DESIGN REVIEW BOARD STAFF REPORT
September 25, 2025
Agenda Item No. 5.9
Case No: Design Review 24-0658, Coastal Development Permit 24-0657 Request: To demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new two-story singlefamily residence with an attached, two-car garage, elevated decks, grading, and landscaping.
Location: 31526 Valido Road | APN: 056-062-25
Applicant: LCRA Architects, Architect
626-449-9698 | [email protected]
Owner: Chuanjie Zhou
Staff: Community Development Department
Heather Steven, Senior Planner
(949) 497-0332 | [email protected]
Recommendation:
Conduct a public hearing and adopt Resolution 24-0658 approving Design Review 24-0658 and Coastal Development Permit 24-0657 for property located at 31526 Valido Road and finding said action categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.
CEQA:
The project qualifies for a categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, in that the project consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small structures
Coastal Development Permit:
The project site is located in the Coastal Zone and is located within the coastal appealable area. The proposed demolition of an existing single-family residence and construction of a new single-family residence requires the approval of a coastal development permit pursuant to Laguna Beach Municipal Code (LBMC) Section
25.07.004.
Board Members within a 500’ Radius: None
Attachment 3
89 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
The applicant, Gabriel Ponciano, requests Design Review 24-0658 and Coastal Development Permit 24- 0657 approval to demolish an existing single-family residence and construct a new two-story, 3,811 square foot single-family residence with elevated decks, a two-car garage and one uncovered parking space, site grading to accommodate the home’s footprint, and new landscaping (the “project”).
The project was first heard on July 11, 2024. With the applicant’s consent, the Design Review Board (DRB) continued the project to September 26, 2024 to incorporate design direction.
On September 19, 2024 the City received a letter from Ann Christoph suggesting that subject property may have historical significance. As a result, on September 26, 2024, staff requested a continuance to November 14, 2024 to allow for further evaluation of the project site. The November 14, 2024, DRB hearing was then continued to December 12, 2024 where, at the applicant’s request, the project was tabled.
To assess the historic significance of the property, several reports have been prepared to determine whether it is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and/or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR), and whether it is an historic resource under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
The September 25, 2025 Design Review Board meeting will be the second substantive hearing for this project.
Staff supports project approval noting that facts affirming the required findings can be made; however, given prior direction, the Design Review Board should deliberate on privacy and view equity, and historic preservation matters to determine if these have been achieved or if other project changes or conditions of approval are warranted.
90 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
PROPERTY AERIAL PHOTO
SITE PHOTO
91 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
PROPERTY INFORMATION
Land Use Designation Village Low Density (1-7 DU/AC)
Zoning Designation R-1 Residential Low Density
ZONING REVIEW
The proposed project complies with applicable zoning standards and guidelines as shown in the summary table below:
Development Standard Required Existing Proposed Conforms Site Coverage 35%, 4924.85
SF
14.9%,
2096.58 SF
22.86%,
3216.63 SF
Yes
Landscape Open Space 34.29%
4825 SF
79%
11,117 SF
55.18%
7,765 SF
Yes
Height (Lowest floor to top of roof) 29’ 11’8” 22’2” Yes Height (Above curb elevation) 17’6” 11’6” 17’6” Yes
Setbacks
Front
Side (South)
Side (North)
Rear
Required
20’
9’-3 ¾ “
9’-3 ¾ “
20’
Existing
3’-11 ½ “
12-’6”
21’-8”
69’-8”
Proposed
20’
9’-3 ¾ “
9’-3 ¾ “
58’
Yes
Yes
Yes
Yes
Parking 3 spaces
(2 covered, 1
uncovered)
2 covered 3 spaces
(2 covered, 1
uncovered)
Yes
DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS:
Site History
The 14,071 square foot project site is a residential property developed with a single-family dwelling, and a detached garage which is accessed from Valido Road. The site slopes downward at the rear of the property with a small area mapped with a watercourse setback. The site does not contain significant natural features, and no work is proposed within the watercourse area.
The property is located on a remaining portion of an original 40-acre land grant. The land was granted to Willam F. Egan through the Homestead Act in 1910. The existing residence was constructed beginning ca. 1909 and built out in 1928. The City does not have any records regarding the construction of the home.
