Development tops agenda for joint meeting

The City Council held freewheeling discussions with the planning commission and the design review board Saturday.

Council members met jointly with the commission for 90 minutes in the morning, broke for a bus tour of new or renovated projects and reconvened for a 90-minute session with board members, also attended by representatives of the design review task force. Senior staff members participated.

“It was one of the better joint meetings I have attended,” said Planning Commissioner Norm Grossman, who stayed for the afternoon session. “We actually made some decisions and we received guidance on some important issues.”

Included in the council/commission agenda:

Lot coverage, hardscape

The meeting led off with lot coverage and impermeable surfaces, which some on the council would like to limit in order to improve water quality.

“This is one of my favorite topics,” Mayor Toni Iseman said. “Limits on lot coverage do not include hardscape.”

“Hardscape,” or impermeable surfaces, prevent irrigation water or rain from being absorbed by the ground, and increase runoff to the ocean.

“We looked at one [appealed] project that said it had 35% coverage and we hardly saw a plant,” Councilwoman Cheryl Kinsman said. “What used to go into the ground now goes into the ocean — plus it is ugly.”

However, in some cases, such as a steep hillside lot with problematic soil, Development Director John Montgomery said permeable surfaces that absorb water are not always a benefit — they could become a possible landslide site.

Planning Administrator Ann Larson said the design review board, which reviews landscape plans, should also look at the issue of lot coverage.

Mansionization

Mansionzation came under scrutiny at both sessions, including medium-and long-range recommendations, some of which are being implemented.

The board and the commission agreed to submit for discussion eight items, including a revision in the definition of “oceanfront bluff,” from which the development setback is established.

“It’s a big deal,” Montgomery said. “The Coastal Commission will slip in [take jurisdiction of the issue] if we change the description and might require a 25-foot setback, which could be a lot more than 25 feet from the bluff.”

Montgomery said under Laguna’s commission-approved local coastal plan, city standards are used if a project is appealed to the commission.

“If we open it up [to the coastal commission], Coastal [Act] criteria would be imposed,” Montgomery said.

The city is already at odds with the coastal commission about which projects can be appealed and which cannot.

“Coastal Commission appealability is based on the U.S. Geological Survey Map of Blue Line Streams,” Montgomery said.

The streams are named for the color of their designation on the map. A “blue line” stream is a stream that flows constantly.

“A lot of regulations are based on the blue line streams and that means that almost all projects in Laguna are appealable because of the number of water courses,” Montgomery said.

The city’s approvals of the Montage Hotel & Spa project and a large South Laguna residence were appealed to the Coastal Commission. Current appeals include the proposed renovation of St. Catherine’s School and the storage of the Third St. Cottages in Laguna Canyon.

The presence of water is one criteria the Coastal Commission uses to determine appealability of a project.

“One [coastal] commissioner walked St. Catherine’s [site], saw a drop of water and said it’s appealable,” Montgomery said. “It’s ludicrous.”

A reduction in the number of required parking spaces for single- or two-family dwellings was also on the joint meeting agenda for both practical and aesthetic reasons.

“A third garage increases the mass of the building and it gets used as storage or for a rental,” Grossman said.

Councilwoman Jane Egly, who co-chaired parking workshops, said vehicles parked on neighborhood streets at 3 a.m. indicate residents are not using their garages, if, in fact they have a garage.

“What do we do about that?” she asked.

No answer was forthcoming.

Bus tour

Commissioners, council and board members boarded a city bus at about 10:45 a.m. for a two-hour sight-seeing tour of proposed and completed projects that included the Pike property on Thurston Drive, Lavender Lane and Ceanothus Drive in South Laguna.

Design Review Task Force recommendations topped the agenda when the three bodies reconvened.

Staff, architects and some board members suggested reinstating concept reviews for projects, which were eliminated at the recommendation of the task force in favor of early staff participation for proposed developments.

“I don’t see any negatives to concept review,” said Lance Polster, a local architect and task force member.

Ten-year board veteran Ilse Lenschow said staff cannot predict what the board will approve.

“Lack of predictability is a big issue,” Task Force Chair Matt Lawson said. “People don’t react well to unpredictability.”

Zoning Administrator Liane Schuller said so much is invested in a project by the time it reaches the board that applicants are not in “flexibility mode.”

“You cannot have predictability — we are not Irvine,” Councilwoman Jane Egly said.

Task force member Gene Gratz said a large number of projects escape early staff oversight because they are smaller than the square-foot threshold that triggers staff assistance.

A resolution will be introduced at the April 17 council meeting to require a pre-submittal site development meeting for staff-assisted projects, which was inadvertently omitted from the revised design review ordinance that incorporated task force recommendations.

“The threshold should be reduced,” Mayor Toni Iseman said. “Fifteen hundred square foot projects are the problem.”

Additional staffing that would be required for more staff assistance will be discussed at the budget meetings in May.

“We are talking about four or five new staff, otherwise, this is all a waste of time,” Gratz said.

Board members at the meeting split on the need for and quality of staff reports on projects, but agreed they are improving.

“They have evolved and we are working on it,” Montgomery said.

The meeting concluded with a discussion of variances — exceptions to the standard code, for which justifications, called findings, must be made.

“Grant them only when absolutely necessary and I don’t think you ever need them on new construction,” Kinsman said.

The council holds joint meetings annually with city commissions and boards for the exchange of ideas and updating progress on projects or policies.