STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
September 22, 2026
APPEAL
A
SUBJECT: 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY: PUBLIC HEARING FOR CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW 2026-0922 FOR ADDITIONS (424 SQUARE FEET) INCLUDING 172 SQUARE FEET AT THE UPPER LEVEL AND 252 SQUARE FEET AT THE LOWER LEVEL,
LANDSCAPING, TO CREATE NEW ON-SITE VEHICULAR ACCESS, AND TO EXCEED (1) THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING SITE COVERAGE AND (2) FLOOR AREA, AND VARIANCE 2026-0923 FOR FRONT AND SIDE YARD SETBACK
ENCROACHMENTS AND TO NOT PROVIDE THE SECOND REQUIRED
COVERED PARKING SPACE AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY IN THE VILLAGE
COMMUNITY ZONE, AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES SECTION 15301 AND 15305 (CLASS 1 AND 5)
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Conduct a Public Hearing, including receiving a staff report and taking public testimony and evidence relating to the consideration of Design Review 2026-0922 and Variance 2026-0923 and the California Environmental Quality Act exemption under Section 15301 and 15305 of the state CEQA Guidelines; and
2. Adopt the Resolution titled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, UPHOLDING AFFIRMING THE DECISION OF THE
DESIGN REVIEW BOARD AND TO CONDITIONALLY APPROVE APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW 2026-0922 FOR ADDITIONS (424 SQUARE FEET) INCLUDING 172 SQUARE FEET AT THE UPPER LEVEL AND 252 SQUARE FEET AT THE LOWER LEVEL, LANDSCAPING,
NEW WINDOW AND DOOR OPENINGS, TO CREATE NEW ON-SITE VEHICULAR ACCESS, AND TO EXCEED (1) THE ALLOWABLE BUILDING SITE COVERAGE AND (2) FLOOR AREA, AND VARIANCE 2026-0923 FOR FRONT AND SIDE YARD SETBACK
ENCROACHMENTS AND TO NOT PROVIDE THE SECOND REQUIRED COVERED PARKING SPACE AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY IN THE VILLAGE COMMUNITY ZONE,
AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES SECTIONS 15301 AND 15305 (CLASS 1 AND 5), ” conditionally approving Design Review 2026-0922 and Variance 2026-0923, and finding the Project categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
Horst Noppenberger, Architect on behalf of Adam McNicol, property owner (“Applicant”), for 31552 Eagle Rock Way (the “Property”) (see aerial map included as Figure 1) applied for Design Review (“DR”) 2026- 0922 to construct additions (424 square feet) including 172 square feet at the upper level and 252 square feet at the lower level, landscaping, new on-site vehicular access, and to exceed the allowable (1) building site coverage and (2) floor area (see Laguna Beach Municipal Code (“LBMC”) Section 25.05.040(B)(1)(c), (B)(1)(k), Section 25.10.008(E)(1)(d) and 25.43.070(H)), and Variance (“VAR”) 2026-0923 for a new CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
building encroachment into the required side yard setback, new parking space encroachment into the required front yard setback, and to not provide the second required covered parking space (see LBMC Section 25.05.025; 25.43.070(D)(1)(b)[for side and front yard setbacks] 25.43.070(L) and 25.56.008(C)) (the “Project”).1 The Project qualifies as excluded development, pursuant to Coastal Commission-issued Exclusionary Order No. E-93-1, and therefore does not require a Coastal Development Permit, subject to the review procedures set forth in LBMC Section 25.07.012(B)(3).
On June 25, 2026, the Design Review Board (“Board”) held a duly noticed public hearing to consider the Project. After carefully considering the oral and documentary evidence and arguments presented at the hearing, including a staff recommendation for approval, the Board conditionally approved DR 2026-0922 and VAR 2026-0923 by a 4-0 vote (Board member Gibbs absent) to adopt Resolution No. 2026-0922, approving the Project, subject to the conditions of approval set forth in the resolution, and a finding that the Project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to Sections 15301 and 15303 of the State CEQA Guidelines (the “Board Approval”).