There are no active code enforcement cases for the property.
A portion of the original 40-acre property was sold to the South Coast Water District in 1937 and 1944 for a water reservoir. On June 21, 1948, Tract No 1243 was recorded which subdivided the southeast portion of the original homestead lot, north of West Street, into 25 lots on Paso Del Sur, Rico Road and Valido Road. The remaining developed parcels that surround the subject property were sold off at various times.
The undeveloped area in the northwest part of the original homestead lot is owned by the County of Orange. 92 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
Figure 1, Original 40-acre homestead property with subject site highlighted Historic Resource Evaluation
Prior to the Design Review Board hearing of September 26, 2024, the Community Development Department received a letter from Ann Christoph stating the existing dwelling on the subject property was constructed in 1910, that the house is the oldest house in South Laguna, and possibly the last remaining homestead house in the city of Laguna Beach. A copy of a letter from the South Laguna Civic Association in 2022, regarding the potential historic significance of the property was also provided (Attachment 12).
Upon receipt of the above-mentioned letters, City staff contacted Historic Resources Group (HRG), one of the City’s contracted historic consultants, to prepare a historic assessment of the property. The purpose of the assessment was to evaluate the subject property for potential historic significance and eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and/or the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).
HRG worked with Ms. Christoph to obtain information regarding the history of the site. The initial Historic Resources Assessment was completed on November 22, 2024 (Attachments 6). Ms. Christoph provided corrections to historic details within the report. These corrections did not affect the conclusions regarding the property. HRG provided a revised report on February 12, 2025 (Attachment 7). The HRG reports concluded that the property at 31526 Valido Road is significant under Criterion A/1 for its association with the Homestead Act of 1862. To be eligible for the California Register, a prehistoric or historic-period 93 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
property must be significant at the local, state, and/or federal level under one or more of the four specified criteria. HRG found the property significant under California Register Criterion 1, that the property is “associated with events that have made a significant contribution to the broad patterns of local or regional history or the cultural heritage of California or the United States.” Therefore, it is eligible for listing in the California Register. Further, HRG determined the property is a historic resource for the purposes of CEQA.
In response to the HRG report, the applicant commissioned their own study, which was prepared by Chronicle Heritage and dated April 2025 (Attachment 8). This historic assessment was also prepared to determine whether the subject property may be considered as an historical resource pursuant to the CEQA and to evaluate whether the property is eligible for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR).
Chronicle Heritage stated “the surrounding area that was once part of the larger homestead has been completely developed and does not retain the feeling and association with the Homestead Act period in the City, and thus it does not retain integrity of feeling and association. Furthermore, due to the substantial surrounding development, the integrity of setting has been lost. Due to the completed alterations, the subject property also does not retain integrity of design, materials, or workmanship.” With that, the report concluded the subject property does not appear to be eligible for listing on the NRHP and CRHR at the local level, nor does it appear to be eligible for listing under any of the local criteria. Therefore, the building does not appear to be a historical resource pursuant to Section 15064.5(a) of the CEQA Guidelines City staff requested HRG review the Chronical Heritage report and comment on the report’s conclusions.
HRG provided a supplemental memo, dated June 2025 (Attachment 9). HRG stated “Generally, Chronicle Heritage did not find fault with HRG’s methodology or research conclusions; however, they did not agree with the finding that the subject property appears eligible for listing in the National Register at the local level and the California Register” and rebutted the Chronicle Heritage report findings. HRG stated, “The urbanization of South Laguna follows twentieth century planning and land use policies seen throughout Southern California (and the United States) and the change in setting alone is not reason enough to disqualify the property from association with homesteading.” Further, HRG stated, in part, “to our knowledge, the Egan property may be the last remaining property associated with homesteading in all of Laguna Beach.” To resolve these contrasting conclusions, the City commissioned an independent professional evaluation of the Historic Resource Assessment reports by a third qualified historic consultant, GPA Consultants (Attachment 10).
GPA conducted a thorough and objective analysis of the reports to determine whether the historic resource assessments met accepted professional and technical standards. GPA’s conclusion states, “Based on our review of the two independent historic resource assessments prepared by qualified professionals, GPA does not find sufficient evidence to support that the property at 31526 Valido Road meets the eligibility criteria for listing in either the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places.”
