3 of 205
MARINE SAFETY SEASONAL AND JUNIOR LIFEGUARD UNIFORM PURCHASE October 28, 2025
ATTACHMENTS
1. Florence Marine X Uniform Bid 2026 (Pgs. 4-5)
Submitted By: Kai Bond Approved: .David A Kiff
Kai Bond, Marine Safety Chief Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Kai Bond, Marine Safety Chief Michelle Bannigan, Finance Director Jessica Agee, Administrative Assistant
Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney
4 of 205
Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 36 38 WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ LBLG Adult Print Boardshort RED Red Standard Issue 18 34 12 24 26 0 0 15 18 $28.50 147 $ 4,189.50 LBLG Adult Print Boardshort NVY Navy Standard Issue 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $39.50 0 $ - Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication 0 2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ LBLG Womens 5" Boardshort RED Red 100% NYLON 10 10 10 10 10 4 2 2 2 $28.50 60 $ 1,710.00 Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication Adult - S Adult - M Adult - L Adult - XL Adult - XXL N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ LBLG LS Hood (Airtex) HRG Heather Grey 67% NYLON/33% POLY 0 0 0 0 0 $36.50 0 $ - LBLG LS Hood (Airtex) WHT White 67% NYLON/33% POLY 20 148 100 111 40 - - - - $36.50 419 $ 15,293.50 Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication
Adult S -
Short
Slv
Adult S -
Long Slv
Adult M -
Short
Slv
Adult M -
Long Slv
Adult L -
Short Slv
Adult L -
Long Slv
Adult XL
- Short
Slv
Adult XL
- Long
Slv
Adult
XXL -
Short
Adult XXL -
Long Slv
Total Units Extended WS$
Office Shirts NVY Navy Expedition 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 $44.00 0 $ - Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication Adult - S Adult - M Adult - L Adult - XL Adult - XXL N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ Tower SS T-Shirt BLK Black Airtech 25 50 65 65 10 - - - - $27.62 215 $ 5,938.30 Tower SS T-Shirt WHT White Airtech 25 50 65 65 10 $27.62 215 $ 5,938.30 Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication Adult - S Adult - M Adult - L Adult - XL Adult - XXL N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ Rashguards WHT White 0 21 33 15 7 - - - - $33.00 76 $ 2,508.00 Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication 5 Panel 6 Panel N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ Florence 5 or 6 Panel
Performance Hat
NVY Navy Hat needs to have patch affixed 100 150 - - - - - - - $19.50 250 $ 4,875.00 Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication No Size N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ Uniform Patches N/A N/A 200 - - - - - - - - $2.00 200 $ 400.00 Hat Patches N/A N/A 250 - - - - - - - - $2.00 250 $ 500.00 Style Desc Color Code Color Desc Fabrication Adult - S Adult - M Adult - L Adult - XL Adult - XXL N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$
2.5 Layer Shell NVY Navy 0 6 12 12 3 $115.00 33 $ 3,795.00 Off Grid Fleece NVY Navy 0 6 12 12 3 $47.60 33 $ 1,570.80 Unit Total Sub Total
1,898 $ 46,718.40
Sales Tax %
City of Laguna Beach 7.75%
Kai Bond
Marine Safety Chief Sales Tax
949-494-6572 ext: 663 $ 3,620.68
[email protected]
Grand Total
$ 50,339.08
Updated: 10/7/25
JG and LG Order Total $ 118,986.60
Sizing
Sizing
Sizing
Lifeguard Uniforms
Estimate - LBLG2026
Sizing
Sizing
Sizing
Sizing
Attachment 1
4 5 of 205
Style Desc Color CodeColor Desc One Size N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ JG LBLG Towel* 200 - - - - - - - - $10.50 200 $ 2,100.00 Style Desc Color CodeColor Desc Fabrication 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ LBLG Youth Print Boardshort NVY Navy Standard Issue 50 125 100 50 50 0 0 0 - - $26.50 375 $ 9,937.50 Style Desc Color CodeColor Desc Youth - S Youth - MYouth - LYouth - XL Adult - S Adult - M Adult - L Adult -XL N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ LBLG Youth LS (Airtex) WHT White 100 125 125 100 100 50 40 - $38.50 640 $ 24,640.00 Style Desc Color CodeColor Desc Youth - S Youth - MYouth - LYouth - XL Adult - S Adult - M Adult - L Adult -XL N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ LBLG LS Hood (Airtex) HRG Heather Gry 100 150 150 100 75 25 25 - $38.50 625 $ 24,062.50 Style Desc Color CodeColor Desc Adult - S Adult - M Adult - L Adult - XL Adult - XXL N/A N/A N/A N/A WS$ Total Units Extended WS$ Shirt Light Blue 15 15 15 $33.00 45 $ 1,485.00
Rashguard Light Blue 15 15 15 $33.00 45 $ 1,485.00
Unit Total Sub Total
1,930 $ 63,710.00
Sales Tax %
City of Laguna Beach 7.75%
Kai Bond
Marine Safety Chief Sales Tax
949-494-6572 ext: 663 $ 4,937.53
[email protected]
Grand Total
$ 68,647.53
Updated: 9/30/25
JG and LG Order Total $ 118,986.60
L/S Rashguard
Sun Pro L/S Logo
Microfiber
Fabrication
Fabrication
Fabrication
Fabrication
Sizing
Sizing
Estimate - LBLG2026
Junior Guard Program Uniforms
Sizing
*JG towel will have the same design of Main Tower on one side, but the pattern on the back side will be a different color annually Sizing
5 6 of 205
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
13 SUBJECT: UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL ASSET POLICY AND PROCEDURES RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council approve the proposed modifications to the City’s Capital Asset Policy to incorporate recent changes from the Office of Management and Budget’s Uniform Guidance for the dollar threshold of classifying capital assets.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
This report recommends that the City Council approve updates to the City’s Capital Asset Policy to align with recent changes in federal guidance. The revisions reflect the updated definition of “equipment” under the Office of Management and Budget’s Uniform Guidance (2 CFR §200.1), which increases the capitalization threshold for equipment from $5,000 to $10,000, effective October 1, 2024.
The revised Policy will be applied retroactively as of July 1, 2025. These changes are administrative in nature and do not impact the City’s procurement practices or budgetary processes, as the revised threshold was already incorporated into the City’s updated procurement policy adopted on October 14, 2025.
This action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) and 15060(c)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines.
DISCUSSION
The City’s current Policy outlines the processes for accounting and reporting on capital assets, including their acquisition, depreciation, and disposal. The Office of Management and Budget issued revisions to the Federal Uniform Guidance (2 CFR Part 200), effective October 1, 2024, which included an increase to the capitalization threshold for equipment purchases from $5,000 to $10,000. Under 2 CFR §200.1, “equipment” is now defined as tangible personal property having a useful life of more than one year and a per-unit acquisition cost of $10,000 or greater. City staff are recommending an increase in the capital asset thresholds to ensure consistency with Federal grant requirements and to streamline financial reporting.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended changes to the Policy have a financial reporting impact to the City’s Annual Comprehensive Annual Report as a threshold of $10,000 is recommended for capitalizing assets, with the exception of Leases and SBITAs relating to GASB 87 and 96, as those thresholds will remain at $25,000 per the last update taken to Council and approved on December 10, 2024.
The changes recommended do not affect the City’s current procurement policy or practices or budgetary practices, which include but are not limited to proper bids, etc., and/or proper approval at the various authority levels and budgetary authorization prior to purchases or entry into an agreement.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
1 of 212
UPDATE TO THE CAPITAL ASSET POLICY AND PROCEDURES
October 28, 2025
The recommended action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to Sections 15060(c)(2) (the activity will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment) and 15060(c)(3) (the activity is not a project as defined in Section 15378) of the CEQA Guidelines, California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Chapter 3, because it has no potential for resulting in physical change to the environment, directly or indirectly.
ATTACHMENT
1. Final draft of the revised Capital Asset Policy and Procedures (Pgs. 3-7) Submitted By: Michelle Bannigan Approved: .David A Kiff Michelle Bannigan, Finance
Director
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Shannon Espinoza, Finance Manager
2 of 212
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY MANUAL
CHAPTER ONE
FINANCE
POLICY 1-10
CAPITAL ASSET POLICY AND PROCEDURES
PURPOSE
The intended purpose of the City of Laguna Beach Capital asset Policy is to ensure adequate control, appropriate use of and proper reporting of the City’s infrastructure assets and capital assets. The policy and the related procedures are intended to establish guidelines for budgeting, purchasing, using, transferring, disposing, depreciation and financial reporting for all assets.
POLICY
It is the policy of the City of Laguna Beach that City assets be properly accounted for and used for appropriate City uses. The Finance Department, with assistance from the Departments will be responsible to ensure capital assets are tagged, whenever feasible, inventoried, and properly accounted for by fund and asset category. It is the responsibility of City Department Heads to ensure that proper budgeting purchasing guidelines are followed, and to ensure that capital assets are adequately controlled and used for appropriate City purposes.
The City of Laguna Beach’s Capital Asset Policy has two (2) objectives:
1. Accounting and Financial Reporting: To accurately account for City assets in financial reports issued to the City Council and external reporting agencies.
2. Safeguarding: The City has fiduciary responsibility to establish systems and procedures to prevent its assets from loss and or theft.
PROCEDURES
Accounting and Financial Reporting
In general, all assets, including land, building and improvements, office equipment and machinery, furniture and fixtures, equipment, machinery and tools, automotive equipment, infrastructure, and sewer plant and lines with an original cost in excess of $10,000 and a useful life of three or more will be subject to capitalization. All costs associated with the purchase or construction shall be considered, including ancillary costs such as freight and transportation charges, site preparation expenditures, installation charges, professional fees, and legal costs directly attributable to asset acquisition.
Specific capitalization requirements are identified below:
a. The capitalization threshold is applied to individual units of fixed assets. For example, ten chairs purchased through a single purchase order each costing $600 will not qualify for capitalization even though the total cost of $ $11,000 exceeds the threshold of $ $10,000. 3 Attachment 1
3 of 212
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY MANUAL
CHAPTER ONE
FINANCE
POLICY 1-10
b. Repair costs for infrastructure will generally not be subject to capitalization unless the repair extends the useful life of the asset.
c. Capital projects will be capitalized as “construction in progress” until the projected completed. Costs to be capitalized include direct costs, such as labor, materials, and transportation and indirect costs such as engineering and construction management. d. All computer and computer related equipment will be recorded and controlled as inventory and not depreciated. Constant change in technology, software demands, and system configurations cause this asset class to be obsolete before it reaches its useful life.
Inventory Control Level - Safeguarding
City assets that do not meet the criteria are accounted for as inventory. These assets are accounted for and controlled through the same systems and procedures used to account and control assets subject to capitalization. Department Heads are responsible for safeguarding assets under their control from theft or loss. However, the Finance Department is responsible for establishing and maintaining systems and procedures that enable Department to properly safeguard assets.
The objectives of a physical inventory are to ensure that the fixed assets are recorded in the system physically exists; to detect whether unrecorded or improperly recorded transactions have occurred, and to identify any excess, defective or obsolete assets on hand.
Departments shall notify the Finance Department of all related transactions such as trade-ins, returns, and item disposed of as junk.
The Finance Department will send an Inventory Listing to each department at least once every two years. This list shall be compared to items physically on hand. The operating division in cooperation with Finance shall reconcile any differences between the system and the inventory and make corrections as necessary.
Donated Assets
Capital assets acquired by gift, donation, or payment of a nominal sum shall be recorded and tagged.
This also holds true for assets purchased with grant monies. The operating department that becomes the beneficiary of any such assets shall notify the Finance Department. Donated assets shall be reported at their estimated fair market value at the time of receipt.
Construction Actively in Progress (CAIP)
A CAIP asset reflects the cost of construction work undertaken, but not yet completed. For construction in progress assets, no depreciation is recorded until the asset is placed in service.
When construction is completed, the asset should be reclassified as building, building improvement, land improvements, equipment, etc., and should be capitalized and depreciated. 4 4 of 212
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY MANUAL
CHAPTER ONE
FINANCE
POLICY 1-10
Depreciation
Capital assets used in operations are depreciated over their estimated useful lives. Depreciation is computed using the straight-line method. Depreciation is charged as an expense against operations and accumulated depreciation is reported on the respective statement of net position. The ranges of lives used for deprecation for each fixed asset class are as follows:
Depreciation/ Assets Depreciation/Amortization Life Years Storm Drains 40
Beach Stairways 30
Streets 50
Sidewalks 50
Sewer Line Relining 40
Sewer Lines 50
Nuisance Water Diversion Units 30
Buildings and Improvements 30
Office Equipment and Machines 5
Furniture and Fixtures 3 to 8
Equipment, Machinery and Tools 3 to 8
Automotive Equipment 2 to 20
Leases Shorter of the lease term or the useful life
of the underlying asset
Subscription Based Information
Technology Lease Arrangements
Shorter of the subscription term or the
useful life of the underlying IT asset
Disposal/Surplus Property
All assets that have reached the end of their useful life and have a zero ($0) book value for reporting purposes will be accounted for under the “Surplus” category. Surplus property, with the approval of the Finance Director, can be donated to a school or non-profit agency, sold to any public or private person or entity, transferred from one department to another department, recycled or disposed of as junk to a landfill or other appropriate waste removal facility. Surplus property for the purposes of this policy includes furniture, fixtures, machinery, equipment and obsolete computer equipment.
It is the Department’s responsibility to appraise the value of surplus properties and fixed assets. City Manager approval will be required for scrapping of surplus items with a value greater than $1,000.
If it is determined that the property sold as a unit has a value less than $1,000, the property may be disposed of in a manner approved by the City Manager. If the appraised value of the surplus properties and the capital assets, either sold as a unit or as a single piece, has a market value of $10,000 or more, the property must be disposed by advertisement to the general public or auction companies. The City Clerk is authorized to advertise such surplus property for sale to the general 5 5 of 212
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY MANUAL
CHAPTER ONE
FINANCE
POLICY 1-10
public and auction companies. Do not bring the surplus properties/fixed assets to the Finance Department.
All items sold, traded-in, scrapped, abandoned or in any way removed from service during the current fiscal year are classified as disposals.
Property should not be transferred, turned-in or disposed of without prior approval of the proper Department Head. The operating departments shall be responsible for initiating the transfer/disposition process. The form “Request to Transfer/Retire Surplus Property” shall be completed by the operating department and submitted to the Finance Department.
The Department then arranges the disposition or transfer of the fixed asset. Each disposal shall be recorded with the date, method, and authorization for such disposition. The Department shall then report the transfer or disposition of the asset to the Finance Department.
Lease Materiality
In accordance with Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB) Statement No. 87, Leases, a lease is defined as a contract that conveys control of the right to use another entity’s nonfinancial asset (the underlying asset) as specified in the contract for a period of time in an exchange or exchange-like transactions (i.e., buildings, land, vehicles, and equipment). Any contract that meets this definition should be accounted for under the lease guidance as identified in GASB Statement No. 87. Subject to certain provisions and exceptions noted in the guidance, leases are generally reported as follows in a government’s external financial statements:
Lessee: A lessee should recognize a lease liability and a lease asset at the commencement of the lease term. A lessee should reduce the lease liability as payments are made and recognize an outflow of resources (i.e., expense) for interest on the liability. The lessee should amortize the lease asset in a systematic and rational manner over the shorter of the lease term or the useful life of the underlying asset.
Lessor: A lessor should recognize a lease receivable and a deferred inflow of resources at the commencement of the lease term. A lessor should recognize interest revenue on the lease receivable and an inflow of resource (i.e., revenue) from the deferred inflows of resources in a systematic and rational manner over the term of the lease.
Effective July 1, 2024, the City has established a materiality dollar threshold for determining the inclusion or exclusion of leases in the external financial statements, both as lessee and lessor. At the commencement of the lease term, City will analyze the terms and provisions of the lease agreement (contract) in order to calculate the value of the underlying asset.
An individual lease agreement (contract) that generates a right-to-use underlying asset value calculated at greater than or equal to $25,000 will be included in the external financial statements. 6 6 of 212
ADMINISTRATIVE POLICY MANUAL
CHAPTER ONE
FINANCE
POLICY 1-10
A lease agreement (contract) with an underlying asset value less than $25,000 may be included in the external financial statements at the discretion of City Finance Department should it be determined that its exclusion might otherwise cause the financial statements to be incomplete or misleading in some manner.
Subscription-based Information Technology Arrangements (SBITA) Materiality In accordance with Governmental Accounting Standard Board (GASB) Statement No. 96, Subscription-Based Information Technology Arrangements, a SBITA is defined as a contract that conveys control of the right to use another party’s (a SBITA vendor’s) information technology (IT) software, alone or in combination with tangible capital assets (the underlying IT assets), as specified in the contract for a period of time in an exchange or exchange-like transactions. Any contract that meets this definition should be accounted for under the SBITA guidance as identified in GASB Statement No. 96.
Subject to certain provisions and exceptions noted in the GASB guidance, SBITAs are generally reported as a right-to-use subscription asset – an intangible asset – and a corresponding subscription liability in a government’s external financial statements:
Effective July 1, 2024, the City has established a materiality dollar threshold for determining the inclusion or exclusion of SBITAs in the external financial statements. At the commencement of the SBITA term, the City will analyze the terms and provisions of the agreement (contract) in order to calculate the fixed and fixed in-substance future payments to the end of the subscription term.
An individual agreement (contract) that generates future payments over the subscription term calculated at greater than or equal to $25,000 will be included in the external financial statements.
An agreement (contract) that generates future payments over the subscription term calculated at less than $25,000 may be included in the external financial statements at the discretion of the City’s Finance Department should it be determined that its exclusion might otherwise cause the financial statements to be incomplete or misleading in some manner. The subscription asset shall be amortized over the shorter of the subscription term or the useful life of the underlying IT asset. 7 7 of 212
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
14 SUBJECT: CONDITIONAL WAIVER OF CITY FEES FOR THREE IN-LIEU PARKING CERTIFICATES AT 224/226 OCEAN AVENUE
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Grant a conditional waiver of fees in the amount of $69,000 for three in-lieu parking certificates for the property located at 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue in consideration of the public benefit of increasing business development, employment opportunities, and the City’s tax base, on the condition that the property owner obtain an effective coastal development permit for the three parking certificates for such property; and
2. Find that the action, as described in the Environmental Analysis section of this staff report, is covered by the commonsense exemption under 14 CCR Section 15061(b)(3) and the existing facilities exemption under 14 CCR Section 15301.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
The property at 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue has remained vacant for seven years in part due to parking constraints created by a private easement agreement recorded in the 1990s, which allocates six of the site’s eight off-street parking spaces to the adjacent property at 222 Ocean Avenue. As a result, the building has been limited to two exclusive parking spaces, restricting its ability to attract a viable business tenant. The property was previously occupied by a dry cleaner and a jewelry store.
To resolve this issue of parking, City staff recommends that the City Council waive the fees in the amount of $69,000 for three in-lieu parking certificates, which would not only resolve the parking issue for the property owner at 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue and the neighboring property owner of 222 Ocean Avenue (Piatta), but it would allow Rivian to proceed with its lease of 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue and facilitate the renovation of a long-vacant building that has been a focus of downtown revitalization efforts. This recommended action also aligns with the City’s Economic Development Incentive Policy.
DISCUSSION
The property owner of 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue has submitted a Commercial Planning Application seeking three parking in-lieu certificates for 224 and 226 Ocean and a waiver of fees for the in-lieu certificates to resolve the property’s parking constrains. Pursuant to the City’s Zoning Code, the City Council may grant relief from some parking requirements if the property owner contributes to parking by purchasing in-lieu parking certificates equivalent to the number of spaces required for a development up to a maximum of three certificates for any one site. (See LBMC Section 25.52.006(E).) The City’s Planning Department is processing the coastal development permit for the three in-lieu parking certificates, which will be heard by the Planning Commission at a future date as to whether the findings for the coastal development permit can be made. In the interim, the Applicant is requesting that the City Council waive the fees for the in-leu certificates in the event that the coastal development permit is granted. 1 of 228
CONDITIONAL WAIVER OF CITY FEES FOR THREE IN-LIEU PARKING CERTIFICATES AT 224/226 OCEAN AVENUE
October 28, 2025
The City recognizes the importance of fostering a strong, resilient local economy and seeks to encourage business development, increase employment opportunities, and enhance the City’s tax base. On February 25, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25.008 establishing the Economic Development Policy and Related Economic Incentives (“Economic Development Policy”) to encourage existing and new business development in the City. (Attachment 2.) The Economic Development Policy contemplates certain economic incentives for new and existing businesses subject to certain restrictions and limitations. While Applicant’s request does not fall directly within the Economic Development Policy, which is focused on serving businesses as opposed to property owners, City staff believes that the goals and intent of the Economic Development Policy is served by granting the waiver of the fees for three in lieu parking certificates.
City staff recommends that the City Council grant the waiver of the fees for the three in-lieu parking certificates in a total amount of $69,000 in fees (three certificates valued at $23,000 each) based on the public benefit of increasing business development, employment opportunities, and the City’s tax base. This action would resolve the parking issue for the property owner at 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue and the neighboring property owner of 222 Ocean Avenue (Piatta), allow Rivian to proceed with its lease of 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue, and facilitate the renovation of a long-vacant building that has been a focus of downtown revitalization efforts.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Per the City’s fee schedule, each in-lieu parking certificate is valued at $23,000. The applicant is requesting three certificates for the property at 224 and 226 Ocean Avenue, resulting in a total fee obligation of $69,000. Staff recommend that these fees be waived in recognition of the public benefit associated with reactivating a long-vacant commercial property in the Downtown.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) because it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment. Here, the waiver of fees for three parking in lieu certificates and potential issuance of three in-lieu parking certificates will not cause any physical changes to 224 or 226 Ocean Avenue.
In the alternative, the recommended action is categorically exempt pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 (Existing Facilities) because the parking in lieu certificates pertain to the ongoing operation, permitting, or minor alteration of existing private structures, involving negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. The site currently has two exclusive parking spaces and this action of waiving three parking in lieu certificates and the potential issuance of such certificates simply confirms and continues the existing physical conditions of the site.
Upon taking the recommended action, City staff will cause to be filed within five calendar days a notice of exemption with the County and State Clearinghouse.
ATTACHMENTS
2 of 228
CONDITIONAL WAIVER OF CITY FEES FOR THREE IN-LIEU PARKING CERTIFICATES AT 224/226 OCEAN AVENUE
October 28, 2025
1. Commercial Planning Application
2. City Council Resolution No. 25.008 (Economic Development Policy and Related Economic Incentives) Submitted By:
.David A Kiff
Approved:
.David A Kiff
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Jeremy Frimond, Assistant City Manager Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney 3 of 228
PLANNING APPLICATION COMMERCIAL
I. INSTRUCTION Use this application to apply for Multi-Family (3+ Units) and Non-Residential Projects II. PROJECT LOCATION
Address: ~ 2 'f-2. 2.6 °~ e~ll/ AV 1=_
Ill. CONTACT INFORMATION
Applicant Information l.A6-ttN I/ OC .E' ~/V
Company Name: ~~6ft:~T [~'5 f./..C I
Mailing Address: f.O. 'ije,, X q13
Phone#: ______ ___________ _
Receive project updates by email? K.ves • No
Applicant Representative (Contact Person) - 5/1 "? ~
APN(s): - ~~'{~/_-_ Z_S'_§"_-_O_G __
Contact Name: /(,£" ,,,u r R q 5f' ,e-L(
City/State/Zip: LAG-qA/A '8r.e ,4 cfl C ,4
Email Address: o/<..GS~
flf5J € L LP~o? ~/?7 IEJ@ ~,4;q7/IL/Afi:;.
--- 'v.£)'
4r 14 ~uv;;
All communications will be sent to the individual identified below.
Company Name: ______ ________ _ Contact Name: _______________ _ Mailing Address: ____________ _ City/State/Zip: ____________ _ Phone#: ___ ______________ _ Email Add ress: ______________ _ Property Owner-$';1/r/C J(/; '4-~6 v£ . Contact Name: _ _ _________ ____ _ Receive project updates by email? • Yes • No Mail ing Address: _____________ _ City/State/Zip: _____________ _ Phone#: ________________ _ Email Add ress: ______________ _
FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
• Adminstrative Use Permit Design Review Sign Permit ZPC#:
Coastal Development Permit • Administrative • Ad ministrative Zoning Designation:
• Exemption • Planning Com mission • Mast er Sign Prog ram General Plan Designation:
• Ad m inistrative • Extension of Approva l • Planning Commission • Non-Appea lable Zone • General Plan Amendment Subdivision Environmental Review • Approval In-Concept D Local Coastal Program • Fi nal Map D Exempt • Lot Line Adjustment • Environmental Review Required • Maj or - Appealable Zone • Planning Commision • SB 9 Urban Lot Spl it • M inor - Ap pealable Zone Interpretation
• Tentative Map A m end m ent r - - - - - , • Tentative Pa rcel/Tract Map • Concept Review • Revocable Encroachment Temporary Use Permit I I Conditional Use Permit Permit • Director
• Intensification of Use D Road Extension • Planning Commission I Date Received Stamp I • Minor
• A m endment/ Extension of Approva l • Sidewalk Vendor Permit • Variance I I • Specific Plan Amendment D Zone Change/Ordinance
Amendment L - - - - - .J
Arc hitectural plans will be posted on the City's website as pa rt of the public hearing agenda packet fo r the Design Review process. Please notify the City if you do not authorize posting the architectural plans on line for public viewing. However, note that three full sets of 24x36 plans will be required at the time of sched uling for Design Review if authorization is not given. Failure to notify the City otherwise will allow the City assumption t hat authorization has been g ranted.
Questions? Contact the Planning Division at (949) 497-0713 4 of 228
PLANNING APPLICATION
IV. AFFIDAVIT
l. I hereby certify that all of the information contained in th is application is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true and correctly represented and I have read and understand Chapter 25.05 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. I understand that additional data and information may be required prior to final action on this application.
2. I understand that there are no assurances at any time, implicitly or otherwise, regarding final staff recommendations to the decision-making body about this application or the determination of any decision-making body.
3. I understand any changes to the project may require a new application and payment of additional or new fees.
4. If this application is approved, I hereby certify that I w ill comply with all conditions attached to the approval action. I understand that fa ilure to comply with any conditions shall constitute grounds for the revocation or modification of the approval.
5. If this application is approved, I hereby understand that a standard condition of approval w ill be imposed requiring me to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify, at my expense, the City, the City Council and other City bodies and members thereof, officials, officers, employees, agents, and representatives from and against any and all third-party claims, actions, or proceedings to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval, or any associated determination made pursuant to the Cal ifornia Environmental Quality Act, including the City's defense costs and expenses as well as costs, expenses, or damages a court may require the City to pay as a result of such claim, action, or proceeding.
6. I understand that it is my responsibility to ensure that discrepancies do not exist betw een the project's description on the permit, the design/architectu ral plans, and the structural plans.