The June 25, 2026 Board-adopted Resolution 2026-0922, Staff Report, Plans, Public Correspondence, and Meeting Transcript are included as Attachments 4 through 8 respectively.2 On July 9, 2026, Mayor Orgill provided notice to the City Manager requesting review of the Board’s determination, consistent with the procedures for a Councilmember-requested review of Board decisions, as set forth in LBMC Section 25.05.0703, and consistent with the requirements of due process under Woody’s Group, Inc. v. City of Newport Beach (2015) 233 Cal.App.4th 1012 (the “Review Request”).4 Public notice was duly provided to consider the Review Request at the August 4, 2026 City Council meeting in accordance with LBMC Section 25.05.065, including notices that were mailed to owners and occupants within a 300-foot and 100-foot radius, respectively, posted at three locations including at the Project site, 1 Citations are made to the Laguna Beach Municipal Code, as amended by Urgency Ordinance Nos. 1732 and 1733 (the Urgency Design Review Efficiency Ordinance), unless stated otherwise. 2 The June 25, 2026 Design Review Board Meeting Video is available to view on the City’s website at the following link (Refer to Agenda Item 5.1): https://lagunabeachcity.granicus.com/player/clip/S3039?view_id=3&redirect=true 4 Due process requires that the city council, as the final decision-maker of lower body appeals, remain neutral and unbiased to ensure a fair adjudication of the matter. (Woody’s Group, Inc., 233 Cal.App.4th at 1021.) This impartiality necessitates that decision-makers avoid conflicts of interest, refrain from prejudging the case-specific facts, and remain free from any bias for or against any involved party. (Petrovich Dev. Co. v. City of Sacramento (2020) 48 Cal.App.5th 963, 973.) For bias to constitute a due process violation in quasi-judicial proceedings, there must be “an unacceptable probability of actual bias” among the decision-makers with direct influence over the matter. (Breakzone Billiards v. City of Torrance (2000) 81 Cal.App.4th 1205, 1236.) While the law presumes administrative decisionmakers are unbiased, this presumption can be overcome by showing concrete, objective facts establishing the decision-maker’s bias against the project or applicant. (Petrovich, 48 Cal.App.5th at 974.) CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
and published in a newspaper of general circulation, thereby providing an opportunity for property owners and tenants to inform the City Council of any comments or concerns at, or prior to the public hearing (Attachment 2). At the August 4, 2026 meeting, the City Council continued the public hearing to September 22, 2026.
After the Review Request, on July 21, 2026, the City Council adopted the Design Review Efficiency Ordinance No. 1732 (the “DR Efficiency Ordinance”) and an urgency version of the DR Efficiency Ordinance through Urgency Ordinance No. 1732, to amend the Laguna Beach Municipal Code and the City’s certified Local Coastal Program to streamline the design review and related development review processes.9 The adoption of the DR Efficiency Ordinance and Urgency Ordinance No. 1732 resulted in amendments to provisions governing the processing and review of development applications, including provisions applicable to appeals and the standard of review. Accordingly, the standard of review provisions previously applicable to this appeal have been superseded by the recently adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 1732. Of particular note, all appeals and councilmember requests for review are subject to a de novo hearing, regardless of the application type or the vote count by the lower body.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW PROCEDURES
A. Councilmember Request for Review
The DR Efficiency Ordinance was not in effect at the time of the Review Request. Accordingly, the former version of LBMC Section 25.05.070 applied to the request for review and authorized any member of the City Council to request review of a Board decision by filing “a written request for review to the City Clerk, directly or through the City Manager, within 14 calendar days of the decision and without any statement of reasons for the request and payment of fees and with a presumption that the request may be of significant concern to the community, significant importance to the quality of life within the community, or significant importance to applicable land use policies and regulations:
(C) City Council Review of Decisions.
(1) Any member of the city council may obtain review of any decision or determination of the planning commission, board of adjustment/design review board 9 On July 21, 2026, the City Council adopted the Design Review Efficiency Ordinance No. 1730 (the “DR Efficiency Ordinance”), to amend the Laguna Beach Municipal Code and the City’s certified Local Coastal Program to streamline the design review and related development review processes. The City Council also adopted corresponding amendments to the Design Guidelines – A Guide to Residential Development (Resolution No. 26.059) and adopted a separate Efficiency Ordinance addressing related provisions of the Municipal Code that were not subject to a Local Coastal Program amendment. Because the DR Efficiency Ordinance is subject to review and certification by the California Coastal Commission, the City Council also adopted Urgency Ordinance No. 1732 at the same meeting.