GPA continued, “While HRG identified a potential association with early homesteading, the broader historic context presented does not convincingly support eligibility under Criterion 1, particularly in light of the compromised integrity of setting and the lack of rarity or comparative analysis. That said, GPA 94 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
acknowledges there may be some potential for local historical significance under a more narrowly defined sub-context of early rural residential development in South Laguna, particularly given that the Egan residence is documented as one of the first homes constructed in the area. However, under the City's current ordinance—which requires owner consent for local designation—the property cannot be formally recognized unless the owner voluntarily elects to pursue local listing. Should the owner wish to do so in the future, the potential eligibility of the property under local criteria may warrant further exploration within this refined context.”
As such, the property does not meet the definition of a “historical resource” under CEQA, nor does it appear to qualify as a historic resource under the City of Laguna Beach’s current Historic Preservation Ordinance, which requires that properties be either formally listed, eligible for listing, or voluntarily nominated by the property owner.” (Attachment 7, page 8). As a result, the project site is not considered a historic resource.
Proposed Project
Originally, the applicant proposed to demolish an existing 1,278 SF single-family residence and construct a new single-family residence (4,002 SF) with attached two-car garage (619 SF), elevated decks (461 SF), grading, landscaping, tandem parking, and third covered parking space.
The revised proposal continues to include demolition of the existing 1,278 SF single-family residence and construction of a new single-family residence (3,811 SF) with attached two-car garage (540 SF), elevated decks (399 SF), grading, and landscaping. A third, uncovered parking space will be provided on the site.
When the Design Review Board met on July 11, 2024, it requested that the house be reoriented, that the appearance of mass be reduced and provide further articulation using materials and landscaping, that the proposed height and width of landscaping be provided, that opaque glass be utilized to address privacy concerns, and that decks be adjusted to respond to privacy concerns (please note that the Board varied on whether the deck should be removed, reduced, or incorporated into the structure).
In response to this direction, the following revisions were made to the project in response to the Board’s comments:
• The structure has been rotated approximately 15 degrees. • Additional materials, textures, and colors have been included at each elevation. • Proposed landscape height and width have been provided. • Frosted privacy glass has been added to bathroom 4.
• The proposed deck between bathroom 2 and bathroom 3 has been removed. • The balcony from bedroom 3 has been removed.
• A 5-foot frosted glass privacy panel has been proposed at the deck on the left (South) elevation. • Third covered, tandem parking space removed.
ENTITLEMENTS: Following is an analysis of the project’s design review and coastal development permit.
95 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
Design Review
The following elements require Design Review: new single-family residence, elevated decks, grading, and landscaping. (See Laguna Beach Municipal Code (LBMC) Section 25.05.040 (B)(1)(m)(p) and (3)(a)(ii)).
Design review is governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 25.05.040. Design Review is considered by the Design Review Board at a duly noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:
Finding No. 1: Physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are designed and located in a manner in overall consistency with the design review criteria specified in Section 25.05.040(H), as set forth below:
1. Access. Conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians and other modes of transportation should be minimized by specifically providing for each applicable mode of transportation. Handicapped access shall be provided as required by applicable statutes.
Yes. The site will maintain access from Valido Road. Since the street frontage is less than 50 feet, an on-street parking space is not required, pursuant to LBMC Section 25.53.006(C). At the previous hearing, the Board expressed concerns with the proposed tandem parking, which has since been removed. The applicant now proposes a two-car garage with the required third parking space being provided in the driveway.
2. Design Articulation: Within the allowable building envelope, the appearance of building and retaining wall mass should be minimized. Articulation techniques including, but not limited to, separation, offsets, terracing and reducing the size of any one element in the structure may be used to reduce the appearance of mass.
Yes. At the prior hearing on July 11, 2024, the Board expressed concerns with the mass and scale of the proposed structure (Figure 1), with recommendations to provide further articulation. The applicant has provided an updated design that eliminates the living area above the garage and utilizes additional materials to reduce the appearance of mass, as shown in Figure 2 below.
Figure 1: Previous Front Elevation Rendering
96 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
3. Design Integrity: Consistency with the applicant’s chosen style of architecture should be achieved by the use of appropriate materials and details. Remodels should be harmonious with the remaining existing architecture.
