Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Land Use topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Laguna Beach design review board adopts resolution denying Bluebird Canyon project
Summary
The Design Review Board voted 3–2 to adopt a staff-prepared resolution denying design review 24-2509, a coastal development permit and a revocable encroachment permit for a project on Bluebird Canyon (Lot B). Attorney and applicant representatives argued state housing laws apply; board majority found the record supported denial.
The Laguna Beach Design Review Board on June 12 adopted a resolution denying design review 24-2509, coastal development permit 24-2510 and revocable encroachment permit 24-2511 for a project at Bluebird Canyon (Lot B).
The denial was adopted after the board limited testimony to the contents of the draft resolution and heard brief remarks from the applicant and the applicant's attorney. The applicant's attorney told the board staff and counsel had exchanged letters and that the Housing Accountability Act and recent state laws were referenced in correspondence sent to the city attorney. Board discussion focused on whether the staff's draft resolution accurately memorialized the board's prior direction and on the content of a "whereas" clause describing other members' concerns.
Why it matters: the resolution formalizes the board's previous direction on the project and documents the board's reasons for denial, which the applicant indicated they could challenge through the city's appeals and potentially in court.
What happened: the applicant and an attorney spoke briefly in support of reconsideration, arguing some comments at the prior hearing had been subjective; staff and the interim planning manager clarified the board's limited scope at the current hearing was to decide whether the resolution reflected the earlier deliberations. Board members proposed minor edits to the "whereas" language and a factual insertion about street width at the driveway access point before voting.
Formal action: Board member Gibbs moved to adopt the resolution denying the project and find the action exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act. The roll call vote was: Board member Bauta — No; Board member Coveney — Yes; Board member Weil — Yes; Chair Pro Tem Gannon — No; Chair Gibbs — Yes. The tally was 3 in favor, 2 opposed; the resolution was adopted.
Next steps: the applicant was told they retain any legal remedies available after the denial. The city clerk recorded the resolution and the permit record will reflect the board's findings and edits made on the record.
Ending: The board moved on to the regular agenda after finalizing the resolution language and vote.