If discrepancies exist between the design/architectural plans and structural plans, the design/ architectural plans shall take precedence. Ultimately, the scope of work, as described on the permit that authorizes construction, takes precedence over the plans. If there is a discrepancy betw een the plans and the description on the permit , the permit governs.
7. The property owner further certifies that they are the legal owner of the property and consents to the filing of this application.
APPLICANT'S SIGNATURE
V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
VALUATION ($ Estimate) -~j(/ ____ /~//_,__ __
OWNER'S SIGNATURE
11-/4/1/'l'//YG /A--'G- .,,N? ~ "1 U~
in the Letter of
l</N6-
f'l}L.. tc..y
Questions? Contact the Planning Division at (949) 497-0713 5 of 228
6 of 228
7 of 228
8 of 228
9 of 228
10 of 228
11 of 228
12 of 228
13 of 228
14 of 228
15 of 228
16 of 228
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
15 SUBJECT: KXFM OAK STREET HALLOWEEN EVENT – WAIVER OF CITY RESOURCE FEES; CEQA DETERMINATION
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Confirm/Authorize the waiver of the application fee ($817) and city costs ($1,626) for this event; and
2. Find that the action of a fee waiver is exempt from California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to State CEQA guidelines section 15340(E)).
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
The City received a request from KXFM Radio to temporarily close a portion of Oak Street (between Glenneyre Street and the first alley toward Pacific Coast Highway) on Thursday, October 30, 2025, from 2:00 p.m. to 6:00 p.m., for a community Halloween event. While the City has historically supported the annual Oak Street Halloween Event, the proposed KXFM event is outside the scope of that regular Citysupported activity. To safely accommodate this event, the use of City resources is required, including Park Rangers, and Public Works support. City staff has administratively approved the Temporary Use Permit for this event, as discussed in more detail below, asks the City Council to approve the waiver of costs associated with the City resources deployed to safely manage the event.
DISCUSSION
The proposed KXFM Halloween event will take place one day prior to Halloween and is expected to draw a moderate level of pedestrian and vehicular activity along Oak Street. Given the location and timing of the event, the safe accommodation of both vehicles and pedestrians requires the deployment of City resources to ensure proper traffic control, emergency access, and overall public safety.
To safely manage the temporary street closure, the Police Department will coordinate overall traffic control and ensure emergency access is maintained throughout the duration of the event. Two large Public Works vehicles will be positioned, in coordination with Police Department staff, at each end of the closure area to block the street. These vehicles can be easily moved in the event of an emergency to allow for ingress or egress. Two Public Works maintenance employees will be assigned to staff the vehicles and assist with setup and breakdown of the closure, with an estimated on-site time of five hours, inclusive of pre-event preparation and post-event removal.
In addition, two Park Rangers will be stationed at the intersection of Glenneyre Street and Oak Street to provide pedestrian and traffic control at this critical location. Glenneyre Street will remain open to vehicular traffic, and due to the expected increase in pedestrian activity associated with Halloween, maintaining a visible City presence at this intersection is necessary to ensure safety for both pedestrians and motorists.
The total cost for staffing the event is estimated at $1,626.88. 1 of 231
KXFM OAK STREET HALLOWEEN EVENT – CONSIDERATION OF WAIVER OF CITY RESOURCE FEES; CEQA DETERMINATION
October 28, 2025
Following the adoption of the new Master Fee Schedule in mid-August 2025, the fee for a Temporary Use Permit (TUP) increased to $817. Recognizing that the City is in the process of developing a Special Event Permit framework to better address community and civic-based events, staff has been administratively waiving the TUP fee for events that are community-oriented, open to the public, and free of charge. This interim policy allows the City to equitably support civic activities while the new permit system is under development and pending Council consideration.
In keeping with that approach, staff has administratively approved and waived the TUP fee for the KXFM Halloween event, as it meets the criteria of a civic-based community event. However, staff has not waived fees associated with the use of City resources, such as Public Works vehicles, maintenance staff, and Park Ranger personnel. Determination of whether to recover or waive these costs is a policy matter for City Council consideration.
Due to the limited time between the preparation of this report and the scheduled October 30th event date, staff has issued the TUP with a condition requiring the applicant to provide a $1,650 deposit to cover anticipated City resource expenses. Should the Council direct staff to waive the resource fees, the deposit will be returned following the event. Conversely, if the Council directs staff to recover City costs, those charges will be applied to the deposit. If event setup and breakdown require less time than estimated, staff will process a refund of any remaining balance.
The City continues to refine its approach to community event management and fee recovery to better distinguish between civic-oriented activities and commercial uses. The forthcoming Special Event Permit program will provide a more tailored and transparent framework for evaluating these types of requests.
Until such a system is formally adopted, requests of this nature will continue to be processed through the TUP process, with administrative discretion applied to ensure consistency and fairness in the treatment of community events.
We as staff have not seen an easy way to address proposals like this. Cities across the region struggle with requests by well-respected, and well-meaning community organizers when weighed against the concept that we as a City government also operate City events, and we have a formal calendaring and budgeting process by which Council considers them.
A good goal may be to have an annual review process for fee waivers and requests to absorb costs so that all may be weighed not in isolation or one-off requests, but in conjunction with both the Budget and all others who seek financial assistance.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
Whether fees are waived or not, the City’s anticipated costs for this will roughly be $1,600, notwithstanding the time to review and process the TUP. While the event is set for hours within a work day (versus an evening or weekend), the event will cause our staff to redirect work that day.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
2 of 231
KXFM OAK STREET HALLOWEEN EVENT – CONSIDERATION OF WAIVER OF CITY RESOURCE FEES; CEQA DETERMINATION
October 28, 2025
Pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15304(e) (Minor Temporary Use of Land), the proposed action is categorically exempt from the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Section 15304(e) exempts minor, short-term uses of land that have negligible or no permanent effects on the environment.
The temporary closure of a portion of Oak Street to accommodate a community Halloween event is a limited-duration activity occurring within an existing public right-of-way. The event will not result in any permanent physical changes or environmental impacts, and all streets and facilities will return to their original condition following the event. Accordingly, the proposed action qualifies for exemption under CEQA Guidelines Section 15304(e).
ATTACHMENTS
None
Submitted By: Matthew Schneider Approved: .David A Kiff Matthew Schneider, Director of
Community Development
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Matthew Schneider, Director of Community
Development
3 of 231
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
16 SUBJECT: VISIT LAGUNA BEACH SERVICES AGREEMENT
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Approve and authorize the City Manager to execute the Agreement for Services between the City of Laguna Beach and Visit Laguna Beach, in accordance with the Property and Business Improvements District Law of 1994; and
2. Find that the action is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
This report recommends that the City Council approve the attached Agreement for Services (“Agreement”) between the City of Laguna Beach and Visit Laguna Beach (sometimes referred to herein as “VLB”), the designated Owners’ Association of the Laguna Beach Tourism Marketing District (the “LBTMD”).
The City Council approved the renewal of the LBTMD and adopted the updated Management District Plan (the “Plan”) on June 10, 2025. Both the LBTMD and the Plan were approved pursuant to the Property and Business Improvements District Law of 1994 (Cal. Sts. & Hwy. Code 36600 et seq., the “1994 Law”).
Pursuant to the terms of the 1994 Law, where a management plan designates an owners’ association to provide certain improvements, maintenance, or activities--as does the Plan, here--the city and owners' association must enter an agreement to further specify the provision of services identified in the management plan.
Accordingly, the attached Agreement is provided for the City Council’s consideration as an operational step in the post-decision phase of the renewed LBTMD and Plan (Attachment 1). Approval of this Agreement furthers compliance with the City’s administrative responsibilities under the 1994 Law, including provisions to support fiscal oversight and ensure compliance with the authorized use of assessment funds, and details Visit Laguna Beach’s implementation of the programs and activities identified in the Plan. The proposed Agreement uses the City’s standard form services agreement, as modified for the application in the context of the LBTMD and Plan, which also includes provisions for insurance and indemnity, amongst others.
DISCUSSION
On June 10, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25.038 to renew the LBTMD for a ten-year term beginning July 1, 2025. As required by the 1994 Law and the adopted Plan, the City must enter into an agreement with Visit Laguna Beach, the designated Owners’ Association, to provide the services identified in the Plan (see Streets and Highways Code section 36651).
Services Agreement
The proposed Agreement between the City and Visit Laguna Beach sets forth the responsibilities and conditions under which Visit Laguna Beach will implement the programs and activities described in the 1 of 300
VISIT LAGUNA BEACH SERVICES AGREEMENT
October 28, 2025
Plan, which directly benefit assessed lodging businesses by increasing overnight visitation and room night sales. More specifically, the key terms of the Agreement are summarized as follows:
• Term: through June 30, 2035
• Services Provided (Based on Laguna Beach Tourism Market Plan (Attachment 2) o Sales, Marketing & Communications: efforts to increase awareness of overnight visitation and room stays.
o Cultural & Environmental Stewardship: including for or related to programs that enhance Laguna Beach’s cultural and natural assets to improve visitor experience and sustainability. o Arts & Cultural Programming: including for or related to support and promotion of public art, cultural programming, and community arts initiatives. o Administration and Operations: Management and oversight functions necessary to support all LBTMD programs, including staffing, office operations, accounting, legal, and insurance costs; coordination with the City and stakeholders; and compliance with audits, transparency, and reporting obligations under the Brown Act and Public Records Act. • Transmittal of TBID Collected Payments: Upon receipt of collected LBTMD funds, the City shall transmit to VLB collected LBTMD assessments within 30 days of the date of collection. These funds are used for the purposes of providing the above-referenced services, which must directly benefit assessed lodging businesses by increasing overnight visitation and room night sales. In furtherance thereof, and for the avoidance of doubt as to the requirement set forth in the Plan, VLB shall pay (either through a return remittance or a further agreement of the parties for the City to retain and/or disburse funds, as appropriate) in the amounts and to the entities identified in the Plan, for the purposes of further provisions of services, including but not limited to the City’s Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund.
• Reporting Requirements: VLB shall submit an Annual Report to the City Council, detailing program activities, expenditures, and projected budgets for the services provided. With City staff, VLB shall also participate in a biennial performance review to assess effectiveness of programming, including in particular the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship program-related services provided.
• Standard Miscellaneous and Administrative Provisions: These provisions include, but not limited to, things like indemnification; insurance requirements and limits (general liability, auto, workers’ compensation); compliance with the Public Records Act for, and the City’s right to review certain materials, non-discrimination requirements; subcontracting requirements; dispute resolution, venue and jurisdiction for legal challenges, modifications to the Agreement, survival, and severability.
2 of 300
VISIT LAGUNA BEACH SERVICES AGREEMENT
October 28, 2025
In short, the Agreement ensures that assessment revenues are used solely for purposes identified in the Plan, including marketing, cultural programming, and stewardship activities that benefit assessed lodging business, and reflects the City’s role in fiscal oversight to monitor compliance, including annual reporting requirements and financial transparency provisions.
Update on the Visit Laguna Board Councilmember Representative Appointments When the Council renewed the District in June via Resolution No. 25.038, amendments were made to the Plan about the composition of the Visit Laguna Board. More specifically, the City requires 25% Board representation, with the first two representatives being City Councilmembers. At its December meeting, along with all the City Council committee, boards, and liaison appointments, the City Council will be asked to designate its Visit Laguna Board Member representatives.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
There is no fiscal impact associated with this action. Payments to Visit Laguna Beach are funded through LBTMD assessments as outlined in the Management District Plan.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it does not involve a commitment to any physical change in the environment. The action involves approval of an administrative agreement to implement the Management District Plan for the Laguna Beach Tourism Marketing District, which does not authorize any specific development or physical activity. Therefore, it is not subject to environmental review under CEQA.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Visit Laguna Beach Services Agreement
2. Resolution #25.038 Laguna Beach Tourism Management District Management Plan Submitted By: Approved:
. , for
Gavin Curran, Assistant City
Manager
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Gavin Curran, Assistant City Manager
3 of 300
Attachment 1
-1- SERVICES AGREEMENT
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
SERVICES AGREEMENT
1. PARTIES AND DATE.
This Agreement #__________ is made and entered into this _____ day of ________, 2025, by and between the City of Laguna Beach, a municipal corporation organized under the laws of the State of California with its principal place of business at 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, California 92651 ("CITY") and Visit Laguna Beach, a private nonprofit corporation, with its principal place of business at 381 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, CA 92651 (“CONSULTANT").
CITY and CONSULTANT are sometimes individually referred to herein as "Party" and collectively as "Parties."
2. RECITALS.
2.1 On June 10, 2025, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 25.038, hereinafter the "Resolution," renewing the Laguna Beach Tourism Marketing District, hereinafter "LBTMD," in accordance with the provisions of the Property and Business Improvement District Law of 1994, Streets and Highways Code section 36600 et seq. (hereinafter the "1994 Law").
2.2 CONSULTANT was designated in the Resolution and LBTMD Management District Plan (“Plan”), as the Owners' Association, in accordance with Streets and Highways Code section 36612, which is the entity responsible for administering and/or implementing the improvements, maintenance, and activities specified in the Plan. The Plan is attached hereto and incorporated herein as Exhibit “A,”
2.3 Streets and Highways Code section 36651 (as part of the 1994 Law) requires a contract between the CITY and CONSULTANT for the provision of services, as identified in the Plan.
2.4 CONSULTANT desires to perform and assume responsibility for the provision of those certain services required by the CITY on the terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement, as originally identified in the Plan (“Project”), as funded by the assessments levied through the LBTMD (“LBTMD Assessments”). CONSULTANT represents that it is experienced in providing the services identified in the Plan, is in good standing in the State of California as a nonprofit corporation, and is familiar with the plans of the CITY.
2.5 CITY desires to engage CONSULTANT to render such services for the Project, as set forth in this Agreement, in furtherance of implementing the Plan. 4 of 300
Attachment 1
-2- SERVICES AGREEMENT
3. TERMS.
3.1 Scope of Services and Term.
3.1.1 General Scope of Services. CONSULTANT promises and agrees to furnish to CITY all labor, materials, tools, equipment, services, and incidental and customary work necessary to fully and adequately supply the services necessary for the Project ("Services"). The Services are more particularly described in Exhibit "B", attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. All Services shall be subject to, and performed in accordance with, this Agreement, the exhibits attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations.
3.1.1.1 Extra Work. At any time during the term of this Agreement, City may request that CONSULTANT perform Extra Work. As used herein, "Extra Work" means any work which is determined by CITY to be necessary for the proper completion of the Project, but which the Parties did not reasonably anticipate would be necessary at the execution of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall not perform Extra Work under this Agreement without written authorization from CITY. Extra Work shall be funded through the Visit Laguna Assessment Payments and shall only be required in the event there are sufficient funds in the Visit Laguna Assessment Payment available to fund the Extra Work.
3.1.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be from the effective date of the Plan to the expiration of the LBTMD on June 30, 2035, unless the LBTMD is earlier disestablished, in accordance with the 1994 Law and the Plan, in which event this Agreement shall terminate upon the effective date of the LBTMD disestablishment. This Agreement may also be earlier terminated as otherwise provided herein. CONSULTANT shall continue to provide the Services on an ongoing basis for the term of this Agreement, and shall meet any other established schedules and deadlines, as may be required by CITY.
3.2 Distribution and Use of LBTMD Assessments.
3.2.1 LBTMD Assessments. Assessments levied in accordance with the Plan that are collected by CITY (“LBTMD Assessments”) shall be used for the purposes identified in the Plan. The LBTMD Assessment revenues shall be used exclusively to benefit assessed lodging business by increased demand for overnight visitation, as set forth in the Plan and in accordance with the 1994 Law. In accordance with the Plan, CONSULTANT is responsible for overseeing the use of the LBTMD Assessments to ensure all such funds are used for programming, including Services, targeted exclusively to benefit assessed lodging business by increased demand for overnight visitation.
3.2.2 Receipt and Distribution of LBTMD Assessments. LBTMD Assessment revenues are initially received by CITY and shall be used for the purposes stated, and by the entities identified and in the amounts specified, in the Plan (each separate payment to the identified entity is an “Assessment Payment”). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the CITY is responsible for transferring only those LBTMD Assessment revenues actually received. With the exception of the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment (as defined below) for Fiscal Years 2025-26 and 2026-27, and the Arts Programming Payments (as defined below) for Fiscal Year 2025-26, all Assessment Payments shall be proportionately made subject to the LBTMD Assessment revenues actually received.
5 of 300
Attachment 1
-3- SERVICES AGREEMENT
3.2.2.1 Visit Laguna Assessment Payment. The Assessment Payment distributed to CONSULTANT to be used to fund the performance of the Services, and all other requirements of the Plan required of CONSULTANT, shall be herein referred to as the “Visit Laguna Assessment Payment.” For the avoidance of doubt, the amount of the Visit Laguna Assessment Payment shall be equivalent to the cumulative amount of the sales, marketing, and communications category; administration and operations category; and the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship category (except as limited by the payment of the CITY’s Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment, as defined below) established in the Plan, as such amounts may from time-to-time vary in accordance with the Plan. CITY shall transfer the Visit Laguna Assessment Payment to CONSULTANT within thirty (30) days of collection.
3.2.2.2 Arts Programming Assessment Payments. In accordance with the Plan, CONSULTANT agrees to pay, through the LBTMD Assessment revenues, an Assessment Payment for arts programming, as identified in the Plan, for the Arts Commission, Laguna College of Arts & Design, Laguna Playhouse, Laguna Art Museum, and Cultural Arts Grants (collectively, the “Arts Programming Assessment Payments”). For ease of administration, CONSULTANT and CITY may mutually agree, by separate writing, that CITY shall make the Arts Programming Assessment Payments directly to each of the entities identified in the Plan, in lieu of the Arts Programming Assessment Payments being transferred to CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT thereafter making the Arts Programming Assessment Payments directly to each identified entity. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Arts Programming Assessment Payments shall be made to each of the identified entities within thirty (30) days of collection.
3.2.2.3 Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment. In accordance with the Plan, CONSULTANT agrees to pay, through the LBTMD Assessments, an Assessment Payment to CITY’s Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund in accordance with the Plan (“the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment”). For the avoidance of doubt, the amounts of the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment shall be as follows: for Fiscal Year 2025-2026, $260,000; for Fiscal Year 2026-27, $500,000; for Fiscal Year 2026-27 and all fiscal years thereafter, the payment amount is as set forth in the Plan, with an annual percentage adjustment identified therein. For ease of administration, CONSULTANT and CITY may mutually agree, by separate writing, that CITY retain the amount for the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment in lieu of the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment being transferred to CONSULTANT and CONSULTANT thereafter transferring the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment back to CITY. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship Fund Assessment Payment is due to CITY within thirty (30) days of collection.
3.3 Accounting Records; Reviews and Reporting; Audits.
3.3.1 Accounting Records. CONSULTANT shall maintain full and adequate records in accordance with CITY requirements to show the actual costs incurred by the CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement and the Plan, and to evidence compliance with the 1994 Law. All such records shall be clearly identifiable. CONSULTANT shall allow a representative of CITY during normal business hours to examine, audit, and make transcripts or copies of such records and any other documents created pursuant to this Agreement, within three (3) weeks of any such request. CONSULTANT shall allow inspection of all work, data, documents, 6 of 300
Attachment 1
-4- SERVICES AGREEMENT
proceedings, and activities related to the Agreement for a period of three (3) years from the date of final transfer of the Visit Laguna Assessment Payment under this Agreement.
3.3.2 Reporting and Performance Review.
3.3.2.1 Annual Report. In accordance with the 1994 Law, CONSULTANT shall prepare and submit an Annual Report to the City Council each year of operation of the LBTMD. The CITY’s remittance of LBTMD Assessment revenues each fiscal year, as set forth in Section 3.2.2, is subject to this annual reporting requirement.
3.3.2.2 Biennial Performance Review. In accordance with the Plan, a performance review shall be conducted every two years during the term of this Agreement, commencing in FY 2026-27. As further delineated in the Plan, the review shall be conducted by a joint committee of CITY and CONSULTANT representatives to evaluate the effectiveness and impact of LBTMD programs, including in particular the Cultural and Environmental Stewardship initiatives. Such review shall also confirm compliance with the terms of this Agreement and that all Services hereunder are being satisfactorily performed, including without limitation that CONSULTANT’s sales, marketing, and communications programming through the use of social media and advertising aligns with the expectations of CITY. CITY and CONSULTANT shall endeavor in good faith to reach consensus on whether Services under this Agreement are being satisfactorily performed and whether adjustments to program priorities, funding allocations, or performance metrics are necessary, to the extent permitted by the Plan and the 1994 Law. If consensus cannot be reached, CITY may require CONSULTANT to prepare a plan, within sixty (60) days, specifying measurable steps and timelines to address identified deficiencies (“Corrective Action Plan”). If CONSULTANT fails to implement an approved Corrective Action Plan or if deficiencies persist after a reasonable opportunity for cure, the City Council may take other actions as permitted by law, as it deems necessary, to correct such deficiencies.
3.3.3 Audits.
3.3.3.1 Performance Audit. CONSULTANT agrees to cooperate fully with CITY in the conduct of any performance audit determined necessary by the City Council to evaluate the effectiveness and efficiency of programs and expenditures funded under this Agreement. This includes timely provision of documentation, access to records, participation in interviews, and reasonable accommodation of requests from the CITY’s auditors.
3.3.3.2 Financial Audit. In light of the Annual Reporting Requirement in Section 3.2.3.2, CONSULTANT shall not be required to conduct a separate annual financial audit pursuant to this Agreement. However, if CITY has a reasonable basis to believe that expenditures have not been consistent with the Plan, the 1994 Law, or any other applicable laws, CITY may request an audit of expenditures for the period in question.
3.4 Responsibilities of Consultant.
3.4.1 Independent Contractor; Control and Payment of Subordinates. The Services shall be performed by CONSULTANT or under its supervision. CONSULTANT will determine the means, methods and details of performing the Services subject to the requirements of this Agreement and the Plan. CITY engages CONSULTANT on an independent contractor basis and not as an employee. Any personnel performing the Services on behalf of 7 of 300
Attachment 1
-5- SERVICES AGREEMENT
CONSULTANT shall not be employees of CITY and shall at all times be under CONSULTANT's exclusive direction and control. Neither CITY, nor any of its officials, officers, directors, employees or agents shall have control over the conduct of CONSULTANT or any of CONSULTANTs officers, employees or agents, except as set forth in this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall pay all wages, salaries, and other amounts due such personnel in connection with their performance of Services under this Agreement and as required by law. CONSULTANT shall be responsible for all reports and obligations respecting such additional personnel, including, but not limited to: social security taxes, income tax withholding, unemployment insurance, disability insurance, and workers' compensation insurance.
3.4.2 Schedule of Services. CONSULTANT shall perform the Services in a prompt and timely manner in furtherance of the requirements of the Plan. CONSULTANT represents that it has the professional and technical personnel required to perform the Services expeditiously. Upon request of CITY, CONSULTANT shall provide a detailed schedule of anticipated performance to establish compliance with the provision of the Services.
3.4.3 Coordination of Services. CONSULTANT agrees to work closely with City staff in the performance of Services and shall be available to CITY staff at all reasonable times.
3.4.4 Standard of Care; Performance of Employees. CONSULTANT shall perform all Services under this Agreement in a skillful and competent manner, consistent with the standards generally recognized as being employed by professionals in the same discipline in the State of California. CONSULTANT represents and maintains that it is skilled in the professional calling necessary to perform the Services. CONSULTANT warrants that all employees and subconsultants shall have sufficient skill and experience to perform the Services assigned to them. CONSULTANT represents that it, its employees and subconsultants have all licenses, permits, qualifications and approvals of whatever nature that are legally required to perform the Services, and that such licenses and approvals shall be maintained throughout the term of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall perform, at its own cost and expense and without reimbursement from CITY, any services necessary to correct errors or omissions which are caused by the CONSULTANT's failure to comply with the standard of care provided for herein.
3.4.5 Period of Performance.
3.4.5.1 Performance Time and Milestones. CONSULTANT shall perform and complete all Services under this Agreement within the term set forth in Section 3.1.2 above (“Performance Time”). CONSULTANT shall also perform the Services in strict accordance with any completion schedule or Project milestones, which may be separately agreed upon in writing by CITY and CONSULTANT (“Performance Milestones”). CONSULTANT agrees that if the Services are not completed within the aforementioned Performance Time and/or pursuant to any such Performance Milestones developed pursuant to provisions of this Agreement, it is understood, acknowledged and agreed that CITY will suffer damage.
3.4.5.2 Force Majeure. Neither City nor CONSULTANT shall be considered in default of this Agreement for delays in performance caused by circumstances beyond the reasonable control of the non-performing Party. For purposes of this Agreement, such circumstances include a Force Majeure Event. A Force Majeure Event shall mean an event that materially affects a Party’s performance and is one or more of the following: (1) Acts of God or other natural disasters; (2) terrorism or other acts of a public enemy; (3) orders of governmental 8 of 300
Attachment 1
-6- SERVICES AGREEMENT
authorities (including, without limitation, unreasonable and unforeseeable delay in the issuance of permits or approvals by governmental authorities that are required for the services); (4) strikes and other organized labor action occurring at the site and the effects thereof on the services, only to the extent such strikes and other organized labor action are beyond the control of CONSULTANT and its subcontractors, and to the extent the effects thereof cannot be avoided by use of replacement workers; and (5) pandemics, epidemics, or quarantine restrictions. For purposes of this section, “orders of governmental authorities,” includes ordinances, emergency proclamations and orders, rules to protect the public health, welfare and safety, and other actions of a public agency applicable to the services and Agreement. Should a Force Majeure Event occur, the non-performing Party shall, within a reasonable time of being prevented from performing, give written notice to the other Party describing the circumstances preventing continued performance and the efforts being made to resume performance of this Agreement.
Force Majeure Events and/or delays, regardless of the Party responsible for the delay, shall not entitle CONSULTANT to any additional compensation.
3.4.6 Laws and Regulations; Employee/Labor Certification.
3.4.6.1 Compliance with Laws. CONSULTANT shall keep itself fully informed of and in compliance with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations in any manner affecting the performance of the Plan, Project, or the Services, including all Cal/OSHA requirements, and shall give all notices required by law. CONSULTANT shall be liable for all violations of such laws and regulations in connection with the Services and this Agreement.
3.4.6.2 Employment Eligibility; Consultant. CONSULTANT certifies that it fully complies with all requirements and restrictions of state and federal law respecting employment and shall require all subconsultants and sub-subconsultants to comply with the same. CONSULTANT certifies that it is not in violation of any such law immediately preceding the date of execution of this Agreement and shall not violate any such law at any time during the term of the Agreement.
3.4.6.3 Equal Opportunity Employment. CONSULTANT represents that it is an equal opportunity employer and it shall not discriminate against any subconsultant, employee or applicant for employment because of race, religion, color, national origin, handicap, ancestry, sex or age. Such non-discrimination shall include, but not be limited to, all activities related to initial employment, upgrading, demotion, transfer, recruitment or recruitment advertising, layoff or termination.
