Laguna Beach City Council
May 12, 2026

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS LOCAL

COASTAL PROGRAM AND MUNICIPAL CODE TO
MODIFY TITLE 25 (ZONING), TITLE 21 (SUBDIVISIONS),
AND TITLE 22 (EXCAVATING, GRADING, AND FILLING)

TO STREAMLINE THE DESIGN REVIEW AND OTHER
PERMIT PROCESSES; AND FINDING SAID ACTION

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY ACT UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION
15301
WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach, California (“City”) is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the California Constitution and laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the police powers delegated to it by the California Constitution, the City has the authority to enact laws which promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City is located within the California State Coastal Zone; and WHEREAS, periodically the City identifies sections of its Local Coastal Program and Municipal Code that are outdated, unclear, conflict with other Municipal Code sections, or warrant modifications to improve or enhance the functions and operations of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend its Local Coastal Program and Municipal Code to streamline the design review and other permit processes within the City; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are hereby adopted as findings in support of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 2. Code Amendment. Section 25.05.015 (Form of application, fees, and permit compliance.) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(A) Prescribed by the Director of Community Development. (1) The Director of Community Development shall prescribe the form and scope of all variances, changes of district boundaries or reclassifications, general plan amendments and all other planning or development applications as identified in Chapter 25.05, and of accompanying data to be furnished so as to assure the fullest practicable presentation of facts for proper consideration of the 142 of 399

matter and for the permanent record. Forms for such purposes may be provided. (2) Each planning and development application shall include verification by at least one of the owners of property involved or their authorized agent attesting to the truth and correctness of all facts and maps presented with such application.
(3) Applications filed pursuant to this Title shall be numbered consecutively in the order of their filing and shall become a part of the permanent official records of the Department of Community Development and shall be attached thereto and permanently filed therewith copies of all notices and actions pertaining thereto. (B) Complete Planning and Development Applications.
(1) Except as otherwise prescribed by law, no later than 30 calendar days after receipt of a planning or development application, the Department of Community Development shall determine whether the application is complete or incomplete.
(2) In the event an application is determined to be incomplete, the applicant shall be notified as to additional materials required to continue processing the application.
(3) Within 30 calendar days of receipt of supplemental materials requested for applications previously determined incomplete, the Department of Community Development shall determine whether the application is complete.
(4) A decision determining an application to be incomplete may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant. The fee for such appeal is to be determined by City Council resolution.
(C) Signatures. If signatures of persons other than the applicant are required, or offered in support of or in opposition to the application, they may be received as evidence of notice having been served upon them of the pending application or as evidence of their opinion on the pending issue, but they shall in no case infringe upon or govern in the free exercise of the powers vested in the City of Laguna Beach.
(D) Filing Fee Collection. Before accepting for filing any request or application submitted relative to Title 25 of this Code, the Department of Community Development shall charge and collect a filing fee for each such request or application as determined by resolution of the City Council to cover the cost of making maps, sending out notices, and other incidental administrative expenses involved in the handling of the matter, including written staff 143 of 399

reports. An application cannot be deemed complete without the payment of the require application fee.
(D) Refund of Filing Fees. Refund of all or any portion of the filing fees may be ordered by the Director of Community Development.
(E) Conformance by Officials. All officials or public employees vested with the duty or authority to issue permits or licenses where required by law shall conform to the provisions of this Title.
(F) Application. The provisions of this Title shall apply to all buildings, improvements, lots and premises, or portions thereof, owned, leased, operated or controlled by the City or any Department or officer thereof, or by any other municipal or quasi-municipal corporation or government, or any Department, Board or officer thereof.
(G) Expiration of Application. If an applicant fails to provide any additional information requested by the Department of Community Development within ninety (90) days of the date the application was deemed incomplete, the application shall expire and have no force and effect, unless otherwise required by state law. After the expiration of an application, future City consideration shall require the submittal of a new, complete application and associated filing fees.

SECTION 3. Code Amendment. Subsection (H)(1) of Section 25.05.025 (Variances) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(H) Effective Date/Expiration Date.
(1) Decisions on Variance applications by the Board of Adjustment or Planning Commission, as applicable, shall become effective ten business 14 calendar days after the date of the decision, unless appealed to the City Council.

SECTION 4. Code Amendment. Subsection (I)(1) of Section 25.05.030 (Conditional Use Permits) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):

C. Effective Date/Expiration Date.
(1) Decisions on Conditional Use Permit applications by the Planning Commission shall become effective ten business 14 calendar days after the date of the decision, unless appealed to the City Council.

SECTION 5. Code Amendment. Section 25.05.040 (Design Review) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed and replaced to read as follows:
144 of 399

A. Intent and Purpose.
(1) The design review process is intended to achieve the following goals:
(a) That development projects comply with the applicable standards and design review findings and criteria;
(b) That development projects focus on quality designs, within a neighborhood context that results in creative design solutions for the City;
(c) That development occurs with an orderly and harmonious appearance, including associated facilities, such as signs, landscaping, and parking areas;
(d) That the development review process considers public and private views;
(e) That public health, safety, and general welfare throughout the City is paramount;
(f) That there is effective implementation of the applicable general and specific plan policies; and
(g) That development projects comply with the policies of the certified Local Coastal Program, including, but not limited to, the shoreline access, open space, environmentally sensitive habitat, hillside protection, and visual resource policies. (2) Approval Authority.
(a) The Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as
appropriate, is the approval authority for Design Review projects identified in Section 25.05.040(B)(1).
(b) The Community Development Department is the approval authority for projects that are Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance), as specified in Section 25.05.040(B)(2). (c) The Director of Community Development is the approval authority for Administrative Design Review as specified in Section 25.05.040(B)(3).
(d) The Director of Community Development, at his or her sole discretion, is authorized to refer projects that are subject to Administrative Design Review or exempt from Design Review, as specified in Sections 25.05.040(B)(3) and 25.05.040(B)(2), to the Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as
145 of 399

appropriate. In determining whether to make such a referral, the Director may consider whether the project:
(i) Could alter significant physical characteristics within an unusually sensitive or highly visible area;
(ii) May create impacts on surrounding properties, based on staff review of the project or issues identified in prior Design Review proceedings; or
(iii) Presents other circumstances that, in the Director’s judgment, warrant review by the Design Review Board
or Planning Commission.
(e) Development Subject to Design Review, Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance), and Administrative Design Review may still require a Coastal Development Permit pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 25.07.

B. Development Subject to Design Review, Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance), and Administrative Design Review.
(1) Design Review. Design Review before the Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as appropriate, at a public hearing shall be required for the following projects:
(a) Demolition, alteration, or addition that constitutes a major remodel. A landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan is required for such major remodel;
(b) All new buildings, except as otherwise provided in Section

25.05.040(B)(2) relating to ADUs and new primary dwelling units. A landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan is required for new buildings under this subsection;
(c) Any improvement that exceeds a height of 15 feet, measured in accordance with the definition of “Height, building” in Chapter 25.08 (from the finished floor or from natural or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive or lower). A landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan is required for such improvement;
(d) Major modifications, alterations, or other actions pertaining to historic resources that do not qualify for administrative approval under Section 25.05.040(B)(3);
(e) Any development in an environmentally sensitive area, unless a licensed professional has determined, subject to peer 146 of 399

review, that the proposed development does not impact the environmentally sensitive area;
(f) Grading in excess of 20 cubic yards outside the building footprint, except as specified in Section 22.10.010(e); (g) Retaining walls in excess of 5 feet in exposed height; (h) Clearing of native vegetation on undeveloped parcels and undeveloped portions of developed parcels, and native
vegetation restoration plans, except for City required annual weed abatement and fuel modification;
(i) Shoreline and bluff protective devices;
(j) Portable and in-ground swimming pools and spas more than 3 feet above adjacent, legal ground elevation, except for portable spas that do not exceed 600 gallons;
(k) New vehicular access to streets or alleys, including the widening of an existing driveway at the street to a width greater than the minimum required by Section 25.52.008(I)(2); (l) Commercial or industrial parking and loading areas; (m) Permanent chain link or similar type of woven metal fences, and vinyl fences that do not simulate natural material; (n) Trash storage or enclosures, except as provided in Section

25.05.040(B)(2) and Section 25.05.040(B)(3);
(o) Major Capital Improvement Project, which means a project undertaken by the City that is determined by the Community Development Director, in consultation with other affected department heads, to require review by the Planning
Commission prior to approval by the City Council of design and/or construction documents, based on the project’s
proposed scope in terms of environmental, aesthetic, and/or land use effects on the community. Typical examples of a Major Capital Improvement Project include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) New or substantial alterations to parks, public
buildings, community facilities, reservoirs, or bridges; (ii) New or substantial alterations to drainage structures which involve significant changes to grades, hillsides, habitats, or views;
147 of 399

(iii) Street improvements which involve substantial
expansion of right-of-way, removal of existing facilities, removal of significant vegetation (unless part of a fuel modification project or program) and/or major changes
to community character;
(iv) Design programs for city-wide features which are
visible to the general public and contribute to
community character, including but not limited to beach and park accessways, promenades, bridges, trails, and
the City-owned property, where Festival of Arts and
Pageant of the Masters is hosted.
(2) Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance). The following types of projects shall require the issuance of zone clearance in compliance with Chapter 25.05.045, rather than design review. For avoidance of doubt, the zone clearance process shall not be used for any of the below projects that are in an environmentally sensitive area (unless a licensed professional has determined, subject to peer review, that the proposed development does not impact the environmentally sensitive area); such projects are subject to Design Review under (B)(1).
(a) Demolition, alteration, or addition that does not constitute a major remodel;
(b) An improvement that does not exceed a height of 15 feet, measured in accordance with the definition of “Height,
building” in Chapter 25.08 (from the finished floor or from natural or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive or lower);
(c) In-kind replacement of improvements for repair and
maintenance;
(d) Interior modifications to existing structures that do not modify the exterior of such structures;
(e) Re-roofing of buildings or structures which do not result in white or light colored roofs, provided there are no changes to the dimensions, square footage, or roof pitch, and which will not result in glare through the use of materials, such as asphalt shingles or stainless steel, both at the determination of the Community Development Director;
(f) Annual weed abatement;
(g) Fuel modification project or program;
148 of 399

(h) Accessory dwelling units, only as set forth in Chapter 25.17; (i) Grading of 20 cubic yards or less outside the building footprint, except as specified in Section 22.10.010(e);
(j) Retaining walls 5 feet or less in exposed height;
(k) Hardscape that does not increase impervious surfaces, or that is proposed to comply with applicable fire prevention
standards as determined by the Fire Official, and complies with all other applicable provisions of this chapter;
(l) Fences, walls and hedges that comply with Section 25.50.012 ("Fences, walls, hedges, latticework and screens"). For avoidance of doubt, this excludes permanent chain link or similar type of woven metal fences, and vinyl fences that do not simulate natural material, which are subject to design review under (B)(1);
(m) Decks, slabs, terraces, or patios elevated 3 feet or less above the adjacent, legal ground elevation;
(n) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or trees within the buildable area that is less than 15 feet at maintained height when measured from ground elevation adjacent to the location of the vegetation, plant, bush, or tree, provided that the plans identify and require that the landscaping is to be maintained at or below the heights reflected in the plans; (o) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or trees in the rear or side yard at less than 6 feet at maintained height and in the front yard at less than 4 feet at maintained height when measured from the ground elevation adjacent to the location of the vegetation plant, bush, or tree, provided that the plans identify and require that the landscaping is to be maintained at or below the heights reflected in the plans;
(p) Artwork approved through the procedures outlined in Chapter

1.09 ("Art in Public Places");
(q) Trash storage within the side yard when screened from public view by a wall or fence at least 4 feet in height and does not impact required access for the property;
(r) Railings;
(s) Skylights with operable automatic night shades;
149 of 399

(t) Portable and in-ground swimming pools and spas no more than 3 feet above adjacent, legal ground elevation, and portable spas that do not exceed 600 gallons;
(u) Water features;
(v) Mechanical equipment, including, but not limited to, air conditioners and pool/spa equipment, that meet the
requirements of Section 7.25.130(c);
(w) Above-ground utility structures, which are below 4 feet in height when measured from adjacent, legal ground elevation, when incorporating colors, finishes, and landscaping to minimize visual impact, as determined by the Community
Development Director, provided that the plans identify and require that the landscaping is to be maintained at or below the heights reflected in the plan and not to exceed the height of such above-ground utility structures;
(x) Temporary on-grade removable accessory structures used as play sets, swing sets, other similar unenclosed recreation equipment, and storage sheds provided that:
(i) the structure does not exceed 120 square feet in size, (ii) the height is less than 12 feet above adjacent, legal ground elevation, and
(iii) minimum required setbacks of the underlying zone are met unless it receives administrative design review
approval;
(y) Certain telecommunication facilities subject to the provisions of Chapters 11.06 and 25.55;
(z) New primary dwelling units that comply with all applicable objective development standards of this Zoning Code and the following requirements; provided, however, that if there is a conflict between the Zoning Code and the following
requirements, the following requirements prevail as they are more restrictive in nature. A landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan are required for new units under this subsection.

Note that other structures and site improvements proposed at the same time as the primary dwelling unit may require design review in accordance with Sections 25.05.040(B)(1) and

25.05.040(B)(3). Projects that meet the objective
development standards and are therefore not subject to
150 of 399

Design Review may still require a Coastal Development Permit. (i) Building Height. The height does not exceed a height of 15 feet and a single story, measured in accordance
with the definition of “Height, building” in Chapter 25.08 (from the finished floor or from natural or finished
grade, whichever is more restrictive or lower).
(ii) Yards.
(1) Side Yards. The side yard setbacks are at least
20% greater than the requirement imposed by
the underlying zone. No redistribution of the
required side yards shall be permitted.
(2) Front and Rear Yards. The front and rear yard
setbacks are at least 20% greater than the
requirements imposed by the underlying zone.

Reduced building setbacks in accordance with
Section 25.50.004(E) shall not be permitted.
(3) In any case where a special subdivision map
building setback applies, the building setback
shall be at least 20% greater than that
requirement.
(4) Permitted projections into required yards in
accordance with LBMC Section 25.50.008 shall
be measured from the setbacks indicated by
subsections (1) – (3), directly above.
(iii) Landscaping.
(1) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes,
or trees within the buildable area shall not
exceed 15 feet at maintained height when
measured from ground elevation adjacent to the
location of the vegetation, plant, bush, or tree,
and the plans shall identify and require that the
landscaping is to be maintained at or below the
heights reflected in the plans; and
(2) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes,
or trees in the rear or side yard shall be less than
6 feet at maintained height and in the front yard
shall be less than 4 feet at maintained height
when measured from the ground elevation
151 of 399

adjacent to the location of the vegetation plant, bush, or tree, and the plans shall identify and require that the landscaping is to be maintained at or below the heights reflected in the plans.
(iv) Lighting. Exterior lighting must be fully shielded and aimed downward.
(v) Roof Decks. The primary dwelling unit does not include a roof deck. For purposes of this subsection, a "roof
deck" is defined to mean a deck above the building.
(aa) De Minimis Capital Improvement Projects. For purposes of this subsection, capital improvement projects undertaken by the City may be deemed de minimis and subject to zone
clearance pursuant to the Zoning Code based on the project’s proposed scope in terms of environmental, aesthetic, and/or land use effects on the community, or are emergency projects determined by the Community Development Director to be
necessary to preserve the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Examples of de minimis capital improvement
projects include but are not limited to the following:
(i) Fuel modification project or program;
(ii) Emergency projects;
(iii) Roadway or trail improvements within existing rightsof-way; (iv) Pipeline, such as storm drain and sewer, installation, repair and maintenance; minor alterations to utilities; (v) Alterations and repairs to parking lots;
(vi) Small habitat restoration projects as defined in Section 15333 of the CEQA Guidelines;
(vii) Sign replacements in the same size with similar
materials, at the determination of the Community
Development Director;
(viii) In kind replacement of improvements for repair and maintenance;
(ix) Similar projects as determined by the Community
Development Director in consultation with other
affected department heads.
152 of 399

(3) Administrative Design Review. Administrative Design Review before the Community Development Director or designee shall be required for the following projects and as set forth below:
(a) The following projects are subject to the administrative design review process. For avoidance of doubt, the administrative design review process shall not be used for improvements that are in an environmentally sensitive area (unless a licensed professional has determined, subject to peer review, that the proposed development does not impact the
environmentally sensitive area); such improvements are
subject to design review under (B)(1).
(i) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or
trees within the buildable area that is 15 feet or higher at maintained height when measured from the ground
elevation adjacent to the location of the vegetation,
plant, bush, or tree;
(ii) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or
trees in the rear or side yard at 6 feet or higher at
maintained height and in the front yard at 4 feet or
higher at maintained height when measured from the
ground elevation adjacent to the location of the
vegetation plant, bush, or tree;
(iii) Decks, slabs, terraces, or patios elevated more than 3 feet above the adjacent, legal ground elevation;
(iv) Minor alterations to historic resources consisting of replacement or modification of doors and windows; the
addition of first floor porches and decks; the
replacement of roofing material or building siding;
minor improvements to landscaping, hardscape, walls,
fences, arbors, and other landscape features; and
similar minor site or building alterations, provided that any such alteration has been reviewed for
conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring,
and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995, Weeks
and Grimmer), as amended from time to time, as
determined by the Community Development Director,
or other similar generally accepted resource, as
determined by the Community Development Director;
153 of 399

(v) Mechanical equipment, including, but not limited to, air conditioners and pool/spa equipment that do not meet
the requirements of Section 7.25.130(C);
(vi) Additional covered or tandem parking as specified in Section 25.52.012(G);
(vii) Decorative features such as fence posts, brick or stone columns which may extend up to twelve inches above
the maximum allowable height within the front yard;
(viii) Revocable Encroachment Permits when not
associated with a project requiring a Design Review
Board or Planning Commission decision;
(ix) Re-roofing of buildings or structures which result in white or light colored roofs and which may result in
glare through the use of materials, such as asphalt
shingles or stainless steel, both at the determination of the Community Development Director;
(x) Roof alterations that change the dimensions, square footage, or roof pitch;
(xi) Detached fireplaces;
(xii) Skylights without operable automatic night shades; (xiii) Telecommunication facilities subject to the provisions of Chapters 11.06 and 25.55 unless otherwise exempt;
(xiv) Above-ground utility structures, which are four 4 or higher in height when measured from adjacent, legal
ground elevation;
(xv) Trash storage located within the front yard setback, screened from public view by a wall or fence 4 feet in
height (3 feet on a corner lot) and not impacting
required access for the property;
(xvi) Extensions of time for design review permits;
(xvii) Minor Capital Improvement project, which means a project undertaken by the City that may be reviewed
and approved administratively, based upon a
determination by the Community Development
Director, in consultation with other affected department heads, based on the project’s proposed scope in terms
154 of 399

of environmental, aesthetic, and/or land use effects on the community. Typical examples of minor capital improvement projects include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) Alterations to existing facilities resulting in
exterior design changes;
(2) Roadway or trail extensions within existing
rights-of-way;
(3) Replacement or renovation of damaged
facilities or structures resulting in exterior design
changes;
(4) Small additions to existing structures resulting in exterior design changes;
(5) Construction or demolition of small structures
resulting in site or building design changes; and
(6) Slope and wall repair for public infrastructure.
(b) Except for decks, slabs, terraces, or patios elevated more than 3 feet above the adjacent, legal ground elevation
(Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a)(iii)) and minor alterations to historic resources (Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a)(iv)), the Community Development Director may waive the requirement for a public hearing on a design review permit for the projects identified in Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a), when no other entitlement is required, if all of the following occur:
(i) Mailed Notice. The City shall mail or deliver notice to issue administrative design review permit not requiring a public hearing to all persons and agencies required
to be notified Section 25.05.065 and with all of the
information required in Section 25.05.065 at least ten
days before the end of the public comment period. In
addition, the notice of waiver of public hearing for the pending action shall contain all of the following:
(1) A statement that a public hearing will be held
upon the written request of any person provided
that such request is received by the Department
within fifteen (15) working days from the date of
sending the notice;
(2) The date of the notice;
155 of 399

(3) A statement that the project is appealable to the
City Council;
(4) The final date to submit a request for a hearing;
(5) The date the design review permit will be
granted if there is no hearing;
(6) A project description and a statement of why the
project qualifies for a waived public hearing;
(7) A statement that failure by a person to request
a public hearing may result in the loss of that
person's ability to appeal to the City Council any
action taken by the City on such design review
application;
(8) A statement that the project plans are available
at the Community Development Department for
inspection during normal operating hours of the
City.
(ii) Publication of Notice. The City shall publish a notice to issue administrative design review permit not requiring a public hearing one time at least ten days before the
end of the public comment period. Such notice shall
contain all the information required in subsections
(B)(3)(b)(i)(1) through (B)(3)(b)(a)(8) of this section above Such notices shall be posted in three public
places, including one at the project site, or in a
newspaper with general circulation in the City.
(iii) If no request for public hearing is received by the Community Development Department within fifteen
(15) working days from the date of sending the notice
pursuant to subsection (B)(3)(v)(ii) of this section, the permit is deemed approved.
(iv) An appeal of a decision on an administrative design review application is subject to the provisions of
Section 25.05.070.
(c) Upon receipt of a request for a hearing, or in the Community Development Director’s discretion not to waive the public hearing requirement, the Community Development
Department shall schedule the matter for a public hearing and issue notice of such hearing consistent with the provisions of 156 of 399

Section 25.05.065 and shall be subject to the following process:
(i) Staking Requirements for Administrative Design
Review. If the Director of Community Development or
his or her designee otherwise determines that a project should be staked, the staking requirements of
subsections (C)(2) of this section shall be followed,
except that the construction and certification of the
staking shall be completed at least 14 calendar days
prior to the public hearing.
(ii) Deliberation and Action on Administrative Design
Review Applications. The Director of Community
Development or his or her designee shall conduct a
public hearing for the designated administrative design review projects. After consideration of all testimony and evidence presented at the public hearing and the
Design Review Findings specified in subsection (I) of
this section, the Director of Community Development
or his or her designee shall either approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the application in
writing. An appeal of a decision on an administrative
design review application is subject to the provisions of Section 25.05.070, and Section 25.07.016 when a
coastal development permit is required.

C. Application. Application for design review shall be made by a property owner or authorized agent. Applications shall contain such information as prescribed by the Director of Community Development.
(1) Early Neighbor Communication. The applicant shall communicate with owners of property within 300 feet of the applicant's property notifying them of the proposed project. Such communication should take place prior to deciding on a final design to help resolve potential conflicts. Communication efforts shall include notification mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the applicant's property. The noticing must be prepared and mailed by a professional listing service. Certification to the accuracy, completeness of the list, and date the notice was mailed is required to be provided by the company, along with a copy of the materials sent. Early neighbor communication must be completed prior to being scheduled for a hearing date. The following information shall be included in the early neighbor notification notice:
(a) Applicant contact information.
157 of 399

(b) Location of the proposed project.
(c) A description of the proposed project.
(d) Information on how to participate in the design review process.
(2) Staking Requirements.
(a) A staking plan shall be prepared as specified on the most current zoning and design review submittal checklist. Staking poles and connecting ribbons, which accurately represent the full extent of the proposed structure, including decks and eaves, shall be constructed at least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing. At least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing, the location and height of the staking poles must be certified as accurate by a registered land surveyor or registered civil engineer licensed to conduct land surveys in the State of California. If complete and certified project staking is not in place at least 21 calendar days prior to the first Design Review Board or Planning Commission public hearing date or 14 calendar days prior to the administrative design review public hearing, the project shall be continued to a later date.

Neither the applicant, a relative of the applicant, nor any other person possessing a financial interest in the property or the project may certify the location and height accuracy of the staking poles. If the project is modified during the design review process because of a view consideration, privacy or other concerns that the design review authority determines is necessary to restake, the project shall be re-staked and recertified at least 14 calendar days prior to any subsequent public hearing.
(b) Staking poles shall be removed by the applicant within 20 calendar days after the City’s final decision on the design review application, after all local appeals are exhausted. The applicant's failure to remove the staking poles within the prescribed time period shall result in any remedies at law, including but not limited to code enforcement remedies. (3) Biological Report Requirements. Prior to deliberation and action on a design review application, the applicant shall submit a biological report that is prepared by a professional in the fields of wildlife biology or botany for any proposal to clear native vegetation on undeveloped parcels that are located within or adjacent to areas designated high or very high value on the city's biological values maps and any other areas that contain environmentally sensitive 158 of 399

habitat resources except for annual weed abatement and approved fuel modification programs.
(4) Fire Safety Standards Review. Prior to deliberation and action on a design review application for new construction and major remodels, the Fire Department or Building Division of the Community Development Department, as applicable, shall serve as the review authority for purposes of reviewing and approving or conditionally approving applications, including proposed fuel modification programs. Fuel modification programs or Alternative Materials and Methods (AM&Ms) requests, when determined necessary by the applicable review authority, are required for any parcel having an "FM"—Fuel Modification designation or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone on the City's Geographic Information Mapping system.

The Cal Fire-designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone is an overlay zone, and does not change the underlying zoning of Title 25.

