that there be no encroachment or change to the Sottos.

The second thing is, I do not recall 806 being standard lane parking. In fact, it was very squeezed in. I wasn't happy about it, but we went along with it. I think there's adequate parking for two parking spaces in front, which, unfortunately, because you can't get any, you know, on-street public parking in this area, which is crazy, I could not approve a project like 806. I couldn't approve it unless I felt comfortable that two cars could park in front of that driveway. I feel comfortable. Now, I think you heard comments from two board members who weren't so comfortable, and I think if you could orient that building, and I don't know what your constraints are, 'cause you're coming back, so that you can address Mr. Weil's concern, and to the extent you can make them two standard rather than one standard and one compact, I think you'd be looking for a, you know, a unanimous vote.

With respect to view equity from the Kraskos, I said last time, and I'll say it again this time, I think view equity's achieved, I think it complies with the Diamond-Crestview Specific Plan, and that the views from the primary, or you know, the ceremonial rooms, which are upstairs kitchen and living room, are amazing and untouched. The major touch is the second bedroom on the first floor, and that is primarily blocked with landscaping. And the impact from the applicant's house, it would even achieve, in my view, view equity as to that second bedroom. The master bedroom, to really preserve any kind of view, you couldn't build your top story, which I think would not be appropriate given what I'll talk about in a second about neighborhood compatibility, the overall design. So I, but you know, you've heard what other people said, you know, to the extent that you could assist in reducing the height or cantilevering that side to improve Mr. Krasko's first floor, second bedroom view, it might help you get a majority vote. But I think, from my point of view, view equity's achieved.

Privacy, I do not see a privacy issue from the Kraskos. They're 50 feet away. The orientation of the windows are not looking at Kraskos. If anything, you have the side of the house going north, I guess it is, is not looking at Krasko, and your backyard is not oriented towards Krasko. It's kind of a catty corner to the building. So I'm more concerned about the Sottos' 308
308 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

property, and I appreciate the two strawberry trees, is that right? And I didn't hear from, I tried to read Mr. Sotto's comments, and I couldn't really tell whether there's privacy. But since you're coming back, I would encourage you to work with the Sottos to come up with a landscaping solution. This was talked about by MJ here, a landscaping solution for both the Kraskos and for the Sottos, and have it clear 'cause it's hard for me to tell whether landscaping does that, but with privacy, landscaping is always the easiest solution, and it actually could be win-win. Height, you know, I think it's neighborhood-compatible. I don't have a problem with the height for the same reason I don't have view equity. Mass and scale, I don't have a problem with. The one problem I have, and I talked about it last time, is I have a real concern whether this is neighborhood-compatible from a design standpoint.

To me, it looks like a bunch of containers, and I think we talked about it last time is, there's a rustic look. And I think several board members, in addition to me, talked about rustic, even the modern, and I showed a bunch of slides. I don't know if you remember. At the first hearing, I showed a bunch of slides, including the modern, that all had a rustic element.

And that's what I was trying to influence you with, and simply putting rock by the garage and changing it to blue, to get my vote, I need to see it blend in more, even with, look at the modern, the modern, the house, not the Kraskos', but the one to, I think it's on Crestview, but the one to the, as you're facing the house to the left and up the hill. You know, that has a lot more kind of rustic modern features. I don't mean to design it, but I'm just telling you, it sticks out in my mind like a sore thumb. It's what I said last time, and I'll say it again this time. So, and then access parking, I would find the variance and everything if you could, given the current parking that you're proposing, so long as you don't impact the Sottos' parking at all. And the way, just so the record, I would've required to come back to us to show the solution. I don't want to leave it. I'm not a big fan of leaving it to working out or administrative design review. The parking is so critical in Diamond-Crestview from a safety standpoint that I think it's incumbent upon me, in my view, incumbent upon the board to review and approve the final parking design, particularly where the houses are too close together. So when you come back, try to work with Mr. Sotto, come up with a solution that accomplishes, you know, what we talked about, where he gets his parking, you get your parking, they can accommodate two cars each in front of the garage. He'll get his four with the garage, you'll get your four, and then I think you'd have at least a majority vote from the board. So those are my comments. Any board member wish to further tell me how I'm wrong or right or...

Board member Coveny:

No, it was brilliant, brilliant, Chair, well done. I just have one quick clarification. The height, you said the height, in order to get Mr. Krasko's view, more of that view back, but not all. I 309
309 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

don't think it needs to be cleared completely, but I don't think it was the height. I think it was more how it was extending out, not so much the height of the building of that upper deck, of the upper floor. I think it was really how it extended out, so.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Right, I have in my comments, listening to Tom Gibbs, Chair Gibbs, that that top floor, it could be, 'cause we don't protect views from secondary bedrooms, it's primary bedrooms, and that top floor doesn't have to be much, but it's just pushed back just a little bit. I don't think height, don't mess with the plate heights, I don't think. That's not my concern either.

Just that top floor needs to be pushed back into the hillside. Yeah, that's pretty much. Oh, and then, for safety, I'm surprised that you're not demanding 18 feet standard parking because everybody, it's an American tradition that we want bigger and better.

Chair Gibbs:

Remember, I caved on 806 for less than that. You don't remember that.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

I'm pretty sure we made them put two standard-sized parking spaces.

Chair Gibbs:

Nope.

Board member Weil:

It wasChair Gibbs:

That was like, I almost voted no on that, and that was it. We squeezed them in, yeah.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

But still two standard-sized parking spaces.

Chair Gibbs:

No, anyway, I'm not going to debate the point. I'm telling you the parking, in my view, the parking solution here is much better than 806. That being said, I'm evaluating, just a second, Louis, I'm evaluating parking based upon this project.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:
310
310 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Okay.

Chair Gibbs:

Louis?
Board member Weil:

No, I'm good.

Chair Gibbs:

Imer?
Board member Bauta:

No further comments from me.

Chair Gibbs:

All right, thank you very much. That was a good discussion. When's the next available hearing date? And you can tell us how long you think you need, but why don't we start with the next available hearing date?
James Campbell (Interim Planning Manager):

Excuse me, we could schedule this theoretically in, we really need to be looking at June, but I would really want to know from the applicant, based on the input that's been received here and then through the, you know, any public comments, how long it would take to, you know, make a design that is responsive to what you're hearing, and then we can schedule accordingly, so.

Chair Gibbs:

Yeah, how long, do you, June date, July?
David Freeland (Architect):

Well, I guess enough time to reach out to the neighbors. Let's say a month should be fine. Is that? Yeah, a month.

Chair Gibbs:

Why don't we put the first meeting in June to give you a little bit, what time do they have to submit plans if it's the first meeting in June?
James Campbell (Interim Planning Manager):
311
311 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

We'd really need to see the plans in a couple of weeks. So I don't really think that's a good idea. We should be looking at July.

Chair Gibbs:

Why don't we do the first meeting in July, which I think is July 10th.

James Campbell (Interim Planning Manager):

July 10th, we'd need to see some, you know, revisions by the 21st of May. So that's basicallyChair Gibbs:

That should give you enough time to work with the neighbors. Does that work for you? James Campbell (Interim Planning Manager):

That's like six weeks.

Chair Gibbs:

Yeah. All right, do I have a motion, please?
Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Chair, I'll make a motion to continue Project 5.3, located at 2058 Crestview Drive to June 10th, 2025, or to July 10th.

Board member Bauta:

Second the motion.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Is it June or July?
James Campbell (Interim Planning Manager):

July.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

July 10th, 2025.

Board member Bauta:

I second that motion.
312
312 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Chair Gibbs:

Can we call the roll?
Board member Weil:

Chair, may I make a point of discussion? This is technically the second hearing, correct? Chair Gibbs:

Yes, second hearing.

Board member Weil:

Do we have to make a finding that the applicant'sChair Gibbs:

No, we don't. That's for the third hearing.

Board member Weil:

This is the second hearing.

Chair Gibbs:

No, this is the first hearing. We, no, the concept review, we didn't vote. This is the first full hearing.

James Campbell (Interim Planning Manager):

Chair, the concept hearing by code is counted as your first hearing.

Chair Gibbs:

Oh, really?
James Campbell (Interim Planning Manager):

We did review that, so this is the second hearing. So Mr. Weil is correct, we do need to make those findings in the code that, you know, the applicant has been responsive to the prior comments and that we can continue forward with the next hearing. So you're more familiar with those findings than I am, actually.

Chair Gibbs:

I am, but Louis, I stand corrected, thank you. I, yeah, yeah, I, in connection with this motion, we're going to find, who made the motion, you did? 313
313 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

That the applicant is moving in the right direction, I can make the findings to grant the third hearing.

Chair Gibbs:

Okay, and that the applicant's acting in good faith toward resolving and achieving project approval. And Imer, you have a second to that?
Board member Bauta:

I second that.

Chair Gibbs:

All right, could you call the roll please?
Clerk:

Board member Bauta?
Board member Bauta:

Yes.

Clerk:

Board member Coveny?
Board member Coveny:

Yes.

Clerk: Board member Weil?
Chair Gibbs:

Weil?
Board member Weil:

Yes. Sorry, it was a delay, yes.

Clerk:

Chair Pro Tem Gannon?
Chair Pro Tem Gannon:
314
314 of 485
Design Review Meeting, April 10, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Yes.

Clerk:

And Chair Gibbs.

Chair Gibbs:

Yes.

Board member Coveny:

And Chair, before we move on, I did not thank Shehriyar for his extraordinary staff report. It helped me a lot, and for all the extra work you guys did to investigate.

Chair Gibbs:

That was very well done. Thank you very much. On a rather tough project. Alrighty, the next item is, anyone wanna take a break or just plow through? 315
315 of 485

DESIGN REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
December 11, 2025
Agenda Item No. 5.9
Case No: Design Review 25-0431
Coastal Development Permit 25-0433
Variance 25-0432
Revocable Encroachment Permit 25-2285
Request: New single-family dwelling and attached Accessory Dwelling Unit on a vacant lot in the D/CSP (Diamond Crestview Specific Plan) area.

Project Location: 2058 Crestview Drive | APN: 644-291-70 Applicant/ Mike Czajkowski
Property Owner: (949) 244-4423 | [email protected]
Staff: Community Development Department
Shehriyar Khan | Associate Planner
(949) 715-0672 | [email protected]
Recommendation:

Conduct a public hearing and adopt Resolution 25-0431 approving Design Review 25-0431, Variance 25- 0432, Coastal Development Permit 25-0433, and Revocable Encroachment Permit 25-2285 for the property located at 2058 Crestview Drive and find said action categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.

CEQA:

The project qualifies for a categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15303 – New Construction, in that the project consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures.

Coastal Development Permit (CDP):

The project site is located within a non-appealable of the Coastal Zone. A final decision by the City to approve the Coastal Development Permit (CDP) cannot be appealed to the California Coastal Commission.

Board Members within a 500’ Radius: None
Attachment 10
316
316 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The project proposes a new single-family residence with an attached two-car garage and an accessory dwelling unit on a vacant site within the D/CSP area. The 4-bedroom residence is approximately 1,569 square feet of gross floor area. The two-car garage is approximately 476 square feet and is located at the lowest level. The second level is a 221 square-foot accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”). The residence and ADU has approximately 783 square feet of elevated deck area. The four-level structure has a building footprint of approximately 1,569 square feet and it meets applicable height requirements. The updated design necessitates approximately 1,424 cubic yards of grading and includes a landscaping plan, and street improvements (the “Project”). The ADU is not subject to Design Review. A Coastal Development Permit is required for the overall development program including the ADU per Laguna Beach Municipal Code (LBMC) Section 25.07.004 and per LBMC Section 25.17.030(B)(1). Two variances are requested to encroach into a significantly modified watercourse (LBMC Section 25.50.030(D)(4)), and to not provide the required on-street public parking space (D/CSP Section IV(J)(1)) due to its infeasibility. A Revocable Encroachment Permit is required for a 10-foot-high wall-mounted steel ladder and 10-foot-high retaining wall located within the public right-of-way.

Staff recommends conditional approval of the Project. Staff has analyzed the request and finds that all of the facts necessary for approval can be made for the requested entitlements. The entitlements are supported by the Hydrology Technical Report—June 20,2022, attached hereto as Attachment 5. 317
317 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

PROPERTY AERIAL PHOTO

PROPERTY INFORMATION
Land Use Designation Village Low Density (1-7 DU/AC)
Zoning Designation R-1 Residential Low Density
Specific Plan Area Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan (D/CSP) Proposed Use Single Family + ADU complies with density and use

ZONING REVIEW
The proposed Project complies with applicable zoning standards and guidelines as shown in the summary table below:

Development Standard Required Proposed Conforms
Site Coverage 38.50% (2483) 24.3% (1569 SF) Yes
Landscape Open Space 3,225 SF Max 1,523 SF Yes
Height (Lowest floor to top of roof)
Height Above Rear Lot Line
29’-0”
12’
29’-0”
8’
Yes
Yes
Setbacks
Front
Side (North)
Side (South)
Rear
5’-0” (Garage)
8’-0” (House)
5’-0”
5’-0”
44’-7 1/4”
16’-0” (Garage)
35-0” (House)
5’-3”
6’-3”
51’-0”
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
318
318 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

Surrounding General Plan Land Uses Designations, Zoning Districts, and Use of Properties Direction General Plan Land Use Zoning Use
North Village Low Density (VLD) Diamond Crestview
Specific Plan (DC/SP
Single-Family
Residential
South Village Low Density (VLD) Diamond Crestview
Specific Plan (DC/SP
Single-Family
Residential
East Village Low Density (VLD) Diamond Crestview
Specific Plan (DC/SP
Single-Family
Residential
West Village Low Density (VLD) Diamond Crestview
Specific Plan (DC/SP
Single-Family
Residential
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:

Site History and Setting
The subject site is a 6,045 square-foot vacant lot in the Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan (D/CSP) area that maintains a steep upward slope above the street of approximately 41 percent. The property also has a modest cross slope, and the street frontage also slopes. The unusual slope of the property makes development of the site more challenging. A mapped watercourse runs along the north of the property line and diagonally towards the rear of the property line (see Property Aerial Photo). Significant modified watercourses include those that have been channeled, piped, culverted or otherwise improved or diverted. The existing watercourse has been significantly modified due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property.

Previous submittals for site development were made as early as 2004, with prior Concept Review hearings conducted in 2005, 2006, and 2013. Those prior designs requested multiple variances, and the most recent review in 2013 being denied. The proposed project does not resemble the prior proposal despite the two variance requests. The applicant submitted the current project for zoning review on June 24, 2022.

Prior Hearings
Pursuant to D/CSP Property Development Standards (N) (pg. IV-10), Design Review is a two-step process that requires a Concept Review prior to submittal for approval of the final design. A Concept Review hearing took place on May 9, 2024, during which the board evaluated the proposed design, considered all public testimony at the time. Public comments were related to view equity, neighborhood compatibility, and privacy issues. The Board directed the applicant to:
- Explore colors and materials to make the project more “rustic” to promote neighborhood compatibility;
- Increase landscaping as a solution to address privacy concerns; and - Increase grading excavation to better integrate the project into the hillside and to reduce the overall appearance of mass of the development.
319
319 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The Board also conveyed that the variance request to encroach into the significantly modified watercourse setback was reasonable due to it being highly modified and as there was no environmental value to protect.

At the second public hearing held on April 10, 2025, the Board reviewed the revised project plans, considered public comments that were again generally related to view equity, neighborhood compatibility, and privacy.

The Board provided the following direction to the applicant:
• Shift the uppermost level toward the rear to help address view equity concerns. • Modify the driveway to accommodate two standard parking spaces outside the public right-of -way. • Adjust the proposed exterior color to a more rustic tone. • Incorporate additional landscaping to enhance privacy. • Explore solutions regarding the neighboring wall encroaching into the public right-of-way, which currently protects the adjacent (southern) property's emergency access stairs.

The applicant made the following changes to the design in response to Board direction:

• The setback between the garage and the street has been increased by 2 feet to better accommodate two cars parking on the driveway. One space in the driveway is a full 18 feet deep, a standard space.

The second space is about 16 feet deep.
• The third (uppermost) level was shifted 3 feet toward the rear, resulting in a corresponding shift and slight enlargement of the second level to address views over the building. • The exterior color has been updated to Sagre Green, and additional limestone veneer has been added to the garage face.
• Vertical siding has been removed in two areas on the front elevation and replaced with stucco to soften the structure’s box-like appearance.
• Additional landscaping along the north and south-side property lines, including two Arbutus unedo (Strawberry Trees), as shown on the updated landscape plan (Sheet A-1.5; Attachment 2) have been included to address privacy concerns.
• The structure has also been further embedded into the hillside in the hope it reduces the appearance of mass.
• Submitted a Revocable Encroachment Permit application requesting the construction of a 10-foothigh retaining wall and the installation of a 10-foot-high wall mounted foldable metal ladder.

The table below summarizes the changes made since the April 10, 2025 Design Review hearing:

DRB April 10, 2025 Changes DRB October 9, 2025
Building Site Coverage 23.6% (1,523 SF) +47 SF 24.3% (1,569 SF) Height 31.4 Feet -2.4 Feet 29 Feet
Front Yard Setback (Garage) 14 Feet +2 Feet 16 Feet
Rear Yard Setback (House) 35 Feet -3 Feet 51 Feet
Deck 1 (Level 1) 496 Feet -91 SF 405 Feet
Deck 2 (Level 2) 291 SF -23 SF 268 SF
320
320 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

Deck 3 (Level 3) 65 SF +15.50 115.5 SF
Level 2 Area 836 SF +88 SF 924 SF
Landscaping (North) 0 Trees +1 Count 1 Strawberry Tree
Landscaping(South) 2 Strawberry Trees +1 Count 3 Strawberry Trees Grading (Cut inside footprint) 823 CY +30 CY 853 CY
Proposed Project
The applicant requests approval to construct an 1,853.3 square-foot, four-level structure consisting of a 476.7 square-foot two-car garage, 221.9 square-foot accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”), and 1,569 squarefoot (floor area) residence. Other improvements include 788.5 square feet of elevated deck area, grading (853 cubic yards outside the building footprint), retaining walls, street improvements, landscaping, and a retaining wall and wall mounted emergency access ladder within the public right of way. Design review is required for the new structure, elevated decks, retaining walls, street improvements, grading, landscaping plan, and encroachments within the public right-of-way pursuant to LBMC Section 25.05.040(B)(1) and LBMC Section 25.05.040(B)(3). A Variance is required to encroach into a modified watercourse pursuant to LBMC Section 25.50.030(D)(4), and to not provide a required on-street public parking space pursuant to DCSP Section IV(J)(1). Pursuant to LBMC Section 11.50.030, a Revocable Encroachment Permit is required for a 10-foot-high wall mounted steel ladder and 10-foot-high retaining wall located within the public right-of-way pursuant. As described above, the proposed structure is in compliance with all setbacks, floor area ratio (allowable building area), and lot coverage requirements of the D/CSP.

As noted, a mapped watercourse runs along the north of the property line and diagonally towards the rear of the property line The existing watercourse has been significantly modified due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property. Based on previous hydrology reports for the subject property, and a Hydrology Technical memo prepared in 2022 (Attachment 5), no impacts to the significant modified watercourse are anticipated and the functional aspect of the watercourse will not be affected. Although the watercourse has been modified a variance is still required to encroach within 25 feet of the centerline of the former watercourse pursuant to the Municipal Code.

The angled garage is accessed via an uphill-sloping driveway, with the finished garage floor located 7 feet above the street centerline. A stairway north of the garage leads to a 221-square-foot ADU and a 404-squarefoot uncovered deck on the first level, situated 16.4 feet above the garage floor. Exterior stairs adjoining the ADU provide access to a second uncovered deck and the primary residence on the second and third level.

The primary dwelling spans two levels, with the main entry, kitchen, dining room, and den on the second level, and three bedrooms on the third level (uppermost).

Site constraints for the property include steep topography (41%), drainage, and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone (VHFHSZ).

The D/CSP permits a maximum building height of 29 feet for lots with slopes exceeding 35% (D/CSP, pg.

IV-3). The initial design proposed a height of 31.2 feet, exceeding the allowable limit by 2.2 feet, which required Design Review approval for modification of height requirement (D/CSP, pg. IV-3). However, in response to Board direction, the applicant revised the plans to shift the uppermost level 3 feet toward the 321
321 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

rear, which reduced the overall building height. As revised, the proposed height complies with the 29-foot maximum and no longer requires a modification to the height requirement.

Lastly, in response to the Board’s direction to explore solutions for the neighboring emergency access stairs and wall that encroach into the public right of way, the applicant proposes to remove the existing staircase and replace it with a wall mounted, foldable fire access ladder. In keeping with the Board’s direction, the neighboring wall that supports the staircase will remain in place.

ENTITLEMENTS: Following is an analysis of the project’s design review, coastal development permit, and variance applications:

Design Review
The proposed new single-family dwelling, elevated decks, grading, height requirement modification, retaining walls, public street improvements, grading and landscaping plan requires the approval of Design Review (See LBMC Section25.05.040(B).) ADUs are not subject to Design Review. Design review is governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 25.05.040. Design Review is considered by the Design Review Board at a duly noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:

Finding No. 1: Physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are designed and located in a manner in overall consistency with the design review criteria specified in Section 25.05.040(H), as set forth below:

1. Access. Conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians and other modes of transportation should be minimized by specifically providing for each applicable mode of transportation. Handicapped access shall be provided as required by applicable statutes.

The project includes an attached two-car garage which is accessed from an uphill sloping driveway, providing sufficient vehicular back-up distance. There is no area within 200 feet of the property that can accommodate a public parking space. Accordingly, the applicant is concurrently seeking a variance from the D/CSP requirement to provide one on-street public parking space. In addition, the project design accommodates one (1) conforming private parking space and one sub-standard private parking space onsite in the driveway leading to the code compliant 2-car garage. These driveway parking spaces would not impede vehicle travel in the abutting public right-of-way. There are no public sidewalks. Adequate vehicle sight distance exists to access the on-site parking spaces based on the proposed site plan reviewed by Public Works staff.

To maintain emergency access to the neighboring property at 2100 Crestview Drive, the applicant is addressing the existing emergency access stairs and supporting wall that currently encroach into the public right of way. The existing concrete steps will be removed, while the adjacent wall will remain in place. A wall mounted foldable fire access ladder is proposed to replace the steps and provide continued access for emergency personnel. Both the new wall improvements and the ladder system are located within the public right of way, and this is discussed further in the Revocable Encroachment Permit section below. The proposed ladder system has been reviewed and approved 322
322 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

by the Public Works Department, the Building and Safety Division, and the City’s Fire Marshal.

While an unconventional approach, the reviewing departments determined that the wall mounted ladder represents a reasonable and workable solution tailored to the unique physical constraints and emergency access needs present at this location. Staff finds that the proposed design responds directly to the specific conditions of the site and the operational requirements identified by safety personnel

2. Design Articulation: Within the allowable building envelope, the appearance of building and retaining wall mass should be minimized. Articulation techniques including, but not limited to, separation, offsets, terracing and reducing the size of any one element in the structure may be used to reduce the appearance of mass.

The proposed terraced project steps up from Crestview Drive and appears as a four-level structure, consisting of a lower-level garage and three upper levels, including the ADU. The front (west) elevation is articulated through terracing, varied projections, and offsets. The angled garage is set back 16 feet and 26 feet from the front property line at its shortest and longest points, respectively.

There will be only one publicly visible retaining wall along the south property line between the garage and the street. The wall will slope up from the street and will be no taller than 16 feet at the face of the garage remaining pedestrian in scale. The first-level deck is located directly above the garage, and the ADU at this level is set back approximately 42 feet from the front property line. The second-level deck is above the ADU, with the primary residence set back approximately 63 feet.

The third (uppermost) level is set back an additional 3 feet, bringing its setback to approximately 66 feet. With a terraced form and a compact building footprint of 1,569 square feet, the design reduces visual massing and is appropriately articulated.

3. Design Integrity: Consistency with the applicant’s chosen style of architecture should be achieved by the use of appropriate materials and details. Remodels should be harmonious with the remaining existing architecture.

One of the policies of the D/CSP seeks to ensure that “the proposed new residences and modifications to existing residences are compatible with the rustic character of the neighborhood by requiring varied and eclectic architectural styles and moderate scale and mass with low-profile design that respect the topography of the land…” (Policy No.1. pg. III-2.). The proposed project is terraced and built into the hillside and provides contemporary design with rustic colors and materials.

The lower-level garage features a limestone veneer. Board-and-batten siding is used on the first level and portions of the third level, while stucco is applied to the second level and parts of the third to soften the structure’s appearance. The exterior is finished in a rustic Sage Green color. The proposed eclectic architectural style is compatible with the more modern character of the neighborhood.

4. Environmental Context: Development should preserve and, where possible, enhance the city’s scenic natural setting. Natural features, such as existing heritage trees, rock out-cropping, ridgelines and significant watercourses should be protected. Existing terrain should be utilized in the design and grading should be minimized.
323
323 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The site is devoid of significant natural features such as heritage trees, rock outcroppings, ridgelines or natural watercourses. The proposed project includes a net grading export of 1,343 cubic yards, which is consistent with new home development on steep hillside building sites. The amount of grading facilitates a reasonable balance of above and below grade structure thereby reducing the appearance of mass. Impervious surfaces are less than 50% which the City has found to be an acceptable amount for steep hillside lots of this size. Further, based on hydrology reports for the subject property, and a Hydrology Technical memo prepared in 2022, no impacts to the significant modified watercourse are anticipated.

5. General Plan Compliance: The development shall comply with all applicable policies of the General Plan, including all of its elements, applicable specific plans, and the certified local coastal program.

With the concurrently sought variances to encroach into the watercourse, and to not provide the required one on-street public parking space, the proposed project complies. More specifically, the Project complies with goals and policies of the General Plan below, and as evidenced below:

General Plan Policies
Land Use (LU) Policy 2.8 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography and/or other significant onsite resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document.

The subject property is located within the D/CSP area, which features steep topography. The proposed project is compatible and integrated with the natural topographic features as it incorporates articulation techniques such as offsets and terracing into the design. The watercourse on site has been significantly modified through a City installed storm drain and an easement has been established to protect the infrastructure. The proposed project does not have an impact on public views based on the location of the structure built into the hillside. Public views from the abutting roadway are away from the subject property to the south and public views from the street above (Gainsborough) are not affected due to the project being at a much lower elevation.

LU Policy 2.10 Maximize the preservation of coastal and canyon views (consistent with the principle of view equity) from existing properties and minimize blockage of existing public and private views. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.).

The proposed project siting considers previous privacy and view equity concerns and has minimized potential impacts by providing a terraced design, landscaping and siting the building appropriately from the rear setback. The Project has no impact on public views because the public right-of-way (Gainsborough Drive) uphill from the subject property, is at a significantly higher elevation. Public comment with view equity concerns was received by a neighbor located at 785 Gainsborough Drive above the Project site prior to the Concept Review hearing on May 9, 2024, and the Design Review 324
324 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

Board hearing on April 10, 2025. Based on a site visit, it appears the neighbor’s existing landscaping effectively screens the proposed project and already blocks a portion of their ocean view.

Furthermore, in response to the Board’s direction, the third level (uppermost) has been shifted toward the rear by 3 feet to partially address view equity concerns.

LU Policy 3.10 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography or other significant onsite resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document by maintaining the low-profile character of structures.

Require use of appropriate landscaping, special architectural treatments, and siting considerations for projects visible from major highways and arterial streets. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff-top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.).

The site is devoid of significant natural features such as heritage trees, rock outcroppings, ridgelines or natural watercourses. The current project siting is a result of multiple project iterations, and the building design and siting is compatible and integrated with the natural topographic features. The excavation into the hillside makes the 4-level terraced design more low profile and reduces above grade mass. The proposed project includes a net grading export of 1,343 cubic yards which is consistent with new home development on steep hillside building sites. Impervious surfaces are less than 50% which the Board has found to be an acceptable amount for steep hillside lots of this size.

The watercourse on site has been significantly modified through a City installed storm drain and an easement has been established to protect the infrastructure. In addition, based on hydrology reports for the subject property, and a Hydrology Technical (Attachment 5) memo prepared in 2022, no impacts to the significant modified watercourse are anticipated. Public views from the abutting roadway are away from the subject property to the south and public views from the street above (Gainsborough) are not affected due to the project being at a much lower elevation.

LU Policy 7.3 and 10.2 Design and site new development to protect natural and environmentally sensitive resources, such as areas of unique scenic quality, public views, and visual compatibility with surrounding uses and to minimize natural landform alterations. (Same as Policy 10.2.) GOAL:

Protect, preserve, and enhance the community’s natural resources.

The proposed project meets this policy and the facts are discussed in the Environmental Context (No.4) and View Equity (No.16) Design Review criteria and LU Policy 10.2 (Coastal Development Permit Section) and they are incorporated herein by reference.