3.4.6.4 Air Quality. To the extent applicable, CONSULTANT must fully comply with all applicable laws, rules and regulations in furnishing or using equipment and/or providing services, including, but not limited to, emissions limits and permitting requirements imposed by the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD) and/or California Air Resources Board (CARB). CONSULTANT shall indemnify CITY against any fines or penalties imposed by SCAQMD, CARB, or any other governmental or regulatory agency for violations of applicable laws, rules and/or regulations by CONSULTANT, its subconsultants, or others for whom CONSULTANT is responsible under its indemnity obligations provided for in this Agreement.
3.4.6.5 Water Quality Management and Compliance. CONSULTANT shall keep itself and all subcontractors, staff, and employees fully informed of and in compliance 9 of 300
Attachment 1
-7- SERVICES AGREEMENT
with all local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations that may impact, or be implicated by the performance of the Services including, without limitation, all applicable provisions of CITY’s ordinances regulating water quality and storm water; the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (33 U.S.C. § 1251, et seq.); the California Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act (Water Code § 13000 et seq.); and any and all regulations, policies, or permits issued pursuant to any such authority. CONSULTANT must additionally comply with the lawful requirements of CITY, and any other municipality, drainage district, or other local agency with jurisdiction over the location where the Services are to be conducted, regulating water quality and storm water discharges.
3.4.6.6 Safety. CONSULTANT shall execute and maintain its work so as to avoid injury or damage to any person or property. In carrying out its Services, the CONSULTANT shall at all times be in compliance with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations, and shall exercise all necessary precautions for the safety of employees appropriate to the nature of the work and the conditions under which the work is to be performed.
3.4.7 Insurance.
3.4.7.1 Time for Compliance. Immediately upon execution of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide evidence satisfactory to CITY that it has secured all insurance required under this section. In addition, CONSULTANT shall not allow any subconsultant to commence work on any subcontract until it has provided evidence satisfactory to CITY that the subconsultant has secured all insurance required under this section.
3.4.7.2 Types of Insurance Required. As a condition precedent to the effectiveness of this Agreement for work to be performed hereunder, and without limiting the indemnity provisions of the Agreement, the CONSULTANT, in partial performance of its obligations under such Agreement, shall procure and maintain in full force and effect during the term of the Agreement the following policies of insurance. If the existing policies do not meet the insurance requirements set forth herein, CONSULTANT agrees to amend, supplement or endorse the policies to do so.
(A) Commercial General Liability: Commercial General Liability Insurance which affords coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office "occurrence" form CG 00 01, or the exact equivalent, with limits of not less than $2,000,000 per occurrence and no less than $4,000,000 in the general aggregate. Defense costs shall be paid in addition to the limits. The policy shall contain no endorsements or provisions (1) limiting coverage for contractual liability; (2) excluding coverage for claims or suits by one insured against another (cross-liability); (3) products/completed operations liability; or (4) containing any other exclusion(s) contrary to the terms or purposes of this Agreement. (B) Automobile Liability Insurance: Automobile Liability Insurance with coverage at least as broad as Insurance Services Office Form CA 00 01 covering "Any Auto" (Symbol 1), or the exact equivalent, covering bodily injury and property damage for all activities with limits of not less than $2,000,000 combined limit for each occurrence. (C) Workers' Compensation: Workers' Compensation
Insurance, as required by the State of California and Employer's Liability Insurance with a limit of not less than $1,000,000 per accident for bodily injury and disease. 10 of 300
Attachment 1
-8- SERVICES AGREEMENT
3.4.7.3 Insurance Endorsements. Required insurance policies shall contain the following provisions, or CONSULTANT shall provide endorsements on forms approved by CITY to add the following provisions to the insurance policies:
(A) Commercial General Liability: (1) Additional Insured: CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be additional insureds with regard to liability and defense of suits or claims arising out of the performance of the Agreement.
Additional Insured Endorsements shall not (1) be restricted to "ongoing operations"; (2) exclude "contractual liability"; (3) restrict coverage to "sole" liability of CONSULTANT; or (4) contain any other exclusions contrary to the terms or purposes of this Agreement. For all policies of Commercial General Liability insurance, CONSULTANT shall provide endorsements in the form of ISO CG 20 10 10 01 and 20 37 10 01 (or endorsements providing the exact same coverage) to effectuate this requirement. (2) Cancellation: Required insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon CITY except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium. (B) Automobile Liability: (1) Additional Insured: CITY, its directors, officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers shall be covered as additional insureds with respect to the ownership, operation, maintenance, use, loading or unloading of any auto owned, leased, hired or borrowed by the Vendor or for which the Vendor is responsible. (2) Cancellation: Required insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon CITY except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium.
(C) Workers' Compensation: (1) Cancellation: Required
insurance policies shall not be canceled or the coverage reduced until a thirty (30) day written notice of cancellation has been served upon the City except ten (10) days shall be allowed for non-payment of premium. (2) Waiver of Subrogation: A waiver of subrogation stating that the insurer waives all rights of subrogation against CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers.
3.4.7.4 Primary and Non-Contributing Insurance. All policies of Commercial General Liability and Automobile Liability insurance shall be primary and any other insurance, deductible, or self-insurance maintained by CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers shall not contribute with this primary insurance. Policies shall contain or be endorsed to contain such provisions.
3.4.7.5 Waiver of Subrogation. All required insurance coverages, except for the professional liability coverage, shall contain or be endorsed to waiver of subrogation in favor of CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers or shall specifically allow CONSULTANT or others providing insurance evidence in compliance with these specifications to waive their right of recovery prior to a loss. CONSULTANT hereby waives its own right of recovery against CITY, and shall require similar written express waivers and insurance clauses from each of its subconsultants.
3.4.7.6 Deductibles and Self-Insured Retentions. Any deductible or selfinsured retention must be approved in writing by CITY and shall protect CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers in the same manner and to the same extent as they would have been protected had the policy or policies not contained a deductible or self-insured retention. 11 of 300
Attachment 1
-9- SERVICES AGREEMENT
3.4.7.7 Evidence of Insurance. The CONSULTANT, concurrently with the execution of the Agreement, and as a condition precedent to the effectiveness thereof, shall deliver either certified copies of the required policies, or original certificates on forms approved by CITY, together with all endorsements affecting each policy. Required insurance policies shall not be in compliance if they include any limiting provision or endorsement that has not been submitted to CITY for approval. The certificates and endorsements for each insurance policy shall be signed by a person authorized by that insurer to bind coverage on its behalf. At least fifteen (15 days) prior to the expiration of any such policy, evidence of insurance showing that such insurance coverage has been renewed or extended shall be filed with CITY. If such coverage is cancelled or reduced and not replaced immediately so as to avoid a lapse in the required coverage, CONSULTANT shall, within ten (10) days after receipt of written notice of such cancellation or reduction of coverage, file with CITY evidence of insurance showing that the required insurance has been reinstated or has been provided through another insurance company or companies.
3.4.7.8 Acceptability of Insurers. Each such policy shall be from a company or companies with a current A.M. Best's rating of no less than A:VII and authorized to transact business of insurance in the State of California, or otherwise allowed to place insurance through surplus line brokers under applicable provisions of the California Insurance Code or any federal law.
3.4.7.9 Enforcement of Agreement Provisions (non estoppel).
CONSULTANT acknowledges and agrees that actual or alleged failure on the part of CITY to inform CONSULTANT of non-compliance with any requirement imposes no additional obligation on CITY nor does it waive any rights hereunder.
3.4.7.10 Requirements Not Limiting. Requirement of specific coverage or minimum limits contained in this Section are not intended as a limitation on coverage, limits, or other requirement, or a waiver of any coverage normally provided by any insurance. The insurance obligations under this Agreement shall be: (1) all the insurance coverage and/or limits carried by or available to the CONSULTANT; or (2) the minimum insurance coverage requirements and/or limits shown in this Agreement; whichever is greater. Any insurance proceeds in excess of or broader than the minimum required coverage and/or minimum required limits, which are applicable to a given loss, shall be available to CITY. No representation is made that the minimum insurance requirements of this Agreement are sufficient to cover the obligations of the CONSULTANT under this Agreement.
3.4.7.11 Additional Insurance Provisions
(A) If any Excess or Umbrella Liability policies are used to meet the limits of liability required by this Agreement, then said policies shall be “following form” of the underlying policy coverage, terms, conditions, and provisions and shall meet all of the insurance requirements stated in this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the additional insured and primary & non-contributory insurance requirements stated herein. No insurance policies maintained by CITY, whether primary or excess, and which also apply to a loss covered hereunder, shall be called upon to contribute to a loss until the CONSULTANT’s primary and excess liability policies are exhausted.
(B) The foregoing requirements as to the types and limits of insurance coverage to be maintained by CONSULTANT, and any approval of said insurance by 12 of 300
Attachment 1
-10- SERVICES AGREEMENT
CITY, is not intended to and shall not in any manner limit or qualify the liabilities and obligations otherwise assumed by the CONSULTANT pursuant to this Agreement, including but not limited to, the provisions concerning indemnification.
(C) If at any time during the life of the Agreement, any policy of insurance required under this Agreement does not comply with these specifications or is canceled and not replaced, CITY has the right but not the duty to obtain the insurance it deems necessary and any premium paid by City will be promptly reimbursed by CONSULTANT or CITY will withhold amounts sufficient to pay premium from CONSULTANT payments. In the alternative, CITY may cancel this Agreement.
(D) CITY may require the CONSULTANT to provide complete copies of all insurance policies in effect for the duration of the Project. (E) Neither CITY nor any of its officials, officers, employees, agents or volunteers shall be personally responsible for any liability arising under or by virtue of this Agreement.
(F) The limits set forth herein shall apply separately to each insured against whom claims are made or suits are brought, except with respect to the limits of liability. Further the limits set forth herein shall not be construed to relieve the CONSULTANT from liability in excess of such coverage, nor shall it limit the CONSULTANT’s indemnification obligations to CITY and shall not preclude CITY from taking such other actions available to CITY under other provisions of the Agreement or law.
(G) CONSULTANT shall report to CITY, in addition to
CONSULTANT’s insurer, any and all insurance claims submitted by CONSULTANT in connection with the Services under this Agreement.
3.4.7.12 Insurance for Subconsultants. CONSULTANT shall include all subconsultants engaged in any work for CONSULTANT relating to this Agreement as additional insureds under the CONSULTANT's policies, or the CONSULTANT shall be responsible for causing subconsultants to purchase the appropriate insurance in compliance with the terms of these Insurance Requirements, including adding CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers as additional insureds to the subconsultant’s policies. All policies of Commercial General Liability insurance provided by CONSULTANT’s subconsultants performing work relating to this Agreement shall be endorsed to name the City, its officials, officers, employees, agents and volunteers as additional insureds using endorsement form ISO CG 20 38 04 13 or an endorsement providing equivalent coverage. CONSULTANT shall not allow any subconsultant to commence work on any subcontract relating to this Agreement until it has received satisfactory evidence of subconsultant’s compliance with all insurance requirements under this Agreement, to the extent applicable. The CONSULTANT shall provide satisfactory evidence of compliance with this section upon request of CITY.
3.5 Labor Code Requirements.
3.5.1 Prevailing Wages. CONSULTANT is aware of the requirements of California Labor Code Section 1720, et seq., and 1770, et seq., as well as California Code of Regulations, Title 8, Section 16000, et seq., ("Prevailing Wage Laws"), which require the payment 13 of 300
Attachment 1
-11- SERVICES AGREEMENT
of prevailing wage rates and the performance of other requirements on "public works" and "maintenance" projects. If the Services are being performed as part of an applicable "public works" or "maintenance" project, as defined by the Prevailing Wage Laws, and if the total compensation is $1,000 or more, CONSULTANT agrees to fully comply with such Prevailing Wage Laws. CITY shall provide CONSULTANT with a copy of the prevailing rates of per diem wages in effect at the commencement of this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall make copies of the prevailing rates of per diem wages for each craft, classification or type of worker needed to execute the Services available to interested parties upon request, and shall post copies at the CONSULTANT's principal place of business and at the project site. It is the intent of the parties to effectuate the requirements of sections 1771, 1774, 1775, 1776, 1777.5, 1813, and 1815 of the Labor Code within this Agreement, and CONSULTANT shall therefore comply with such Labor Code sections to the fullest extent required by law. CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and hold CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of any failure or alleged failure to comply with the Prevailing Wage Laws.
3.5.2 Registration/DIR Compliance. If the Services are being performed on a public works project of over $25,000 when the project is for construction, alteration, demolition, installation, or repair work, or a public works project of over $15,000 when the project is for maintenance work, in addition to the foregoing, then pursuant to Labor Code sections 1725.5 and 1771.1, the CONSULTANT and all subconsultants must be registered with the Department of Industrial Relations (“DIR”). CONSULTANT shall maintain registration for the duration of the Project and require the same of any subconsultants.
3.5.3 Compliance Monitoring. Work performed under this Project may also be subject to compliance monitoring and enforcement by the DIR. It shall be CONSULTANT’s sole responsibility to comply with all applicable registration and labor compliance requirements, including the submission of payroll records directly to the DIR. Any stop orders issued by the DIR against CONSULTANT or any subconsultant that affect CONSULTANT’s performance of services, including any delay, shall be CONSULTANT’s sole responsibility. Any delay arising out of or resulting from such stop orders shall be considered CONSULTANT caused delay and shall not be compensable by CITY. CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and hold CITY, its officials, officers, employees and agents free and harmless from any claim or liability arising out of stop orders issued by the DIR against CONSULTANT or any subconsultant.
3.5.4 Labor Certification. By its signature hereunder, CONSULTANT certifies that it is aware of the provisions of Section 3700 of the California Labor Code which require every employer to be insured against liability for Worker's Compensation or to undertake self-insurance in accordance with the provisions of that Code, and agrees to comply with such provisions before commencing the performance of the Services.
3.6 Termination of Agreement. CITY has and reserves the right to suspend, terminate or abandon the execution of any work by CONSULTANT upon adoption of a resolution disestablishing the LBTMD pursuant to the 1994 Law. Per the 1994 Law, such a resolution may only be adopted if (1) the City Council finds there has been misappropriation of funds, malfeasance, or a violation of law in connection with the management of the district and a noticed hearing on disestablishment is held, or (2) in the thirty (30) day period following the anniversary of the district's formation, businesses owners paying fifty percent (50%) or more of the assessment file a written protest with CITY and a hearing on disestablishment is held. In the event CITY disestablishes the LBTMD, CONSULTANT shall be entitled to retain LBTMD Assessment 14 of 300
Attachment 1
-12- SERVICES AGREEMENT
revenues only for paying the CONSULTANT’s current liabilities of the LBTMD. Pursuant to the 1994 Law, CONSULTANT shall refund to CITY any remaining LBTMD Assessment revenues or any revenues derived from the sale of assets acquired with LBTMD revenues to enable distribution of the revenues to the businesses owners who paid the LBTMD Assessment.
CONSULTANT agrees that CITY has and reserves the right to deny the transfer of LBTMD Assessment revenues and/or suspend, terminate, or abandon the execution of any Services by the Contractor in accordance with this Agreement or upon the misfeasance, nonfeasance, or gross malfeasance, or criminal conduct, as determined by a court of competent jurisdiction. In the event of termination of this Agreement, any retention of LBTMD Assessment Revenues by Contractor shall comply with the I994 Law.
3.7 Indemnification. To the fullest extent permitted by law, CONSULTANT shall defend (with counsel of CITY’s choosing), indemnify and hold CITY, its officials, officers, employees, volunteers, and agents free and harmless from any and all claims, demands, causes of action, costs, expenses, liability, loss, damage or injury of any kind, in law or equity, to property or persons, including wrongful death, in any manner arising out of, pertaining to, or incident to any acts, errors or omissions, or willful misconduct of CONSULTANT, its officials, officers, employees, subcontractors, consultants, or agents in connection with the performance of the CONSULTANT’s Services, the Project or this Agreement, including without limitation the payment of all damages, expert witness fees and attorney’s fees and other related costs and expenses, except any proportionate loss or damage caused by the sole negligence or willful misconduct of CITY. CONSULTANT's obligation to indemnify shall survive expiration or termination of this Agreement and shall not be restricted to insurance proceeds, if any, received by CONSULTANT, CITY, its officials, officers, employees, agents, or volunteers.
3.8 General Provisions.
3.8.1 Party Representatives.
3.8.1.1 City's Representative. CITY hereby designates Dave Kiff, City Manager, or his designee, to act as its representative in all matters pertaining to the administration and performance of this Agreement ("City's Representative"). City's Representative shall have the power to act on behalf of CITY for review and approval of all products submitted by CONSULTANT and to satisfy all requirements of CITY hereunder specified. The City Representative shall be authorized to act on CITY’s behalf and to execute all necessary documents necessary for the performance of this Agreement, subject to the provisions contained in this Plan and the 1994 Act. CONSULTANT shall not accept direction or orders from any person other than the City's Representative or his/her designee on behalf of the CITY.
3.8.1.2 Consultant’s Representative. CONSULTANT hereby
designates Joanna Bear, its President and Chief Executive Officer, or her designee, to act as its representative for the performance of this Agreement ("Consultant’s Representative").
Consultant’s Representative shall have full authority to represent and act on behalf of the CONSULTANT for all purposes under this Agreement. The Consultant’s Representative shall supervise and direct the Services, using her best skill and attention, and shall be responsible for all means, methods, techniques, sequences, and procedures and for the satisfactory coordination of all portions of the Services under this Agreement.
15 of 300
Attachment 1
-13- SERVICES AGREEMENT
3.8.1.3 Change of Representative. In the event either the City’s Representative or Consultant’s Representative change during the course of this Agreement, the party making such change shall notify, in writing, the other party of the change and designate a new representative. Such change of representative shall not require an amendment to this Agreement to be effectuated.
3.8.2 Independent Contractors and Subcontracting.
3.8.2.1 Use of Consultants. CONSULTANT is aware of statutory and case law regarding classification of workers as independent contractors, including California Labor Code Section 2750.3 and Dynamex Operations West, Inc. v. Superior Court, 4 Cal. 5th 903 (2018). To ensure that CONSULTANT is in compliance with the California Labor Code, CONSULTANT shall only utilize its employees to provide the Services. CONSULTANT may not provide the services through any independent contractor, subcontractor or subconsultant (“Subcontractor(s)”) unless approved by CITY as set forth in Section 3.8.2.2 below.
CONSULTANT represents and warrants that all personnel who perform the Services on CONSULTANT’s behalf are CONSULTANT’s employees, and that CONSULTANT complies with all applicable laws, rules and regulations governing its employees, including, but not limited to, the California Labor Code, Unemployment Insurance Code and all applicable Industrial Welfare Commission Wage Orders.
3.8.2.2 Prior Approval Required. CONSULTANT shall not use any Subcontractor to provide the Services, or any portion of the work required by this Agreement, without prior written approval of CITY. In the event that CITY authorizes CONSULTANT to use a Subcontractor, CONSULTANT shall enter into a written agreement with the Subcontractor, which must include all provisions of the Agreement, including a restriction on the Subcontractor’s use of further independent contractors, subcontractors or subconsultants without CITY’s prior written consent.
3.8.3 Delivery of Notices. All notices permitted or required under this Agreement shall be given to the respective parties at the following address, or at such other address as the respective parties may provide in writing for this purpose:
CONSULTANT: Visit Laguna Beach
381 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
ATTN: Joanna Bear, President and Chief Executive
Officer
CITY: City of Laguna Beach
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach CA 92651
ATTN: Dave Kiff, City Manager
With a copy to: City of Laguna Beach
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach CA 92651
ATTN: Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
16 of 300
Attachment 1
-14- SERVICES AGREEMENT
Such notice shall be deemed made when personally delivered or when mailed, forty-eight (48) hours after deposit in the U.S. Mail, first class postage prepaid and addressed to the party at its applicable address. Actual notice shall be deemed adequate notice on the date actual notice occurred, regardless of the method of service.
3.8.4 Ownership of Materials and Confidentiality.
3.8.4.1 Documents & Data; Licensing of Intellectual Property. This Agreement creates a non-exclusive and perpetual license for CITY to copy, use, modify, reuse, or sublicense any and all copyrights, designs, and other intellectual property embodied in plans, specifications, studies, drawings, estimates, and other documents or works of authorship fixed in any tangible medium of expression, including but not limited to, physical drawings or data magnetically or otherwise recorded on computer diskettes, which are prepared or caused to be prepared by CONSULTANT under this Agreement ("Documents & Data"). All Documents & Data shall be and remain the property of City, and shall not be used in whole or in substantial part by CONSULTANT on other projects without CITY’s express written permission. Within thirty (30) days following the completion, suspension, abandonment or termination of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide to City reproducible copies of all Documents & Data, in a form and amount required by CITY. CITY reserves the right to select the method of document reproduction and to establish where the reproduction will be accomplished. The reproduction expense shall be borne by CITY at the actual cost of duplication. In the event of a dispute regarding the amount of compensation to which the CONSULTANT is entitled under the termination provisions of this Agreement, CONSULTANT shall provide all Documents & Data to CITY upon payment of the undisputed amount. CONSULTANT shall have no right to retain or fail to provide to CITY any such documents pending resolution of the dispute. In addition, CONSULTANT shall retain copies of all Documents & Data on file for a minimum of fifteen (15) years following completion of the Project, and shall make copies available to City upon the payment of actual reasonable duplication costs. Before destroying the Documents & Data following this retention period, CONSULTANT shall make a reasonable effort to notify City and provide CITY with the opportunity to obtain the documents.
3.8.4.2 Subconsultants. CONSULTANT shall require all subconsultants to agree in writing that CITY is granted a non-exclusive and perpetual license for any Documents & Data the subconsultant prepares under this Agreement. CONSULTANT represents and warrants that CONSULTANT has the legal right to license any and all Documents & Data.
CONSULTANT makes no such representation and warranty in regard to Documents & Data which were prepared by design professionals other than CONSULTANT or its subconsultants, or those provided to CONSULTANT by the CITY.
3.8.4.3 Right to Use. CITY shall not be limited in any way in its use or reuse of the Documents and Data or any part of them at any time for purposes of this Project or another project, provided that any such use not within the purposes intended by this Agreement or on a project other than this Project without employing the services of CONSULTANT shall be at CITY’s sole risk. If CITY uses or reuses the Documents & Data on any project other than this Project, it shall remove the CONSULTANT’s seal from the Documents & Data and indemnify and hold harmless CONSULTANT and its officers, directors, agents and employees from claims arising out of the negligent use or re-use of the Documents & Data on such other project.
CONSULTANT shall be responsible and liable for its Documents & Data, pursuant to the terms of this Agreement, only with respect to the condition of the Documents & Data at the time they 17 of 300
Attachment 1
-15- SERVICES AGREEMENT
are provided to CITY upon completion, suspension, abandonment or termination. CONSULTANT shall not be responsible or liable for any revisions to the Documents & Data made by any party other than CONSULTANT, a party for whom the CONSULTANT is legally responsible or liable, or anyone approved by the CONSULTANT.
3.8.4.4 Indemnification. CONSULTANT shall defend, indemnify and hold CITY, its directors, officials, officers, employees, volunteers and agents free and harmless, pursuant to the indemnification provisions of this Agreement, for any alleged infringement of any patent, copyright, trade secret, trade name, trademark, or any other proprietary right of any person or entity in consequence of the use on the Project by CITY of the Documents & Data, including any method, process, product, or concept specified or depicted.
3.8.4.5 Confidentiality. All ideas, memoranda, specifications, plans, procedures, drawings, descriptions, computer program data, input record data, written information, and other Documents & Data either created by or provided to CONSULTANT in connection with the performance of this Agreement shall be held confidential by CONSULTANT.
Such materials shall not, without the prior written consent of CITY, be used by CONSULTANT for any purposes other than the performance of the Services. Nor shall such materials be disclosed to any person or entity not connected with the performance of the Services or the Project. Nothing furnished to CONSULTANT which is otherwise known to CONSULTANT or is generally known, or has become known, to the related industry shall be deemed confidential.
3.8.4.6 Confidential Information. CITY shall refrain from releasing CONSULTANT’s proprietary information ("Proprietary Information") unless CITY's legal counsel determines that the release of the Proprietary Information is required by the California Public Records Act or other applicable state or federal law, or order of a court of competent jurisdiction, in which case CITY shall notify CONSULTANT of its intention to release Proprietary Information.
CONSULTANT shall have five (5) working days after receipt of the release notice to give City written notice of CONSULTANT's objection to CITY's release of Proprietary Information.
CONSULTANT shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY, and its officers, directors, employees, and agents from and against all liability, loss, cost or expense (including attorney’s fees) arising out of a legal action brought to compel the release of Proprietary Information. City shall not release the Proprietary Information after receipt of an objection notice unless either: (1) CONSULTANT fails to fully indemnify, defend (with City's choice of legal counsel), and hold City harmless from any legal action brought to compel such release; and/or (2) a final and nonappealable order by a court of competent jurisdiction requires that City release such information.
3.8.4.7 Use of City Seal or Emblem; Advertising. CONSULTANT shall not use, reproduce, or copy CITY’s insignia, emblem, or seal without the prior written consent of CITY. Further, CONSULTANT shall not represent CITY in an official capacity as spokesperson or officer or agent or use the name City of Laguna Beach, or the names of CITY's officers, directors, employees or agents, in advertising or publicity releases or otherwise without securing the prior written consent of CITY in each instance unless set forth in this Agreement. Nothing in this section prohibits CONSULTANT from using the name Laguna Beach Tourism Marketing District or City of Laguna Beach for regional identification for promotion and marketing of the LBTMD.
18 of 300
Attachment 1
-16- SERVICES AGREEMENT
3.8.5 Cooperation; Further Acts. The Parties shall fully cooperate with one another, and shall take any additional acts or sign any additional documents as may be necessary, appropriate or convenient to attain the purposes of this Agreement.
3.8.6 Entire Agreement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement of the Parties with respect to the subject matter hereof, and supersedes all prior negotiations, understandings or agreements.
3.8.7 Conflict Resolution: In the event of any dispute arising under this Agreement, the Parties agree to meet and confer in good faith to resolve the matter informally. If the dispute is not resolved through informal discussions, the Parties shall participate in facilitated non-binding mediation prior to pursuing formal legal remedies; such non-binding mediation shall be pursued with diligence and may not be unreasonably delayed, and must be completed within six (6) months from the first meet-and-confer meeting required under this section.
3.8.8 Attorneys’ Fees. If either Party commences an action against the other party, either legal, administrative or otherwise, arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, the prevailing Party in such litigation shall be entitled to have and recover from the losing Party reasonable attorneys’ fees and all costs of such action.