Yes. The modern/contemporary architectural style of the structure, with horizontal planes, is further achieved using a variety of materials and textures, including smooth stucco, horizontal siding, stone wall cladding, glass railings, and glazing.
4. Environmental Context: Development should preserve and, where possible, enhance the city’s scenic natural setting. Natural features, such as existing heritage trees, rock out-cropping, ridgelines and significant watercourses should be protected. Existing terrain should be utilized in the design and grading should be minimized.
Yes. The site does not contain significant natural features and no work is proposed within the watercourse area located on the site. The proposed grading includes 3,019 cubic yards of cut outside the building footprint, largely to lower the driveway from Valido Road and to create a parking space and turnaround area in front of the proposed garage. Retaining walls will be constructed along the side property line and the driveway. Approximately 740 cubic yards of cut are proposed inside the building footprint to lower the structure on the site. No grading is proposed in the sloped area or within the watercourse setback area at the rear of the site. The proposed development is located more than 65 feet from the centerline of the watercourse/stream and no impacts are anticipated.
5. General Plan Compliance: The development shall comply with all applicable policies of the General Plan, including all of its elements, applicable specific plans, and the certified local coastal program.
Yes. The proposed Project complies with the goals and policies of the General Plan as evidenced in the findings below.
Figure 2: Proposed Front Elevation Rendering
97 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
General Plan Policies
Land Use (LU) Policy 2.8 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography and/or other significant onsite resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document.
The proposed Project meets this policy as discussed in the design articulation, environmental context, and neighborhood compatibility Design Review Criteria.
LU Policy 2.10 Maximize the preservation of coastal and canyon views (consistent with the principle of view equity) from existing properties and minimize blockage of existing public and private views. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.).
The proposed Project meets this policy as discussed in the View Equity Design Review Criteria, Design Review Finding No. 4, and the CDP findings below.
LU Policy 3.10 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography or other significant onsite resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document by maintaining the low-profile character of structures.
Require use of appropriate landscaping, special architectural treatments, and siting considerations for projects visible from major highways and arterial streets. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff-top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.).
The proposed Project meets this policy as discussed in the view equity Design Review Criteria, Design Review Finding #4, and the CDP findings below.
LU Policy 7.3 Design and site new development to protect natural and environmentally sensitive resources, such as areas of unique scenic quality, public views, and visual compatibility with surrounding uses and to minimize natural landform alterations. (Same as Policy 10.2.) GOAL:
Protect, preserve, and enhance the community’s natural resources.
Yes. The site is developed with an existing single-family residence, garage, and paved driveway.
The existing slope at the rear of the site is undeveloped. A small area at the northern corner of the site is mapped with a watercourse setback. The proposed residence and garage will be constructed in the same location as the existing structures. The proposed grading will lower the elevation of the driveway area and allow the proposed structure to step with the natural topography. The site does not contain significant natural features or environmentally sensitive resources, and the proposed development is located more than 65 feet from the centerline of the watercourse/stream, therefore, impacts are not anticipated.
98 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
LU Policy 7.10 Require new construction and grading to be located in close proximity to preexisting development to minimize environmental impacts and growth-inducing potential.
The new single-family dwelling will replace the existing single-family dwelling in the same location on the site and will utilize the same access from the public street which minimizes environmental impacts and growth-inducing potential.
LU Policy 10.2 Design and site new development to protect natural and environmentally sensitive resources such as areas of unique scenic quality, public views, and visual compatibility with surrounding uses and to minimize landform alterations. (Same as Policy 7.3) GOAL: Ensure that proposals for new development, subdivisions, and major remodels are sufficiently evaluated to protect public health and safety and natural resources.
Yes. The site does not contain significant natural features or environmentally sensitive resources, and grading is mainly utilized to allow the structure to step with the natural topography. The Project proposes 3,019 cubic yards of cut outside the building footprint. No grading is proposed on the slope at the rear of the site. The proposed development is located more than 65 feet from the centerline of the watercourse/stream and impacts are not anticipated.
6. Historic Preservation: Destruction or alteration to historic resources should be avoided whenever possible. See Chapter 25.45 for more information.
Pursuant to LBMC Chapter 25.45.004, “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.