The review authority’s conditions of approval relating to public safety may not subsequently be modified by the design review authority without the review and approval of the Fire Department or Building Division of the Community Development Department, as applicable.

D. Filing Fee. Prior to accepting an application, the Department of Community Development shall charge and collect a filing fee as determined by resolution of the City Council.

E. Public Notice. Public notice shall be subject to the provisions of Section

25.05.065, except that if a Coastal Development Permit is required pursuant to Chapter 25.07, noticing for that type of permit shall instead be carried out through the public notice provisions of Section 25.07.014.

F. Deliberation and Action on Applications.
(1) The authorities responsible for reviewing and making decisions on design review applications under Section 25.05.040(B)(1) are as follows:
(i) The design review board shall conduct a noticed public hearing on design review applications for all singlefamily or two-family developments, including associated public right-of-way improvements.
(ii) The planning commission shall conduct a noticed
public hearing on all other design review applications, including but not limited to: residential development of three-families or more, all projects located in the
downtown specific plan area, all non-residential
development, public works projects, and projects for
159 of 399

which the planning commission is the primary discretionary review authority, such as approval of a conditional use permit.
(2) Upon the conclusion of the public hearing on a design review application, and the consideration of all testimony and evidence presented at the public hearing, the approval authority shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. Determinations of design review applications shall be by majority vote of the voting members of the approval authority present.
(3) The approval, conditional approval, or denial of design review applications by the approval authority shall be based upon the design review findings set forth in subsection (I) this section. Additional findings and review criteria are specified in Section 25.07.012(F) and (G) when an associated Coastal Development Permit is required.

Additional review criteria contained in specific plans and/or zoning overlays shall apply to projects located in areas covered by any such specific plans and/or zoning overlays.
(4) The approval, conditional approval or denial of design review applications by the approval authority shall be accompanied by written findings correlated with the design review findings set forth in subsection (I). Section 25.07.012(G) requires written findings to be made when approving or conditionally approving an associated Coastal Development Permit.
(5) Written notice of the approval, conditional approval or denial of design review applications shall be provided to the applicant or authorized agent within 14 calendar days of the date of the decision of the approval authority.
(6) Landscaping Conditions. The approval authority shall condition all landscaping approvals with maintained growth height limits for all vegetation that potentially impacts views. The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plans.

Thereafter, the landscaping shall be continuously maintained (including replanting, as necessary) in compliance with the approved landscaping plans, unless such plans are subsequently modified pursuant to Section 25.05.060. Certain landscaping is subject to zone clearance pursuant to subsection (B)(2) of this section and must be maintained at approved heights.
(7) Applications for design review approval constitute applications for a "permit" as that term currently is used in California Government Code Section 65009(c)(1), and as hereafter may be amended.
160 of 399

G. Design Guidelines. "Design Guidelines" is a publication that has been developed by the City to assist designers in understanding the Design Review criteria. These guidelines complement the zoning regulations provided for in this Title by providing conceptual examples of potential design solutions and design interpretations. The guidelines are general and may be utilized with flexibility in their application to specific projects.

H. Design Review Criteria. The design review criteria are as follows:
(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.
(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 any one element of the structure into smaller components, may be used to reduce the appearance of mass.
(3) 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 except when necessary to balance other design review criteria. (4) 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. (5) Historic Preservation. Destruction, alteration, or other actions pertaining to historic resources must be consistent with Chapter

25.45. (6) 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.
(7) 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 161 of 399

cause glare or a negative visual impact (e.g. skylights, white rock roofs, high-gloss 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.
(8) 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.
(9) Pedestrian Orientation. Commercial and mixed-use with commercial development design shall maintain, to the maximum extent possible, the existing pedestrian orientation and improve upon it, when feasible. Design techniques that support a pedestrian orientation may include articulated building masses, frequent building entrances, display windows near the sidewalk, outdoor activity spaces, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting. Blank walls should be avoided, to the maximum extent feasible. 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 to the extent feasible.
(10) 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.
(11) 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. View equity is intended to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property.

I. Design Review Findings. In order to approve a design review permit application, the reviewing authority shall make all of the following findings:
(1) The proposed design of the project complies with all applicable provisions of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code; and
(2) The physical improvements and site developments are designed and located in a manner that achieves consistency with the design review criteria specified in Section 25.05.040(H).
162 of 399

J. Appeals. Appeals of the design review authority are subject to the provisions of Section 25.05.070, and Section 25.07.016 when a Coastal Development Permit is required.

K. Effective Date/Expiration Date.
(1) A Design Review decision shall become effective 14 calendar days after the date of the decision, unless appealed to the City Council. (2) Design Review approval shall lapse and become void two years following the effective date if the privileges authorized by design review are not executed or utilized or, if construction work is involved, such work is not commenced within such two-year period and diligently pursued to completion.
(3) The Director of Community Development or his or her designee may grant approval, through the administrative design review process, a two-year extension of time and, after that initial extension of time, a final one-year extension of time. Such time extensions shall be requested in writing by the applicant or authorized agent prior to the expiration of the beginning two-year approval period or a subsequently approved extension of time.
(4) Extension of Time Findings. An extension of time of the beginning two-year approval period may be granted by through the
administrative design review process, if each of the following findings can be made:
(a) The zoning codes or standards applicable to the
circumstances of the originally approved design review have not materially changed; and
(b) The neighborhood character has not changed so as to be materially inconsistent with the findings made when design review was originally approved.

L. Reapplication Waiting Period. After denial of a project, no design review application for a project located on the same parcel or building site may be filed or accepted for filing for six months.

M. The actual development allowed after the application of the design review findings and criteria will typically be less than the maximum designated by the general standards for the zone because of localized conditions identified during the design review process. A proposed development that has no variances from the Zoning Code does not have any presumptive development right or “entitlement.”
163 of 399

SECTION 4. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add Section 25.05.045 (Zone Clearance) to read as follows:

Section 25.05.045 (Zone Clearance)
(A) Purpose. Zoning clearance is the procedure used by the City to verify that a proposed use or structure complies with the activities allowed in the applicable zoning district and the development standards and other provisions of this Zoning Code.
(B) Applicability. Where this Zoning Code requires a zoning clearance as a prerequisite to establishing a use or structure, a zoning clearance shall be required at the time of the Department’s review of any of the following:
(1) Initiation of a Use. A zoning clearance shall be obtained before the initiation or commencement of any use of land not requiring the construction of a structure.
(2) Change of Use. Whenever a use is proposed to be changed or intensified, whether or not the new or intensified use involves a new lessee, operator, or owner, a zoning clearance shall be obtained. (3) Building Permit, Grading Permit, or Other Construction Permit. A zoning clearance shall be obtained before the City issues a new or modified building permit, grading permit, or other constructionrelated permit required for the alteration, construction, modification, moving, or reconstruction of any structure.
(C) Review and Approval
(1) The Community Development Department shall issue the zoning clearance after first determining that the request complies with all Zoning Code provisions and other adopted criteria and policies applicable to the proposed use or structure.
(2) An approval may be in the form of a stamp, signature, or other official notation on approved plans, a letter to the applicant, or other certification, at the discretion of the Community Development Director.
(3) Appeals. The Department’s action on a zone clearance request may be appealed to the City Council in compliance with Section

25.05.070, unless said zoning clearance is for ministerial approval in which case the Director is the final review authority.
(4) Coastal Development Permit. A coastal development permit may still be required in accordance with Chapter 25.07.
164 of 399

SECTION 5. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add Section 25.05.060 (Subsequent Modification to Approved Permits) to read as follows:

Section 25.05.060 (Subsequent Modification to Approved Permits). (A) Subsequent Modification to Coastal Development Permits. (1) After a coastal development permit has been approved, modification of the approved plans and/or any conditions imposed, including additions or deletions, are subject to review in accordance with Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits), including Section

25.07.012(I) and Section 25.07.016(C).
(B) Subsequent Modification to Other Approved Permits.
(1) Development or a use authorized through an administrative use permit, variance, conditional use permit, temporary use permit, and design review permit issued by the City in compliance with the City’s Code shall be established only as approved by the review authority, and in compliance with any conditions of approval, except where a change to the project is approved in compliance with this section. (2) Application. An applicant shall request a proposed change in writing and shall also furnish appropriate supporting information and materials explaining the reasons for the request.
(3) Minor Changes Approved by the Community Development Director without a Public Hearing.
(i) The Community Development Director may authorize minor changes to an approved permit without a public hearing, where the Director first finds that the changes:
a. Are consistent with the requirements of the City’s
Zoning Code; and
b. Do not involve a feature of the project that was a basis for findings for an exemption, negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or environmental
impact report for the project; and
c. Do not involve a feature of the project that was
specifically addressed or was the subject of a
condition(s) of approval for the project or that was a
specific consideration by the applicable review
authority in the project approval; and
165 of 399

d. Do not result in an expansion or change in operational characteristics of the use; and
e. Do not alter the facts in support of the findings required by Section 25.07.012(G).
(ii) The Director may choose to refer any requested change to the original review authority for review and final action.
(C) Changes to Other Permits Approved by the City.
(1) Changes Approved by Original Review Authority. A proposed change that does not comply with the criteria identified in subsection (B)(3) of this section (Minor Changes Approved by the Director without a Public Hearing) may only be approved by the original review authority for the project through a new permit application filed and processed in compliance with the application provisions of Chapter 25.05.
(2) Conditions. If a proposed change is approved by the reviewing body, all terms and conditions of the original approval shall remain in effect, unless specifically removed or modified by the reviewing body. If a proposed change is denied by the reviewing body, the terms and conditions of the original permit shall remain in effect.

SECTION 6. Code Amendment. Subsection (C) of Section 25.05.065 (Public Notice) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):

Section 25.05.065 Public Notice.
. . .
(C) Content of Public Hearing Notices. All public hearing notices that are mailed, posted or published for a proposed project shall contain the information listed below.
(1) Time, date, address and location of the hearing;
(2) Name of the approval authority holding the hearing; (3) A description of the proposed development and its proposed location;
(4) The environmental determination;
(5) The name, title, telephone and email address of a staff contact person;
166 of 399

(6) All case numbers for the proposed development related project case numbers, and project name, if any;
(7) The project applicant’s name;
(8) A statement, if applicable, of whether the proposed project is located within the coastal zone and appeal procedure; see the coastal development permit noticing requirements specified in Section

25.07.014, and Section 25.07.020 for emergency coastal
development permit.

SECTION 7. Code Amendment. Subdivision (E) of Section 25.05.065 (Public Notice) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(E) Posting of Public Hearing Notices. Notice of a public hearing shall be posted in three public places within the City, including on the project site, not less than ten calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing for administrative use permit, conditional use permit, design review, general plan amendment (for specific property), heritage tree, revocation, rezone, street abandonment, subdivision (parcel or tentative tract map), temporary use permit (decided by the planning commission) and variance applications.

SECTION 8. Code Amendment. Section 25.05.070 (Appeals and Requests for Review of Decisions) is hereby repealed and replaced with the following:

Section 25.05.070 Appeals and Requests for Review.
(A) Purpose. It is the intent and purpose of this section to provide standardized procedures for appeals and requests for review with respect to planning and development applications and requests.
(B) Allowed Appeals.
(1) Community Development Director Decisions.
(i) Any decision by the Community Development Director or designee on a ministerial permit may be appealed to the Planning Commission or Design Review Board, as applicable, provided that the only allowed grounds for appeal shall be that the decision of the Community Development Director or
designee has not complied with the applicable provisions of this Zoning Ordinance. Appeals of any determinations and requirements regarding coastal development permit
processing, including exemptions, determinations relative to appealable development, etc. shall be as described in
Chapter 25.07.
167 of 399

(ii) Any decision by the Community Development Director or designee on a discretionary permit may be appealed to the Planning Commission or Design Review Board, as applicable.

Appeals of any determinations and requirements regarding coastal development permit processing, including
exemptions, determinations relative to appealable
development, etc. shall be as described in Chapter 25.07. (2) Planning Commission and Design Review Board Decisions. Any decision rendered by the Planning Commission and Design Review Board may be appealed to the City Council. Similarly, any decision rendered by a board, committee, or commission appointed by the City Council will be processed in the same manner as set forth herein for the Planning Commission and Design Review Board decisions.

Appeals of any determinations and requirements regarding coastal development permit processing, including exemptions,
determinations relative to appealable development, etc. shall be as described in Chapter 25.07.
(3) Requests for Review. On its own initiative, the City Council may review any decision rendered by the Community Development Director, Planning Commission, or Design Review Board as follows:
(i) Decision to Review
a. One Council member may initiate review of a
Community Development Director or Planning
Commission/Design Review Board decision,
respectively, by filing a written request with the City Clerk, within 14 calendar days after the date of the
decision.
b. The Council shall consider the “request for review” at its next regularly scheduled meeting.
c. If the Council votes to review the decision, a
subsequent review hearing shall be scheduled to
consider the merits of the review. Either action shall
require an affirmative majority of the legislative body vote.
d. Where the City is the applicant or affected property owner, the City Manager may initiate proceedings for
review of the decision or determination by written
request to the City Clerk within 14 calendar days of the decision or determination.
168 of 399

(ii) Applicant Notification. At the time the review body votes to initiate review, the applicant shall be informed of the aspects of the application and the decision that the review authority will consider.
(iii) Notice of Hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be provided and the hearing shall be conducted in compliance with Section

25.05.065.
(iv) A request for review shall not require any statement of reasons from the member(s) calling for review and therefore shall not represent support of or opposition to an application.

No fee shall be required for a request for review. There shall be a presumption that the reason for the request is that the application may be of significant concern to the community or significant importance to the quality of life within the community and/or applicable land use policies and
regulations. There shall be no inference or implication of bias or prejudgment due to a request for review being filed. (C) Filing and Processing of Appeals.
(1) Form of Appeal and Timing.
(i) Appeals, other than City Council review, shall be submitted in writing and filed with the Community Development
Department or City Clerk, as applicable, on a City application form, within 14 calendar days after the date the decision is rendered by the Community Development Director or
Planning Commission/Design Review Board.
(ii) Appeals to the Planning Commission/Design Review Board and City Council shall include a statement specifying the basis for the appeal and the specific aspect of the decision being appealed.
(2) Filing Fees.
(i) Appeals shall be accompanied by the filing fee set by the City Council’s Fee Resolution when the application is filed with the Community Development Department or City Clerk, as
applicable. No appeal shall be accepted or deemed filed unless such payment is made.
(ii) Where more than one appeal is allowed, and if more than one appeal is filed, then following the filing expiration date for appeals, the City Clerk shall prorate the required appeal fee 169 of 399

among the total number of appeals and refund the excess amount paid by each appellant.
(iii) The Community Development Director is authorized to waive the filing fee for appeals upon a showing of good cause. (3) Effect of Filing. The filing of an appeal in compliance with this Chapter shall have the effect of suspending the effective date of the decision being appealed, and no further actions or proceedings shall occur in reliance on the decision being appealed except as allowed by the outcome of the appeal.
(4) Notice to Applicant. If the appellant is not the applicant, a copy of the appeal shall be provided to the applicant within seven days of its filing.
(5) Report and Scheduling of Hearing. When an appeal has been filed, the Community Development Director shall prepare a report on the matter. The City shall schedule the matter, in its sole discretion, within ninety (90) days of the filed appeal, for consideration by the appropriate appeal body identified in Section 25.05.070(B). All appeals shall be considered during public hearings with notice provided in compliance with subsection (C)(6). The City may consolidate hearings on all timely filed appeals for the same project. (6) Notice Requirements. Public notice of the hearing for the appeal or request for review shall be subject to the provisions of Section

25.05.065, except that the public notice for appeals of Coastal Development Permits shall be instead carried out through the public notice provisions of Section 25.07.014.
(7) Withdrawal of Appeal. Once filed, an appeal may only be withdrawn by a written request submitted to the Community Development Director, with the signatures of all persons who filed the appeal. (D) Hearing on Appeal.
(1) Upon the hearing of an appeal, the Planning Commission/Design Review Board, shall conduct a de novo hearing on the underlying application but shall be limited to the grounds specifically stated in the notice of appeal, if an appeal was filed. The Planning Commission/Design Review Board shall exercise its independent judgment as to the evidence. Nevertheless, there shall be a presumption that the decision or determination made by the approval authority was reasonable, valid, and not an abuse of discretion; and the appellant, if there is one, shall have the burden of proof of demonstrating otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence, including plans, presented. Abuse of discretion is established when 170 of 399

(a) the agency has not proceeded in the manner required by law; (b) the order or decision is not supported by the findings; (c) the findings are not supported by evidence.
(2) Upon the hearing of an appeal or request for review, the City Council shall conduct a de novo hearing on the underlying application but shall be limited to the grounds specifically stated in the notice of appeal, if an appeal was filed. The City Council shall exercise its independent judgment as to such evidence. Nevertheless, there shall be a presumption that the decision or determination made by the approval authority was reasonable, valid, and not an abuse of discretion; and the appellant, if there is one, shall have the burden of proof of demonstrating otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence, including plans, presented. Abuse of discretion is established when (a) the agency has not proceeded in the manner required by law; (b) the order or decision is not supported by the findings; (c) the findings are not supported by evidence. (3) Hearings are subject to the provisions of Section 25.07.016 when a coastal development permit is required.
(E) Action on Appeal.
(1) At the hearing, the appeal body shall conclude the proceedings with one of the following actions.
(i) Affirmation or Reversal. The appeal body may, by resolution, affirm, affirm in part and reverse in part, or reverse the action that is the subject of the appeal.
(ii) Additional Conditions. When reviewing an appeal, the appeal body may adopt additional conditions of approval involving or related to the subject matter of the appeal.
(iii) Remand. The City Council may, but shall not be required to, remand the matter back to the Planning Commission/Design Review Board, as applicable, for further consideration. The Planning Commission/Design Review Board, as applicable, shall not be allowed to remand the matter back to the
Community Development Director.
(2) Deadlocked Vote.
(i) By Planning Commission/Design Review Board. In the event an appeal from an action of the Community Development
Director results in a deadlocked vote by the Planning
Commission/Design Review Board, the determination,
interpreting decision, judgment, or similar action, the appeal 171 of 399

shall be forwarded to the City Council for the City Council’s proceedings on the appeal, as specified in this Section.
(ii) By City Council. In the event that an appeal from an action of the Planning Commission/Design Review Board results in a deadlocked vote by the City Council, the action of the
Planning Commission/Design Review Board (or Community
Development Director), as appropriate, shall become final.

SECTION 9. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.07.006 (Definitions) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add the following definition in alphabetical order of the existing list of definitions:
“Director of Community Development” and “Community Development Director” shall mean the Director of the Community Development Department at the City of Laguna Beach and his or her designee.

SECTION 43. Code Amendment. Subsection (B) of Section 25.07.008 (Exemptions) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(B) Record of Exemptions. Consistent with Section 25.07.014(A) of this chapter, the Community Development Director shall maintain a record of all development within the coastal zone that were exempted from the requirements of the coastal development permit process. This record shall be available on the City's website. The record of exemption shall include the name of the applicant, the location of the project, and a complete description of the project. For exemptions issued for development that is appealable to the Coastal Commission, the Community Development Director shall also provide notification to the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission of any record of exemptions within seven (7) calendar days of the exemption determination or issuance.

SECTION 44. Code Amendment. Section 25.07.012 (Procedures) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add Subdivisions (J) and (K) to read as follows:
(J) Subsequent Modification to Approved Coastal Development Permits. (1) Development or a use authorized through a coastal development permit issued by the City in compliance with the City’s certified Local Coastal Program shall be established only as approved by the review authority, and in compliance with any conditions of approval, except where a change to the project is approved in compliance with this section.
172 of 399

(2) Application. An applicant shall request a proposed change in writing, and shall also furnish appropriate supporting information and materials explaining the reasons for the request.
(3) Minor Changes Approved by the Community Development Director without a Public Hearing.
(i) The Community Development Director may authorize minor changes to an approved coastal development permit without a public hearing, where the Director first finds that the changes:
a. Are consistent with the requirements of the certified Local Coastal Program; and
b. Do not involve a feature of the project that was a basis for findings for an exemption, negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or environmental
impact report for the project; and
c. Do not involve a feature of the project that was
specifically addressed or was the subject of a
condition(s) of approval for the project or that was a
specific consideration by the applicable review
authority in the project approval; and
d. Do not result in an expansion or change in operational characteristics of the use; and
e. Do not alter the facts in support of the findings required by Section 25.07.012(G).
(ii) The Director may choose to refer any requested change to the original review authority for review and final action.
(4) Changes to Coastal Development Permits Approved by the City. (i) Changes Approved by Original Review Authority. A proposed change that does not comply with the criteria identified in subsection (J)(3) of this section (Minor Changes Approved by the Director without a Public Hearing) may only be approved by the original review authority for the project through a new permit application filed and processed in compliance with the application provisions of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal
Development Review Procedures)
(ii) Conditions. If a proposed change is approved by the reviewing body, all terms and conditions of the original 173 of 399

approval shall remain in effect, unless specifically removed or modified by the reviewing body. If a proposed change is denied by the reviewing body, the terms and conditions of the original permit shall remain in effect. (5) Amendments to Coastal Development Permits Approved by the Coastal Commission. Amendments to coastal development permits approved by the Coastal Commission within an area where the Coastal Commission continues to exercise original permit jurisdiction shall not be processed by the City and instead shall be processed by the Coastal Commission.
(K) Staking Requirements.
(1) A staking plan shall be prepared as specified on the most current zoning and coastal development permit submittal checklist. Staking poles and connecting ribbons, which accurately represent the full extent of the proposed structure, including decks and eaves, shall be constructed at least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing.

At least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing, the location and height of the staking poles must be certified as accurate by a registered land surveyor or registered civil engineer licensed to conduct land surveys in the State of California. If complete and certified project staking is not in place as required, the project shall be continued to a later date. Neither the applicant, a relative of the applicant, nor any other person possessing a financial interest in the property or the project may certify the location and height accuracy of the staking poles. If the project is modified during the review process and the reviewing body determines it is necessary to restake, the project shall be re-staked and re-certified at least 14 calendar days prior to any subsequent public hearing.
(2) Staking poles shall be removed by the applicant within 20 calendar days after the final project decision. The applicant's failure to remove the staking poles within the prescribed time period shall result in any remedies at law, including but not limited to code enforcement remedies.
(3) The Community Development Director may waive this requirement in writing in the Community Development Director’s sole discretion.

