Design review board approves front‑deck variance at 31860 Eighth Avenue, 4–0

The Laguna Beach Design Review Board on Oct. 23 adopted Resolution 25‑0633 approving a design review and variance to permit a front‑deck addition at 31860 Eighth Avenue (Design Review 25‑0633; Variance 25‑0635), voting 4–0.

Staff presented the application as a front‑area deck addition to a 1937 corner house in the Village Community zone and noted that prior approvals in the neighborhood had allowed similar encroachments; staff recommended the board find the project categorically exempt from CEQA and approve the requested variance. Izzy, the planning presenter, described the project footprint, the 0.21‑ft (2‑inch) setback to the front property line for the proposed deck and a staff analysis of adjacent properties that have similar intrusions into front setbacks.

Neighbors opposed the variance during public comment, saying cumulative encroachments along Eighth Avenue have narrowed the paved roadway, create visibility and emergency access concerns on a designated wildfire evacuation route, and represent inconsistent code enforcement. MJ Abraham and Phil Abraham asked the board to require mitigation of existing public‑right‑of‑way encroachments and to require the applicant to address parking/landscape encroachments before any approval.

Applicant representatives, including Jeff and Ashley Dippel and their project consultant Nancy, argued the work is a modest deck addition, not a major remodel, and said the lot’s age and historic footprint justify a variance. The applicant provided a list of other properties in the VC zone with approved nonconforming conditions and variances, and told the board they had not received neighbor complaints about privacy or view impacts.

Board members discussed public‑safety and access concerns, precedent in the neighborhood, and the project’s privacy and view impacts. Several members said that while neighborhood encroachments are an existing condition, the board should not penalize an applicant for rights already enjoyed by others if the stated findings can be made. The board added a condition to the approval requiring that any support structures be placed so they do not impede existing access to adjoining properties.

Chair Pro Tem Jared Gannon moved approval and the motion was seconded; roll call votes were recorded as Board member Bauta — yes; Board member Weil — yes; Chair Pro Tem Gannon — yes; Chair Gibbs — yes. Motion passes 4–0.

What happens next: The decision is subject to a 14‑day appeal period to the City Council by any person within 300 feet of the project. The approval includes conditions the board attached regarding support‑structure placement to safeguard adjoining access.

Quotes ‘‘We do see a pattern of decks and encroachments up and down the street,’’ said Board member Lewis during deliberations, ‘‘and I don’t see this deck causing a more intense access issue than the current home state as it stands.’’‘‘We heard public‑safety concerns; the board added a condition to ensure support beams do not impede access,’’ Chair Gibbs said after the vote.

Why it matters: The application highlights recurring tensions in older neighborhoods between property owners seeking modest improvements and neighbors who say small encroachments cumulatively reduce roadway width and can hamper emergency access. The board’s decision balances those claims by approving the deck while adding a safety‑oriented condition.