LU Policy 7.10 Require new construction and grading to be located in close proximity to preexisting development to minimize environmental impacts and growth-inducing potential.

The proposed construction and associated grading is within a mostly developed neighborhood of single-family residences and has no growth inducing potential.

6. Historic Preservation: Destruction or alteration to historic resources should be avoided whenever possible. See Chapter 25.45 for more information.
325
325 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The subject property is a vacant building site and not listed on the City’s Historic Register.

7. Landscaping: Landscaping shall be incorporated as an integrated part of the structure’s design and relate harmoniously to neighborhood and community landscaping themes. View equity shall be an important consideration in the landscape design. The relevant landscaping guidelines contained in the City’s “Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document” should be incorporated, as appropriate, in the design and planned maintenance of proposed landscaping.

The proposed project is located within the Diamond/Crestview neighborhood as described in the City’s Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document. This document includes a set of policies and maintenance guidelines to address the issues of tree maintenance, fire safety, heritage tree preservation, view preservation, scenic highways, water conservation, soil stability, invasive plants, and neighborhood landscape character. The proposed landscape plan includes a mix of new trees (such as Arbutus Unedo and Rhus Integrifolio) and small shrubs while avoiding target species for fire safety considerations. The required landscape open space is 21.55% (1,392 SF) and the project provides 3,299 SF, which includes as area of natural vegetation. The proposed landscape plan was approved by the City’s Landscape consultant on November 29, 2022.

8. Lighting and Glare: Adequate lighting for individual and public safety shall be provided in a manner which does not significantly impact neighboring properties. Reflective materials and appurtenances that cause glare or a negative visual impact (e.g., skylights, white rock roofs, highgloss ceramic tile roofs, reflective glass, etc.) should be avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance in those locations where those surfaces are visible from neighboring properties.

The proposed lighting plan is shown on sheet A1.6 (Attachment 2) and includes a total of 12 light fixtures, such as lantern wall lights,and ceiling lights. Overall, the plan provides low level lighting where needed for safety and efficient operation in outdoor activities, terraces, stairs, and walkways.

9. Neighborhood Compatibility: Development shall be compatible with the existing development in the neighborhood and respect neighborhood character. Neighborhood character is the sum of the qualities that distinguish areas within the City, including historical patterns of development (e.g., structural heights, mass, scale or size), village atmosphere, landscaping themes and architectural styles.

The pattern of development in the neighborhood consists of a mixture of three-level and four-level residences that are stepped into the hillsides with varying architectural styles and rustic exteriors, including mid-century and Mediterranean styles. Similar to other residences in the neighborhood, the proposed building is integrated into the hillside. The applicant proposes a contemporary design with rustic colors and materials that is consistent with the surrounding pattern of development.

10. Pedestrian Orientation: Commercial development design shall enhance and encourage pedestrian uses. Incorporation of articulated building masses, compact open spaces and courtyards, mixed use developments, use of landscaping as part of design, and orientation to pedestrian access should be maximized.
326
326 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

Design Review Criteria for Pedestrian Orientation is related to commercial development and this residential project is not subject to those criteria.

11. Privacy: The placement of activity areas (e.g., decks, picture windows and ceremonial or entertainment rooms) in locations that would result in a substantial invasion of privacy of neighboring properties should be minimized.

Prior to the Concept Review hearing on May 9, 2024, and the Design Review Board hearing on April 10, 2025, staff received a public comment from a neighbor regarding the potential privacy issues the current project may cause. The neighbor located north of the subject property, claimed that the windows on the North elevation of the building are placed directly across from their bedrooms and ocean viewing windows and would therefore infringe on their privacy. Based on staff’s site visits, it appears that existing landscaping at that neighbor’s property screens the Project site and promotes privacy. Moreover, in response to the Board direction to increase screening to address the privacy concerns of the neighbors located to the south and north of the subject property, the applicant proposed additional landscaping consisting of four (4) Arbutus Unedo ‘Strawberry Trees’ as shown on the updated landscape plan (Sheet A-1.5) in Attachment 2. Furthermore, in response to the Board’s direction, the third level (uppermost) has been shifted toward the rear by 3 feet, in order to address the neighbor’s concerns.

12. Public Art: Public art is encouraged and shall be displayed where feasible or required by the Art in Public Places ordinance.

Design Review Criteria for Public Art is related to commercial development and this residential project is not subject to those criteria.

13. Sign Quality: Signs shall be incorporated into the architecture of the structure and shall be made of high quality materials, be simple in design and be visually compatible with the surrounding physical environment in terms of color, scale and size. Use of natural materials in the construction of signs is encouraged.

Design Review Criteria for Signage is related to commercial development and this residential project is not subject to those criteria.

14. Sustainability: New development should consider architecture and building practices which minimize environmental impacts and enhance energy efficiency by: (a) reducing energy needs of buildings by proper site and structural design; (b) increasing the building’s ability to capture or generate energy; (c) using low-impact, sustainable and recycled building materials; (d) using the latest Best Management Practices regarding waste and water management; and (e) reducing site emissions.

New construction is required to meet Title 24 energy and Building Code requirements, which include insulated windows and energy efficient lighting. The applicant will be required to provide proof of compliance. Further, the applicant will be required to reuse, recycle, or divert at least 65 percent of 327
327 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

the project’s construction and demolition debris. Finally, to promote future installation of solar panels, a minimum of 250 square-feet of “solar ready” roof area will be provided.

15. Swimming Pools, Spas, and Water Features: Swimming pools, spas and water features shall be located, designed and constructed where: (a) geology conditions allow; (b) noise produced by circulatory mechanical pumps and equipment is mitigated; and (c) any associated fencing or other site improvements are compatible with neighboring properties.

No pool/spa or other water feature is proposed for this project site.

16. View Equity: The development, including its landscaping, shall be designed to protect existing views from neighboring properties without denying the subject property the reasonable opportunity to develop as described and illustrated in the City’s “Design Guidelines.” The “Design Guidelines” are intended to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property.

Due to the hillside setting and orientation of uphill and downhill homes, significant impacts to private views are not anticipated. The project proposes a rear setback of 51 feet and the roof of the highest level would be approximately 12 feet to 22 feet below the homes above. Three strawberry trees are proposed to be approximately 14 feet from the rear property line, which with a maintained height of 15’ should not impede public or private views over the project site. Prior to the Concept Review Hearing on May 9, 2024, and the Design Review Board hearing on April 10, 2025, staff received view equity concerns from the neighbor located north of the subject property. Based on a site visit, it appears the neighbor’s existing landscaping effectively screens the proposed project and already impedes the ocean view. However, in response to the Board direction to increase screening to address the privacy concerns of the neighbors located to the south and north of the subject property, the applicant proposed additional landscaping consisting of four (4) Arbutus Unedo ‘Strawberry Trees’ as shown on the updated landscape plan (Sheet A-1.5) in Attachment 2.

Furthermore, in response to the Board’s direction, the third level (uppermost) has been shifted toward the rear by 3 feet, effectively addressing the neighbor’s concerns.

Finding No. 2. The physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are designed and located in a manner in overall consistency with all other applicable design guidelines.

Yes. The Project is consistent with the Residential Design Review Guidelines, as explained above.

In addition, the Project is also consistent with Design Guidelines for Hillside Development:

The guidelines are intended to describe the City’s design philosophy for hillside development. The guidelines set forth design principles and parameters and provide the framework for the City’s Design Review process. The guidelines are intended to provide the flexibility in the design review process because the evaluation of building design includes the application of judgement, discretion and independent analysis. Furthermore, the guidelines are intended to provide assistance and direction in the design of hillside projects in a manner that is compatible with the mutual interests of the property owner and the City (Design Guidelines for Hillside Development. Pg. A-2).

The hillside guideline suggests terraced walls with landscape incorporated to break up the appearance of mass. The Project is designed to be terraced into the hillside and is graded 328
328 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

appropriately. The applicant proposes elevated decks that are set back and integrated with the topography, and planter areas to soften the structure’s appearance from street view. Open space between the properties has been provided by providing substantial planter area along the south property line. Furthermore, the setback on the north side was increased due to the sewer easement which allows for additional planting.

Finding No. 3. The physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are characterized by appropriately scaled development, diverse and unique architectural designs, pedestrian orientation, and sensitivity to the natural conditions of the site.

Yes. See Findings above under Design Review Criteria 2, 3, 4, and 9 for design articulation, design integrity, environmental context, and neighborhood compatibility, with the facts provided incorporated herein by reference.

Finding No. 4. The project is consistent with any specific plan or any other specific zoning design review criteria.

The Project is consistent with the Diamond Crestview Specific Plan findings, as detailed below, and based on the concurrently sought variance from the one on-street public parking space.

DIAMOND CRESTVIEW SPECIFIC PLAN FINDINGS.

No. 1 | The proposed use is compatible with surrounding land uses and is consistent with the intent and purpose established in the specific plan;
The intent of the D/CSP is to preserve and enhance this unique area by creating special land use development standards that protect and promote the rustic character of the neighborhood, and that allow for safe and orderly development. The site is designated for single family use including ADUs.

The proposed use is that of a single-family dwelling with an attached two-car garage and is consistent with surrounding single family uses on adjacent properties in the D/CSP area.

No. 2 | The site is adequate in size and shape to accommodate the proposed development; The subject property is 6,450 square-feet and is “fan-like shape”. The proposed program conforms to the maximum allowable building area of the site and the proposed design appears to be neighborhood compatible in terms of mass and scale relative to the natural topography. The overall living and elevated deck areas are consistent with the pattern of development. The design also conforms to development standards (e.g. setbacks, parking, building coverage, etc.) the Board is comfortable with the watercourse setback variance and the design accommodates additional on-site private parking.

No. 3 | All necessary public improvements have been provided or will be required as conditions of approval;
329
329 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

All necessary and required public access improvements have been incorporated in the design and will require separate street improvement plans submitted and approved by Public Works prior to building permit issuance, which is reflected in a condition of approval on this project. The street frontage will be widened along the frontage of the property, providing a greater than the minimum for a 10’ travel lane and 2’ reserve shoulder. The initially proposed on-street parking space along Gainsborough Drive is no longer available and a parking variance has been requested. DCSP Section IV(J)(1) states that upon the development of a building site, “one (1) on-street public parking space shall be provided”. The development standard further adds that “if the provision of on-street parking is found to be infeasible, an equivalent parking space shall be provided on-site. Only upon exhaustion of all possible alternatives to provide a parking space either on-street or on-site and with the approval of a variance, an in-lieu fees as established by the City Council, shall be paid to fund the future construction of parking in the neighborhood”.

To satisfy the requirement, two on-street public parking spaces were proposed. The first parking space, near the intersection of Crestview Drive and Diamond Street, was found infeasible due to inadequate pavement width by the Public Works Department. Adding a designated space in that location would force oncoming cars into one another, increasing the risk of accidents. After coordination with the Public Works Department and the Planning Division, a second potential parking location was identified further to the west of the site close to ‘hairpin’ turn on Crestview Drive. The revised location (and other potential locations along the ‘hairpin’ turn) were ultimately found infeasible due to insufficient pavement width even with creating retaining walls within the public right-of-way. Additionally, any reduction in lane width with the provision of a new public on-street parking space would impede emergency fire access based on input from the City Fire Marshall. A potential public parking space across from the subject property proximate to 2025 Crestview was also examined and deemed infeasible due to the need to construct 6-8-foot-high retaining walls and the loss of existing vegetation creating privacy issues for that property owner.

Additionally, that potential space is close to the hairpin curve in Crestview Drive and existing vegetation can create sight distance constraints and additional safety risks. No other potential locations to accommodate the on-street parking have been identified within 200 feet of the subject property, already significantly far from the property’s line-of-sight.

The Project design provides code-required covered parking in a two-car garage, and it can accommodate two parking spaces on the driveway (a conforming parking space and an additional sub-standard parking space) but these spaces could not accommodate the public as it would prevent access to the garage. The driveway spaces will reduce street parking demands for residents and their guests. All possible alternatives within a reasonable distance of the project site have been exhausted.

Therefore, a variance is being sought with the payment of an in-lieu fee as established by the City Council.

No. 4 | The project will not cause any significant environmental impact and appropriate mitigation measures, if any, have been incorporated into the project or are attached as conditions of approval; The site is devoid of significant natural features such as heritage trees, rock outcroppings, ridgelines or natural watercourses. Based on previous hydrology reports for the subject property, and a Hydrology Technical memo (Attachment 5) prepared in 2022, no impacts to the significant modified 330
330 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

watercourse are anticipated. The property is not located within any sensitive biological overlay, and a geotechnical study shall be required during the building plan check review phase.

No. 5 | The project complies with the development standards and design guidelines of the specific plan; and
With the concurrently sought variance for not providing the required on-street public parking space (D/CSP Section IV(J)(1)), as discussed in more detail under the variance entitlements herein, the project complies with the development standards and design guidelines of the specific plan. The project complies with the Lot Coverage, Setback, Allowable Building Area and Landscape Open Space requirements and meets the Hillside Design Guidelines as it is designed to be terraced and integrated into the hillside, with an appropriate amount of grading to reduce the appearance of mass.

No. 6 | The project mitigates or avoids environmental constraints of the lot as identified in the sitespecific studies and/or overlay maps of high and very high value habitats and unique geological features (Figures 5 & 7).

The site is devoid of significant natural features such as heritage trees, rock outcroppings, ridgelines or natural watercourses. The subject property is not included within any sensitive biological area that would warrant additional review or studies. The site is within the “Undifferentiated Uncertified and Certified Fill” geologic overlay. The vacant lot features a west-facing slope. In general, the Seismic and Public Safety Element of the General Plan designates the specific plan area as having high probability for slope instability due to particular types of geologic formation. Historically, the unstable slopes in the Plan area are the steep, south facing slopes underlain by weak bedrock. A geotechnical study, which is a standard requirement for hillside developmentshall be required during the building plan check review phase to ensure that the proposed construction design and slope remain stable. The site constraints include steep topography, which the proposed design embraces, and a significant modified watercourse which is already protected and preserved through the establishment of an easement.

VARIANCE
The proposed new single-family residence requires the approval of the following variances because the proposed project encroaches into the required 25-foot significant watercourse setback (LBMC Section

25.50.030(D)(4)) and does not provide a required on street public parking space (D/CSP Section IV(J)(1)).

Variances are governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 25.05.025. A Variance is considered by the Design Review Board at a duly noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:

Finding No. 1: There are special circumstances applicable to the property involved, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which cause the strict application of the zoning ordinance to deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification.
331
331 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The lot is triangular in shape and has 40-foot-wide street frontage and also has steep topography (41% slope). These factors significantly limit the buildable area of the lot. The on-site mapped watercourse runs along the north property line and diagonally towards the rear property line and it requires a 25-foot setback buffer. The “watercourse” is not natural and is highly modified due to being piped underground and a small concrete V-ditch. The existing watercourse has also been significantly modified due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property and easements have been established to protect the infrastructure. The watercourse setback is a regulatory constraint that further restricts the development of the property.

The Project site is in the Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan area (D/CSP), which is characterized by steeply sloping developed and non-developed lots accessed by narrow sloping streets. The existing development pattern (e.g. existing driveways, narrow streets, and on-street parking) coupled with existing slopes and vegetation are physical constraints to providing access to lots and to providing additional safe on-street parking spaces. Specifically, the project site is located on a steeply sloping street with limited pavement width proximate to a hairpin curve with. The width of the street in the nearby vicinity is consistently less than 25 feet and some cases less than 18 feet.

D/CSP Section IV(J)(1) states that upon the development of a building site, “one (1) on-street public parking space shall be provided”. The development standard further adds that “if the provision of on-street parking is found to be infeasible, an equivalent parking space shall be provided on-site.

Only upon exhaustion of all possible alternatives to provide a parking space either on-street or onsite and with the approval of a variance, an in-lieu fees as established by the City Council, shall be paid to fund the future construction of parking in the neighborhood.” To satisfy the requirement, two on-street public parking spaces were proposed. The first parking space, near the intersection of Crestview Drive and Diamond Street, was found infeasible due to inadequate pavement width by the Public Works Department. Adding a designated space in that location would force oncoming cars into one another, increasing the risk of accidents. After coordination with the Public Works Department and the Planning Division, a second potential parking location was identified further to the west of the site close to ‘hairpin’ turn on Crestview Drive. The revised location (and other potential locations along the ‘hairpin’ turn) were ultimately found infeasible due to insufficient pavement width even with creating retaining walls. Additionally, any reduction in lane width with the provision of a new public on-street parking space would impede emergency fire access based on input from the City Fire Marshall. A potential public parking space across from the subject property proximate to 2025 Crestview was also examined and deemed infeasible due to the need to construct 6-8-foot-high retaining walls and the loss of existing vegetation creating privacy issues for that property owner. Additionally, that potential space is close to the hairpin curve in Crestview Drive and existing vegetation can create sight distance constraints and additional safety risks. No other potential locations to accommodate the on-street parking have been identified within 200 feet of the subject property, already significantly far from the property’s line-of-sight.

The project design provides code-required covered parking in a two-car garage, and it can accommodate two parking spaces on the driveway (a conforming parking space and an additional sub-standard parking space) but these spaces could not accommodate the public as it would prevent 332
332 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

access to the garage. All possible alternatives within a reasonable distance of the project site have been exhausted. Therefore, a variance is being sought with the payment of an in-lieu fee as established by the City Council.

Finding No. 2: Such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, which right is possessed by other property owners under like conditions in the same vicinity and zone.

Granting the variance to the watercourse setback standard and provision of on-street parking is necessary to permit the construction of a single-family home and appurtenant accessory improvements in a safe and compatibly way consistent with the existing development pattern of the area. This privilege is enjoyed by all developed lots in the D/CSP area (zone) and without variance approval, the property owner is deprived of the ability to develop the buildable lot compatible with the neighborhood.

The property immediately above (803 Gainsborough Drive) the subject site was granted a variance allowing construction of a new single-family dwelling within the 25-foot watercourse setback. That property was identically constrained by the watercourse setback to a significantly modified and nonexistent watercourse and City easements.

Finding No. 3: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience and welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.

The granting of the two variances would not be detrimental to the public because the watercourse is significantly altered, and the proposed design incorporates all the necessary drainage improvements to accommodate stormwater as shown on the plans and addressed in the associated hydrology report for the proposed development. No setback to the “watercourse” is necessary as a result. Providing a public-on-street parking space in the immediate area would increase risks of accidents due to reduced lane width. It would potentially impede fire emergency access and create privacy issues for nearby homes. No feasible location exists in the vicinity of the project site and the applicant will pay an inlieu fee to the City in the amount established by the City Council to provide a space in the larger neighborhood. The project design provides its own required parking, and it accommodates two additional spaces in the driveway, reducing the need for off-site parking. Due to these facts, the grant of variances will not be detrimental to public health, safety, convenience and welfare.

Finding No. 4: The granting of such a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the zoning ordinance or the general plan.

The general purpose of the General Plan and Zoning Code is to provide for the orderly, safe, and compatible development of the City consistent with a community approved land use plan. The General Plan and Zoning Code allow for the development of a single-family home and appurtenant accessory improvements on the project location and the proposed project is consistent with the allowed use.
333
333 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The purpose of the 25-foot watercourse setback is to protect existing or planned development and ensure compatible development and use near mapped watercourses. In this case, the watercourse is significantly modified due to underground piping, and it is a concrete V-ditch. The proposed design incorporates all the necessary drainage improvements to accommodate stormwater as shown on the plans and addressed in the associated Hydrology Technical Memo for the proposed development.

No setback to the “watercourse” is necessary as a result. The project improvements will preserve the drainage carrying capacity of the site, ensuring the safe transference of storm water protecting the subject and neighboring properties thereby protecting the functional significance of the watercourse.

The watercourse has no scenic or ecological value given that it is so highly modified. The watercourse is not connected to a natural watercourse and the concrete v-ditch connects existing channels and drainage pipes, therefore the encroachments within the watercourse setback will not impair the functional, scenic and ecological purposes of the watercourse.

The purpose of the requirement to provide a public on-street parking space with new home development is to increase the parking supply in the D/CSP area that has very limited on-street parking spaces for general use where it is feasible to do so. The specific requirement provides for relief if it is determined that no space can be accommodated. In this case, several proximate locations were examined by the applicant and City staff and all either created unacceptable risks to vehicular or fire access or they would create undue privacy issues due to the loss of vegetation and potential safety concerns due to limited sight distance for vehicles on a steeply sloping street at a hairpin curve. Additionally, the proposed design provides 4 on-site parking spaces, reducing the need for residents and guests of the project to park on the street. Granting relief from the on-site parking requirement will avoid safety and privacy issues and would therefore not be detrimental to the public.

25.50.030(D)(4) Watercourse Encroachment Variances
Variances for the purpose of placing a building or structure within an established watercourse setback area may be granted only when the following findings are made in addition to those listed above.

Finding No. 5: The proposed encroachment will act to preserve, enhance or restore the significance of the watercourse.

The “watercourse” has not maintained its natural form and is highly modified due to being piped underground via a small concrete V-ditch. The existing watercourse has also been significantly modified due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property and easements have been established to protect the infrastructure. The proposed project encroaches into the 25-foot watercourse setback buffer but does not encroach into the established easement and will therefore preserve the significant modified watercourse.

Finding No. 6: The proposed encroachment is not likely to impair the functional, scenic and ecological purposes of the watercourse.

The proposed encroachment is not likely to impair any functional, scenic and ecological purposes of the modified watercourse. There is no scenic or ecological purpose of the mapped watercourse. Man334 334 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

made swales were created 20 years ago after the 1980 Del Mar landslide that occurred uphill from the subject site. Significant modified watercourses are typified by the continuous presence of a topographic swale or depression and the ability to conduct overflow runoff. The respective watercourse is highly modified due to being piped underground and a small concrete V-ditch. The existing watercourse has also been significantly modified due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property and easements have been established to protect the infrastructure.

COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

The proposed new single-family residence requires the approval of a coastal development permit (see LBMC Section 25.07.004). Coastal Development Permits are governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.07. A Coastal Development Permit is considered by the Design Review Board at a duly noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:

Finding No. 1: The project is in conformity with all the applicable provisions of the certified local coastal program, including the following review criteria:

1. The proposed development will not encroach upon any existing physical accessway legally utilized by the public or any proposed public accessway identified in the adopted local coastal program land use plan.

The proposed development will occur on vacant private property (currently only improved with an underground sewer and terrace drains), which is accessible from an improved public street. The public street will be widened slightly and no public sidewalks exist along this narrow street (Crestview Drive). The proposed project is not encroaching on a public coastal accessway, and no new coastal access is proposed.

2. The proposed development will not adversely affect marine resources, environmentally sensitive areas, or archaeological or paleontological resources.

There are no known marine resources, archeological, or paleontological resources in the project area.

The property has been identified and mapped as an environmentally sensitive area (drainage). The existing watercourse has been significantly modified due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property and easements have been established to protect the infrastructure. The revised drainage system no longer uses the V-ditch storm drain and instead collects site runoff, which is piped to the street for conveyance into the City’s storm drain system.

Based on previous hydrology reports for the subject property, and a Hydrology Technical Memo prepared in 2022, no impacts to the significant modified watercourse are anticipated. The project primarily involves a new single-family dwelling, including grading, to a site within an established residential neighborhood and is not expected to result in impacts to any of these resources.

3. The proposed development will not adversely affect recreational or visitor-serving facilities or coastal scenic resources.
335
335 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The site is devoid of significant natural features such as heritage trees, rock outcroppings, ridgelines or natural watercourses. The proposed project is located on a vacant lot designated for single family use by the Local Coastal Program (ADUs are allowed by State law) within an established residential neighborhood and is not adjacent to any recreational or visitor-serving facilities. The proposed project will not impact any coastal scenic resources, such as public ocean views, as it will be stepped into the hillside and the public-right-of-way uphill of the project, Gainsborough Drive, it at a significantly higher elevation.

4. The proposed development will be sited and designed to prevent adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive habitats and scenic resources located in adjacent parks and recreation areas, and will provide adequate buffer areas to protect such resources.

The site is devoid of significant natural features such as heritage trees, rock outcroppings, ridgelines or natural watercourses. The proposed project is located on a vacant lot designated for residential use by the Local Coastal Program within an established residential neighborhood. The property has been identified and mapped as an environmentally sensitive area (drainage). The existing watercourse has been significantly modified due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property and easements have been established to protect the infrastructure. The revised drainage system no longer uses the V-ditch storm drain and instead collects site runoff, which is piped to the street for conveyance into the City’s storm drain system.

Based on previous hydrology reports for the subject property, and a Hydrology Technical Memo prepared in 2022, no impacts to the significant modified watercourse are anticipated. The site is not within any sensitive biological overlay and is not adjacent to any parks or recreation areas.

5. The proposed development will minimize the alterations of natural landforms and will not result in undue risks from geological and erosional forces and/or flood and fire hazards.

The vacant hillside property will be altered for the construction of a new single-family dwelling. The subject site is within the “Undifferentiated Uncertified and Certified Fill” geologic overlay and is not a natural landform and contains no rock outcroppings. The vacant lot features a west-facing slope. In general, the Seismic and Public Safety Element of the General Plan designates the specific plan area as having high probability for slope instability due to particular types of geologic formation. Historically, the unstable slopes in the Plan area are the steep, south facing slopes underlain by weak bedrock. A geotechnical study shall be required during the building plan check review phase to ensure that the proposed construction design and slope remain stable. The project meets the Hillside Design Guidelines as it is designed to be terraced and integrated into the hillside, with an appropriate amount of grading to reduce the appearance of mass.

6. The proposed development will be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and where feasible, will restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

The new residence appears to be compatible with the neighborhood and surrounding hillside development. The Project is designed to be stepped into the hillside and incorporates rustic colors and materials which in consistent with the character of the neighborhood. 336
336 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

7. The proposed development will not have any adverse impacts on any known archaeological or paleontological resource.

There are no known archeological or paleontological resources in the project area.

8. The proposed development will be provided with adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities.

The project does not involve any significant changes to existing facilities. The onsite drainage has been designed to collect and convey site runoff to a swale or closed drain for off-site discharge and collection by the City storm drain system.

9. Other public services, including, but not limited to, solid waste and public roadway capacity have been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed development.

The project does not involve any significant changes to existing public services. The existing public services are considered to be adequate to serve an additional single-family dwelling on a site designated for residential use by the Local Coastal Program.

The project is consistent with all applicable policies of the Certified LCP.

LCP COASTAL VIEW POLICIES (CDP)
Land Use Element (LU) Policy 2.8 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography and/or other significant on-site resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document.

The subject property is located within the D/CSP area, which features steep topography. The proposed project is compatible and integrated with the natural topographic features as it incorporates articulation techniques such as offsets and terracing into the design. The watercourse on site has been significantly modified through a City installed storm drain and an easement has been established to protect the infrastructure. Public views from the abutting roadway are away from the subject property to the south and public views from the street above (Gainsborough Drive) are not affected due to the project being at a much lower elevation. The project meets the Hillside Design Guidelines, as it is designed to be terraced and integrated into the hillside, with an appropriate amount of grading to reduce the appearance of mass.

LU Element Policy 2.9 Require the use of appropriate landscaping, special architectural treatments, and/or siting considerations to protect public views for projects visible from major highways and arterial streets.

The landscaping is appropriate for the neighborhood and complies with the City’s landscape requirements. During the Building plan check review phase, the Building Official may require a fuel modification plan or an Alternative Means & Method report. The project is not visible from Coast 337
337 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

Highway or arterial streets. Public views from the abutting roadway are away from the subject property to the south and public views from the street above (Gainsborough Drive) are not affected due to the project being at a much lower elevation.

LU Element Policy 2.10 Maximize the preservation of coastal and canyon views (consistent with the principle of view equity) from existing properties and minimize blockage of existing public and private views. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.) Policy 2.10 includes: Action 2.10.1 Discourage the addition of second stories in established neighborhoods where view equity has historically been achieved through one-story construction.

The Project is designed to be stepped into the hillside in a tiered fashion and conforms to the allowable buildable area. No obstructions to public views of coastal or canyon resources shall be caused by the proposed project because public views from the abutting roadway are away from the subject property to the south and public views from the street above (Gainsborough Drive) are not affected due to the project being at a much lower elevation. Prior to the Concept Review Hearing on May 9, 2024, and Design Review Board hearing on April 10, 2025, staff received view equity concerns from the neighbor located at 785 Gainsborough Drive, north of the subject property. The proposed project may have a minimal yet inevitable impact on the neighbor’s private views. After a site visit, however, a Board member confirmed that the neighbor’s existing landscaping, which would screen the proposed project, already impedes the ocean view. Furthermore, in response to the Board’s direction, the third level (uppermost) has been shifted toward the rear by 3 feet, promoting partial view retention with the goal to address neighbor’s concerns.