Historic Resource Assessments were prepared for the property by two qualified historic consultants, Historic Resources Group and Chronicle Heritage, to evaluate the subject property for potential historic significance and eligibility for listing in the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) and the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR). The historic consultants reached differing determinations as to whether the property is eligible for listing in the NRHP or CRHP.
Thus, the City requested an independent professional evaluation of the Historic Resource Assessment reports by a third qualified historic consultant. GPA Consultants conducted a thorough and objective analysis of the reports. GPA did not find sufficient evidence to support that the property at 31526 Valido Road meets the eligibility criteria for listing in either the California Register of Historical Resources or the National Register of Historic Places. As such, the property does not meet the definition of a “historical resource” under CEQA, nor does it appear to qualify as a historic resource under the City of Laguna Beach’s current Historic Preservation Ordinance, which 99 DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
requires that properties be either formally listed, eligible for listing, or voluntarily nominated by the property owner.”
As such, the Project site and the existing structures are not historic. In addition, the project will not result in significant adverse impacts to historical resources as defined by CEQA because the existing single-family dwelling, detached garage, and the subject property are not historic resources.
7. Landscaping: Landscaping shall be incorporated as an integrated part of the structure’s design and relate harmoniously to neighborhood and community landscaping themes. View equity shall be an important consideration in the landscape design. The relevant landscaping guidelines contained in the City’s “Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document” should be incorporated, as appropriate, in the design and planned maintenance of proposed landscaping.
Yes. The landscaping plan has been reviewed by the City’s landscape consultant for compliance with the City’s landscaping requirements and Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document.
The proposed planting plan, provided as sheet L-3, includes a mix of groundcover, shrubs, vines, and trees. The proposed trees include one Lemon Scented Tea Tree maintained at a 20’ height and two New Zealand Christmas Trees maintained at a 30’ height.
8. Lighting and Glare: Adequate lighting for individual and public safety shall be provided in a manner which does not significantly impact neighboring properties. Reflective materials and appurtenances that cause glare or a negative visual impact (e.g., skylights, white rock roofs, highgloss ceramic tile roofs, reflective glass, etc.) should be avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance in those locations where those surfaces are visible from neighboring properties.
Yes. All exterior lighting complies with the City’s Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting ordinance (LBMC Chapter 7.70) and no reflective materials are proposed.
9. Neighborhood Compatibility: Development shall be compatible with the existing development in the neighborhood and respect neighborhood character. Neighborhood character is the sum of the qualities that distinguish areas within the City, including historical patterns of development (e.g., structural heights, mass, scale or size), village atmosphere, landscaping themes and architectural styles.
Yes. The neighborhood is developed with single-family homes, with a variety of architectural styles, attached garages, and elevated decks. At the July 11, 2024 Design Review Board meeting, the Board identified concerns with the mass and scale of the proposed project. The applicant has provided an updated design that eliminates the living area above the garage and utilizes additional materials to reduce the appearance of mass.
10. Pedestrian Orientation: Commercial development design shall enhance and encourage pedestrian uses. Incorporation of articulated building masses, compact open spaces and courtyards, mixed use developments, use of landscaping as part of design, and orientation to pedestrian access should be maximized.
100
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
Design Review Criteria for Pedestrian Orientation is related to commercial development and this residential project is not subject to these criteria.
11. Privacy: The placement of activity areas (e.g., decks, picture windows and ceremonial or entertainment rooms) in locations that would result in a substantial invasion of privacy of neighboring properties should be minimized.
At the prior hearing, the Board expressed concerns with privacy as created by proposed windows and decking. The applicant has provided an updated design that utilizes frosted glass on the window of bathroom 4, proposes a 5-foot frosted glass privacy screen on the deck off the loft, and removes several of the proposed decks (deck square footage has been reduced from 464 SF to 399 SF). Staff recommends that the Board deliberate on privacy and consider whether additional conditions of approval are necessary to address any privacy concerns.
12. Public Art: Public art is encouraged and shall be displayed where feasible or required by the Art in Public Places ordinance.
Design Review Criteria for Public Art is related to commercial development and this residential project is not subject to these criteria.
