Red Dragon restaurant project approved, parking plans will return to council for final review
By SARA HALL
After being stalled for years due to a definition disagreement with a state agency, the Red Dragon restaurant project was unanimously approved by Laguna Beach City Council this week. But the conditioned approval included direction on the plans for parking, which will return to council for final review before the restaurant opens.
Councilmembers voted 5-0 on Tuesday (April 26) to approve a Conditional Use Permit, design review, a Coastal Development Permit and several variances for the proposed restaurant at 680 South Coast Highway, formerly the Mosun restaurant and nightclub.
Although they also agreed that several conditions related to parking need to be worked out and return to council for review before the Certificate of Occupancy is issued. Several public speakers and local residents agreed that it’s a worthy project, but that the parking plan wasn’t clear and there were concerns about the potential impact on the neighborhood.
“I’d like to see the project approved too (and) I’d like to see something that the neighborhood can support,” said Mayor Pro Tem Bob Whalen. “It sounds to me like there is a deal to be made there, it just needs more work.”
“Things need to be nailed down,” he added.
Conditions related to off-site parking agreements, a valet plan and employee parking can be modified to note that they will return to the council prior to the issuance of a COO, confirmed Principal Planner Martina Caron.
Related to the other key items of discussion, councilmembers also agreed to a maximum of 150 seats, hours of operation limited between 11 a.m.-10 p.m., and parking planned for at least 52 customers and 30 employees.
Ultimately, the council approved a motion that also included removing take-out from the resolution (it was initially included in the previously approved CUP), but allowed for delivery services.
Whalen suggested they grant the CUP with the required condition that it comes back to the council on the items specified.
Others agreed that the parking plan is the biggest issue that needs to be settled before it returns.
Councilmember George Weiss said he loves the project, but is concerned that they are “pushing the envelope,” in terms of the parking not being fully thought out.
“It’s kind of messy,” he said. “There’s a number of moving parts to this.”
He suggested holding off on the applicant-requested breakfast hours until the parking plan is solidified and studied to ensure it’s working as expected. This is a high-end restaurant that will likely attract people from the surrounding areas, he noted, so it will likely be busy.
The building is beautiful and it’s a great addition to the city, he noted, but it’s a lot of people to accommodate and vehicles to park.
“I support this project, I want it to go through,” Weiss said, “but I want it to go through with the best solutions for parking that we can come up with.”
It’s not fully figured out quite yet, Whalen agreed, although the applicant team didn’t know what the council was going to require, which makes it hard to finalize any parking plans.

Click on photo for a larger image
Courtesy of City of Laguna Beach/James Conrad Architects
Proposed elevation renderings for the Red Dragon project
Overall, councilmembers liked the project and were excited to see it come to town.
“I just love the building and I think it’s going to make a really great addition to our dining atmosphere here in Laguna Beach,” said Councilmember Peter Blake.
It will be an improvement to the previously “blighted” area, he said. It’s also not intensified over the previous use, he added, if anything it will be reduced from the nightclub use to fine dining.
The applicant has gone out of their way to get the parking mitigation plan to work, Blake said. Many of the guests will likely take Uber or other rideshare services, he commented. He doesn’t anticipate a parking problem.
And it should be conditioned on the parking they are proposing to bring in, he added.
“As long as they can park what they say they can park,” Blake said. “I think it’s time we opened this restaurant up and let people enjoy it.”
It’s been vetted “up and down” since starting the process about six years ago, he noted.
Council previously approved the remodel project in April 2016. Design review was required for the upper-level additions, elevated decks, rooftop equipment and some other modifications. It was determined not to be a “major remodel” and that there was no increase in intensity, therefore city staff found it exempt from the need for a Coastal Development Permit. The Planning Commission later approved a variance to allow the roof to be constructed over the proposed trash enclosure. Construction started in early 2018.
A member of the public challenged the city’s determination in September 2018 and requested a determination by the California Coastal Commission executive director.
After a site inspection and a stop-work order for some additional slab demolition that had occurred, it was still determined not to be a major remodel by the city. However, after some back and forth with the CCC, it was concluded that the development requires a CDP. Based on this, city staff advised the applicant that new plans would need to be submitted as required for a major remodel and a CDP.

Click on photo for a larger image
Photo by Mary Hurlbut
The current property for the proposed Red Dragon project
The city’s current land use element policy addresses major remodel, but it’s fairly vague, Community Development Director Marc Wiener noted at Tuesday’s meeting. It says more specificity is provided in the municipal code, but that’s not the case, he explained.
“So, it’s really a difference in interpretation,” of what constitutes a major remodel, Wiener said, “the city’s understanding of that was different than the Coastal Commission’s.”
The CCC’s standard isn’t codified in the Coastal Act, he added, so it’s been a work in progress and developed through their review of projects.
“It’s kind of a moving target,” Wiener said.
In the case of this project, the city believed it to be under the major threshold because almost 70% of the exterior structural walls are being preserved, but the CCC said the roof structure (which was completely removed) should also be included.
Since that time, the city is now on the same page with the Coastal Commission, Wiener said. Staff is planning on bringing an ordinance before the council in June that will provide clarity to the definition and more flexible standards.
Click open story button to continue reading…