Design Review Board continues 2058 Crestview Drive after neighbors raise views, privacy and parking concerns

The Laguna Beach Design Review Board on April 10 continued its review of a proposed new single-family home at 2058 Crestview Drive to the board’s first July meeting (July 10) after extended public comment and deliberation where neighbors raised concerns about coastal views, privacy, parking and an existing retaining wall that encroaches into the public right of way.

Staff presented the project as a four-level single-family residence with an attached two-car garage and an attached ADU; staff also noted a height modification request because part of the structure would reach 31.2 feet—2.2 feet above the permitted height. The applicant is also seeking variances, including for not providing a required on-street parking space; staff said public-works review found no feasible location within 200 feet that would satisfy the on-street parking requirement, and the applicant proposed payment of an in-lieu fee instead.

Neighbors objected to aspects of the proposal. Yevgeny Krasco (owner at 785 Gainsborough Drive) told the board the building "will block the beautiful view of Catalina Island from my master bedroom" and urged modest changes such as moving the upper level back or lowering the garage height. Edward Sotto, a representative for the family at 2100 Crestview Drive, said the project’s siting threatens on-site parking and the retaining wall near his driveway: "To lose the driveway is to make it virtually impossible for a family with four vehicles to even live here," he said. Architect David Freeland said the design has been revised since 2013 and emphasized the constrained, 40-foot-wide lot and steep cross slope; he added the project has been reduced from about 3,600 square feet to approximately 2,000 square feet in prior iterations.

Staff and the applicant also discussed a portion of an existing retaining wall that extends into the public right of way in front of the adjacent property at 2100 Crestview. Staff said no revocable encroachment permit (REP) could be located for that wall and that any structural solution to preserve the neighbor’s fire-access stairs and parking would likely require a mutual agreement between property owners and an REP for any new wall work in the right of way. Staff recommended the applicant propose an REP or reach a mutual agreement; board members said the parking and public-safety implications mean the final wall and parking solution should be reviewed by the board rather than deferred entirely to administrative approval.

Board members asked for additional changes to respond to privacy and view concerns, to refine grading and plate heights so more of the structure is below grade where feasible, and to present a clearer, workable plan for parking and the wall encroachment. The board voted to continue the item to July 10, with the expectation the applicant will work with neighbors and submit revised plans for staff review.

Why it matters: The project is in the Diamond Crestview specific plan area, where view protection, hillside integration and on-street parking rules are central to approvals. The board’s request for additional revisions reflects concern for neighbors’ coastal views and for maintaining emergency access and parking on a narrow, hairpin section of Crestview Drive.

Key technical details raised in the hearing: staff reported an updated grading calculation showing a net export increase of about 327 cubic yards relative to prior estimates and noted approximately 54% of proposed project volume is above grade and 46% below grade; the applicant and civil engineer indicated total export would be under about 1,300 cubic yards. Staff also noted the north elevation reaches 31.2 feet in height, exceeding the permitted height by 2.2 feet, and a revocable encroachment permit will be required for any new wall construction in the public right of way.

Next steps: Applicant to coordinate with neighbors (Krasco and Sotto were identified as principal neighbors of concern), submit revised plans that address parking, grading and view/privacy mitigation, and, if applicable, propose a revocable encroachment permit design for staff review before the July 10 hearing.