13. Sign Quality: Signs shall be incorporated into the architecture of the structure and shall be made of high quality materials, be simple in design and be visually compatible with the surrounding physical environment in terms of color, scale and size. Use of natural materials in the construction of signs is encouraged.
Design Review Criteria for Signage is related to commercial development and this residential project is not subject to these criteria.
14. Sustainability: New development should consider architecture and building practices which minimize environmental impacts and enhance energy efficiency by: (a) reducing energy needs of buildings by proper site and structural design; (b) increasing the building’s ability to capture or generate energy; (c) using low-impact, sustainable and recycled building materials; (d) using the latest Best Management Practices regarding waste and water management; and (e) reducing site emissions.
Yes. New construction is required to meet Title 24 energy and Building Code requirements, which include insulated windows and energy efficient lighting. The applicant will be required to provide proof of compliance. Further, the applicant will be required to reuse, recycle, or divert at least 65 percent of the project’s construction and demolition debris.
15. Swimming Pools, Spas, and Water Features: Swimming pools, spas and water features shall be located, designed and constructed where: (a) geology conditions allow; (b) noise produced by circulatory mechanical pumps and equipment is mitigated; and (c) any associated fencing or other site improvements are compatible with neighboring properties. 101
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
No pool, spa, or water feature is proposed as part of this application.
16. View Equity: The development, including its landscaping, shall be designed to protect existing views from neighboring properties without denying the subject property the reasonable opportunity to develop as described and illustrated in the City’s “Design Guidelines.” The “Design Guidelines” are intended to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property.
At the prior hearing, adjacent neighbors to the east of the site expressed concerns with view equity due to the proposed height and orientation of the proposed structure. In response, the applicant has reduced the size of the upper level, lowered areas of the structure, and reoriented the building. Staff recommends that the Board deliberate on view equity and consider whether additional conditions of approval are necessary to address any view concerns.
Finding No. 2. The physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are designed and located in a manner in overall consistency with all other applicable design guidelines.
The proposed project conforms to the development standards of the zone and is consistent with the Residential Design Review Guidelines and the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document, as explained above.
Finding No. 3. The physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are characterized by appropriately scaled development, diverse and unique architectural designs, pedestrian orientation, and sensitivity to the natural conditions of the site.
Yes. The Project design and architecture are appropriately scaled and diverse, as described in the Design Integrity and Neighborhood Compatibility Design Review Criteria above.
Finding No. 4. The project is consistent with any specific plan or any other specific zoning design review criteria.
Yes. The Project site is not located within a specific plan and the R-1 zoning does not contain any other specific design review criteria. The Project conforms to the Architectural Guidelines, including avoiding major disparities of height and bulk with adjacent structures, use of appropriate colors, and appropriate scale, detail and articulation of the structure.
Coastal Development Permit
The proposed new single-family Residence, elevated decks, grading, and landscaping requires the approval of a coastal development permit. (See LBMC Section 25.07.004.) Coastal Development Permits are governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.07. A Coastal Development Permit is considered by the Design Review Board at a duly-noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:
Finding No. 1: The project is in conformity with all the applicable provisions of the certified local coastal program, including the following review criteria:
102
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
1. The proposed development will not encroach upon any existing physical accessway legally utilized by the public or any proposed public accessway identified in the adopted local coastal program land use plan.
Yes. The proposed development will occur on a property accessible from an improved public street (Valido Road). The Project is not encroaching on a public accessway, and no new access is proposed.
2. The proposed development will not adversely affect marine resources, environmentally sensitive areas, or archaeological or paleontological resources.
Yes. There are no known marine resources, environmentally sensitive areas, archeological, or paleontological resources in the project area. The Project site is located within an established residential neighborhood. The proposed development is located more than 65 feet from the centerline of the watercourse/stream and impacts are not anticipated
3. The proposed development will not adversely affect recreational or visitor-serving facilities or coastal scenic resources.
Yes. The subject property is located within an established residential neighborhood and the proposed addition and remodel of the existing single-family dwelling will be on private property. No impacts will occur to recreational or visitor-serving facilities or coastal scenic resources in the area.
4. The proposed development will be sited and designed to prevent adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive habitats and scenic resources located in adjacent parks and recreation areas, and will provide adequate buffer areas to protect such resources.