LU Element Policies 7.3 and 10.2 Design and site new development to protect natural and environmentally sensitive resources, such as areas of unique scenic quality, public views and visual compatibility with surrounding uses and to minimize landform alterations.

The building design and siting is compatible and integrated with the natural topographic features as it incorporates articulation techniques such as offsets and terracing into the design with an appropriate amount of grading to reduce the appearance of mass. The watercourse on site has been significantly modified through a City installed storm drain and an easement has been established to protect the infrastructure. Public views from the abutting roadway are away from the subject property to the south and public views from the street above (Gainsborough Drive) are not affected due to the project being at a much lower elevation.

LUE Policy 3.10 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography or other significant onsite resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document by maintaining the low-profile character of structures.

Require use of appropriate landscaping, special architectural treatments, and siting considerations for projects visible from major highways and arterial streets. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff-top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.).
338
338 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

Policy 3.10 requires protection of public views as specified in the Design Guidelines. The Design Guidelines require View Equity for impacts to public views, and require maintenance of view corridors.

View Equity is defined as: View equity means achievement of a fair, reasonable and balanced accommodation of views and competing obstructions such as structures, trees and/or vegetation, privacy and the use and enjoyment of property.

The Design Review Guidelines refers to Public Views:

15.6 Maintain view corridors when feasible.
∙Consider opportunities for public views.
∙Locate a building to retain view opportunities through side yards.

The Project is designed to be stepped into the hillside in a tiered fashion. No obstructions to public views of coastal or canyon resources shall be caused by the proposed project because the public right-of-way (Gainsborough Drive) uphill from the subject property, is at a significantly higher elevation and the subject property is surrounded by developed properties. The side yards meet the required setbacks and retain view opportunities. Three strawberry trees are proposed to be approximately 14 feet from the rear property line, and two strawberry trees have been proposed along the south property line, which with a maintained height of 15’ would not impede views. Prior to the Concept Review Hearing on May 9, 2024, and the Design Review Board hearing on April 10, 2025, staff received view equity concerns from the neighbor located at 785 Gainsborough Drive, north of the subject property. Based on a site visit, it appears the neighbor’s existing landscaping effectively screens the proposed project and already impedes the ocean view. Furthermore, in response to the Board’s direction, the third level (uppermost) has been shifted toward the rear by 3 feet, effectively addressing the neighbor’s concerns
Open Space Conservation Element (OSCE) 7A As best possible, preserve the quality of public views from the hillsides and along the City’s shoreline.

The Project is designed to be stepped into the hillside in a tiered fashion. No obstructions to public views of coastal or canyon resources would be caused by the proposed project because public views from the abutting roadway are away from the subject property to the south and public views from the street above (Gainsborough Drive) are not affected due to the Project being at a much lower elevation.

LCP DOCUMENTS
The project conforms with all the following applicable documents of the Certified LCP.

Design Guidelines for Hillside Development (as adopted by Resolution 89.104) Finding No. 2. Any development located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea is in conformity with the certified local coastal program and with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.
339
339 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The Project is not located between the sea and first public road paralleling the sea.

Finding No. 3. The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act.

As described further herein, the Project does not have any significant adverse environmental impacts.

The Project qualifies for a categorical exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines Section 15303, as discussed further herein.

REVOCABLE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT
The applicant requests approval of a revocable encroachment permit to construct and maintain a ten-foothigh retaining wall and a ten foot high wall mounted foldable fire access ladder within the public right of way. The neighboring property at 2100 Crestview Drive currently has emergency access stairs that extend approximately ten feet into the right of way and are supported by an adjoining retaining wall that is approximately twelve feet in height. During earlier hearings, the respective neighbor expressed concern about the removal of these improvements, which was part of the applicant’s initial proposal. The Board directed the applicant to explore alternatives and indicated a preference for keeping the existing wall in place.

Site excavation is required to develop the project and to access the site, including removal of soil at the entrance of the property that currently supports the neighboring stairs. In response to the Board’s direction, the applicant proposes to remove the existing stairs and replace them with a prefabricated, wall mounted foldable fire access ladder installed on a new retaining wall within the right of way. In an emergency, the ladder can be quickly extended outward to land on the street, as illustrated in Attachment

7. The new wall would support the ladder and retain soil beneath the remaining portion of the neighboring emergency access area. The Community Development Department, Public Works Department, and Fire Department have reviewed the proposal and are supportive of the request.

Finding No. 1: It should be located in a manner that is not hazardous to the traveling public, including motorists, bicyclists and pedestrians.

The proposed retaining wall and foldable fire access ladder are located along the uphill edge of the public right of way where no sidewalks exist and where pedestrian activity is minimal. The improvements do not project into the travel lane and do not reduce the existing roadway width. When in the closed position, the ladder remains mounted flat against the retaining wall and does not encroach into the roadway. In an emergency, the ladder would be deployed by public safety personnel and extended onto the street under controlled conditions. Public Works staff, Building and Safety staff, and the Fire Marshal have reviewed the proposal and determined that the location and design will not create a hazard for motorists, bicyclists, or pedestrians.

Finding No. 2: It should be sufficiently set back from the edge of pavement or street centerline to provide adequate travel, parking, and walking lanes.
340
340 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

The proposed retaining wall and foldable fire access ladder are fully located within the uphill portion of the public right of way and do not extend into the paved roadway. The improvements are set back from the edge of pavement in a manner that maintains the existing travel lane width, which Public Works staff has confirmed is adequate for vehicle circulation. There are no public sidewalks or designated on-street parking spaces along this segment of Crestview Drive, and the proposed encroachments do not alter existing walking or parking conditions. Public Works staff has reviewed the plans and determined that the required clearances for travel, parking, and pedestrian movement are maintained.

Finding No. 3: It should not conflict with preexisting public utility structures, especially hydrants, vault and service meters in any manner that necessitates relocation thereof at public expense or causes any other unacceptable interference, including impediments to the maintenance, relocation or repair of pipelines, conduits, or substructures of any public utility.

Electric utility boxes are located beneath the existing base of the neighboring stairs and adjoining retaining wall. Removal of the existing stairs will improve access to these facilities by eliminating the concrete structure currently situated over them. Public Works staff has reviewed the plans and confirmed that the proposed retaining wall and foldable fire access ladder will not interfere with the utility boxes or associated lines, nor will they require any relocation of utility infrastructure at public expense. The proposed encroachments maintain adequate clearance for ongoing utility maintenance, repair, and future work.

Finding No. 4: It will not preclude public access, use or enjoyment of any area that has historically established such access, use or enjoyment.

The area of the public right of way where the retaining wall and foldable fire access ladder are proposed has not historically been used for public access or recreational purposes. There are no sidewalks, trails, or designated public spaces in this location, and the existing neighboring stairs serve only as emergency access for the private property at 2100 Crestview Drive. The proposed improvements do not alter or restrict any established public access or use patterns, and emergency access for the neighboring property will be maintained through the new foldable ladder system. As a result, the Project does not preclude public access, use, or enjoyment of any area where such access has historically occurred.

Finding No. 5: It is not precedent setting in nature to the extent that it creates a noticeable projection into the streetscape as established by existing construction and improvements on neighboring properties.

The proposed retaining wall and foldable fire access ladder are located along the uphill edge of the public right of way and do not project into the roadway or alter the established streetscape pattern. The existing neighboring stairs already extend into the right of way in this same location, and the proposed improvements represent a reduction in mass and visual presence compared to the existing condition.

The ladder remains folded against the wall when not in use and does not introduce a new form or scale of encroachment along the street. As a result, the project does not create a precedent setting condition or a new type of projection into the streetscape beyond what currently exists on neighboring properties. 341
341 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

Finding No. 6: It does not create structures of unusual or unacceptable appearance, form, shape or height that detract from the general quality of the streetscape.

The proposed retaining wall is similar in scale and appearance to other walls commonly found along hillside streets. The foldable fire access ladder is a functional and compact solution developed to address emergency access needs without leaving a permanent projection into the right of way. When not in use, the ladder remains folded flat against the wall, which reduces its visibility and presence in the streetscape. Although the ladder is a creative solution rather than a typical access feature, its low profile and utilitarian design do not detract from the general visual quality of the street.

THIRD HEARING:

This is the third hearing for the project. Per LBMC 25.05.040 (F)(5), Design review hearings on a proposed residential development project shall usually be limited to a maximum of two hearings. A third hearing may be permitted if the approval authority makes a finding that the applicant followed the authority's direction(s) from the initial hearing in good faith and further design work on the project is in the best interest of the community and the project. On April 10, 2025, the Design Review Board made the respective finding, and continued to project to be heard on July 10, 2025. The approval authority may allow up to two continuances of hearings at which no substantive discussion of the application occurs. At the applicant’s request, the project was continued to the September 11, 2025, Design Review Board meeting and subsequently to the December 11, 2025, meeting, thereby exhausting the allowance for non-substantive continuances. Concept review hearings for residential dwelling units of three units or less are not allowed, except where required by current City ordinance. If required, concept review shall be limited to one hearing and shall count as one of the above limited hearings. The Board may approve the project as proposed, approve it with conditions, or direct staff to prepare a resolution of denial for consideration at a subsequent Design Review Board meeting.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW:

In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, the project is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, in that the project consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small structures. Examples of Class 3 exemptions include single family residence, second dwelling units, duplexes, and multi-family residential structures totaling no more than four dwelling units. The proposed project involves one single-family residence and attached two-car garage and is located in a residential zone.

Therefore, this project fits within a Class 3 exemption.

Further, none of the exceptions outlined in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. The project site contains a drainage area that has been significantly modified and altered due to the installation of a City storm drain constructed on the adjacent contiguous property. Based on previous hydrology reports for the subject property, and a Hydrology Technical memo prepared in 2022, no impacts to the significant modified watercourse are anticipated. Therefore, the Project will not present significant impacts to a particularly sensitive environment. There will be no cumulative impact resulting from successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time. There are no unusual circumstances resulting in a significant impact on the environment. There will be no damage to scenic resources, including trees, historic buildings, rock 342
342 of 485
DR-25-0431, VAR 25-0432, CDP 25-0433, REP 25-2285
10/9/2025

outcroppings or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. The project is not located on a hazardous waste site or any other site included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. The project will not result in significant adverse impacts to historical resources as defined by CEQA. Consequently, additional environmental analysis is not necessary to meet the requirements of the CEQA. Staff will cause to be filed a Notice of Exemption (NOE) with the County Recorder’s Office should the Project receive final approval.

RECOMMENDATION:

Conduct a public hearing and adopt Resolution 25-0431 approving Design Review 25-0431, Variance 25- 0432, and Coastal Development Permit 25-0433, located at 2058 Crestview Drive and finding said action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.

NOTIFICATION:

Pursuant to Title 25 (Zoning) Public Notice, a public hearing notice was mailed on November 19, 2025, more than twenty-one (21) days prior to the hearing date in accordance with Title 25. In addition, a public hearing notice was posted on the project site on November 29, 2025, more than 10 days in advance of the hearing date.

CORRESPONDENCE:

As of the date that the December 11, 2025 Design Review Board agenda was published, staff has not received any public comments on the proposed project; however, public comments from several neighbors were received at prior hearings and they are attached to this report (Attachment 6).

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 25-0431
Attachment 2 – Plans
Attachment 3 – Color and Material Board
Attachment 4 – Colored Elevations and Renderings
Attachment 5 – Hydrology Memo
Attachment 6 – Correspondence
Attachment 7 – REP Exhibits
343
343 of 485
STAMP CRESTVIEW HOUSE 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SITE PLAN SHEET NO. A-1.0 1 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A 4 4 REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 5 6 6 6 6 T.ODRIVEWAY 88.80 3"DIAM. WEEP HOLES T.O.W 113.0'T.O.W 108.0' F.G.104.0' T.O.W 106.5' F.G 108.0' 1 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION FOR 6'X4'X6' HIGH TRASH BIN COMPARTMENT X X' 1 18'-10" (106) (102) (96) (98) (100)(104) (94) (92) (90) (88) (108) (110) (112) (114) (116) (118) (120) (122) (124) (126) (128) (130) (132) (134) (110)(112) (108) (106) (122) (124)(126) (114) (116)(118) (120) (136) (128)(130) (132) (134) (136)(138)(140)(142) (144)(146)(148) (150) (152) (154) (156) (102) (104) (N)RET.WALL 26'-6" CURB END END OF WALL 86.3' T.O DRIVEWAY 1 87.80' T.O DRIVEWAY SECONDARY CONCRETE RET/LANDSCAPING WALL 1 CORTEN STEEL 1 8'-0" 20'-0" 8'-4" 14' 5'-9" UP UP NARROWEST DIST.BTWN PL AND GARAGE 5'(GAR) FYSB 157.0' PROPERTY CORNER 137.6' PROPERTY CORNER 128.13' 138.50' (N)RET.WALL 5% SITE PLAN SCALE 18"=1'-0" 120' (N)RET.WALL 113' 26'-6" (90.5) 85.0 (100.0) 87.6' 10' MIN. 16' MIN. 100.0' PROPERTY CORNER (SW PROPERTY CORNER) E.P. 81.41 CL CL E.P. CRESTVIEWE.P. FD. 3/4" I.P. 82.92 82.5 84.56 84.31 81.60P. CL EXISTING POWER POLE MANHOLE RIM: 81.28 E.P. 82.91 83.80' MIDPOINT AT CL OF STREET (RIGHT OF WAY) 83.68' DRIVEWAY ELEV. AT PRPPERTY LINE LS3064 EXIST. SLOPE EXIST. SLOPE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT EXIST. EDGE OF EXISTING ROAD (FIXED DATUM) 83.00' AT MIDPOINT82.30' ADD NEW BASE AND PAVING TO MEET 26' ROAD WIDTH REQUIREMENT FOR POWER CONNECTION END OF EXISTING PAVING MATCH NEW PAVING WITH NEXT DOOR PROPERTY STREET IMPROVEMENT EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT DRIVE CL. PAVE FD 1" I.P. 86.0' PROPERTY CORNER (E) UTILITY BOX F.F.104.68 CURB END106.5' CONCR.T.O 2:1 F.G.106.0' F.G.108.5' T.O.W 112.5' T.O.W 119.0' 2:1 2:12:1 LOW GRADE SWALE 113.25' BOTTOM OF WINDOWS 119.0 117.0' 2:1
2:1 F.G.120.0' 5% F.G.122.5' T.O.W127.5' F.G.129.0' T.O.W 135.0' T.O.W136.0' T.O.W134' 2:1 SLOPE
5%MIN LANDSCAPING WALL T.O CONCR. 119.0' WALL END. T.O. WALL EL. 118.5' GRADE EL.118.5' F.G 119' 5%MIN SLOPE DECK 1 GARAGE BELOW DECK 2 FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 FD. 1" I.P. LS3064 FD. 3/4" I.P.

40.00' 16'16' GARAGE DOOR SHEET INDEX A-1.0 SITE PLAN SURVEYING PLAN BY JOY CIVIL ENGINEERING A-1.1 PROJECT INFORMATION A-1.2 PROJECT LOCATION PLAN A-1.3 GRADING PLAN A-1.4 STAKING PLAN A-1.5 LANDSCAPING PLAN A-1.6 EXTERIOR LIGHTING PLAN A-1.7 STREET PARKING FD-1 FIRE ACCESS PLAN A-2 GRID PLAN A-3.0 GARAGE FLOOR PLAN A-3.1 GARAGE FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS A-4.0 FLOOR PLAN FIRST LEVEL A-4.1 FIRST LEVEL FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS A-4.2 SLAB PLAN LEVEL 1 A-5.0 FLOOR PLAN SECOND LEVEL A-5.1 SECOND LEVEL FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS A-6.0 FLOOR PLAN THIRD LEVEL A-6.1 THIRD LEVEL FLOOR AREA CALCUALTIONS A-7.0 ROOF PLAN A-8.0 SOUTH ELEVATION A-8.1 NORTH ELEVATION A-8.2 WEST ELEVATION A-8.3 EAST ELEVATION A-9.0 SECTION 1 A-9.1 SECTION 2 A-9.2 SECTION 3 A-9.3 SECTION 4,SECTION 5 NOTE: 1) ALL UTILITIES TO BE ROUTED UNDERGROUND TO THE NEAREST UTILITY BOX. 2) RESIDENTIAL, FIRE SPRINKLERS ARE REQUIRED 3) FENCING, LANDSCAPING OR GRADING WITHIN SANITARY SEWER EASMENT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH MEMO DATED JAN. 1, 2000 BY STEVE W. MAY - CITY ENGINEER. "SEE SHEET FD-1 FOR LBFD CODE REQUIREMENTS"7' SYS PLLCRM NAME RM # AREA SYMBOLS PROJECT DESCRIPTION NEW 3 STORIES SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENCE WITH ATTACHED GARAGE TO AN EXISTING VACANT LOT. PROJECT DATA APN 644-291-70 ZONE DCSP OCCUPANCY R/3/U CONSTRUCTION TYPE VB FULLY SPRINKLED NUMBER OF STORIES 3 W/ATTACHED GARAGE SQUARE FOOTAGES FIRST FLOOR LIVING (ADU) 221.93 SF SECOND FLOOR LIVING 836.11 SF THIRD FLOOR LIVING 923.86 SF TOTAL LIVING 2,009.00 SF GARAGE 476.67 SF FIRST FLOOR DECK 404.80 SF SECOND FLOOR DECK 263.00 SF THIRD FLOOR DECK 115.5 SF TOTAL DECK 783.30 SF OUTSIDE WALKWAY/STAIRS 314 SF LOT AREA 6,450 SF BUILDING FOOTPRINT AREA 1,569 SF PROPOSED LOT COVERAGE 24.3% ALLOWABLE LOT COVERAGE 35+(((8,000-6450)X9)/4000 =38.5% CODE DATA: THIS PROJECT SHALL COMPLY WITH THE 2019 CBC,CMC,CPC & CEC,CRC,CAL-GREEN,CALIFORNIA TITLE 24 ACCESSIBILITY REGULATIONS,2019 TITLE 24 ENERGY REGULATIONS,CITY ORDINANCES,AND STATE AND FEDERAL LAWS AND REGULATIONS AVERAGE LOT DEPTH 133.0' +- R=82.85 L=40.00' 7'-7.5"
SYS VICINITY MAP FYSB/RYSB CALCULATION: PROJECT SITE MAGNETIC ASSUMED C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG T.O.W 134' T.O.W 132.0' F.S 122.5' F.G.121.0' LANDSCAPE STEPS T.O.W 95.0' PLANTER DRIVEWAY F.F EL.88.17' T.O 101.66' T.O 91.05' 2ND STORY DECK CANTILIVER 3RD STORY CANTILIVER 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 A-8.3 1/A-9 3/A-9.2 4/A-9.3 5/A-9.3 1 EDGE OF DRIVEWAY' 5'-5" 1 1 1 FIRE ACCESS NON-COMBUSTIBLE STAIRS SEE SHEET FD-1 1 1 1 1 1 FIRE ACCESS STEP 3' MIN. 1 1 4" DIAM. SEWER LINE CONNECTION TO EXIST. CITY SEWER LINE OR NEW SEWER LINE IN THE CITY EASEMENT 1 3'-0" EASEMENT ACCESS UNDERGROUND SANITARY SEWER AND STORMDRAIN AND 7'-0" TOTAL OF ACCESS NON-EXCLUSIVE EASEMENT RIGHT OF WAY 7'-0" ACCESS EASEMENT 1 21' C.L CITY MAPPED OLD WATERCOURSE 1 0 END OF WALL 86.3' T.O DRIVEWAY 1 T.O.W 102.0' 1 87.80' T.O DRIVEWAY 108.0' T.O. WALL 1 ALTERNATIVE LOCATION FOR 6'X4' TRASH BIN COMPARTMENT T.O.W 95.0' 2 A IF THE AVERAGELOT DEPTH IS 131.50' THEN 40% X 131.50'=52.60' B IF THE MINIMUM FYSB (HOUSE)=8'AND IF 52.6'=FYSB+RYSB THEN RYSB=52.6'-8'=44.6' C THEREFORE THE "REQ/ALLOWED"FYSB=8' (HOUSE);5' (GARAGE) AND RYSB=44.6'

61.54' 3' 8'(HOUSE) FYSB MAIN CONCRETE. RET.WALL SECONDARY CONCRETE RET/LANDSCAPING WALL 1 1 CORTEN STEEL CORTEN STEEL 1 5' 5'SY SB 1 44'-6"RYSB 1 5'SYSB AC CONDENSER RHEEM RP1448A 35"X33.75"X33.75" 55 DB WITH TIMER PROVIDE INTERNAL SOUND BLANKET AND SHOCK ABSORTION PAD 1 CL EXIST. PAVED AREA 3 20'-0" 3 3 3 3' 10% SLOPE 3 44'-6" 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 3/A-9.2 5/A-9.3 D/A-1.3 3 (*)EXISTING TEMPORARY TERRACE DRAIN EXCAVATION SUBJECT TO CHANGE IN CONNECTION TO DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY BY THE OWNER.PER EASEMENT AGREEMENT ORANGE COUNTY RECORDING BK13743 PG 1986-1990 DRIVEWAY WALL VIEW NTS

24.2' T.O.W 113.0' T.O.W 102.0' 9' 6' 6' 8' TRASH BIN COMPARTMENT 88.8' TOP OF DRIVEWAY CONCRETE (TYP) SMOOTH FINISH

14.0' 88.0' T.O FINISHED GRADE CORTEN STEEL 1
4' 4' 4' 4' 4' 4' PLANTER LIVE ROOF 5%MIN SLOPE 44'-6" RYS LINE CONCR. LANDING 14' ROOF OF PRIMARY STRUCTURE DECK 3 47'-9" AVERAGE REAR SET BACK 1 1'-7" 3'-2" CL CRESTVIEW DRIVE ROW 3 FG86.30 TW100.00FG100.90 104.46 TW TW110.27 EG 86.28 TC86.67 FS86.05 (E)V-GUTTER 3' 1'7' 15'-4"20'
6'-1" 4'-1" CONCR. DRIVEWAY PER CITY STD (N)ASPHALT PAVING PER CITY STD REMOVE (E)STEPS EXISTING STEPS AND WALL IN THE CITY STREET R.O.W. STEPS TO BE DEMO WALL TO BE LEFT IN PLACE WALL MOUNTED FOLDING STEEL LADDER W/ BRAKE AWAY LOCK BY GLOBAL INDUSTRIAL OR SIMILAR FOR FIRE DEPT ACCESS ONLY (N)WALL 1'+/- 2'+/- (N)LADDER 4'-1" 88.0' 87.6' TOP OF WALL EL 98.0' OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 344
345
345 of 485
STAMP CRESTVIEW HOUSE 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 PROJECT SHEET NO. A-1.1 INFORMATION 3 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 5 6 6 CITY R.O.W E.P. 82.5 CRESTVIEW DRIVE C C C E.P. 81.41 CL CL E.P. FD 1" I.P. 82.92 84.56 84.31 81.60P. CL FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 EDGE OF EXISTING ROAD 8'-8" ACCESS TO STAGING AND CONSTRUCTION EXISTING WALL AND STEPS PROTRUDING INTO CITY ROW AT 2100 CRESTVIEW DRIVE AREAS TO BE TEMPORARY, SHORED AND GRADED FOR PARKING AND MATERIALS. SHORING TO BE APPROVED BY BUILDING AND SAFETY. (N)RET.WALLS 5' MAX. HIGH. C R=82.85' L=40.00' MAGNETIC ASSUMED A) CONSTRUCTION EQUIPMENT PARKING B) CONSTRUCTION MATERIALS C) CONSTRUCTION PARKING SPACES D) GARAGE AREA FOR TEMPORARY STAGING 1 @ 10' X 20' 1 @ 15' X 20' 9' X 20' EACH 17.33' X 18' D E.P. CL 82.92 81.60P. CONSTRUCTION STAGING PLAN PLAN SCALE 3/16"=1'0" (N)LANDSCAPING WALL 3' HIGH MAX. GARAGE AREA BELOW FIRE ACCESS PATH FIRE ACCESS PATH 1 1 ACCESS TO STAGING AND CONSTRUCTION DECK 1 DECK 3 PRIMARY STRUCTURE
DECK 2 A C 14'-0" DRIVE 85.17' DRIVEWAY ELEV. AT PRPPERTY LINE 88.17' ADD NEW BASE AND PAVING TO MEET 26' ROAD WIDTH REQUIREMENT SIDE YARD SETBACK/ GARAGE FLOOR PLAN SCALE 14"=1'0" 20'2" 20'4" FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 EXISTING NEIGHBOR'S STEPS AND WALL (2100 CRESTVIEW DR) TO BE PROTECTED IN PLACE OR DEMOLISHED-PART IN THE CITY ROAD R.O.W EDGE OF EXISTING ROAD (N)RET.WALLS 5' MAX. HIGH. PL PROPERTY CL CITY R.O.W PL NARROWEST DIST.BTWN PL AND GARAGE 1 15%SLOPE MAX 10% SLOPE 8'-8" 13' 8'-4" 5'-9"

CRESTVIEW
DRIVE
R=82.85' L=40.00' GRADIENT DRIVEWAY 15%/10% MAGNETIC ASSUMED THE PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DESIGN CONFORMS TO THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY IN THAT IT IS ALIGNED WITH MAJOR SE/NW DOWN SLOPE AND ITS MASS IS STEPPED DOWN THE SLOPE IN DESCENDING LEVELS AND ROOF LINES. THE EXISTING TOPOGRAPHY AT THE FRONT PROPERTY LINE ENCROACHES THE EDGE OF THE TRAVEL LINE ON CRESTVIEW DRIVE LEAVING MINIMAL PAVED SHOULDER BEYOND THE TRAVEL LINE. THE NORTHWEST-FACING PARCEL IS FAIRLY STEEP (1.7:1) AND IS SURROUNDED ON ALL SIDES BY EXISTING RESIDENCES: ELEVATIONS RANGED FROM 86 FEET AT THE SITE'S NORTHERNMOST POINT POINT (AT CRESTVIEW DRIVE) TO 157 FEET AT THE SOUTHERNMOST POINT. THE SITE DOES NOT INCLUDE ANY STREAMBEDS OF SEASONAL DRAINAGE COURSES.THE PROPERTY IS ALREADY IMPARED ON ALL SIDES BY EXISTING DEVELOPMENT AND IS NOT WILDLIFE CORRIDOR AS STATED IN STAFF LETTER FROM JULY 25,2013 "THE PROJECT MITIGATES OR AVOIDS ENVIRONMENTAL CONSTRAINTS OF THE LOT AS IDENTIFIED IN THE SITE-SPECIFIC STUDIES AND/OR OVERLAY MAPS OF HIGH OR VERY HIGH VALUE HABITATS AND UNIQUE GEOLOGICAL FEATURES . NO PROTECTED OAKS TREES OR BLACK WALNUT TREE IS PRESENT WITHIN PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT . SEE PROJECTS SOIL REPORT AND DRAINAGE REPORT FOR OTHER CHARACTERISTICS. NO ROCK OUTCROPPING ON THE PROPERTY SIDE YARD SETBACK/ 5'9" MANHOLE RIM: 81.28 POWER POLE E.P. 81.41 CL CL E.P. FD 1" I.P. E.P. 82.92 82.5 84.56 84.31 81.60P. CL FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 REAR YARD SETBACK 49.5' FD. 1" I.P. LS3064 FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 SLOPE 31'1" SIDE YARD SETBACK/ EASEMENT 7'-0" 7' CONSTRAINT ANALYSIS PLAN SCALE 116"=1'0" 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA (N)RET.WALLS 5' MAX. HIGH. A EDGE (E)PAVEMENT C FIRE ACCESS PATH FIRE ACCESS PATH 1 1 ACCESS TO STAGING AND CONSTRUCTION VIEW CORRIDOR VIEW CORRIDOR UP UP 17'-6" FRONT YARD SETBACK 8'-5" 5'-9" 8'-8" X 18' PARKING 8'-8" X 18' PARKING 14'-0" OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 346
STAMP CRESTVIEW HOUSE 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 PROJECT SHEET NO. A-1.2 LOCATION PLAN 4 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 6 OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK GAINSBOROUGH DRIVE 74 73 72 71 69 146 70 MAIN HOUSE OCCUPIED 2100 2058 777 785 803 145 144 143 59 75 OCCUPIED OCCUPIED GARAGE AREA BELOW 60 CRESTVIEW DRIVE +/-44'-0" OCCUPIED OCCUPIED 821 GAINSBOROUGH DRIVE PROJECT LOCATION PLAN SCALE 332"/1'0" VIEW CORRIDOR VIEW CORRIDOR VIEW CORRIDOR +/-30'-1"
+/-43'-8" +/-21'-3"
347
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 GRADING PLAN SHEET NO. A-1.3 CRESTVIEW HOUSE PRELIMINARY 5 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A 5 REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 6 C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE ABANDDONED EXIST. CONCRETE DITCH 7'-0" EASEMENT AND SETBACK 157.0' PROPERTY CORNER 137.6' PROPERTY CORNER 128.13' 138.50' (N)RET.WALL 5% PRELIMINARY GRADING PLAN SCALE 18"=1'-0" 120' (N)RET.WALL 113' (90.5) 85.0 (100.0) 85.5610' MIN. 16' MIN. 100.0' PROPERTY CORNER E.P. 81.41 CL CLE.P.CRESTVIEWE.P. FD. 3/4" I.P. 82.92 82.5 84.5684.31 81.60P. CL EXISTING POWER POLE MANHOLE RIM: 81.28 E.P. 82.91 83.80' MIDPOINT AT CL OF STREET (RIGHT OF WAY) 83.68' DRIVEWAY ELEV. AT PROPERTY LINE LS3064 EXIST. SLOPE EXIST. SLOPE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT EXIST. EDGE OF EXISTING ROAD (FIXED DATUM) 83.00' 82.30' ADD NEW BASE AND PAVING TO MEET 26' ROAD WIDTH REQUIREMENT FOR POWER CONNECTION END OF EXISTING PAVING MATCH NEW PAVING WITH NEXT DOOR PROPERTY STREET IMPROVEMENT EXISTING NEIGHBOR'S WALL. EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT DRIVE CL. PAVE FD 1" I.P. 86.0' PROPERTY CORNER (E) UTILITY BOX T.ODRIVEWAY 88.80 3"DIAM. WEEP HOLES T.O.W 113.0' T.O.W 108.0' F.G.104.0' T.O.W 106.5' 2:1 F.G.108.5' F.G.106.0' T.O.W 112.5' T.O.W 119.0' 2:1 2:1 2:1 LOW GRADE SWALE 113.25' BOTTOM OF WINDOWS 119.0 117.0' 2:1
2:1 5%F.G.121.0' F.G.120.0' F.G.122.5' T.O.W127.5' F.G.129.0' T.O.W 135.0' T.O.W136.0' T.O.W127.5' LANDSCAPE STEPS 120.0' T.O.W122.0' 4' 2:1 2:1 SLOPE
5%MIN LANDSCAPING WALL T.O CONCR. 119.0' 5%MIN SLOPE

61.54'
FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 FD. 1" I.P. LS3064
FD. 3/4" I.P.

