The Design Review process is broken and must be reformed

By Jacob Cherub

Tthe capricious and divisive nature of design review is a corrosive process which damages neighborhoods and neighbor relationships.

I will work to end the capricious and divisive nature of design review by working with neighborhoods to establish specific codes defining limits on construction. I will work to implement a system where all Lagunans can expect to be treated justly.

Presently there is no objective code in Laguna Beach that definitively informs any property owner, property buyer, architect, neighbor, or building official what improvement(s) may be made to a house or lot.

This system makes adversaries out of neighbors. Knowing that they cannot rely on an objective, constitutional standard that applies to all, neighbors feel forced to advocate for their own property rights. It is heartbreaking to see so many neighbors turned into combatants forced to do so in the face of weak or non-existent, uniform, equally applied criteria.

This is the core issue that politicized me and directly led to my becoming a candidate for the council. My wife and I were dangerously naïve when, as property owners, we began the journey to build our dream house.

We intended to build a variance free dwelling, blocking no views, well within the "building envelope restrictions". Yet we were overwhelmed by the Laguna Beach design review process where anyone and everyone is given standing whether or not they are detrimentally affected by the proposed improvements. For example, the current system allowed the first appeal of our approval by DRB to be lodged by a neighbor who cannot see our house from inside his/her house. (nor can we see his/her house from ours.)

Somehow, we were able to suffer through this painful process. Our house is now finished and we are ecstatic in our new home. Unfortunately, our experience is not exceptional. This lamentable scenario will continue to occur over and over to countless other unsuspecting citizens unless we take action.

Why does this happen? What can we do to end this strife-ridden process?

With a system fraught with inequities, we must create a clear, consistent set of rules on which all interested parties can rely. A buzzword currently in use by many expressing the desire in maintaining our village atmosphere is "Mansionization". However, if we indeed wish to curb "Mansionization" we must first decide what a "mansion" is and write the code expressing our collective will.

Another major ingredient of the problem is the nature of the "appeals" process

The members of the Planning Commission the Board of Adjustments (DRB) are directly appointed by the City Council. Yet decisions of the appointed board(s) are overturned frequently by those who made the appointments. It is an epidemic of appeals that go directly onto the council agenda.

Frequently, the proposed improvement is sent back down to DRB with "instructions". Generally speaking no background in the building arts is required of a council member in the way DRB and Planning Commission members must have. This, then, is a puzzling kind of disrespect to these board members who, week after week, patiently toil to craft important design decisions. It has to be disheartening. Often the City Council actually begins to overhaul the design on the spot.

Furthermore, appeals should be limited to cases in which egregious concerns were unaddressed or to correct errors in procedure. This is how it is done in the courts. This is simply due process and we should demand nothing less.

This subjective and capricious process must be revamped. It is so damaging, and time consuming, and expensive to ALL the parties. The City Council has many more important and appropriate concerns. As a council member I would place trust in those appointed by my colleagues and me.

Truthful testimony

Neighborhood character

As a municipality we are charged to reflect the will of the citizens, and to do so fairly there must be a clear standard for all.