SECTION 12. Code Amendment. Section 25.07.026 (Local Coastal Program amendments) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed and replaced with the following:
(A) Purpose and Intent. The City Council may amend the Local Coastal Program when required by public necessity, convenience, and general 174 of 399

welfare or protection of coastal resources, or where required by specific policies in the Local Coastal Program by following the procedure specified in this Chapter. For purposes of this Section, amendments of a certified Local Coastal Program includes, but is not limited to, any action by the City that authorizes the use of a parcel of land other than a use that is designated in the certified local coastal program as a permitted use of the parcel, except for temporary uses as defined in Section 25.05.035. Such amendments will not take effect until effectively certified by the Coastal Commission. (B) Application
(1) Proposals
(a) Initiation. An amendment to the Local Coastal Program may be initiated by:
(i) Resolution of Intention of the City Council;
(ii) Property owners, or their duly authorized agents, by filing a complete and verified application with the
Community Development Department for amendments
to the LCP involving their property.
(iii) Any person authorized to undertake a public works project or proposing an energy facility development
may request to amend the local coastal program, if the
purpose of the proposed amendment is to meet public
needs of an area greater than that included within such certified local coastal program that had not been
anticipated by the person making the request at the
time the local coastal program was before the Coastal
Commission for certification.
(b) Contents of Amendment Applications. The amendment
application shall include:
(i) All policies, plans, standards, objectives, diagrams, drawings, maps, photographs, and supplementary
data related to the amendment in sufficient detail to
allow review for conformity with the requirements of the Coastal Act. Written documents should be readily
reproducible. An amendment application may also
need to include, where applicable, a readily identifiable public access component as set forth in California
Code of Regulations Section 13512.
(ii) The application shall be accompanied by a map drawn to scale showing the location of the property concerned 175 of 399

and the location of all highways, streets and alleys, public easements or Offers to Dedicate Public Easements and all lots and parcels of land within a distance of 500 feet from the exterior boundaries of the property involved. The accuracy of such map shall be the responsibility of the applicant.
(iii) A discussion of the amendment's relationship to and effect on the other sections of the certified LCP.
(iv) An analysis that meets the requirements of California Code of Regulations Section 13511 that demonstrates
conformity with the requirements of Chapter 6 of the
Coastal Act.
(v) Any environmental review documents, pursuant to
CEQA, required for all or any portion of the amendment
to the LCP.
(vi) An indication of the zoning measures or
implementation that will be used to carry out the
amendment (unless submitted at the same time as the
amendment to the Local Coastal Program).
(c) Any application made pursuant to Paragraph (B)(1)(a)(ii) and (iii), above, shall be in writing and signed and verified by the owner of the land involved or by his authorized agent. If a person other than the owner makes the application, written authorization to act on behalf of the owner shall be submitted with such application. The application shall show or be accompanied by the legal description of the property for which the amendment is requested, and the street address or
addresses, if any, or other common description of the
premises.
(2) Review of Filing. An amendment to a certified LCP together with all necessary attachments and exhibits shall be deemed "submitted" after having been received and found by the Community
Development Director to be in proper order and legally adequate to comply with this Section. The Community Development Director shall cause a date of receipt stamp to be affixed to all LCP submissions on the day they are so received and a stamp of the date of submittal on the day they are found to be properly submitted. (C) LCP Amendment Hearing and Notice. Upon receipt in proper form of an LCP amendment application, or upon receipt of a Resolution of Intention 176 of 399

from the City Council, the Community Development Department shall set a public hearing before the Planning Commission.
(1) Notice of Public Hearings. Notice of public hearings shall be given at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. Such notice shall state the nature of the proposed change, location of the affected area, and the time(s) and place(s) of the scheduled hearing(s) and for accepting comments on the proposed amendment.
(a) For Amendments to LCP, the notice shall be provided as follows:
(i) By mail to all of the following parties:
(1) Any member of the public who has so
requested;
(2) Each local government contiguous with the area
that is the subject of the Amendment;
(3) Local governments, special districts, or port or
harbor districts that could be directly affected by
or whose development plans should be
considered in the Amendment;
(4) Regional, state and federal agencies that may
have an interest in or be affected by the
amendment;
(5) Local libraries and media;
(6) The Coastal Commission.
(7) Any reference in this subchapter to "interested
parties" or "public agency" shall include the
aforementioned persons or groups.
(ii) By posting the draft amendment to the City’s website in a format that can be downloadable.
(iii) By placing a display advertisement of at least onefourth page in newspaper having the greatest circulation within the area affected by the proposed
action.
(b) Following a public hearing, the Planning Commission shall recommend approval, modification, or denial of the proposed amendment to the City Council. The recommendation shall be 177 of 399

by resolution carried by the affirmative vote of not less than the majority of the entire Commission. It shall be transmitted to the City Council within forty (40) days after the rendering of a decision. Such decision is final and conclusive and may not be reconsidered except upon referral by the City Council. (2) Council Hearing and Notice. After receipt of the Planning Commission's recommendation, the City Council shall hold a public hearing and shall give notice in the same manner as required for the Planning Commission in this Section above.
(3) Council Decision. After the required hearing, the City Council shall take actions on the Amendment by resolution or ordinance, as applicable, to either approve, modify, or deny the proposed amendments.
(D) Required Findings. Before approval of any LCP Amendment, the City Council must make the finding that such amendment meets the requirements of, and is in conformity with, the LCP and the policies of Chapter 3 the California Coastal Act.
(E) Certification of Local Coastal Program Amendments.
(1) Submittal to Coastal Commission. Any amendment approved by the City shall be submitted to the Coastal Commission in accordance with Sections 30510, 30512, 30513 and 30514 of the Public Resources Code and Sections 13551 and 13552 of the California Code of Regulations.
(2) Effective Certification. An amendment to the Commission-certified Local Coastal Program shall not become effective after City Council adoption until the amendment is submitted pursuant to the requirements of Section 13551 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations and is effectively certified by the California Coastal Commission pursuant to the requirements of Section 13544 et seq. of the California Code of Regulations.
(3) Amendments Pursuant to PRC 30515 (Public Works Project or Energy Facility Development). LCP Amendments approved by the Coastal Commission pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 30515 shall be effectively certified upon final action by the Coastal Commission.

SECTION 13. Code Amendment. Section 25.08.004 (Words beginning with “B.”) of Chapter 25.08 (Definitions and Standards) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add the following definition in alphabetical order:
178 of 399

“Buildable Area” means the total area of the parcel minus the area of all required setbacks pursuant to the local zoning regulations.

SECTION 13. Code Amendment. Section 25.08.010 (Words beginning with “E.”) of Chapter 25.08 (Definitions and Standards) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add the following definition in alphabetical order:
“Environmentally Sensitive Area” means any area in which plant or animal life or their habitats are either rare or especially valuable because of their special nature or role in an ecosystem and which could be easily disturbed or degraded by human activities and developments. “Environmentally Sensitive Area” includes slopes of 30% or greater and areas designated as an “Environmentally Sensitive Area” on a map adopted by resolution of the City Council.

SECTION 14. Code Amendment. Section 25.08.016 (Words beginning with “H.”) of Chapter 25.08 (Definitions and Standards) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to modify the definition for “Height, building” (additions shown in underline):
“Height, building” means one or more of the following:
(a) The vertical distance from any point on the finished roof surface, including any roof-mounted or rooftop appurtenance, to the finished floor surface of the lowest floor measured directly below or to the natural or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive or lower. If the entire lowest floor, measured from the finished floor surface of the floor above, is located completely below natural or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive, then the building height shall be measured to the top of the finished floor of the next level directly above that subterranean level;
179 of 399

(b) For purposes of measuring the height above the front lot line, an applicant may have the option of measuring by one of the following two options:
(1) The vertical distance from the curb, street centerline or property line to the highest point of the roof, whichever is the applicable measurement as required under the specific chapters of this title. The elevation of the curb shall be taken on top of the curb at a point created by the intersection of the curb and a line perpendicular to and intersecting the midpoint of the front lot line. In the event, there is no curb, height shall be measured from the centerline of the street to the top of the roof. The elevation of the centerline of the street shall be taken at a point created by the intersection of the centerline and a line perpendicular to and intersecting the midpoint of the front lot line; or
(2) At every point along the curb or street center line. (c) For purposes of measuring the height above the rear lot line, the elevation of the rear lot line shall be taken at every point along the rear property line. (d) Exception: Provided they do not exceed a maximum height limit set forth in Chapter 25.51, and provided further that no structure in excess of the 180 of 399

specified building height shall be used for additional living or floor space, the following items may be permitted to a height in excess of that permitted within a zone when approved by the design review board pursuant to the procedures and findings of Chapter 25.05 as applicable: structures for the sole purposes of housing elevators, stairways, tanks, ventilating fans or similar equipment required to operate and maintain the building, skylights, spires, flagpoles, broadcasting and receiving antennae and chimneys. (e) For development proposed on the seaward side of Pacific Coast Highway, where topography allows, no structures shall be constructed above the finish elevation of Pacific Coast Highway at the right-of-way line.

SECTION 15. Code Amendment. Section 25.08.018 (Words beginning with “I.”) of Chapter 25.08 (Definitions and Standards) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add the following definition in alphabetical order:
“Improvement” means any building, structure, feature, or object constituting a physical addition to real property or a structure on real property, or any part of such addition.

Improvements include the construction of streets and all related appurtenances bridges, utilities, pedestrian ways, bikeways, trails, or landscaping and irrigation in connection with an approved development or public works project, whether involving the subdivision of land or not.

SECTION 16. Code Amendment. Section 25.08.022 (Words beginning with “L.”) of Chapter 25.08 (Definitions and Standards) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add the following definitions in alphabetical order:
“Landscaping” means an area devoted to or developed and maintained with native or exotic plantings, lawn, groundcover, gardens, trees, shrubs, and other plant materials, and associated decorative outdoor landscape elements.
“Landscape plans” means plans prepared to depict proposed landscaping and irrigation on a development site, which include a planting plan and an irrigation plan drawn to the same scale as the grading plan, that clearly and accurately identify specified plants, irrigation layout equipment, finish grades and drainage, specifications and construction details, plan sheet numbers, and drawing date of plans.

SECTION 17. Code Amendment. Subdivision (E)(1)(c) and (E)(1)(d) of Section

25.10.008 (Property development standards) of Chapter 25.10 (R-1 Residential Low Density Zone) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(E) Yards
. . .
181 of 399

(1) General Provisions
. . .
(c) The maximum lot area which may be occupied by habitable enclosed building space and covered off-street parking shall depend on lot size. For lots four thousand 4,000 square feet and under, site coverage shall not exceed forty-four percent; for lots greater than four thousand 4,000 square feet and less than 8,000 square feet, the maximum site coverage shall be calculated using the formula below; and for lots eight
thousand 8,000 square feet and over, site coverage shall not exceed thirty-five 35 percent. The maximum site coverage percentage permissible on any residential lot shall be
calculated using the following formula:

Building Site Coverage (%) = 35 + (8,000-A) x 9
4,000
Where A = lot area (square feet)
For example, if the lot area is six thousand six hundred twentyfive 6,625 square feet, the maximum allowable building site coverage would be calculated as follows:

Lot Area (A) = 6,625 square feet
Building Site Coverage (%) = 35 + (8,000-A) x 9
4,000
= 35 + (1,375) x 9
4,000
= 35 + 3.094
BSC (%) = 38.09
(d) The Design Review Board is authorized to modify the building site coverage requirement identified in subsection

25.10.008(E)(4)(c), above, upon a finding that shall only be modified by the design review board when it is necessary to preserve views, preserve privacy, reduce heights, or to maintain neighborhood development patterns. In no event shall the Design Review Board modify such requirement by 182 of 399

more than five percent. In no event shall the Design Review Board modify such requirement by more than five percent.

SECTION 18. Code Amendment. Subdivision (E)(3)(a)(2) of Section 25.10.008 (Property Development Standards) of Chapter 25.10 (R-1 Residential Low Density Zone) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(E) Yards
. . .
(3) Side Yard.
(a) The width of each side yard shall be not less than ten 10 percent of the average lot width, but in no case less than three 3 feet; except that when the average lot width is forty 40 feet or greater, no side yard shall be less than four 4 feet. . . .
2) Side yards shall not be used for accessory buildings, clotheslines, air conditioning or pool equipment, the
storage of trailers, boats, campers or other materials, or the regular or constant parking of automobiles or other vehicles, except for the required additional parking space when approved by the Design Review Board in
accordance with Section 25.52.012(f).

SECTION 19. Code Amendment. Sections 25.15.002 (Intent and Purpose) and

25.15.004 (Design Criteria) of Chapter 25.15 (R/HP Residential/Hillside Protection Zone) in Title 25 (Zoning) are hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough) with re-numbering and re-lettering to occur in numerical and alphabetical order:

Section 25.15.002 (Intent and Purpose)
The intent and purpose of this zone is to allow for low-intensity, residential development that addresses concerns for public health and safety and promotes the design criteria set forth in Section 25.15.004. All new development in this zone shall be sensitive to the hillside terrain and to the environmental constraints and shall provide for the conservation of existing natural open space lands, unique landforms, scenic hillsides and sensitive biological habitats. These environmental constraints include potential danger from fire, slope failure and erosion, as well as the difficulty of emergency evacuation. Protection of the physical environment, public views and aesthetic qualities associated with undeveloped lands is of critical concern in this zone. Low-intensity agricultural uses and passive, recreational uses are also appropriate for this zone. 183 of 399

Section 25.15.004 (Design Criteria Standards)
The area included in the residential/hillside protection zone encompasses a substantial amount of the city's undeveloped hillsides. Not only does this land incorporate some of the most undisturbed physical environments in the city, it also supports many environmentally sensitive habitats. These included rare species of flora or fauna, significant watercourses, ridgelines and unique landforms such as rock outcroppings and caves. In addition, land within this zone typically contains physical conditions such as steep topography and geologically sensitive areas which amplify the environmental and safety concerns of this zoning district.

The following design criteria standards have been established to help ensure that future development proposals take the proper steps to avoid adverse impacts on these unique resources. In addition, all development proposals shall be subject to the zoning standards and design review procedures of this chapter and shall be strictly evaluated for conformance with the city's general plan, with particular emphasis on the open space and conservation element. As part of the environmental review process for any project, the city shall require detailed environmental studies to identify specific impacts, measures to avoid those impacts and, when allowable impacts are unavoidable, the necessary mitigation measures.
(A) To ensure compliance with the applicable General Plan policies, aAll development proposals shall be subject to the following standardscriteria :
(1) Building Site. Development Buildings and other improvements should be located on a slopes of less than thirty percentand shall be situated such that they do not adversely impact any environmentally sensitive areas, and should minimize impacts to ridgelines, geologic hazard areas and unique landforms.
(2) Mass and Scale. The height and scale of the building(s) should respect the natural surroundings and unique visual resources by incorporating designs which minimize bulk and mass, follow natural topography and minimize visual intrusion on the natural landscape. (3) Building Size. In addition to the mass and scale of the residence, the total square footage shall also be maintained at a size compatible with the open space characteristics of the hillsides. Residential designs should blend in with the surroundings, while minimizing their prominence to public view. As such, larger lots shall not necessarily enable the development of correspondingly larger homes. (4) Architectural Style. The architectural style, including materials and colors, should be compatible with the natural setting by encouraging designs which blend in with the surroundings.
184 of 399

(5) Grading. Development proposals should minimize grading of hillside areas by encouraging designs which follow the natural grade while maintaining a building mass and scale that is sensitive to topography. (6) Landscaping. The proposal should maintain native vegetation to the greatest extent possible and should include the provision of additional native vegetation to mitigate potential visual impacts and erosion concerns associated with the development proposal.

Invasive plantings shall be prohibited.
(7) Fuel Modification. The development proposal should address the required fuel modification as part of the initial application and should integrate fuel modification provisions into the site plan in such a way as to minimize impact on existing native vegetation and areas of visual prominence. Alternative means to thinning and/or removal of native vegetation for fire hazard management such as minimizing the building envelope, and/or siting of the structure(s) away from hazard areas, and/or use of fire retardant design and materials are preferred where feasible. The fuel modification plan shall be in compliance with all Fire Department fuel modification requirements, and may qualify as development requiring a coastal development permit that is subject to the provisions of Chapter 25.07, including instances when such a plan constitutes development that is not exempt pursuant to Section 25.07.008 because it would impact environmentally sensitive habitat areas.

SECTION 20. Code Amendment. Subsection J (Fences and Walls) of Section

25.15.010 (Property development standards) of Chapter 25.15 (R/HP Residential/Hillside Protection Zone) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(J) Fences and Walls. All fences and walls shall be subject to the provisions of Section 25.50.012 as well as the following standards:
(1) Except as provided for in subsection (2) below, any fencing shall be located within one hundred 100 feet of the main dwelling principal structure. If no dwelling principal structure exists on the lot, a fence is not permitted.
(2) Requests for security or safety fences which are not addressed in the Building Code may be exempt from the provisions of
subsection (1) abovebelow, subject to design review board approval which includes a finding that the fence is necessary for the preservation of public health, safety and welfare.

SECTION 21. Code Amendment. Section 25.15.012 (Required findings) of Chapter

25.15 (R/HP Residential/Hillside Protection Zone) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed. 185 of 399

SECTION 22. Code Amendment. Subsection B (Design Review) of Section

25.24.005 (Property development standards) of Chapter 25.24 (Lagunita Zone) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(B) Design Review.
(1) Intent and Purposes. The intent and purpose of this section is to establish design review standards and controls over private development in the Lagunita residential community. It is recognized that there are unique design aspects inherent in the Lagunita community that need to be preserved and enhanced, particularly with respect to preserving existing views and view corridors. The design criteria, as established herein, shall be utilized for all projects proposed within the Lagunita Zone. Prior to any discretionary review by the city, the Lagunita Community Association shall conduct its own project review. The Community Development Department shall notify the Association in writing when the City has received an application with reference to the submitted plans and with information that comments are due within thirty days of when the Community Development Department mails or otherwise sends the written communication to the Association. The Association will may submit a letter of comment to the city for its consideration within thirty days of when the Community Development Department mails or otherwise sends the written communication to the Association. The lack of the comment letter from the Association after the appropriate thirty day notice period afforded by the City will not prevent the City from proceeding with consideration, approval, or denial of the application; however, the City’s processing and decision on the application shall not be delayed or extended to accommodate Association review beyond the timeframes required by applicable state law, including the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 et seq.), or any other state-mandated deadlines. If compliance with such state-law deadlines requires earlier action, the City may proceed to consider, approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application before the expiration of the thirty (30)-day comment period. prior to the design review board's review of the applicant's plans. The adoption of these design criteria will guide and ensure that all future growth contributes to preservation of the Lagunita community character.
(a) All buildings, structures, and improvements shall be evaluated on criteria in Section 25.05.040, and on the following
additional view preservation criteria: a prime consideration for the Design Review Board in reviewing development
applications including its landscaping shall be the
maintenance of views and view corridors. For purposes of this 186 of 399

chapter, a “view corridor” shall be defined as a vista or scenic field of vision enjoyed from a residence between and/or above other structures of buildings. Property development standards for the Lagunita Zone shall represent the maximum allowable building envelope. The actual development allowed might be less than that designated by the general standards for the Lagunita Zone because of localized conditions identified during the design review process.

SECTION 43. Code Amendment. Section 25.25.010 (Performance Standards/design criteria) of Chapter 25.25 (SLV, South Laguna Village Commercial Zone) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed.

SECTION 44. Code Amendment. Section 25.28.040 (Design criteria) of Chapter

25.28 (Institutional Zone) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed.

SECTION 45. Code Amendment. Section 25.35.070 (Design Review) of Chapter

25.35 (Specific Plan (Arch Beach Heights)) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough) with re-numbering and relettering to occur in numerical and alphabetical order:

Section 25.35.070 Design review.
(A) All new residences and accessory structures, and additions to existing residences and accessory structures, are subject to the design and review as per the zoning ordinance. The design review board shall be guided by the development standards set forth in Section 25.35.080 in addition to the normal design review criteria findings in Section 25.05.040. (B) Design review shall be limited to those Projects requiring design review shall be subject to the standards set forth in Sections 25.35.080 and

25.40.005. Additional guidelines may be adopted by resolution of the city council, upon recommendation of the design review board, when such guidelines are deemed warranted.
(C) In the event that a project is disapproved by the design review board, the design review board shall state in writing the subsections of Section 25.35.080 or 25.40.005, or the guidelines adopted by resolution of the city council, upon which such disapproval is based, and shall further state the reason disapproval of the project is justified by said subsections or guidelines.

SECTION 46. Code Amendment. Section 25.35.080 (Design Review development standards) of Chapter 25.35 (Specific Plan (Arch Beach Heights)) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough) with renumbering and re-lettering to occur in numerical and alphabetical order:

25.35.080 (Design review development standards.)
187 of 399

(A) Intent and Purpose. It is the intent and purpose of this section to establish design review development standards and controls over public and private development in the Arch Beach Heights Tract. It is recognized that the area has specific design constraints relating to its visibility from the city below, historic development pattern and potential for fire. In this respect, it is the declared intent of the city that this section shall serve the following purposes:
(1) To establish standards and policies that will promote and enhance quality design, site relationships, and other aesthetic considerations of development in the Arch Beach Heights Tract.
(2) To improve and augment the controls now included in ordinances related to planning and building in order to promote development which is in the best interest of the public safety and welfare. (3) To recognize the interdependence of land values and aesthetics and to implement these standards in the best interest of the city. (B) Standards.
(1) All designs shall demonstrate an individuality of design, which should be achieved primarily through a manipulation of the volume of the structure rather than by means of nonessential architectural details. (2) While individuality of design should be achieved, the thrust should be scaling down rather than duplication of existing bulk and size of existing structures.
(3) Lot coverage shall not exceed that specified in the zoning ordinance for R-1 development.
(4) All designs shall limit areas of large blank walls by carefully planned windows, porches, and smaller volumes.
(5) Harsh boxlike structures, and structures which make extensive use of glossy surfaces, or strong, glaring colors, shall be avoided. (6) On downhill homes, all designs shall avoid vertical repetitive detailing which adds to the illusion of height.
(7) All designs shall minimize roof penetration by grouping all plumbing vents and ducts together.
(8) All vents, gutters, downspouts, louvers, exposed flashings, and service doors shall be treated as architectural design elements, and shall be painted to coordinate with the color scheme of the structure. 188 of 399

(9) Roof decks should shall not be permitted above the uppermost story., nor should pParapets, walls, protective roof deck railings or and stair enclosures shall not exceed the roof height of the uppermost story, except as approved by design review.
(10) All exterior lighting should relate to the design of the structure, and the light emitted shall not adversely affect neighboring properties, exceed that reasonably necessary for security purposes, nor detract from the aesthetics of the property.
(11) All landscape plans shall address the functional aspects of landscaping such as drainage, erosion prevention, wind barriers, shade, sound absorption, dust abatement, and reduction of glare. (12) Landscaping shall be used in front and rear yards to relieve solid, unbroken elevations and to soften continuous wall expanses. (13) All designs shall incorporate the use of shrubbery and trees to reduce the appearance of height.
(14) The area between the underside of the building and finished grade should be completely enclosed, except as approved by design review.
(15) There shall be provided a storage area for at least two garbage and trash containers, minimum forty-gallon capacity each, completely enclosed from view, easily accessible to the street. Such areas shall be protected by at least one-hour fire rating.
(16) A general storage area of at least 400 cubic feet, completely enclosed from view, shall be provided within each garage or carport, except as otherwise approved by design review.
(17) All developments should seek to minimize the difference between the natural grade and the finished project height by such methods as split level or stepping down the building along with the grade.

SECTION 27. Code Amendment. Section 25.39.100 (Design Review) of Chapter

25.29 (Specific Plan (Sarah Thurston Park)) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed.

SECTION 28. Code Amendment. Section 25.44.060 (Architectural design criteria) of Chapter 25.44 (Three Arch Bay Zone) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough) with re-numbering and re-lettering to occur in numerical and alphabetical order:

Section 25.44.060 Architectural design criteria Design Review 189 of 399

Intent and Purpose. It is the intent and purpose of this section to establish design review standards and controls over private development in the Three Arch Bay residential community. It is recognized that there are unique design aspects inherent in the community appearance that need to be preserved and enhanced. These design criteria will be utilized for all projects in this zone reviewed by the city. Applicants should note that prior to city review, the Three Arch Bay Community Association will conduct its own plan review. The Association will submit a letter of comment to the city for its consideration and review prior to city approval of the applicant's plans. The adoption of these design criteria will guide and ensure that all future growth contributes to a preservation of the community character. Applicants should note that prior to City review, the Three Arch Bay Community Association will conduct its own plan review. The Community Development Department shall notify the Association in writing when the City has received an application with reference to the submitted plans and with information that comments are due within thirty days of when the Community Development Department mails or otherwise sends the written communication to the Association. The Association may submit a letter of comment to the City for its consideration within thirty days of when the Community Development Department mails or otherwise sends the written communication to the Association; however, the City’s processing and decision on the application shall not be delayed or extended to accommodate Association review beyond the timeframes required by applicable state law, including the Permit Streamlining Act (Government Code Section 65920 et seq.), or any other state-mandated deadlines. If compliance with such state-law deadlines requires earlier action, the City may proceed to consider, approve, conditionally approve, or deny the application before the expiration of the thirty (30)-day comment period. The lack of the comment letter from the Association after the appropriate thirty-day notice period afforded by the City will not prevent the City from proceeding with consideration, approval, or denial of the application.

In order to approve a design review permit, the City’s reviewing authority must make the following findings in addition to the findings at LBMC Section 25.05.040(I):
(A) While individuality of architectural style should be achieved, the design should conform to the established small-scale building character which is sensitive to existing topography and view preservation. (B) All designs shall protect the privacy and views of neighboring properties especially in side and rear yard areas by providing architectural relief from large blank walls by proper placement of windows, porches, architectural pop-outs and other similar features.
(C) The minimum roof pitch on any building or structure shall be 3:12. Flat roofs and roof decks are prohibited.
(D) Roof-mounted solar collectors shall not be visible from any street view; the solar collector shall not exceed the ridge elevation of the roof. 190 of 399

(E) All development shall strive to be compatible with surrounding homes and the community with respect to architectural character, style, scale, mass and color.
(F) Walls and fences should tie directly to the main building, enclosing only active use areas. Both wood and wrought iron fencing can be used when the material and color are compatible with the main building. (G) All landscape and hardscape plans shall address the functional aspects of landscaping such as drainage, erosion prevention, wind barrier, shade, sound absorption, dust abatement and reduction of glare. (1) Landscaping, as required, shall be provided in accordance with the community design and landscape guidelines as adopted by Resolution No. 89-104 and as hereafter amended.
(2) All residential and landscaping design shall preserve surrounding views of the ocean and, whenever possible, utilize trees and other vegetation to complement this viewshed.

SECTION 29. Code Amendment. Section 25.44.050 (Property development standards) of Chapter 25.44 (Three Arch Bay Zone) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add subsection M (Roof Pitch) to read as follows:
(M) Roof Pitch. The minimum roof pitch on any building or structure shall be 3:12. Flat roofs and roof decks are prohibited.

SECTION 30. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.49 (Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):

Section 25.49.010 Intent and purpose.

The intent and purpose of this chapter is to establish a specific plan for the Diamond/Crestview area pursuant to the authority of California Government Code Sections 65450 et seq. It is recognized that there is a need for a comprehensive planning program to address the unique issues associated with the Diamond/Crestview area and that this need is best served through the establishment of a specific plan. The Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan contains goals, policies, and development standards and design guidelines.

Section 25.49.020 Description and application.

The specific plan covers a forty-one acre area of Tract 764 and is generally located west of Arch Beach Heights, north of the Loma Tract, east of Woods Cove and south of Bluebird Canyon. The physical boundaries of the specific plan area are delineated on Attachment D attached hereto.
191 of 399

Section 25.49.030 Development regulations.