3.8.9 Governing Law. This Agreement shall be governed by the laws of the State of California. Venue shall be in Orange County. In addition to any and all contract requirements pertaining to dispute resolution and cure periods, CONSULTANT must comply with the claim procedures set forth in Government Code sections 900 et seq. prior to filing any lawsuit against CITY. Such Government Code claims and any subsequent lawsuit based upon the Government Code claims shall be limited to those matters that remain unresolved after all procedures pertaining to extra work, disputed work, claims, and/or changed conditions have been followed by CONSULTANT. If no such Government Code claim is submitted, or if any prerequisite contractual requirements are not otherwise satisfied as specified herein, CONSULTANT shall be barred from bringing and maintaining a valid lawsuit against CITY.
3.8.10 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for each and every provision of this Agreement.
3.8.11 Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall be binding on the successors and assigns of the Parties.
3.8.12 Assignment or Transfer. CONSULTANT shall not assign, sublet, or transfer this Agreement or any rights under or interest in this Agreement without the written consent of CITY, which may be withheld for any reason. Any attempt to so assign or so transfer without such consent shall be void and without legal effect and shall constitute grounds for termination. CONSULTANT shall not subcontract any portion of the Services required by this Agreement, except as expressly stated herein, without prior written approval of CITY.
Subcontracts, if any, shall contain a provision making them subject to all provisions stipulated in this Agreement.
3.8.13 Construction; References; Captions. Since the Parties or their agents have participated fully in the preparation of this Agreement, the language of this Agreement shall be construed simply, according to its fair meaning, and not strictly for or against any Party. Any term 19 of 300
Attachment 1
-17- SERVICES AGREEMENT
referencing time, days or period for performance shall be deemed calendar days and not work days. All references to CONSULTANT include all personnel, employees, agents, and subconsultants of CONSULTANT, except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. All references to CITY include its elected officials, officers, employees, agents, and volunteers except as otherwise specified in this Agreement. The captions of the various articles and paragraphs are for convenience and ease of reference only, and do not define, limit, augment, or describe the scope, content, or intent of this Agreement.
3.8.14 Amendment; Modification. No supplement, modification, or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless executed in writing and signed by both Parties.
3.8.15 Waiver. No waiver of any default shall constitute a waiver of any other default or breach, whether of the same or other covenant or condition. No waiver, benefit, privilege, or service voluntarily given or performed by a Party shall give the other Party any contractual rights by custom, estoppel, or otherwise.
3.8.16 No Third-Party Beneficiaries. There are no intended third party beneficiaries of any right or obligation assumed by the Parties.
3.8.17 Invalidity; Severability. If any portion of this Agreement is declared invalid, illegal, or otherwise unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remaining provisions shall continue in full force and effect.
3.8.18 Prohibited Interests. CONSULTANT maintains and warrants that it has not employed nor retained any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for CONSULTANT, to solicit or secure this Agreement. CONSULTANT warrants that it has not paid nor has it agreed to pay any company or person, other than a bona fide employee working solely for CONSULTANT, any fee, commission, percentage, brokerage fee, gift or other consideration contingent upon or resulting from the award or making of this Agreement.
CONSULTANT further agrees to file, or shall cause its employees or subconsultants to file, a Statement of Economic Interest with CITY’s Filing Officer as required under state law in the performance of the Services. For the term of this Agreement, no member, officer or employee of City, during the term of his or her service with City, shall have any direct interest in this Agreement, or obtain any present or anticipated material benefit arising therefrom.
3.8.19 Authority to Enter Agreement. CONSULTANT has all requisite power and authority to conduct its business and to execute, deliver, and perform the Agreement. Each Party warrants that the individuals who have signed this Agreement have the legal power, right, and authority to make this Agreement and bind each respective Party.
3.8.20 Counterparts. This Agreement may be signed in counterparts, each of which shall constitute an original.
3.8.21 Survival. All rights and obligations hereunder that by their nature are to continue after any expiration or termination of this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the indemnification obligations, shall survive any such expiration or termination.
3.8.22 Precedence of Documents. Notwithstanding any provision of this Agreement, including the Exhibits hereto, in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between 20 of 300
Attachment 1
-18- SERVICES AGREEMENT
this Agreement and the Plan, the terms of the Plan shall control. This Agreement is intended solely to implement the Plan, as required by the 1994 Law, and shall be interpreted to conform to it. If any provision of this Agreement cannot reasonably be construed to conform, that provision shall be deemed amended to the extent necessary to achieve consistency with the Plan and applicable law. Nothing in this section limits CITY’s statutory rights under the 1994 Law.
3.8.23 Use of City Property. CONSULTANT shall not use CITY property, including equipment, instruments and supplies, or personnel for any purpose other than in the performance of its obligations under this Agreement.
SIGNATURES ON NEXT PAGE
21 of 300
Attachment 1
-18- SERVICES AGREEMENT
22 of 300
Attachment 1
-19- SERVICES AGREEMENT
SIGNATURE PAGE TO PROFESSIONAL SERVICES AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH AND
VISIT LAGUNA BEACH
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, each of the Parties has caused this Agreement to be executed on the day and year first above written.
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
Approved By:
DAVE KIFF
CITY MANAGER
Approved as to Form:
_____________________________________
City Attorney
Attested By:
City Clerk
VISIT LAGUNA BEACH
By: __________________________________
Its:
Printed Name:
By:
Its:
Printed Name:
23 of 300
Attachment 1
-19- SERVICES AGREEMENT
24 of 300
Attachment 1
Exhibit “A” SERVICES AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT "A"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Management District Plan
25 of 300
Attachment 1
Exhibit “A” SERVICES AGREEMENT
26 of 300
Exhibit “B” SERVICES AGREEMENT
EXHIBIT "B"
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Consultant shall provide the following services:
1. Consultant shall cooperate with City and City staff in the performance of all work hereunder.
2. Consultant will provide projects, programs and activities that benefit businesses within the LBTMD in accordance with the LBTMD Management District Plan (Plan), and any subsequent amendments thereto. Consultant shall design, implement, and oversee programs and activities that directly benefit assessed lodging businesses by increasing overnight visitation and room night sales, across the following service categories:
a. Marketing and Communications. Programs to drive overnight tourism demand, with a focus on arts, and cultural and environmental stewardship, including:
• Digital, print, television, radio, and social media campaigns; • Trade shows, travel industry events, and familiarization/media tours; • Public relations and media outreach;
• Creation of collateral, photography, and video content promoting assessed lodging;
• Development of cooperative marketing partnerships with regional organizations;
• Training programs for hospitality staff and management on visitor experience and marketing; and
• Maintenance of a reserve fund for future marketing initiatives b. Cultural and Environmental Stewardship. Programs that enhance Laguna Beach’s cultural and natural assets to improve visitor experience and sustainability, including:
• Destination product development and beautification projects; • Arts, cultural, and educational programming;
• Wayfinding and visitor signage;
• Transportation and connectivity improvements between hotels and attractions;
• Environmental and sustainability initiatives mitigating visitor impacts; • Research and data analysis on program effectiveness.
c. Administration & Operations. Management and oversight functions necessary to support all LBTMD programs, including:
27 of 300
55852.00003\42823523.1
Attachment 1
Exhibit “B”-2
• Staffing, office operations, accounting, legal, and insurance costs; • Coordination with the City and stakeholders; and
• Compliance with audits, transparency, and reporting obligations under the Brown Act and Public Records Act.
d. Arts Programming. In accordance with the Plan, Consultant is responsible for overseeing the use of LBTMD Assessments to ensure all such Arts Programming Assessment Payment funds are used for programming targeted exclusively to benefit assessed lodging business by increased demand for overnight visitation. 28 of 300
29 of 300
30 of 300
31 of 300
32 of 300
33 of 300
34 of 300
35 of 300
36 of 300
37 of 300
38 of 300
39 of 300
40 of 300
41 of 300
42 of 300
43 of 300
44 of 300
45 of 300
46 of 300
47 of 300
48 of 300
49 of 300
50 of 300
51 of 300
52 of 300
53 of 300
54 of 300
55 of 300
56 of 300
57 of 300
58 of 300
59 of 300
60 of 300
61 of 300
62 of 300
63 of 300
64 of 300
65 of 300
66 of 300
67 of 300
68 of 300
69 of 300
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
OCTOBER 28, 2025
CONSENT
17 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF BOND PURCHASE METHOD FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2021-1 (WEST STREET)
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Approve the use of a public bond issuance as the financing method for Underground Utility Assessment District 2021-1 (West Street), based on the October 13, 2025, recommendation of the Financing Analysis Working Group; and
2. Determine that the recommended action is not a project subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15378(b)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
This report recommends that the City Council approve the use of a public bond issuance to finance Underground Utility Assessment District 2021-1 (West Street), consistent with the recommendation made by the Financing Analysis Working Group at its October 13, 2025 meeting.
This action follows prior City Council direction to evaluate financing alternatives and establish a preferred approach for the district. The recommended public issuance reflects the committee’s analysis of cost, risk, and long-term flexibility. A separate staff report will return to Council with final bond documents and resolutions for approval.
The recommended action has been reviewed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and is not considered a project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(4).
DISCUSSION
On May 20, 2025, the City Council directed staff to evaluate bond financing options for Underground Utility Assessment District 2021-1 (West Street) in collaboration with the City’s assessment district finance team, including Fieldman, Rolapp & Associates (municipal advisor) and Oppenheimer & Co. Inc. (underwriter). On August 12, 2025, the Council formed a Financing Analysis Working Group composed of Councilmembers Whalen and Kempf, Finance Director Michelle Bannigan, City Treasurer Laura Parisi, and former Investment Advisory Committee member Steve Brown.
The group considered five potential financing methods. Two options, IBank financing and private placement, were removed from consideration due to ineligibility and market limitations. The remaining three options: (1) public bond issuance; (2) City purchase at market rate; and (3) City purchase at a belowmarket rate, were analyzed in detail and compared across cost, investment impact, and administrative factors.
The working group convened on October 13, 2025, to review the comparative analysis and unanimously recommended proceeding with a public bond issuance. This method reflects the City’s successful 1 of 307
CONSIDERATION OF BOND PURCHASE METHOD FOR UNDERGROUND UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2021-1 (WEST STREET)
October 14, 2025
experience with similar undergrounding districts, avoids long-term capital lockup, and provides full transparency through a public offering process.
As the City anticipates the formation of a larger undergrounding district, staff also intends to return in spring 2026 with a study session to support development of a formal policy framework. Future policy considerations may include criteria for City bond purchases, contribution thresholds above the base 10 percent, and evaluation methods for discounted interest rates.
A summary of the financial comparison is provided in Attachment 1. Related staff reports from prior City Council meetings are provided as Attachments 2 through 4 for reference.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended actions have no financial impact at this time. City staff will return to City Council in the near future for approval of public offering municipal bonds to fund the project. Appropriations related to the project, authorization to make advanced payments to utility companies, and authorization to use the Utility Underground Assessment Deferment Loan Program will be presented at that time.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action, to review financing options and provide policy direction, does not constitute a “project” under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), as defined by Section 15378(b)(4) of the CEQA Guidelines. It involves organizational or administrative activities of government that will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. Any future construction activity associated with utility undergrounding will be subject to separate environmental review and CEQA documentation prior to implementation.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Financing Options Evaluated by Staff (Pgs. 3-5)
2. July 22 Staff Report
https://lagunabeachcity.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=2726&meta_id=229756
3. August 12 Staff Report creating Financing Working Group https://lagunabeachcity.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=2742&meta_id=231515
4. September 23 Staff Report – Forming the District
https://lagunabeachcity.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=2783&meta_id=235948 Submitted By: Mark McAvoy Approved: .David A Kiff
Mark McAvoy, Director of Public
Works & Utilities
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Pierre Sawaya, Capital Program Manager Michelle Bannigan, Finance Director Laura Parisi, City Treasurer
2 of 307
Financing Options Evaluated by Staff:
A. Eliminated Options
• IBank (Infrastructure Bank) Loan: The California IBank program is structured to finance projects repaid from City revenue sources. Because the West Street undergrounding project would be repaid solely by assessments collected from private property owners, it is unlikely to meet IBank eligibility requirements. (staff recommend removal).
• Private Placement: Most private placement structures are limited to terms of 15 to 20 years, whereas the West Street district’s property owners have expressed a strong preference for a 25-year term to reduce annual assessments. Given limited bank interest and shorter terms available, this option was eliminated. (staff recommend removal).
B. Remaining Options
1. Public Offering (25-Year Term): Bonds would be marketed to external investors, similar to the recent Diamond Street and Woods Cove undergrounding districts. This approach includes full disclosure, underwriting, and investor outreach. While the issuance costs are higher, the risk is minimal as the City does not hold the bonds.
Current market rates for 25-year tax-exempt bonds are approximately 4.77%.
2. City Purchase at Market Rate: The City may elect to purchase 100% of the bonds at the prevailing market rate. This option would eliminate underwriting, placement, and disclosure costs, resulting in an estimated savings of approximately $47,500 in issuance expenses. However, the City would hold the bonds as a 25-year investment, limiting liquidity.
3. City Purchase at Below-Market Rate: The City may also consider purchasing the bonds at an interest rate lower than the market rate, if it determines that doing so supports a valid public purpose (e.g., wildfire safety, community infrastructure investment). This would reduce property owner costs even further, but would generate lower investment returns to the City. A comparative analysis was completed to evaluate interest savings versus opportunity cost.
Estimated Financing Requirements
The table below shows the estimated financing costs and bond proceeds for each method:
Purchase Method Total Fees Bond
Issuance
Total
Cost Interest Rate
Public Offering $566,772 $5,010,000 $5,576,772 4.77%
City Purchase MR $460,081 $5,081,000 $5,541,081 4.77%
City Purchase Below MR $460,081 $5,081,000 $5,541,081 4.77% or less City Purchase at Discounted Rate – Sensitivity Analysis If the City elects to purchase the West Street bonds at a rate below the estimated market rate of 4.77%, property owners would benefit from lower total interest costs over the 25- Attachment 1
3 3 of 307
year repayment period. However, the City would also reduce its investment earnings by allocating capital to a lower-yielding, long-term investment.
This analysis models the financial implications of offering discounted bond rates ranging from 0.25% to 1.00% below the market-equivalent rate of 4.77%. It calculates two types of opportunity cost to the City:
• Opportunity Cost vs. Market Rate (4.77%) – Reflects the investment return the City would forgo by not charging the full market rate when holding the bonds as a City investment.
• Opportunity Cost vs. LAIF Rate (4.15%) – Reflects the difference between returns on discounted bonds and the City’s current short-term, highly liquid investment option.
As shown in the table below, deeper discounts result in increased interest savings for property owners, but also greater opportunity costs to the City under both benchmarks.
This side-by-side comparison helps quantify the tradeoff between supporting lower property assessments and preserving the City’s long-term investment returns.
Assumptions Used
• Bond principal: $5,081,000
• Amortization term: 25 years
• Market-equivalent bond rate: 4.77%
• LAIF rate: 4.15% (as of October 15, 2025)
Discount Rate
Below 4.77%
Property Owner
Interest Savings
City’s Lost
Opportunity
(Foregone Earnings)
at 4..77%
City’s Lost
Opportunity
(Foregone Earnings)
at 4.15%
0.25% (4.52%) $222,015 $222,015 -$323,542
0.50% (4.27%) $441,292 $441,292 -$104,266
0.75% (4.02%) $657,784 $657,784 $112,225
1.00% (3.77%) $871,449 $871,449 $325,590
The analysis confirms that the greater the discount offered on the bond rate, the higher the City’s opportunity cost. While reduced rates lower property owner payments, they increase the City’s forgone investment earnings over the 25-year term.
Additional City Contribution Equivalent:
An alternative approach to purchasing the bonds at a lower rate could be for the City to maintain the bond rate at market and instead provide an additional upfront contribution to reduce the overall bond principal.
Reducing the bond rate from 4.77% to 4.15%, equal to the City’s current LAIF investment return, would save property owners approximately $545,558 in interest over the 25-year repayment term. This reduction results in lower annual assessments for property owners. 4 4 of 307
Because the City would earn the same return (4.15%) on the bond as it does through LAIF, there is no opportunity cost relative to its current investment strategy. However, there is a significant opportunity cost when measured against the higher 4.77% market-equivalent rate that the City could otherwise charge.
Councilmembers may ask: What would it take to achieve the same benefit to property owners through a one-time contribution instead of offering a discounted rate? To deliver the same level of interest savings without lowering the rate, the City would need to make a one-time contribution of $545,558 to reduce the bond principal. This would lower property owner debt service and produce an identical long-term benefit, while allowing the City to maintain the full 4.77% return on the remaining invested capital.
Although a contribution requires more upfront funding, it avoids tying up capital in a longterm, fixed-rate investment and preserves greater liquidity and flexibility for future needs or unforeseen opportunities.
Legal Review of City Council’s Authority to purchase bonds at below market rate Staff consulted with the City Attorney’s Office to assess whether a City bond purchase at a below-market rate could be considered a gift of public funds under California law. The Public Finance legal team concluded that such a transaction would not constitute a gift of public funds, as the City is under no legal obligation to invest its reserves at a specific rate of return. Provided that the City Council determines the undergrounding project serves a public benefit, a discounted bond rate may be legally supported. 5 5 of 307
6 of 307
7 of 307
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
18 SUBJECT: ADOPTION OF AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 3.10 TO TITLE 3 (FINANCE) OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING
TO COLLECTION OPTIONS FOR UNPAID TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX IN
THE CITY
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Adopt by title only an Ordinance titled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 3.10 TO TITLE 3 (FINANCE) OF THE CITY OF LAGAUNA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE RELATING TO
COLLECTION OPTIONS FOR UNPAID TRANSIENT OCCUPANCY TAX IN THE CITY AND
FINDING THE SAME EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT”.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
On October 14, 2025, the City Council approved the ordinance adding Chapter 3.10 to the Laguna Beach Municipal Code to provide the City an additional enforcement options to collect unpaid and delinquent transient occupancy tax, amended as presented by staff.
The vote at the first reading of the proposed ordinance was:
AYES: 5 COUNCILMEMBERS: Jones, Kempf, Whalen, Rounaghi
NOES: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: None
RECUSED: 0 COUNCILMEMBERS: Orgill
The subject ordinance is being presented for its second reading and adoption. Unless otherwise directed by a member of the City Council, the vote at the second reading will reflect the same vote as the first reading.
However, if a Councilmember is not present at the second reading, the vote will be reflected as absent.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action has no financial impact to the budget.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action has no environmental impact.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Ordinance (Pgs. 2-7)
Submitted By: Megan Garibaldi Approved: .David A Kiff
Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk Patrick Donegan, Assistant City Attorney 1 of 314
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADDING CHAPTER 3.10 TO TITLE
3 (FINANCE) OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE
RELATING TO COLLECTION OPTIONS FOR UNPAID TRANSIENT
OCCUPANCY TAX IN THE CITY AND FINDING THE SAME EXEMPT
FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach, California (“City”) is a municipal corporation, duly organized under the constitution and laws of the State of California; and WHEREAS, like many other jurisdictions throughout the State, the City imposes a transient occupancy tax on properties in the City offering, among other things, rentals for a period of thirty days or less via Laguna Bech Municipal Code Chapter 5.05 (“City TOT”); and WHEREAS, from time to time, some operators subject to the City TOT fail to pay the required tax – despite collecting this tax from transients in the City; and WHEREAS, at present failure to remit the City TOT is a misdemeanor and/or is subject to a civil action brought by the City to collect unpaid and delinquent City TOT; and WHEREAS, the existing legal remedies for the City are time consuming and costly processes that require substantive staff time and resources which makes pursing these remedies for the varying amounts overly burdensome; and
WHEREAS, the proposed addition of Chapter 3.10 to the Laguna Beach Municipal Code would authorize the City to record a lien on real property in the event operators of these properties fail to timely remit payment of the City TOT that they have collected from their patrons, providing a strong incentive for timely payment of the City TOT to avoid this lien on title of the property; and
Attachment 1
2 2 of 314
-2- Ord. XXXX
WHEREAS, certain properties in the City that were subject to the City TOT have gone multiple quarters without paying the City TOT, despite collecting from patrons and these same properties may be subject to foreclosure or other legal mechanisms that could result in a change of ownership; and
WHEREAS, it is imperative that the City’s interest in ensuring the collection of City TOT that was paid by individuals in the City is protected.
NOW, THEREFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES ORDAIN, AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The recitals above are each incorporated by reference and adopted as findings by the City Council.
SECTION 2. Environmental Review. This Ordinance is not a project subject to CEQA, because it is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. (CEQA Guidelines Section (15378(b)(5)).
SECTION 3. Laguna Beach Municipal Code Amendment. Title 3 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code is amended to add Chapter 3.10 to read in full as follows:
Chapter 3.10
COLLECTION OF UNPAID TAX
3.10.010 Purpose.
The purpose of this Chapter is to establish one possible procedure for the collection of unpaid taxes due under Chapter 5.05 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code related to transient uses (“City TOT”) and any assessments under the Laguan Beach Tourism Marketing District that the City is responsible for collecting. Specifically, this Chapter is established to allow, among other remedies, the City to record liens against real property used in the operation of transient occupancies for unpaid City TOT, penalties, and interest. This Chapter shall not be the exclusive remedy of the City and any and all other legal means to recover unpaid City TOT shall remain available to the City.
3 3 of 314
-3- Ord. XXXX
3.10.020 Lien for Unpaid City TOT.
(a) If any amount required to be paid to the city under the ordinance codified in Chapter 5.05 is not paid when due, or any assessment under the Laguan Beach Tourism Marketing District that the City is responsible for collecting is not paid when due, the City Manager, or their designee, upon expiration of any applicable time period and appeal found in sections
5.05.110 and 5.05.120 of this Code, may, within four years after the amount is due, record in the office(s) of the county recorder(s) of any county in the State of California a certificate specifying the amount of tax, penalties, and interest due, the name and address of the operator (as defined by section 5.05.020) liable for the same, and the fact that the City Manager, or their designee, has complied with all provisions of this Code and any other legal requirement in the determination of the amount required to be paid. From the time of the recording, the amount required to be paid, together with penalties and interest, shall constitute a lien upon any and all real property in any county owned by the operator or thereafter acquired by the operator. The lien shall have the force, effect, and priority of a judgment lien, and shall continue for ten years from the time of filing of the certificate unless sooner released or otherwise discharged. The lien may be renewed in the same manner as the renewal of judgment liens under state law. (b) Priority and Lien of Tax. The amounts required to be paid by any operator under this Code with penalties and interest shall be satisfied first in any of the following cases:
(1) Whenever the person is insolvent;
(2) Whenever the person makes a voluntary assignment of his or her assets; (3) Whenever the estate of the person in the hands of executors, administrators, or heirs is insufficient to pay all the debts due from the deceased; or (4) Whenever the estate and effects of an absconding, concealed, or absent person required to pay any amount under this Code are levied upon by process of law.
This chapter does not give the city a preference over any recorded lien which is attached prior to the date when the amounts required to be paid became a lien or any other liens that take priority by virtue of other State of Federal law.
3.10.030 Warrant for collection of tax
At any time after any operator is delinquent in the payment of any amount herein required to be paid off after recording a certificate of lien under section 3.10.020, the City Manager, or their designee, may issue a warrant directed to any sheriff or marshal for the enforcement of any liens and for the collection of any amount required to be paid to the city under this Code. The warrant shall have the same effect as a writ of execution, and be executed in the same manner and with the same effect as a levy and sale pursuant to a writ of execution. The City Manager, or their designee may pay or advance to the sheriff or marshal such fees, commissions, and expenses for services as are provided by law for similar services pursuant to a writ of execution. 4 4 of 314
-4- Ord. XXXX
3.10.040 Seizure and sale.
At any time after any operator is delinquent in the payment of any City TOT amount, the City Manager, or their designee, may forthwith collect the amount in the following manner: The City Manager, or their designee, shall seize any property, real or personal, of the operator and sell the property, or a sufficient part of it, at public auction to pay the amount due, together with any penalties and interest, imposed for the delinquency and any costs incurred on account of the seizure and sale. Any seizure made to collect occupancy taxes due shall be only of property of the operator not exempt from execution under the provisions of the California Code of Civil Procedure or any other applicable law.
3.10.050 Successor's and Assignee's Responsibility and Liability. (a) If any operator, while liable for any amount under this Code, sells, assigns, or otherwise transfers the subject property or quits the subject property, whether voluntarily or involuntarily, the operator's subsequent successor, assign, other transferee, or other person or entity obtaining ownership or control of the subject property, shall satisfy any transient occupancy tax liability owed to the city associated with the property. Failure to do so for the benefit of the city will result in the successor operator, assign, purchaser, transferee, or other person or entity obtaining ownership or control of the subject being personally liable to the city for the full amount of the transient occupancy tax liability, which includes interest and penalties.
(b) The successor operator, assign, purchaser, transferee, or other person or entity seeking to obtain ownership or control of the subject property shall notify the City Manager, or their designee, of the date of transfer at least thirty days prior to the transfer date; or if the agreement to sell, transfer, or otherwise dispose of the subject property was made less than thirty days prior to the date of transfer, notice shall be provided immediately. (c) The successor operator, assign, purchaser, transferee, or other person or entity who obtains ownership or control of the subject property shall be deemed to have complied with the requirement of this section to satisfy the unpaid transient occupancy tax liability, if that person or entity complies with the requirements of California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 7283.5 by withholding from the purchase price an amount sufficient to cover the tax liability, or by otherwise paying the tax liability until the City Manager, or their designee, provides a transient occupancy tax clearance certificate showing that it has been paid and stating that no amount is due through the date of transfer. (d) The City Manager, or their designee, within ninety days of receiving a written request from a successor operator, assign, purchaser, transferee, or other person or entity who obtains or attempts to obtain ownership or control of the subject property, may issue a transient occupancy tax clearance certificate stating either the amount of tax liability due and owing for the property, or stating that there is no tax liability due and owing for the property. The City Manager, or their designee, may also request financial records from the current or former owner or operator to conduct an audit of the transient occupancy tax that may be due and owing. After completing the audit within ninety days after the date that the records were made available, the City Manager, or their designee, may issue a tax clearance 5 5 of 314
-5- Ord. XXXX
certificate within thirty days of completing the audit, stating the amount of the tax liability owed, if any. If the city determines that the records provided for an audit are insufficient, the City Manager, or their designee, may rely on the facts and information available to estimate any transient occupancy tax liability associated with the property. The City Manager, or their designee, may issue a tax clearance certificate stating the amount of the tax liability, if any, based on such facts and information available. A written application for a hearing on the amount assessed on the tax clearance certificate must be made within ten days after the serving or mailing of the certificate. The hearing provision of section
5.05.120 shall apply. If an application for a hearing is not made within the time prescribed, the tax clearance certificate shall serve as conclusive evidence of the tax liability associated with the property as of the date specified on the certificate.
SECTION 4. Certification. The City Clerk shall certify to the adoption of this ordinance and, within 15 days after its adoption, shall cause it to be published in accordance with California Law.
SECTION 5. Custodian of Records. The custodian of records for this Ordinance is the City Clerk and the records comprising the administrative record are located at 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.