40.00' T.O.W 100.5' 16' GARAGE DOOR SITE WORK GRADING OUTSIDE STRUCTURAL FOOTPRINT (CYS) TOTAL (CYS) AVERAGE LOT SLOPE :41.00% 7' MAGNETIC ASSUMED GARAGE PAD EL. 87.67' PAD EL.104.0' ALL CUT PAD EL.115.0' FILL CUT FIRE ACCESS NON-COMBUSTIBLE STAIRS SEE SHEET FD-1 EG CUT FILL NET EXPORT INSIDE STRUCTURAL FOOTPRINT-INCLUDING GARAGE (CYS) 571 12559 853 69754 1424 811343 84' 85' 86' 87' 88' 108' 110' 112'114' 116' 120' 122'124' 126' 127' 130' 118' 128' 104' 106' 108' 110' 112' 114' 116' 118' 122' 120' 124' 126' T.O.W 127.5' T.O.W 132.0' F.S 122.5' 1 ADJACENT RESIDENCE 1 ADJACENT RESIDENCE 1 ADJACENT RESIDENCE 1 PUBLIC ROW 1660 BB' A A' D D' UNDERSLAB APROX. BOUNDARY OF CUT APROX. BOUNDARY OF CUT 166 CL EXIST. PAVED AREA CL CRESTVIEW DRIVE ROW 3 3 CUT FILL 33 WALL END.LANDSCAPING GRADE EL.118.5' F.G 119' 1479 INCL.PUBLIC ROW 18'-10" (106) (102) (96) (98) (100)(104) (94) (92) (90) (88) (108) (110) (112) (114) (116) (118) (120) (122) (124) (126) (128) (130) (132) (134) (110)(112) (108) (106) (122) (124)(126) (120) (114) (116)(118) (136) (128)(130) (132) (134) (136)(138)(140)(142) (144)(146)(148) (150) (152) (154) (156) (102) (104) (N)RET.WALL 26'-6" CURB END 87.80' T.O DRIVEWAY SECONDARY CONCRETE RET/LANDSCAPING WALL 8'-0" 1 14' 8'-8" 22'-4" 28'-3" 4'-2" 6' 17' 10'-1" 21'-8" 6'-6" 10'-2" 21'-3" 21'-8" 10'-2" 26'-11" 31'-5" OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 85.91' 15% MAX. 10% MAX. 84.31 E.P EXISTING 88.17' 88.25' GAR.FS. 84.56 1% MIN C.L STREET EXISTING 10'-1" 17' EXISTING ASPHALT STREET 88.0' NEW ASPHALT DRIVEWAY IN PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY NEW GRASS PAVE-2 SYSTEM DRIVEWAY 88.45' GAR.FS. 16'-1" PL DRIVEWAY SECTION D-D' SCALE 18"=1'-0" CL

CRESTVIEW VIEW
DRIVE
6"MIN 98.0' 106.0' 108.2' 104.35' TOP OF GARAGE 22'-4"
P/L 2.52 20' 100 104 108 112 116 120 124 128 132 9692888482 GARAGE PAD 87.7' CL CRESTVIEW VIEW DRIVE PL 84.0' 87.8' TEMP. EX=87.5' 21'-8" TEMP.EX=87.7' TEMP.EX=96.0' 128.0' BACKYARD CUT AND FILL ATLANDSCAPING WALLS 10' 17' BACK OF THE HOUSE EXCAVATION TEMP. EX=105.0' TEMP. EX=107.0' TEMP. EX=105.0' TEMP. EX=114.0' 17' SECTION A-A' SCALE 18"=1'-0" EXISTING GRADE 85.1' 98.0' 106.0' 10'-8" 8'-11" 26'-11" 21'-3" 21'-8" 22'-7" 31'-5" 100 104 108 112 116 120 124 128 (E)GRADE 126.0' 10' VARIES PL 5'
5' PL 3' 7' (E)GRADE 103.0' MIN. SECTION B-B' SCALE 18"=1'-0" T.OW 119.0' F.G 113.0' F.G 104.0' F.G 121.0'F.G 114.0' TEMP.EXC 101.0' 104.0' TEMP.EXC 101.0' 2' 31'-11" DITCH ELEV. 101.5' 348
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 STALKING PLAN SHEET NO. A-1.4 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 6 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 06.18.25 SCALE N/A 4 REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 55 5 5 ABANDDONED EXIST. CONCRETE DITCH 7'-0" EASEMENT 157.0' PROPERTY CORNER 137.6' PROPERTY CORNER 128.13' 138.50' (N)RET.WALL 5% STAKING PLAN SCALE 18"=1'-0" 120' (N)RET.WALL 113' 8'-0" (90.5) 85.0 (100.0) 85.56 18'-10" 100.0' PROPERTY CORNER E.P. 81.41 CL CL E.P. CRESTVIEWE.P. FD. 3/4" I.P. 82.92 82.5 84.56 84.31 81.60P. CL EXISTING POWER POLE MANHOLE RIM: 81.28 E.P. 82.91 83.80' MIDPOINT AT CL OF STREET (RIGHT OF WAY) 83.68' DRIVEWAY ELEV. AT PRPPERTY LINE LS3064 EXIST. SLOPE EXIST. SLOPE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT EXIST. EDGE OF EXISTING ROAD (FIXED DATUM) 83.00' 82.30' ADD NEW BASE AND PAVING TO MEET 26' ROAD WIDTH REQUIREMENT FOR POWER CONNECTION END OF EXISTING PAVING MATCH NEW PAVING WITH NEXT DOOR PROPERTY STREET IMPROVEMENTEXISTING NEIGHBOR'S WALL TO BE DEMOED IN THE CITY STREET R.O.W EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT DRIVE CL. PAVE FD 1" I.P. 86.0' PROPERTY CORNER (E) UTILITY BOX T.O DRIVEWAY 88.80 F.F.104.68 T.OCONCRETE CURB END T.O.W 113.0' T.O.W 108.0' F.G.104.0' T.O.W 106.5' 2:1 F.G.106.0' F.G.108.5' T.O.W 112.5' T.O.W 119.0' 2:1 2:1 2:1 LOW GRADE SWALE 113.25' BOTTOM OF WINDOWS 119.0 117.0' 2:1
2:1 5% F.G.120.0' F.G.122.5' T.O.W127.5'
4' F.G.129.0' T.O.W 135.0' T.O.W136.0' T.O.W127.5' 4' 2:12:1 SLOPE
5%MIN LANDSCAPING WALL T.O CONCR. 119.0' WALL END. T.O. WALL EL. 118.5' GRADE EL.118.5' F.G 119' 5%MIN SLOPE PRIMARY STRUCTURE DECK 1 DECK 2 DECK 3

61.54'
FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 FD. 1" I.P. LS3064
FD. 3/4" I.P.

40.00' T.O.W 100.5' 16' 16' GARAGE DOOR NOTE: 1. STAKE POINTS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS TABLE FALL BELOW EXISTING GRADE. Pole Number Base Grade Elevation*(Ft) Story Pole Height from Proposed Maximum Base Grade Elevation(Ft) Elevation(Ft) *If standard base grade elevation nails are not feasible because of the existence of rocks, paving or existing structural improvements, then the surveyor or engineer may use an alternative method of establishing horizontal and vertical control for story poles that can be observed in the field. The surveyor or engineer shall describe the control method used directly on the full-size staking plan. Such alternative methods may include painted markings. It is also recognized that sometimes it may not be feasible to set poles due to unforeseen circumstances. In that case, please identify the story poles that were not established and an explanation as to the reason. 12345678 (SEE NOTE) 9101112131415161718192020-1 2122 Name of Surveyor or Engineer: Datum Benchmark: Date: Site Address: Story Pole Construction Notes Table 444546474849505152535455565758596061626364656636673768394038424341707169727375 81.28 SMH 06.18.252058 Crestview Drive, Laguna Beach, CA 92651 74 7' 1 9 10 11 8 12 16 17 19 15 14 13 6 7 5 4 3 2 18 MAGNETIC ASSUMED 7' 7' 7' 5'-3" 5'-3" 13'-5"20'-9"21'-4" 21'-9" 7'-10"
8'-11"
7'-5"
7'-11"
13'-10" 3RD STORY CANTILIVER 3RD STORY POLE CANTILIVER 2ND STORY CANTILIVER 5'-5" C.B. 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG T.O.W 127.5' T.O.W 132.0' F.G.121.0' NON-COMBUSTIBLE STAIRS SEE SHEET FD-1 20-1 1'-7" 1'-9" 2 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 130.18 105.16 119.18 119.18 106.5 108.2 108.2 95.0 108.0 119.18 2.MAN MADE DITCH SUBJECT TO LANDOWNER MODIFICATION AS PER BK13743PG 1986 20 2221 116.4 21.3 130.5 7.2 125.0 12.7 126.0 11.7 122.2 15.5 113.0 26.2 114.0 23.7 107.0 30.6 (see note 2) 116.0 21.7 112.0 25.7 103.4 26.8 99.5 5.7 106.7 11.0 117.0 2.2 115.0 -8.5 100.0 8.2 111.0 -2.8 89.2 5.8 114.0 -6.0 114.0 5.2 108.5 18.2 126.68 113.5 5.7 119.18 112.0 7.2 119.18 14'-1" 16'MIN. 10' MIN. (106) (102) (96) (98) (100)(104) (94) (92) (90) (88) (108) (110) (112) (114) (116) (118) (120) (122) (124) (126) (128) (130) (132) (134) (110)(112) (108) (106) (122) (124)(126) (120) (114) (116)(118) (136) (128)(130) (132) (134) (136)(138)(140)(142) (144)(146)(148) (150) (152) (154) (156) (102) (104) (N)RET.WALL 26'-6" 87.80' T.O DRIVEWAY SECONDARY CONCRETE RET/LANDSCAPING WALL 1 8'-4" 8'-5" 4'-2" 6' 33'-1" 20'-7"
5'-9" C032946 Exp.06-30-2026 Z A E W.C J J OW M I C K I A K SCIVIL E E F TS T AT O E I N A N R I G EEN CALI FOR F D RO P ESSIONA ER L REGI MACIEJ WOJCIECH CZAJKOWSKI S C032946/06.30.26 06.18.25 OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 349
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 LANDSCAPE PLAN SHEET NO. A-1.5 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 7 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A 5 5 5 REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 PRELIMINARY LANDSCAPE PLAN SCALE 18"=1'-0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED FUEL MODIFICATION: THE PROPOSED NATIVE VEGETATION CONSIST OF LOW FIRE FUEL SPECIES. THE SITE IS SURROUND BY RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT WITH DOMESTICATED, LOW FUEL MODIFIED LANDSCAPES, REDUCING THE POTENTIAL FOR WILDLAND FIRE. IN ADDITION THE PROPOSED VEGETATION SHALL HAVE A PERMANENT IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND RECEIVE REGULAR MAINTENANCE TO REDUCE FIRE FUELS. THE OWNER SHALL PROVIDE THE FOLLOWING FUEL MODIFICATION: 1. BI-ANNUALLY (April & Oct.), THE PROPERTY OWNER SHALL REMOVE ALL DEAD, DYING, HIGH FUEL VEGETATION INCLUDING NATIVE SAGES, ARTEMESIA, BUCKWHEAT, ANNUAL GRASSES AND BROADLEAF WEEDS. OAK LEAF LITTER IS ALLOWED TO REMAIN. 2. ON A MONTHLY BASIS THE OWNER SHALL REMOVE ALL WEEDS ON SITE AND CHECK THE IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO ENSURE PROPER OPERATIONS. 3. THE OWNER SHALL NOT STORE FLAMABLE MATERIALS ADJACENT TO HOUSE WALLS OR UNDER DECKS, EAVES OR OVERHANGS. 4. THE OWNERS SHALL NOT ALLOW SHRUB VEGETATION TO GROW ONTO HOUSE WALLS OR UNDER DECKS, EAVES OR OVERHANGS. NOTES: 1) PROPOSED VEGETATION IS NATIVE TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA. AND MOST ARE INDIGENOUS TO THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH. 2) LANDSCAPING WILL BE IRRIGATED BY A PERMANENT AUTOMATIC DRIP IRRIGATION SYSTEM. 3) SEE SHEET A-1 FOR ADDITIONAL EXISTING LOT CONDITIONS & LOT INFORMATION NOT TO SCALE SHRUB PLANTING DETAIL ROOTBALL DIA. DEPTH ROOTBALL 2" 2" BERM COMPACTED BASE; NATIVE SOIL CROWN OF SHRUB 1" ABOVE ADJACENT FINISH GRADE ROOTBALL, SET CROWN COMPACT BACKFILL MIX: FINISH GRADE KEEP CROWN OF TREE CLEAR OF MULCH. 2" DEEP MULCH GROUND COVER SHRUB (PER PLAN) 2x 15% BY VOL. GOOD QUALITY HUMUS/COMPOST 1/8 POUND OF AG. GYPSUM ROOTBALL TREE PLANTING DETAIL SLOPE VEGETATION ROOTBALL DEPTH 18" 2x 24" 12" BETWEEN STAKE & TREE 2" DIA X 10' LONG LODGE POLE STAKES 2" DEEP MULCH GROUND COVER KEEP CROWN OF TREE CLEAR OF MULCH. COMPACT BACKFILL MIX: ROOTBALL, SET CROWN 1" ABOVE ADJACENT FINISH GRADE COMPACTED BASE; NATIVE SOIL 1 POUND OF AG. GYPSUM 15% BY VOL. GOOD QUALITY HUMUS/COMPOST FINISH GRADE NOT TO SCALE DIA 2" "E-ZEE" TIE CROWN OF TREE 2" BERM TREE (PER PLAN) PLANTER 1 NATIVE GRASSES PLANTED ON DISTURBED GROUND (N) ARBUTUS UNEDO TREE, TYP (3 TOTAL) WEATHER BASED IRRIGATION CONTROLLER HOSE BIB DECK 1 104.68' F.F DECK 2 115.68' F.F DECK 3 126.68' F.F ROOF 137.68' F.F FIRE ACCESS PATH FIRE ACCESS PATH GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM 1 1 1 1 FIRE ACCESS STEP 3' MIN. 1 3' WIDE FIRE ACCESS STEP DOWN 1 3' MIN FIRE ACCESS 1 LANDSCAPE OPEN SPACE REQUIRED 15% + (( 6450-2500)X 20 12000 =21.58% OR 1,392.13SF 1 GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM 1 1 1 GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM 2 2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 5' AVERAGE +/-60' MIN.LANDSCAPE OPENSPACE PROVIDED 52'X52'=2,704.00 SF (AREA A) 83'X5'= 415.00 SF (AREA B) 36'X5'= 180.00 SF (AREA C) TOTAL= 3,299.00 SF 1,392.13 SF 3 UP UP NATIVE VEGETATION GREEN ROOF AND PLANTER TREE SPOT LIGHTS COOL WHITE DOWN LIGHTS (MOONLIGHT) PATH LIGHTS LIGHTING LEGEND FOR HOUSE LIGHTING SEE DWG A-1.6 * * ** * * * * * GREEN ROOF ARBUTUS LINEDO (STRAWBERRY TREE) ARBUTUS LINEDO (STRAWBERRY TREE) ARBUTUS LINEDO (STRAWBERRY TREE) OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 GENERAL FREELANDBUCK NOTES 1. FOR INFORMATION ON TREE REMOVALS AND NEW TREE INSTALLATIONS SEE ARBORIST REPORT 2. PRIOR TO ANY EXCAVATION NEAR PROTECTED TREES, A SITE MEETING IS TO BE CONVENED BY THE CONTRACTOR TO COORDINATE EXCAVATION W. THE ARCHITECT & ARBORIST 3. IT WILL BE THE CONTRACTORS SOLE RESPONSIBILITY TO PROTECT TREES ON SITE. ANY DAMAGE WILL BE MITIGATED BY CONTRACTOR OR TREE REPLACED AT THE CONTRACTORS EXPENSE 4. SEE SOIL REPORT RECOMMENDATIONS FOR GRADED SLOPES 1. LID PLANTER (15.8 SF) FOR TRIBUTARY AREA FOR UNCOVERED BALCONIES. 2. LID PLANTER (43.2 SF) FOR TRIBUTARY ARE FOR ROOF KEYNOTES LANDSCAPE (TO BE SPRINKLERED) BROOM FINISHED CONCRETE (125 SF) PERMEABLE HARDSCAPE HARDWOOD DECKING LEGEND DECK 1
DECK 3
DECK 2 LANDSCAPE LIGHTING PLAN SCALE 1/16"=1'-0" (75) (75) (75) (60) (60) (60) (75) (75) (75) (75) FIRE ACCESS PATH FIRE ACCESS PATH LANDSCAPE AREA B LANDSCAPE AREA C LANDSCAPE AREA A LANDSCAPE AREAS LAYOUT SCALE 1/16"=1'-0" PRIMARY STRUCTURE * * * * * * * * UP UP DECK 1
DECK 3
DECK 2 PRIMARY STRUCTURE UP UP
350
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 LIGHTING PLAN SHEET NO. A-1.6 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 8 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 DUPLEX CONVENIENCE OUTLET FLOOR OUTLET HOUSE LIGHTING SCHEDULE CEILING MTD. FIXT. W/INCANDESCENT LAMP. LAMP PLUS - MISSION LODGE COLLECTION BRONZE FLUSH OUTDOOR. WALL MTD. FIXT. W/INCANDESCENT LAMP. LAMP PLUS - MISSION LODGE COLLECTION BRONZE HIGH LANTERN. WALL MTD. FIXT. W/INCANDESCENT LAMP. LAMP PLUS - MISSION LODGE COLLECTION BRONZE HIGH LANTERN. (60) (75) SYMBOL DESCRIPTION/MANUFACTURER QUANTITY WATTS VOLTAGE MOUNTING 3 120 WALL MOUNT 7 120 WALL MOUNT 2 120 CEILING MOUNT NO MORE THAN 4 WATTS OR 300 LUMENS PER LIGHT NO MORE THAN 4 WATTS OR 300 LUMENS PER LIGHT NO MORE THAN 4 WATTS OR 300 LUMENS PER LIGHT NO MORE THAN 4 WATTS OR 300 LUMENS PER LIGHT LANDSCAPE LIGHTING PLAN SCALE 1/8"=1'-0" TREE SPOT LIGHTS COOL WHITE DOWN LIGHTS (MOONLIGHT) PATH LIGHTS LIGHTING LEGEND * DECK 1
DECK 3
DECK 2 (75) (75) (75) (60) (60) (60) (75) (75) (75) (75) FIRE ACCESS PATH FIRE ACCESS PATH PRIMARY STRUCTURE * * * * * * * * UP UP OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 351
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 FIRE ACCESS PLAN SHEET NO. FD-1 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 10 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 74 73 69 146 70 MAIN HOUSE OCCUPIED 2100 2058 145 144 59 75 OCCUPIED GARAGE AREA BELOW 60 FIRE ACCESS PLAN SCALE 1/8"=1'0" CRESTVIEW DRIVE R=82.85' L=40.00'GRADIENT DRIVEWAY 15%/10% B MANHOLE RIM: 81.28 POWER POLE E.P. 81.41 CL CL E.P. FD 1" I.P. E.P. 82.92 82.5 84.56 84.31 81.60P. CL FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064 A EDGE (E)PAVEMENT C +/-18'-0" OCCUPIED FIRE TRUCK PARK AREA