All development regulations of the Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan area are contained within the text of the document. These regulations include goals, policies, and development standardsand design guidelines. All other ordinances and sections of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code shall also apply to the specific plan area, unless such standards are inconsistent with the provisions of the specific plan, in which case, the specific plan shall apply.

SECTION 31. Code Amendment. Section 25.45.004 (Definitions) of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
"Historic resource" means a property or structure that (1) is listed on the City's historic register, (2) is listed on the California Register of Historical Resources, (3) has been officially determined to be eligible for the California Register of Historical Resources by the State Historical Resource Commission, (4) is listed on the National Register of Historic Places, (5) has been officially determined to be eligible for the National Register of Historic Places by the National Park Service, or (6) the City is mandated by law to treat as a historic resource based on substantial evidence in light of the whole record. Generally, a resource shall be considered to be "historically significant" if the resource meets the criteria for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources. The absence of a fully executed and recorded written historic resource preservation agreement between a property owner and the City shall not, on its own, be considered conclusive evidence that the property is not listed on the City’s historic register.

SECTION 32. Code Amendment. Subsection B (Designation Procedures) of Section 25.45.006 (Historic register designation, criteria and procedures and removal from register) of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(B) Designation Procedures.
(1) The property owner shall complete the application for the proposed designation as a historic resource and inclusion on the register on a form provided by the department, include all information required and file the application with the department.
(2) The Heritage Committee will review the application for designation.

In its consideration of placement on the register, the Heritage Committee may request additional information and plans for any future planned changes to the structure. There shall be no application fee for placement on the register.
(3) Recordation of a written historic resource preservation agreement between the City and the property owner, acknowledging the owner's obligations and responsibilities to ensure preservation of the historic character of the resource shall be filed after the property is 192 of 399

designated by the Heritage Committee for inclusion on the register.

If the owner has applied for incentives, the recordation shall not occur until the owner's request, or the incentive has been acted upon. This agreement shall be recorded with the County and will apply to any subsequent owners. A property approved for the Register shall not be formally designated until the property owner executes the preservation agreement, and it is recorded with the County.

SECTION 33. Code Amendment. Subsection (A) of Section 25.45.008 (Incentives to properties on the city’s historic register) of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(A) Parking. The following benefits are subject to Design Review Board approval, except when a conditional use permit is required for the project, in which case the City Council Planning Commission shall be the final approval authority, with a recommendation from the Planning Commission.

SECTION 34. Code Amendment. Section 25.45.010 (Procedures for alteration of an historic resource) of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough) with re-numbering and re-lettering to occur in numerical and alphabetical order:
(A) Review. Prior to the issuance of a building permit to remodel or alter any historic resource, City staff shall review the proposed changes to determine if the proposal is consistent with the design review criteria, the Secretary of the Interior's Standards (SOIS) or the City's Local Design Guidelines.

Interior changes shall not be reviewed unless the changes will alter a character defining features of the historic resource or if the interior area is publicly accessible.
(B) If the project is found to be consistent with the SOIS or the City's Local Design Guidelines, but otherwise requires design review pursuant to Section 25.05.040(B), the Heritage Committee shall make a recommendation to the approval authority prior to design review. Repair or replacement of existing materials with in-kind or historically appropriate materials, in the same location, does not require design review approval.

Minor alterations may be subject to Section 25.05.040 (B)(3). (C) If staff believes the project is not consistent with the SOIS and/or the City's Local Design Guidelines, then after the appropriate environmental documentation has been prepared pursuant to CEQA, design review shall be required. The Heritage Committee shall make a recommendation to the approval authority prior to design review.
193 of 399

(D) Historic Resource Assessment Report. If an historic resource assessment has not been prepared for the property, the Heritage Committee or the design review authority may require that an historic resource assessment, paid for by the City, be prepared prior to the review of the project to evaluate the project impacts to the property.
(E) Environmental Determination. During its review, the design review authority will adopt the appropriate environmental determination pursuant to CEQA.

An historic resource assessment may be required to evaluate a project's potential environmental impact. Projects that comply with the SOIS and the local design guidelines may be eligible for a categorical exemption. (F) Pre-construction Meeting. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a preconstruction meeting shall occur and shall consist of the property owner, contractor, inspector assigned to inspect the structure, a City staff member, the project architect/designer and historic monitor (if required). This meeting will be used to convey the obligations and responsibilities of the property owner and his or her contractors and architects in protecting and avoiding destruction of the identified historic fabric that is to be retained. (A) Any action pertaining to a historic resource that qualifies for Administrative Design Review pursuant to Section 25.05.040(B)(3) may be approved administratively pursuant to the procedures set forth in that section, provided that such approval shall be based on finding that the proposed action is consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995, Weeks and Grimmer), as amended from time to time, as determined by the Community Development Director, or other similar generally accepted resource, as determined by the Community Development Director, in addition to other required findings. Before the project is scheduled for Administrative Design Review pursuant to Section 25.05.040(B)(3), Heritage Committee must review the project and make a recommendation on the project.
(B) Major modifications, alterations, or other actions pertaining to historic resources that do not qualify for Administrative Design Review shall require approval of a design review permit pursuant to Section 25.05.040(B)(1).

Before the project is scheduled before the Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as appropriate, the Heritage Committee must review the project and make a recommendation on the project.
(C) Historic Resource Assessment. To evaluate whether a property is a historic resource or whether a project has effects on a historic resource, the Community Development Director may require a historic resource assessment report as follows:
194 of 399

(1) The Community Development Director may require a historic resource assessment report, paid for by the City, be prepared prior to the review of the project to evaluate whether the property is a historic resource.
(2) The Community Development Director may require a historic resource assessment report, paid for by the applicant, be prepared prior to the review of the project to evaluate the impacts of the project on the historic resource.
(D) Pre-construction Meeting. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, a preconstruction meeting shall occur and shall consist of the property owner, contractor, inspector assigned to inspect the structure, a City staff member, the project architect/designer and historic monitor (if required). This meeting will be used to convey the obligations and responsibilities of the property owner and his or her contractors and architects in protecting and avoiding destruction of the identified historic fabric, as defined in California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 3, Chapter 11.5, Appendix A, as amended from time to time, that is to be retained.

SECTION 35. Code Amendment. Section 25.45.012 (Historic property disclosure) of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of Title 25 (Zoning) shall be amended to read as follows:

Section 25.45.012 Historic property disclosure.
(A) Agent Disclosure. If a property has been included in the register, the owner of the property or the owner's representative shall, in any real property transaction, provide the buyer of the property with notice informing the buyer of the property's listing on the register. Distribution of a current Real Property Report issued pursuant to Section 14.76.090 of this code to the buyer shall satisfy the requirements of this subsection. (B) Penalty. Any person who violates the provisions of subsection (A) of this section shall be subject to the penalties and remedies specified in Section

14.76.090 of this code.

SECTION 36. Code Amendment. Subsection (B)(6) of Section 25.50.012 (Fences, Walls, Hedges, Latticework and Screens) of Chapter 25.50 (General Yard and Open Space Provisions) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (deletion shown in strikethrough):
(6) Pedestrian entry features which only includes arbors, arched entries, arcades or finials may exceed the maximum allowable fence height in any yard subject to design review as provided for in Section

25.05.040 and the following standards:
195 of 399

(a) The maximum height shall not exceed 8 feet;
(b) The maximum pedestrian entry width shall not exceed 6 feet;
(c) The maximum width of each side of the pedestrian
entry for which there is proposed an architectural
transition from the nominal fence height shall not
exceed 3 feet.

SECTION 47. Code Amendment. Subsection (G) of Section 25.52.006 (Special provisions) of Chapter 25.52 (Parking Requirements) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(G) Incentives. The City CouncilPlanning Commission may approve a conditional use permit, and a coastal development permit when required, upon recommendation by the approval authority, to reduce the parking standards required under this chapter where the proposed use provides for and promotes the use of alternative modes of transportation such as ridesharing, carpools, vanpools, public transit, bicycle and walking; and where the reduced parking requirement will not adversely impact public access to beaches, parks, open spaces, and trails and one or more of the following conditions apply:
(1) The proposed use is a very low or low income, disabled, or senior housing project;
(2) The proposed use is a sidewalk cafe having outdoor seating available to restaurant customers, and when the outdoor seating is located on public property or right-of-way, to the general public as well, which contributes positively to the local pedestrian environment.

The parking reduction may be granted on a temporary or seasonal basis and shall be limited to a maximum of five spaces; and (3) The proposed use incorporates innovative parking solutions, such as a shuttle service program provided by the entity whose parking requirement has been reduced. Any proposed innovative parking solution shall provide parking mitigation measures at an equivalent ratio to the parking spaces required by Section 25.52.012(G) for the proposed intensification of use. An innovative parking solution shall be described in a detailed program which includes, but is not limited to, the number of otherwise required parking spaces that will not be provided, a detailed description of the proposed innovative solution, a detailed description of how the innovative solution provides an equivalent ratio to the number of parking spaces that would have been required without the innovative solution, and a detailed description of how the proposed solution is expected to offset 196 of 399

impacts from the reduction in required parking spaces, supported by studies and/or examples. An example of a program for innovative parking solutions might include, but not be limited to, a shuttle service program provided by the entity whose parking requirement has been reduced that indicates the number and capacity of shuttle vehicles, the range of shuttle services, where shuttle vehicles are stored and the hours of shuttle service operation. At the discretion of the Director of Community Development, peer review of such a program may be required and paid by the applicant.

A parking study shall be prepared by a qualified engineer, retained by the entity whose parking requirement has been reduced, that reviews efficiencies, effectiveness and/or problems of the approved innovative parking solutions at one year and at five years from the date of their approval; and the study shall be provided to the City for review and assessment.

This Subsection 25.52.006(G)(3) shall expire five years from the date of effective certification of LCP-5-LGB-19-0139-1. If innovation solutions have been implemented pursuant to this section, and the required engineered parking studies demonstrate the effectiveness of those innovative parking solutions, a Local Coastal Program amendment may be requested to retain this subsection for an extended period. Such an LCPA shall include all necessary supporting documentation with submittal of the LCP amendment request.

SECTION 48. Code Amendment. Subdivision (D) of Section 25.54.010 (Signs permitted on private property) of Chapter 25.54 (Sign Regulations) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(D) Master Sign Programs. A master sign program shall be submitted for review and approval in relation to new office or shopping center construction or substantial façade improvements of an existing office or shopping center, when either contain four or more businesses or uses prior to the issuance of any sign permits. (See the master sign program submittal requirements in Section 25.54.018(A).) In order to assure aesthetic compatibility, the approval authority Planning Commission may establish whatever conditions are deemed necessary to maintain appropriate design, continuity and harmony of the signage for the site.

SECTION 38. Code Amendment. Subdivisions (E), (F), and (G) of Section

25.54.018 (General Permit Procedures) of Chapter 25.54 (Sign Regulations) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
197 of 399

(E) Signs Eligible for Administrative Approval. Except for luminous tube signs, signs may be eligible for administrative review and approval by the director of community development, if they meet the following criteria. At the discretion of the director, such signs may be referred to the appropriate approval authority the Planning Commission for review. Eligible signs include:
(1) Signs in compliance with an approved master sign program; (2) Signs that meet all of the following conditions:
(a) The sign(s) must meet all applicable design standards as set forth in this chapter, including but not limited to Section

25.54.010 and Tables 1 and 2 at the end of this chapter; (b) The sign(s) shall must not cause the total signage to exceed the maximum allowable sign area for the site; and
(c) The letter or font height must shall not exceed eight fourteen inches.
(3) Temporary signs which comply with the requirements of Section

25.54.020. Temporary signs or temporary sign programs for city council approved special events are not eligible for administrative approval.
(4) Replacement of signs previously authorized by a sign permit provided that the sign meets all applicable design standards as set forth in this chapter, including but not limited to Section 25.54.010 and Tables 1 and 2 at the end of this chapter.
(5) Signs that are not eligible for Administrative Approval shall be considered by the Planning Commission.
(F) Appeals of a Determination by the Community Development Director. Any person disagreeing with a determination of the Community Development Director or Planning Commission shall have the right to appeal in accordance with the appeal provisions in Section 25.05.070to the appropriate approval authority. The appeal must be filed within ten business days after such determination and shall be heard at the next regular meeting of the appropriate approval authority.
(G) Creativity Encouraged. Except for the community development department director, the approval authority The Planning Commission may, at his or her its discretion, grant permits for signs not otherwise in conformance with this chapter up to a twenty-five percent increase in allowable sign area or height, if it finds the sign design to be extraordinarily creative and significantly contributing to the charm and character of Laguna Beach. 198 of 399

SECTION 40. Code Amendment. Subdivision (A) of Section 25.54.026 (Arts Organizations) of Chapter 25.54 (Sign Regulations) in Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby added to read as follows:

25.54.026 Arts and cultural organizations
(A) Signs, Façade Changes and Sign Programs for Arts and Cultural Organizations. It is recognized that certain public benefit non-profit arts and cultural organizations, specifically such as the Festival of Arts, the Sawdust Festival, the Art-A-Fair, the Laguna Playhouse, the Laguna Art Museum and the Laguna College of Art and Design, conduct annual or ongoing special events which have special needs in terms of the audience or patrons they serve which may not be adequately addressed by the sign requirements applicable to private commercial enterprises.
(B) Criteria. The above a Arts organizations and cultural organization may apply for and receive approval for sign permits or sign programs, including façade changes, from the planning commission in accordance with the provisions of this section. The proposed plans for a sign, façade change or sign program must: (1) specify the size and design for each sign or façade change; (2) the maximum display term; and (3) the location of each sign.

The planning commission has complete discretion for these specifications, regardless of the other provisions of this chapter. The approved signs, façade changes or sign programs shall minimize clutter, be compatible with the village character of Laguna Beach, reflect an integration with the site's surroundings, promote the purpose and mission of the arts organization and not significantly differ from the historic pattern of the arts and cultural organization's signage and façade presentation.
(C) Administrative Approval. The planning commission may authorize administrative approval by the director of community development for new signs or changes to existing signs subject to and in accordance with an approved sign program. The planning commission may establish special criteria for such administrative approvals by the director when it approves an arts and cultural organization's sign program.
(D) Commercial Events. Signs for any type of private commercial events located at an arts and cultural organization's site shall require separate sign permits and be subject to the requirements of this chapter.

SECTION 41. Code Amendment. Subdivision (H) of Section 25.55.006 (Permits Required) of Chapter 25.55 (Wireless Communication Facilities) is hereby added to read as follows:

Section 25.55.006 (Permits Required)
199 of 399

In addition to the permit requirements described below, the permit requirements of Chapter 25.07 Coastal Development Permits remain applicable except when inconsistent with federal law.
. . .
(H) Exemptions. Wireless Communications Facilities owned and operated by the City or other local or regional public agency do not require a permit under this Chapter. Such exempt wireless communications facilities shall fully comply with other applicable requirements of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code.

SECTION 42. Code Amendment. Section 25.56.011 (Major Remodels) is hereby added to Chapter 25.56 (Nonconforming Buildings, Lots, and Uses) of Title 25 (Zoning) to read as follows:

Section 25.56.011 (Major Remodels)
Whenever modifications to an existing building or structure constitute a major remodel, the construction shall be classified as a new building or structure subject to the current development standards of the subject zone, and all requirements applicable to the construction of a new building or structure including undergrounding requirements, required dedication of on- and off-site improvements, and payment of new development fees.

SECTION 43. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.58 (Amendments to General Plan) is hereby added to Title 25 (Zoning) to read as follows:

Chapter 25.58 (Amendments to General Plan)

25.58.010 Purpose
The purpose of this chapter is to establish procedures for making changes to the General Plan, as provided for in applicable law when there are reasons to do so. These circumstances include, without limitation, changes in applicable law, in the public interest, property owner interest, opportunities that were unanticipated at the time of General Plan adoption or the last amendment, or as required by State law.

25.58.020 Applicability
(A) The procedures of this chapter apply to all proposals to change the content of the General Plan.
(B) The City Council, by resolution, shall establish and from time to time amend a schedule of fees imposed for any initiation or application to change the content of the General Plan.

25.58.30 Initiation of Amendments
200 of 399

(A) Request. A request to initiate an amendment to the General Plan may be submitted by an applicant or the City. This request must occur before the City processes any applications associated with the request to amend the General Plan.
(B) Initiation Factors. The following factors must be considered by the City Council for the initiation of a non-City applicant’s proposed General Plan amendment:
(1) The amendment proposed appears to be consistent with the Guiding Principles and Goals of the General Plan;
(2) The amendment proposed appears to have minimal to no material effect on the community or the General Plan;
(3) The amendment proposed provides additional public benefit to the community as compared to the existing land use designation or policy;
(4) Public facilities appear to be available to serve the affected site, or their provision will be addressed as a component of the amendment process; or
(5) The amendment proposed is required under other rules or regulations.
(C) Public Hearing. The City Council will consider, deliberate, and act upon the initiation of all proposed General Plan amendments at a duly noticed public hearing. If the General Plan Amendment request is not initiated, then the General Plan Amendment application will not be processed by the City. (D) Expiration. If a request to initiate a General Plan Amendment is approved by City Council, a General Plan Amendment application must be submitted within two years from the date of initiation. If no application for a General Plan Amendment is submitted within this time period, the approved initiation shall expire, become null and void, and shall not be subject to an extension.

25.58.040 Planning Commission Hearing and Recommendation (A) Hearing. Following City Council initiation and project processing by the City, the Planning Commission must conduct a duly noticed public hearing. (B) Recommendation to Council. Following the public hearing, the Planning Commission must make a written recommendation on the adoption or amendment of the General Plan or any Element thereof based on the findings listed below. A recommendation for approval must be made by a resolution carried by an affirmative vote of not less than a majority of the Planning Commission membership in accordance with California 201 of 399

Government Code Section 65354. The Director must promptly transmit to the City Council the Planning Commission’s written recommendation, together with any maps, charts, studies, or other materials, including any required environmental analysis. (C) Required Findings. The Planning Commission must make all of the following findings in its recommendation to the City Council:
(1) The amendment is consistent with the guiding principles and goals of the General Plan.
(2) The amendment is deemed to be in the public interest.

25.58.050 City Council Hearing and Action
(A) Council Hearing. Before acting upon any proposed General Plan Amendment, the City Council must hold a duly noticed public hearing. (B) Council Action. After the conclusion of the hearing, the City Council may approve, modify, or deny the proposed General Plan amendment. If the Council proposes any substantial modification not previously considered by the Planning Commission during its hearings, the proposed modification must first be referred back to the Planning Commission for its recommendation.
(C) Required Findings. The City Council must make all of the following findings to amend the General Plan:
(1) The amendment is consistent with the guiding principles and goals of the General Plan.
(2) The amendment is deemed to be in the public interest.

SECTION 44. Section 21.08.030 (Lot Line Adjustments exempted.) of Chapter

21.08 (Subdivisions) in Title 21 (Plats and Subdivisions) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):

Section 21.08.030 (Lot Line Adjustments exempted.)
(A) In accordance with Section 66412(d) of the California Government Code, a lot line adjustment between two or more existing building sites, or between parcels of land contained within an existing building site, where the land taken from one building site is added to an adjacent building site, or where interior parcel lines are eliminated for the purpose of consolidation, and where a greater number of parcels than originally existed is not thereby created, is exempt from this Chapter, provided the lot line adjustment is approved by the City Council of the City of Laguna Beach and observes the following requirements:
202 of 399

(1) The project site described in the proposal consists of legal building sites as defined in Title 25 (Zoning) of this code;
(2) The proposal does not create one or more building site(s); (3) Any land taken from one site will be added to an adjacent site and no additional sites will result from the lot line adjustment; (4) The project complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act;
(5) The proposal is consistent with the general plan;
(6) The parcels proposed to be adjusted by the lot line adjustment comply with all applicable zoning regulations or, in the case of existing, legal nonconforming lots, do not significantly or adversely increase the extent of such nonconformity;
(7) The lot line adjustment, in and of itself, will not result in the need for additional improvements and/or facilities;
(8) The proposal does not include any lots or parcels created illegally; (9) The project does not impair any existing access, create a need for new access, impair any existing easements or create a need for any new easements serving any adjacent lots or parcels.
(B) Application. Lot line adjustment applications shall be filed by the legal owner(s) on a form prescribed by the Director of Community Development and submitted with a fee as established by resolution of the City Council.

Since the forms, if approved, must be filed for record with the Orange County recorder they shall be drawn in a clear, legible, and professional manner using conventional surveying or civil engineering techniques. An acceptable current title report, excerpt or lot book report that verifies the legal ownership of the parcels under consideration shall be submitted. (C) Approval Authority. All lot line adjustments are considered development and therefore require a Coastal Development Permit in the Coastal Zone. Other permits may also be required.
(1) An application for a lot line adjustment shall be reviewed in conjunction with whatever other permits are required for the project in the underlying zone; the approval authority for the lot line adjustment shall be the same as the approval authority for the permits required by the underlying zone or other City rule or policy. (2) In the case where the project only requires a lot line adjustment and a coastal development permit, the project applications may be 203 of 399

approved or denied by the Director of Community Development. The Department of Community Development shall set a public hearing date before the Director of Community Development or designee and noticing shall be provided in accordance with the requirements of Section 25.05.065 and Section 25.07.014.
(D) Recording. Any failure to file for the record an approved lot line adjustment form within ninety days from the date of approval by the City Council Director of Community Development, or from the date of a final decision, whichever is later, shall result in a termination of approval unless prior to expiration an application for extension not to exceed an additional ninety days is submitted in writing for approval by the Director of Community Development.

SECTION 45. Code Amendment. Section 22.10.010 (Permits required) of Chapter

22.10 (Permit Required) of Title 22 (Excavating, Grading, and Filling) is hereby amended to add subsection (e)(6) to read as follows:
(e) Exceptions. A grading permit shall not be required for any of the following conditions, but in all other respects the provisions of this title shall apply:
. . .
(6) Backfill for a swimming pool if authorized by a valid building permit.

SECTION 46. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any entity, person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of Laguna Beach hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 47. CEQA. This Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 because it consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Here, the recommended action meets the exemption because the City is amending its code to improve procedural efficiencies and to comply with state law.

The City is not authorizing new uses that are not already established within the City through this ordinance. Furthermore, under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15265, CEQA does not apply to activities and approvals pursuant to the Coastal Act necessary for the preparation and adoption of a local coastal program because the Coastal Commission’s LCP review and approval procedures have been found to be functionally 204 of 399

equivalent to the environmental review process. Therefore, the adoption of the Ordinance amending the City’s local coastal program is statutorily exempt from CEQA. Upon taking the recommended action, City staff will cause to be filed within five calendar days a notice of exemption with the County and State Clearinghouse.

SECTION 49. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following its adoption by the City Council and upon concurrence by the California Coastal Commission.

SECTION 50. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance. Not later than fifteen (15) days following the passage of this Ordinance, the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, along with the names of the City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance, shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City.

PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Laguna Beach, California, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on the ____ day of ______, 2026.

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH:
________________________________
Mark Orgill
Mayor
ATTEST:
__________________________________
Ann Marie McKay
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________________
Megan Garibaldi
City Attorney
205 of 399
Summary of Design Review Streamlining Ordinance
Section / Topic Current Code Proposed Change Practical Effect / Notes Application
Completeness

25.05.015
No uniform timeline or
explicit expiration.
30-day completeness
determination; applications
expire after 90 days of inactivity.

Minor. Creates predictable timing
and avoids stale applications.

Design Review
Process

25.05.040
Most exterior development
requires full Design Review
Board (“DRB”)/Planning
Commission (“PC”) hearing
on Design Review (“DR”)
entitlement.

Three-tier system: (1) Full
DRB/PC; (2) Zone Clearance
(exempt) (3) Administrative
Design Review (“ADR”).

Community Development
Director (“CDD”) may refer up
from ADR to DRB/PC, and refer
up a DR-exempt project to the
appropriate DR authority.

Major. Small projects no longer
default to DRB/PC—reduces
backlog.

Threshold for Full
Design Review

25.05.040(B)(1)
Many small improvements
require DRB review.

Full DR only for major remodels,
new buildings, >15 ft height,
sensitive areas, steep slopes,
grading >20 CY, retaining walls >5
ft, historic work that does not
qualify for ADR, etc.

Major. Focuses DRB/PC review on
visually/environmentally impactful
projects.

Zone Clearance

25.05.040(B)(2)
No dedicated “ministerial
clearance” category.

Creates a ministerial approval
path for minor changes,
Major. Removes minor/no-impact
items from the public hearing
process entirely.

Attachment 2
76 206 of 399
Section / Topic Current Code Proposed Change Practical Effect / Notes maintenance, small landscaping,
etc.

Administrative
Design Review

25.05.040(B)(3)
Limited improvements that
still require public hearings
Expands ADR for moderate
changes (e.g., landscaping,
minor historic changes, decks > 3
ft, roof dimension changes, etc.)
with option to waive hearing with
notice.