The Urgency Ordinance temporarily implements the DR Efficiency Ordinance provisions while the Coastal Commission review and certification process remains pending, thereby allowing the City to immediately implement the streamlined procedures. The City Council subsequently extended the Urgency Ordinance on August 4, 2026, for an additional 22 months and 15 days.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
or director of community development by a written request for review to the city clerk, directly or through the city manager, within fourteen calendar days of the decision or determination. Where the city is the applicant or an aggrieved property owner, the city manager may initiate proceedings for review of the decision or determination by written request to the city clerk within fourteen calendar days of the decision or determination.
(2) A request for review shall not require any statement of reasons, 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.
(LBMC Section 25.05.070(C) [pre-Urgency Ordinance No. 1732].) Consistent with the Municipal Code procedures for a Councilmember-requested review, Mayor Orgill’s Review Request stated no grounds or reasons for the request for review, nor does it take any position on the application (Attachment 3). The request has complied with all procedural requirements and is therefore presumed to be for the purpose of evaluating a significant concern to the community, or significant importance to the quality of life within the community and/or applicable land use policies and regulations.
B. Standards of Review
In considering requests for review, the City Council may affirm the Board decision, affirm the decision in part and reverse in part, reverse the decision, or remand the matter back to the Board for further consideration, subject to the requirements of LBMC Section 25.05.070(E). If the City Council affirms the decision, it may also impose additional conditions of approval that involve or relate to the subject matter of the appeal, pursuant to LBMC Section 25.05.070(E)(1)(ii).
LBMC Section 25.05.070(D)(2) sets forth the procedures and review criteria for City Council requests for reviews. The City Council shall conduct a de novo hearing on the underlying application.11 The City Council shall exercise its independent judgment as to the evidence. Nevertheless, there shall be a presumption that the decision or determination made by the Board was reasonable, valid, and not an abuse of discretion.
In its consideration of the Board’s approval of DR 2026-0922, VAR 2026-0923, and Class 1 and Class 5 categorical exemptions from CEQA, the City Council is not limited to either the evidence in the record or the deliberations of the Board. The Applicant or members of the public may present new evidence for the City Council’s consideration, and the City Council is free to deliberate without being limited to the Board’s findings – in other words, a de novo hearing.
C. City Council Options
11 As previously indicated, an appeal was not filed. There is no appellant for a City Council request for review.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
The City Council has numerous options in consideration of this matter, which are as follows:
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
1. Adopt the attached Resolution upholding the Board Approval, and finding the approval of the Project categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15301 and 15305;
2. Adopt the attached Resolution upholding the Board Approval and finding the approval of the Project categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 and 15305, but modifying the Resolution to include more restrictive conditions of approval;
3. Direct staff to prepare and return at a future meeting with a Resolution overturning the Board Approval, with findings in support of overturning the Board Approval and denying the Project; or
4. Direct staff to prepare and return at a future meeting with a Resolution remanding DR 2026-0922 and VAR 2026-0923 to the Board, with findings in support of the remand and further direction to the Board.
DISCUSSION
A. Project Overview
1. Project Site and Background
The proposed Project site is located in the Village Community (VC) zone at the southeast corner of Eagle Rock Way and Wildwood Road in an area characterized by small lots, limited open space, non-conforming setbacks, and deficient on-site parking. The subject property consists of a rectangular lot measuring 35-feet wide and 45-feet deep and has an area of 1,575 square feet. The property is currently developed with a 1,137-square-foot single-family dwelling, 248 square feet of elevated deck area, and no on-site parking.
The adjacent Wildwood Road is a private street easement having a full width of 35 feet (which is 17.5 feet on each side of the centerline of the street). As codified within LBMC Section 25.43.070, the VC zone prescribes that the private street width shall be excluded from lot area calculation, setbacks, and building site coverage calculations. Excluding this easement area, the remaining buildable portion of the property measures approximately 35-feet wide along Eagle Rock Way and 45-feet deep along Wildwood Road.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
Figure 1 – Aerial Photo
2. Proposed Project
The Project proposes construction of an approximate 424-square-foot addition to the existing residence, including 252 square feet at the lower level to reconfigure and expand the existing two bedrooms, bathroom, and living area and 172 square feet at the upper level to expand the existing kitchen and primary bedroom.