SECTION 6. Severability. If any provision of this Ordinance or its application to any person or circumstance is held to be invalid by a court of competent jurisdiction, such invalidity has no effect on the other provisions or applications of the Ordinance that can be given effect without the invalid provision or application, and to this extent, the provisions of this Ordinance are severable. The City Council declares that it would have adopted this Ordinance irrespective of the invalidity of any portion thereof.
SECTION 7. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall take thirty days after its passage and adoption pursuant to California Government Code section 36937.
ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2025.
Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
6 6 of 314
-6- Ord. XXXX
Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
____________
Megan Garibaldi, City Attorney
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. XXXX was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on October 28, 2025, and was finally adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on _______________, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach, CA
7 7 of 314
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
19 SUBJECT: FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE UPDATING THE CITY’S CAMPAIGN
CONTRIBUTION REGULATIONS
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Introduce and conduct first reading, proceed by title only, and waive further reading in full of an Ordinance titled, “AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 1.14.030 (CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS) OF TITLE 1 (GENERAL PROVISIONS) OF THE LAGUNA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO UPDATE THE CITY’S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION REGULATIONS AND DETERMINE
THE ORDINANCE IS NOT A PROJECT FOR PURPOSES OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT”; and
2. Determine that the proposed ordinance is not a “project’ for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act or, in the alternative, determine the proposed ordinance is exempt from the CEQA pursuant to section 15061(b)(5).
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
On May 28, 2024, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 1698, which adjusted the campaign contribution limit for the 2024 election cycle to $520 based on the Consumer Price Index (CPI) for Los Angeles-Long Beach-Anaheim, and updated the Campaign Contributions chapter in the Laguna Beach Municipal Code to make this adjustment automatic.
On March 11, 2025, the City Council supported Mayor Alex Rounaghi’s recommendation to have an item on a future City Council agenda to lower the City’s campaign contribution limit to the $500 limitation found in the Levine Act – the State law positing a contribution limit in order for City officials to participate in certain actions. The attached ordinance has been prepared in response to the City Council’s direction.
Deletions are identified in strikeout text and additions are identified in bold italics.
DISCUSSION
Ordinance No. 1698 set the baseline campaign contribution limit at $520 per contributor to a candidate/controlled committee per election, to be adjusted automatically by the CPI starting January 1, 2025, and January 1 of each odd-numbered year thereafter.
Effective January 1, 2023, SB 1439 expanded the Levine Act (Government Code Section 84308) to cover all appointed and local elected officials, including members of city council, making them subject to the Levine Act’s restrictions and disqualification rules. Effective January 1, 2025, SB 1243 increased the Levine Act contribution threshold from $250 to $500. Contributions of more than $500 that are made beginning on January 1, 2025, will trigger the Levine Act’s prohibition and disqualification rules and the City desires to align its local contribution limit with the Levine Act. 1 of 329
FIRST READING OF ORDINANCE UPDATING THE CITY’S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION
REGULATIONS
October 28, 2025
Aligning the City’s local contribution limit to match the Levine Act contribution threshold will simplify tracking of contributions to ensure compliance with the Levine Act.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action has no financial impact to the budget.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
Determine that the proposed ordinance is not a ”project” pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5). Specifically, the setting of a local campaign contribution limit to align with the Levine Act is an administrative activity of the City that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment as the setting of campaign contribution limits has no possibility of creating a change in the environment.
In the alternative, the City Council finds the proposed ordinance is exempt from CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(5) as changes to the local campaign contribution limit is not anticipated to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, not will the proposed changes have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Draft Ordinance (Pgs. 3-5)
2. Ordinance 1698 (Pgs. 6-15)
Submitted By: Ann Marie McKay Approved: .David A Kiff
Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk Patrick Donegan, Assistant City Attorney 2 of 329
ORDINANCE NO. XXXX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 1.14.030
(CONTRIBUTION LIMITATIONS) OF TITLE 1 (GENERAL
PROVISIONS) OF THE LAGUNA BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TO
UPDATE THE CITY’S CAMPAIGN CONTRIBUTION REGULATIONS
AND DETERMINE THE ORDINANCE IS NOT A PROJECT FOR
PURPOSES OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT
NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. Section 1.14.030(a) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code is amended to shall read as follows [NOTE: deletions are identified in strikeout text and additions are identified in bold italics]:
§1.14.030. Contribution limitations.
(a) Beginning on January 1, 20245, no person shall make to any candidate for elective city office or a controlled committee, and no candidate or controlled committee shall solicit or accept from any person, a contribution or contributions totaling more than five hundred twenty dollars in any single election. Beginning on January 1, 2025, the contribution limitation established by this subdivision shall be adjusted on January 1 of each odd-numbered year to reflect the then current contribution limit found in the Levine Act (Government Code Section 84308 as amended or renumbered). Consumer Price Index for the Los Angeles-Orange County Metropolitan Area, rounded to the nearest ten dollars. The City Clerk shall publish or post the adjusted limit on January 1 of each odd-numbered year or as soon thereafter as applicable Consumer Price Index data contribution threshold adjustment information is available. In the event the Levine Act is repealed or there no longer exists a contribution limit applicable to a city candidate, the most recent contribution threshold shall apply. No adjustment shall apply to past elections.
SECTION 2. The City Council determines that, pursuant to California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) Guidelines Section 15378 (b)(5), the proposed ordinances is not a “project” for the purposes of CEQA. Specifically, the setting of a local campaign contribution limit to align with the State contribution limit found in the Levein Act is an administrative activity of the City Attachment 1
3 3 of 329
- 2 - Ord. XXXX
which will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment, Setting a local contribution limit has no possibility of creating a change in the environment.
Alternatively, the City Council finds that this Ordinance is exempt from the CEQA pursuant to State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(5) in that the proposed amendments are not anticipated to result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment, nor will the proposed changes have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment.
SECTION 3. If any portion of this Ordinance, or the application of any such provision to any person or circumstance, shall be held invalid, the remainder of this Ordinance to the extent it can be given affect, of the application of such provision to persons or circumstances other than those as to which it is held invalid, shall not be affected thereby, and to this extent the provisions of this Ordinance are severable.
SECTION 4. This Ordinance is intended to be of Citywide effect and application. All ordinances and provisions of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code and Sections thereof inconsistent shall be and the same are hereby repealed to the extent of such inconsistency and no further.
SECTION 5. The City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach shall certify to the passage and adoption of this Ordinance and shall cause the same to be published in the manner required by law in the City of Laguna Beach. This Ordinance shall become effective thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption by the City Council.
ADOPTED this ________ day of _____________, 2025.
Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
ATTESTED ON: ____________________________
(Date)
4 4 of 329
- 3 - Ord. XXXX
Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. XXXX was introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council on ___________________, 2025, and was finally adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on ____________________, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):
City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach, CA
5 5 of 329
Attachment 2
6 6 of 329
7 7 of 329
8 8 of 329
9 9 of 329
10 10 of 329
11 11 of 329
12 12 of 329
13 13 of 329
14 14 of 329
15 15 of 329
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
20 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH AND THE LAGUNA BEACH POLICE EMPLOYEES’
ASSOCIATION REGARDING OVERTIME INCENTIVE PAY FOR PUBLIC
SAFETY DISPATCHERS
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Adopt the attached Resolution titled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH AND THE LAGUNA BEACH POLICE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION REGARDING OVERTIME INCENTIVE PAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS”; and
2. Authorize the City Manager to sign the Side Letter of Agreement between the City of Laguna Beach and the Laguna Beach Police Employees’ Association.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
This report recommends that the City Council adopt a Resolution approving a Side Letter of Agreement between the City of Laguna Beach and the Laguna Beach Police Employees’ Association (LBPEA or the Association), reflecting a mutual agreement to provide an overtime incentive for Public Safety Dispatchers and Senior Dispatchers. Under the agreement, employees in these classifications will receive double-time pay for all hours worked in excess of 52 hours per workweek when the Dispatch Unit is staffed with fewer than ten mission-ready employees through March 31, 2027. The City and LBPEA have identified this incentive as a necessary step to maintain essential public safety staffing levels during periods of reduced availability.
The estimated cost of the incentive is approximately $8,000 per month and can be accommodated within the Police Department’s approved Fiscal Year 2025–26 operating budget. This action has been reviewed under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and determined not to be a project pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378.
DISCUSSION
The City and the LBPEA are parties to the current Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with a term of January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2025. Under this Agreement, Dispatchers and Senior Dispatchers are compensated at a rate of time and one-half for hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours in a workweek.
To maintain essential public safety services, the City and the Association have agreed to enter into a Side Letter of Agreement to offer an additional overtime incentive for employees in the Dispatcher classifications. This incentive will apply for the term of the Side Letter Agreement whenever the Dispatch Unit is staffed with fewer than ten (10) "mission ready" employees. For purposes of this agreement, “mission ready” refers to employees who are fully trained, certified, and available for assignment without requiring further qualification or preparation.
1 of 337
APPROVAL OF A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH AND THE LAGUNA BEACH POLICE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION REGARDING
OVERTIME INCENTIVE PAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS
October 28, 2025
Under the proposed Side Letter of Agreement, Dispatchers and Senior Dispatchers will be compensated at a rate of double time (2x) for all hours worked in excess of fifty-two (52) hours in a workweek, provided the Dispatch Unit is operating with fewer than ten mission ready employees. Use of accrued leave time leave will not count toward the 52-hour threshold.
This temporary incentive is intended to:
• Ensure adequate staffing levels to support public safety operations; • Recognize the additional workload absorbed by existing personnel; and • Promote voluntary coverage of overtime shifts.
The Dispatch Unit is budgeted for eleven positions. Currently, there are eight mission ready employees and one employee in training. The Police Department expects to have ten mission ready employees by March 31, 2027.
If approved, the overtime incentive will take effect on the first day of the pay period following Council approval and will be applied whenever the number of mission ready employees in the Dispatch Unit is less than ten. The agreement will sunset on March 31, 2027, unless extended by mutual agreement of the parties.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The estimated cost of this incentive is approximately $8,000 per month, or $96,000 annually, based on current staffing levels and average overtime hours. Sufficient funding is available within the Police Department’s adopted FY 2025–26 operating budget under existing salary and overtime appropriations. No additional appropriations are required at this time.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS This action is not a “project” within the meaning of CEQA (Pub. Res.
Code § 21065; CEQA Guidelines § 15378(b)(2)) because it involves only a personnel-related action impacting compensation and will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. No further environmental review is required.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution (Pgs. 3-5)
a. Exhibit A: Side Letter of Agreement with LBPEA (Pgs. 6-7) Submitted By:
Aggie Nesh
Approved:
, for
Aggie Nesh, Director of Human
Resources & Risk Management
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Aggie Nesh, Director of Human Resources &
Risk Management
Jeff Calvert, Police Chief
Michelle Bannigan, Finance Director
2 of 337
APPROVAL OF A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH AND THE LAGUNA BEACH POLICE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION REGARDING
OVERTIME INCENTIVE PAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS
October 28, 2025
3 of 337
Attachment 1
RESOLUTION NO. 25.XXX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING A SIDE LETTER AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH AND THE LAGUNA BEACH
POLICE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION REGARDING OVERTIME
INCENTIVE PAY FOR PUBLIC SAFETY DISPATCHERS
WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach (“City”) and the Laguna Beach Police Employees’ Association (“LBPEA”) are parties to a Memorandum of Understanding (“MOU”) covering the period of January 1, 2023, through December 31, 2025, which from time to time may be renewed by mutual agreement of the parties; and
WHEREAS, employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher and Senior Public Safety Dispatcher currently receive compensatory time or overtime pay at the rate of time and one-half for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours in a workweek; and WHEREAS, the parties have negotiated a Side Letter Agreement to the existing MOU providing that employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher and Senior Public Safety Dispatcher shall receive overtime pay at the rate of double time for all hours actually worked in excess of fifty-two (52) hours in a workweek; and
WHEREAS, the eligibility for this double time overtime pay shall require that the employee physically works more than fifty-two (52) hours in a workweek, and accrued leave time shall not be included in the calculation of hours worked; and WHEREAS, the incentive pay shall remain in effect whenever the Dispatch Unit is staffed with fewer than ten (10) mission ready employees (as that term is defined in the Side Letter Agreement) through March 31, 2027, unless both parties mutually agree in writing to extend the Side Letter Agreement.
4 of 337
Attachment 1
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The above-stated recitals are hereby adopted by the City Council and incorporated as set forth herein.
SECTION 2. The Side Letter Agreement between the City and LBPEA, attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby approved.
SECTION 3. This action is not a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because it involves only a personnel-related action regarding compensation and will not result in a direct or reasonably foreseeable indirect physical change in the environment. (Pub. Res. Code § 21065; CEQA Guidelines § 15378(b)(2).) No further environmental review is required.
SECTION 4. This resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption by the City Council, and the City Clerk shall certify the vote adopting the resolution. For the avoidance of doubt, the Side Letter Agreement shall take effect upon the date set forth therein.
ADOPTED this 28th day of October, 2025.
Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
ATTEST:
City Clerk
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 25.XXX was duly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of said City held on _____________, 2025, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
5 of 337
Attachment 1
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach, California
6 of 337
LETTER OF AGREEMENT
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
AND
THE LAGUNA BEACH POLICE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION
This Letter of Agreement (“Agreement”) between the City of Laguna Beach (“City”) and the Laguna Beach Police Employees’ Association (“LBPEA”) is entered into with respect to the following:
WHEREAS, the parties are currently parties to a Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with a term of January 1, 2023 through December 31, 2025; and WHEREAS, the parties wish to provide additional incentive for employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher and Senior Public Safety Dispatcher to work overtime shifts when staffing is less than ten (10) mission ready employees; and WHEREAS, the following sets forth the parties’ Agreement:
1. Article 27.2 of the parties’ MOU provides that employees in the professional staff (which includes employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher and Senior Public Safety Dispatcher) receive compensatory time or overtime pay at the rate of time and one-half for all hours worked in excess of forty (40) hours in a workweek.
2. Effective on the first day of the pay period following City Council approval of this Agreement, and subject to the conditions below, employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher and Senior Public Safety Dispatcher shall receive overtime pay at the rate of double time for all hours worked in excess of fifty-two (52) hours in a workweek. If the employee chooses to earn compensatory time off, it will be earned at time and one-half.
3. Eligibility for this double time overtime pay or is subject to the following:
a. The employee must actually, physically work in excess of fifty-two (52) hours in a workweek. In determining whether the employee has worked in excess of fifty-two (52) hours in a workweek, no forms of accrued leave shall count in the calculation.
b. The double time overtime pay described above will continue until the bargaining unit represented by LBPEA is staffed with ten (10) mission ready employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher or Senior Public Safety Dispatcher. “Mission ready employees” means employees who are fully-trained, certified, and available to be assigned without needing further qualification or preparation. For the avoidance of doubt, the double overtime pay described above shall be available during the term of this Agreement, as set forth in Paragraph 4, whenever LBPEA is staffed with fewer than ten (10) 7 of 337
mission ready employees in the classifications of Public Safety Dispatcher or Senior Public Safety Dispatcher.
4. This Agreement will sunset on March 31, 2027, unless both parties mutually agree that it will continue and specify for how long it will continue.
FOR THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
_________________________ __________________________
Dave Kiff, Date
City Manager
_________________________ __________________________
Aggie Nesh, Director of Human Date
Resources & Risk Management
_________________________ __________________________
Peter Brown, Labor Negotiator Date
FOR THE LAGUNA BEACH POLICE EMPLOYEES’ ASSOCIATION
_________________________ __________________________
Brian Griep, President PEA Date
_________________________ __________________________
Damian Stafford, PEA Date
Labor Relations Representative
8 of 337
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
CONSENT
21 SUBJECT: FORMATION OF AN ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AD HOC COMMITTEE (KEMPF)
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Form an Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Mark Orgill and Councilmember Sue Kempf, supported by City staff, to focus on advancing the City’s economic development initiatives; and
2. Direct staff to return to the City Council at its November 10, 2026, meeting to review the committee’s progress and determine whether to continue or sunset the Ad Hoc Committee
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
At its October 14, 2025, City Council meeting, and in accordance with Resolution No. 24.011, Councilmember Kempf requested that the City Council direct staff to return with an agenda item establishing an Economic Development Ad Hoc Committee comprised of Mayor Pro Tem Mark Orgill, Councilmember Sue Kempf, and City staff, with a focus on advancing the City’s economic development initiatives.
Mayor Rounaghi and Councilmember Jones expressed their support for the request, providing the requisite three votes to bring the item back to the City Council for further consideration.
By definition, Ad Hoc Committees are temporary in nature and established for a specific purpose with a defined end date. It is recommended that the City Council form the Ad Hoc Committee and review the need to continue or sunset the committee at its November 10, 2026, City Council meeting.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Resolution 24.011 Establishing Policy Relating to Councilmember Placement of Agenda Items for City Council Meetings (Pgs. 2-4)
2. Staff Update on Economic Development Program September 2025 (Pgs. 5-11) Submitted By:
.
Approved: .David A Kiff
Jeremy Frimond, Assistant City
Manager
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Jeremy Frimond, Assistant City Manager
1 of 348
RESOLUTION NO. 24. 011
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ESTABLISHING A
POLICY RELATING TO COUNCILMEMBER
PLACEMENT OF AGENDA ITEMS FOR CITY COUNCIL
MEETINGS AND REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 22. 066
WHEREAS, the City Council is authorized to adopt rules for the conduct of its meetings, proceedings, and business; and
WHEREAS, it is important to establish a clear and easily understood process for the preparation of agendas for City Council meetings and to provide a means for Councilmembers and certain advisory City bodies to request items be placed on a future agenda for consideration; and WHEREAS, it is important that agendas for City Council meetings be prepared to ensure that the City Council focuses on business items for which there is consensus, and which are consistent with the City Council' sapproved priorities and work plans; and WHEREAS, it is important that agendas for City Council meetings be prepared to utilize staff, fiscal and other resources efficiently and effectively; and WHEREAS, it is important that agendas for City Council meetings be prepared in a manner that manages the duration of meetings; and
WHEREAS, during its January 19, 2024, meeting the City Council discussed the matter of amending its process for Councilmembers adding items to the City Council agenda, and reached consensus that staff should prepare a resolution that amends the current agenda -setting process for City Council members for the reasons listed above.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. For the purpose of this Resolution, the term " initiative" shall mean " a new policy, ordinance, program, or project that is not budgeted, or is not included in the City Council priorities established during the Strategic Planning Session." SECTION 2. Placing Councilmember- Requested Items on the City Council Agenda.
In accordance with the City Council -City Manager form of government, a Councilmember shall 1-
Attachment 1
2 2 of 348
propose to place a new initiative on a future City Council meeting agenda in the manner set forth herein. Two members of the City Council may propose at a Council meeting, under " Council Member Items" that an item be agendized for future Council discussion, consideration, and/ or action. The merits of the requested item shall not be debated at that meeting. Subject to notice and hearing requirements, the item shall be agendized for a future meeting and noticed as required by law. Items agendized pursuant to this section shall appear on the agenda under the Councilmember Items portion of the agenda and the names of the Councilmembers who agendized the item shall be included with the item description. Staff reports will only be prepared if a minimum of three members of the City Council at a Council meeting affirmatively direct staff to prepare a report.
SECTION 3. Placing Board, Commission, and Committee - Requested Items on the City Council Agenda.
A. Notwithstanding Section 2, above, if a City Board, Commission, or Committee desires to place an initiative on the City Council agenda, the Chair of the body and Staff Liaison to the body should contact and work with the City Council Liaison and City Manager to place an initiative on a future City Council meeting agenda.
B. For bodies other than the Planning Commission, Design Review Board, Arts Commission, Parking Traffic and Circulation Committee, and the View Restoration Committee, only initiatives on the City Council approved workplan for the body shall be placed on a City Council meeting agenda pursuant to this Section 3.
SECTION 4. Resolution No. 22. 066 is hereby repealed. All other prior resolutions and minute actions of the City Council with regard to the policy of the City Council relating to the agenda -setting process for City Council meetings are hereby rescinded and superseded to the extent of any conflict or inconsistency with this Resolution.
SECTION 5. The procedures established in this Resolution are directory in nature. No action of the City Council shall be held invalid due to any failure to strictly observe the provisions of this Resolution, nor shall any person have a claim or cause of action against the City or any of its officers or employees as a result of any such failure.
3 Reso. 24. 011
3 of 348
SECTION 6. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon its adoption.
ADOPTED this 27th day of February 2024.
Sue Kempf, May
ATTEST:
y, City Clerk
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 24. 011 was duly adopted at a Regular Meeting ofthe City Council of said City held on February 27, 2024, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBER( S): Orgill, Weiss, Whalen, Rounaghi, Kempf NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS( S): None
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER( S): None
arie McKay, City Cler
4 Reso. 24. 011
4 of 348
MEMORANDUM
Date: September 24, 2025
To: Laguna Beach City Council
Via: Dave Kiff, City Manager
From: Jeremy Frimond, Assistant City Manager
Louie Lacasella, Senior Management Analyst
cc: Matt Schnider, Community Development Director
Subject: Economic Development – Council Briefing Update Report Overview
This memo provides the City Council with a briefing on the progress of the City’s Economic Development Program, in alignment with the 2025 Key Initiative on Economic Development. A more comprehensive update is included as an attachment to this memo.
Key Initiative Alignment
• Supports Council Key Initiative No. 2 – Economic Development. • Focus on reducing vacancies and creating visible results in commercial districts.
Program Momentum
• Vacancy rate reduced from 7.1% to 6.2%.
• Mix of local, regional, and national tenants secured or in progress. • Downtown and Coast Highway corridors showing visible improvement.
Accomplishments
• Open for Business: Board & Brew, Chakra Shack, Slice Pizza, Golden Spoon, Piatti. • Coming Soon: Better Buzz, Porsche, Rainbow Cone, Nalu Poke, Truly Pizza, Surf Heritage Museum, Rivian.
• Policy Implementation: Incentive Policy applied (fee waiver of $3,289), Commercial Property Maintenance Ordinance enforced (multiple properties improved). • Process Improvements: Coordination with County Health Department to allow tenant improvements while permits are under review.
• Community Engagement: Workshop completed; resident survey launching October 2025. • Retail Leakage Report & HIP District Branding completed.
Strategic Tools in Place
• Retail Coach engaged; Phase One complete, targeted recruitment now underway. • Broker roundtable held; AI business analytics tool offered to local businesses.
Attachment 2
5 5 of 348
Economic Development – Council Briefing Update
• Outdoor dining program paused pending Downtown Landscape Feasibility Study (AB 413 alignment).
Next Steps
• Advance targeted recruitment strategy with Retail Coach. • Expand support for businesses through streamlined permitting. • Continue zoning/property maintenance enforcement.
• Return to Council with recommendations on the long-term outdoor dining/parklet program.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Economic Development Program Update: Progress and Next Steps September 2025 6 6 of 348
City of Laguna Beach
Economic Development
Program Update
Progress and Next Steps
In alignment with City Council 2025
Key Initiative No. 2 – Economic Development
Prepared for:
Laguna Beach City Council
Prepared by:
City Manager’s Office
September 2025
7 7 of 348
2025 Economic Development Program: Nine-Month Progress Report September 24, 2025
Report Overview
This report provides a comprehensive update on the City’s Economic Development Program in alignment with City Council 2025 Key Initiative No. 2 – Economic Development. It summarizes accomplishments during the first nine months of the program, highlights ongoing projects, and outlines next steps to continue reducing vacancies and strengthening Laguna Beach’s commercial vitality.
Introduction
In alignment with the City Council’s 2025 Key Initiative No. 2 – Economic Development, this memorandum provides an overview of the accomplishments, ongoing projects, and strategic advancements made during the first nine months of the City’s Economic Development Program.
The economic development team is off to a strong start. The corner of Ocean Avenue and Coast Highway, once marked by several vacant storefronts, is now more vibrant and active. Looking ahead to the end of 2025 and 2026, several visible projects are on track to open and further energize the commercial landscape in the City:
• The Surf Heritage Museum (former drug store, Ocean/ Broadway) • Two Truly Pizza locations (N. Coast Highway & Former Ti Amo) • Rivian delivery point of sale store (former dry cleaner, Ocean Ave.) • Better Buzz (former BJ’s Pizza, S. Coast Highway)
• A new Porsche electric vehicle showroom (Former Verizon store, Broadway and Forest) • A new poke restaurant and ice cream shop (former Rocky Mountain Chocolate Factory and adjacent vacant storefront, Coast Highway)
The mission of the Economic Development Program is to create visible results in the commercial areas by reducing vacancies and working with businesses to maintain active storefronts. While we are pleased to report progress toward this goal, the team is setting up a process to approach future opportunities strategically.
To this end, the City has engaged The Retail Coach to assist in actively recruiting quality businesses that align with Laguna Beach’s stewardship goals, resident’s preferences, and market conditions. Groundwork is underway, including community meetings and a forthcoming resident survey . At the same time, staff is facilitating introductions between property owners and the consultant team to build relationships that will support long-term recruitment success. The team acknowledges that Aliso Shopping Center is important to the community and are staying connected to the property representatives.
DISCUSSION
Below is a list of projects that the economic development team has assisted with to date. Including expediting review, technical assistance with permitting, and landlord/tenant negotiations:
8 8 of 348
2025 Economic Development Program: Nine-Month Progress Report September 24, 2025
Open for Business
• Board & Brew (188 S. Coast Hwy – former Wild Taco)
• The Chakra Shack (207 Ocean Ave – former Aero)
• Slice Pizza (477 Forest Ave – ownership change)
• Golden Spoon (30912 Coast Hwy)
• Piatti (222 Ocean Ave)
Coming Soon:
1. Better Buzz Coffee (280 S. Coast Hwy, former BJ’s Pizza) – Fall 2025
2. Porsche / AutoNation (480 Ocean Ave, former Forest & Ocean Gallery) – Fall 2025
3. Rainbow Cone (244 S. Coast Hwy) – Fall 2025
4. Nalu Poke Bowl (248 S Coast Hwy) – Fall 2025
5. Truly (Ti Amo) – Fall 2025/ Winter 2026 (Pending Health Department)
6. Truly Pizza (320 N. Coast Hwy) – Fall 2025/ Winter 2026 (Pending Health Department)
7. Surfing Heritage & Culture Center (239 Broadway, former Laguna Drug) – Fall 2025/Winter 2026
8. Rivian Point of Sale and Delivery Office Site (224/226 Ocean Dry Cleaner) – Winter 2026
9. Hotel Joaquin CUP Amendment – TBD
10. New Business (903 S. Coast Hwy, former Billabong) – TBD Program Development & Policy Implementation
• Incentive Policy Adoption & Implementation: City Council adopted the Economic Development Incentive Policy at its meeting on February 25, 2025, which authorizes financial incentives aimed at reducing commercial vacancies. o The policy was actively applied to support the relocation of The Chakra Shack to a previously vacant storefront at 207 Ocean Avenue, with a retroactive waiver of City fees totaling $3,289.