Modest. Adds a middle path that
resolves many projects without
DRB/PC/CDD hearings but still
allows public input and/or referral to
full DRB/PC public hearing
Design Review
Findings

25.05.040(I)
Specifies findings in
paragraph form Require two specific findings Minor. Reduces duplicative analysis Design Review
Criteria

25.05.040(H)
16 criteria 10 Criteria Modest. Reduces duplicative
analysis
Appeals

25.05.070
Strict standards of review;
City Council decisions of

DRB/PC/CDD
Requires de novo hearing to
review for abuse of discretion for
all entitlements; create structure
that City Council reviews DRB/PC
and DRB/PC reviews CDD.

Modest. Makes appeal path less
complex and more efficient
Modifications to
Approved Permits No clear minor-modification
process.

CDD may approve minor
modifications without hearing if
no core change to findings. Larger
Modest. Avoids unnecessary
hearings for small adjustments
during construction.
77 207 of 399
Section / Topic Current Code Proposed Change Practical Effect / Notes

25.05.060 &

25.07.012 (J)
changes return to original
approval body.
“Community
Development
Director” definition

25.07.006
Does not include a
“designee” within CDP
chapter
Adds “designee” within definition Minor. Allows a designee to hold a hearing on a CDP.

Staking
Requirements

25.07.012
No explicit staking
requirement for CDP
Add same staking requirement
for CDPs that exists for DR.

Modest. Ensures protection of
coastal resources and avoids
applicant confusion
Coastal
Development
Permit Exemption
Reporting

25.07.008
Requires online posting and
Coastal Commission
notification when applicable.

Remove need to post CDP
exemption on City website when
non-appealable development
Minor. Reduces burden on City staff
Local Coastal
Program
Amendments

25.07.026
Provides for LCP
amendments but with little
guidance to City staff
Defines LCP amendment as
adding a new use; brings process
up to date
Modest. Provides better guidance to
staff on how to process LCP
amendments.

Environmentally
Sensitive Area
ESA is trigger for DR but there
is no definition
Add environmentally sensitive
area as defined term and define it
Modest. Provides better guidance to
applicants, City staff, and public.
78 208 of 399
Section / Topic Current Code Proposed Change Practical Effect / Notes

25.08.010
to mean same definition as
Coastal Act, include slopes of
30% or greater, and include areas
mapped by City Council
Residential Site
Coverage
Development
Standard

25.10.008
DRB could modify coverage
in limited conditions without
a maximum.

Clarifies DRB authority to modify
up to 5% only to preserve views,
privacy, reduce height, or
maintain neighborhood
character.

Modest. Narrows discretion and
strengthens findings defensibility.

Side Yard
Development
Standard (R-1)

25.10.008
Prohibits accessory
buildings, clotheslines, air
conditioning, and pool
equipment in side yards
Now allows air conditioning and
pool equipment in side yards.

Major. Provide flexibility to
applicants.

R/HP Hillside Zone
Design Review
Criteria

25.15 Broad design review criteria
language.

Remove duplicative design
review criteria as covered by

25.05.040(H) and (I).

Modest. Creates efficiencies for City
staff; improves clarity by including
design review criteria in one place.

Lagunita Zone
Design Review
Criteria

25.24.005
HOA comment required
before City review; broad
design review criteria
language.

HOA comments optional; City
may move forward after 30 days.

Remove duplicative design
review criteria as covered by

25.05.040(H) and (I).

Modest. Stops HOA inaction from
delaying City permitting; Creates
efficiencies for City staff; improves
clarity by including design review
criteria in one place.
79 209 of 399
Section / Topic Current Code Proposed Change Practical Effect / Notes South Laguna
Village Zone Design
Review Criteria

25.25.010
Broad design review criteria
language.

Repealed. Remove duplicative
design review criteria as covered
by 25.05.040(H) and (I).

Modest. Creates efficiencies for City
staff; improves clarity by including
design review criteria in one place.

Institutional Zone
Design Review
Criteria

25.28.040
Broad design review criteria
language.

Repealed. Remove duplicative
design review criteria as covered
by 25.05.040(H) and (I).

Modest. Creates efficiencies for City
staff; improves clarity by including
design review criteria in one place.

Arch Beach Heights
Zone Design Review
Criteria

25.35.070; 25.35.080
Broad design review criteria
language.

Remove duplicative design
review criteria as covered by

25.05.040(H) and (I).

Modest. Creates efficiencies for City
staff; improves clarity by including
design review criteria in one place.

Specific Plan (Sarah
Thurston Park)
Design Review
Criteria

25.39.100
Broad design review criteria
language.

Remove duplicative design
review criteria as covered by

25.05.040(H) and (I).

Modest. Creates efficiencies for City
staff; improves clarity by including
design review criteria in one place.

Three Arch Bay Zone
Design Review
Criteria
Broad design review criteria
language.

HOA comments optional; City
may move forward after 30 days.

Remove duplicative design
Modest. Stops HOA inaction from
delaying City permitting; Creates
efficiencies for City staff; improves
80 210 of 399
Section / Topic Current Code Proposed Change Practical Effect / Notes

25.44.060
review criteria as covered by

25.05.040(H) and (I).
clarity by including design review
criteria in one place.

Diamond Crestview
Design Review
Criteria

25.49 Broad reference to design
guidelines as part of specific
plan
Remove reference to design
guidelines
Modest. Allows flexibility with design
guidelines.

Historic
Preservation

25.45 Sets forth procedure to alter
historic resource
Better identifies review procedure
and specifies that the absence of
a fully executed and recorded
historic resources preservation
agreement is not conclusive
evidence that property is not on
register.

Modest. Provides better guidance to
City staff on how to process
applications relating to historic
resources
Sign Permits

25.54.018
Identifies certain types of
signs that qualify for
administrative review by CDD
Adds replacement signs as
subject to administrative review
by CDD
Modest. Reduces backlog
Sign Permits

25.54.018
Allows for appeals of CDD
decisions on sign permits
within 10 calendar days
Allows for appeals of CDD and
PC decisions within same limits
as general appeal procedures
Minor. Streamlines appeals process
through the code and makes it more
consistent.

Sign Permits

25.54.026
Grants PC the authority to set
the sign standards for public
benefit non-profit arts
Grants PC the same authority for
public benefit non-profit cultural
institutions.

Minor. Broadens the scope of sign
flexibility for Arts Organizations to
81 211 of 399
Section / Topic Current Code Proposed Change Practical Effect / Notes organizations, which have
special needs for signage.

Arts and Cultural Organizations,
which have similar needs.

Wireless

25.55.006
Requires design review and
conditional use permit for
city / other local or regional
public agencies
Create exemption from permit
requirements for City or other
local or regional public agency
project
Modest. Improve wireless coverage
for projects; reduce discretionary
permit requirement for projects that
do not afford much discretion with
placement
General Plan
Amendments

25.58 Silent. Create procedure for
amendments to General Plan
Minor. Provide guidance and training
to City staff.

Grading Permit
Exemption

22.10.010
Require grading permit for
backfill for swimming pool
Remove grading permit
requirement
Modest. Implement industry
practice; reduce backlog.
82 212 of 399
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS
MUNICIPAL CODE TO MODIFY CHAPTER 7.25 (NOISE),

12.08 (PRESERVATION OF HERITAGE TREES), 12.16
(VIEW PRESERVATION AND RESTORATION), AND 17.50
(PRIVATE SEWER LATERALS) TO IMPROVE
CONSISTENCY WITHIN THE CODE; AND FINDING SAID

ACTION EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA

ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT UNDER CEQA
GUIDELINES SECTION 15301
WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach, California (“City”) is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the California Constitution and laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the police powers delegated to it by the California Constitution, the City has the authority to enact laws which promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, periodically the City identifies sections of its Municipal Code that are outdated, unclear, conflict with other Municipal Code sections, or warrant modifications to improve or enhance the functions and operations of the City; and WHEREAS, under its police power, the City Council desires to amend its Municipal Code to streamline the design review and other permit processes within the City; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are hereby adopted as findings in support of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein.

Attachment 3
83 213 of 399
-2- Ord. XXXX
SECTION 2. Code Amendment. Section 7.25.130 (Heating, venting, pool/spa and air conditioning—special provisions) of Chapter 7.25 (Noise) of Title 7 (Health and Sanitation) is hereby amended as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):

Section 7.25.130 (Heating, venting, and air conditioning (HVAC) and pool/spa equipment and air conditioning—special provisions)
(A) Permits for heating, venting, and air conditioning (HVAC) and pool/spa equipment in or adjacent to residential areas shall be issued only after the installation contractor signs an acknowledgment that the installation will meet the noise limits established in Section 7.25.040 of this chapter.
(B) Applicants of mechanical permits for commercial HVAC equipment may be required to submit a detailed acoustical study that demonstrates compliance with the noise limits established in Section 7.25.040 of this chapter. (C) Permits for HVAC and pool/spa equipment air conditioning units and pool and spa in or adjacent to residential areas shall be reviewed and approved without Design Review if they comply with all of the following requirements:
(1) The mechanical equipment is ground-mounted or wall-mounted at ground level.
(2) The mechanical equipment is not within the required front or side yard setbacks.
(3) The mechanical equipment must maintain a five-foot clearance from all property lines.
(4) A manufacturer's specification sheet for the mechanical equipment must be provided with the application and include the decibel rating. The maximum decibel level is sixty dB during the day and fifty dB at night, with the exception that the measurement shall be taken at the property line. Two sound attenuation techniques shall be utilized to minimize noise impacts.

Examples of sound attenuation techniques include, but are not limited to, physical enclosures such as fencing with insulation, internal sound compression blanket, and shock absorption base. Sound attenuation techniques must be used and maintained in accordance with the manufacturer's specifications for the life of the equipment. (5) Completion of a form provided by the city detailing how the project meets maximum sound level requirements measured at the property line. The method of computation required is specified in Standard 275 "Standard 84 214 of 399
-3- Ord. XXXX
Application of Sound Rated Outdoor Unitary Equipment" of the Air Conditioning and Refrigeration Institute (ARI), 1984, as amended. (6) The mechanical equipment would not obstruct a 3-foot path of travel around any structure.
(D) Air conditioning units HVAC and spa/pool equipment that do not meet the above requirements shall be reviewed and approved in conformance with the requirements of Section 25.05.040 Design Review.

SECTION 3. Code Amendment. Subdivision (b) of Section 12.08.030 (Heritage tree incentives) of Chapter 12.08 (Preservation of Heritage Trees) of Title 12 (Trees and Vegetation) shall be amended as follows:
(b) The tree(s) shall be placed on the heritage tree list, and a certificate shall be presented to the owner. Notice of the existence of a heritage tree shall be included in the property file and in the real property report issued by the city when property is sold. Heritage tree owners are also eligible for the following benefits related to potential development improvements to property on which one or more heritage trees are located. The granting of any benefit shall be conditioned upon a written agreement between the city and the property owner ensuring the continued preservation and maintenance of the heritage tree(s) located on the subject property.

The written agreement shall include a provision requiring subsequent heritage tree owners to continue preservation and maintenance.

SECTION 4. Code Amendment. Subdivision (b) of Section 12.16.040 (View Preservation) of Chapter 12.16 (View Preservation and Restoration) of Title 12 (Trees and Vegetation) shall be amended as follows:
(b) Record of Views. Upon the filing for a record of views, city staff shall conduct a site visit and photographically document the significantly unimpaired view of the property owner from the property owner's selected viewing locations or areas. A record of views shall be prepared, maintained in the applicable property address files, and noted in any real property report required by Chapter 14.76. Staff shall send written notice to affected vegetation property owners within five hundred feet informing them of the record of views and their associated maintenance responsibilities.
85 215 of 399
-4- Ord. XXXX
SECTION 5. Code Amendment. Section 12.16.100 (View decisions binding on future owners—Disclosure obligations) of Chapter 12.16 (View Preservation and Restoration) of Title 12 (Trees and Vegetation) shall be amended as follows:

Decisions made by city staff and the view restoration committee regarding view restoration and view preservation run with the land and shall be binding on the claimant and the vegetation owner and their heirs, successors and assigns. Such decisions, to the extent permitted, shall be recorded in the official records of the county of Orange. In addition, such decisions shall be set forth in any real property report required by Chapter 14.76 and should be disclosed by each owner to prospective purchasers of their properties.

SECTION 6. Code Amendment. Section 17.50.053 (Requirements for video inspection and private sewer lateral inspection reports) of Chapter 17.50 (Private Sewer Laterals) of Title 17 (Sewers) is hereby amended to repeal subdivision (e) and renumber the subdivisions in chronological order.

SECTION 7. Severability. If any section, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance or the application thereof to any entity, person or circumstance is held for any reason to be invalid or unconstitutional, such invalidity or unconstitutionality shall not affect other provisions or applications of this Ordinance which can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this end the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council of the City of Laguna Beach hereby declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance and each section, sentence, clause or phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more section, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 8. CEQA. This Ordinance is exempt from the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 because it consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, 86 216 of 399
-5- Ord. XXXX
involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Here, this ordinance meets the exemption because the City is amending its code to resolve inconsistencies and is not authorizing new uses or development. City staff is directed to cause to be filed within five calendar days a notice of exemption with the County and State Clearinghouse.

SECTION 9. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days following its adoption by the City Council and upon concurrence by the California Coastal Commission.

SECTION 10. Publication. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this Ordinance.

Not later than fifteen (15) days following the passage of this Ordinance, the Ordinance, or a summary thereof, along with the names of the City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance, shall be published in a newspaper of general circulation in the City.

ADOPTED this _____ day of ____________, 2026.

Mark Orgill, Mayor

Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________
Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney

87 217 of 399
-6- Ord. XXXX
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. XXXX was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on _______________, 2026, and was finally adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on _______________, 2026, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach, CA
.
88 218 of 399

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
March 18, 2026
Agenda Item No. 5.2
Case No: Municipal Code Amendment 2026-0381
Local Coastal Program Amendment 2026-0382
Request An Ordinance amending Title 25 (Zoning), Title 21 (Plats and Subdivisions), and Title 22 (Excavating, Grading, and Filling) of the Municipal Code and Local Coastal Program to streamline the design review and other permit processes.

Project Location: Citywide
Applicant: City of Laguna Beach
Prepared By: Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney
(949) 497-0476 | [email protected]
Anthony Viera, Deputy Director of Community Development (949) 497-0398 | [email protected]
CEQA:

The recommended action is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 because it consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Furthermore, under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15265, CEQA does not apply to activities and approvals pursuant to the Coastal Act necessary for the preparation and adoption of a local coastal program (“LCP”) because the Coastal Commission’s LCP review and approval procedures have been found to be functionally equivalent to the environmental review process.

Coastal Zone:

Tiles 21, 22, and 25 of the Municipal Code are components of the City’s certified Local Coastal Program (“LCP”). Amendments to the certified LCP are subject to California Coastal Commission approval. After the local adoption process is completed, the City will submit the ordinance to the Coastal Commission for certification. Further information regarding California Coastal Commission processes can be found at https://www.coastal.ca.gov/lcp/mrfcj/lcp-amendmentprocess.html Attachment 4
89 219 of 399
PC Staff Report
March 18, 2026

Recommendation:

By motion, adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) recommending to the City Council adoption of the Ordinance amending the Municipal Code (MC Amendment 2026-0381) and the Local Coastal Program (LCP Amendment 2026-0382), and finding said action exempt from CEQA.

Planning Commissioners
within a 500’ Radius: None
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

The processing of development applications in the City of Laguna Beach (“City”) has always been complex, but in recent years, changes in State law, which direct a faster and more objective pathway to approval, as well as poor customer service experiences with the burdensome Zoning Plan Check process, suggest that the City’s plan review process needs improvement. As such, City staff has been evaluating various measures to improve efficiency within the Community Development Department process. As part of this process, City staff has developed a Design Review Efficiency Ordinance (“DR Efficiency Ordinance”). (Attachment 1, Exhibit A.) Before arriving at this version of the DR Efficiency Ordinance, the City held a community workshop on October 1, 2024 to gain feedback on the development of the DR Efficiency Ordinance. City staff then released to the public a cover letter summarizing the DR Efficiency Ordinance changes and the DR Efficiency Ordinance itself for purposes of gathering feedback to incorporate into the ordinance. Then the City Council, the Planning Commission, and the Design Review Board all met in a joint session on Wednesday, March 12, 2025 to discuss a revised version of the DR Efficiency Ordinance, based on feedback from the public. Based on the joint session, City staff presented further revisions to the draft ordinance to the City Council for additional feedback on April 8, 2025, July 22, 2025, and November 18, 2025. Since then, City staff has submitted the draft DR Efficiency Ordinance to California Coastal Commission staff for consideration and feedback. Based on such feedback, City staff made minor changes, as described in more detail below. All feedback received, including feedback provided by members of the public, Coastal Commission staff, Planning Commissioners, Board members, and Councilmembers, has been carefully considered and has led to a revised DR Efficiency Ordinance that is now ready for a public hearing before the Planning Commission. A high-level summary of the DR Efficiency Ordinance and the changes it proposes to make is attached. (Attachment 2.) Staff is now requesting the Planning Commission’s final recommendation to the City Council.

DISCUSSION:

In an attempt to both meet the goals of the City's Housing Element and to address larger concerns about delays and the slow pacing of project approvals, City staff has identified changes to specific parts of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code (“LBMC”) that relate to Community Development Department’s processing of applications. The DR Efficiency Ordinance does four primary things:
90 220 of 399
PC Staff Report
March 18, 2026

1. Common Practices not yet in the Code.

In some cases, staff has procedures and interpretations that are not clearly outlined in the Zoning Code. This effort attempts to codify these approaches, such as the concept of “Zoning Clearance,” whereby a project that does not require a planning entitlement may be approved by a planner to authorize the next step in the permit process, typically culminating in the issuance of a building permit.

2. Triggers for Design Review.

These changes focus on reducing the level of design review required for various project types.
a. Inverting the Design Review relationship. Today, all development requires design review approval, unless explicitly exempted by the LBMC. The DR Efficiency Ordinance would instead state that Design Review is required only for those projects clearly identified by the LBMC as requiring Design Review.
b. Adding to the Types of Projects that are Exempt from Design Review. These include, but are not limited to:
• Changes that do not constitute a major remodel
• Improvements that do not exceed a height of 16 feet above adjacent ground elevation
• Roof alterations that do not exceed a height of 16 feet above adjacent ground elevation
• Re-roofing of buildings, except for white roofing materials or materials that result in glare
• Annual weed abatement and fuel modification
• Certain hardscape and landscaping improvements
• Swimming pools and spas no more than three feet above adjacent ground elevation
• Mechanical equipment that meet certain noise standards and other requirements
• Above-ground utility structures less than four feet in height when incorporating colors, finishes, and landscaping to minimize visual impact • New primary dwelling units that do not exceed a height of 16 feet and a single story, with greater setbacks than those required by the underlying zone as specified, and otherwise complying with all applicable objective development standards in the Zoning Code
• De Minimis capital improvement projects, as defined.
c. Reducing the Level of Design Review to Administrative Design Review. These changes add to the types of Design Review projects that can be heard by City staff rather than the Design Review Board or Planning Commission. Staff is also proposing to institute a public hearing waiver process where staff will issue public notice to determine if 91 221 of 399
PC Staff Report
March 18, 2026

neighbors would like for a hearing to be held on a proposed application. If the noticed neighbors do not respond by requesting a public hearing, the project would be approved without a public hearing. Projects subject to Administrative Design Review would include, but are not limited to the following:
• Certain landscaping
• Decks more than three feet above adjacent ground elevation • Minor alterations to historic resources, provided that such alterations have been reviewed for conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring, and Reconstructing Historic Buildings • Mechanical equipment that does not meet certain objective development standards
• Minor capital improvement projects, as defined
The Community Development Director would be authorized to refer Administrative Design Review projects to the Design Review Board or Planning Commission if the Director deems it appropriate.

3. Consolidation of Design Review Criteria.

The 16 design review criteria have been consolidated into the following 11 criteria. These changes help staff operate more efficiently and reduce the potential for mistakes and delays.

1. Access

2. Design Articulation

3. Environmental Context

4. General Plan Compliance

5. Historic Preservation

6. Landscaping

7. Lighting and Glare

8. Neighborhood Compatibility

9. Pedestrian Orientation

10. Privacy

11. View Equity

4. Other and Miscellaneous Changes.

In some cases, the City's processes can add to inefficiencies that slow project considerations. In other cases, design review criteria appear in multiple sections of the LBMC within neighborhood reference sections (where they are arguably not needed). These changes would remove duplicative language that is redundant to the design review criteria and would also re-word certain development standards and other key code provisions for 92 222 of 399
PC Staff Report
March 18, 2026

clarity to improve consistency in how planning staff and design professionals are interpreting and applying requirements to projects.

5. Public Works Projects.

As staff, we have great respect for the role of the Planning Commission in guiding effective and attractive Public Works projects. But aspects of the review are not working as well as they could, and with labor and materials costs significantly increasing in the recent past (all indications are that this will continue), any delay or longer-term review process causes a project's budget to often be significantly below the final bid costs. As such, staff proposes the following changes:

Item
Proposed
What Code
Says Now
Exempt
from
DR
Admin
DR
DRB,
PC, or
CC
City of Laguna Beach Public Works
Projects/ CIP Items
De Minimus. Fuel modification project or
program; (i) emergency projects; (ii)
roadway or trail improvements within
existing rights-of-way; (iii) pipeline, such as
storm drain and sewer, installation, repair
and maintenance; minor alterations to
utilities; (iv) alterations and repairs to
parking lots; (v) small habitat restoration
projects as defined in Section 15333 of the
CEQA Guidelines; (vi) sign replacements in
the same size with similar materials, at the
determination of the Community
Development Director; (vii) in kind
replacement of improvements for repair
and maintenance; (viii) similar projects as
determined by the Community
Development Director in consultation with
other affected department heads.

X
Admin DR
for repair
and
maintenance
Minor. (i) alterations to existing facilities
resulting in exterior changes; (ii) roadway or
trail extensions within existing rights-ofway; (iii) replacement or renovation of damaged facilities or structures resulting in
exterior design changes; (iv) small
X PC
93 223 of 399
PC Staff Report
March 18, 2026

additions to existing structures resulting in
exterior changes); (v) construction or
demolition of small structures resulting in
site or building design changes; (vi) slope
and wall repair for public infrastructure.

Major. New or substantial alterations to
parks, public buildings, community
facilities, reservoirs, or bridges; (ii) new or
substantial alterations to drainage
structures which involve significant
changes to grades, hillsides, habitats, or
views; (iii) street improvements which
involve substantial expansion of right-ofway, removal or existing facilities, removal of significant vegetation (unless part of a
fuel modification project or program)
and/or major changes to community
character.

PC PC
Changes Based on Coastal Commission Staff Comments:

Coastal Commission made some typographical proposed changes, including recommending the following:
• City specify that lighting plan requirements are for exterior lighting plans • City exempt roof alterations that are 16 feet in height or greater and exempt roof alterations that are less than 16 feet in height.
• City specify measuring height from the “existing legal grade” adjacent ground elevation. • Limiting landscaping to the height of the above-ground utility structures in the exemption from design review for above-ground utility structures. • Modify the type of de minimis capital improvement project to “in kind replacement of improvements for repair and maintenance” rather than “repair and maintenance activities to public facilities”
• Specify that a coastal development permit may still be required when a project is exempt from design review or subject to zone clearance permit. • Specify that for appeals of decisions of the Community Development Director to the Planning Commission / Design Review Board, neither the PC nor DRB can remand back to the Community Development Director.
• Repeal Section 25.39.100 of Chapter 25.29 (Specific Plan (Sarah Thurston Park) of Title 25 as consisting of duplicative design review criteria.
• Remove the provisions that would have repealed and replaced the City’s existing SB 9 ordinance to address the changes in the law brought by SB 450. Coastal Commission staff indicated that it needed more time to review the SB 9/SB 450 provisions. 94 224 of 399
PC Staff Report
March 18, 2026

City staff also made the following additional changes:
• Modified provisions relating to luminous tube signs to make regulations of such signs internally consistent;
• Broadened the scope of signs, façade changes, and sign programs for Arts Organizations from Arts Organizations to Arts and Cultural Organizations.

Next Steps
Adopting the attached resolution (Attachment 1) recommending adoption of the proposed ordinance will facilitate the City Council’s review and potential adoption of the DR Efficiency Ordinance. The City Council will also be asked to adopt a resolution amending the Design Guidelines – A Guide to Residential Development, removing the design review criteria that will be struck from the Municipal Code.

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:

The recommended action is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 because it consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use.

Here, the recommended action meets the exemption because it involves processing of ordinances that are affecting the organization and procedures within the City and modifications to some standards for existing uses that will not result in an expansion of the existing use. Upon taking the recommended action, City staff will file within five calendar days a notice of exemption with the County and State Clearinghouse. Furthermore, under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15265, CEQA does not apply to activities and approvals pursuant to the Coastal Act necessary for the preparation and adoption of a local coastal program because the Coastal Commission’s LCP review and approval procedures have been found to be functionally equivalent to the environmental review process. Therefore, the adoption of the Ordinance amending the City’s local coastal program is statutorily exempt from CEQA.