To accommodate portions of the upper-level addition and reduce the perception of massing, approximately 77 square feet of existing elevated deck area is proposed to be removed. The additions are generally proposed on the west side of the property and would extend the existing structure towards Wildwood Road and the neighboring southerly property. The Project would maintain the existing maximum roof height of 21 feet, 6 inches, and retain the existing contemporary architectural style by incorporating materials and colors consistent with the existing home. The Project also includes new window and door openings13, new landscaping, the introduction of one covered on-site parking space at the northwest corner of the property, and new vehicular access from Wildwood Road to connect to the new, one covered on-site parking space.
These modifications are proposed for the purpose of modernizing and improving the functionality of the existing residence.
Design review is required for the upper-level additions, landscaping, new vehicular access, and to exceed the allowable (1) building site coverage and (2) floor area in the VC zone. A variance is required for the 13 The new window and door openings are no longer subject to design review under Urgency Ordinance No. 1730.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
proposed additions to encroach into the required side yard setback, for the proposed on-site parking space to encroach into the required front yard setback, and to not provide the second required covered parking space.
Figure 2 – Existing Street View from Street Intersection CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
Figure 3 – Proposed North (Eagle Rock Way) Elevation
Figure 4 – Proposed West (Wildwood Road) Elevation
B. June 25, 2026 Design Review Board Hearing
On June 25, 2026, the Board held a public hearing on DR 2026-0922 and VAR 2026-0923. During the public hearing, Chair Bauta, Chair Pro Tem Neev, and Board member Coveny each indicated that they had visited the site and corresponded with the Applicant, Horst Noppenberger. During the public hearing, the Applicant and two members of the public provided public testimony, and one speaker expressed opposition to the project with concerns related to the requested variances and neighborhood compatibility in terms of building mass and setbacks. After closing the public hearing, the Board deliberated, reviewed the evidence, and voted 4-0 (Board Member Gibbs absent) to conditionally approve the project..
C. City Council Review
As indicated under Standards of Review, in the City Council’s review of the Board’s action, the Council shall conduct a de novo hearing of the underlying applications and is not limited to the evidence that was presented to the Board. Accordingly, in its consideration of the Board Approval, the Council is free to deliberate without being limited to the Board’s findings or evidence presented to the Board.
As there are no contentions or grounds stated in a Councilmember request for review, the City Council is tasked with evaluating and determining whether it can make all of the findings necessary to issue DR 2026- 0922 and VAR 2026-0923, consistent with or by overturning the Board Approval.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
The recently adopted DR Efficiency Ordinance updated the required findings applicable to design review and consolidated the design review criteria.15 Accordingly, the findings and criteria applicable to the City Council’s review are those currently in effect under the urgency ordinance version of the DR Efficiency Ordinance (Urgency Ordinance No. 1732). For the City Council’s evaluation of the Project, City staff included the DR findings and criteria that were modified by Urgency Ordinance No. 1732 in the analysis below but maintained largely the same facts and analysis contained within the Board Approval for the City Council’s review. City staff did not modify the Variance findings in the analysis below as those were not modified by Urgency Ordinance No. 1732 and maintained the facts and analysis contained within the Board Approval for the City Council’s review.
Below is a summary of the required findings.
1. Design Review Findings
The proposed Project involves upper-level additions, landscaping, new on-site vehicular access, and to exceed the allowable (1) building site coverage and (2) floor area, all of which require the approval of design review. (See LBMC Section 25.05.040(B)(1)(c), (B)(1)(k), Section 25.10.008(E)(1)(d) and
25.43.070(H).) The design review findings specified in LBMC Section 25.05.040(I) and (H), are as follows:
Finding No. 1: The proposed design of the project complies with all applicable provisions of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code, including any applicable specific plan.