Yes. The subject property is located within an established residential neighborhood and not immediate to environmentally sensitive habitats or scenic resources in adjacent areas. The proposed development is located more than 65 feet from the centerline of the watercourse/stream and impacts are not anticipated.
5. The proposed development will minimize the alterations of natural landforms and will not result in undue risks from geological and erosional forces and/or flood and fire hazards.
Yes. The Project site does not contain any significant natural landforms. Grading is mostly limited to the structure’s footprint and done so to create safe access to the property. The Project will not result in undue risk from flood or fire hazards.
6. The proposed development will be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and where feasible, will restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.
Yes. The proposed Project is well-articulated and is architecturally compatible with the surrounding neighborhood in an area that is not visually degraded as described in Design Articulation (No. 2) 103
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
and Neighborhood Compatibility (No. 9) Design Review Criteria and the facts in support are incorporated herein by reference.
7. The proposed development will not have any adverse impacts on any known archaeological or paleontological resource.
N/A. There are no known archaeological or paleontological resources in the Project area.
8. The proposed development will be provided with adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities.
Yes. The existing site and existing single-family dwelling are within an established residential neighborhood with connections to necessary utilities, drainage, and other facilities.
9. Other public services, including, but not limited to, solid waste and public roadway capacity have been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed development.
Yes. The existing site is within an established residential neighborhood and the existing singlefamily dwelling has access to other public services.
The project is consistent with all applicable policies of the Certified LCP.
LCP COASTAL VIEW POLICIES (CDP)
Land Use Element (LU) Policy 2.8 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography and/or other significant on-site resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document.
The proposed Project is designed to integrate with the existing topography of the site and there will be no impacts to any public views. No development is proposed within the watercourse nor the watercourse buffer area existing at the northeast corner of the property.
LU Element Policy 2.9 Require the use of appropriate landscaping, special architectural treatments, and/or siting considerations to protect public views for projects visible from major highways and arterial streets.
The proposed Project meets this policy as discussed in the Design Integrity (No. 3) and Neighborhood Compatibility (No. 9) Design Review Criteria and the facts in support are incorporated herein by reference. The proposed Project will be architecturally compatible with the surrounding neighborhood. The site is not visible from any major highways and arterial streets. No public views through or across the site exist, therefore there will be no impact to public views.
LU Element Policy 2.10 Maximize the preservation of coastal and canyon views (consistent with the principle of view equity) from existing properties and minimize blockage of existing public and 104
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
private views. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.) Policy 2.10 includes: Action 2.10.1 Discourage the addition of second stories in established neighborhoods where view equity has historically been achieved through one-story construction.
The proposed Project meets this policy as discussed in the View Equity (No. 16) Design Review Criteria and the facts in support are incorporated herein by reference. The Project will not impact coastal views as no public views through or across the site exist.
LU Element Policies 7.3 and 10.2 Design and site new development to protect natural and environmentally sensitive resources, such as areas of unique scenic quality, public views and visual compatibility with surrounding uses and to minimize landform alterations.
The proposed Project meets this policy and the facts are discussed in the Environmental Context (No.4) and View Equity (No.16) Design Review criteria and LU Policy 10.2 (Coastal Development Permit Section) and they are incorporated herein by reference.
LUE Policy 3.10 Require building design and siting to be compatible and integrated with natural topographic features, minimize significant alteration of natural topography or other significant onsite resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines and Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document by maintaining the low-profile character of structures.
Require use of appropriate landscaping, special architectural treatments, and siting considerations for projects visible from major highways and arterial streets. Best efforts should be made to site new development in locations that minimize adverse impacts on views from public locations (e.g., roads, bluff-top trails, visitor-serving facilities, etc.).
Policy 3.10 requires protection of public views as specified in the Design Guidelines. The Design Guidelines require View Equity for impacts to public views, and require maintenance of view corridors.
View Equity is defined as: View equity means achievement of a fair, reasonable and balanced accommodation of views and competing obstructions such as structures, trees and/or vegetation, privacy and the use and enjoyment of property.
The Design Review Guidelines refers to Public Views:
15.6 Maintain view corridors when feasible.
∙Consider opportunities for public views.
∙Locate a building to retain view opportunities through side yards.