RECOMMENDATION:

By motion, adopt a Resolution (Attachment 1) recommending to the City Council adoption of the Ordinance amending the Municipal Code (MC Amendment 2026-0381) and the Local Coastal Program (LCP Amendment 2026-0382), and finding said action exempt from CEQA.

NOTIFICATION:

Pursuant to Title 25 (Zoning) Public Notice, a public hearing notice was published in a newspaper of general circulation on February 27, 2026 in accordance with LBMC Section 25.05.065(F) and sent by mail to surrounding public agencies, the California Coastal Commission, and others who have requested notification.
95 225 of 399
PC Staff Report
March 18, 2026

ATTACHMENT(S):

Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 26-0381, including Ordinance as Exhibit A Attachment 2 – Chart of DR Efficiency Ordinance Changes 96 226 of 399
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: j .net
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 1:48 AM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: Agenda Item 5.2.2b
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open a"achments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Hi, Planning Manager Beier -
Just a note regarding the proposed free pass on reviews for 16’ tall structures and foliage.

This is nuts!
People spend millions of dollars for homes with views.

This free pass could slash hundreds of thousands of dollars off of their home values just based on a neighbor’s whim.

Please rethink this and put some restric3ons or other limits on this item to ensure some kind of responsibility for individual homeowners.

Many thanks!
Jerome Pudwill
39-Year Resident
Attachment 5
97 227 of 399
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: Amy Hundhausen < @gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 1:14 AM
To: Beier, Samantha CD; Amy Hundhausen; Allan Hundhausen; Sadler, Ken Subject: Concerns Regarding Proposed Design Review Efficiency Ordinance [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Dear Members of the Planning Commission,
I recently became aware of the proposed Design Review Efficiency Ordinance scheduled for discussion at the January 18, 2026 Planning Commission meeting. I appreciate the City’s goal of reducing the Design Review Board backlog. I cannot attend the meeting in person, but I have several concerns regarding this proposal's potential unintended consequences. I have included the contact information that I saw for the Planning Manager; I hope it is correct. (I have included others on blind copy who may prefer not to have their contact information shared.)

1. Administrative modification of approved Design Review projects My primary concern is ensuring that clear guardrails exist to prevent modification of previously approved Design Review projects without public notice or hearing.

Design Review approvals—particularly those that are extensively negotiated—create reasonable reliance by neighboring property owners. Allowing material elements of an approved project to be altered overthe-counter risks undermining the integrity of the Design Review process and could invite disputes or legal challenges.

The draft ordinance introduces ambiguity in this area. For example, what constitutes a feature that was “specifically addressed”? Does this include all items shown on approved plans? Does it include all matters discussed during the Design Review hearings?
Also, the current code provides examples of minor landscape modifications that can bypass design review, specifically those that do not increase the height, width, or spacing of vegetation. Please retain at least this example if not a few others for clarity and predictability.

The Community Development Director may authorize minor changes to an approved permit without a public hearing, where the Director first finds that the changes: a. Are consistent with the requirements of the City’s Zoning Code; and b. Do not involve a feature of the project that was a basis for findings for an exemption, negative declaration, mitigated negative declaration, or environmental impact report for the project; and c. Do not involve a feature of the project that was specifically addressed or was the subject 98 228 of 399
2 of a condition(s) of approval for the project or that was a specific consideration by the applicable review authority in the project approval; and d. Do not result in an expansion or change in operational characteristics of the use; and e. Do not alter the facts in support of the findings required by Section

25.07.012(G). (ii) The Director may choose to refer any requested change to the original review authority for review and final action.

2. Very significant expansion of ministerial (“over-the-counter”) approvals, including hardscape and softscape less than 16 feet in height
The proposed “Zone Clearance” category substantially expands the scope of projects eligible for overthe-counter approval—encompassing mutliple dozens of categories, including new primary dwelling units, pools, telecommunications facilities, hardscape, and landscaping.

Of particular concern is the automatic allowance for structures and landscaping up to 16 feet high to be approved over-the-counter. A 16-foot element represents approximately two stories of visual mass and can materially impact views, privacy, and neighborhood character—especially in hillside areas.

This appears inconsistent with the intent of Laguna Beach’s View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance (Chapter 12.16) and may introduce internal inconsistencies within the Municipal Code, potentially leading to legal conflicts if and when over-the-counter approvals impact views. If a height limit is defined at all for over-the-counter approvals, it should be consistent with the 6 foot limit for the rear and side yard setbacks.

Instead of broadly expanding over-the-counter approvals, why not eliminate the Zone Clearance category and transfer those items to an expansion of the Administrative Design Review (ADR). This approach could reduce backlog for non-controversial projects while preserving:
• Transparency
• Neighbor notice
• Opportunity for input.

Over the counter approvals don't allow anyone to view the impacts of projects on neighbors, and I think this is a fundamental shortcoming of that approach.

3. Scope of changes and reduced emphasis on view protection The proposed ordinance significantly restructures the Design Review framework, yet public awareness appears limited given the scope of these changes.

At the same time, removing explicit view preservation language weakens a long-standing policy priority.

While “view equity” remains, the shift appears to reduce the emphasis on protecting existing views.

Laguna Beach’s character and desirability are closely tied to preserving views and privacy. Changes of this magnitude warrant broader public awareness and discussion. 99 229 of 399
3 I respectfully urge the Commission to consider substantial revisions to this ordinance and to consider broader community outreach, such as a Town Hall, before moving forward.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Amy Hundhausen
100
230 of 399
101
231 of 399
102
232 of 399
103
233 of 399
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: photobykristie < .net>
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 1:25 PM
To: Beier, Samantha CD; Sadler, Ken
Subject: Concerns Regarding Proposed Design Review Efficiency Ordinance [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Dear Members of the Planning Commission,
I recently learned about the proposed Design Review Efficiency Ordinance scheduled for an upcoming meeting. While I appreciate the goal of reducing backlog, I have a few concerns about potential unintended consequences and am unable to attend in person.

1. Modifications to approved projects
There should be clear guardrails to prevent changes to previously approved Design Review projects without public notice. Neighbors rely on those approvals, and allowing material changes over-the-counter could undermine the process and lead to disputes. The draft language is unclear—for example, what qualifies as a feature “specifically addressed”? I would also encourage retaining clear examples (such as minor landscape changes) for consistency and predictability.

2. Expansion of over-the-counter approvals
The proposed “Zone Clearance” category significantly broadens what can be approved administratively, including structures and landscaping up to 16 feet high. That scale can meaningfully impact views, privacy, and neighborhood character—particularly in hillside areas—and may conflict with existing view protection policies. A lower, more consistent height limit (such as 6 feet in rear and side yards) would be more appropriate.

Alternatively, expanding Administrative Design Review instead could help reduce backlog while preserving transparency, neighbor notice, and input.

3. Scope and public awareness
104
234 of 399
2 The ordinance represents a substantial shift in the Design Review framework, yet public awareness seems limited. At the same time, reducing emphasis on view preservation weakens an important community priority. Changes of this scale would benefit from broader outreach and discussion.

I respectfully urge the Commission to consider revisions and additional community engagement, such as a town hall, before moving forward.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Thanks!
Kristie Decker
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
105
235 of 399
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: B <b .com>
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 3:40 PM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: comment for March 18, 2026 Agenda Item No. 5.2 [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Hello
This is a reference to the March 18, 2026 Agenda Item No. 5.2 Case No:

Municipal Code Amendment 2026-0381
Local Coastal Program Amendment 2026-0382
I am a resident of Laguna Beach
Bryan Dominick
Santa Ana street
Please do not adopt this resolution
This 16 foot exemption effectively exempts a lot of construction that municipalites across the country typically review as standard procedure. 16 feet of construction is more than enough to adversely imapct a neighborhood. This is not streamlining, which would be reasonable, this is a dereliction of duty.

Thank you
106
236 of 399
107
237 of 399
108
238 of 399
2 processes easier. Understanding that design review can sometimes be a laborious process, it is equally laborious for all by design, so that it can be fair to everyone. It is there for the equal protection of all of the city’s residents’ quality of life and preservation of value. A change of this nature benefits only those making changes, to the detriment of those around them. It helps the one by injuring many, many others.

A city’s job is to help the many. Not the few.

While there is a value in streamlining processes, eliminating controls to such a degree that there is no control, is unconscionable in this city. This is a very unique place.

This revision should not be allowed to pass.

Streamlining is best done by improving administrative issues. The planning commission could meet more regularly. Every week, for example. All of the applications could be streamlined by putting them all online so that nobody has to go to City Hall during their limited open hours to put in applications or communicate with the planning commission. I have had to do this myself, and it has been a challenge.

Most of the problems with this process, like any other process run by any other municipal body, are administrative.

Small things like internal renovations should not require any sort of review at all besides permits, unless it is a historic structure. Many of the other suggestions in this plan (such as suggestions for low lying foliage revisions) make perfect sense. All of those things could be enacted to decrease the rigamarole of the design review process without diminishing residents’ quality of life.

There should never be a change so dramatic that it negatively impacts property values, quality of life, and the reason we are here in the first place.

Please reconsider what you are planning to do to completely change the tenor of our lives in Laguna Beach.

Finally, before I sign off, I would like to point out text on page 6 of the proposal that looks like, it could potentially be a typo. In the section where revisions suggest suggested by the coastal commission are laid out in a bulleted list, this text is found:
“City exempt roof alterations that are 16 feet in height or greater and exempt roof alterations that are less than 16 feet in height.”
The two clauses in the statement appear to be saying that both roof alterations, whether it is above 16 feet in height or below 16 feet in height, are exempt. Given the text of the rest of the document, it appears that it should probably be saying that roof alterations 16 feet in height or greater are not exempt from review.

Thank you very much for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Margot Goodkin
Arch Beach Heights resident
Santa Ana Street
Get Outlook for iOS
109
239 of 399
110
240 of 399
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: Trish Sweeney <t zone>
Sent: Tuesday, March 17, 2026 2:21 PM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: Public Comment for the proposed Design Review Efficiency Ordinance, Item 5.2 [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.] Hi, Samantha. Would you please attach this letter to Item 5.2, put it into the public record, and send it to the Planning Commission members in advance of tomorrow night’s meeting? Many thanks, Trish and Mike Sweeney
Dear Commissioners:

Thank you for your service.

We’re writing with respect to the proposed DR E*iciency Ordinance, Item 5.2 for this Wednesday’s meeting. While we rarely write in, we felt compelled to do so after reading the Sta* Report.

We understand the desire of applicants to get projects moving. But whether it’s someone building a second home or a family new to town, it appears that the majority of applicants are not long term residents.

It would seem that the needs of existing neighborhoods would take precedence since the vast majority of the taxpaying public have been here for some time. Instead, the proposed ordinance seems geared to the much smaller segment of new applicants who may not have considered the impact of new viewblocking projects.

While Section 3 (page 3 of 62) of the draft ordinance amending the LCPA asks “that development review process consider the public and private views,” the types of projects exempt from Design Review as outlined in 5.2 B of the sta* report include: “Improvements that do not exceed a height of 16 feet above adjacent ground elevation.”
Due to Laguna’s history, many homes are single story in neighborhoods like North Laguna, the Village, Canyon Acres, Sun Valley Castle Rock and many others. It seems possible that by permitting over the counter approval of projects up to 16 feet, views could, in fact, be blocked by hardscape, trees, and many other things. Privacy could be impacted. The look and feel of a neighborhood could be irreversibly and negatively influenced.

We understand that the State has imposed some constraints on local oversight re housing. But what will happen as a result of diluting View Preservation when an applicant is inevitably granted approval for a project that blocks someone else’s views? Will more lawsuits be in the City’s future? By shifting to Administrative Design Review instead of DR, things would certainly be streamlined. 111
241 of 399
2 However, no detail is provided in terms of notification to residents to see if they’d like a hearing. Some have complained that a small postcard is easily lost. Would this be the only notification method? If so, is this su*icient in a town of multimillion dollar homes where the value of properties are often predicated on dramatic views?
How many residents even realize projects occurring in their neighborhoods up to 16 feet could be in their future if this is eventually approved by Council?
In their post to the community on NextDoor four days ago, The City of Laguna Beach neglected to include anything regarding this important proposed ordinance. The Planning Commission post focused solely on the Ocean Avenue Streetscape Project.

This proposed ordinance needs work and greater public outreach is warranted.

Trish and Mike Sweeney
Top of the World

112
242 of 399
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: Anne Caenn <a com>
Sent: Wednesday, March 18, 2026 11:08 AM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: Item 5.2
[NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open a"achments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Dear Commissioners,
Although I can appreciate a desire to streamline development requirements, please consider the nega)ve impact on Laguna Beach residents. Exemp)ng any structure 16 feet and under from Design Review may speed up development, but has the poten)al of blocking views for exis)ng homeowners.

Please support that all development requires Design Review approval, unless explicitly exempted by LBMC and deny the DR Efficiency Ordinance.

Thank you,
Anne Caenn
9 Katella Street
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
113
243 of 399
114
244 of 399
This proposed change to cut the Heritage Committee out of project review is outrageous. Just look at what constitutes “minor alterations”:
a) replacement or modification of doors and windows;
b) addition of first floor porches and decks
c) the replacement of roofing material or building siding; d) minor improvements to landscaping, hardscape, walls, fences, arbors, and other landscape features;
e) similar minor site or building alterations
Alterations a, b, c (building siding), are not trivial; they can quickly disintegrate the historic fabric of a property and thus a property's qualification as historic. Alteration e, based on “similarity,” is meaningless. Even in cities that have qualified preservation staff changes of these substance would go to a Heritage committee or commission. In Laguna, there is no staff member who is qualified to make determinations of conformity with the Standards. The Heritage Committee has frequently found egregious errors in the evaluations and recommendations of the City’s consultants, while staff treat the consultants’ evaluations as gospel (full speed ahead!). Any consultant report of Standard compliance needs to be reviewed by the Heritage Committee with an opportunity for public comment.

Please note that under the proposed change to ADR process, only neighbors will receive public notice of projects; the rest of the public is cut out from notification unless a neighbor objects and they notice it on the ADR hearing agenda. Thus disclosure of projects on historic resources subject to CEQA will only be available to property owners within 300 feet of a projects, not the public that is the intended beneficiary of the CEQA process. This flies in the face of CEQA’s intent and is a terrible change.

But it’s not really a change at all. The Director has already put this into practice (see staff report, p. 3), even though nothing in the current Code allows ADR hearings to be handled in this way. The City now notifies only neighbors of ADR projects, and those projects are not noticed to the public and do not get a hearing (and appear on an agenda) unless a neighbor has objected. Please remember that ADR has no staff reports; just plans are posted. If there are no objections, projects sail through in an instant. Why not notify the public? The amount of work is minimal—the import of the codified changes, dramatic.

The solution to this change is obvious. Heritage should make a recommendation to the Director about the so-called “minor” alterations.
115
245 of 399
2) Here is another enormous change, which the public would never know is proposed; I could not find it red-lined; it simply disappeared. Under Section 25.05.040 (B) (1) of the current Code:
"Exceptions. The following improvements shall be exempt from the design review process. The Director of Community Development has the discretion to refer applications to the appropriate design review authority for consideration and final action.” This language is proposed for removal. The upshot is that projects that are now discretionary, because they are subject to the DCD’s discretion, are now uniformly and unequivocally ministerial projects. Thus they are exempt from CEQA. It is worth pointing out that the existing language was inserted at the behest of community members, because of the CEQA implications, when the DR code was revised not all that long ago to allow many more exemptions from DR. How many times has the Director intervened and brought something through design review that was exempt? Each and every exemption should be explored to ensure that they really should be exempt from design review without any possibility for a DR process.
3) Projects would be exempt from Design Review unless the Code specifically requires they go through Design Review
I agree with DRB member Tom Gibbs: it is a bad idea to change the rules so that if a project is not specifically called out as requiring design review, it slides by without any design review at all. If staff can reasonably foresee all the types of projects that might be proposed as well as their impacts, then write them into the Code and specify the level of review (if any) required.

But of course that is not possible. Unless state law forbids it, the City should err in favor of maintaining protections not reducing them. By eliminating design review for undisclosed future projects, the city would eliminate protections by creating a new and unknowable category of ministerial approvals.

The time for CEQA objections will be at the Coastal Commission. But you should reject these changes because they are bad policy and planning.

Thank you for your consideration. I wrote this in haste and apologize for any typos. Best, Cathy 116
246 of 399
117
247 of 399
________________________________________________________________________________ --
Nancy Balmer-Csira
Architect
3 Bern Drive
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
(949) 2 -6
118
248 of 399
DR Efficiency Ordinance NBC comments in red. Morris comments in blue. 3-18-2026
PC Staff Report
Request: PC recommendation to CC

2. Triggers for Design Review
b. Adding to …. Exempt from Design Review.
• Changes that do not accumulatively constitute a major remodel. • Improvements that do not exceed a height of 16 feet above adjacent ground elevation.

Now 15 feet, proposed 16 feet to be consistent with allowable height for detached ADU? What if view impairment? Could be Admin or view no longer an issue? • Re-reroofing of buildings, except for white roofing materials or materials that result in glare.

Change in roof material no longer requires DR?
Is a shiny painted metal or stainless steel roof constitutes glare? • Swimming pools and spas no more than 3 feet above adjacent ground level.

What about neighborhood compatibility, size, location, hillside, geo., etc.? Pools can be incompatible with neighbor locations, windows, noise, geologic issues. 3 ft above the adjacent
• Mechanical equipment that meets certain noise standards and other requirements.

No setback to PL? Note, electric heat pumps are quiet.

Heat pumps are electric and quiet. Typical condensers can be quiet when installed but get nosier over time. Having some separation from property line at a minimum should be considered.

Example: 5 ft same for swimming pool equipment. If side yard is only 5 ft. need clearance for fire and 30” or so for condenser. Consider side yards ok as long as 5 ft from PL? • New primary dwelling ….

No landscaping plan or design criteria?
Landscape is often questionable and causes view issues. View is primary concern of all neighbors. c. Reducing the level of DR to Admin DR.
• Certain landscaping.

Hedges, trees, etc.
• Decks more than three feet above adjacent ground elevation.

Decks must be staked.

Proposed plans must be available for neighbors as soon as PH notice mailed. Depending on lot size, decks can be as close as 3 ft to a property line. Decks 30” and above require 42” railings.

Above than can be umbrellas, chairs, tables, awnings, trellises etc. Should at least be Admin.

3. Consolidation of Design Review Criteria
Do not eliminate Swimming Pools, Spas and Water Features. Agreed. 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.

Changes Based on Coastal Commission Staff Comments:
• City specify measuring height from the existing “legal grade’” adjacent ground elevation.

MAJOR CONCERN: Mansionization Ordinance (2003 Implementation) after 27 hearings changed the measurement to lowest finished floor due to massing issues – ABS at rear, 3rd covered parking space, no decks in required side setbacks, etc. 119
249 of 399
Height should be measured from lowest finish floor. Years of complaints from resulting 4-5 story buildings caused this change some 30 years ago. Rear additional building setback was part of change.

Chart DR Efficiency Ordinance Changes (Summary of Design Review Streamlining Ordinance) Administrative Design Review 25.05.040(B)(3)
If hearing requested applicant provides another listing (cost approx. $400).

Staking Requirements 25.07.012
Staking for CDPs only for ADUs over 16 feet?
Environmentally Sensitive Area 25.08.010
Provide legible CC mapped ESAs and call out the ESAs.

Residential Site Coverage Development Standard
Pattern of development, document prior privilege so cannot come back w/upper-level addition. If expanded lot coverage is allowed due to lowering of building to protect neighboring views, there is no process to document this limitation of height for future owner or neighbors. - 5% could be considered minimal however, is 5% takes it from 35 to 40% or is it 5% increase of 35% which is 1.75%? Diamond/Crestview Specific Plan 25.49
Specific Plan includes unique DR Criteria and Hillside Guidelines. Major effort to change D/CSP.

Suggest deleting concept review prior to actual Design review as doubles the time and burden on neighbors.

PC Resolution No. 26-0381
Exhibit A
LBMC Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a)(iii)
Include terraces/filled yards more than three feet above adjacent grade elevation. These areas are often lawn areas that allow chairs, umbrellas, etc. Building Code only requires a railing is a walking surface adjacent to 30-inch drop.

Is limited to 6 ft maximum before stepping to avoid filling rear year completed. No filling of yards to within 3 ft of property lines?
LBMC Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a)(xiv)
Include trash storage fencing limited to 3 feet high in front setbacks on corner lots.

Corner lot requirement is 3 ft max for certain distance in both directions of corner then can rise to 4 ft which is max fence height?
LBMC Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(c)(i)
Require staking (ADR) for decks/terraces greater than three feet above adjacent grade elevation.

LBMC Section 25.05.070(B)(1)(i) Allowed Appeals/CDD Decisions Only ADR? How do find out all decisions?
LBMC Section 25.05.070(D) Hearing on Appeal
(1) Clarify ADR and de novo hearing?
(2) Clarify PC/DRB and de novo hearing?
With majority vote or 4-0 or 5-0, of DRB or PC, appeal to CC is for Abuse of Discretion only not de novo? LBMC Section 25.05.070(E)(2) Action on Appeal/Deadlocked Vote (i) & (ii) Can applicant or appellant continue for a full Board, Commission or Council? Continuance of hearing to obtain full board in the event of only 4 members or even 3 members? 120
250 of 399
RESOLUTION NO. 2026-0381

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA RECOMMENDING

THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT AN ORDINANCE
AMENDING THE CITY’S LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM (LCPA
2026-0381) AND MUNICIPAL CODE (2026-0381) TO
MODIFY TITLE 25 (ZONING), TITLE 21 (PLATS AND
SUBDIVISIONS), AND TITLE 22 (EXCAVATING, GRADING,

AND FILLING) TO STREAMLINE THE DESIGN REVIEW AND

OTHER PERMIT PROCESSES, AND FINDING THE ACTION

TO BE CATEGORICALLY EXEMPT FROM CEQA PURSUANT
TO STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15301
WHEREAS, the City’s development regulations are intended to protect community character, coastal resources, public safety, and environmental quality, and advance orderly development; and WHEREAS, in recent years, the California Legislature has approved, and the Governor has signed into law, numerous bills affecting local land use and housing approvals that are intended, among other purposes, to create a faster, more objective pathway to approval for certain development applications and to constrain or modify the use of discretionary review in specified circumstances; and WHEREAS, as a result of these ongoing changes in state law, related regulations, and litigation trends, the legal landscape for land use planning in California has become more complex, more timesensitive, and more contested, increasing the need for clear procedures, objective standards where appropriate, predictable timelines, and well-defined decision-maker roles; and WHEREAS, periodically the City identifies sections of its Local Coastal Program and Municipal Code that are outdated, unclear, conflict with other Municipal Code sections, or warrant modifications to improve or enhance the functions and operations of the City; and WHEREAS, on October 1, 2024, the City held a community workshop to gain feedback on development of an ordinance to streamline the design review and other permit processes within the City (the “Design Review Efficiency Ordinance” or “DR Efficiency Ordinance”); and WHEREAS, City staff then released to the public a cover letter summarizing the DR Efficiency Ordinance and a copy of the ordinance itself for purposes of gathering feedback to incorporate into the ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on March 12, 2025, the City Council, the Planning Commission, and the Design Review Board all met in a joint session to discuss a revised draft of the DR Efficiency Ordinance; and Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 Attachment 6
121
251 of 399
Planning Commission Resolution 2026-0381
March 18, 2026

WHEREAS, based on the joint session, City staff presented further revisions to the draft ordinance to the City Council for additional feedback on April 8, 2025, July 22, 2025, and November 18, 2025; and
WHEREAS, City staff sent the California Coastal Commission staff the draft ordinance and the California Coastal Commission staff provided comments on the draft ordinance; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a duly-noticed public hearing on March 18, 2026 pursuant to Title 25, Zoning, of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code to consider the attached Ordinance. The Planning Commission has considered all public testimony on the proposed Ordinance and all relevant public comments, and all documents and evidence submitted, including but not limited to the staff report and attachments; and
WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Laguna Beach does hereby find, determine, and resolve as follows:

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.

SECTION 2. The Planning Commission hereby finds under the California Environmental Quality Act, this action is exempt from environmental review under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 because it consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Here, the recommended action meets the exemption because it involves processing of ordinances that are affecting the organization and procedures within the City and modifications to some standards for existing uses that will not result in an expansion of the existing use. Upon taking the recommended action, City staff will file within five calendar days a notice of exemption with the County and State Clearinghouse. Furthermore, under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15265, CEQA does not apply to activities and approvals pursuant to the Coastal Act necessary for the preparation and adoption of a local coastal program because the Coastal Commission’s LCP review and approval procedures have been found to be functionally equivalent to the environmental review process. Therefore, the adoption of the Ordinance amending the City’s local coastal program is statutorily exempt from CEQA.

SECTION 3. The Planning Commission hereby finds that the adoption of the Ordinance is consistent with the City’s General Plan(c) and certified Local Coastal Program.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 122
252 of 399
Planning Commission Resolution 2026-0381
March 18, 2026

SECTION 4. Given the foregoing, and based on the entire record before the Planning Commission, the Planning Commission hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the ordinance attached hereto as Exhibit “A”, which includes modifications read into the record as reflected in redline, along with a recommendation to require all capital improvement projects, except for “de minimis” capital improvement projects, to be presented to the Planning Commission for concept review prior to entitlement.