• Economic Development Team Formation: Established a cross-departmental team comprised of the Assistant City Manager, Senior Management Analyst in the City Manager’s Office, and Community Development staff to streamline support for new and existing businesses navigating the City’s permitting process. • Commercial Property Maintenance Ordinance Enforcement: Continue to implement the Commercial Property Maintenance Ordinance to improve commercial property upkeep, several success stories thus far include (888 Glenneyre Street, 244 Forest Avenue, 294 Forest Avenue, 304 Forest Avenue, 392 Ocean Avenue, 290 Forest Avenue, 381 Forest Avenue, etc.)
9 9 of 348
2025 Economic Development Program: Nine-Month Progress Report September 24, 2025
Retail Recruitment Efforts
• The Retail Coach – Targeted Business Recruitment:
o Engaged The Retail Coach to execute the the City’s retail attraction and retention strategy.
Phase One of the engagement—market analysis, strategy development, and preliminary recommendations—is complete, with targeted recruitment efforts now underway.
• Community Engagement:
o Hosted a community workshop to solicit resident input on types of businesses that should be recruited in town.
o An online survey will be launched shortly to further refine retail targets based on resident input. (October 2025)
Intergovernmental Coordination
• County Health Department Process Improvement:
o In response to applicant delays, City staff coordinated with the County Supervisor’s Office to address Health Department delays. o An interim solution now allows applicants to initiate tenant improvements while their health permits are under review, expediting project timelines.
Completed Projects
• Retail Leakage Report: Developed a comprehensive analysis of retail leakage trends, identifying key opportunities to recapture resident spending currently occurring outside the city.
• HIP District Branding:
o Installed 35 new district banners following Planning Commission approval, enhancing identity and visibility within the HIP District.
Additional Initiatives
• Business Communications and Tools:
o Launched an opt-in system to streamline communications and updates for Laguna Beach businesses, improving transparency and engagement. o Offered an AI business analytics tool to help local businesses gain deeper customer Insights
o Hosted a commercial broker's roundtable on March 26, 2025,2025 with local brokers to provide updates on the City’s economic development initiative. 10 10 of 348
2025 Economic Development Program: Nine-Month Progress Report September 24, 2025
• Outdoor Dining & Parklet Program:
o 16 participating businesses utilizing a mix of 8 public and 55 private dining spaces.
o City Council has temporarily paused new parklet applications while a sidewalk and curb improvement feasibility study is conducted. This review, aligned with Assembly Bill 413 requirements, explores expanded curbside safety measures (e.g., bulb-outs, widened walkways, enhanced outdoor dining designs) to modernize the City’s pedestrian infrastructure.
Vacancy Rate
The most recent data indicates a downward trend in the vacancies, which has declined to 6.2%, down from a recent peak of 7.1%.
Next Steps
• Advance recruitment strategy with The Retail Coach based on finalized target list. • Continue proactive support for businesses through streamlined permitting and interdepartmental coordination.
• Monitor implementation outcomes related to zoning code amendments and property maintenance enforcement.
• Prepare for City Council review of the long-term future of the Outdoor Dining and Parklet Program as informed by the Downtown Landscape Feasibility Study. 11 11 of 348
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
BUSINESS
22 SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC TREE MAINTENANCE PRACTICES RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Continue the July 22, 2025 presentation from staff regarding public tree maintenance practices;
2. Discuss the City’s approach to public trees, public tree maintenance practices, and provide further direction to staff regarding next steps or potential policy considerations; and
3. Find that the recommended action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
This report provides an overview of the presentation provided to City Council during the July 22, 2025 Study Session (Attachment 1) and the resulting discussion. The presentation described the strategies employed by the Public Works & Utilities Department to manage a network of approximately 3,300 public trees in parks, medians, sidewalks, and other public spaces. Due to time constraints during the July 22, 2025 Study Session, Council’s discussion was not completed. City staff is available to continue the discussion and address any additional questions regarding these practices.
1. DISCUSSION
Overview:
The Public Works & Utilities Department maintains approximately 3,300 public trees using a proactive and structured inspection and pruning cycle, managed by the City Arborist and guided by the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards, International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) Best Management Practices, and the Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document (LSHRD). All public trees are generally inspected and pruned on a biennial cycle (once every 2 years). The City is divided into three maintenance sections: Downtown (pruned annually), North, and South (the latter two pruned in alternating years). This ensures that every public tree is inspected and pruned at least once every two years between October and June, with some species receiving annual pruning regardless of section.
The City Arborist ensures that public trees are pruned for the purpose of encouraging healthy growth, tree preservation, and hazard/risk mitigation by utilizing several professional pruning strategies that conform to ANSI A300 standards, including crown cleaning, crown thinning, crown raising, crown restoration, clearance pruning, crown reduction, and structural pruning. Crown reduction is a deliberate, structured method reserved for specific circumstances, such as mitigating risk in declining trees or resolving unavoidable conflicts. Tree "topping" is avoided on healthy public trees as it is a non-standard practice that can significantly reduce tree health and increase the likelihood of future branch failure.
Discussion:
Staff’s presentation at the July 22, 2025, Study Session resulted in several public comments and discussion by the Council that highlighted issues for further consideration. 1 of 15
DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC TREE MAINTENANCE PRACTICES
October 28, 2025
Central to this discussion was a perceived discrepancy between the City's policy for public tree maintenance and the requirements for certain private trees under Laguna Beach Municipal Code (LBMC) Chapter 12.16 View Preservation and Restoration. Residents voiced concerns that there is a lack of a formal mechanism for view-based pruning of publicly maintained trees, leading to a loss of valuable scenic views, due to exemptions for City maintained vegetation under LBMC 12.16.080.
The distinction in these policies primarily centers on the City's obligation for public safety and risk management. Because the City cannot practically restrict public access to rights-of-way, parks, and other public areas surrounding public trees, staff’s tree maintenance approach prioritizes structural integrity and long-term tree health. Pruning methods requested solely for view enhancement, such as inappropriate crown reduction or topping, are generally inconsistent with professional arboriculture standards. These nonstandard practices run counter to the tree's natural mechanisms; create large, vulnerable wounds; and lead to the rapid growth of weakly attached shoots to decaying wood. Consequently, performing view-based pruning significantly increases the likelihood of branch failures and other hazards. This, in turn, elevates the City’s exposure to liability by intentionally introducing defects into a public asset located in an area of unrestricted public use. Thus, the maintenance standards are primarily driven by the imperative to mitigate risk and preserve a safe public environment.
This issue is particularly noted with mature trees, such as the tall Eucalyptus trees adjacent to the Glenneyre Parking Structure and along South Coast Highway adjacent to the Montage resort. A distinction was clarified between these specific Eucalyptus groves. The trees adjacent to the Glenneyre Parking Structure are public trees, managed under the Public Works & Utilities Department. Conversely, the mature Eucalyptus trees in front of the Montage are classified as privately maintained public trees with specific maintenance guidelines to ensure their long-term preservation. The City Arborist’s role is to ensure the guidelines are adhered to.
Ultimately, the discussion pointed to the broader need for a comprehensive, long-term Urban Forestry Master Plan to guide the City's public tree care and maintenance program. In July 2024, the City Arborist secured $100,000 of federal grant funding to help fund this process, and staff is in the process of issuing an RFP to solicit proposals for several services needed for the development of an Urban Forestry Master Plan.
Key Questions for Discussion
Key questions for the Council and community members may include, but not be limited to:
1. Given the City’s written policies, including approaches within the General Plan (see references to these policies in the staff report that is Attachment A to this staff report), what would the pathways be to change our tree maintenance approach if the Council so desired – i.e., should the policies and plans be amended before real time practices can be changed?
2. There is some sense that our current practices – which for argument’s sake are considered lighter trims – are different from years ago, when our plans and policies were the same – but the trimming was more moderate than light. What is staff’s and the community’s perspective on whether this is so?
3. Let’s say that Council wants to stay consistent with the written policies, but also direct an approach that encourages more comprehensive / moderate trimming than may be done today – how would that work, 2 of 15
DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC TREE MAINTENANCE PRACTICES
October 28, 2025
and would that work within existing policies?
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended actions have no financial impact to the budget at this time
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action consists of organizational or administrative activities of the City that will not result in a direct or indirect physical change in the environment and therefore does not constitute a “project” within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. (Public Resources Code Section 21065; 14 CCR Section 15378(b)(5).)
ATTACHMENTS
1. July 22, 2025 Study Session Staff Report (Pgs. 4-7)
Submitted By: Mark McAvoy Approved: .David A Kiff
Mark McAvoy, Director of Public
Works & Utilities
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Matthew Barker, City Arborist Reza Jafari, Deputy Director/ Public Services 3 of 15
AGENDA REPORT
Meeting Date
July 22, 2025
Study Session
SUBJECT: DISCUSSION OF PUBLIC TREES, TREE MAINTENANCE PRACTICES RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Receive a presentation from staff regarding public tree maintenance practices: and
2. Discuss public trees, public tree maintenance practices and provide further direction.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
This report provides an overview of the City's public tree maintenance practices. The City manages approximately 3,300 public trees in parks, medians, sidewalks, and other public spaces, using a structured pruning and inspection cycle led by the City Arborist. These practices ensure long-term tree health, safety, and environmental benefits for the community.
DISCUSSION
Overview:
The Public Works & Utilities Department employs a proactive and structured approach to managing the City's public trees through a comprehensive inspection and pruning cycle carried out by contractors working under the direction of the City Arborist. The City Arborist integrates work planning, maintenance history, and analytics through a web-based GIS software program. All public trees are inspected and pruned generally on a biennial (once every 2 years) cycle. The pruning cycle starts each year in October and ends in June. The City is divided into three maintenance sections: Downtown, North, and South pruning sections.
The Downtown section trees are inspected and pruned annually. The North section consists of public trees located north of Broadway Street, and the South section consists of public trees located south of Park A venue. The North and South sections are pruned in alternating years, along with all Downtown section trees. This structure ensures that every City-maintained tree receives inspection and at least one form of pruning maintenance every two years, with specific trees (palms as one example) receiving annual attention due to species characteristics, location, or other considerations.
The City's approach to maintenance is, as noted, grounded in proper arboriculture practices. It is also guided by the City's Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document (LSHRD), introduced in 1995 Attachment 1
4 4 of 15
Discussion of Trees, Public Tree Maintenance Practices
July 22, 2025
and updated in 2018. Aspects of the LSHRD are referred to in the City's Landscape and Scenic Highways Element (LSHE) which is part of the City's General Plan.
Discussion:
The City Arborist utilizes several pruning strategies conforming to International Society of Arboriculture (ISA) best management practices and the American National Standards Institute (ANSI) A300 pruning standards that are considered appropriate to an individual's species, maturity, condition, and site considerations. These include crown cleaning, crown raising, crown thinning, structural pruning, crown restoration, clearance pruning, and crown reduction.
Often, a resident or business owner, will request a tree be pruned for the purpose of view enhancement, and they may specifically request that the City Arborist employ "Topping" or "Crown Reduction" as the pruning method. Two locations that receive these requests on a frequent basis are the Eucalyptus trees along Glenneyre adjacent to the Glenneyre Parking Structure, and the Eucalyptus trees along Coast Highway adjacent to the Montage.
Tree "topping" is defined as the indiscriminate reduction of a tree's height or spread by cutting branches to stubs or lateral branches not capable of assuming apical control. This method removes significant live tissue without regard for natural structure or physiology. Topping results in the rapid growth of weakly attached shoots, exposure oflarge wounds prone to decay, and a loss of stored energy reserves. Topping significantly reduces tree health, decreases the tree's ability to defend against pests and wood-decaying fungi, increases the likelihood of tree failure, and permanently disfigures the tree's structure. This pruning strategy does not conform to the ISA best management practices or ANSI A300 pruning standards, and therefore, is not used by City staff or its contractors on publicly maintained trees.
Crown reduction is a structured and deliberate pruning method used to reduce the height or spread of a tree by selectively cutting back to strong, viable lateral branches capable of assuming apical dominance. A proper reduction cut removes a branch or stem back to a lateral that is at least one-third of the diameter of the removed portion. Crown reduction is an appropriate treatment only in specific circumstances. This is most commonly performed when the tree is experiencing physiological stress or is in a state of decline.
Crown reduction can act as a preservation strategy to extend the functional lifespan of the tree while mitigating risk by removing dead, dying, diseased, and poorly attached tissue across the outer portions of the crown. This is often accompanied by other supportive maintenance practices and/or chemical treatments to support preservation of the tree. Other instances where crown reductions are warranted are post-failure responses when part of the crown has failed and the remaining crown must be rebalanced or structurally stabilized and unavoidable conflicts with buildings or infrastructure when tree removal is not a viable option. It is not appropriate to use for aesthetic reshaping, view enhancement, or convenience-based requests because of the negative consequences to otherwise healthy trees stated above.
The LSHRD provides maintenance guidance, too - including:
• Noting the importance of following ANSI A300 standards • "Pruning should not be done solely to reduce the overall height of a tree or to keep the tree at an arbitrary height or spread."
5 5 of 15
Discussion of Trees, Public Tree Maintenance Practices
July 22, 2025
• "Topping disfigures the tree, severely depletes the tree's food making ability, and renders the tree vulnerable to pests and diseases.
The LSHRD also speaks to tree species along both Coast Highway and Broadway/SR-133. Recommended Street Trees within the LSHRD include (the below is a selected list), but are not limited to:
• For the Downtown highway sections (Broadway, Coast Highway), Silver Dollar Gum, Desert Gum, NZ Christmas Tree, Brisbane Box, Red Flowering Gum, Coral Gum, and Lemon Scented Gum. • For Legion to Cress (PCH): Silver Dollar Gum, NZ Christmas Tree, Brisbane Box, Torrey Pine • For Cress to Cardinal (PCH): Silver Dollar Gum, NZ Christmas Tree, Brisbane Box, Torrey Pine. • For Cardinal to Lang Park: Sugar Gum, Red-Flowering Gum, Torrey Pine The Landscape and Scenic Highways Element (to the General Plan) also suggests:
Policy 1.4 Ensure that the Laguna Beach landscape will continue to include large mature trees, including eucalyptus, cypress, pines, cedars, palms, and others. Foster preservation of existing large trees.
Action 1. 4.1 Update design guidelines to provide for large trees to remain and be planted at select locations pursuant to Land Use Element Policy 2. 6. (Implementation: Short-term) Action 1. 4. 2 Because large mature trees are important to community character, discourage the trade-off of approving new building development that blocks views. (Implementation: Short-term) Policy 2.2 Promote improved long-term pruning techniques to enhance neighborhood views, promote tree health, and produce safe and natural tree form.
Action 2. 2.1 Develop and disseminate a pruning guide for the public, utilities, and tree pruners. (Implementation: Mid-term)
Action 2.2.2 Consider development guidelines and regulations that promote appropriate pruning and discourage severe pruning practices. See action 8.18.1. (Implementation: Mid-term) The Public Works & Utilities Department prunes public trees for the purpose of encouraging healthy growth, tree preservation, and hazard/risk mitigation; pruning public trees for the sole purpose of view enhancement is not recommended. Pruning performed to create or restore views typically causes structural and physiological harm to trees. Public complaints or requests for view-based pruning are evaluated by the City Arborist, and taken into consideration when providing pruning specifications to the City's tree maintenance contractor. However, pruning for the sole purpose of enhancing a- scenic view is not a justification for topping a shade tree or performing crown reduction, unless one of the outlined conditions applies. Combined with long-term consistent maintenance, view equity in these cases is often improved through normal maintenance operations, including crown thinning and crown raising.
Issues for the Council's discussion include, but are not limited to:
6 6 of 15
Discussion of Trees, Public Tree Maintenance Practices
July 22, 2025
1. Balancing requests from residents to improve ocean and other important views against tree health, as some of the requests suggest tree pruning methods that may be more unhealthy for the tree.
2. The cadence of discussions like these in the future, as well as whether the Council would like more input on and community awareness of the urban forest and the LSHRD/LSHE - including issues like the future of large Eucalyptus in our community as trees age and fire concerns continue. For example, the LSHE suggests " ... an annual audit to the Planning Commission and City Council of tree-related decisions" (Action 2.3.2)
3. Whether the Council would like to consider the development of an Urban Forest Management Plan in the future to consolidate policy, maintenance standards, species selection, canopy goals, view management strategies, and funding needs in a single document.
4. How the City might include updated species selection priorities, such as climate adaptation, drought tolerance, and fire safety, within a future Urban Forest Management Plan, to help guide future updates to City standards, planting guidelines, and maintenance documents.
5. Opportunities to enhance public education and outreach, including how residents can understand pruning standards, best practices, and options for preserving views without harming tree health.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended actions have no financial impact to the budget at this time.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed actions are not considered projects, and therefore, not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act review.
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Matthew Barker, City Arborist Reza Jafari, Deputy Director of Public Works 7 7 of 15
8 of 15
9 of 15
10 of 15
11 of 15
12 of 15
13 of 15
14 of 15
2020
2025
15 of 15
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
BUSINESS
23 SUBJECT: DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PHASE II AMENDMENTS
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Review the proposed Downtown Specific Plan Phase II amendments summarized in the agenda report and the attached outline, receive public input, and provide direction on the proposed amendments; and
2. Find that the recommended action is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15306 (Information Collection).
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
In 2019, the City Council decided to complete the comprehensive update to the Downtown Specific Plan (“DSP”) in two phases. Phase I, adopted in 2020 and implemented in 2022, included streamlining of the business permitting process and new parking standards for non-residential uses. The housing, building height, and parcel merger components of the DSP update were bifurcated, to be addressed separately and in coordination with the Housing Element update as Phase II. The Housing Element update was completed and certified by the California Department of Housing and Community Development in February of 2023.
The City Council has directed staff to prepare a Program Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) to initiate Phase II of the DSP (DSP Phase II) update, which is now underway as of October, 2025. In order to prepare an adequate environmental analysis, the City must first define the scope of the Specific Plan update.
BACKGROUND
On October 5, 2023, the City was awarded a $200,000 competitive grant from the Southern California Association of Governments (“SCAG”) via its Sustainable Communities Program to substantially fund the EIR and associated public outreach efforts. The consultant selection process for the EIR was delayed for a time due to potential state budget deficits affecting the SCAG grant and difficulties in securing consultant services for the project. On May 1, 2025, funding was re-secured and the City and SCAG selected CSG Consultants (“CSG”) to prepare the EIR with the assistance of a subconsultant team to provide support on technical studies, renderings, and a 3D computer model. The services to be provided are detailed in the attached scope of work (Attachment 5).
The kick-off meeting with City staff, SCAG, and CSG occurred on October 14, 2025. The EIR is projected to be ready for presentation to decision-making bodies within 11 months of this kick-off date.
In order to prepare an adequate environmental analysis, the City must first solidify the scope of the DSP Phase II update. City staff presented an outline of the draft Phase II updates to the City Council, Planning Commission, and Housing and Human Services Committee between December 12, 2023, and February 28, 2024. Due to the amount of time that has lapsed since City Council last provided direction to staff on the scope of this project, staff is returning to the City Council to confirm prior direction and request additional direction.
1 of 110
Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Amendments
October 28, 2025
DISCUSSION
The Phase II update implements the following program from the 2021-2029 6th Cycle Housing Element.
Table 1
Housing Element Program 5.2-4
Action Time Frame and Objectives
a. Provide more permissive development standards for affordable housing. With adoption of DSP Phase II, include incentives such as: increased densities, increased height limits, higher lot coverage, lower parking requirements, allowances for off-site parking, allowances for lot assemblage and, and removal of upper story residential use limitations to assist in the development of housing for lower-income households,
including extremely low-income households and households with special needs, persons experiencing homelessness;
farmworkers; persons with disabilities, including
developmental; and elderly.
Start environmental analysis in
2023 to investigate the best
pathway to increase the number
of potential housing sites and
improve the economic feasibility
of developing residential units
Downtown.
b. With adoption of DSP Phase II, designate additional locations for residential/mixed use development.
Begin Phase 2 of Downtown
Specific Plan in 2024.
As indicated by Table 1 above, Program 5.2-4 identifies specific land use tools that can help facilitate the creation of new housing units, with an emphasis on affordable units. The City’s assigned share of the regional housing need requires that it plan to facilitate production of 394 housing units through 2029, of which 277 would be affordable to extremely low- to moderate-income households. The City is not responsible for building these units through City-sponsored projects, but it is required to adequately plan for these units by addressing constraints to housing development that are within the City’s control. This includes evaluating regulatory barriers through amendments to the City’s Zoning Ordinance, which includes the DSP. It is anticipated that the DSP Phase II amendments would promote the production of all housing types in the Downtown, including market rate housing.
In addition to addressing a housing shortage that is of statewide concern, adding new housing units in the Downtown area would provide a variety of environmental, economic, social, and health benefits. These include reduced auto dependency in favor of greater foot traffic, increased economic opportunity for both residents and Downtown businesses, and fostering a sense of community by bringing more individuals into shared pedestrian environments that allows them to interact face-to-face both socially and professionally.
Greater housing density would also promote a village-style mix of resident-serving businesses to serve the larger resident population that would be located within short walking distance of many commercial uses.
The Downtown is the commercial, political, economic, and social center of Laguna Beach. It is important that the DSP Phase II update preserve these important functions. As the City continues to encourage nonresidential uses on the ground floor in most areas of the Specific Plan, it is envisioned that the greatest 2 of 110
Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Amendments
October 28, 2025
opportunities for new housing is found in the potential to enlarge existing single-story commercial buildings through upper-level additions that create second- or third-story rental housing. An existing restriction that limits most Downtown buildings to a single-story, 12-foot height is a primary barrier to adding new residential density. Infill housing opportunities could also be created by addressing the zoning constraints that impact the feasibility of converting upper-level commercial space to a residential use (i.e., new housing units). Regardless of the form that future development may take, the DSP Phase II update will need to balance changes to the development standards with the need to preserve the visual character of the Downtown. Lastly, because many of the buildings in the Downtown were not originally developed with onsite parking, many properties cannot accommodate new uses that would increase the parking requirement.
This is another key barrier to housing production that will be addressed by the DSP Phase II update.
Project Timeline and Outreach
As directed by the City Council on July 25, 2023, the City’s environmental document will be a Program EIR, which will streamline housing production by allowing future housing projects to “tier” from the EIR, incorporating by reference the general discussions from the broader EIR, and limiting the scope of any additional environmental review that would be needed for the later project.
To draft the Program EIR, the City must first prepare an accurate and stable project description that can be consistently described and analyzed throughout the document. An EIR scoping meeting would occur during the 30-day Notice of Preparation public review period, which is likely to take place in December of 2025.
The scoping meeting is designed to examine a proposed project early in the process to identify the range of issues and impacts that should be analyzed, which will guide the scope and content of the EIR. Staff is also proposing to organize a community workshop, which would be timed around the completion of project renderings illustrating changes in the streetscape conditions. These renderings would show the impact if buildings at various locations were to receive second- or third-level additions.
The draft Program EIR is anticipated to be completed during the summer of 2026, at which time a complete draft of the DSP Phase II updates will be available for public review. The Planning Commission would review the project over the course of two public meetings. City Council review and local adoption must occur by December 2026 in order to utilize the grant funding secured through SCAG. At the same time, the City Council will be asked to adopt a resolution approving a Local Coastal Program Amendment, which would then be transmitted to the California Coastal Commission for certification.
Staff will be utilizing an interested parties list developed for the DSP Phase I update to notify stakeholders of upcoming meetings and distribute documents for public review. The Planning Division also maintains a Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Update Webpage. Staff will provide email updates to interested parties in coordination with updates to the project webpage, where the public can access downloadable materials like agenda reports, environmental documents, and the DSP.
Phase II Amendments
As previously mentioned, the DSP Phase I draft amendments had initially included several housing-related provisions, including building height increases, and parcel mergers. At its December 17, 2019 meeting, the City Council directed staff to defer the housing-related changes to the DSP Phase II update that would be processed in conjunction with an EIR. The October 21, 2019 DSP public review draft contained both the 3 of 110
Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Amendments
October 28, 2025
residential and non-residential updates and will be used as a reference point for the DSP Phase II project.
A detailed outline of the potential DSP Phase II changes is provided as Attachment 1, with key changes summarized below. Each heading in Attachment 1 includes a hyperlink to the first page of the referenced section as it currently reads in the 2022 adopted and certified version of the DSP. On December 12, 2023, staff received the feedback below from City Council. Since nearly two years has passed since feedback was provided, Staff is seeking confirmation and/or additional direction on the proposed amendments.
Attachment 2 provides a summary of the City Council’s December 12, 2023, direction and the public comments delivered at or prior to the City Council meeting. Meeting minutes are provided as Attachment
3. The City Council’s direction included the following: (1) consider expanding the areas where groundfloor residential would be allowed, provided that requirements for a ground-floor commercial street presence are met; (2) to maximize future flexibility and demonstrate to the State that good-faith efforts are being undertaken to locally address a share of the regional housing need, consider allowing multi-story development throughout the entire Downtown, potentially up to a maximum of three stories; (3) explore a potential northward expansion of the DSP boundary along Laguna Canyon Road to incorporate the Laguna College of Art + Design Main Campus (2222 Laguna Canyon Road);1 (4) broaden eligibility for lot mergers, which are currently proposed to be limited to 100-percent affordable housing projects, to include some market-rate developments, potentially with an inclusionary housing component; (5) reduce the residential parking requirement to 0.5 spaces per market-rate or affordable unit; (6) prepare a 3D model of the DSP area depicting taller infill development; (7) develop standards for converting upper-level commercial space to housing; and (8) set a standard for maximum residential density. Much of this direction has now been incorporated into the proposed amendments for the Phase II update. Changes made to the scope since the December 12, 2023 meeting are denoted in the summary provided below with underline and strikethrough bold text.
Summary of Key Phase II Specific Plan Updates
• Changes to height restrictions:
o Existing regulation: most areas are restricted to a 12-foot height (one story), with an additional six feet allowed for roof structures, mechanical equipment, and other limited improvements.
o Proposed regulation: variable maximum building heights (12, 24, or 36 feet) based on location. It is anticipated that most areas would be eligible for the 24-foot building height allowance.
• Changes to maximum residential density:
o Existing regulation:
▪ One unit per 2,000 square feet of lot area in the CBD-1, CBD-2, and CBD-Office Districts, except for the following:
1 Laguna Canyon is being studied for potential rezoning to accommodate a greater mix of land uses – including housing – as part of the Comprehensive Zoning Code Update (“CZCU”). The CZCU is now underway, and staff recommends that any rezoning or changes to development standards for properties in Laguna Canyon remain part of the CZCU project. This will allow for a broader study encompassing all Laguna Canyon neighborhoods. The Laguna Canyon neighborhoods generally share a common setting and land use issues and may benefit from being studied as holistically. This would mirror the approach taken with the Laguna Canyon Planning Study, which was completed in 2017. 4 of 110
Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Amendments
October 28, 2025
• Historically significant homes may add units at a density of one unit per 1,000 square feet.