7.5"MAX 11"min FIRE DEPARTMENT NOTES: a) A SEPARATED (DEFERRED) SUBMITTAL FOR FIRE SPRINKLERS IS REQUIRED.SYSTEM DESIGN MUST COMPLY WITH THE 2016 CFC AND 2016 NFPA 13d STANDARD .PLANS MUST BE DESIGNED AND INSTALLED BY A QUALIFIED FIRE PROTECTION CONTRACTOR .PLANS SHALL BE SUBMITTED TO AND APPROVED BY THE LBFD,WITH PERMIT ISSUED AND APPROPRIATE INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED. b) ALL EXTERIOR FIRE PLACES AND FIRE PITS MUST BE GAS FIRE ONLY.NO SOLID FUEL IS ALLOWED PER THE LBFD MUNICIPAL CODE.FIRE PLACES AND FIRE PITS MUST BE A MINIMUM OF 10 FEET FROM COMBUSTIBLE VEGETATION. c) MAINTAIN JOBSITE SAFETY DURING CONSTRUCTION AS PER CHAPTER 33 OF THE 2016 CALIFORNIA FIRE CODE. d) COMPLETE FIREFIGHTER ACCESS AROUND THE BUILDING IS REQUIRED, AND MUST BE IN COMPLIANCE WITH DRB APPROVED PLANS.SEE THIS SHEET FOR DETAILS.THIS IS SUBJECT TO FINAL FIRE INSPECTION AND REQUIRES APPROVAL PRIOR TO OCCUPANCY. e) ADDRESS NUMBERS MUST BE PLACED ON THE EXTERIOR FACING THE STREET ADDRESSED TO MINIMUM SIZE OF NUMBERS IS 4",AND THEY MUST CONTRAST WITH BACKGROUND. f) FOR FIRE DEPARTMENT INSPECTIONS,CALL (949)497-0352 AT LEAST 3 DAYS IN ADVANCE TO SCHEDULE. 1 10% MAX SLOPE EA WAY 1 1 (E)FIRE WATER HYDRANT 170' TO (E)FIRE WATER HYDRANT +_ PAVED AREA TOTAL HOSE PULL 126' +_ TOTAL HOSE PULL 127' +_ 1 1 1 1 1 GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM 1 1 1 1 1 1 HOSE PULL 1 FIRE ACCESS PATH 1 FIRE ACCESS PATH 1 FIRE ACCESS PATH 1 1FD ACCESS STEPS 1FD ACCESS STEPS 1 1 FIRE ACCESS STEP 3' MIN. 1PROPOSED EXTRA STREET PARKING 6'-0"X22'-0" FIRE HOSE LENGHT CALCULATIONS LEFT SIDE 18' 2.5' 69 X 1.069 (SLOPE)=73.7' 2' 30' ----------------------------------------------- TOTAL=126.2 TO S.E CORNER RIGHT SIDE 26' 3X (SLOPE)=4' 16' (11.75' STAIRS RAISE)=19.9' 4' 25' 48'X SLOPE (16' RISE)=50.6' ----------------------------------------------- TOTAL= 126.9' TO S.E CORNER 2 2 2 FIREFIGHTER ACCESS AREAS WITHOUT STAIRS DO NOT HAVE A SLOPE AND CROSS SLOPE EXCEEDING 10%.THE MAXIMUM. FOR STAIRS SEE DETAIL 1-FD CONCRETE STAIRS 2 CONCRETE DECK 2 GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM 2 GRASS PAVE 2 SYSTEM 2 2 2 2 2FD2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 2FD 1FD +/-43'-8" +/-30'-2"
+/-46'-9" 17'-6" FRONT YARD SETBACK 28'-9" OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 352
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-3.0 GARAGE FLOOR PLAN CRESTVIEW HOUSE 11 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 GARAGE FLOOR PLAN SCALE 14"=1'0" 20'2" 20'4" 16' PARKING SPACE 1 8'-8"x18'-0'=155.88' SF MIN 203.33' SF PROVIDED 2%MIN. 2'-8" 6'5" 8" 8" 8" 3'3" UP MAGNETIC ASSUMED RETAINING WALL AND STAIRS UNDER SEPARATE PERMIT FOUNDATION STEPS-SEE STRUCT. 88.25' F.F GARAGE S/MO 001 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 A-8.3 1/A-9 3/A-9.2 4/A-9.3 5/A-9.3 PARKING SPACE 2 8'-8"x18'-0'=155.88' SF MIN 203.33' SF PROVIDED 1 1 3'-3" 5'(GAR) FYSB 8'(HOUSE) FYSB 9'-4" 7'-0" 22' 3 3 3 3 3 2'4"
5'-0"SYS
SYS 5'-0" 6'-2" 18' 6'-5" 12'-9" 8' 4'-5" 44.5' RYS 24'-4" 20' A B D A.6 C.8 C 2 3 4 2.1 3.6 1 16'-0" 5'-9" 20' 8'-8" X 18' PARKING 8'-8" X 18' PARKING
8'-8" 18'
8'-8" 18' GREEN BUILDING NOTES: 1. EACH APPLIANCE PROVIDED AND INSTALLED SHALL MEET ENERGY STAR IF AN ENERGY STAR DESIGNATION IS APPLICABLE FOR THAT APPLIANCE. 2. MATERIALS DELIVERED TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM RAIN OR OTHER SOURCES OF MOISTURE. (4.407.4, 9.407.4) 3. ALL DUCT AND OTHER RELATED AIR DISTRIBUTION COMPONENT OPENINGS SHALL BE COVERED WITH TAPE, PLASTIC, OR SHEETMETAL UNTIL THE FINAL STARTUP OF THE HEATING AND COOLING EQUIPMENT. (4.504.1, 9.504.1) 4. THE FLOW RATES FOR ALL PLUMBING FIXTURES SHALL COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM FLOW RATES IN TABLE 4.303.2. 5. ALL DUCT AND OTHER RELATED AIR DISTRIBUTION COMPONENT OPENINGS SHALL BE COVERED WITH TAPE, PLASTIC, OR SHEET METAL UNTIL THE FINAL STARTUP OF THE HEATING AND COOLING EQUIPMENT. 6. THE VOC CONTENT VERIFICATION CHECKLIST, FORM GRN 2, SHALL BE COMPLETED AND VERIFIED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION APPROVAL. THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS SHOWING VOC CONTENT FOR ALL PPLICABLE PRODUCTS SHALL BE READILY AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE AND BE PROVIDED TO THE FIELD INSPECTOR FOR VERIFICAITON. BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES: 1. VEHICULAR ACCESS DOORS SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION R612.7 2. BUILDINGS SHALL HAVE APPROVED ADDRESS NUMBERS, BUILDING NUMBERS OR APPROVED BUILDING IDENTIFICATION PLACED IN A POSITION THAT IS PLAINLY LEGIBLE AND VISIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ROAD FRONT THE PROPERTY. (R319) 3.PROTECTION OF WOOD AND WOOD BASED PRODUCTS FROM DECAY SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE LOCATIONS SPECIFIED PER SECTION R317.1 BY THE USE OF NATURALLY DURABLE WOOD OR WOOD THAT ISPRESERVATIVE-TREATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWPA U1 FOR THE SPECIES, PRODUCT, PRESERVATIVE AND END USE. PRESERVATIVES SHALL BE LISTED IN SECTION 4 OF AWPA U1. 4. PROVIDE ANTI-GRAFFITI FINISH WITHIN THE FIRST 9 FEET, MEASURED FROM GRADE, AT EXTERIOR WALLS AND DOORS. EXCEPTION: MAINTENANCE OF BUILDING FFIDAVIT IS RECORDED BY THE OWNER TO COVENANT AND AGREE WITH THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES TO REMOVE ANY GRAFFITI WITHIN 7-DAYS OF THE GRAFFITI BEING APPLIED. (6306) GARAGE NOTES: 1. DUCTS PENETRATING THE WALLS OR CEILINGS SPEARATING THE DWELLING FROM THE GARAGE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF A MIN. N0.26 GA. SHEET STEEL OR OTHER APPROVIED MATERIAL AND THERE SHALL BE NO OPENINGS FROM THE DUCTS INTO THE GARAGE. (R302.5.2) 2. OTHER PENETRATIONS OF GARAGE/DWELLING CEILINGS AND WALLS ARE TO BE PROTECTED AS REQ. BY SECTION 302.11, ITEM 4 (R309.1 ). 3. GARAGE FLOOR SURF SHALL BE OF AN APPROVED NONCOMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL, AND THE AREA USED TO PARK THE VEHICLES SHALL BE SLOPED TO A DRAIN ORTOWARDS THE MAIN VEHICLE ENTRY. (R309. 1) 4. PROV. 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. THROUGHOUT GARAGE FOR 1 HR FIRE PROTECTION BETWEEN R-3 & U OCCUPANCY. 5. AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR OPENERS, IF PROVIDED SHALL BE LISTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UL325. 6. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). ESVE NOTES 1. THE PANEL OR SUBPANEL SHALL PROVIDE CAPACITY TO INSTALL A 40 AMP MINIMUM DEDICATED BRANCH CIRCUIT AND SPACE RESERVED TO PERMIT INSTALLATION OF A BRANCH CIRCUIT OVERCURRENT PROTECTIVE DEVICE. 2. THE SERVICE PANEL OR SUBPANEL CIRCUIT DIRECTORY SHALL IDENTIFY THE OVERCURANT PROTECTIVE DEVICE SPACES RESERVED FOR FUTURE EV CHARGING AS EV CAPABLE. THE RACEWAY TERMINATION LOCATION SHALL BE PERMANEND AND VISIBLY MARKED EV CAPABLE. 3. A MIN 1" (INSIDE DIAMETER) LISTED RACEWAY IS INSTALLED FOR EACH UNIT TO ACCOMMODATE A DEDICATED 208 240 VOLT BRANCH CIRCUIT NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 BROOM FINISHED CONCRETE BLOCK WALL POURED CONC WALL SMOKE/ CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR S/MO GENERAL NOTES LEGEND OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 353
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-3.1 GARAGE FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS CRESTVIEW HOUSE 12 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 GARAGE: 476.67 SF RFA: 0 SF R3 OCC: 0 SF U COC: 476.67 SF 21'-8" 22'-0" GARAGE FLOOR AREA CALCULATION SCALE 14"=1'0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED "PER CITY STANDARDS FLOOR AREAS ARE CALCULATED TO OUTSIDE OF WALLS" 1 FLOOR AREA BREAKDOWN GREEN BUILDING NOTES: 1. EACH APPLIANCE PROVIDED AND INSTALLED SHALL MEET ENERGY STAR IF AN ENERGY STAR DESIGNATION IS APPLICABLE FOR THAT APPLIANCE. 2. MATERIALS DELIVERED TO THE CONSTRUCTION SITE SHALL BE PROTECTED FROM RAIN OR OTHER SOURCES OF MOISTURE. (4.407.4, 9.407.4) 3. ALL DUCT AND OTHER RELATED AIR DISTRIBUTION COMPONENT OPENINGS SHALL BE COVERED WITH TAPE, PLASTIC, OR SHEETMETAL UNTIL THE FINAL STARTUP OF THE HEATING AND COOLING EQUIPMENT. (4.504.1, 9.504.1) 4. THE FLOW RATES FOR ALL PLUMBING FIXTURES SHALL COMPLY WITH THE MINIMUM FLOW RATES IN TABLE 4.303.2. 5. ALL DUCT AND OTHER RELATED AIR DISTRIBUTION COMPONENT OPENINGS SHALL BE COVERED WITH TAPE, PLASTIC, OR SHEET METAL UNTIL THE FINAL STARTUP OF THE HEATING AND COOLING EQUIPMENT. 6. THE VOC CONTENT VERIFICATION CHECKLIST, FORM GRN 2, SHALL BE COMPLETED AND VERIFIED PRIOR TO FINAL INSPECTION APPROVAL. THE MANUFACTURER'S SPECIFICATIONS SHOWING VOC CONTENT FOR ALL PPLICABLE PRODUCTS SHALL BE READILY AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE AND BE PROVIDED TO THE FIELD INSPECTOR FOR VERIFICAITON. BUILDING ENVELOPE NOTES: 1. VEHICULAR ACCESS DOORS SHALL COMPLY WITH SECTION R612.7 2. BUILDINGS SHALL HAVE APPROVED ADDRESS NUMBERS, BUILDING NUMBERS OR APPROVED BUILDING IDENTIFICATION PLACED IN A POSITION THAT IS PLAINLY LEGIBLE AND VISIBLE FROM THE STREET OR ROAD FRONT THE PROPERTY. (R319) 3.PROTECTION OF WOOD AND WOOD BASED PRODUCTS FROM DECAY SHALL BE PROVIDED IN THE LOCATIONS SPECIFIED PER SECTION R317.1 BY THE USE OF NATURALLY DURABLE WOOD OR WOOD THAT ISPRESERVATIVE-TREATED IN ACCORDANCE WITH AWPA U1 FOR THE SPECIES, PRODUCT, PRESERVATIVE AND END USE. PRESERVATIVES SHALL BE LISTED IN SECTION 4 OF AWPA U1. 4. PROVIDE ANTI-GRAFFITI FINISH WITHIN THE FIRST 9 FEET, MEASURED FROM GRADE, AT EXTERIOR WALLS AND DOORS. EXCEPTION: MAINTENANCE OF BUILDING FFIDAVIT IS RECORDED BY THE OWNER TO COVENANT AND AGREE WITH THE CITY OF LOS ANGELES TO REMOVE ANY GRAFFITI WITHIN 7-DAYS OF THE GRAFFITI BEING APPLIED. (6306) GARAGE NOTES: 1. DUCTS PENETRATING THE WALLS OR CEILINGS SPEARATING THE DWELLING FROM THE GARAGE SHALL BE CONSTRUCTED OF A MIN. N0.26 GA. SHEET STEEL OR OTHER APPROVIED MATERIAL AND THERE SHALL BE NO OPENINGS FROM THE DUCTS INTO THE GARAGE. (R302.5.2) 2. OTHER PENETRATIONS OF GARAGE/DWELLING CEILINGS AND WALLS ARE TO BE PROTECTED AS REQ. BY SECTION 302.11, ITEM 4 (R309.1 ). 3. GARAGE FLOOR SURF SHALL BE OF AN APPROVED NONCOMBUSTIBLE MATERIAL, AND THE AREA USED TO PARK THE VEHICLES SHALL BE SLOPED TO A DRAIN ORTOWARDS THE MAIN VEHICLE ENTRY. (R309. 1) 4. PROV. 5/8" TYPE "X" GYP. THROUGHOUT GARAGE FOR 1 HR FIRE PROTECTION BETWEEN R-3 & U OCCUPANCY. 5. AUTOMATIC GARAGE DOOR OPENERS, IF PROVIDED SHALL BE LISTED IN ACCORDANCE WITH UL325. 6. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). ESVE NOTES 1. THE PANEL OR SUBPANEL SHALL PROVIDE CAPACITY TO INSTALL A 40 AMP MINIMUM DEDICATED BRANCH CIRCUIT AND SPACE RESERVED TO PERMIT INSTALLATION OF A BRANCH CIRCUIT OVERCURRENT PROTECTIVE DEVICE. 2. THE SERVICE PANEL OR SUBPANEL CIRCUIT DIRECTORY SHALL IDENTIFY THE OVERCURANT PROTECTIVE DEVICE SPACES RESERVED FOR FUTURE EV CHARGING AS EV CAPABLE. THE RACEWAY TERMINATION LOCATION SHALL BE PERMANEND AND VISIBLY MARKED EV CAPABLE. 3. A MIN 1" (INSIDE DIAMETER) LISTED RACEWAY IS INSTALLED FOR EACH UNIT TO ACCOMMODATE A DEDICATED 208 240 VOLT BRANCH CIRCUIT NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 BROOM FINISHED CONCRETE BLOCK WALL POURED CONC WALL SMOKE/ CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR S/MO GENERAL NOTES LEGEND OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 354
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-4.0 FIRST FLOOR PLAN CRESTVIEW HOUSE 13 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 2% MIN 2% MIN 36"MIN CLR.REQ 36"MIN.CLR. RQD 2% MIN FIRST FLOOR PLAN SCALE 14"=1'0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED DECK 1 STORAGE BATH UNFINISHED CRAWL SPACE CEILING HEIGHT 4'-6"/1'-6" LID PLANTER 104.68' F.F 104.68' F.F 5'-4" 14'-7" 4'-10" 14' ADU 101 101 101 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 A-8.3 1/A-9 3/A-9.2 4/A-9.3 5/A-9.3 5'(GAR) FYSB 8'(HOUSE) FYSB 7'-0" 3 3 3 3 3 5'-0"SYS
SYS 5'-0" 5' UNFINISHED CRAWL SPACE CEILING HEIGHT 5'/3' KITCHEN REF UP UP 44.5' RYS 3' A B D A.6 C.8 C 2 3 4 2.1 3.6 1 2'-8" 5'-10" GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. AN APPROVED SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE FUEL GAS LINE ON THE DOWN STREAM SIDE OF THE UTILITY METER AND BE RIGIDLY CONNECTED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ONTAINING THE FUEL GAS PIPING. 3. PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER OR TO AN APPROVED SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. 4. KITCHEN SINKS, LAVATORIES, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS, BIDETS, LUNDRY TUBS, WASHING MACHINE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH HOT AND COLD WATER AND CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY. 5. BATHTUB AND SHOWER FLOORS, WALLS ABOVE BATHTUBS WITH A SHOWERHEAD, AND SHOWER COMPARTMENTS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A NOABSORBENT SURFACE SUCH WALL SURFACES SHALL EXTEND TO A EIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 6 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR. 6. PROVIDE ULTRA LOW FLUSH WATER CLOSETS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 7. PROVIDE 70-INCH HIGH NON-ABSORBENT WALL ADJACENT TO SHOWER AND APPROVED SHATTER-RESISTANT MATERIALS FOR SHOWER ENCLOSURE. B. WATER HEATER MUST BE STRAPPED TO WALL. (SEC 507 LAPC) 9.SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL DWELLING UNITS INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. 10. WHERE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS REPAIRS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING $1000.00 EXISTING DWELLINGS OR SLEEPING UNITS THAT HAVE ATTACHED GARAGES OR FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R315.1. 11. EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF GLAZED OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R303.1 OR SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT THAT IS ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE ILLUMINATION OF 6 FOOT-CANDLES OVER THE AREA OF THE ROOM AT A HEIGHT OF 30" ABOVE THE FLOOR LEVEL. 12. A COPY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT AND/OR CONDITIONS OF LISTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 13. HEATER SHALL BE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING A MINIMUM ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 68aF AT A POINT 3 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR AND 2 FEET FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS AT THE DESIGN TEMPERATURE. (R303.8) 14. EVERY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A WATER CLOSET, LAVATORY, BATHTUB OR SHOWER, AND KITCHEN (R306.1 AND R306.2). 15. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). WATER CLOSET NOTES: 1. PROVIDE 15" MIN. BETWEEN THE CENTER OF WATER CLOSET TO ANY SIDEWALL. 2. PROVIDE 24" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY WATER CLOSET. 3. BATHROOMS, WATER CLOSET COMPARTMENTS AND OTHER SIMILAR ROOMS SHALL PROVIDE NATURAL VENTILATION OR WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION CABABLE OF 50 CFM EXHAUSTED DIRECL Y TO THE OUTSIDE (R303.3). 4. ALL EXHAUST FAN UNITS IN PROJECT SHALL BE ENERGY STAR RATED AND HUMIDSTAT CONTROLED AND VENTED TO THE OUTSIDE (SEE GRN CODE NOTES ON SHT. C102 #18, #19, &#20.) TYPICAL ON ALL PLANS AT ALL LOCATIONS). NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 LEGEND KEYNOTES 1. FOUNDATION STEPS; SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2. LINE OF BLDG. ABOVE BLOCK WALL BROOM FINISHED CONCRETE POURED CONC WALL PLANTING EARTH TILE SMOKE/ CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR S/MO GENERAL NOTES OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 355
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-4.1 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 14 of 28 FIRST FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 FIRST FLOOR AREA CALCULATION SCALE 14"=1'0" MECHANICAL SPACE: 0 SF STAIR AREA: 0 SF AREA 1:UNCOVERED DECK : 404.80 SF AREA 2:ADU: 221.93 SF AREA 3: STORAGE: 49.43 SF MAGNETIC ASSUMED"PER CITY STANDARDS FLOOR AREAS ARE CALCULATED TO OUTSIDE OF WALLS" 1 3 AREA 1 AREA 2 CRAWL SPACE AREA 3 9'-2" 5'-4" 14'-0" 4'-10' 4" 12'-3" 13'-6" 10'-4" 4'-10" 22'-0"
14'-5" 11'-0"
15'-2" 10'-3" 8'-8" 6'-1" 14'-8" FLOOR AREA BREAKDOWN GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. AN APPROVED SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE FUEL GAS LINE ON THE DOWN STREAM SIDE OF THE UTILITY METER AND BE RIGIDLY CONNECTED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ONTAINING THE FUEL GAS PIPING. 3. PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER OR TO AN APPROVED SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. 4. KITCHEN SINKS, LAVATORIES, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS, BIDETS, LUNDRY TUBS, WASHING MACHINE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH HOT AND COLD WATER AND CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY. 5. BATHTUB AND SHOWER FLOORS, WALLS ABOVE BATHTUBS WITH A SHOWERHEAD, AND SHOWER COMPARTMENTS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A NOABSORBENT SURFACE SUCH WALL SURFACES SHALL EXTEND TO A EIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 6 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR. 6. PROVIDE ULTRA LOW FLUSH WATER CLOSETS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 7. PROVIDE 70-INCH HIGH NON-ABSORBENT WALL ADJACENT TO SHOWER AND APPROVED SHATTER-RESISTANT MATERIALS FOR SHOWER ENCLOSURE. B. WATER HEATER MUST BE STRAPPED TO WALL. (SEC 507 LAPC) 9.SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL DWELLING UNITS INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. 10. WHERE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS REPAIRS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING $1000.00 EXISTING DWELLINGS OR SLEEPING UNITS THAT HAVE ATTACHED GARAGES OR FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R315.1. 11. EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF GLAZED OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R303.1 OR SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT THAT IS ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE ILLUMINATION OF 6 FOOT-CANDLES OVER THE AREA OF THE ROOM AT A HEIGHT OF 30" ABOVE THE FLOOR LEVEL. 12. A COPY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT AND/OR CONDITIONS OF LISTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 13. HEATER SHALL BE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING A MINIMUM ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 68aF AT A POINT 3 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR AND 2 FEET FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS AT THE DESIGN TEMPERATURE. (R303.8) 14. EVERY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A WATER CLOSET, LAVATORY, BATHTUB OR SHOWER, AND KITCHEN (R306.1 AND R306.2). 15. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). WATER CLOSET NOTES: 1. PROVIDE 15" MIN. BETWEEN THE CENTER OF WATER CLOSET TO ANY SIDEWALL. 2. PROVIDE 24" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY WATER CLOSET. 3. BATHROOMS, WATER CLOSET COMPARTMENTS AND OTHER SIMILAR ROOMS SHALL PROVIDE NATURAL VENTILATION OR WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION CABABLE OF 50 CFM EXHAUSTED DIRECL Y TO THE OUTSIDE (R303.3). 4. ALL EXHAUST FAN UNITS IN PROJECT SHALL BE ENERGY STAR RATED AND HUMIDSTAT CONTROLED AND VENTED TO THE OUTSIDE (SEE GRN CODE NOTES ON SHT. C102 #18, #19, &#20.) TYPICAL ON ALL PLANS AT ALL LOCATIONS). NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 LEGEND KEYNOTES 1. FOUNDATION STEPS; SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2. LINE OF BLDG. ABOVE BLOCK WALL BROOM FINISHED CONCRETE POURED CONC WALL PLANTING EARTH TILE SMOKE/ CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR S/MO GENERAL NOTES OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 356
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-4.2 SLAB PLAN LEVEL 1 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 15 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 2% MIN 2% MIN 2% MIN 1 SLAB PLAN LEVEL 1 SCALE 14"=1'0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED 104.68' F.F 104.68' F.F 8'-9'10'-8" 13'-6'
13'-8" 5'-4" 4'-10" 14' LID PLANTER ON GRADE BOT. @ 7'-6" LOCATION OF 8" CMU, TYP. EXTEND STAIR TO BE FOUNDATION FOR STAIR WALL FULL HEIGHT BLOCK WALL 3' 3'-7" 8" 5'-10" 2'-8" 5'-5" 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 A-8.3 1/A-9 3/A-9.2 4/A-9.3 5/A-9.3 14" GAP AT BACK GARAGE WALL 2'-7" 9'-2" 5' 5'(GAR) FYSB 8'(HOUSE) FYSB 5'-0"SYS
SYS 5'-0" UP 44.5' RYS 13'-2" 18'-9" A B D A.6 C.8 C 2 3 4 2.1 3.6 1 GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. AN APPROVED SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE FUEL GAS LINE ON THE DOWN STREAM SIDE OF THE UTILITY METER AND BE RIGIDLY CONNECTED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ONTAINING THE FUEL GAS PIPING. 3. PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER OR TO AN APPROVED SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. 4. KITCHEN SINKS, LAVATORIES, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS, BIDETS, LUNDRY TUBS, WASHING MACHINE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH HOT AND COLD WATER AND CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY. 5. BATHTUB AND SHOWER FLOORS, WALLS ABOVE BATHTUBS WITH A SHOWERHEAD, AND SHOWER COMPARTMENTS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A NOABSORBENT SURFACE SUCH WALL SURFACES SHALL EXTEND TO A EIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 6 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR. 6. PROVIDE ULTRA LOW FLUSH WATER CLOSETS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 7. PROVIDE 70-INCH HIGH NON-ABSORBENT WALL ADJACENT TO SHOWER AND APPROVED SHATTER-RESISTANT MATERIALS FOR SHOWER ENCLOSURE. B. WATER HEATER MUST BE STRAPPED TO WALL. (SEC 507 LAPC) 9.SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL DWELLING UNITS INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. 10. WHERE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS REPAIRS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING $1000.00 EXISTING DWELLINGS OR SLEEPING UNITS THAT HAVE ATTACHED GARAGES OR FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R315.1. 11. EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF GLAZED OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R303.1 OR SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT THAT IS ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE ILLUMINATION OF 6 FOOT-CANDLES OVER THE AREA OF THE ROOM AT A HEIGHT OF 30" ABOVE THE FLOOR LEVEL. 12. A COPY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT AND/OR CONDITIONS OF LISTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 13. HEATER SHALL BE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING A MINIMUM ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 68aF AT A POINT 3 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR AND 2 FEET FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS AT THE DESIGN TEMPERATURE. (R303.8) 14. EVERY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A WATER CLOSET, LAVATORY, BATHTUB OR SHOWER, AND KITCHEN (R306.1 AND R306.2). 15. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). WATER CLOSET NOTES: 1. PROVIDE 15" MIN. BETWEEN THE CENTER OF WATER CLOSET TO ANY SIDEWALL. 2. PROVIDE 24" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY WATER CLOSET. 3. BATHROOMS, WATER CLOSET COMPARTMENTS AND OTHER SIMILAR ROOMS SHALL PROVIDE NATURAL VENTILATION OR WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION CABABLE OF 50 CFM EXHAUSTED DIRECL Y TO THE OUTSIDE (R303.3). 4. ALL EXHAUST FAN UNITS IN PROJECT SHALL BE ENERGY STAR RATED AND HUMIDSTAT CONTROLED AND VENTED TO THE OUTSIDE (SEE GRN CODE NOTES ON SHT. C102 #18, #19, &#20.) TYPICAL ON ALL PLANS AT ALL LOCATIONS). NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 LEGEND KEYNOTES 1. FOUNDATION STEPS; SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS 2. LINE OF BLDG. ABOVE BLOCK WALL BROOM FINISHED CONCRETE POURED CONC WALL PLANTING EARTH TILE SMOKE/ CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR S/MO GENERAL NOTES OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 357
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-5.0 SECOND FLOOR PLAN CRESTVIEW HOUSE 16 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 UP17 R @7-1/2" 16 T @ 10" DINING ROOM DEN KITCHEN LIVING ROOM CL CL CL DECK 2 115.68' F.F 115.68' F.F 115.68' F.F 115.68' F.F 115.68' F.F 11'-5" 14'-7" 4'-10" 6'-1" 5'-10" 8'-2" 2'-10" 11'-8" 13'-7" 12'-1" 202 204 203 205 201 R7' R5' R12' R8'-0" R10'R13'
R2'-6"
R6'-7" 3'-3" R12'-7" 7'-6" 7" 4'-10" 3'-9" 5' 4" 5'-4" 5'-11" 6" 2'-1" 6'-0" 3'-7" 5'-4" 5'-8" 3'-8" 4'-0" 7'-4" 3'-10" 4'-0" 3'-0"3'-0" 3'-1" 6'-9" 1/A-9 3 SYS 5'-0" 42" HIGH GUARDRAIL (INCL.PLANTER AREA) 5'-6" 17-6" STORAGE BELOW WITH MODULAR GREEN ROOF SYSTEM (TRIMMED TO 2' MAX ABOVE DECK) 22'-6" SECOND FLOOR PLAN SCALE 14"=1'0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 A-8.3 3/A-9.2 4/A-9.3 5/A-9.3 5'(GAR) FYSB 8'(HOUSE) FYSB 3 3 3 5'-0"SYS STAIRWAY HANDRAIL AND GUARDRAIL 42" HIGH GUARDRAIL (OUTSIDE GARAGE FLOOR FOOTPRINT) MODULAR GREEN ROOF SYSTEM (TRIMMED TO 2' MAX ABOVE DECK) 2' WIDE X 7' LONG X 2' HIGH MAX PERMANENT PLANTER A' SECTION A-A' 44.5' RYS A' 17'-1" 8'-4" 17'-1" 2'-2" 3'-4" 10'-2" REF UNDER PANTRY STAIR DW UP A B D A.6 C.8 C 2 3 4 2.1 3.6 1 7'-1" GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. AN APPROVED SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE FUEL GAS LINE ON THE DOWN STREAM SIDE OF THE UTILITY METER AND BE RIGIDLY CONNECTED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ONTAINING THE FUEL GAS PIPING. 3. PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER OR TO AN APPROVED SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. 4. KITCHEN SINKS, LAVATORIES, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS, BIDETS, LUNDRY TUBS, WASHING MACHINE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH HOT AND COLD WATER AND CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY. 5. BATHTUB AND SHOWER FLOORS, WALLS ABOVE BATHTUBS WITH A SHOWERHEAD, AND SHOWER COMPARTMENTS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A NOABSORBENT SURFACE SUCH WALL SURFACES SHALL EXTEND TO A EIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 6 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR. 6. PROVIDE ULTRA LOW FLUSH WATER CLOSETS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 7. PROVIDE 70-INCH HIGH NON-ABSORBENT WALL ADJACENT TO SHOWER AND APPROVED SHATTER-RESISTANT MATERIALS FOR SHOWER ENCLOSURE. B. WATER HEATER MUST BE STRAPPED TO WALL. (SEC 507 LAPC) 9.SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL DWELLING UNITS INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. 10. WHERE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS REPAIRS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING $1000.00 EXISTING DWELLINGS OR SLEEPING UNITS THAT HAVE ATTACHED GARAGES OR FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R315.1. 11. EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF GLAZED OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R303.1 OR SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT THAT IS ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE ILLUMINATION OF 6 FOOT-CANDLES OVER THE AREA OF THE ROOM AT A HEIGHT OF 30" ABOVE THE FLOOR LEVEL. 12. A COPY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT AND/OR CONDITIONS OF LISTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 13. HEATER SHALL BE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING A MINIMUM ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 68aF AT A POINT 3 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR AND 2 FEET FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS AT THE DESIGN TEMPERATURE. (R303.8) 14. EVERY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A WATER CLOSET, LAVATORY, BATHTUB OR SHOWER, AND KITCHEN (R306.1 AND R306.2). 15. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). WATER CLOSET NOTES: 1. PROVIDE 15" MIN. BETWEEN THE CENTER OF WATER CLOSET TO ANY SIDEWALL. 2. PROVIDE 24" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY WATER CLOSET. 3. BATHROOMS, WATER CLOSET COMPARTMENTS AND OTHER SIMILAR ROOMS SHALL PROVIDE NATURAL VENTILATION OR WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION CAPABLE OF 50 CFM EXHAUSTED DIRECL Y TO THE OUTSIDE (R303.3). 4. ALL EXHAUST FAN UNITS IN PROJECT SHALL BE ENERGY STAR RATED AND HUMIDSTAT CONTROLED AND VENTED TO THE OUTSIDE (SEE GRN CODE NOTES ON SHT. C102 #18, #19, &#20.) TYPICAL ON ALL PLANS AT ALL LOCATIONS). NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 KEYNOTES 1. FOUNDATION STEPS; SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS LEGEND BLOCK WALL EARTH WOOD FLOOR, GREY STAIN ORIENT PER PLAN WOOD DECK, GREY STAIN, ORIENT PER PLAN, CLASS A ROOF BELOW TILE SMOKE DETECTOR..................................S/MO OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 358
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-5.1 SECOND FLOOR AREA CALCULATIONS CRESTVIEW HOUSE 17 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 AREA 1: RFA 923.86 SF STAIR AREA: 0 SF (RFA EXEMPT) AREA 2: COVERED DECK: 55.13 SF AREA 3: UNCOVERED DECK: 212.95 SF RFA: 923.86 SF 29'-3" 22'-8" 2'-1" 11'-4" 14'-1" 7" SECOND FLOOR AREA CALCULATION SCALE 14"=1'0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED "PER CITY STANDARDS FLOOR AREAS ARE CALCULATED TO OUTSIDE OF WALLS" AREA 1 1 AREA 2 1 AREA 3 1 1 2'-6" 15'-6" 16'-1" 4'-8" 21'-1" 3'-5" 3'-3" 6'-2" 11'-5" 9'-11" 7'-7"
2'-0" FLOOR AREA BREAKDOWN 3'-0" 29'-4" GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. AN APPROVED SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE FUEL GAS LINE ON THE DOWN STREAM SIDE OF THE UTILITY METER AND BE RIGIDLY CONNECTED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ONTAINING THE FUEL GAS PIPING. 3. PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER OR TO AN APPROVED SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. 4. KITCHEN SINKS, LAVATORIES, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS, BIDETS, LUNDRY TUBS, WASHING MACHINE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH HOT AND COLD WATER AND CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY. 5. BATHTUB AND SHOWER FLOORS, WALLS ABOVE BATHTUBS WITH A SHOWERHEAD, AND SHOWER COMPARTMENTS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A NOABSORBENT SURFACE SUCH WALL SURFACES SHALL EXTEND TO A EIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 6 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR. 6. PROVIDE ULTRA LOW FLUSH WATER CLOSETS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 7. PROVIDE 70-INCH HIGH NON-ABSORBENT WALL ADJACENT TO SHOWER AND APPROVED SHATTER-RESISTANT MATERIALS FOR SHOWER ENCLOSURE. B. WATER HEATER MUST BE STRAPPED TO WALL. (SEC 507 LAPC) 9.SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL DWELLING UNITS INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. 10. WHERE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS REPAIRS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING $1000.00 EXISTING DWELLINGS OR SLEEPING UNITS THAT HAVE ATTACHED GARAGES OR FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R315.1. 11. EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF GLAZED OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R303.1 OR SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT THAT IS ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE ILLUMINATION OF 6 FOOT-CANDLES OVER THE AREA OF THE ROOM AT A HEIGHT OF 30" ABOVE THE FLOOR LEVEL. 12. A COPY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT AND/OR CONDITIONS OF LISTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 13. HEATER SHALL BE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING A MINIMUM ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 68aF AT A POINT 3 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR AND 2 FEET FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS AT THE DESIGN TEMPERATURE. (R303.8) 14. EVERY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A WATER CLOSET, LAVATORY, BATHTUB OR SHOWER, AND KITCHEN (R306.1 AND R306.2). 15. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). WATER CLOSET NOTES: 1. PROVIDE 15" MIN. BETWEEN THE CENTER OF WATER CLOSET TO ANY SIDEWALL. 2. PROVIDE 24" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY WATER CLOSET. 3. BATHROOMS, WATER CLOSET COMPARTMENTS AND OTHER SIMILAR ROOMS SHALL PROVIDE NATURAL VENTILATION OR WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION CAPABLE OF 50 CFM EXHAUSTED DIRECL Y TO THE OUTSIDE (R303.3). 4. ALL EXHAUST FAN UNITS IN PROJECT SHALL BE ENERGY STAR RATED AND HUMIDSTAT CONTROLED AND VENTED TO THE OUTSIDE (SEE GRN CODE NOTES ON SHT. C102 #18, #19, &#20.) TYPICAL ON ALL PLANS AT ALL LOCATIONS). NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 KEYNOTES 1. FOUNDATION STEPS; SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS LEGEND BLOCK WALL EARTH WOOD FLOOR, GREY STAIN ORIENT PER PLAN WOOD DECK, GREY STAIN, ORIENT PER PLAN, CLASS A ROOF BELOW TILE SMOKE DETECTOR..................................S/MO OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 359
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-6.0 THIRD FLOOR PLAN CRESTVIEW HOUSE 18 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 THIRD FLOOR PLAN SCALE 14"=1'0"MAGNETIC ASSUMED W D MASTER BED. WALK-IN CLOSET BEDROOM 2 BATH BATH BEDROOM 1 DECK 3 CL CLCL 126.68' F.F 126.68' F.F 126.68' F.F 126.68' F.F 11'-10" 14'-5" 11'-11" 12'-5" 10'-1" 8'-10" 6'-6" 8'-10" 14'-6" MAX 4" BETWEEN POST AND FACE OF BUILDING, TYP. 306 307 308 301 302 303 304 305 9" 5' 6'-5" 3'-9" 7'-5" 3'-1" 1'-10" 2'-8"
2'-0"
6"
8'-10"
3'-5"
8'-8"
2'-4" 1'-4" 2'-10" 10" 3'-10" 1'-3" 5'-6" 5" 3'-0" 4"8" 5'-3" 4'-11" 2'-11" 5' 4'-10" 5'-4" 5'-2" 7'-6" 1'-1" 10'-3" 3' 4"2'-8" 8'-2" 6'-10" 3'-3" R6'-2" 2'-4" 2'-8" 4'-4" 2'-8" 8'-2" 12'-5" 5'-7" 5" 6'-5" 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 A-8.3 1/A-9 3/A-9.2 4/A-9.3 5/A-9.3 LEVEL 2 DECK BELOW 5'(GAR) FYSB 8'(HOUSE) FYSB3 3 3 3 5'-0"SYS
SYS 5'-0" HALLWAY 126.68' F.F LANDING 122.8' F.F 44.5' RYS 4' 17'-2" 6'-5" 6'-10" UP 12'-9" 22'-6" 3' 8' CONCRET PAD LANDING 13' 25'-11" A B D A.6 C.8 C 2 3 4 2.1 3.6 1 2'-4" 6' 1' GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. AN APPROVED SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE FUEL GAS LINE ON THE DOWN STREAM SIDE OF THE UTILITY METER AND BE RIGIDLY CONNECTED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ONTAINING THE FUEL GAS PIPING. 3. PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER OR TO AN APPROVED SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. 4. KITCHEN SINKS, LAVATORIES, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS, BIDETS, LUNDRY TUBS, WASHING MACHINE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH HOT AND COLD WATER AND CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY. 5. BATHTUB AND SHOWER FLOORS, WALLS ABOVE BATHTUBS WITH A SHOWERHEAD, AND SHOWER COMPARTMENTS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A NOABSORBENT SURFACE SUCH WALL SURFACES SHALL EXTEND TO A EIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 6 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR. 6. PROVIDE ULTRA LOW FLUSH WATER CLOSETS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 7. PROVIDE 70-INCH HIGH NON-ABSORBENT WALL ADJACENT TO SHOWER AND APPROVED SHATTER-RESISTANT MATERIALS FOR SHOWER ENCLOSURE. B. WATER HEATER MUST BE STRAPPED TO WALL. (SEC 507 LAPC) 9.SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL DWELLING UNITS INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. 10. WHERE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS REPAIRS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING $1000.00 EXISTING DWELLINGS OR SLEEPING UNITS THAT HAVE ATTACHED GARAGES OR FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R315.1. 11. EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF GLAZED OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R303.1 OR SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT THAT IS ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE ILLUMINATION OF 6 FOOT-CANDLES OVER THE AREA OF THE ROOM AT A HEIGHT OF 30" ABOVE THE FLOOR LEVEL. 12. A COPY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT AND/OR CONDITIONS OF LISTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 13. HEATER SHALL BE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING A MINIMUM ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 68aF AT A POINT 3 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR AND 2 FEET FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS AT THE DESIGN TEMPERATURE. (R303.8) 14. EVERY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A WATER CLOSET, LAVATORY, BATHTUB OR SHOWER, AND KITCHEN (R306.1 AND R306.2). 15. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). WATER CLOSET NOTES: 1. PROVIDE 15" MIN. BETWEEN THE CENTER OF WATER CLOSET TO ANY SIDEWALL. 2. PROVIDE 24" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY WATER CLOSET. 3. BATHROOMS, WATER CLOSET COMPARTMENTS AND OTHER SIMILAR ROOMS SHALL PROVIDE NATURAL VENTILATION OR WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION CAPABLE OF 50 CFM EXHAUSTED DIRECL Y TO THE OUTSIDE (R303.3). 4. ALL EXHAUST FAN UNITS IN PROJECT SHALL BE ENERGY STAR RATED AND HUMIDSTAT CONTROLED AND VENTED TO THE OUTSIDE (SEE GRN CODE NOTES ON SHT. C102 #18, #19, &#20.) TYPICAL ON ALL PLANS AT ALL LOCATIONS). NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 KEYNOTES 1. FOUNDATION STEPS; SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS LEGEND BLOCK WALL EARTH WOOD FLOOR, GREY STAIN ORIENT PER PLAN WOOD DECK, GREY STAIN, ORIENT PER PLAN, CLASS A ROOF BELOW TILE SMOKE DETECTOR..................................S/MO OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 360
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-6.1 THIRD FLOOR AREA CALCULATION CRESTVIEW HOUSE 19 OF 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 7'-0" 2'-11" 14'-8" 7'-10" 7'-6" AREA 1: RFA 880.00 SF AREA 2:STAIR AREA: 53.2 SF (RFA EXEMPT) COVERED DECK: 0 SF (RFA EXEMPT) AREA 3:UNCOVERED DECK: 115.5 SF (RFA EXEMPT) RFA: 880.00 SF R3 OCC: 880.00 SF THIRD FLOOR AREA CALCULATION SCALE 14"=1'0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED "PER CITY STANDARDS FLOOR AREAS ARE CALCULATED TO OUTSIDE OF WALLS" 1 AREA 3 1 AREA 1 1 AREA 2 1 2'-0" 11'-2" 31'-8" 21'-8" 15'-5" 9'-10" 26'-8" FLOOR AREA BREAKDOWN GENERAL NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. AN APPROVED SEISMIC GAS SHUTOFF VALVE WILL BE INSTALLED ON THE FUEL GAS LINE ON THE DOWN STREAM SIDE OF THE UTILITY METER AND BE RIGIDLY CONNECTED TO THE EXTERIOR OF THE BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ONTAINING THE FUEL GAS PIPING. 3. PLUMBING FIXTURES ARE REQUIRED TO BE CONNECTED TO A SANITARY SEWER OR TO AN APPROVED SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM. 4. KITCHEN SINKS, LAVATORIES, BATHTUBS, SHOWERS, BIDETS, LUNDRY TUBS, WASHING MACHINE OUTLETS SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH HOT AND COLD WATER AND CONNECTED TO AN APPROVED WATER SUPPLY. 5. BATHTUB AND SHOWER FLOORS, WALLS ABOVE BATHTUBS WITH A SHOWERHEAD, AND SHOWER COMPARTMENTS SHALL BE FINISHED WITH A NOABSORBENT SURFACE SUCH WALL SURFACES SHALL EXTEND TO A EIGHT OF NOT LESS THAN 6 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR. 6. PROVIDE ULTRA LOW FLUSH WATER CLOSETS FOR ALL NEW CONSTRUCTION. 7. PROVIDE 70-INCH HIGH NON-ABSORBENT WALL ADJACENT TO SHOWER AND APPROVED SHATTER-RESISTANT MATERIALS FOR SHOWER ENCLOSURE. B. WATER HEATER MUST BE STRAPPED TO WALL. (SEC 507 LAPC) 9.SMOKE DETECTORS SHALL BE PROVIDED FOR ALL DWELLING UNITS INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY. 10. WHERE A PERMIT IS REQUIRED FOR ALTERATIONS REPAIRS OR ADDITIONS EXCEEDING $1000.00 EXISTING DWELLINGS OR SLEEPING UNITS THAT HAVE ATTACHED GARAGES OR FUEL-BURNING APPLIANCES SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A CARBON MONOXIDE DETECTOR IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R315.1. 11. EVERY SPACE INTENDED FOR HUMAN OCCUPANCY SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH NATURAL LIGHT BY MEANS OF GLAZED OPENINGS IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION R303.1 OR SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH ARTIFICIAL LIGHT THAT IS ADEQUATE TO PROVIDE AN AVERAGE ILLUMINATION OF 6 FOOT-CANDLES OVER THE AREA OF THE ROOM AT A HEIGHT OF 30" ABOVE THE FLOOR LEVEL. 12. A COPY OF THE EVALUATION REPORT AND/OR CONDITIONS OF LISTING SHALL BE MADE AVAILABLE AT THE JOB SITE. 13. HEATER SHALL BE CAPABLE OF MAINTAINING A MINIMUM ROOM TEMPERATURE OF 68aF AT A POINT 3 FEET ABOVE THE FLOOR AND 2 FEET FROM EXTERIOR WALLS IN ALL HABITABLE ROOMS AT THE DESIGN TEMPERATURE. (R303.8) 14. EVERY DWELLING UNIT SHALL BE PROVIDED WITH A WATER CLOSET, LAVATORY, BATHTUB OR SHOWER, AND KITCHEN (R306.1 AND R306.2). 15. ALL INTERIOR AND EXTERIOR STAIRWAYS SHALL BE ILLUMINATED (R303.6). WATER CLOSET NOTES: 1. PROVIDE 15" MIN. BETWEEN THE CENTER OF WATER CLOSET TO ANY SIDEWALL. 2. PROVIDE 24" CLEAR SPACE IN FRONT OF ANY WATER CLOSET. 3. BATHROOMS, WATER CLOSET COMPARTMENTS AND OTHER SIMILAR ROOMS SHALL PROVIDE NATURAL VENTILATION OR WITH MECHANICAL VENTILATION CAPABLE OF 50 CFM EXHAUSTED DIRECL Y TO THE OUTSIDE (R303.3). 4. ALL EXHAUST FAN UNITS IN PROJECT SHALL BE ENERGY STAR RATED AND HUMIDSTAT CONTROLED AND VENTED TO THE OUTSIDE (SEE GRN CODE NOTES ON SHT. C102 #18, #19, &#20.) TYPICAL ON ALL PLANS AT ALL LOCATIONS). NOTE: DAMPPROOFING WHERE REQ. SHALL BE INSTALLED WITH MATERIALS AND AS REQUIRED IN SECTION R406.1 KEYNOTES 1. FOUNDATION STEPS; SEE EXTERIOR ELEVATIONS LEGEND BLOCK WALL EARTH WOOD FLOOR, GREY STAIN ORIENT PER PLAN WOOD DECK, GREY STAIN, ORIENT PER PLAN, CLASS A ROOF BELOW TILE SMOKE DETECTOR..................................S/MO OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 361
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-7.0 ROOF FLOOR PLAN CRESTVIEW HOUSE 20 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 ROOF FLOOR PLAN SCALE 14"=1'0" MAGNETIC ASSUMED ROOF TOP OF PARAPET 137.68' F.F 2/A-9.1 A-8.2 A-8.1 A-8 A-8.3 1/A-9 3/A-9.2 4/A-9.3 5/A-9.3 2% MIN SLOPE FOR SOLAR USE 250 FS MIN. RQD (254.9 SF PROVIDED) PROVIDE 1" MIN. METALLIC CONDUIT FOR SOLAR USE 5'(GAR) FYSB 8'(HOUSE) FYSB 3 3 3 5'-0"SYS 44.5' RYS 1' 10'-8" 11'-10" 15'-0"
15'-10" 10'-1" 18'-1" 13'-2" 2% MIN SLOPE 2% MIN 2% MIN 2% MIN 2% MIN 3'MIN.CL RQD3'MIN.CL RQD 24'-6" 5' 3'-10" 7' 18'-9"
SYS 5'-0" 21'-9" 6' A B D A.6 C.8 C 2 3 4 2.1 3.6 1 1' GENERAL NOTES KEYNOTES 1. ROOFING MATERIAL- CARLISLE WHITE SURE-WELD TPO REINFORCED MEMBRANE ICC #ESR-1463 SRI INITIAL-99, SRI 3 YEAR-85, THERMAL EMITTANCE-0.9 2. BALCONY MATERIAL- OPEN WOOD DECK, GREY STAIN, ORIENT PER PLAN, CLASS A ROOF BELOW ROOF NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. DIAGONAL DIMENSIONS ALIGN WITH CONTROL POINT"B". 3. CONVEY RUNOFF TO THE STREET VIA A NON-EROSIVE DEVICE. 4. PROVIDE A "CLASS A" FIRE-RETARDANT ROOF COVERING. 5. CLASS "A" ROOF COVERING IS REQ. FOR ALL BUILDINGS LOCATED IN A MOUNTAIN FIRE DISTRICT OR FIRE BUFFER ZONE. 6. ROOF SHALL CONSIST OF A "CLASS A" MODIFIED BITUMEN BUll T-UP ROOF. 7. THE MAIN ELECTRICAL SERVICE PANEL SHALL HAVE A RESERVED SPACE TO ALLOW FOR INSTALLATION OF A DOUBLE POLE CIRCUIT BREAKER FOR A FUTURE SOLAR ELECTRIC INSTALLATION. THE RESERVED SPACE SHALL BE POSITIONED AT THE OPPOSITE (LOAD) END FROM THE INPUT FEEDER LOCATION OR MAIN CIRCUIT LOCATION SHAT BE PERMANENTLY MARKED AS 'FOR FUTURE SOLAR ELECTRIC 8. SOLAR ZONE SHALL BE FREE OF OBSTRUCTIONS AND BE SETBACK AT LEAST TWO TIMES THE HEIGHT OF ANY OBSTRUCTIONS, INCLUDING BUT NOT LIMITED TO VENTS, CHIMNEYS, AND EQUIPMENT 9.ROOFING MATERIAL- CARLISLE WHITE SURE-WELD TPO REINFORCED MEMBRANE ICC #ESR-1463 SRI INITIAL-99, SRI 3 YEAR-85, THERMAL EMITTANCE-0.9 ELECTRIC NOTES 1. THE MAIN SERVICE PANEL SHALL HAVE A MINIMUM BUSBAR RATING OF 200 AMPS 2. THE MAIN ELECTRICAL SERVICE PANEL SHALL HAVE A RESERVED SPACE TO ALLOW FOR INSTALLATION OF A DOUBLE POLE CIRCUIT BREAKER FOR A FUTURE SOLAR ELECTRIC INSTALLATION. THE RESERVED SPACE SHALL BE POSITIONED AT THE OPPOSITE (LOAD) END FROM THE INPUT FEEDER LOCATION OF MAIN CIRCUIT LOCATION AND SHALL BE PERMENANTLY MARKED AS 'FOR FUTURE SOLAR ELECTRIC' B.O.S. LID DEVCE CALCS TOTAL ROOF AREA: 985 SF GROSS MITIGATION REQ. FOR TRIBUTARY AREA FROM ROOF: ONE 38.5 SF PLANTER TOTAL UNCOVERED BALCONY AREA: 340 GROSS MITIGATION REQ. FOR TRIBUTARY AREA FROM BALCONIES: ONE 13.5 SF PLANTER LEGEND GWB. CLG. (SEE PLAN FOR ELEV) CEILING DIFFUSER FLOOR DIFFUSER CEILING DIFFUSER DUCT UP/DN RETURN FAN DUCT WALL SUP WALL RETURN F U P D N OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 362
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-8.0 SOUTH ELEVATION CRESTVIEW HOUSE 21 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 85.17' 15% MAX. EXIST. GRADE AT SOUTH PL EXIST. GRADE AT SOUTH FACE OF THE BLDG FF 104.68 11'-0" 11'-0" 11'-0" SOUTH ELEVATION SCALE 1/4"=1'0" FF 115.68 FF 126.68 TOP OF ROOF 137.68 16'1" LEGEND NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR ALL WALLS BELOW GRADE THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BOARD ON BATTEN, LIGHT MIST HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BATTEN ON BOARD, LIGHT MIST FF 88.17' 8'-6" 9'-10.5" 9'-10.5"
CEILING HEIGHT CEILING HEIGHT CEILING HEIGHT F.G 104.0' GARAGE F.F 88.25' 88.17' AT END OF DRIVEWAY 5'-0" MAX (TYP) 14" SEPARATION GAP C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG 100.0' PROPERTY CORNER-SOUTH 86.0' PROPERTY CORNER-NORTH 4"X4" BOX GUTTER EXIST. GRADE AT SOUTH PL EXIST. GRADE AT SOUTH BLDG FACE FINISHED GRADE ATHOUSE FACE T.O.W 132.0' T.O.W 127.5' F.G.120' F.G 115' F.G106.0' F.S 122.5' T.O.W 95.0' T.O 91.05' T.O.W 104.68' PERVIOUS PATIO AREA 1 2 (E)SLOPE BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING HARDIE BOARD, TYP. (LARR 24862) T.O RAIL 108.2' 3' FIRE ACCESS 3' WIDE MIN. STEP DOWN F.G 104.1 7.5" MAX. DROP 7.5" MAX RISER (TYP) 10%MAX SLOPE (TYP) FIRE ACCESS PATH 1 1 1 1 1 F.S 120.6' 1 1% MIN NATURAL GRADE EL.146.0' AT REAR PL ALONG SOUTHERN FACE OF BLDG 1 12'-0" EL.158.0' GUIDELINE ALONG SOUTHERN FACE OF BLDG 1 GUIDELINE 12'-0" MAX. ABOVE REAL PL 1 CLG 103.68' CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18'1FD FOR FIRE ACCESS PATH SEE NON-COMBUSIBLE STAIRS DETAILS 2FD 2 110' FINISHED GRADE AT THIS POINT (SEE PLAN) 30'-1" SEE PLAN FOR PRECISE LOCATION
29'-0" FG 121' AT HOUSE FACE 29' FINISHED GRADE LINE TOP RAIL EL.119.18' GARAGE MAX ALLOWED FOR STAIRS 42" STAIRS LANDING 42" METAL RAILING OUTSIDE GARAGE FLOOR FOOTPRINT (SEE PLAN) PL 99'-6" 15'-0" 5'-0" 5'FYS (GARAGE) 8'-0"
15'-0" 8'FYS (HOUSE)
15'-0" PL 41.5' RYS LINE 302 303 305 202 4 3.6 3 2.1 2 11'-0" 22'-6" 6'-5" 6'-2" 18' 36'-0" 23'-6" 13'-6" 203 BOTTOM OFWINDOWS 119.0' OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 363
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-8.1 NORTH ELEVATION CRESTVIEW HOUSE 22 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 7'-0" F.G AT HOUSE NORTH ELEV. NORTH ELEVATION 137.68'