SECTION 5. This Resolution takes effect immediately upon adoption.

SECTION 6. The documents and materials that constitute the record of proceedings on which this Resolution has been based are located at City Hall, 505 Forest Avenue Laguna Beach, CA 92651. The custodian of the record of proceedings is the Director of Community Development.

ADOPTED this 18th day of March, 2026
AYES: Commissioner(s) DUBIN, GOLDMAN, KELLENBERG, SADLER, WHITIN

NOES: Commissioner(s)
ABSENT: Commissioner(s)
ATTEST:

Steve Kellenberg, Chairperson
Planning Commission
City of Laguna Beach, California
Samantha Beier, AICP
Planning Manager
City of Laguna Beach, California
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 123
253 of 399
Planning Commission Resolution 2026-0381
March 18, 2026

Exhibit “A”
Proposed Ordinance with Redlines Recommended by Planning Commission [Attached]
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 124
254 of 399

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING ITS LOCAL

COASTAL PROGRAM AND MUNICIPAL CODE TO
MODIFY TITLE 25 (ZONING), TITLE 21 (SUBDIVISIONS),
AND TITLE 22 (EXCAVATING, GRADING, AND FILLING)

TO STREAMLINE THE DESIGN REVIEW AND OTHER
PERMIT PROCESSES; AND FINDING SAID ACTION

EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL

QUALITY ACT UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION
15301
WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach, California (“City”) is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the California Constitution and laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the police powers delegated to it by the California Constitution, the City has the authority to enact laws which promote the public health, safety, and general welfare of its citizens; and
WHEREAS, the City is located within the California State Coastal Zone; and WHEREAS, periodically the City identifies sections of its Local Coastal Program and Municipal Code that are outdated, unclear, conflict with other Municipal Code sections, or warrant modifications to improve or enhance the functions and operations of the City; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend its Local Coastal Program and Municipal Code to streamline the design review and other permit processes within the City; and WHEREAS, all other legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1. Recitals. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are hereby adopted as findings in support of this Ordinance as if fully set forth herein.

SECTION 2. Code Amendment. Section 25.05.015 (Form of application, fees, and permit compliance.) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(A) Prescribed by the Director of Community Development. (1) The Director of Community Development shall prescribe the form and scope of all variances, changes of district boundaries or reclassifications, general plan amendments and all other planning or development applications as identified in Chapter 25.05, and of accompanying data to be furnished so as to assure the fullest practicable presentation of facts for proper consideration of the Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 125
255 of 399

matter and for the permanent record. Forms for such purposes may be provided.
(2) Each planning and development application shall include verification by at least one of the owners of property involved or their authorized agent attesting to the truth and correctness of all facts and maps presented with such application.
(3) Applications filed pursuant to this Title shall be numbered consecutively in the order of their filing and shall become a part of the permanent official records of the Department of Community Development and shall be attached thereto and permanently filed therewith copies of all notices and actions pertaining thereto. (B) Complete Planning and Development Applications.
(1) No later than 30 calendar days after receipt of a planning or development application, the Department of Community
Development shall determine whether the application is complete or incomplete.
(2) In the event an application is determined to be incomplete, the applicant shall be notified as to additional materials required to continue processing the application.
(3) Within 30 calendar days of receipt of supplemental materials requested for applications previously determined incomplete, the Department of Community Development shall determine whether the application is complete.
(4) A decision determining an application to be incomplete may be appealed to the City Council by the applicant. The fee for such appeal is to be determined by City Council resolution.
(C) Signatures. If signatures of persons other than the applicant are required, or offered in support of or in opposition to the application, they may be received as evidence of notice having been served upon them of the pending application or as evidence of their opinion on the pending issue, but they shall in no case infringe upon or govern in the free exercise of the powers vested in the City of Laguna Beach.
(D) Filing Fee Collection. Before accepting for filing any request or application submitted relative to Title 25 of this Code, the Department of Community Development shall charge and collect a filing fee for each such request or application as determined by resolution of the City Council to cover the cost of making maps, sending out notices, and other incidental administrative expenses involved in the handling of the matter, including written staff Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 126
256 of 399

reports. An application cannot be deemed complete without the payment of the require application fee.
(D) Refund of Filing Fees. Refund of all or any portion of the filing fees may be ordered by the Director of Community Development.
(E) Conformance by Officials. All officials or public employees vested with the duty or authority to issue permits or licenses where required by law shall conform to the provisions of this Title.
(F) Application. The provisions of this Title shall apply to all buildings, improvements, lots and premises, or portions thereof, owned, leased, operated or controlled by the City or any Department or officer thereof, or by any other municipal or quasi-municipal corporation or government, or any Department, Board or officer thereof.
(G) Expiration of Application. If an applicant fails to provide any additional information requested by the Department of Community Development within ninety (90) days of the date the application was deemed incomplete, the application shall expire and have no force and effect, unless otherwise required by state law. After the expiration of an application, future City consideration shall require the submittal of a new, complete application and associated filing fees.

SECTION 3. Code Amendment. Section 25.05.040 (Design Review) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed and replaced to read as follows:

A. Intent and Purpose.
(1) The design review process is intended to achieve the following goals:
(a) That development projects comply with the applicable standards and design review findings and criteria;
(b) That development projects focus on quality designs, within a neighborhood context that results in creative design solutions for the City;
(c) That development occurs with an orderly and harmonious appearance, including associated facilities, such as signs, landscaping, and parking areas;
(d) That the development review process considers public and private views;
(e) That public health, safety, and general welfare throughout the City is paramount;
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 127
257 of 399

(f) That there is effective implementation of the applicable general and specific plan policies; and
(g) That development projects comply with the policies of the certified Local Coastal Program, including, but not limited to, the shoreline access, open space, environmentally sensitive habitat, hillside protection, and visual resource policies. (2) Approval Authority.
(a) The Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as
appropriate, is the approval authority for Design Review projects identified in Section 25.05.040(B)(1).
(b) The Community Development Department is the approval authority for projects that are Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance), as specified in Section 25.05.040(B)(2). (c) The Director of Community Development is the approval authority for Administrative Design Review as specified in Section 25.05.040(B)(3).
(d) The Director of Community Development, at his or her sole discretion, is authorized to refer projects that are subject to Administrative Design Review or exempt from Design Review, as specified in Sections 25.05.040(B)(3) and 25.05.040(B)(2), to the Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as
appropriate.
(e) Development Subject to Design Review, Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance), and Administrative Design Review may still require a Coastal Development Permit pursuant to the provisions of Chapter 25.07.

B. Development Subject to Design Review, Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance), and Administrative Design Review.
(1) Design Review. Design Review before the Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as appropriate, at a public hearing shall be required for the following projects:
(a) Demolition or reinforcement, or addition, that constitute a major remodel. A landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan is required for such major remodel;
(b) All new buildings, except as otherwise provided in Section

25.05.040(B)(2) relating to ADUs and new primary dwelling Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 128
258 of 399

units. A landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan is required for new buildings under this subsection;
(c) Any improvement that exceeds a height of 16 15 feet, measured in accordance with the definition of “Height,
building” in Chapter 25.08 (from the finished floor or from natural or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive or lower). above the adjacent, legal ground elevation. A
landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan is required for such improvement;
(d) Major modifications, alterations, or other actions pertaining to historic resources that do not qualify for administrative approval under Section 25.05.040(B)(3);
(e) Any development in an environmentally sensitive area, unless a licensed professional has determined, subject to peer review, that the proposed development does not impact the environmentally sensitive area;
(f) Grading in excess of 20 cubic yards outside the building footprint, except as specified in Section 22.10.010(e); (g) Retaining walls in excess of five 5 feet in exposed height; (h) Clearing of native vegetation on undeveloped parcels and undeveloped portions of developed parcels, and native
vegetation restoration plans, except for City required annual weed abatement and fuel modification;
(i) Shoreline and bluff protective devices;
(j) Swimming pools and spas more than three 3 feet above adjacent, legal ground elevation;
(k) New vehicular access to streets or alleys;
(l) Commercial or industrial parking and loading areas; (m) Permanent chain link or similar type of woven metal fences, and vinyl fences that do not simulate natural material; (n) Trash storage or enclosures, except as provided in Section

25.05.040(B)(2) and Section 25.05.040(B)(3);
(o) Major Capital Improvement Project, which means a project undertaken by the City that is determined by the Community Development Director, in consultation with other affected Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 129
259 of 399

department heads, to require review by the Planning
Commission prior to approval by the City Council of design and/or construction documents, based on the project’s
proposed scope in terms of environmental, aesthetic, and/or land use effects on the community. Typical examples of a Major Capital Improvement Project include, but are not limited to, the following:
(i) New or substantial alterations to parks, public
buildings, community facilities, reservoirs, or bridges; (ii) New or substantial alterations to drainage structures which involve significant changes to grades, hillsides, habitats, or views;
(iii) Street improvements which involve substantial
expansion of right-of-way, removal of existing facilities, removal of significant vegetation (unless part of a fuel modification project or program) and/or major changes
to community character;
(iv) Design programs for city-wide features which are
visible to the general public and contribute to
community character, including but not limited to beach and park accessways, promenades, bridges, trails, and
the City-owned property, where Festival of Arts and
Pageant of the Masters is hosted.
(2) Exempt from Design Review (Zone Clearance). The following types of projects shall require the issuance of zone clearance in compliance with Chapter 25.05.045, rather than design review. For avoidance of doubt, the zone clearance process shall not be used for any of the below projects that are on a lot within an environmentally sensitive area (unless a licensed professional has determined, subject to peer review, that the proposed development does not impact the environmentally sensitive area); such projects are subject to Design Review under (B)(1).
(a) Demolition or reinforcement, or addition, that does not constitute a major remodel;
(b) An improvement that does not exceed a height of 16 15 feet, measured in accordance with the definition of “Height,
building” in Chapter 25.08 (from the finished floor or from natural or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive or lower) above the adjacent, legal ground elevation;
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 130
260 of 399

(c) In-kind replacement of improvements for repair and
maintenance;
(d) Interior modifications to existing structures that do not modify the exterior of such structures;
(e) Re-roofing of buildings or structures which do not result in white or light colored roofs, provided there are no changes to the dimensions, square footage, or roof pitch, and which will not result in glare through the use of materials, such as asphalt shingles or stainless steel, both at the determination of the Community Development Director;
(f) Roof alterations that do not exceed a height of 16 feet above the adjacent, legal ground elevation;
(g)(f) Annual weed abatement;
(h)(g) Fuel modification project or program;
(i)(h) Accessory dwelling units, only as set forth in Chapter 25.17; (j)(i) Grading of 20 cubic yards or less outside the building footprint, except as specified in Section 22.10.010(e);
(k)(j) Retaining walls five 5 feet or less in exposed height; (l)(k) Hardscape that does not increase impervious surfaces, or that is proposed to comply with applicable fire prevention
standards as determined by the Fire Official, and complies with all other applicable provisions of this chapter;
(m)(l) Fences, walls and hedges that comply with Section 25.50.012 ("Fences, walls, hedges, latticework and screens"). For avoidance of doubt, this excludes permanent chain link or similar type of woven metal fences, and vinyl fences that do not simulate natural material, which are subject to design review under (B)(1);
(n)(m) Decks, slabs, terraces, or patios elevated three (3) feet or less above the adjacent, legal ground elevation;
(o)(n) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or trees within the buildable area that is less than sixteen 15 feet at maintained height when measured from ground elevation
adjacent to the location of the vegetation, plant, bush, or tree, provided that the plans identify and require that the
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 131
261 of 399

landscaping is to be maintained at or below the heights reflected in the plans;
(p)(o) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or trees in the rear or side yard at less than six 6 feet at maintained height and in the front yard at less than four 4 feet at maintained height when measured from the ground elevation adjacent to the location of the vegetation plant, bush, or tree, provided that the plans identify and require that the landscaping is to be maintained at or below the heights reflected in the plans; (q)(p) Artwork approved through the procedures outlined in Chapter

1.09 ("Art in Public Places");
(r)(q) Trash storage within the side yard when screened from public view by a wall or fence at least four 4 feet in height and does not impact required access for the property;
(s)(r) Railings;
(t)(s) Skylights with operable automatic night shades;
(u)(t) Swimming pools and spas no more than three (3) feet above adjacent, legal ground elevation;
(v)(u) Water features;
(w)(v) Mechanical equipment, including, but not limited to, air conditioners and pool/spa equipment, that meet the
requirements of Section 7.25.130(c);
(x)(w) Above-ground utility structures, which are below four (4) feet in height when measured from adjacent, legal ground
elevation, when incorporating colors, finishes, and
landscaping to minimize visual impact, as determined by the Community Development Director, provided that the plans identify and require that the landscaping is to be maintained at or below the heights reflected in the plan and not to exceed the height of such above-ground utility structures;
(y)(x) Temporary on-grade removable accessory structures used as play sets, swing sets, other similar unenclosed recreation equipment, and storage sheds provided that:
(i) the structure does not exceed 120 square feet in size, (ii) the height is less than 12 feet above adjacent, legal ground elevation, and
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 132
262 of 399

(iii) minimum required setbacks of the underlying zone are met unless it receives administrative design review
approval;
(z)(y) Certain telecommunication facilities subject to the provisions of Chapters 11.06 and 25.55;
(aa)(z)New primary dwelling units that comply with all applicable objective development standards of this Zoning Code and the following requirements. A landscape plan and an exterior lighting plan are required for new units under this subsection.

Note that other structures and site improvements proposed at the same time as the primary dwelling unit may require design review in accordance with Sections 25.05.040(B)(1) and

25.05.040(B)(3).
(i) Building Height. The height does not exceed a height of 16 15 feet and a single story, measured in
accordance with the definition of “Height, building” in Chapter 25.08 (from the finished floor or from natural
or finished grade, whichever is more restrictive or
lower). For purposes of this subsection, height is the
vertical distance from any point measured from the
adjacent, legal ground elevation or the level of the
lowest floor, whichever is lower, to the peak of the
structure. The maximum height of the peak allowed by
this subsection applies to every part of the structure, including but not limited to chimneys, vents, and
mechanical equipment.
(ii) Yards.
(1) Side Yards. The side yard setbacks are at least
20% greater than the requirement imposed by
the underlying zone. No redistribution of the
required side yards shall be permitted.
(2) Front and Rear Yards. The front and rear yard
setbacks are at least 20% greater than the
requirement imposed by the underlying zone.

Reduced building setbacks in accordance with
Section 25.50.004(E) shall not be permitted.
(3) In any case where a special subdivision map
building setback applies, the building setback
shall be at least 20% greater than that
requirement.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 133
263 of 399

(iii) Landscaping. Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes or trees within the buildable area shall not
exceed 16 15 feet at maintained height when
measured from the adjacent, legal ground elevation.

Within the rear and side yards, such vegetation shall
not exceed a maintained height of six 6 feet, or four 4 feet within the front yard.
(iv) Lighting. Exterior lighting must be fully shielded and aimed downward.
(v) Roof Decks. The primary dwelling unit does not include a roof deck. For purposes of this subsection, a "roof
deck" is defined to mean a deck above the building.
(bb)(aa) De Minimis Capital Improvement Projects. For
purposes of this subsection, capital improvement projects undertaken by the City may be deemed de minimis and
subject to zone clearance pursuant to the Zoning Code based on the project’s proposed scope in terms of environmental, aesthetic, and/or land use effects on the community, or are emergency projects determined by the Community
Development Director to be necessary to preserve the health, safety, or welfare of the community. Examples of de minimis capital improvement projects include but are not limited to the following:
(i) Fuel modification project or program;
(ii) Emergency projects;
(iii) Roadway or trail improvements within existing rightsof-way; (iv) Pipeline, such as storm drain and sewer, installation, repair and maintenance; minor alterations to utilities; (v) Alterations and repairs to parking lots;
(vi) Small habitat restoration projects as defined in Section 15333 of the CEQA Guidelines;
(vii) Sign replacements in the same size with similar
materials, at the determination of the Community
Development Director;
(viii) In kind replacement of improvements for repair and maintenance;
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 134
264 of 399

(ix) Similar projects as determined by the Community
Development Director in consultation with other
affected department heads.
(3) Administrative Design Review. Administrative Design Review before the Community Development Director or designee shall be required for the following projects and as set forth below:
(a) The following projects are subject to the administrative design review process. For avoidance of doubt, the administrative design review process shall not be used for improvements that are on a lot within an environmentally sensitive area (unless a licensed professional has determined, subject to peer review, that the proposed development does not impact the environmentally sensitive area); such improvements are subject to design review under (B)(1).
(i) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or
trees within the buildable area that is sixteen 15 feet or higher at maintained height when measured from the
ground elevation adjacent to the location of the
vegetation, plant, bush, or tree;
(ii) Landscaping of any vegetation, plants, bushes, or
trees in the rear or side yard at six 6 feet or higher at maintained height and in the front yard at four 4 feet or higher at maintained height when measured from the
ground elevation adjacent to the location of the
vegetation plant, bush, or tree;
(iii) Decks, slabs, terraces, or patios elevated more than three (3) feet above the adjacent, legal ground
elevation;
(iv) Minor alterations to historic resources consisting of replacement or modification of doors and windows; the
addition of first floor porches and decks; the
replacement of roofing material or building siding;
minor improvements to landscaping, hardscape, walls,
fences, arbors, and other landscape features; and
similar minor site or building alterations, provided that any such alteration has been reviewed for
conformance with the Secretary of the Interior’s
Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties with Guidelines for Preserving, Rehabilitating, Restoring,
and Reconstructing Historic Buildings (1995, Weeks
and Grimmer), as amended from time to time, as
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 135
265 of 399

determined by the Community Development Director,
or other similar generally accepted resource, as
determined by the Community Development Director;
(v) Mechanical equipment, including, but not limited to, air conditioners and pool/spa equipment that do not meet
the requirements of Section 7.25.130(C);
(vi) Additional covered or tandem parking as specified in Section 25.52.012(G);
(vii) Decorative features such as fence posts, brick or stone columns which may extend up to twelve inches above
the maximum allowable height within the front yard;
(viii) Revocable Encroachment Permits when not
associated with a project requiring a Design Review
Board or Planning Commission decision;
(ix) Re-roofing of buildings or structures which result in white or light colored roofs and which may result in
glare through the use of materials, such as asphalt
shingles or stainless steel, both at the determination of the Community Development Director;
(ix)(x) Roof alterations that change the dimensions, square footage, or roof pitch;
(x)(xi) Detached fireplaces;
(xi)(xii)Skylights without operable automatic night shades; (xii)(xiii) Telecommunication facilities subject to the provisions of Chapters 11.06 and 25.55 unless
otherwise exempt;
(xiii)(xiv) Above-ground utility structures, which are four (4) feet or higher in height when measured from
adjacent, legal ground elevation;
(xiv)(xv) Trash storage located within the front yard
setback, screened from public view by a wall or fence
at least four 4 feet in height (3 feet on a corner lot) and not impacting required access for the property;
(xv)(xvi) Extensions of time for design review permits; Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 136
266 of 399

(xvi)(xvii) Minor Capital Improvement project, which
means a project undertaken by the City that may be
reviewed and approved administratively, based upon a
determination by the Community Development
Director, in consultation with other affected department heads, based on the project’s proposed scope in terms
of environmental, aesthetic, and/or land use effects on the community. Typical examples of minor capital
improvement projects include, but are not limited to the following:
(1) Alterations to existing facilities resulting in
exterior design changes;
(2) Roadway or trail extensions within existing
rights-of-way;
(3) Replacement or renovation of damaged
facilities or structures resulting in exterior design
changes;
(4) Small additions to existing structures resulting in exterior design changes;
(5) Construction or demolition of small structures
resulting in site or building design changes; and
(6) Slope and wall repair for public infrastructure.
(b) Except for decks, slabs, terraces, or patios elevated more than 3 feet above the adjacent, legal ground elevation
(Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a)(iii)) and minor alterations to historic resources (Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a)(iv)), Tthe Community Development Director may waive the requirement for a public hearing on a design review permit for the projects identified in Section 25.05.040(B)(3)(a), when no other entitlement is required, if all of the following occur:
(i) Notice is mailed or delivered to all persons and
agencies required to be notified Section 25.05.065.

The notice shall contain all of the information required in Section 25.05.065. In addition, the notice of waiver of public hearing for the pending action shall contain all of the following:
(1) A statement that a public hearing will be held
upon the written request of any person provided
that such request is received by the Department
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 137
267 of 399

within fifteen (15) working days from the date of
sending the notice;
(2) The date of the notice;
(3) A statement that the project is appealable to the
City Council;
(4) The final date to submit a request for a hearing;
(5) The date the design review permit will be
granted if there is no hearing;
(6) A project description and a statement of why the
project qualifies for a waived public hearing;
(7) A statement that failure by a person to request
a public hearing may result in the loss of that
person's ability to appeal to the City Council any
action taken by the City on such design review
application;
(8) A statement that the project plans are available
at the Community Development Department for
inspection during normal operating hours of the
City.
(ii) Publication of Notice. The City shall publish a notice to issue administrative design review permit not requiring a public hearing one time at least ten days before the
end of the public comment period. Such notices shall
contain all the information required in subsections
(B)(3)(b)(i)(1) through (B)(3)(b)(a)(8) of this section above and Section 25.07.014. Such notices shall be
published online on the City's website or in a
newspaper with general circulation in the City.
(iii) If no request for public hearing is received by the Community Development Department within fifteen
(15) working days from the date of sending the notice
pursuant to subsection (B)(3)(v)(ii) of this section, the permit is deemed approved.
(iv) An appeal of a decision on an administrative design review application is subject to the provisions of
Section 25.05.070.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 138
268 of 399

(c) Upon receipt of a request for a hearing, or in the Community Development Director’s discretion not to waive the public hearing requirement, the Community Development
Department shall schedule the matter for a public hearing and issue notice of such hearing consistent with the provisions of Section 25.05.065 and shall be subject to the following process:
(i) Staking Requirements for Administrative Design
Review. If the Director of Community Development or
his or her designee otherwise determines that a project should be staked, the staking requirements of
subsections (C)(2) of this section shall be followed,
except that the construction and certification of the
staking shall be completed at least 14 calendar days
prior to the public hearing.
(ii) Deliberation and Action on Administrative Design
Review Applications. The Director of Community
Development or his or her designee shall conduct a
public hearing for the designated administrative design review projects. After consideration of all testimony and evidence presented at the public hearing and the
Design Review Findings specified in subsection (I) of
this section, the Director of Community Development
or his or her designee shall either approve,
conditionally approve, or deny the application in
writing. An appeal of a decision on an administrative
design review application is subject to the provisions of Section 25.05.070, and Section 25.07.016 when a
coastal development permit is required.

C. Application. Application for design review shall be made by a property owner or authorized agent. Applications shall contain such information as prescribed by the Director of Community Development.
(1) Early Neighbor Communication. The applicant shall communicate with owners of property within 300 feet of the applicant's property notifying them of the proposed project. Such communication should take place prior to deciding on a final design to help resolve potential conflicts. Communication efforts shall include notification mailed to all property owners within 300 feet of the applicant's property. The noticing must be prepared and mailed by a professional listing service. Certification to the accuracy, completeness of the list, and date the notice was mailed is required to be provided by the company, along with a copy of the materials sent. Early neighbor communication must be completed prior to being scheduled for a Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 139
269 of 399

hearing date. The following information shall be included in the early neighbor notification notice:
(a) Applicant contact information.
(b) Location of the proposed project.
(c) A description of the proposed project.
(d) Information on how to participate in the design review process.
(2) Staking Requirements.
(a) A staking plan shall be prepared as specified on the most current zoning and design review submittal checklist. Staking poles and connecting ribbons, which accurately represent the full extent of the proposed structure, including decks and eaves, shall be constructed at least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing. At least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing, the location and height of the staking poles must be certified as accurate by a registered land surveyor or registered civil engineer licensed to conduct land surveys in the State of California. If complete and certified project staking is not in place at least 21 calendar days prior to the first Design Review Board or Planning Commission public hearing date or 14 calendar days prior to the administrative design review public hearing, the project shall be continued to a later date.

Neither the applicant, a relative of the applicant, nor any other person possessing a financial interest in the property or the project may certify the location and height accuracy of the staking poles. If the project is modified during the design review process because of a view consideration, privacy or other concerns that the design review authority determines is necessary to restake, the project shall be re-staked and recertified at least 14 calendar days prior to any subsequent public hearing.
(b) Staking poles shall be removed by the applicant within 20 calendar days after the final decision on the design review application. The applicant's failure to remove the staking poles within the prescribed time period shall result in any remedies at law, including but not limited to code enforcement
remedies.
(3) Biological Report Requirements. Prior to deliberation and action on a design review application, the applicant shall submit a biological report that is prepared by a professional in the fields of wildlife Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 140
270 of 399

biology or botany for any proposal to clear native vegetation on undeveloped parcels that are located within or adjacent to areas designated high or very high value on the city's biological values maps and any other areas that contain environmentally sensitive habitat resources except for annual weed abatement and approved fuel modification programs.
(4) Fire Safety Standards Review. Prior to deliberation and action on a design review application for new construction and major remodels, the Fire Department or Building Division of the Community Development Department, as applicable, shall serve as the review authority for purposes of reviewing and approving or conditionally approving applications, including proposed fuel modification programs. Fuel modification programs or Alternative Materials and Methods (AM&Ms) requests, when determined necessary by the applicable review authority, are required for any parcel having an "FM"—Fuel Modification designation or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone on the City's Geographic Information Mapping system.