• Residential units in the CBD-Office District where at least 50-percent of the units are committed to low-income, senior, and/or disabled housing may provide units at a density of one unit per 1,000 square feet. ▪ One unit per 1,000 square feet of lot area in the CBD Visitor Commercial District. ▪ One unit per 2,000 square feet of lot area in the CBD Multiple-Family District. o Proposed regulation:
▪ No maximum residential density
▪ Density cap for two-story properties (residential on one upper floor only): 700 square feet of lot area per unit (62 dwelling units per acre)3 ▪ Density cap for three-story properties (residential on two upper floors) and the Multiple-Family District: 500 square feet of lot area per unit (87 dwelling units per acre)4
▪ Average unit size: 800 square feet maximum5
• Changes to lot merger regulations:
o Existing regulation: parcels shall not be merged together for development purposes that exceed 5,000 square feet except for City-ownership projects and when a Planned Integrated Development is proposed in the Central Bluffs District. o Proposed regulation: a new provision would be added to allow lots to be merged for a combined area over 5,000 square feet on Broadway, in the Arts District, and in the CBD Office District for affordable housing projects and market-rate residential projects that provide on-site inclusionary housing in accordance with the requirements of Laguna Beach Municipal Code (“LBMC”) Section 25.96.070.
6 • Changes to the urban design guidelines:
o Downtown projects subject to the Planning Commission’s design review approval must be found to comply with the urban design guidelines. Several revisions are proposed:
▪ New/amended urban design guidelines:
• Amendments to ensure that upper-level additions are adequately addressed. • Where the more generalized design review criteria established by Section
25.04.040 of the Municipal Code do not have an urban design guideline 3 While lot sizes vary throughout the Downtown, 2,100 square feet is a typical lot size on Forest Avenue and Ocean Avenue. On a 2,100-square-foot lot, this density standard would provide sufficient flexibility for 2-3 small units. The density standards assume an average unit size of 600-700 square feet (including circulation) to encourage 1-bedroom and studio units. 4 This standard would support approximately 4 small units (e.g., studios or 1-bedrooms) on a 2,100-square-foot lot. 5 With the goal of creating compact, infill residential above commercial in the downtown core, an average unit size requirement would encourage a mix of unit sizes that include smaller units that, while market rate, are more affordable by design. Larger lots in particular would be able to provide greater flexibility with unit layout and mix, while still being required to provide smaller studio and 1-bedroom units.
6 The City’s inclusionary housing provisions apply when an applicant proposes a development that would result in 10 or more residential units. In a for-sale project, 15% must be moderate-income. Rental housing projects require 15% moderate-income or 10% very-low or low-income. Applicants that propose to pay an in-lieu housing fee instead of providing affordable (inclusionary) units on-site would not be eligible for the lot merger provisions. 5 of 110
Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Amendments
October 28, 2025
equivalent, staff proposes to update the guidelines to incorporate those topics into the DSP. These include view equity.
▪ New objective design standards:
• Certain types of housing development projects must be reviewed against objective design and development standards in accordance with State law. A new set of objective design standards would be created to ensure that these projects are held to high architectural standards.
• Changes to the allowed uses:
o Allow residential uses in the Arts District and Central Bluffs by right, without a Conditional Use Permit (currently disallowed).
o Allow artist work/live units with a Conditional Use Permit in the Visitor Commercial and Multiple-Family Residential zones (currently disallowed). o Restrict residential uses to above the ground floor or behind a commercial storefront on the ground floor in certain areas where pedestrian orientation and the quality of the shopping experience are primary goals.
• Changes to parking requirements:
o Existing regulation:
▪ Single- and two-family dwellings: two covered spaces per dwelling unit plus an additional space when the gross floor area of each residence is 3,600 or more square feet.
▪ Multi-family dwellings: 1.5 spaces for every studio or one-bedroom unit; two spaces for every unit with two or more bedrooms and one additional guest space for four units and every four thereafter.
o Proposed regulation: one0.5 spaces per market-rate dwelling unit and 0.5 spaces for each or affordable dwelling unit, which may be covered or uncovered.11 Building Height Restrictions
The existing human-scale patterns of development are a defining characteristic of the Downtown and significantly contribute to the walking experience. Today, buildings are restricted to a 12-foot, single-story height in most areas of the Downtown, creating many non-conforming conditions. The intent of this restriction is to preserve the existing building height diversity. The DSP Phase II update would ease these restrictions by allowing two- and three-story building heights in more areas of the Downtown. This change will be studied carefully over the course of the project to ensure that the pedestrian orientation of the area is maintained, and that any proposed development projects such as upper-level additions enrich the environment with attractive, high-quality architecture. The goal will be to maximize infill housing opportunities at those locations where additional building height would maintain an appropriate scale and form.
Figures 1 and 2 below compare existing building heights and the building height increases that staff proposes to carefully study for compatibility with a pedestrian-friendly environment.12 Some of these 11 Properties in the Downtown Specific Plan area may purchase in-lieu parking certificates (currently $23,000 per certificate) if the required off-street parking cannot be provided.
12 Refer to Attachment 4 for the full-size figures.
6 of 110
Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Amendments
October 28, 2025
recommended height increases may be reduced based on the forthcoming analysis to further study the compatibility between increasing building height while maintaining a pedestrian-friendly environment, in addition to feedback received through outreach efforts and direction from the City Council.
Figures 1 and 2. Left: existing building heights. Open space and parking areas are colored grey. Right: Staff-proposed building heights to be studied.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action has no financial impact. The City was awarded State and regional grant funding totaling $200,000 to help cover the environmental review costs. The City Council budgeted $160,000 for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 for this project. No funds have been expended to date; therefore, the full amount will roll over into Fiscal Year 2025-2026. Additionally, the Community Development Department’s current Fiscal Year 2025-2026 operating budget will cover the remaining cost of $17,388 as authorized through Agreement #25-69 approved by City Council on August 12, 2025. 7 of 110
Downtown Specific Plan Phase II Amendments
October 28, 2025
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guidelines Section 15306 because it consists of basic data collection, research, experimental management, and resource evaluation activities which do not result in a serious or major disturbance to an environmental resource. The recommended action is strictly for information gathering purposes, or as part of a study leading to an action which a public agency has not yet approved, adopted, or funded. Here, the recommended action meets the exemption because the City Council is providing direction on the scope of the Downtown Specific Plan (“DSP”) Phase II amendments so that an accurate and stable project description can be developed. The project description will be used to consistently describe and analyze the DSP Phase II update in the Program Environmental Impact Report. Upon taking the recommended action, City staff will cause to be filed within five calendar days a notice of exemption with the County and State Clearinghouse.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Phase II Amendments Summary (Pgs. 9-17)
2. 12/12/23 City Council Hearing Summary (Pgs. 18-20)
3. 12/12/23 City Council Meeting Minutes (Pgs. 21-42)
4. Building Heights (Existing and Proposed for Study) (Pg. 43)
5. CSG Scope of Work (Pgs. 44-94)
Submitted By: Matthew Schneider
Matthew Schneider, Director of Community
Development
Approved: Gavin Curran, for
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Kate Kazama, Associate Planner Anthony Viera, Planning Manager 8 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
Chapter 1: Introduction
Proposed
Changes
What are the Key Updates to this Specific Plan?
1. The list of key updates would be expanded to address the various changes intended to promote new housing opportunities as part of mixed-use development and conversion of existing upper-floor commercial area.
Purpose Expand the summary to encompass both of the Phase I and Phase II changes, which together comprise the most significant amendment to the DSP since its original adoption in 1989.
Chapter 2: Profile of Downtown Characteristics
Proposed
Changes
Land Use and Zoning
1. This section describes the different land use characteristics of the Downtown streets and some of the more significant Downtown areas. Subsection 10 (City Hall/Village Entrance references the pre-redevelopment condition of the Village Entrance site and lays out the vision for the planned improvements. The Village Entrance project has now been completed, and this section would be revised accordingly, noting the site’s important function as a link between the summer art festivals and the Downtown core, and use of a rustic California landscape design to establish its visual identity at the entrance to Laguna Canyon.
Land Use Summary
2. The City conducted a land use inventory in 2016 to better understand the existing Downtown land use mix. The Specific Plan notes that a subsequent land use count should be completed in five years to understand land use trends over time, which may inform future land use policy decisions. Staff would update the inventory through records and field research.
Urban Design Features
3. In response to the pandemic, the City has now trialed a pedestrian promenade and outdoor dining and parklet programs. This section would be updated to reference these pilot programs and the entitled design for a permanent Forest Promenade.
Public Infrastructure and Utilities
4. In 2023, the County replaced the concrete flood control channel between Laguna Canyon Road and Frontage Road that failed during a rainstorm in 2019. A description of this project would be added.
Purpose General updates to reflect existing conditions.
Attachment 1
9 9 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
Chapter 3: Goals, Issue Statements and Policies
Proposed
Changes
Topic 1 (Village Character), Issue Statements and Discussion: Streetscape
1. The following text currently suggests that more consistent two-story development may adversely affect pedestrian orientation and would be revised to align with the Phase II building height recommendations. The effect of more consistent multistory development on the visual character and pedestrian orientation of the Downtown will be studied through renderings that will be prepared for the Phase II project.
“One of the major attractions of the downtown is the pedestrian orientation that is part of the village atmosphere. The variation in building heights, particularly the presence of single story structures, maintains a human scale of development that does not overwhelm a walker and allows views of other notable structures.”
Topic 1 (Village Character) Policies
2. Policies 19 and 20 encourage the continuation of the small lot development pattern that typifies the Downtown area. While this characteristic should be maintained by most development projects, the City is proposing to allow lots to be merged for affordable housing projects and market-rate projects with an inclusionary housing component. These policies would be revised accordingly.
Historic Resources Tables
3. The inventory of properties listed on the City’s Historic Register would be updated to reflect additional properties that have been added to the Register since the list was prepared in January of 2019.
Topic 4 (Parking, Circulation and Public Transit), Issue Statements and Discussion:
Parking Management Techniques
4. This section would be revised to include new transportation demand management initiatives such as the Laguna Local microtransit shuttle service and reference the adopted Parking and Transportation Demand Management Report.
5. This section includes a discussion on repurposing parking and roadways to enhance the pedestrian experience and foster a sense of place, community, and vibrancy to the area. The Specific Plan currently references the trial implementation of a temporary parklet in 2016 and a temporary pedestrian plaza on Park Avenue in 2017. The City has since established the parklet and promenade pilot projects and entitled the design for a permanent Forest Promenade, which would be added to this section of the document.
10 10 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
Topic 6 (Hazard Planning), Issue Statements and Discussion: Hazard Planning and Stormwater Capacity
6. The Laguna Canyon Creek Channel improvements have now been completed, and the project description would be revised accordingly.
Topic 8 (Housing), Issue Statements and Discussion: Affordable and Special Needs Housing
7. The 2013 Housing Element references would be replaced with the 2021-2029 6th Cycle Housing Element and incorporate updated demographic information prepared for the 6th Cycle update.
8. The Phase II DSP update implements Housing Element Program 5.2-4, which will be added to this section of the Specific Plan.
Topic 8 (Housing) Policies
9. These policies would be amended where appropriate to align with the goals of the Phase II update. This would include references to modified development standards that are intended to improve the feasibility of upper-level residential additions over existing commercial buildings.
10. New policy language would be added to promote infill housing projects, encourage diversifying the housing mix for different types of occupants such as “missing middle” and senior housing, and to note that workforce, senior, and student housing can be encouraged by incentivizing smaller units that are more affordable by design.
Topic 9 (Arts District) Policies
11. New or amended policies would be incorporated to encourage residential uses on mixed-use sites in the Arts District to enhance the year-round vitality of the area.
Topic 10 (Central Bluffs) Policies
12. Policy 6 currently encourages a land use mix including dining, entertainment, hospitality, retailing, socializing, and special event activities. Residential could also be encouraged within the Central Bluffs District as part of mixed-use development. This district overlooks the beach and spans the area of South Coast Highway from Laguna Avenue to Sleepy Hollow Lane.
Purpose The primary purpose of the Chapter 3 revisions is to ensure that the intent of the Phase II changes to increase housing opportunities is addressed with supporting policy language, and that these policies avoid inconsistencies with the more permissive development standards being proposed. This chapter would also be amended to replace outdated information where needed.
11 11 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
Chapter 4: Urban Design
Proposed
Changes
Streetscape Improvements, Parklet Program
1. The parklet program description would be revised to indicate that parklets have been piloted since the pandemic.
Building Height
2. The 2019 draft included a section on building height, which was omitted in its entirety once the City Council determined to defer any changes to the building height provisions to the Phase II project. The 2019 draft mapped the areas that would be permitted to construct up to one, two, and three stories. Staff is proposing to re-study those recommendations with the intent to maximize infill housing opportunities. Any increase in the maximum allowable building height should be carefully considered and ultimately found to satisfy two criteria: (1) the height increase does not come at the cost of human-scale development that currently contributes to the Downtown’s special character; and (2) the area can potentially accommodate a building height increase without significantly impacting public views of the ocean and hillsides. Private views would continue to be evaluated through the design review process, which takes view equity into consideration. Preliminarily, staff believes that relatively few areas will need to remain at a single-story maximum building height. However, more study will be needed to make a final staff recommendation. Photorealistic renderings depicting upper-level additions at key locations and a 3D model of the Downtown will be prepared to guide public discussion and assist with the analysis in the EIR.
3. In addition to identifying the locations where two- and three-story building heights would be appropriate, staff is recommending that certain areas be permitted to establish residential uses on the ground floor and near the street, with others prohibited from establishing new ground-floor residential uses unless located behind a commercial space when it would have a negative effect on commercial continuity and consequently the pedestrian experience. Ground-floor residential may be appropriate along the Downtown periphery, in areas that interface with abutting residential neighborhoods and that do not have a high concentration of commercial uses that generate high pedestrian activity. This may include areas such as the CBD Office District where pedestrian levels are relatively low. The building height map exhibit in the agenda report also includes staff’s preliminary recommendations for where ground-floor residential should be allowed along the street frontage.
Urban Design Guidelines
4. The urban design guidelines articulate the City’s design approach to Downtown Laguna Beach, and projects subject to design review are evaluated for compliance with the guidelines. The guidelines would be amended to ensure that upper-level additions are adequately addressed.
12 12 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
5. Certain types of housing development projects are required by state law to be reviewed against objective design and development standards. Objective standards are measurable, verifiable, and knowable to all parties prior to project submittal. To comply with state legislation and ensure that Downtown projects are held to high architectural standards, staff will be developing a set of objective design standards that would apply to certain multi-family and mixed-use residential projects.
6. Currently, design review staff reports that are prepared for projects located in the DSP area include two, separate analyses that evaluate for compliance with both the design review criteria in Section 25.04.040 of the Municipal Code (Design Review) and the DSP urban design guidelines. To be more efficient with staff resources, staff is recommending that the urban design guidelines, which respond directly to the specific issues and context of the Downtown, supersede the more generalized design review criteria. However, there are several design review criteria that do not currently have an urban design guideline equivalent. These are:
environmental context, General Plan compliance, historic preservation, privacy, sustainability, and view equity. Staff proposes to update the guidelines to incorporate these topics so that only the more Downtown-specific set of standards can be applied to projects. If the design review criteria in LBMC Section
25.04.040 are consolidated as part of the Design Review Efficiency Ordinance that is now underway, the approach taken with the DSP design guidelines will be revised to track with the Design Review Efficiency Ordinance.
Purpose Most significantly, the chapter 4 revisions would introduce a new discussion on building height with accompanying map exhibits identifying existing building heights and the proposed maximum allowed building heights. Staff anticipates that the twostory height restriction could be most common, with relatively few areas eligible to receive a third story. In addition to determining which areas will qualify for two- and three-story maximum building heights, the City Council will decide whether upperlevel land uses should be restricted to certain types, such as residential uses only. For areas where a third story would be appropriate, the Council may consider whether third-story additions should be restricted to housing types the City wants to promote, such as affordable, senior or student housing.
This chapter would also be revised to refine the urban design guidelines and establish objective design standards that are contextually appropriate to the unique characteristics of the Downtown.
13 13 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
Chapter 5: Land Use Districts
Proposed
Changes
Table 5.1, Allowed Uses and Permit Requirements
1. Staff recommends several changes to the permissible land uses, including:
(1) allowing residential uses in the Arts District and Central Bluffs by right; (2) restricting residential uses to above the ground floor or behind sidewalkfronting commercial space in certain zones where pedestrian orientation and the quality of the shopping experience are primary goals, subject to the following additional requirements:
i. The residential use is separated from the primary street, with a commercial use fronting the highway. Primary street shall mean the most primary or highest capacity road classification abutting the site; and ii. The commercial use has a useable, enclosed depth of no less than 30 feet at any point, measured perpendicular to the primary street, except for areas used for open space, pedestrian circulation, or vehicular access. This standard may be modified by the Planning Commission if it finds that the ground-floor commercial use would meet the functional needs of a commercial tenant and provide sufficient street presence to encourage healthy levels of pedestrian activity, or when necessary to comply with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; (3) remove the Conditional Use Permit requirement for residential uses in the Visitor Commercial District;
(4) allow artist work/live with a Conditional Use Permit in the Visitor Commercial and Multiple-Family Residential zones;
(5) replace guest houses and guest rooms with accessory dwelling units; and (6) consider creating a list of prohibited uses that are considered inappropriate for the unique functions of the DSP area. Any unpermitted use that is currently established would become a legal, nonconforming use that may be continued.
CBD Office
2. Except for projects that involve City participation and that provide housing for seniors, low-income, or disabled individuals, residential uses in this zone are subject to larger setbacks than non-residential uses. As a result, staff believes that these more restrictive development standards create a barrier to residential infill development, and property owners that are seeking to add value to their existing commercial buildings are more likely to pursue an office addition or other nonresidential development. Staff proposes to revise the standards to incentivize residential uses in the CBD Office District.
CBD Multiple-Family Residential
3. The development standards for the CBD Multiple-Family Residential Zone generally match the R-3, Residential High Density standards. These standards are generally more restrictive than those that apply elsewhere in the Downtown, and 14 14 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
therefore staff proposes to review these standards to determine if they should be relaxed to better encourage residential uses.
Arts District
4. Intent and Purpose. This section could be revised to expand the scope of desirable residential uses from affordable housing to include all residential uses that are part of a mixed-use project.
5. Building Height. This section establishes special findings that must be made in order to allow buildings to exceed the single-story building height, up to a maximum height of 36 feet. If the City determines that a 36-foot height is generally appropriate in this zone, the special findings would not be required.
General Development Standards
6. Lot Area and Dimension Standards. The DSP currently sets a maximum lot area of 5,000 square feet. The 2019 draft contemplated allowing the assembly of parcels into building sites over 5,000 square feet on Broadway, in the Arts District, and in the CBD Office District for affordable housing projects. Staff believes that these areas continue to be appropriate for the purpose of developing 100% affordable housing projects on larger lots. Market-rate residential projects with an on-site inclusionary housing component and consistent with the requirements of LBMC Section 25.96.070 (Inclusionary Housing Program) will also be eligible for lot mergers.
7. Building Setback and Yard Area Standards. The City currently requires a corner setback on street corner lots. Most Downtown properties have no setback requirements. Staff recommends that a reduced corner setback be allowed when it can be demonstrated that the improvements will maintain adequate motorist visibility and safe pedestrian mobility.
8. Open Space and Landscaping. Lots greater than 2,500 square feet are required to provide open space equal to 25% of the total gross floor area. To encourage infill housing projects, staff recommends that the open space requirements be based on the size of the commercial space only.
9. Building Height Standards. This section would be revised to reflect the maximum allowable building heights that will be implemented with the Phase II update. See “Building Height” discussion above under Chapter 4.
10. Residential Uses. The 2019 draft struck the density restrictions from all Downtown zones except for the CBD Multiple-Family Residential Zone. Under current standards most projects would be limited to one residential unit for every 2,000 square feet of lot area. Staff proposes a relaxed density standard that would incentivize a greater number of smaller dwelling units that may be more affordable by design by establishing the following density provisions • Density cap for two-story properties (residential on one upper floor only): 700 square feet of lot area per unit (62 dwelling units per acre). 15 15 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
• Density cap of three-story properties (residential on two upper floors) and the Multiple-Family District: 500 square feet of lot area per unit (87 dwelling units per acre).
• Average unit size: 800 square feet maximum
11. Parking. Under current standards, single and two family dwellings require two covered spaces per dwelling unit plus an additional space when the gross floor area of each residence is 3,600 or more square feet, and multiple-family dwellings requires 1.5 spaces for every studio or one-bedroom unit; two spaces for every unit with two or more bedrooms and one additional guest space for four units and every four thereafter. This section would be revised to reduce the residential parking requirement to 0.5 spaces per market-rate or affordable dwelling unit, which may be covered or uncovered.
12. Miscellaneous. As part of the City’s Housing Element implementation, staff has developed an ordinance to reduce the constraints to infill housing on mixed-use sites outside of the Downtown. Staff proposes similar modifications to the DSP regulations, including the following:
Development standard exceptions. Provided that the property owner agrees to enter into a recorded covenant with the City, ensuring that the residential units will not be converted to short-term lodging units as defined in Chapter
25.23, the following development standard exceptions shall apply. The covenant shall be in a form approved by the City Attorney and binding upon all future owners and successors in interest. The approval and recordation shall occur prior to issuance of building permits.
(1) Additional Building Setback Waiver. Compliance with the additional building setback required by Section 25.50.004(D) shall be waived for no more than two exclusively residential floor levels that provides two or more residential units immediately above the ground floor, provided that the following conditions are met:
(a) At least half of these residential units, rounded to the nearest whole number, do not exceed 700 square feet in gross floor area (halves are rounded up); and
(b) The residential plate height does not exceed nine feet and, if the residential floor level is also the uppermost floor, the roof height does not exceed 16 feet above the residential finished floor. (2) Nonconforming Open Space. Residential uses that are proposed above an existing commercial ground floor level may reduce the nonresidential open space required by the zoning district in which the project is located only as necessary to accommodate access improvements, bicycle storage, and trash storage serving the residential use.
(3) Nonconformities - Major Remodel. Residential additions that constitute a major remodel of an existing building or structure shall not be 16 16 of 110
PHASE II AMENDMENTS SUMMARY
required to bring nonconformities associated with the non-residential use or uses into compliance with this Title, including nonconforming parking, provided that the project constitutes a major remodel due to the size of the floor area addition only. This exception does not apply when a project meets one or more of the major remodel demolition thresholds, and in no instance shall this exception be interpreted to relieve projects from compliance with bluff and shoreline development policies, including but not limited to Policy 7.3 and Policy 10.2 of the Land Use Element or the associated action items.
Purpose Revisions to the land use districts and development standards established by Chapter 5 of the DSP are wide-ranging and will help promote new Downtown housing opportunities by addressing multiple regulatory barriers to housing production. These include relaxing density requirements, setbacks, height restrictions, parking requirements, and the open space standards. Several zones where residential uses are currently disallowed would be modified to allow such uses by right or subject to a Conditional Use Permit.
17 17 of 110
DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PHASE II UPDATE
DECEMBER 12, 2023 CITY COUNCIL MEETING
COMMENT AND DIRECTION SUMMARY
City Council Direction:
I. Orgill
A. Ground-floor residential: Consider allowing ground-floor residential on lots that are of sufficient size to provide commercial space at the sidewalk with residential behind.
B. Floodplain considerations: To compensate for floodplain constraints that require buildings to be raised above the base flood elevation (BFE), revise the building height measurement to be taken from the BFE.
1. Staff note: page 155 of the DSP currently states the following: “Compensatory height exceptions may be granted for those properties where the first habitable level must be raised above the floodplain elevation.”
a) Consider replacing “may be granted” with “shall be granted,” or simply state that building height is measured from the BFE.
C. Maximum building height: Consider maximizing future flexibility by allowing multi-story throughout the Downtown, and potentially up to three stories everywhere.
D. DSP boundary: Task 1.4 of the Phase I update generated an analysis of the DSP boundaries with recommendations regarding a potential northward expansion on Laguna Canyon Road to incorporate the Laguna College of Art and Design (LCAD) Main Campus at 2222 Laguna Canyon Road. Orgill requested that staff revisit the idea.
II. Whalen
A. Lot mergers: Broaden eligibility beyond 100% affordable housing projects. Allow for some market-rate, perhaps with an inclusionary component.
B. DSP boundary: Evaluate whether the DSP should extend out to the LCAD Main Campus.
C. Parking: Addressing parking requirements will be critical.
III. Rounaghi
A. DSP boundary: Evaluate whether the DSP should extend out to the LCAD Main Campus.
Attachment 2
18 18 of 110
B. Parking requirements: The DSP currently requires one space for every studio/onebedroom unit and two spaces for every unit with two or more bedrooms. Rounaghi recommends reducing the requirement to 0.5 spaces per market-rate or affordable unit, regardless of bedroom count.
C. Parking decoupling: Allow parking spaces to be rented and/or sold separately from the land use by decoupling parking costs from residential and commercial lease costs.
D. 3D model: Prepare a 3D model of the Downtown Specific Plan area depicting taller infill development.
E. Maximum building height: Ensure that the Downtown isn’t completely cast in shade.
F. Residential unit size: Establish incentives for creating smaller residential units.
Consider waiving permit fees if units are below a certain size.
G. Phase I DSP update: The Planning Commission should revisit the Phase I deliverables that were studied during the prior update process but not implemented. The Commission should make recommendations to the City Council as to which should be folded into the Phase II update, if any.
H. Density bonus: Staff should confirm that the proposed changes do not have any unanticipated consequences as they relate to density bonus projects.
I. Residential density: Consider maintaining a minimum density, albeit one that increases flexibility relative to the existing standard, such as 1 unit/500 SF.
IV. Weiss
A. 3D model: Prepare a 3D model of the Downtown Specific Plan area depicting taller infill development.
B. Residential density: Unclear what unlimited density would look like. Staff should also study what the potential unit yield would be at The Hive and Art-A-Fair, which probably have the greatest potential for creating new housing units.
V. Kempf
A. Conversions: Develop standards for converting upper-level commercial space to housing.
B. Parking requirements: Reduce the residential parking requirement.
C. Maximum building height: Buildings along the north side of Lower Forest should remain at their existing heights.
D. 3D model: Prepare a 3D model of the Downtown Specific Plan area depicting taller infill development.
19 19 of 110
Public Comments:
I. Cody Engle
A. Parking requirements: Reduce the requirement to 0.5 spaces per unit.
II. Cathy Jurca
A. Density bonus law: The City has to grant a density bonus, and staff cannot ask for a pro forma demonstrating that the requested incentives and concessions are necessary to make the housing development financially feasible. There may be unintended consequences with staff’s recommendations, particularly as it relates to developer requests for additional building height.
B. Density requirements: Expressed concern with allowing unlimited residential density.
III. Michelle McCormick
A. Supports affordable housing.
IV. Horst Noppenberger
A. Consider allowing third stories that step back such that they cannot be seen from the street.
V. Ketta Brown
A. Supports staff recommendations.
VI. Anne Caen
A. Expressed concern with the number of changes proposed.
VII. Rona Henry with Welcoming Neighbors Home, a ministry of Tapestry Unitarian Universalist Congregation
A. Generally supportive given the need to facilitate the development of infill housing. Rona recommends that the plan prioritize upper-story and infill development of affordable housing for households with very-low, extremely-low, and acutely-low incomes.