23.41' NORTH ELEVATION SCALE 1/4"=1'0" FF 104.68'
11'-0" FF115.68' FF 126.68' TOP OF ROOF PARAPET137.68'11'-0" 11'-0" F.F EL.85.17' 15% MAX. 10% MAX. BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING HARDIE BOARD, TYP. (LARR 24862) 4"X4" BOX GUTTER

CEILING HEIGHT CEILING HEIGHT CEILING HEIGHT
9'-10.5" 9'-10.5" 8'-6" LEGEND NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR ALL WALLS BELOW GRADE THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BOARD ON BATTEN, LIGHT MIST HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BATTEN ON BOARD, LIGHT MIST C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG EXIST. GRADE AT HOUSE SOUTH FACE F.G AT HOUSE SOUTH FACE E.G AT HOUSE SOUTH FACE E.G. 113.75' 42"MIN GUARD WALL TYP. T.O.W 108.2'
16'-1" 100.0' PROPERTY CORNER-SOUTH 86.0' PROPERTY CORNER-NORTH 14" SEPARATION GAP T.O.W 119.5' END T.O.W 118.5 F.S 122.5' 5'-0" MAX (TYP) T.O.W 127.5' T.O.W 95.0' T.O LANDING 91.05' T.O LANDING 101.66' E.G REAR PL 144.0' HOUSE SOUTH FACE E.G REAR PL,S.E CORNER 137.0' 42"MIN EL. 119.18' T.O.W 105.16' FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) GARAGE F.F 88.25' FILL 6" MAX.1 1 1 11 1 1 7.5" MAX RISER (TYP) 10%MAX SLOPE (TYP) 1 1 FIRE ACCESS 3' WIDE MIN. 1 LANDSCAPING WALL SEE PLAN (TYP) FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 1 TO DRIVEWAY F.F AT STEPS EL.88.5' 1 CLG 103.68' CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' 29' GUIDELINE 143.5' 29'-0"
12'-0" 1 REAR PL GUIDELINE 149.68' 1 E.G. 137.68' AT REAR PL HOUSE NORTH FACE 1 F.G AT HOUSE SOUTH FACE TOP OF WALL AT PL AT DRIVEWAY T.O.W EL. 102.0' 6'X3' STAINLESS STEELCABLE TRELLIS SYSTEM FOR GREEN WALL 1FD FIRE ACCESS PATH SEE NON-COMBUSIBLE STAIRS DETAILS 2FD 2 1 2 2.1 4 EG EL.104.5' AT HOUSE FACE T.O PARAPET CORNER AT NORTH ELEVATION 137.68' (E)REMNANT OF TEMPORARY TERRACE DRAIN SYSTEM OWNERS OPTION TO MODIFY PER EASEMENT AGREEMENT PERMANENT PLANTER 2' MAX HEIGHT MANTEINED STAIRS LANDING GUARDRAIL 44.5' RYS 36'-0" PL FYS (GARAGE) FYS (HOUSE) 15'-0"
15'-0"
15'-0" GREEN ROOF METAL GUARDRAIL (TYP) AT BACKGROUND
MAX AT
STAIRWAY 87.0' AT PL 308 309 204 206 101 FF 88.17' END OF DRIVEWAY 5'-0" E.G AT NORTH PL 3 3.6 18' 6'-2" 6'-5" 22'-6" 13'-5" EL. 107.01' 8'-0" 29'-0" OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 364
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-8.2 WEST ELEVATION CRESTVIEW HOUSE 23 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 6 88.25' GARAGE F.F 104.68' FIRST FLOOR F.F TOW 106.5' 115.68' SECOND FLOOR F.F 126.68' THIRD FLOOR F.F 137.68' TOP OF ROOF PARAPET 16'1" 11'-0"
11' EMERGENCY EGRESS WINDOW: MIN 24H X 20W & 44" MAX HGT, TO SILL 42"STEEL GUARDDRAIL, TYP AT STAIRWAY AND OUTSIDE GARAGE FLOOR FOOTPRINT ELEV. 119.19' EXPOSED RETAINING WALL CONCRETE STAIRS PARGED CONCRETE GARAGE DOOR CLOPAY MODERN GROOVED PANEL OR SIM. MODERN OR SIMILAR 301 205 101 E.G.137.68' REAR PROPERTY CORNER SOUTH PROPERTY LINE E.G 157.0' REAR PROPERTY CORNER NORTH PROPERTY LINE LEGEND NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR ALL WALLS BELOW GRADE THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BOARD ON BATTEN, LIGHT MIST HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BATTEN ON BOARD, LIGHT MIST C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG EG.ELEV.100.0' FRONT PROPERTY CORNER 10'-0"
2'-3"
8'-9" WEST ELEVATION SCALE 1/4"=1'0" T.O.W 95.0' T.O LANDING F.F.91.05' F.F. 88.17' T.O LANDING 101.66' 10'-11"
42"MIN
42"MIN
42"MIN T.O.W 108.2' T.O.W 113.0' AT DRIVEWAY AT PL BOARD AND BATTEN SIDING HARDIE BOARD, TYP. (LARR 24862) T.O.W 108.0' T.O RAILING 108.2' FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 CLG 103.68' CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' 1FD FIRE ACCESS PATH SEE NON-COMBUSIBLE STAIRS DETAILS 2FD 2 EG. ELEV.86.0' FRONT PROPERTY CORNER STAIRS LANDING PLANTER TOP ELEV.117.7' 6" GREEN ROOF TRIMMED TO 2' MAX ABOVE DECK FLR 301 201 98.0 +/- 10'-0" REP CONCRETE WALL AND LADDER 2.5' +/- OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 365
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-8.3 EAST ELEVATION CRESTVIEW HOUSE 24 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 EAST ELEVATION SCALE 1/4"=1'0" 3 137.68' TOP OF ROOF PARAPET F.F 11'-0'' LEGEND NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR ALL WALLS BELOW GRADE THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BOARD ON BATTEN, LIGHT MIST HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BATTEN ON BOARD, LIGHT MIST C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG 137.6' PROPERTY CORNER REAR 157.0' PROPERTY CORNER REAR E.G 135.0' T.O.W 135.0' 5'-0" MAX (TYP) EXIST.GRADE ATEAST ELEVATION T.O.W 127.5' F.G122.5' F.G 120.0' TOP OUTSIDE PAD 122.5' T.O.W 119.0' MAX E.G 116.0' E.G 128.0' F.G 121.0' 4'-0" 4'-0" 122.8' STAIR LANDING F.F 122.0' PATIO AREA F.G 1 1 2 1 2 5% MIN 11'-0" HARDIE PANEL
2'-8" BOX GUTTER DOWNSPOUT 126.68' THIRD FLOOR F.F EGRESS WINDOW MIN. 24"X 20"W & 44" MAX. HEIGHT TO SILL D C B A FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 10% MAX.CROSS SLOPE 1 FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 FILL. CUT E.G 113.5' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' 29'-0"
12'-0" 12'-0" MAX. ABOVE REAR PROPERTY LINE GUIDELINE 144.0' GUIDELINE 157.0' 29'-0" 1FD FIRE ACCESS PATH SEE NON-COMBUSIBLE STAIRS DETAILS 2FD 2 4" THICK PAVED APPROACH PAD F.G 115.0' 305 306 302 OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 366
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-9.0 SECTION 1 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 25 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 5 EXIST GRADE AT SECTION GARAGE 001 DEN 204 DINING ROOM 202 BATHROOM 205 BEDROOM 1 301 M BEDROOM 303 SOFFIT FOR MECH. SOFFIT FOR MECH. FF 104.68 11' 115.68 126.6811' 11' 88.25' GARAGE F.F 15% MAX. 1 2 2.1 3 SECTION 1 SCALE 1/4"=1'0" 16'1" REAR PL HOUSE SOUTH FACE EL. 144.0' 14" SEPARATION GAP 4"X4" BOX GUTTER T.O.W 95.0' 88.17' 3'-7.5"
8'-6"
7'-6"
9'-10.5"
8'
9'-10.5"
2'-8" 1% MIN
42"MIN T.O RAILING 108.2' 36"MIN T.O LANDING 91.5' 137.68' TOP OF ROOF PARAPET F.F E.G AT HOUSE SOUTH FACE CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' CLG 103.68 3.6 4 LEGEND NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR ALL WALLS BELOW GRADE THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BOARD ON BATTEN, LIGHT MIST HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BATTEN ON BOARD, LIGHT MIST C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG 42" METAL RAILING OUTSIDE GARAGE FOOTPRINT (SEE PLAN) STAIRS LANDING AND RAIL 6'-3" F.F ELEV. 108.0'
29' 44.5' RYS
15'
29'
36'-0"
MAX AT
STAIRS PL EG.91.0' FYS (GARAGE) FYS (HOUSE)
15'-0"
15'-0" UNFINISHED CRAWL SPACE PERMANENT PLANTER SEE DWG A-5.0 GREEN ROOF 5' 5' 22'-6" 18' 6'-2" 6'-5" 22'-6" 13'-5" 14'-6" 10'-10"8'-0" GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. ENCLOSED USABLE SPACE UNDER INTERIOR STAIRS REQUIRES 1-HR. FIRE-RESISTIVE CONTRUCTION. ON ENCLOSED SIDE. USE 5/8" "TYPE X" GYP OR SIM. 4. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR WALLS THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. 5. FOOTINGS TO BE SETBACK FROM DESCENDING SLOPES EXCEEDING 3:1 [H:V] A MINIMUM OF H/3 BUT NEED NOT EXCEED 40FT. (1806.5.3). 6.THE GARAGE FLOOR SHALL BE NON-COMPUSTABLE OR ASPHALTIC PAVING MATERIALS. 7.FOOTINGS TO BE SETBACK FROM DESCENDING SLOPES EXCEEDING 3:1 [H:V] A MINIMUM OF H/3 BUT NEED NOT EXCEED 40FT. (1806.5.3). 8. BACKFILL COMPACT GRAVEL OF SLURRY. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT MIX DESIGN FOR STRUCT. APPROVAL OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 367
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-9.1 SECTION 2 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 26 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 5 5 5 5 5 4 3.6 3 2.1 1 KITCHEN 203 LIVING ROOM 201 BEDROOM 2 302 BATHROOM 304 M BATHROOM 307 SOFFIT FOR MECH. GARAGE 001 F.F115.68 F.F126.68 137.68 TOP OF ROOF PARAPET 11' 11' FF 104.68
16'-1" 11' SECTION 2 SCALE 1/4"=1'0" 84.00 15% MAX. 10% MAX. E.P. 84.00 EXIST GRADE AT SECTION T.O.W 95.0' T.O LANDING 91.05' 88.17' 85.17' 9'-10.5"
8'-0"
7'-6"
8'-6" T.O RAILING 108.2' 1% MIN
42"MIN LEGEND NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR ALL WALLS BELOW GRADE THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BOARD ON BATTEN, LIGHT MIST HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BATTEN ON BOARD, LIGHT MIST C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' CLG 103.68 BELOW GRADE ELEV. 99.5' 5' 8' FYS (GARAGE) FYS (HOUSE) 15'
15'
29'
29'-1" 127.0'
15'
29' PL
9'-10.5"
42"MIN STAIRS LANDINGPERMANENT PLANTER 2' HIGH ADU
BATH/
KITCHENNETTE 42" HIGH GUARDRAIL ADU 14" SEPARATION GAP 2' PL PL AT SECTION 2 44.5 RYS 22'-6" 6'-5" 6'-2" 18' 47'-0" 20' 13'-5" OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 368
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-9.2 SECTION 3 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 27 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 SECTION 3 THRU GARAGE (HOUSE IN BACKGROUND) SCALE 1/4"=1'0" A B C D 11'-0" 115.68 126.68 137.68 TOP OF ROOF PARAPET11'-0" 11'-0" 16'1" FF 104.68 115.68 88.25' GARAGE F.F GARAGE 001 EXIST GRADE AT SECTION THRU GARAGE EXIST. GRADE 137.6' REAR PROPERTY CORNER EXISTING GRADE 157-0' REAR PROPERTY CORNER T.O.W 118.0' RET. WALL (TYP) 5'-0" MAX (TYP) 3'MIN 1 2 CURB LEGEND NOTES: 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR ALL WALLS BELOW GRADE THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BOARD ON BATTEN, LIGHT MIST HARDIEPANEL VERT. SIDING (LARR 24862) BATTEN ON BOARD, LIGHT MIST C.B. (156) 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 T.O.W 111.0' CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' CLG 103.68