The Cal Fire-designated Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zone is an overlay zone, and does not change the underlying zoning of Title 25.

The review authority’s conditions of approval relating to public safety may not subsequently be modified by the design review authority without the review and approval of the Fire Department or Building Division of the Community Development Department, as applicable.

D. Filing Fee. Prior to accepting an application, the Department of Community Development shall charge and collect a filing fee as determined by resolution of the City Council.

E. Public Notice. Public notice shall be subject to the provisions of Section

25.05.065, except that if a Coastal Development Permit is required pursuant to Chapter 25.07, noticing for that type of permit shall instead be carried out through the public notice provisions of Section 25.07.014.

F. Deliberation and Action on Applications.
(1) The authorities responsible for reviewing and making decisions on design review applications under Section 25.05.040(B)(1) are as follows:
(i) The design review board shall conduct a noticed public hearing on design review applications for all singlefamily or two-family developments, including associated public right-of-way improvements.
(ii) The planning commission shall conduct a noticed
public hearing on all other design review applications, Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 141
271 of 399

including but not limited to: residential development of three-families or more, all projects located in the
downtown specific plan area, all non-residential
development, public works projects, and projects for
which the planning commission is the primary
discretionary review authority, such as approval of a
conditional use permit.
(2) Upon the conclusion of the public hearing on a design review application, and the consideration of all testimony and evidence presented at the public hearing, the approval authority shall approve, conditionally approve or deny the application. Determinations of design review applications shall be by majority vote of the voting members of the approval authority present.
(3) The approval, conditional approval, or denial of design review applications by the approval authority shall be based upon the design review findings set forth in subsection (I) this section. Additional findings and review criteria are specified in Section 25.07.012(F) and (G) when an associated Coastal Development Permit is required.

Additional review criteria contained in specific plans and/or zoning overlays shall apply to projects located in areas covered by any such specific plans and/or zoning overlays.
(4) The approval, conditional approval or denial of design review applications by the approval authority shall be accompanied by written findings correlated with the design review findings set forth in subsection (I). Section 25.07.012(G) requires written findings to be made when approving or conditionally approving an associated Coastal Development Permit.
(5) Written notice of the approval, conditional approval or denial of design review applications shall be provided to the applicant or authorized agent within 14 calendar days of the date of the decision of the approval authority.
(6) Landscaping Conditions. The approval authority shall condition all landscaping approvals with maintained growth height limits for all vegetation that potentially impacts views. The landscaping shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plans.

Thereafter, the landscaping shall be continuously maintained (including replanting, as necessary) in compliance with the approved landscaping plans, unless such plans are subsequently modified pursuant to Section 25.05.060. Certain landscaping is subject to zone clearance pursuant to subsection (B)(2) of this section and must be maintained at approved heights.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 142
272 of 399

(7) Applications for design review approval constitute applications for a "permit" as that term currently is used in California Government Code Section 65009(c)(1), and as hereafter may be amended.

G. Design Guidelines. "Design Guidelines" is a publication that has been developed by the City to assist designers in understanding the Design Review criteria. These guidelines complement the zoning regulations provided for in this Title by providing conceptual examples of potential design solutions and design interpretations. The guidelines are general and may be utilized with flexibility in their application to specific projects.

H. Design Review Criteria. The design review criteria are as follows:
(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.
(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 any one element of the structure into smaller components, may be used to reduce the appearance of mass.
(3) 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 except when necessary to balance other design review criteria. (4) 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. (5) Historic Preservation. Destruction, alteration, or other actions pertaining to historic resources must be consistent with Chapter

25.45. (6) 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.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 143
273 of 399

(7) 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, high-gloss 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. (8) 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.
(9) Pedestrian Orientation. Commercial and mixed-use with commercial development design shall maintain, to the maximum extent possible, the existing pedestrian orientation and improve upon it, when feasible. Design techniques that support a pedestrian orientation may include articulated building masses, frequent building entrances, display windows near the sidewalk, outdoor activity spaces, and appropriate use of landscaping and lighting. Blank walls should be avoided, to the maximum extent feasible. 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 to the extent feasible.
(10) 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.
(11) 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. View equity is intended to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property.

I. Design Review Findings. In order to approve a design review permit application, the reviewing authority shall make all of the following findings:
(1) The proposed design of the project complies with all applicable provisions of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code; and
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 144
274 of 399

(2) The physical improvements and site developments are designed and located in a manner that achieves consistency with the design review criteria specified in Section 25.05.040(H).

J. Appeals. Appeals of the design review authority are subject to the provisions of Section 25.05.070, and Section 25.07.016 when a Coastal Development Permit is required.

K. Effective Date/Expiration Date.
(1) A Design Review decision shall become effective 14 calendar days after the date of the decision, unless appealed to the City Council. (2) Design Review approval shall lapse and become void two years following the effective date if the privileges authorized by design review are not executed or utilized or, if construction work is involved, such work is not commenced within such two-year period and diligently pursued to completion.
(3) The Director of Community Development or his or her designee may grant approval, through the administrative design review process, a two-year extension of time and, after that initial extension of time, a final one-year extension of time. Such time extensions shall be requested in writing by the applicant or authorized agent prior to the expiration of the beginning two-year approval period or a subsequently approved extension of time.
(4) Extension of Time Findings. An extension of time of the beginning two-year approval period may be granted by through the
administrative design review process, if each of the following findings can be made:
(a) The zoning codes or standards applicable to the
circumstances of the originally approved design review have not materially changed; and
(b) The neighborhood character has not changed so as to be materially inconsistent with the findings made when design review was originally approved.

L. Reapplication Waiting Period. After denial of a project, no application for a project located on the same parcel or building site may be filed or accepted for filing for six months.

M. The actual development allowed after the application of the design review findings and criteria will typically be less than the maximum designated by the general standards for the zone because of localized conditions identified during the design review process. A proposed development that has no variances Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 145
275 of 399

from the Zoning Code does not have any presumptive development right or “entitlement.”
SECTION 4. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add Section 25.05.045 (Zone Clearance) to read as follows:

Section 25.05.045 (Zone Clearance)
(A) Purpose. Zoning clearance is the procedure used by the City to verify that a proposed use or structure complies with the activities allowed in the applicable zoning district and the development standards and other provisions of this Zoning Code.
(B) Applicability. Where this Zoning Code requires a zoning clearance as a prerequisite to establishing a use or structure, a zoning clearance shall be required at the time of the Department’s review of any of the following:
(1) Initiation of a Use. A zoning clearance shall be obtained before the initiation or commencement of any use of land not requiring the construction of a structure.
(2) Change of Use. Whenever a use is proposed to be changed or intensified, whether or not the new or intensified use involves a new lessee, operator, or owner, a zoning clearance shall be obtained. (3) Building Permit, Grading Permit, or Other Construction Permit. A zoning clearance shall be obtained before the City issues a new or modified building permit, grading permit, or other constructionrelated permit required for the alteration, construction, modification, moving, or reconstruction of any structure.
(C) Review and Approval
(1) The Community Development Department shall issue the zoning clearance after first determining that the request complies with all Zoning Code provisions and other adopted criteria and policies applicable to the proposed use or structure.
(2) An approval may be in the form of a stamp, signature, or other official notation on approved plans, a letter to the applicant, or other certification, at the discretion of the Community Development Director.
(3) Appeals. The Department’s action on a zone clearance request may be appealed to the City Council in compliance with Section

25.05.070, unless said zoning clearance is for ministerial approval in which case the Director is the final review authority.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 146
276 of 399

(4) Coastal Development Permit. A coastal development permit may still be required in accordance with Chapter 25.07.

SECTION 5. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add Section 25.05.060 (Subsequent Modification to Approved Permits) to read as follows:

Section 25.05.060 (Subsequent Modification to Approved Permits). (A) Subsequent Modification to Coastal Development Permits. (1) After a coastal development permit has been approved, modification of the approved plans and/or any conditions imposed, including additions or deletions, are subject to review in accordance with Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits), including Section

25.07.012(I) and Section 25.07.016(C).
(B) Subsequent Modification to Other Approved Permits.
(1) Development or a use authorized through an administrative use permit, variance, conditional use permit, temporary use permit, and design review permit issued by the City in compliance with the City’s Code shall be established only as approved by the review authority, and in compliance with any conditions of approval, except where a change to the project is approved in compliance with this section. (2) Application. An applicant shall request a proposed change in writing and shall also furnish appropriate supporting information and materials explaining the reasons for the request.
(3) Minor Changes Approved by the Community Development Director without a Public Hearing.
(i) The Community Development Director may authorize minor changes to an approved permit without a public hearing, where the Director first finds that the changes:
a. Are consistent with the requirements of the City’s
Zoning Code; and
b. Do not involve a feature of the project that was a basis for findings for an exemption, negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or environmental
impact report for the project; and
c. Do not involve a feature of the project that was
specifically addressed or was the subject of a
condition(s) of approval for the project or that was a
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 147
277 of 399

specific consideration by the applicable review
authority in the project approval; and
d. Do not result in an expansion or change in operational characteristics of the use; and
e. Do not alter the facts in support of the findings required by Section 25.07.012(G).
(ii) The Director may choose to refer any requested change to the original review authority for review and final action.
(C) Changes to Other Permits Approved by the City.
(1) Changes Approved by Original Review Authority. A proposed change that does not comply with the criteria identified in subsection (B)(3) of this section (Minor Changes Approved by the Director without a Public Hearing) may only be approved by the original review authority for the project through a new permit application filed and processed in compliance with the application provisions of Chapter 25.05.
(2) Conditions. If a proposed change is approved by the reviewing body, all terms and conditions of the original approval shall remain in effect, unless specifically removed or modified by the reviewing body. If a proposed change is denied by the reviewing body, the terms and conditions of the original permit shall remain in effect.

SECTION 6. Code Amendment. Subsection (C) of Section 25.05.065 (Public Notice) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):

Section 25.05.065 Public Notice.
. . .
(C) Content of Public Hearing Notices. All public hearing notices that are mailed, posted or published for a proposed project shall contain the information listed below.
(1) Time, date, address and location of the hearing;
(2) Name of the approval authority holding the hearing; (3) A description of the proposed development and its proposed location;
(4) The environmental determination;
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 148
278 of 399

(5) The name, title, telephone and email address of a staff contact person;
(6) All case numbers for the proposed development related project case numbers, and project name, if any;
(7) The project applicant’s name;
(8) A statement, if applicable, of whether the proposed project is located within the coastal zone and appeal procedure; see the coastal development permit noticing requirements specified in Section

25.07.014, and Section 25.07.020 for emergency coastal
development permit.

SECTION 7. Code Amendment. Subdivision (E) of Section 25.05.065 (Public Notice) of Chapter 25.05 (Administration) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to read as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(E) Posting of Public Hearing Notices. Notice of a public hearing shall be posted in three public places within the City, including on the project site, not less than ten calendar days prior to the date of the public hearing for administrative use permit, conditional use permit, design review, general plan amendment (for specific property), heritage tree, revocation, rezone, street abandonment, subdivision (parcel or tentative tract map), temporary use permit (decided by the planning commission) and variance applications.

SECTION 8. Code Amendment. Section 25.05.070 (Appeals and Requests for Review of Decisions) is hereby repealed and replaced with the following:

Section 25.05.070 Appeals and Requests for Review.
(A) Purpose. It is the intent and purpose of this section to provide standardized procedures for appeals and requests for review with respect to planning and development applications and requests.
(B) Allowed Appeals.
(1) Community Development Director Decisions.
(i) Any decision by the Community Development Director or designee on a ministerial permit may be appealed to the Planning Commission or Design Review Board, as applicable, provided that the only allowed grounds for appeal shall be that the decision of the Community Development Director or
designee has not complied with the applicable provisions of this Zoning Ordinance. Appeals of any determinations and requirements regarding coastal development permit
processing, including exemptions, determinations relative to Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 149
279 of 399

appealable development, etc. shall be as described in
Chapter 25.07.
(ii) Any decision by the Community Development Director or designee on a discretionary permit may be appealed to the Planning Commission or Design Review Board, as applicable.

Appeals of any determinations and requirements regarding coastal development permit processing, including
exemptions, determinations relative to appealable
development, etc. shall be as described in Chapter 25.07. (2) Planning Commission and Design Review Board Decisions. Any decision rendered by the Planning Commission and Design Review Board may be appealed to the City Council. Similarly, any decision rendered by a board, committee, or commission appointed by the City Council will be processed in the same manner as set forth herein for the Planning Commission and Design Review Board decisions.

Appeals of any determinations and requirements regarding coastal development permit processing, including exemptions,
determinations relative to appealable development, etc. shall be as described in Chapter 25.07.
(3) Requests for Review. On its own initiative, the City Council may review any decision rendered by the Community Development Director, Planning Commission, or Design Review Board as follows:
(i) Decision to Review
a. One Council member may initiate review of a
Community Development Director or Planning
Commission/Design Review Board decision,
respectively, by filing a written request with the City Clerk, within 14 calendar days after the date of the
decision.
b. The Council shall consider the “request for review” at its next regularly scheduled meeting.
c. If the Council votes to review the decision, a
subsequent review hearing shall be scheduled to
consider the merits of the review. Either action shall
require an affirmative majority of the legislative body vote.
d. Where the City is the applicant or affected property owner, the City Manager may initiate proceedings for
review of the decision or determination by written
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 150
280 of 399

request to the City Clerk within 14 calendar days of the decision or determination.
(ii) Applicant Notification. At the time the review body votes to initiate review, the applicant shall be informed of the aspects of the application and the decision that the review authority will consider.
(iii) Notice of Hearing. Notice of the hearing shall be provided and the hearing shall be conducted in compliance with Section

25.05.065.
(iv) A request for review shall not require any statement of reasons from the member(s) calling for review and therefore shall not represent support of or opposition to an application.

No fee shall be required for a request for review. There shall be a presumption that the reason for the request is that the application may be of significant concern to the community or significant importance to the quality of life within the community and/or applicable land use policies and
regulations. There shall be no inference or implication of bias or prejudgment due to a request for review being filed. (C) Filing and Processing of Appeals.
(1) Form of Appeal and Timing.
(i) Appeals, other than City Council review, shall be submitted in writing and filed with the Community Development
Department or City Clerk, as applicable, on a City application form, within 14 calendar days after the date the decision is rendered by the Community Development Director or
Planning Commission/Design Review Board.
(ii) Appeals to the Planning Commission/Design Review Board and City Council shall include a statement specifying the basis for the appeal and the specific aspect of the decision being appealed.
(2) Filing Fees.
(i) Appeals shall be accompanied by the filing fee set by the City Council’s Fee Resolution when the application is filed with the Community Development Department or City Clerk, as
applicable. No appeal shall be accepted or deemed filed unless such payment is made.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 151
281 of 399

(ii) Where more than one appeal is allowed, and if more than one appeal is filed, then following the filing expiration date for appeals, the City Clerk shall prorate the required appeal fee among the total number of appeals and refund the excess amount paid by each appellant.
(iii) The Community Development Director is authorized to waive the filing fee for appeals upon a showing of good cause. (3) Effect of Filing. The filing of an appeal in compliance with this Chapter shall have the effect of suspending the effective date of the decision being appealed, and no further actions or proceedings shall occur in reliance on the decision being appealed except as allowed by the outcome of the appeal.
(4) Notice to Applicant. If the appellant is not the applicant, a copy of the appeal shall be provided to the applicant within seven days of its filing.
(5) Report and Scheduling of Hearing. When an appeal has been filed, the Community Development Director shall prepare a report on the matter. The City shall schedule the matter, in its sole discretion, within ninety (90) days of the filed appeal, for consideration by the appropriate appeal body identified in Section 25.05.070(B). All appeals shall be considered during public hearings with notice provided in compliance with subsection (C)(6). The City may consolidate hearings on all timely filed appeals for the same project. (6) Notice Requirements. Public notice of the hearing for the appeal or request for review shall be subject to the provisions of Section

25.05.065, except that the public notice for appeals of Coastal Development Permits shall be instead carried out through the public notice provisions of Section 25.07.014.
(7) Withdrawal of Appeal. Once filed, an appeal may only be withdrawn by a written request submitted to the Community Development Director, with the signatures of all persons who filed the appeal. (D) Hearing on Appeal.
(1) Upon the hearing of an appeal, the Planning Commission/Design Review Board, shall conduct a de novo hearing on the underlying application but shall be limited to the grounds specifically stated in the notice of appeal, if an appeal was filed. The Planning Commission/Design Review Board shall exercise its independent judgment as to the evidence. Nevertheless, there shall be a presumption that the decision or determination made by the approval authority was reasonable, valid, and not an abuse of discretion; and Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 152
282 of 399

the appellant, if there is one, shall have the burden of proof of demonstrating otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence, including plans, presented. Abuse of discretion is established when (a) the agency has not proceeded in the manner required by law; (b) the order or decision is not supported by the findings; (c) the findings are not supported by evidence.
(2) Upon the hearing of an appeal or request for review, the City Council shall conduct a de novo hearing on the underlying application but shall be limited to the grounds specifically stated in the notice of appeal, if an appeal was filed. The City Council shall exercise its independent judgment as to such evidence. Nevertheless, there shall be a presumption that the decision or determination made by the approval authority was reasonable, valid, and not an abuse of discretion; and the appellant, if there is one, shall have the burden of proof of demonstrating otherwise by a preponderance of the evidence, including plans, presented. Abuse of discretion is established when (a) the agency has not proceeded in the manner required by law; (b) the order or decision is not supported by the findings; (c) the findings are not supported by evidence. (3) Hearings are subject to the provisions of Section 25.07.016 when a coastal development permit is required.
(E) Action on Appeal.
(1) At the hearing, the appeal body shall conclude the proceedings with one of the following actions.
(i) Affirmation or Reversal. The appeal body may, by resolution, affirm, affirm in part and reverse in part, or reverse the action that is the subject of the appeal.
(ii) Additional Conditions. When reviewing an appeal, the appeal body may adopt additional conditions of approval involving or related to the subject matter of the appeal.
(iii) Remand. The City Council may, but shall not be required to, remand the matter back to the Planning Commission/Design Review Board, as applicable, for further consideration. The Planning Commission/Design Review Board, as applicable, shall not be allowed to remand the matter back to the
Community Development Director.
(2) Deadlocked Vote.
(i) By Planning Commission/Design Review Board. In the event an appeal from an action of the Community Development
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 153
283 of 399

Director results in a deadlocked vote by the Planning
Commission/Design Review Board, the determination,
interpreting decision, judgment, or similar action, the appeal shall be forwarded to the City Council for the City Council’s proceedings on the appeal, as specified in this Section. (ii) By City Council. In the event that an appeal from an action of the Planning Commission/Design Review Board results in a deadlocked vote by the City Council, the action of the
Planning Commission/Design Review Board (or Community
Development Director), as appropriate, shall become final.

SECTION 9. Code Amendment. Chapter 25.07.006 (Definitions) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add the following definition in alphabetical order of the existing list of definitions:
“Director of Community Development” and “Community Development Director” shall mean the Director of the Community Development Department at the City of Laguna Beach and his or her designee.

SECTION 45. Code Amendment. Subsection (B) of Section 25.07.008 (Exemptions) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to as follows (additions shown in underline and deletion shown in strikethrough):
(B) Record of Exemptions. Consistent with Section 25.07.014(A) of this chapter, the Community Development Director shall maintain a record of all development within the coastal zone that were exempted from the requirements of the coastal development permit process. This record shall be available on the City's website. The record of exemption shall include the name of the applicant, the location of the project, and a complete description of the project. For exemptions issued for development that is appealable to the Coastal Commission, the Community Development Director shall also provide notification to the Executive Director of the Coastal Commission of any record of exemptions within seven (7) calendar days of the exemption determination or issuance.

SECTION 11. Code Amendment. Section 25.07.012 (Procedures) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby amended to add Subdivisions (J) and (K) to read as follows:
(J) Subsequent Modification to Approved Coastal Development Permits. (1) Development or a use authorized through a coastal development permit issued by the City in compliance with the City’s certified Local Coastal Program shall be established only as approved by the review authority, and in compliance with any conditions of approval, except Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 154
284 of 399

where a change to the project is approved in compliance with this section.
(2) Application. An applicant shall request a proposed change in writing, and shall also furnish appropriate supporting information and materials explaining the reasons for the request.
(3) Minor Changes Approved by the Community Development Director without a Public Hearing.
(i) The Community Development Director may authorize minor changes to an approved coastal development permit without a public hearing, where the Director first finds that the changes:
a. Are consistent with the requirements of the certified Local Coastal Program; and
b. Do not involve a feature of the project that was a basis for findings for an exemption, negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration, or environmental
impact report for the project; and
c. Do not involve a feature of the project that was
specifically addressed or was the subject of a
condition(s) of approval for the project or that was a
specific consideration by the applicable review
authority in the project approval; and
d. Do not result in an expansion or change in operational characteristics of the use; and
e. Do not alter the facts in support of the findings required by Section 25.07.012(G).
(ii) The Director may choose to refer any requested change to the original review authority for review and final action.
(4) Changes to Coastal Development Permits Approved by the City. (i) Changes Approved by Original Review Authority. A proposed change that does not comply with the criteria identified in subsection (J)(3) of this section (Minor Changes Approved by the Director without a Public Hearing) may only be approved by the original review authority for the project through a new permit application filed and processed in compliance with the application provisions of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal
Development Review Procedures)
Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 155
285 of 399

(ii) Conditions. If a proposed change is approved by the reviewing body, all terms and conditions of the original approval shall remain in effect, unless specifically removed or modified by the reviewing body. If a proposed change is denied by the reviewing body, the terms and conditions of the original permit shall remain in effect.
(5) Amendments to Coastal Development Permits Approved by the Coastal Commission. Amendments to coastal development permits approved by the Coastal Commission within an area where the Coastal Commission continues to exercise original permit jurisdiction shall not be processed by the City and instead shall be processed by the Coastal Commission.
(K) Staking Requirements.
(1) A staking plan shall be prepared as specified on the most current zoning and coastal development permit submittal checklist. Staking poles and connecting ribbons, which accurately represent the full extent of the proposed structure, including decks and eaves, shall be constructed at least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing.

At least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing, the location and height of the staking poles must be certified as accurate by a registered land surveyor or registered civil engineer licensed to conduct land surveys in the State of California. If complete and certified project staking is not in place as required, the project shall be continued to a later date. Neither the applicant, a relative of the applicant, nor any other person possessing a financial interest in the property or the project may certify the location and height accuracy of the staking poles. If the project is modified during the review process and the reviewing body determines it is necessary to restake, the project shall be re-staked and re-certified at least 14 calendar days prior to any subsequent public hearing.
(2) Staking poles shall be removed by the applicant within 20 calendar days after the final project decision. The applicant's failure to remove the staking poles within the prescribed time period shall result in any remedies at law, including but not limited to code enforcement remedies.
(3) The Community Development Director may waive this requirement in writing in the Community Development Director’s sole discretion.

SECTION 12. Code Amendment. Section 25.07.026 (Local Coastal Program amendments) of Chapter 25.07 (Coastal Development Permits) of Title 25 (Zoning) is hereby repealed and replaced with the following:

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 156
286 of 399

(A) Purpose and Intent. The City Council may amend the Local Coastal Program when required by public necessity, convenience, and general welfare or protection of coastal resources, or where required by specific policies in the Local Coastal Program by following the procedure specified in this Chapter. For purposes of this Section, amendments of a certified Local Coastal Program includes, but is not limited to, any action by the City that authorizes the use of a parcel of land other than a use that is designated in the certified local coastal program as a permitted use of the parcel, except for temporary uses as defined in Section 25.05.035. Such amendments will not take effect until effectively certified by the Coastal Commission. (B) Application
(1) Proposals
(a) Initiation. An amendment to the Local Coastal Program may be initiated by:
(i) Resolution of Intention of the City Council;
(ii) Property owners, or their duly authorized agents, by filing a complete and verified application with the
Community Development Department for amendments
to the LCP involving their property.
(iii) Any person authorized to undertake a public works project or proposing an energy facility development
may request to amend the local coastal program, if the
purpose of the proposed amendment is to meet public
needs of an area greater than that included within such certified local coastal program that had not been
anticipated by the person making the request at the
time the local coastal program was before the Coastal
Commission for certification.
(b) Contents of Amendment Applications. The amendment
application shall include:
(i) All policies, plans, standards, objectives, diagrams, drawings, maps, photographs, and supplementary
data related to the amendment in sufficient detail to
allow review for conformity with the requirements of the Coastal Act. Written documents should be readily
reproducible. An amendment application may also
need to include, where applicable, a readily identifiable public access component as set forth in California
Code of Regulations Section 13512.

Docusign Envelope ID: 230D8988-4BC8-83E5-837A-4106220F81E9 157
287 of 399