The Project is sited adjacent to a large open space area and few properties have views overlooking the Project. Therefore, the proposed single-family dwelling will not impact coastal views or view equity as described in “view equity” criteria above.
105
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
LCP DOCUMENTS
The project conforms with all the following applicable documents of the Certified LCP.
Land Use and Open Space/Conservation General Plan Elements Zoning Map
Title 25 (Zoning Code)
2010 Design Guidelines – A Guide to Residential Development Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document
South Laguna Community Design and Landscape Guidelines (as adopted by Resolution 89.104) Finding No. 2. Any development located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea is in conformity with the certified local coastal program and with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.
The Project site is not located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea and does not impact existing public access or public recreation facilities. Additionally, the subject site is zoned residential and is not suitable for recreational uses identified in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.
Therefore, the finding that the project is in conformity with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act can be made.
Finding No. 3. The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act.
As described further herein, the Project does not have any significant adverse environmental impacts.
The Project qualifies for a categorical exemption pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, as discussed further herein.
THIRD HEARING FINDING:
This is the second hearing for the project. Per LBMC 25.05.040 (F)(5), Design review hearings on a proposed residential development project shall usually be limited to a maximum of two hearings. A third hearing may be permitted if the approval authority makes a finding that the applicant followed the authority's direction(s) from the initial hearing in good faith and further design work on the project is in the best interest of the community. The approval authority may allow up to two continuances of hearings at which no substantive discussion of the application occurs. Concept review hearings for residential dwelling units of three units or less are not allowed, except where required by current City ordinance. If required, concept review shall be limited to one hearing and shall count as one of the above limited hearings.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT:
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, the project qualifies for a categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15303 - New Construction or Conversion of Small Structures, in that the project consists of construction and location of limited numbers of new, small structures There is no evidence of any unusual or special conditions that would result in a significant effect on the environment. 106
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
This project fits within the Class 3 exemption because it is a single-family dwelling on an existing legal building site.
Further, none of the exceptions outlined in State CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 apply. The project site does not contain any environmentally sensitive areas. There are no unusual circumstances resulting in a significant impact on the environment as the project is similar in scope to other developed properties in the surrounding developed neighborhood. There will be no cumulative impact resulting from successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time. There are no unusual circumstances resulting in a significant impact on the environment as the project site does not contain any environmentally sensitive areas. There will be no damage to scenic resources, including trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. The project is not located on a hazardous waste site, or any other site included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. The Project will not result in significant adverse impacts to historical resources as defined by CEQA in that the existing single-family dwelling, detached garage, and the subject property are not a historic resource as determined by the Historic Resource Assessments prepared for the project.
Consequently, additional environmental analysis is not necessary to meet the requirements of the CEQA.
RECOMMENDATION:
It is recommended that the Board adopt Resolution 24-0658 approving DR-24-0658 and CDP-24-0657 and finding said action categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15303.
NOTIFICATION:
Pursuant to Title 25 (Zoning) Public Notice, a public hearing notice was mailed on August 28, 2025, which is at least twenty-one (21) days prior to the hearing date in accordance with Title 25. In addition, a public hearing notice was posted on the project site on September 2, 2025, which is at least 10 days in advance of the hearing date.
CORRESPONDENCE:
A public comment letter regarding the historicity of the project site, dated September 19, 2024, and one new public comment letter are provided as Attachment 12.
ATTACHMENT(S):
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 24-0658
Attachment 2 – Plans
Attachment 3 – Certified Staking Plan
Attachment 4 – Color and Material Board
Attachment 5 – Colored Elevations and Renderings
Attachment 6 – Historic Resources Assessment of 31526 Valido Rd, Historic Resources Group, November 22, 2024
Attachment 7 – Historic Resources Assessment of 31526 Valido Rd, Historic Resources Group, February 12, 2025
107
DR-24-0658, CDP-24-0657
September 25, 2025
Attachment 8 – Historic Resource Assessment of 31526 Valido Road, Chronicle Heritage, April 2025 Attachment 9 – Historic Assessment Memo, Historic Resources Group, June 3, 2025 Attachment 10 – Peer Review of Historic Resource Assessments for 31526 Valido Road, Laguna Beach, GPA Consulting, July 28, 2025
Attachment 11 – Soils Report
Attachment 12 – Correspondence
108