7.5" GRADE AT REAR PROPERTY LINE 101 8'-0" 14'-0" PL 7'-0" PL PL PL 7'-0" 42"MIN 301 205 101 GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. ENCLOSED USABLE SPACE UNDER INTERIOR STAIRS REQUIRES 1-HR. FIRE-RESISTIVE CONTRUCTION. ON ENCLOSED SIDE. USE 5/8" "TYPE X" GYP OR SIM. 4. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR WALLS THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. 5. FOOTINGS TO BE SETBACK FROM DESCENDING SLOPES EXCEEDING 3:1 [H:V] A MINIMUM OF H/3 BUT NEED NOT EXCEED 40FT. (1806.5.3). 6.THE GARAGE FLOOR SHALL BE NON-COMPUSTABLE OR ASPHALTIC PAVING MATERIALS. 7.FOOTINGS TO BE SETBACK FROM DESCENDING SLOPES EXCEEDING 3:1 [H:V] A MINIMUM OF H/3 BUT NEED NOT EXCEED 40FT. (1806.5.3). 8. BACKFILL COMPACT GRAVEL OF SLURRY. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT MIX DESIGN FOR STRUCT. APPROVAL OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 369
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 SHEET NO. A-9.3 SECTION 4 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 28 of 28 SECTION 5 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 05.22 SCALE N/A REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 07.01.2025 6 REP 11.09.2025 133.5' +/- (E)GRADE AT PL EXIST GRADE AT SECTION CL 115.68' SECOND FLOOR F.F 126.68' THIRD FLOOR F.F 137.68' TOP OF ROOF PARAPET 11'-0"
11' 5'-0" MAX (TYP) F.G 117.0' RET. WALL (TYP) 1 2 5% MIN 1 2 SECTION 5 SCALE 1/4"=1'0" A B C D BEDROOM 1 301DEN 301 KITCHEN 203 BEDROOM 2 302 2'-8"
5'-6"
9'-10.5"
6'-6.5"
3'-9.5"
9'-10.5"
2'-8"
5'-6" FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. AND CONCRETE 1 FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' T.O.W 134.0' T.O.W 125.0' 1FD FIRE ACCESS PATH SEE NON-COMBUSIBLE STAIRS DETAILS 2FD 2 EXIST. GRADE REAR PL CORNERELEV. 157' PL PL E.G.137.68' REAR PROPERTY CORNER GENERAL NOTES 1. ALL DIMENSIONS MEASURED FROM FACE OF STRUCTURE UNLESS OTHERWISE NOTED. 2. STRUCTURE SHOWN FOR SCHEMATIC PURPOSES ONLY. 3. ENCLOSED USABLE SPACE UNDER INTERIOR STAIRS REQUIRES 1-HR. FIRE-RESISTIVE CONTRUCTION. ON ENCLOSED SIDE. USE 5/8" "TYPE X" GYP OR SIM. 4. PROVIDE DAMP-PROOFING FOR WALLS THAT ENCLOSE USABLE SPACE. 5. FOOTINGS TO BE SETBACK FROM DESCENDING SLOPES EXCEEDING 3:1 [H:V] A MINIMUM OF H/3 BUT NEED NOT EXCEED 40FT. (1806.5.3). 6.THE GARAGE FLOOR SHALL BE NON-COMPUSTABLE OR ASPHALTIC PAVING MATERIALS. 7.FOOTINGS TO BE SETBACK FROM DESCENDING SLOPES EXCEEDING 3:1 [H:V] A MINIMUM OF H/3 BUT NEED NOT EXCEED 40FT. (1806.5.3). 8. BACKFILL COMPACT GRAVEL OF SLURRY. CONTRACTOR TO SUBMIT MIX DESIGN FOR STRUCT. APPROVAL OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK SECTION 4 SCALE 1/4"=1'0" 115.68' SECOND FLOOR F.F 126.68' THIRD FLOOR F.F 137.68' TOP OF ROOF PARAPET 11'-0" 104.68' FIRST FLOOR F.F11'-0" 11'-0" EXIST GRADE AT SECTION T.OW. 124.5' 5'-0" MAX (TYP) RET. WALL (TYP) 1 216'-1" 88.25' GARAGE F.F A A.1 B B.1 C C.1 D M.CLOSET 306 M.BATH 307 GARAGE 001 2'-8"
8'-0"
9'-10.5" FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 FIRE ACCESS STEPS (TYP) 11"MIN TREAD,7.5"MAX RAISER,3'WIDE MIN. 1 CLG 114.56' CLG 125.56' CLG 135.18' CLG 103.68 E.G.137.68' REAR PROPERTY CORNER PL 7'-0" ADU 205 ELEV.103'ELEV.101' ELEV.104' EXIST.REMNANT OF OLD TEMP. TERRACE DITCH OWNER'S OPTION TO MODIFY PER EASEMENT AGREEMENT EXIST. GRADE REAR PL CORNERELEV. 157' PL 5% MIN 5'-0" ELEV.120.5'
5'-0" 5% MIN ELEV. 118.5' UPPER FLOORS IN BACKGROUND (SEE PLAN) ORIGINAL (E)GRADELINE 370
STAMP 2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH CA 92651 STALKING PLAN SHEET NO. A-1.4 CRESTVIEW HOUSE 6 of 28 PROJECT NUMBER 001 DATE 06.18.25 SCALE N/A 4 REVISIONS 1 PLANNING 12.31.19 2 FIRE DEPARTMENT 02/21/20 43 PLANNING 02.18.22 DRB 07.10.24 5 DRB 7-1--2025 55 5 5 ABANDDONED EXIST. CONCRETE DITCH 7'-0" EASEMENT 157.0' PROPERTY CORNER 137.6' PROPERTY CORNER 128.13' 138.50' (N)RET.WALL 5% STAKING PLAN SCALE 18"=1'-0" 120' (N)RET.WALL 113' 8'-0" (90.5) 85.0 (100.0) 85.56 18'-10" 100.0' PROPERTY CORNER E.P. 81.41 CL CL E.P. CRESTVIEWE.P. FD. 3/4" I.P. 82.92 82.5 84.56 84.31 81.60P. CL EXISTING POWER POLE MANHOLE RIM: 81.28 E.P. 82.91 83.80' MIDPOINT AT CL OF STREET (RIGHT OF WAY) 83.68' DRIVEWAY ELEV. AT PRPPERTY LINE LS3064 EXIST. SLOPE EXIST. SLOPE EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT EXIST. EDGE OF EXISTING ROAD (FIXED DATUM) 83.00' 82.30' ADD NEW BASE AND PAVING TO MEET 26' ROAD WIDTH REQUIREMENT FOR POWER CONNECTION END OF EXISTING PAVING MATCH NEW PAVING WITH NEXT DOOR PROPERTY STREET IMPROVEMENTEXISTING NEIGHBOR'S WALL TO BE DEMOED IN THE CITY STREET R.O.W EXISTING ASPHALT PAVEMENT DRIVE CL. PAVE FD 1" I.P. 86.0' PROPERTY CORNER (E) UTILITY BOX T.O DRIVEWAY 88.80 F.F.104.68 T.OCONCRETE CURB END T.O.W 113.0' T.O.W 108.0' F.G.104.0' T.O.W 106.5' 2:1 F.G.106.0' F.G.108.5' T.O.W 112.5' T.O.W 119.0' 2:1 2:1 2:1 LOW GRADE SWALE 113.25' BOTTOM OF WINDOWS 119.0 117.0' 2:1
2:1
5% F.G.120.0' F.G.122.5' T.O.W127.5'
4' F.G.129.0' T.O.W 135.0' T.O.W136.0' T.O.W127.5' 4'
2:1
2:1
SLOPE
5%MIN LANDSCAPING WALL T.O CONCR. 119.0' WALL END. T.O. WALL EL. 118.5' GRADE EL.118.5' F.G 119' 5%MIN SLOPE PRIMARY STRUCTURE DECK 1 DECK 2 DECK 3

61.54'
FD. 3/4" I.P. LS3064
FD. 1" I.P. LS3064
FD. 3/4" I.P.

40.00' T.O.W 100.5' 16' 16' GARAGE DOOR NOTE: 1. STAKE POINTS NOT INCLUDED IN THIS TABLE FALL BELOW EXISTING GRADE. Pole Number Base Grade Elevation*(Ft) Story Pole Height from Proposed Maximum Base Grade Elevation(Ft) Elevation(Ft) *If standard base grade elevation nails are not feasible because of the existence of rocks, paving or existing structural improvements, then the surveyor or engineer may use an alternative
method of establishing horizontal and vertical
control for story poles that can be observed in
the field. The surveyor or engineer shall describethe control method used directly on the full-size staking plan. Such alternative methods may
include painted markings. It is also recognized
that sometimes it may not be feasible to set
poles due to unforeseen circumstances. In that
case, please identify the story poles that were
not established and an explanation as to the reason. 12345678 (SEE NOTE) 9101112131415161718192020-1 2122 Name of Surveyor or Engineer: Datum Benchmark: Date: Site Address: Story Pole Construction Notes Table 444546474849505152535455565758596061626364656636673768394038424341707169727375 81.28 SMH 06.18.252058 Crestview Drive, Laguna Beach, CA 92651 74 7' 1 9 10 11 8 12 16 17 19 15 14 13 6 7 5 4 3 2 18 MAGNETIC ASSUMED 7' 7' 7' 5'-3" 5'-3" 13'-5"20'-9"21'-4" 21'-9" 7'-10"
8'-11"
7'-5"
7'-11"
13'-10" 3RD STORY CANTILIVER 3RD STORY POLE CANTILIVER 2ND STORY CANTILIVER 5'-5" C.B. 156 E.P TOWCL FSFG LEGEND: EXISTING TOPO. CONTOURS FINISHED TOPO. CONTOURS CATCH BASIN DRAINAGE TROUGH (SWALE OR CLOSED DRAIN) END OF STREET PAVEMENT TOP OF WALL CENTER LINE FINISHED SURFACE EXISTING GRADE FINISHED GRADE DIRECTION OF SLOPE EG T.O.W 127.5' T.O.W 132.0' F.G.121.0' NON-COMBUSTIBLE STAIRS SEE SHEET FD-1 20-1 1'-7" 1'-9" 2 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 137.68 130.18 105.16 119.18 119.18 106.5 108.2 108.2 95.0 108.0 119.18 2.MAN MADE DITCH SUBJECT TO LANDOWNER MODIFICATION AS PER BK13743PG 1986 20 2221 116.4 21.3 130.5 7.2 125.0 12.7 126.0 11.7 122.2 15.5 113.0 26.2 114.0 23.7 107.0 30.6 (see note 2) 116.0 21.7 112.0 25.7 103.4 26.8 99.5 5.7 106.7 11.0 117.0 2.2 115.0 -8.5 100.0 8.2 111.0 -2.8 89.2 5.8 114.0 -6.0 114.0 5.2 108.5 18.2 126.68 113.5 5.7 119.18 112.0 7.2 119.18 14'-1" 16'MIN. 10' MIN. (106) (102) (96) (98) (100)(104) (94) (92) (90) (88) (108) (110) (112) (114) (116) (118) (120) (122) (124) (126) (128) (130) (132) (134) (110)(112) (108) (106) (122) (124)(126) (120) (114) (116)(118) (136) (128)(130) (132) (134) (136)(138)(140)(142) (144)(146)(148) (150) (152) (154) (156) (102) (104) (N)RET.WALL 26'-6" 87.80' T.O DRIVEWAY SECONDARY CONCRETE RET/LANDSCAPING WALL 1 8'-4" 8'-5" 4'-2" 6' 33'-1" 20'-7"
5'-9" C032946 Exp.06-30-2026 Z A E W.C J J OW M I C K I A K SCIVIL E E F TS T AT O E I N A N R I G EEN CALI FOR F D RO P ESSIONA ER L REGI MACIEJ WOJCIECH CZAJKOWSKI S C032946/06.30.26 06.18.25 OWNER/APPLICANT JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 ARCHITECT FREELANDBUCK 724 S.SPRING STREET LOS ANGELES CA 90014 (323)540-4346 FAX (323)570-0846 [email protected] STRUCTURAL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E. 23RD.STREET COSTA MESA ,CA 92627 949-244-4423 CIVIL ENGINEER JZMC,LLC 300 E.23RD.STREET COSTA MESA,CA 92627 949-244-4423 GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEERING KEITH TUCKER CONSULTING GEOTECHNICAL ENGINEER 9032 CHRISTINE DRIVE HUNTINGTON BEACH ,CA 92646 ARBORIST GUY STIVERS 160 CENTENNIAL WAY SUITE 3 TUSTIN ,CA 92670 714-838-9811 TOPOGRAPHIC MAP JOY CIVIL ENEGINEERING 9681 GARDEN GROVE BLVD #205 GARDEN GROVE CA 92844 7143235795 FREELANDBUCK 371
Attachment 12
372
372 of 485
373
373 of 485
374
374 of 485
375
375 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Design Review Board Meeting, December 11, 2025
Design Review of Project located at 2058 Crestview Drive.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Is the applicant even here for the 2058 Crestview Road? Please come to the table.

So after 5.16 we will return to 5.11. OK, ex-parte.

Board Member Weil:

I spoke with Mike, the applicant owner, visited the site, magically saw Horst while we were visiting the site but we really didn’t talk about the project but I just want to give a shout out to Horst.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Ms. Coveny, ex parte? This is for Crestview.

Board member Coveny:

Almost, good, thank you. That's what I was searching for. Nothing, I just reviewed past meetings and spoke to City about a few things.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Yes, and I drove by the site and previously met with the neighbor above, Mr. Kraskow and Steve Kawaratani
Board member Bauta:

I visited the site and spoke with Steve Kawaratani
Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

One of your fabulous presentations.

Shehriyar Khan (Associate Planner):

Thank you. Good evening, Chair Pro Tem Gannon and fellow board members. This is item number 5.16 for Design Review Variance, and Coastal Development Permit, and Revocable Encroachment Permit for a new single family dwelling and associated improvements located at 2058 Crestview Drive. The project was previously considered at a concept review hearing last year and at the Design Review Board meeting of April 10th earlier this year. This is the project's third and final hearing. To provide a brief recap, the proposed single-family Attachment 13
376
376 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

dwelling is a four level structure, which includes a two car attached garage, an attached ADU, the primary residence across two levels and three elevated decks. At the Design Review Board hearing on April 10th, the Board directed the applicant to move the uppermost level towards the rear to help address privacy and view equity concerns, modify the driveway to accommodate two standard parking spaces on site, explore more rustic colors for the exterior, increase landscaping to enhance privacy, and explore solutions regarding the neighboring wall encroaching into the public right of way. The Board also conveyed that the variance request to encroach into the significantly modified watercourse setback was reasonable, as there were no environmental... There was no environmental value to protect. In response to board feedback, the applicant revised the plans to move the uppermost level toward the rear by three feet to address view equity concerns, and move the garage back by two feet to create more area for on-site parking. These shifts result in the decks and second level of the residence being pulled back as well. As you can see, the changes provide more area for on-site parking. However, one parking space is just slightly beyond the property line. The project does comply with the required covered parking and a variance is being requested to not provide the on-street public parking space required by the Diamond Crestview-Specific Plan area. In response to Board feedback, the applicant has revised the previously proposed Cape Cod blue color of the residence to Sage Green, and an additional limestone veneer has been added to the garage face. In addition, the applicant has also replaced the proposed siding with smooth stucco at select areas. Regarding privacy concerns, the applicant has provided two additional trees, highlighted in green, one on the north side of the structure and the other at the south. The project requires a new 10 foot high retaining wall and wall-mounted foldable fire access ladder within the public right of way. Existing emergency access stairs for 2100 Crestview Drive, the adjacent neighbor to the south, extend into the right of way and must be removed due to necessary site excavation. In response to Board direction to preserve emergency access, the applicant proposes replacing the stairs with an extendable fire access ladder mounted on the wall, which extends out towards the public right of way. The wall will also retain soil supporting the remaining portion of the neighbors access area. The Community Development Department, Public Works, and fire department have reviewed the solution and are supportive. Again, just to reiterate, at prior hearings, the Board indicated that the findings for the watercourse encroachment variance can be made. Regarding the parking variance, at the previous hearing, staff introduced a variance request to not provide the required Diamond Crestview-Specific Plan on-street public parking space. As a brief recap, the project initially proposed on-street public parking spaces in close vicinity to the property which were deemed infeasible due to emergency access concerns. All possible 377
377 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

alternatives within a reasonable distance of the project site have been exhausted.

Therefore, a variance is being sought with the payment of an in-lieu fee as established by the City Council, which is incorporated as a condition of approval. The project design provides code, required covered parking in a two-car garage. And it can accommodate two private parking spaces on the driveway. In conclusion, with the concurrently sought variances, the project is consistent with the DR criteria and findings, Diamond CrestviewSpecific Plan, Coastal Development Permit findings, and REP findings, staff recommends to conduct a public hearing and adopt resolution number 25-0431, approving the requested entitlements subject to the conditions of approval, including the payment of the parking in-lieu fee and findings said action exempt from CEQA. That concludes staff's report, thank you.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Wonderful, fabulous staff report, you... Oh, any questions by the Board to staff? Ms.

Coveny?
Board member Coveny:

No questions, Chair.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

All right, you have five minutes.

David Freeland (Architect):

Hi, my name is David Freeland. Good evening, thank you for this third opportunity to present the design proposal for 2850 Crestview on behalf of Mike Czakowski. And this is an amazing presentation by Sherry, thank you. Maybe a reminder about the overall context of this parcel, if you want to start the slideshow. This parcel is a deep and narrow lot and is surrounded by five houses, which puts it in unique situation and having to satisfy the concerns of many different adjacent property owners. And we that we've been able to address those here with the revised design, and that this is a beautiful, yet now modest home that balances the, all of these different interests of multiple neighbors. The project was previously reviewed by the Board in 2012. This current design is much downsized from that, from 3,000 square feet to 1,800 square feet, and is now far undersized for the lot. We can go to the next one. Oh, one before this, actually. Thanks so much. So I wouldn't dwell on this because I think most of you're familiar with the lot or visited it. But I want to emphasize the difficulty of the topography here. And this you'll see is a result in the design, the topography slope steeply in two directions, both up slope and cross-slope. And this 378
378 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

makes it quite difficult to deal with, certainly from a gradient foundation situation. This is a viewshed and a diagram that we're providing here for reference. This is taken from the lowest level of 785 Gainsborough. There is no view encroachment we found based on our estimation from the main level of the neighboring house. And it's our intention here to respect the view equity criteria as described in the code. The design has been revised based on the Board request and neighbor concerns expressed at the last meeting to preserve fair views from neighboring properties, while affording fair view from from this property as well. And also, a reminder that the previous house design was sited much higher on the slope. Comments from the Board at that time in 2012 were to move the house down on the lot into the narrow and more steep part of the site, which sacrifices a great deal in terms of Mike's view, viewshed. But this has been done with this design. And the result is the square footage of the house that's been reduced by over 40%. These slides, I think you've shown the, adequately the way that the design has been adjusted. I want to just point out that red circle up there, that is the corner that encroaches into the viewshed at the lowest level. But I point that out because I'm, that circle is going to appear again in other moments. We can go forward here to the next one as well. Oh, let's go with the previous one. I wanted to make one other comment here. So this is the grade at the south elevation. You can see the house as seen from this side of the property is primarily underground. And this has been a significant concession also because of the planting to provide privacy from the adjacent house has resulted in quite unfavorable condition when it comes to sunlight, but one that we're willing to accept as a compromise given the concerns of neighbors. Again, the highlighted portion is where it's been moved back. We can go to the next. And the next one again. Yeah, here we go. Going back to the previous. So that red circle, previously in the meeting, we identified a corner of the house that was outside of the height limitation that has been changed. I wanted to be clear about that because the house has been moved back into the site. Increasing, this is just the increase in grading numbers, which comes at significant cost. The exterior color and finishes have been adjusted to the light green to blend in with canyon shades and the new vegetation. We can continue going through here. Stone was added on the north side to produce more of a rustic look. Smooth stucco has been replaced as well in several different areas where there was concerns. Just skipping ahead to the REP, if you would please. So this is something that came up and the reason for the continuance in the last meeting. Thank you for covering the situation with the stair. We believe that this has enhancing safety along this difficult turn, while also improving the egress angle.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:
379
379 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

We'll have three minutes to hit that very topic. At this time, any members of the public wish to speak on 2058 Crestview Road?
Evgenii Kraskow (Neighbor):

Can I have my slides please? Yes . You ready to start? May I start? Okay. Good evening, my name is Evgenii Krasko. And I'm speaking on this project for the third time. Next slide, please. My concerns remain the same. The project breaks my horizon line and obstructs a significant portion of the Catalina Island view from my master bedroom. At the first hearing, the Board gave clear directions to address this issue through measures such as grading and terracing. Only nominal changes have been made. For example, a surge cubic yard increase in grading, which is very noticeable. I believe that mutually acceptable solutions to this issue were possible and weren't particularly hard to implement. The applicant just refused work with me and refused to follow the spirit of the Board directions. Next slide, please. Another concern is neighborhood compatibility and building quality. My ocean view is currently framed by two rustic homes with charming details, like chimneys and vanes.

The new project resembles a shipping container. Again, the board directed the applicant to make the building more rustic, but very little has changed. Stone material was added to the facade of the garage, but not to the rest of the structure, an approach explicitly discouraged by the DCSP. Next slide, please. For a year and a half, my neighbors and I have been making the same arguments again and again. Here's the spring 2024 plan compared to the current one. At last hearing, the architect said that they would work with us to address privacy concerns. But no one has reached out to me since then. The windows remain unscreened.

They overlook adjacent homes. And the wall height is excessive, exactly at the maximum 29 feet allowed by the DCSP, which also states that most homes should be lower than that.

Next slide, please. This building is a copy and paste version of an existing structure in Los Angeles shown on the left. But if you look closely beyond the color difference, there is one subtle but important change between the two homes, the building height, particularly a raised garage and a steeper driveway slope in the current plan. Why did they do that? To raise the building for the view at the expense of the neighbors' views. Next slide, please.

Another way to see that the height is unreasonable is that the story poles extend much higher than the neighboring house, even above its chimney, despite the lot being on the lower part of the street. This is what creates the view obstruction for me. The renderings photo on the right are misleading and depict the planned building as much shorter. I do want to be a good neighbor. And I would gladly support this project if I saw the same good neighbor attitude from the applicant. But in my opinion, it's not fair to capture a view at the 380
380 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

expense of a neighbor's, especially where solutions such as grading and height reduction are so easy to find and have been pointed out multiple times. I don't believe that DRB should reward such an attitude either. Thank you.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Thank you, any other speakers? Mr. Kawaratani?
Steve Kawaratani:

Could you queue me up please, Shay? Ah, there we go. Good evening, Board, Chair Gannon, staff, Shay, everyone. Merry Christmas, happy holidays as well. I was here on Tuesday saying that I got no love, but it's okay. I would really like to see Mike's project approved. He's making it hard. The last time I was here and the project wasn't heard, you know, I made the comment that Mike should probably reach out to Mr. Kraskow and to see if we could reach an accommodation. But as Evgenii said that no call came. So that is a concern. And what I want to talk about real briefly now is the DCSP, which is a guideline, and view equity, which is a guideline, and then the Land Use Element Policy 2.1. So starting with the DCSP, this project continues to be in violation of the view equity portion. As Evgenii said, it's blocking the majority of his Catalina of view from his ceremonial master bedroom.

It's also in violation of the design review guideline of view equity for the same reason. And then policy 2.1 of the Land Use Element basically says that coastal views should be protected to the greatest extent. So what I had brought up previously, and Evgenii just brought it up now, the plate of the garage is 15 feet high. And I understand that Mike's trying to get his project up the hill as much as possible, but a typical plate for a garage is eight feet. And I've spoken to Louis and Jessica and Imir about this. If the project could be lowered four to five feet, I think that we'd be able to support the project. So again, when you have a project that prioritizes one's individual view at the expense of a neighboring property, it really can't be approved. Thank you.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Any other speakers? 2058 Crestview Road. Does the fire marshal, do you want to speak? Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

No, Madam Acting Chair, the fire marshal was just here in case the Board or any members of the public had questions that he had the expertise to answer, particularly as it pertained to the fire access stair.
381
381 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Board member Weil:

We'll get one question to him.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

Okay, got it.

Board member Weil:

It's just 'cause he's here.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Okay, you have. You have three minutes.

David Freeland (Architect):

Oh, can you cue the slides back up? And actually advance to the one that shows the view.

So we care about producing view equity and so did our best to simulate and understand how our house as proposed today may affect the view from 785 Gainsborough. And so, we've made some approximations. Just a forward a few slides. We made some approximations for the different elevations using a wide angle camera from the back of the property to try and understand what those are. So this is towards the end, slide number 17.