The proposed Project complies with the applicable provisions of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code, as demonstrated by the submitted development and landscape plans (Attachment 6). The Project includes modifications to the building site coverage and floor area standards, which may be granted pursuant to LBMC Sections 25.10.008(E)(1)(d) and
25.43.070(H), as discussed below:
25.10.008(E)(1)(d) Building Site Coverage Exceedance
Pursuant to Section 25.10.008(E), the maximum lot area which may be occupied by habitable enclosed building space and covered off-street parking depends on the lot size.
For lots four thousand square feet and under, site coverage shall not exceed forty-four percent. (Id.) The Municipal Code provides a formula for calculating the building site coverage. (Id.) However, the building site coverage may be modified “when it is necessary to preserve views, preserve privacy, reduce heights or to maintain neighborhood development patterns.” (Id.)
Here, the proposed building site coverage exceedance will preserve views, preserve privacy, reduce heights, and/or maintain neighborhood development patterns. 15 Generally, the DR Efficiency Ordinance reduced the number of criteria from 16 to 11, and reduced the number of findings from four to two.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
The proposed building site coverage exceedance will maintain the established neighborhood development pattern, which is characterized by small lots, compact building footprints, limited open space, and numerous legal nonconforming conditions. The proposed increase in building site coverage from approximately 36.78 percent to 54.61 percent, which is attributable to the additions, represents a modest expansion of an existing residence on a constrained lot and remains compatible with the scale and character of surrounding properties.
The additions are split between the lower and upper levels and are primarily oriented toward the street frontages along Eagle Rock Way and Wildwood Road rather than toward adjoining residential properties, thereby minimizing potential privacy impacts. The Project maintains the existing building height and low-profile character of the residence and does not introduce new vertical elements that would adversely affect public or private views. By allowing a modest horizontal expansion rather than additional building height, the proposed building site coverage and floor area ratio exceedance preserves views, minimizes privacy impacts, and maintains the compact village development pattern intended by the Village Community zone.
25.43.070(H) Floor Area Variance
The required floor area is inappropriate due to the existing development patterns in the surrounding area.
Pursuant to Section 25.43.070(H), the maximum floor area allowed for lots with less than 1,600 square feet shall not exceed one and seven-tenths the maximum building site coverage. However, the maximum floor area may be modified by the Board “upon making a finding that the requirement is inappropriate due to existing development patterns in the surrounding area.” (Id.) The subject property is located within area of South Laguna Village neighborhood characterized by small lots, narrow setbacks, and nonconforming conditions that predate current zoning regulations. Many of the surrounding cottage-style homes were constructed in the 1930s and 1940s and reflect a compact, village-scale pattern of development. The proposed increase in floor area to approximately 1,561 square feet represents a modest expansion that maintains the existing building height and low-profile character of the neighborhood and is compatible with the scale and development pattern of the surrounding Village area. There are several other properties on Wildwood Road including 31555 Wildwood Road, 31567 Wildwood Road, 31627 2nd Avenue, 31562 Wildwood Road, and 31561 Wildwood Road that contain residences exceeding the allowable Floor Area Ratio for the zone, demonstrating that the existing pattern of development in the immediate vicinity does not conform to prescribed floor area standards and that the required floor area is inappropriate due to the existing development pattern in the surrounding area.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
While the Project deviates from the required side yard setback, front yard setback, and parking standards, LBMC Section 25.05.025 allows for a variance to vary from the provisions of Title 25 (Zoning) at a noticed public hearing based upon four required findings, which are provided below.
The Project is not subject to any specific plan requirements.
Finding No. 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) as set forth below:
(1) Access. Conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians and other modes of transportation should be minimized by specifically providing for each applicable mode of transportation.
Handicapped access shall be provided as required by applicable statutes.
The proposed Project introduces one new covered on-site parking space with vehicular access from Wildwood Road by removing existing improvements within Wildwood Road.
The new access point meets minimum width and backup distance requirements and is designed in a way that allows for reasonable sight lines. While Wildwood Road does allow for parallel street parking, the proposed access point condition is quite similar to that existing on many nearby properties and is typical throughout the surrounding neighborhood. Because of the narrow street widths and correspondingly slower vehicular speeds, the proposed access is not expected to result in direct conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians or other modes of transportation.
