SOUNDING OFF: Home’s height not a ‘deal’ for neighbors

In an article written by Barbara Diamond regarding the dispute between the Blue Lagoon homeowners and the Montage property owner, represented by their architect, Morris Skenderian, (“Dispute over views settled,” May 30) it was noted that “Mayor Pro Tem Cheryl Kinsman brokered a deal.”

That is simply not true.

There was no deal “brokered.” Rather, the City Council voted 3-2 to lower the roof height by one foot on a proposed 7,700-square-foot home to be built on the Montage grounds. The Blue Lagoon Homeowners had requested a lowering of the roof by four feet.

We likely would have agreed to a two-foot reduction as supported by both Mayor Jane Egley and Councilwoman Toni Iseman but, make no mistake, there was no “deal reached or brokered.”

It was, in fact, a unilateral decision reached by board majority.

Kinsman was the first to suggest the one-foot lowering of the roof line; she was supported by Council Members Kelly Boyd and Elizabeth Pearson. Egley and Iseman lobbied hard for the two-foot reduction and asked the other members to reconsider, but the three remaining were obviously not interested in any further height reduction and just sat quietly. Do you think they might have been somewhat embarrassed by their recommendation of only one foot?

The only meaningful part the Blue Lagoon homeowners played in this process was to plead with the council members to take into account “equity view preservation” while making their determination.

The article also makes reference to loss of view percentage. It says the Blue Lagoon homeowners would have lost 80% of their views. That is true but somewhat misleading as it implies the so-called “compromise” mitigated said view loss.

Let’s be clear. Twelve units are directly affected by the Skenderian proposed development; eight of these units would have lost 80% of their “primary” view while the four remaining units would have lost 80% of their “secondary” view. While it is true we, the homeowners, are grateful the council members did vote for the one-foot roof reduction, and as such, effectively overruled a disgraceful prior decision by the Design Review Board “” which ruled 4-1 against us for any roof reduction (the only voice of reason belonging to Caren Liuzzi) “” we will still lose about 60% of our view. (By the way, Liuzzi supported a four-foot lowering of the roof line.) Another one-foot roof reduction, if supported by the council members, would have resulted in a view loss of about 40%.

At this time, it is important to note that lowering the roof line would not adversely impact the square footage of the 7,700-square-foot home nor would it impact its unobstructed 100% view of the ocean.

“Equity view preservation?” Not quite. Maybe it is time for Laguna Beach city officials to redefine its meaning.

JOSEPH F. RUVOLO lives in Laguna Beach.