Keep go, there we go. Okay. And so, this image, and this is the red circle appearing. Again, this is the corner of the house that was described in plan. This is our best approximation of the upper level viewpoint that would be found from 785 Gainsborough. We can go to the next slide. This then is the... Oh, one back. Yeah, okay. This being the view from the main level of that house. This is the living and dining rooms at elevation 148.3. We can go one more. And this is at their lowest level. So this is where the, where the bedrooms are located. And the resulting view corridor, it's our estimation that approximately 10% of the viewshed is being affected by the proposed house at this time. And that this is that corner that I was talking about in plan. We can go to the next one. The intent of the design review with regard to views is to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property. It is recognized that each property is a part of the view dynamic. A property may enjoy a specific view today, but that experience may change as surrounding properties are developed. And that's what's happening here. A balance of interest should be achieved in which all those who enjoy the view, new or existing, retain some access to it. Each property owner may seek to maximize view opportunity opportunities. But these opportunities must be balanced with the rights of others already in the neighborhood and those that have that 382
382 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

are yet to come. And that's what the objective is here with this encroachment. And this, again, is the view from the main level, which we don't think actually encroaches at all on that existing viewshed.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Does that conclude your comments?
David Freeland (Architect):

It does.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Okay.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Mr. Weil, do you want to ask the fire marshal a question? Board member Weil:

We will. All right, so one of the questions that came up with the last hearing when we were talking about the ladder component. Oh, sorry. One of the questions that came up at the last hearing was the ladder component. And there was a... There were two different options given to us at the time. One was like an extended ladder that was permanent well out into the right of way. This one's more of a, I guess a retractable one that fixes to the wall but can be put out. So does this application that they're proposing tonight work and minimize the risk in the right of way, given the reduction?
Robert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

Good evening, thank you for that question. Chair Pro Tem Gannon and and members of the Board, I did review the proposed access for firefighter access for the property next door. I actually made a site visit. And I also had one of our captains to go ahead and go with me to ensure that... I like to do my Is and cross my Ts when it comes to these type of access. So not only my expertise in in firefighter access, but also an actual firefighter who would actually respond to the scene. So we did look at a couple of options with development department staff. And what they propose does meet it. I like the fact that there was one condition that I did ask for and they said it was no problem was that when the ladder does retract back and when it's in a locked position, that a breakaway lock gets installed on that. 383
383 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

So that way the firefighters don't have a special tool or key or anything like that to be able to utilize that ladder. And that ladder should really support up to 300 pounds in weight.

Because the firefighters with their hose packs or any tools that they need to access the side of the structure for firefighting, and cutting a line or anything like that, it would accommodate that type of weight. And they said that they would meet those standards. So in fact, looking at the current staircase that supplies or provides the firefighter access, this current staircase is very dilapidated. I'm very uncomfortable, hesitant to allow any firefighters go up that staircase. So this would be a improvement to what's currently there.

Board member Weil:

For both properties?
Robert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

Correct.

Board member Weil:

Thank you very much.

Robert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

You're welcome.

Board member Weil:

Thank you very much, oh.

Board member Coveny:

I have one. I have one quick question just about maintenance on it. Who maintains that? And doe it need a lot of maintenance?
Robert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

That type, it doesn't. It should be the paint and the stainless steel or the metal that's there, it's all weather. And that's what it's designed for. If you see these emergency exits on the old hotels or old apartment complexes, they'll last for years. The only maintenance is very nominal, would be just painting every five to 10 years, if that.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

Correct, and then that would be the property owner. And once again, in conjunction with the city, it'd be a collaborative process. Hey, this is what we're looking for, X, Y, and Z. 384
384 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Robert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

Right. Okay.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Any more questions for the fire marshal?
Board member Weil:

Diamond Crestview just in and of itself is a pretty hard access for the fire department.

Robert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

It is overall. This the street is, that area. In its entirety, it is, yes.

Board member Bauta:

I've got a question for theRobert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

Oh, any improvement we get for firefighter access to structures is a plus. It's a benefit to us.

Board member Weil:

Awesome.

Robert Montaghami (Fire Marshall):

You're welcome, thank you.

Board member Bauta:

I got a question for city staff, Chair. On the leading edge of that walkway, would fall protection be required along that wall? I know it's at grade. But it looks like on some of the renderings, there was a steep drop off. And I just wanted to make sure that it's considered here, if there were a necessity for it.

Shehriyar Khan (Associate Planner):

I believe at the top of the ladder after a few feet, there is a gate at the neighboring property that sort of blocks access. So that's one precaution that's already in place. But in terms of fall protection, I defer to management.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):
385
385 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Yeah, I mean, I don't... I mean, the point's well taken. But yeah, we didn't. That necessarily wasn't considered. I'm trying to think of what ideas that the Board may have. But recall that the point of that is for the fire department to be able to get out there up there quickly. So we can't, you know, can't have guard railings and stuff like that kind of, you know, impede that goal.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Right, and so that brings me to my question. So it shows as it's identified as parking lot C in the driveway, is still in the front setback. And I asked that... I pointed out that the two applicants on the street above you, Gainsborough, were required to move their parking out of that right of way. Are you ready to... What do you... Are you guys prepared to push the house further back, so that your two parking spaces when you pull in, they're not in the right of way?
Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

I think the shorter parking space is 18 feet.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

It's identified as C in front of the garage.

David Freeland (Architect): It's this one.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

It's on page nine of 28.
*inaudible*
Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yeah, it's shown as 18 feet long.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

FD-1. Right, there you go. So this corner is a very tight blind corner. It's very unsafe as it is.

So for cars to pull into that spot and pull out it's very dangerous. And for a car, 'cause most cars are ginormous these days. So for a car to pull in and be partially in that right of way, it could be a problem. It's a public safety situation.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

What's the... There is a parking.
386
386 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Board member Bauta:

I could probably jump into the deliberation if you want, Jess.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Yeah, we can go into deliberation.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

I think the shortest parking that has been approved, shortest length there has been approved was 16 feet for the other house that you mentioned.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

On Gainsborough?
David Freeland (Architect):

Yeah, I think what he's pointing out, this one, C, is 18 feet.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yeah, it shows eight 18 feet. But I think the shortest could be 16.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Right.

Board member Weil:

I guess I got one more question. Shehriyar, can you pull up A9? Or 0.0. And I guess, I mean, you showed the... In your presentation, you articulated how one set of the property's completely subterranean, the other side's open. I guess, I have two challenges. I mean, I think since the concept review and then the last hearing, we all talked about trying to bring the overall height of that second structure down in height. And we talked about how the garage has kind of an excessive plate height of being 15 feet or more. And then kind of the crawl space that's existing between the ADU and then the main house being at like six feet on this side. And so, the question was, could the back part of the house just be lowered and leave your front, or can the whole thing come down a bit to open up that horizon view for the neighbor to maintain Catalina, maintain the high horizon? 'Cause those were the things we were looking for.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):
387
387 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

The house is dug in already. The house is dug in into the hillside about 40% already. And given the length and the size of the lot, it was brought in front of it down to the narrower part.

Board member Weil:

I wasn't asking for kind of like excuses. I was like, can we do it? I mean, can we like... Can we actually physically do it?
Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Can you reduce the garage from 15 feet to 10 feet, or 11 feet? Board member Weil:

Bring the whole structure down. I mean, Diamond Crestview, tons of the houses are buried 60, 70% into the hillside.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

But again, if we do that, then the south side of the house will be almost buried to the roof.

And we will lose sunlight and the view.

Board member Weil:

The south side of the house will butt like a retaining wall entirely.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yeah, but it hides behind the hill. So if you bring this down, it's a south side.

Board member Weil:

But you're already...

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yeah, can we see the south, south side?
Board member Weil:

But you're already under grade.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

The south side, the exhibit.

David Freeland (Architect):
388
388 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Elevation?
Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yeah, elevation. What it shows the grade.

David Freeland (Architect):

In the slideshow.

Board member Weil:

Yeah, I mean even in the deck, A8, I mean, it shows the grade just fine, the south side of your house.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yeah, the grade doesn't change.

Board member Weil:
80, 90% of it's already under grade.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yes, and...

Board member Weil:

You're building a retaining wall. So a few more feet doesn't change most of your house.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

We'll basically lower the house below the existing grade.

Board member Weil:

I understand. But we also have to protect the views of Diamond Crestview in the specific plan.

Board member Bauta:

Chair, can we move to deliberation?
Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Yeah, okay, public commentary is over. The Board can go into their deliberation, Imer? 389
389 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Board member Bauta:

Yeah, I'll give it... I'll give it a stab. You know, we've gone... In multiple hearings, we were very clear on direction and what we're looking for. And I think at the current moment, this project doesn't meet the design review criteria. There are some challenges pertaining to view equity. There are some challenges pertaining to some privacy concerns from neighbors. And then there are definitely some challenges pertaining to egress that I could see from safety standpoint, and also parking. It seems like all of these could have been resolved prior to this hearing. You know, in my understanding of the previous direction, we were pretty clear on dropping some elevations and working through those elements. But for those reasons, I cannot approve this project tonight.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Yeah, for me, it's safety. And we held the two neighbors above to the highest standard of safety. And that was with a road that was not on a blind curve. It was a wider road. So I've gotta hold this to the same safety level. And as far as views, you know, Catalina is a major view. It should be protected at all costs. If you lowered the plate heights of the garage, that would remedy that from what I could tell. The staking wasn't complete when I went out there the two times. When the previously scheduled meeting was on the schedule, I went out and the staking was incomplete. So I'm just eyeballing, guessing that a few feet, whether it's four feet, five feet, lowering the garage plate height would mitigate the, that primary Catalina view. And then also for the safety of the neighbors, the people driving up and down that road, it's a blind corner. It's tiny. Yeah, access needs to be improved. And I can concur with Board Member Bauta. Miss Coveny, voice in the sky? Board member Coveny:

Yeah, okay. I was ready to kind of approve this last time. And I could approve it again this time. I feel like this is a very difficult lot to build on. I didn't think views were enough obscured to warrant that being an issue. I think by having pulled back the upper level, and subsequently, the second level based... I think it was three, two or three feet, I can't... Three feet, I recall, showed signs of wanting to try to solve that portion of the problem. As far as the parking on the driveway, I did a quick Google range. Rovers are 16 feet. Bentley GTS are

15.9. So everything else is secondary in the car world. So I think that the parking spaces accommodate the requirements for the two spaces off road and out of the right of way. So 390
390 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

privacy, don't see that as an issue. I think this is a... Everything up there is pretty tight, tucked in. People are looking into each other's patios. And it's a real congested area. So I feel like he's got a modest home here. And to make any more concessions would really take away his right to build. And I appreciate the fire marshal approving the remedy that they came up with for access for the fire department. So I can approve the project tonight.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Okay. Louis?
Board member Weil:

Yeah, I knew we threw a lot at the project throughout the three hearings to address quite a bit. And I think you did work towards a majority of them. I know the parking, the neighboring wall, the old dirt kind of right there to create the fire access component was a big challenge, originally, Moving the garages back were a big win. I think overall it is a minimalistic design. I think the kind of coloring palettes and a few of the articulation components that you added softened it and made it a little bit more unique. Those things are all good. I think it comes down to that view equity component for me that asking to try to get the program a bit lower. And it stayed constant the whole time. That's been my biggest challenge. If we could come up with an agreement to lower it like four to five feet. I think she was recommending five, but I'm trying to get four where we can maintain that horizon line and the Catalina view for the behind neighbor. I've been there, I've seen the... I have my own photos. I know exactly what we're looking at. I mean, having the staking been a little bit more tighter, that could have been a little bit more definitive. But I could try to work on if we can red line to go down four feet on that upper story, whether it comes out of the crawl space and just that side of the program, or it comes out the garage and the whole thing comes down, we could work on that tonight. But right now, I think we're a little split.

So 2-2 leaves in a denial. But we might be able to sway if we have some concessions.

Board member Bauta:

Do we want to give the applicant a chance to present something, an alternative? Board member Weil:

Well, it's got to be like pretty simple and dry to work with us, or then we vote. 'Cause we still have a lot of items to go.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):
391
391 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

I feel like the house has been downsized and moved a lot down the hill, considering the shape and the size of the lot. And I feel like the view equity has been compromised and the sunlight has been compromised. And so, could I... We could possibly... If could we could move two feet down somehow, working with the garage and the stories, which I think that would be a big compromise, you know, considering that the size of the house. And we'll like to have some view. I mean, some view from the house as well. So we don't have a Catalina view right now. And there is a giant pine tree on the west side that is growing very fast. So pretty much we're going to... We're going to... We're going to lose the sunlight almost completely. And the south side per 2100 Crestview owner, we provided more trees and just to accommodate the privacy. So this is south side, those trees going to grow. So basically sunlight view, we are just like, I feel like we compromised a lot. So if they board... If they board could give us maybe a limit instead of four feet, go to two feet, we could maybe. If you board could consider that two feet, that we could work with this. We'd be happy to work with this.

Board member Weil:

Okay, well, let me ask. Does two feet get either one of you to move? Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

I'm still stuck on the safety aspect.

Board member Weil:

Yeah, same here. We'd also like the front part, you know, access-wise to be brought back a little bit.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

And we can move the garage.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney)
Hang on, hang on, hang on. Once again, let them ask you... Sorry, go ahead, Madam Chair.

Board member Weil:

So if you can move the garage back, what two feet would accommodateMike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yeah, we can slide in into the hillside garage two feet. 392
392 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Board member Weil:

Tuck the garage in two feet, you can lower the uppermost roof by two feet? Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yes.

Board member Weil:

I'm trying to workChair Pro Tem Gannon:

He's saying to push the garage, the whole program, into the hillside so it clears the right of way.

Board member Bauta:

Yeah, I think that's a good move for both the applicantChair Pro Tem Gannon:

Is that enough, two feet?
Board member Bauta:

And the public, yeah.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

I resort to the contractor. He says two feet will work.

Board member Weil:

Okay, and then what about the height? Do you need three or do you need four? Board member Bauta:

Yeah.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

I need four at least, it's a Catalina view.

Board member Weil:
393
393 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Can we get it at three? We're split.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

It's hard without looking at the staking.

Board member Weil:

We got our photos. I mean, it's right in the line. So a foot or two makes it better if we... Can we get to three on the roof?
David Freeland (Architect):

Well, I think that as the house gets pushed back into the slope, it will also open up more viewshed at the same time. So I'm not sure ifChair Pro Tem Gannon:

That is true.

David Freeland (Architect):

Both is..
- [Board Member] Yeah, I reChair Pro Tem Gannon:
'Cause it was just the little bit that poked out, that top floor that poked out that was taking the Catalina view. So if it's pushed back two feet...

Board member Weil:

And lowered by two feet.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Yeah, that should do it. Would you lower the garage two feet? Or wherever you wanna lower it.

Board member Weil:

Where would the height come out of? Just come out of the whole program? Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):
394
394 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

The total program, two feet, and push the garage two feet.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

That would work.

Board member Bauta:

I also just want to address those retaining walls on the, was it south side? So if we can pull up rendering two on attachment four. I feel like this might come up again somewhere down the line. So I just want to make sure we get it captured in this review.

Board member Weil:

Oh, I'll make sure that's clear.

Board member Bauta:

Rendering two on attachment four for the...

Board member Weil:

I lost track of where we were.

Board member Bauta:

Rendering two on attachment four for the project.

Board member Weil:

The coloring?
Board member Bauta:

Yeah.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

You said the retaining wall?
Board member Bauta:

Page two of six. So if we're able to pull it up, yeah. Yeah, so... -[Participant]: It's the next one,
Board member Bauta:
395
395 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

So on the right side of that wall, the way terrace is up, you can tell the top of that retaining wall, it looks like there would be some kind of a railing or something there. You know, as is currently shown right now, that would be a fall hazard, you know, for the project. So right now, that's not shown in the design. I think it behooves us to look at that. With that said, you know, it's not staked. So potential neighbor concerns could come up down the road if there is a railing put there. So I don't know if we want to address that in the grades, where maybe we bring down those stairs further if we have the ability to do so, so that the retaining wall will provide fall protection.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

And so, just so I want to make sure that staff's following it, Mr. Board Member. And so, we're looking at... So are you looking at kind of the retaining wall where I can see the staircase rendering to the left or to the right in this?
Board member Bauta:

Yeah, on the right side of the page where, above where the ladder is.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

So to the right of the ladder or to the left of the ladder? Board member Bauta:

To the left of the ladder.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

Okay, got it.

Board member Bauta:

Yeah, so as you're going up the hill there, that that exposes a fall.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

And so, where these stairs start, that is, that is kind of the property line. So we can't have any permanent improvements. That was kind of the need for this flexible kind of erector set ladder and all kinds of stuff like that. So we can't extend those anymore. But, of course, if the board thinks there should be some kind of fall protection device on the property owner's retain wall, that would be within the board's discretion.

Board member Weil:
396
396 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Recommending just like a metal rail with like cable rails? Board member Bauta:

Yeah, I just think it's...I think whatever we do there could, you know, come up in the future.

So it's better to address it now and it looks like... Or we just say bring it back, you know.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

Well, so yeah, so this isChair Pro Tem Gannon:

Cross that roadPatrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney):

Yeah, this is the third hearing.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

So they would have to cross that road when they get there? Board member Bauta:

Yeah.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Yeah.

Board member Bauta:

Okay, we'll leave it to Shehriyar then, got it.

Board member Weil:

All right. So let me clarify two things. One, the proposal to make the garage work is to push the whole program back two more feet, or just the garage? Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Just the garage.

Board member Weil:

Just the garage section to two feet.

Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):
397
397 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Yes.

Board member Weil:

And the ADU stays put?
Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

Yes.

Board member Weil:

Does that work?
Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

That doesn't push the upper level.

Board member Weil:

Well, but... And does is the upper level going further back? Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

The upper level, if we are going to move down, it's going to go further up.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

So it'll be cantilevered two feet back?
Mike Czajkowski (Applicant/Owner):

It could be cantilevered, yeah.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Let's cantilever it back since the whole structure isn't getting pushed back. So just minimize the garage two feet, so away from the access point. And so, no lowering of the garage. Just lowering the whole building two feet. Wherever you find two feet, whether you want it to be the garage or one of the floor floor plates. And then push the cantilever, the top floor back towards the back of the house two feet.

Board member Weil:

It'll be buried in the ground.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:
398
398 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

If you push it back?
Board member Weil:

Well, can we ask the architect, can you describe that? I'm just trying to... I'm just trying to make sure that if we do make a conditioned motion to approve this, we get it really detailed enough that staffs sufficed.

David Freeland (Architect)
Yeah, I think that the third and fourth level, both of both the third and fourth level have to come at the same time.

Board member Weil:

Okay, so the whole program goes back,
David Freeland (Architect)
Would go back two feet, and then down two feet.

Board member Weil:

The roof, the upper ridge? Right now, the upper ridge is at 137, so we'd be at 135 max height. Does that work for you guys?
Board member Bauta:

So they're proposing a two foot drop and a two foot pushback. Yeah, I think that's an improvement.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

I think it'll preserve the Catalina view just by pushing it back.

Board member Weil:

MJ, are you good with it? Oh, sorry. Oh, I thought you were done.

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

No, the voice in the sky. Miss Coveny, are you okay with these alterations? Board member Coveny:

Oh yeah, sure. If we can get approved tonight, absolutely.

Board member Weil:
399
399 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Okay. Then I'll move Item 5.9 at 2058 Crestview Drive, that the Board adopts resolution 25- 0431 approving design review 25-0431, variance 25-0432, and coastal development permit 25-0433, and revocable encroachment permit 25-2285 for the property located at... Well, I already said that part. Project exempt from CEQA guideline section 15303 with the following conditions, that the full project be pushed back two feet away from the front property line, and that the uppermost roof be dropped two feet, and the building compressed and that aBoard member Bauta:

Fall protection.

Board member Weil:

Fall protection be minimalistically installed along the fire access railing on theBoard member Bauta:

To city's discretion, to city staff discretion.

Board member Weil:

With the city staff's discretion to install, to approve it. What's that? Shehriyar Khan (Associate Planner)
The parking in-lieu fee
Board member Weil:

The parking in-lieu fee still has to be applied 'cause there's no off-street parking.

Board member Bauta:

Correct.

Board member Weil:

The other conditions.

Patrick Donegan (Assistant City Attorney)
And then, yeah. And so, I just want to clarify. I did hear, I understand that you guys said lower two feet. I did like the idea the max height of 135. Just so that's clear, max height 135.

And then staff, is that... You guys good with that from the technical side? And I will say, I 400
400 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

apologize, there could be a typo in the staff. It's item 5.16, not 5.9, but we're good to go. You listed all the correct resolution numbers and address.

Board member Weil:

I'll amend with those comments.

Board member Bauta:

Yeah, I just want to add the current top of roof is 137.68. I'm okay with 135, but it would be two feet and eight inches.

Board member Weil:

Well, let's leave it at 135. Okay, I think they can make that work.

Board member Bauta:

I agree with that. I second your motion, Louis.

Clerk:

Board Member Bauta?
Board Member Bauta:

Yes.

Clerk:

Board Member Coveny?
Board Member Coveny:

Yes.

Clerk:

Board Member Weil?
Board Member Weil:

Yes.

Clerk:

Chair Pro Tem Gannon?
401
401 of 485
Design Review Meeting, December 11, 2025
Hearing Transcript

Chair Pro Tem Gannon:

Yes.

Clerk:

Motion has passed four to zero.
402
402 of 485
Attachment 14
403
403 of 485
404
404 of 485
405
405 of 485
406
406 of 485
407
407 of 485
408
408 of 485
409
409 of 485
410
410 of 485
411
411 of 485
412
412 of 485
413
413 of 485
414
414 of 485
415
415 of 485
416
416 of 485
417
417 of 485
418
418 of 485
419
419 of 485
420
420 of 485
421
421 of 485
422
422 of 485
423
423 of 485
424
424 of 485
425
425 of 485
426
426 of 485
427
427 of 485
Attachment 15
428
428 of 485
429
429 of 485
430
430 of 485
431
431 of 485
432
432 of 485
433
433 of 485
434
434 of 485

NOTICE OF A PUBLIC HEARING

LAGUNA BEACH CITY COUNCIL
The Laguna Beach City Council will hold an in-person Public Hearing in the City Council Chambers, located in City Hall at 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, to consider:

Appeal of approval of Design Review 25-0431, Variance 25-0432, Coastal Development Permit 25-0433, and Revocable Encroachment Permit 25-2285, and CEQA Categorical Exemption for a new single-family residence with an attached accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”) and attached two-car garage, elevated decks, grading, and landscaping at 2058 Crestview Drive in the Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan (D/CSP) Area. Design review is required for the new single-family residence and associated improvements. A Coastal Development Permit is required for the new single-family residence and associated improvements and the attached ADU. A Variance is required to encroach into a significant modified watercourse setback area and to not provide a public parking space required by the D/CSP. A Revocable Encroachment Permit is required for a retaining wall and emergency access ladder within the public right-of-way.

Related Project Cases on the property include but are not limited to: Concept Review 23-2048 Applicant: Mike Czajkowski
A person has appealed the decision of the Design Review Board (DRB) to approve the project.

SAID PUBLIC MEETING to be held Tuesday, February 24, 2026, at 5:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter.

For additional information, contact City staff: Shehriyar Khan, Associate Planner (949) 715-0672 or [email protected]. Comments may be made in writing prior to the hearing (when emailed or mailed to the City Clerk’s office) or in-person in Council Chambers during the public hearing. In order to allow sufficient time for members of the City Council and staff to review and consider your comments, written comments will be accepted for consideration up until the close of business (i.e., 5:30 p.m.) on the business day before the date on which this public hearing is scheduled; however, it is recommended they be submitted to the City Clerk’s office on or before 5:00 p.m. five days prior to the scheduled hearing.

Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65009(b), if you challenge this application in court, the issues raised shall be limited to those raised in the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the City of Laguna Beach prior to, or at, the public hearing.

CEQA: This project is categorically exempt pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, Section 15303 (New construction)
COASTAL: This project is located in the Coastal Zone. This project is located within a non-appealable area of the Coastal Zone.

The project is proposed as non-appealable development. The application was filed on March 10, 2025 by Mike Czajkowski and is assigned application number CDP-2025-0433. The application was approved by the Design Review Board. The decision by the Design Review Board is appealable to the City Council upon the payment of $2500 and in accordance with Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 25.05.070. The decision by the City Council is not appealable to the California Coastal Commission.

Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disability-related modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk’s Office at (949) 497-0705 (telephone) or (949) 497-0771 (facsimile). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.

Property Owners within 300 ft./ Tenants within 100 ft./ Property Posted/ California Coastal Commission / Interested Persons List/ Publish Date: 2/13/2026
Attachment 16
435
435 of 485
CYNTHIA A . DE LEON C I V I L No. C-31604 EXP. 12-31-2026 01/08/2026 (e.signed)
(e.signed)
(DATE OF SURVEY)
Attachment 18
437
437 of 485
438
438 of 485
439
439 of 485
440
440 of 485
441
441 of 485
442
442 of 485
443
443 of 485
444
444 of 485
445
445 of 485
446
446 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 1
Attachment 19
447
447 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 2
448
448 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 3
449
449 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 4
450
450 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 5
451
451 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 6
452
452 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 1
453
453 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 2
454
454 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 3
455
455 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 4
456
456 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 5
457
457 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 6
458
458 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 1
459
459 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 2
460
460 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 3
461
461 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 4
462
462 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 5
463
463 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW 6
464
464 of 485
Created 12/28/20

CITY COUNCIL ORDER OF TESTIMONY FOR APPEALS

AND REQUESTS FOR REVIEW OF PROJECTS
Purpose: The City Council is committed to assuring that members of the public have the opportunity to speak to any meeting agenda item before final action on projects.

This Order of Testimony establishes the right of persons who specifically wish to speak on projects appealed to or otherwise reviewed by the City Council.

Procedures: There are three types of hearings conducted by the City Council: 1) the appellant is person opposed to the project, 2) the appellant is the applicant, and 3) the project was called up for review by a member of the City Council or the City Manager. The procedures below provide the order in which testimony is considered and the allotted time for public comment. The procedure for each hearing shall be provided as the first attachment to the agenda bill.

I. Appellant is Person Opposed to Approved Project:

1. Staff report summary provided.

2. The appellant has 5 minutes for opening remarks.

3. Any persons in support of the appeal may speak for 3 minutes each.

4. The applicant has 5 minutes to speak in opposition to the appeal.

5. Any other persons in opposition to the appeal may speak for 3 minutes each.

6. The appellant has 2 minutes to speak in rebuttal.

II. Appellant is Applicant for Denied or Conditionally Approved Project:

1. Staff report summary provided.

2. The applicant has 5 minutes for opening remarks.

3. Any other persons in support of the appeal may speak for 3 minutes each.

4. Any persons in opposition to the appeal may speak for 3 minutes each.

5. The applicant has 2 minutes to speak in rebuttal.

Attachment Attachment 20 16
465
465 of 485
Created 12/28/20
III. City Council or City Manager Review of Decision:

1. Staff report summary provided.

2. The City Manager may comment on the reason for review. City Council members will usually comment after hearing comments from the applicant and members of the public.

3. The applicant has 5 minutes to present the project.

4. Any persons in support of or in opposition to the project may speak for 3 minutes each.

5. The applicant has 2 minutes to speak in rebuttal.
466
466 of 485
467 of 485
468 of 485
2058 CRESTVIEW DRIVE: PUBLIC HEARING FOR APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW 25-1431
Staking Violations, Unreliable Record, and Requested Relief PHOTO # DATE EXPLANATION
01 April 20, 2024 (before Concept Review)
02 April 20, 2024 Board member Weil stated during the Concept Review (May 9, 2024) that the "staking does need
to be much more accurate" and he observed, "no
single straight-line string that ran across."
03 April 10, 2025 Board member Weil reiterated that for the third hearing, the "staking needs to be really cleanly
done for a close analysis of view preservation."
04 November 30, 2025 Subpar staking condition before the Final Review 05 December 6, 2025 (Different angle, staking same as in Photo #04) 06 December 13, 2025 After Mr. Krasko’s letter was posted on the City's website, the Applicant fixed the staking. This
happened on December 9th, right before the
December 11, 2025 hearing. Nobody from the
DRB or City Staff had seen it in this state. The
right-most tall pole is the one that was bending in
Photo #05. When it is upright, the area of view
blockage is greatly increased. Chair Pro Tem
Gannon noted that incomplete staking made it
difficult to assess view impacts.
07 December 21, 2025 Photos #06 and #07 show the "recertified" poles, substantially different from Photos #01 through
#05. Additionally, the architect claimed they are
blocking only 10% of Mr. Krasko's view from the
master bedroom, but Photo #07 shows a more
substantial blockage, with Photo #05 showing
that the most sensitive area -- Catalina Island -- is
blocked. Applicant's self-certification was not
only illegal but also the certified staking was
materially inaccurate.
08 Demonstrates that the Applicant has room
to lower the building.
09 (rendering) With all the pole issues above, the only way to tell what height the building will be is to use
renderings, which are misleading (depict the
building shorter than adjacent the 2100 Crestview
Drive house).
469 of 485
Photo #01
470 of 485
Photo #02
Photo #03
472 of 485
Photo #04
473 of 485
Photo #05
Photo #06
475 of 485
Photo #07
Photo #08
Photo #09