Pedestrian access to the residence would remain from Eagle Rock Way and would not be altered by the proposed improvements.
(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.
The proposed additions are modest in scale, totaling approximately 424 square feet, and are distributed between the lower and upper levels. The Project maintains the existing building height, use of varied wall planes, wall heights, building materials, and window openings. A portion of the existing elevated deck is proposed to be removed to accommodate portions of the additions, and the guardrail will continue to be of glass, which further alleviates the perception of an increase in building 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 CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
terrain should be utilized in the design and grading should be minimized except when necessary to balance other design review criteria.
The subject property is a relatively flat, previously developed residential lot with an average slope of approximately 1.73 percent. The Project involves minimal grading of 8 cubic yards to create the on-site parking space and would not impact significant natural features, heritage trees, rock out-croppings, ridgelines, watercourses, or environmentally sensitive habitat areas on or adjacent to the subject property. (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.
The Project would be consistent with the General Plan Land Use Element, which encourages reinvestment in existing residential neighborhoods while maintaining compatibility with surrounding development and topography, including the following General Plan policies:
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 Project design utilizes the existing topography, maintains the existing building height, and is not anticipated to impact any public views.
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 Project does not increase the height of the existing residence and is not anticipated to obstruct existing public or private coastal or canyon views. The additions are appropriately sited within an existing developed neighborhood and would not impact views from public locations. Additionally, the property is not located in the vicinity of a blufftop trail or other visitor-serving facilities where public scenic views could be impacted.
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 on-site resources, and protect public views as specified in the Design Guidelines CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
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 is consistent with this policy as discussed under LU Policy 2.8 and
2.10 above. The Project site is not located in an area adjacent to major highways or arterial streets.
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.
The proposed Project is consistent with this policy as discussed under the Environmental Context Design Review Criteria section and LU Policy 2.8 and 2.10 above.
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 Project site is located within an established, urbanized area and is surrounded by existing development and infrastructure. The Project does not require the extension of roadways, utilities, or public services into previously undeveloped areas. Minimal grading of 8 cubic yards is proposed, and all new construction is confined to a previously disturbed portion of the site.
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.
The proposed Project is consistent with this policy as discussed under the Environmental Context Design Review Criteria section and LU Policy 2.8, 2.10. and 7.10 above. (5) Historic Preservation. Destruction, alteration, or other actions pertaining to historic resources must be consistent with Chapter 25.45.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
The subject property is not listed on the City’s Historic Register. Although the residence was likely originally constructed in or around 1930, the structure has undergone substantial alterations over time, including modifications to the roof, exterior façade, windows and doors, decks, and other site improvements.
(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.
The Project includes new landscaping improvements that are integrated with the overall site design and are compatible with the landscaping patterns of the surrounding neighborhood. All new landscaping is proposed to be maintained at a height of two to four feet. As such, the proposed landscaping is not anticipated to adversely affect view equity and would improve the visual appearance of the property. The landscaping plan has been reviewed and approved by the City’s landscape consultant for compliance with the City’s landscaping requirements and the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document.
The submitted landscape plan indicates the removal of the existing giant white birds of paradise along the perimeters and proposal of low-growing white rose, lavender, and cactus. The existing eucalyptus tree located adjacent to Eagle Rock Way just east of Wildwood Road would remain. The landscaping shall be continuously maintained (including replanting, as necessary) in compliance with the approved landscaping plans, as conditioned.
(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.
No significant new exterior lighting or reflective materials are proposed that would adversely impact neighboring properties. The submitted lighting plan indicates all proposed lighting would be fully shielded, downward facing, and compliant with the provisions of the City’s Good Neighbor Lighting Ordinance. (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.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
The Project is compatible with the established development pattern and character of the Village Community neighborhood, which consists of modestly scaled residences and cottages, many originally constructed during the 1930s and 1940. This gridded portion of South Laguna Village is characterized by compact lots, narrow streets, closely spaced homes, limited open space, landscaping and parking areas, varied and narrow setbacks, and numerous legal nonconforming conditions that predate current zoning standards. The proposed additions maintain the existing building height and introduce a modest increase in floor area while retaining the residence's compact scale and low-profile character. The Project does not introduce a building form, mass, or intensity of development that is inconsistent with the surrounding residential context and preserves the established village character of the neighborhood.
(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.
Design Review Criteria for Pedestrian Orientation is related to commercial development and this residential Project is not subject to these criteria. (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.
The Project does not propose new activity areas, deck expansions, or other elements that would result in a significant invasion of privacy onto neighboring properties. New window and door openings are generally limited to the street facing elevations. A new bay window with glazing only at the top of the bay projection is proposed on the south elevation facing the neighboring property to minimize privacy impacts. The proposal also includes a reduction in existing elevated deck area. No privacy concerns have been raised by any neighbors.
(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.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
The Project maintains the existing building height and consists of modest additions within an established residential neighborhood. No new landscaping is proposed which would create view obstructions. Due to the limited increase in building mass, absence of increased building height or landscaping, the proposal is not anticipated to impact any existing public or private views.
2. Variance Findings
A variance is requested for the proposed additions to encroach into the required south side setback, for the proposed on-site parking space to encroach into the front yard setback, and to not provide the second required covered parking space (see LBMC Section 25.05.025; 25.43.070(D)(1)(b) [for side and front yard setbacks] 25.43.070(L) and 25.56.008(C)). Variances are governed by LBMC Section 25.05.025. A Variance is considered at a duly noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:
Finding No. 1: There are special circumstances applicable to the property involved, including size, shape, topography, location or surroundings which cause the strict application of the zoning ordinance to deprive such property of privileges enjoyed by other property in the vicinity and under identical zoning classification.
Special circumstances applicable to the property exist. The property is located within the South Laguna Village neighborhood characterized by small "postage stamp"-sized lots averaging approximately 2,500 square feet in area. The site is further constrained by the presence of a 17.5-foot-wide easement for the property’s contribution to the half-width of Wildwood Road, which substantially reduces the property's buildable area to 1,575 square feet. The existing residence was constructed in or around 1930, prior to the adoption of current zoning regulations, and contains legal nonconforming conditions, including nonconforming setbacks on all sides of the existing structure and absence of on-site parking.
The surrounding neighborhood is similarly characterized by narrow streets, compact lot configurations, closely spaced homes, limited open space, and numerous residences with legal nonconforming setbacks and parking deficiencies.
Several similarly situated properties in the immediate vicinity have also received discretionary relief from development standards to accommodate reasonable improvements consistent with the historic development pattern of the neighborhood. Given the property's reduced buildable area and preexisting nonconforming conditions, strict application of the current setback and parking standards would deprive it of privileges commonly enjoyed by similarly situated properties, including the ability to make reasonable additions and provide on-site parking while maintaining compatibility with the established neighborhood character.
CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
Finding No. 2: Such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of a substantial property right of the applicant, which right is possessed by other property owners under like conditions in the same vicinity and zone.
The requested variances are necessary to afford the property owner a reasonable opportunity to improve and modernize the existing residence and provide one covered onsite parking space where none currently exists. The property's reduced buildable area and existing legal nonconforming conditions limit the ability to accommodate additions and conforming parking under current development standards. The surrounding South Laguna Village neighborhood consists predominantly of modestly scaled cottages developed on small lots with reduced setbacks and limited on-site parking opportunities that predate current zoning standards.
Approval of the requested variances would allow the property owner to enjoy development rights similar to those possessed by other property owners under like conditions within the same vicinity and zoning classification, while preserving the compact, low-profile character of the neighborhood. Other properties in the immediate neighborhood have been granted variances to encroach into required setbacks and provide non-conforming number of parking spaces, including the following:
• 31572 Wildwood Road: On December 10, 1987, the Board approved encroachments into the front and rear setback and allowed a non-conforming garage width of 8’-4”. • 31562 Wildwood Road: On May 14, 1992, the Board approved the construction of additions without providing the required parking.
• 31632 Wildwood Road: On June 25, 1995, the Board approved the construction of additions that encroach into the required front yard, side yard, and additional building setback.
• 31578 Jewel Street: On September 12, 2002, the Board approved the construction of upper-level additions that encroach into the required side setbacks. • 31550 Eagle Rock Way: On January 26, 2023, the Board approved the construction of additions without providing any on-site parking.
Finding No. 3: The granting of the variance will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience and welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity in which the property is located.
The requested variances will not be detrimental to the public health, safety, convenience, or welfare, nor injurious to nearby properties or improvements. The Project maintains the existing building height and consists of modest additions that are compatible with the established scale and character of the South Laguna Village neighborhood. The proposal does not create significant privacy, view, or visual impacts and is consistent with the CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
neighborhood's historic pattern of compact development, reduced setbacks, and limited onsite parking opportunity.
Furthermore, the Project introduces one covered on-site parking space where no on-site parking currently exists, thereby reducing reliance on the limited on-street parking resources within the neighborhood. The Project will remain subject to all applicable Building and Fire Code requirements and will not adversely affect access, circulation, or public safety.
Finding No. 4: The granting of such a variance will not be contrary to the objectives of the zoning ordinance or the general plan.
The requested variances are consistent with the objectives of the Village Community zoning regulations and the General Plan. The Village Community zone is intended to recognize and preserve the unique historic development pattern of South Laguna Village, which is characterized by moderately sloping and variable-sized lots serviced by narrow, private streets, small-scale buildings and diversified, mature vegetational growth. The purpose of this zone is to preserve the characteristics and development patterns inherent to the Village
The subject property is located within this historic gridded portion of South Laguna Village and exhibits many of the defining characteristics that the Village Community zone. The Project maintains the existing building height and low-profile character of the residence and introduces only modest additions that remain compatible with the scale of surrounding development. The proposal constitutes reinvestment in an existing residential neighborhood and is consistent with General Plan policies promoting neighborhood compatibility, preservation of community character, and sensitive infill development within established urban areas. Accordingly, granting the requested variances would not be contrary to the objectives of the Municipal Code or General Plan.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action has no financial impact to the budget.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) guidelines, the Project qualifies for a categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15301 - Existing Facilities, in that the project consists of the repair, maintenance, or minor alteration of existing structures or topographical features, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Here, the Project consists of additions, landscaping modifications, and new vehicular access. Alternativerly, and as an independent basis, the Project qualifies for a categorical exemption pursuant to Section 15305 – Minor Alterations in Land Use Limitations in that the Project consists of minor alterations in land use limitations in areas with an average slope of less than 20%, which do not result in any changes in land use or density, including but not limited to minor lot line adjustments, CITY COUNCIL REVIEW OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DR 2026-0922 AND VAR 2026-0923 AT 31552 EAGLE ROCK WAY
September 22, 2026
side yard, and setback variances that do not create any new parcel. Here, the Project is located on a lot with an average slope of 1.73 percent and includes additions, landscaping modifications, and new vehicular access for an existing single-family residence. The requested setback variances would allow encroachments into the required side and front yards but would not create a new parcel or result in a change in land use or density.
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 will be no cumulative impact resulting from successive projects of the same type in the same place, over time. There are no unusual circumstances resulting in a significant impact on the environment. There will be no damage to scenic resources, including trees, historic buildings, rock outcroppings or similar resources, within a highway officially designated as a state scenic highway. The Project is not located on a hazardous waste site or any other site included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5. The Project will not result in significant adverse impacts to historical resources as defined by CEQA. Consequently, additional environmental analysis is not necessary to meet the requirements of the CEQA.
ATTACHMENTS
1. City Council Resolution (Pgs. 20-43)
2. City Council Review Public Notice (Pg. 44)
3. Mayor Request for Call-up (Pg. 45)
4. Adopted DRB Resolution No. 2026-0922 (Pgs. 46-59)
5. June 25, 2026 DRB Staff Report (Pgs. 60-76)
6. June 25, 2026 DRB Project Plans (Pgs. 77-115)
7. June 25, 2026 Public Correspondence (Pgs. 116-117)
8. June 25, 2026 DRB Meeting Transcript (Pgs. 118-127)
9. Order of Testimony (Pg. 128-129)
Submitted By: . Approved: .David A Kiff
Matthew Schneider, Director of
Community Development
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Kate Kazama, Senior Planner, Community
Development
Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney
Anthony Viera, Deputy Director of Community
Development