Moderate income rental rates, and to some extent low-income rental rates, are too close to market rate, and thus are unaffordable to many downtown workers, seniors, and students.
VIII. Barbara McMurray
A. Supports building height increases to facilitate second-story housing. However, to reach our housing goals per the City’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation, Barbara recommends that the City prioritize affordable housing for housing with very-low, extremely-low, and acutely-low incomes.
20 20 of 110
Attachment 3
21 21 of 110
22 22 of 110
23 23 of 110
24 24 of 110
25 25 of 110
26 26 of 110
27 27 of 110
28 28 of 110
29 29 of 110
30 30 of 110
31 31 of 110
32 32 of 110
33 33 of 110
34 34 of 110
35 35 of 110
36 36 of 110
37 37 of 110
38 38 of 110
39 39 of 110
40 40 of 110
41 41 of 110
42 42 of 110
27 Ground-floor
residential
permitted
along street
43 43 of 110
www.csgengr.com
Prepared By
CSG CONSULTANTS
3707 W. Garden Grove Blvd., Suite 100 | Orange, CA 92868 TEL: 714.568.1010 | FAX: 714.568.1028
REQUEST FOR PROPOSAL NO. 24-012-MRFP 07
SCP CEEEJ ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR
LAGUNA BEACH DOWNTOWN SPECIFIC PLAN PHASE II
JUNE 13, 2025
SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA
ASSOCIATION OF
GOVERNMENTS (SCAG)
Attachment 5
44 44 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR June 13, 2025
Ted Dorjee
Southern California Association of Governments
900 Wilshire Blvd., Suite. 1700
Los Angeles, CA 90017
Subject: Revised Proposal, MRFP 24-012-MRFP 07 SCP CEEEJ Environmental Impact Report Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan Phase II, City of Laguna Beach
Dear Mr. Dorjee:
CSG Consultants is pleased to submit this revised proposal to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) to prepare and process an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II. This update supersedes our April 8, 2025 submittal. As further detailed in the Project Understanding and Approach subsections of this proposal, it is our understanding that Specific Plan Phase II addresses opportunities for infill housing, allow unlimited housing density, increase maximum allowable building heights, and allow parcel mergers for affordable housing projects. The Plan is envisioned to allow 200 to 400 additional residential units.
The CSG team will be led by Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP, Principal/Director of Environmental Planning. Mr. Lajoie has over 35 years of experience in the environmental and policy planning fields, with a primary focus on environmental assessments for local agency clients. His expertise includes the preparation and management of environmental compliance documents pursuant to both CEQA and the National Environmental Protection Act (NEPA). He has managed a variety of projects ranging from development, infrastructure, and policy environmental clearances. More specifically, Mr. Lajoie has attained a diverse background in the review of downtown and city center projects throughout California, including: the Dana Point Town Center Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration; Downtown and Central Long Beach Master Plan EIR; the Downtown Lancaster Specific Plan Program EIR; the North Village EIR in Mammoth Lakes; the Historic Downtown Upland Specific Plan EIR; the Palmdale Transit Village Specific Plan EIR; and the South Pasadena Downtown Revitalization EIR.
Our Approach to the Assignment, Scope of Work, Qualifications, and Budget are included in this submittal. CSG has partnered with a subconsultant team which includes Michael Baker International, Linscott, Law and Greenspan, CRM TECH and Fuscoe Engineering to provide support on technical studies for this environmental review. Our approach outlines a collaborative process, resulting in thorough, complete, and legally defensible documentation and processing. We are proud of our history of working closely with agency staff to effectively navigate the environmental compliance process while being flexible and responsive. CSG has also gained familiarity over the past two years with Laguna Beach through our on-call services, which has been a great opportunity to learn more about the community.
We are ready to begin the assignment and are committed to completing the CEQA processing for presentation to the decision-making bodies within 11 months of the Notice to Proceed.
Please note that we were thrilled to be selected by the City of Laguna Beach approximately two years ago for this same assignment. We understand the steps that have been taken to secure grant funding and the restart of the consultant procurement under the guidance of SCAG. Our budget estimate at that time is consistent with the budget range that has been identified in the current RFP and Addendum. There are differences and additions to the current work program, as presented in the RFP, which has resulted in cost increases in comparison to our previous bid. We welcome the opportunity to discuss our Scope of Work and Budget Estimate in order to determine any adjustments to scoping and costs, and to once again be considered for this important project for Laguna Beach.
Thank you for the opportunity to submit our proposal to SCAG for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan Phase II EIR. Please contact Mr. Lajoie at 714.568.1010 (Orange office) or at [email protected] if you have question or need additional information. We look forward to being of service to both SCAG and the City of Laguna Beach.
Sincerely,
Cyrus Kianpour, PE, PLS
President, CSG Consultants, Inc.
45 45 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR ii
TABLE OF CONTENTS
SECTIONS
Cover Letter ......................................................................................................................................i I. Introduction, Project Understanding, and Approach ..................................................................... 3 II. Technical Approach......................................................................................................................... 6 III. Scope of Work............................................................................................................................... 10 IV. Identification of Key Staff and Resumes....................................................................................... 33 VI. CSG Team Sample Environmental Project Experience ................................................................. 46 V. Client References.......................................................................................................................... 50 VI. Required Forms............................................................................................................................. 51 VII. Additional Information ................................................................................................................. 52 46 46 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 3 I. INTRODUCTION, PROJECT UNDERSTANDING, AND APPROACH
FIRM PROFILE
CSG Consultants, Inc. (CSG) is an employee-owned, California company with headquarters in Foster City, and additional offices in Sacramento, Paso Robles, San Jose, Pleasanton, and Orange. Our office in Orange provides a local presence, as we are within a drive time of 30 minutes from the Laguna Beach City Hall. The majority of the 350+ individuals within our firm have provided public agency services throughout their entire careers. Our talented personnel bring a wealth of ideas and experiences, having held positions with communities facing similar development opportunities as the City.
NAME OF FIRM: CSG Consultants, Inc.
PRIMARY CONTACT: Glenn Lajoie, AICP – Principal & Director of Environmental Planning CONTACT INFO: [email protected] email
LOCAL OFFICE: 3707 W. Garden Grove Boulevard, Suite 100, Orange, CA 92868 (714) 568-1010 phone, (714) 568-1028 fax
www.csgengr.com | [email protected]
REGIONAL OFFICES: 3150 Almaden Expressway, Suite 255, San Jose, CA 95118 3875 Hopyard Road, Suite 141, Pleasanton, CA 94588
2150 River Plaza, Suite 255, Sacramento, CA 95814
930 Fresno Street, Newman, CA 95360
806 9th Street, Suite 2A, Paso Robles, CA 93446
HEADQUARTERS: 550 Pilgrim Drive, Foster City, CA 94404
(650) 522-2500 phone, (650) 522-2599 fax
www.csgengr.com | [email protected]
YEARS IN BUSINESS: 34 • Founded in 1991
EMPLOYEES: 350+ (Nationally) 93 (Local Office)
TYPE OF BUSINESS: California Corporation • Incorporated June 15, 2000 • Federal ID: 91-2053749 Our multi-disciplined municipal services staff consists of the following types of professionals:
47 47 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 4
INTRODUCTION
CSG is pleased to submit this proposal to the Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) for the City of Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Environmental Impact Report (EIR). CSG will serve as the prime consultant, in partnership with our subconsultants which include Michael Baker International, Linscott, Law and Greenspan, CRM TECH, and Fuscoe Engineering, will work closely with staff and project team from contract execution and project inception through to public hearings and completion of the process. The documentation and processing will be in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code 21000-21177), the State CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 6, Chapter 3, Section 15000-15387), the City of Laguna Beach Environmental Guidelines and the regulations, requirements, and procedures of any other responsible Public Agency with jurisdiction by law.
PROJECT UNDERSTANDING
It is our understanding that the proposed project involves Phase II for the Downtown Specific Plan Update. The city completed Phase 1 for the Downtown Specific Plan, which addressed commercial off-street parking standards, streamlining the land use permit requirements, as well as other changes. Phase II would potentially expand opportunities for infill housing, allow unlimited housing density, increase maximum allowable building heights, and allow parcel mergers for affordable housing projects. It is envisioned that these changes may allow 200 to 400 additional residential units.
The 115-acre study area is overall urban in character and extends along Laguna Canyon Road, to Main Beach, westerly in the vicinity of Cliff Drive, east along Pacific Coast Highway, and within the heart of the Downtown, in the area of Forest and Ocean Avenues. The area features a broad range of commercial uses, including retail shops, resident services, offices, and restaurants. Residential uses are located primarily along Cliff Drive and other residential properties are dispersed throughout the Downtown. Downtown is one of the earliest areas of the city to have been developed and is typified by small lot development patterns, with varied building heights and architectural styles.
Downtown is recognized as the historical center of the City’s business, civic, cultural, and other public activities, and represents much of the identity and heritage of the city. It is important that the Phase II Update preserves these important functions. Because the city would continue to encourage non-residential uses on the ground floor in most areas of the Specific Plan, it is envisioned that most of the latent housing capacity exists in the potential to enlarge existing single story commercial buildings through upper-level additions, that create second and third story rental housing. An existing restriction that limits most downtown buildings to a single story, 12-foot height, is therefore a primary impediment to adding new residential density. The Phase II Update would remove this impediment and provide a new maximum height that considers second and third story housing. Infill housing opportunities could also be created by addressing the zoning constraints that impact the feasibility of converting upper-level commercial space into new housing units. The Phase II Update will need to balance changes to the development standards with the need to preserve the visual character of the downtown. Lastly, because many of the buildings in the downtown were not originally developed with on-site parking, many properties cannot accommodate new uses that would potentially increase the parking requirement. This is another key barrier to housing production in the downtown, which will also be addressed by Phase II.
The Key Actions for the Specific Plan Phase II include:
Changes to height restrictions: Introduce variable maximum heights (12, 24, or 36 feet) based on location. It is anticipated that most areas would be eligible for the 24-foot building height allowance.
Changes to maximum residential density: No proposed maximum density, with a potential exception for the CBD Multiple Family District, where no changes may be proposed. 48 48 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 5 Changes to lot merger regulations: A new provision would be added to allow lots to be merged for a combined area of over 5,000 square feet on Broadway, in the Arts District, and in the CBD Office District, for affordable housing projects.
Changes to the Urban Design Guidelines: Several revisions are proposed, including new and amended Urban Design Guidelines and new Objective Design Standards.
Changes to the allowed uses: Allow residential uses in the Arts District and Central Bluffs by right, without a Conditional Use Permit. Allow artists live/work units with a Conditional Use Permit in the Visitor Commercial and Multiple Family Residential Zones. Restrict residential uses to above the ground floor in certain areas where pedestrian orientation and the quality of the shopping experience are primary goals.
Changes to parking requirements: One space per market-rate dwelling unit and 0.5 spaces for each affordable dwelling unit, which may be covered or uncovered.
The overall Project Objectives include:
1. Diversify the city's housing stock in terms of cost, size, and type to meet the needs of present and future households. At. Address regulatory barriers to promote affordable housing in the development of smaller multifamily units that are more affordable by design.
2. Encourage. Human scale development and engaging architecture, which will maintain the special character of the downtown.
3. Reduce auto dependency in favor of greater pedestrian accessibility by placing housing near most daily necessities and services.
4. Increase economic opportunities for both residents and downtown businesses.
5. Foster a sense of community by bringing more individuals into shared pedestrian environments that allows them to interact face to face, both socially and professionally.
6. Promote a village style mix of resident serving businesses to serve the larger resident population that would be located within a short walking distance of many commercial uses.
Measurable outcomes resulting from implementation of the Specific Plan include accelerating infill development that facilitates housing supply, choice, and affordability, affirmatively further fair housing and the reduction of vehicle miles travel (VMT).
49 49 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 6 II. TECHNICAL APPROACH
TECHNICAL APPROACH
The CSG work program and overall Scope of Work is centered on the preparation of a Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) in accordance with Section 15168 of the CEQA Guidelines. The Program EIR will serve as the primary CEQA clearance for individual projects referenced in the Project Description. As has been displayed throughout the State, the Program EIR is an excellent tool for CEQA streamlining and carries with it a beneficial shelf life, beginning with the Program EIR certification and throughout the buildout and implementation of the improvements within the Downtown Plan area. Once the Specific Plan Program EIR is certified and is in place, subsequent entitlements can tier, when necessary, from the findings of the Program EIR, in accordance with Section 15152 of the CEQA Guidelines, ensuring environmental compliance under the Program review and streamlining the orientation for further CEQA compliance for individual components and applications. It is important to note that although presented at a program level, the key objective of this CEQA review will focus on a Project level analysis, to the greatest extent possible, further assuring the long-term viability of the clearance.
As the work program is initiated, the CSG team will serve as an extension of SCAG and City staff to ensure that the entire CEQA process is conducted comprehensively and will consider recent CEQA legislation and legal rulings that have implications for the practice of CEQA. CSG will be responsible for the day-to-day management and supervision of the environmental review and will be the direct point of contact for the city. CSG will be responsible for coordinating the environmental review team to ensure a thorough analysis that complies with the CEQA requirements. The CSG Project Manager, Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP will also represent the Project Team at public hearings and other presentations, as necessary. The CSG team includes our technical team of experts, Michael Baker International, Linscott, Law and Greenspan, CRM TECH, and Fuscoe Engineering. The core team has worked together for many years. Mr. Lajoie was a department manager at Baker and that oversight will ensure continuity and understanding of expectations for concise writing styles, analysis, documentation and time management.
It is our understanding that this project is a Co-Applicant partnership with the Kennedy Commission. The Kennedy Commission will focus on amplifying engagement with community members that work and or live in the downtown area, specifically engagement with community members who have not historically been engaged nor had their input heard. The Kennedy Commission will engage organizations serving impacted communities and engage residents as to how affordable housing could be developed to support the community, the Laguna Beach workforce, and the local economy. The Kennedy Commission will amplify equitable engagement by supporting and facilitating several streams of feedback, focus groups and one-on-one engagement. The Kennedy Commission's outreach efforts are anticipated to result in feedback that the city and CEQA compliance team will use to inform in The Downtown Specific Plan Phase II and environmental matters for the Program EIR.
With the authorization to proceed and within one week of the fully executed contract being provided to CSG, the kick-off meeting will occur. We view the Project kick-off meeting as a key component for setting up a successful project review. This meeting will serve as an opportunity to discuss expectations, responsibilities, and communication procedures. The initiation of the CEQA process will involve a review of issues, constraints, and Project goals/objectives, as well as the overall schedule.
Once we confirm that we have complete and current Project information, CSG will draft the Project Description for staff review. It is expected that our team will work collaboratively with City Staff in the development and confirmation of the Project Description, which is exactly how we have approached our initial work for the project in 2023, when we were assigned the Downtown EIR for the City of Laguna Beach. It was our perspective at that time and carries to the current process, of staying flexible, with an eye on navigating analysis and developing an analytical approach that ensures defensibility of the documentation and process. 50 50 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 7 We understand that the Project Description and related details may continue to evolve as the work program is launched. The CSG team will work closely with SCAG and City staff to recognize and respond to the adjustments in the project details as we move forward. We recommend, as best as possible, that Project information and any background environmental and Project related documentation are forwarded to the CSG team at the time of the Notice to Proceed. The early and continued sharing of information will allow further discussions and clarification at the kick-off.
The initiation of the EIR review and CEQA processing will involve a detailed scoping process, including agency consultations and a public scoping session, to get a better understanding of the concerns of affected agencies and the community. A Notice of Preparation (NOP) will be circulated for a 30-day review. The NOP review will confirm the screening of topics and level of review for the EIR. During the 30-day review process, the CSG team will engage in agency and stakeholder consultations within and outside of the city. This will include the initiation of the tribal consultations as discussed further in our scope of work.
The CSG team will be preparing the following technical studies once the draft Project Description is confirmed:
Aesthetics/Viewshed, Air Quality, Biological Resources, Cultural and Historical Resources, Energy, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hydrology, Drainage and Water Quality, Noise/Vibration, and Traffic and Circulation.
The Draft EIR will include the Introduction and Purpose, Executive Summary and Project Description. The Environmental Analysis section will identify the existing conditions baseline for each topic, short-term demolition/construction, and long-term environmental impacts (both individually and cumulative) and the level of significance of those impacts. Feasible mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce the significance of impacts, and the analysis will conclude if any unavoidable significant adverse impacts are identified following the implementation of mitigation.
The review of Alternatives will be consistent with Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines. The range of Alternatives is expected to include the “No Project,” a “Reduced Density Alternative,” and a possible “Design and/or Use Alternative,” subject to further discussions with SCAG and the City. If SCAG and the City require further flexibility, options may be studied further in the Alternatives section. In addition, as an optional task and to address potential project variations, we can prepare a Comparative Summary subsection, which can be incorporated as an Appendix in the Program EIR. Our team members have used this tool while at another firm for the City of Walnut Creek Mixed Use Special District Project. A copy of that subsection has been included as an Appendix for reference.
Following the administrative draft review process with SCAG and City staff, the Draft EIR will then undergo a 45-day public review. CSG will respond to all comments received during the public review process, prepare the Final EIR, Mitigation Monitoring Program and draft the necessary Findings and possible Statement of Overriding Considerations under Sections 15091 and 15093 of the CEQA Guidelines.
The CSG team will be viewed as an integral contributor in the project review, will participate in on going meetings with SCAG and City staff, and will provide presentations, answer questions and provide guidance on all matters related to the documentation and process at the public hearings. The CSG team will assist decision makers and the public in understanding the analysis and conclusions of the environmental review process, as the process continues through the Planning Commission review and on to the City Council for a determination to certify the Program EIR.
We have had great opportunities with recent CEQA review studies and training programs with city staff in Laguna Beach and are proud to support of environmental review and clearances. 51 51 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 8 Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan Area
Legend
Downtown Specific Plan
Boundary
52 52 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 9 Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan Area Land Uses
Legend
Downtown Specific Plan
Boundary
Arts District
CBD-1 (Resident Serving
CBD-2 (Downtown Commercial)
CBD-Visitor Commercial
CBD-Office
CBD-Multi-Family Residential
CBD-Public Parks
CBD-Central Bluffs
53 53 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 10 III. SCOPE OF WORK
1.0 Project Management and Meetings
1.1 Project Management and Invoicing
The CSG Project Manager, Mr. Glenn Lajoie, AICP and Senior Environmental Project Manager Liza Debies will be responsible for the management and supervision of the EIR Project Team. Mr. Lajoie will direct the preparation of the EIR, ensuring compliance with CEQA requirements, guidelines, and the City of Laguna Beach CEQA procedures.
Documentation will be prepared in a city-approved format and will undergo internal review to ensure that it is of high quality, per industry standards, and meets the expectations of legal defensibility. Mr. Lajoie will coordinate with SCAG, city staff and/or other stakeholder representatives as well as internal technical staff, support staff, and word processing/editing team members to achieve the timely completion of the EIR. Throughout the work program, the CSG team will serve as an extension of SCAG and city staff and serve as a resource on CEQA and environmental review matters for the Project.
Monthly progress reports will be included with invoices, identifying the tasks accomplished, deliverables submitted, anticipated tasks/progress for the next month, any pending issues and proposed solutions to address concerns, will be prepared in accordance with SCAG invoicing and reporting methodologies. Any modifications and/or updates to the schedule will also be provided. Monthly invoices will include the total contract amount, all costs (by task) incurred to date (actual and percentage), estimated completion percentage for each task, and financial information for each task for that billing period. The monthly progress report will include:
Executive Summary
Progress Narrative.
Description of tasks completed
Project schedule describing the percentage of each task and deliverable milestone Summary of costs incurred per task and milestone
Schedule and schedule tracking narrative
List of deliverable items
Management issues and Statement of resolution of problems 30 days look ahead.
Confirmation from the City of Laguna Beach Project Manager that the CEQA Consultants work products for the reporting period are satisfactory.
It is assumed that all documents will be shared via Microsoft 365 (Teams, OneDrive, or SharePoint) and comments will be shared via the same method, using collaborative editing tools available on Microsoft Word, Excel, etc.
1.2 Project Management Plan and Schedule
CSG will prepare a Project Management Plan (PMP), which will include contact information for the key project team members, scope of work, schedule, budget, invoices, progress reporting details, along with document control and quality assurance quality control procedures (QA/QC). The PMP will include the Kennedy Commission deliverables and timelines. The PMP will identify systems for project control, including necessary procedures for conducting the work, managing resources, communications, budget, schedule, monitoring and reporting project status and progress, document control and QA/QC. The PMP will include the safeguards for early identification of issues and their effective resolution. Upon approval by SCAG, the PMP will be the document guiding the progression on the overall work program effort. CSG will notify SCAG as soon as possible about any potential necessary updates to the PMP. Any proposed changes to the overall PMP are subject to approval by SCAG. CSG will deliver the PMP prior to the kick-off meeting.
CSG will develop a schedule showing all work tasks, sub tasks, start dates, activity durations, product submittal dates, key project milestones, and relationships among work tasks, including critical path items. Each task and 54 54 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 11 subtask deliverable will be provided identified in the PMP, as it is completed, according to the project scheduled.
The PMP will have a two-week review period at a minimum, for all deliverables. Some deliverables may require additional time for higher level reviews and possible presentations to local boards or commissions. All comments, edits, suggestions, and questions from the PMP will be submitted to the CSG team and edits will be incorporated into a revised schedule of deliverables.
1.3 Project Meetings
Close coordination with staff is essential. CSG will participate in progress/project conference calls and/or meetings with staff. The meetings are anticipated to include the Project Kick-Off Meeting and Public Scoping Meeting during the 30-day Notice of Preparation and meetings before the Planning Commission and City Council. CSG will confirm assumptions before finalizing the agreement for consultant services. Virtual progress meetings will be coordinated with SCAG and the city. Presentations will utilize digital slides and any other presentation materials deemed appropriate.
CSG will conduct monthly check-in meetings, up to 16 meetings, each one hour long, with the project management team (PMT). The meetings will be used to update the PMT on project progress, to identify and plan for upcoming tasks, and to anticipate any concerns or challenges. CSG will provide each meeting agenda at least 48 hours in advance, meeting attendees in order to allow time to review and revise the agenda. CSG will provide meeting notes within 48 hours after each meeting for attendees to ensure each step is documented. CSC will provide presentation materials electronically to attendees no less than 24 hours prior to each meeting. In addition, CSG will be available for phone check-ins with SCAG, City of Laguna Beach, and the Kennedy Commission Project Manager up to a time commitment of 12 hours. The following meetings are assumed:
Kick-off meeting with SCAG and City staff and stakeholder representatives (included in Task 2.1) NOP Scoping/Community meeting (included in Task 3.2)
Planning Commission and/or City Council meeting(s) (budgeting for two EIR certification hearings). Periodic project update calls and virtual meetings with staff, at a minimum, expected bi-weekly. Should SCAG and/or the City determine that additional meetings beyond the meetings outlined above are necessary, this scope of work can be modified accordingly.
1.4 Project Close Out Files
At the conclusion of the project assignment, CSG will document and assemble all project deliverables and provide them in accordance with SCAG’s project close out procedures. All deliverables will be provided in accordance with the Project Schedule. CSG will document all project deliverables in an organized fashion and deliver them to the City of Laguna Beach in an electronic format at the end of the project, along with an Excel file documenting location and completion of deliverables. Each task will have its own folder. Within each task there will be a folder with the name of the deliverable and final version within it. Each meeting held will have a folder including agendas, notes, all other relevant materials from that meeting. All deliverables will be provided in accordance with the project schedule.
2.0 Kick-Off and Project Description
2.1 Kick-Off Meeting
Within the first month of receiving the fully executed contract for the assignment and Notice to Proceed, the work program will be initiated with a virtual kick-off meeting with the Project Management Team, which will consist of the SCAG Project Manager, City of Laguna Beach Project Manager, the Kennedy Commission Project Manager and other key staff members to review the project vision, goals and confirm the direction of the scope of work and engagement efforts. CSG will provide the kick-off meeting agenda to attendees at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting. This initial meeting is vital to the success of the CEQA process and will be a key milestone to confirm the Project Management Plan, parameters of the analysis, information needs, Potential stakeholders to engage, buildout conditions, scheduling, and overall communications. CSG will lead a discussion on data collection (Task 2.2) and 55 55 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 12 discuss the specific metrics and plans for developing baseline data for analysis. Prior to the kick-off, CSG will distribute an agenda and information needs memorandum. Upon completion of the kick-off meeting, CSG will prepare meeting minutes within 48 hours after the kick-off meeting that detail action items for the CSG team, SCAG staff, and City staff to ensure that next steps are documented.
The kick-off meeting is expected to focus on the following:
Refinements to the Scope of Work and to establish date certain timelines, team roles, and clear lines of communication between SCAG, the City, environmental consultants and Project consultants. Establish procedures for communication and task completion. Preview a preliminary list of data needs.
Confirm a mutual understanding of the key issues to be addressed in the environmental document and to review Project related issues.
Discuss the conceptual Project Description and Project objectives. Identify a date certain Project schedule and key milestones, including delivery of and review of technical studies.
With the receipt of detailed Project information and feedback from the kick-off meeting, CSG will draft the preliminary Project Description (Task 2.3) and provide updates to the master schedule for review and approval by SCAG and City staff.
2.2 Data Collection, Existing Conditions Review and Site Visit Following the kick-off meeting, CSG will prepare and submit a data request to obtain any further information needs and/or clarifications related to Project construction and buildout assumptions. Initial review of project materials will include the General Plan and EIR, and related documents. Additionally, CSG will conduct a site visit to assist in describing the environmental setting and to photographically document the site and surrounding area.
CSG will assemble and summarize available data and information to inform an assessment of existing conditions in the Project area. As a first step, CSG will create a data request for SCAG and the City of Laguna Beach that will be initiated at the project kick-off meeting to ensure that data requests and turnaround times do not impact the project schedule. The data requests are anticipated to include GIS data, lists of known historical resources, technical reports such as shoreline geology assessments and parking utilization studies, and information regarding significant projects in the general vicinity of the Downtown Specific Plan area that have not been constructed.
Following the kick-off meeting, CSG will prepare and submit a data request to obtain any further information needs and/or clarifications related to baseline information and other relevant information required for the environmental analysis. This task may include coordination with other agencies for data collection. Additionally, CSG will conduct a site visit to assist in describing the environmental setting and to photographically document the site, the project area and surrounding area. CSG will also obtain and review existing documents available from the city, including policy documents such as the existing Downtown Specific Plan, the Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, the 6th Cycle Housing Element, city ordinances, and the City’s General Plan, as well as environmental review studies and technical reports prepared for projects within the project area of vicinity.
CSG will also collect and report on a baseline in final measurable outcomes for each of the three eligible criteria for REAP 2.0 (Accelerating infill development, Affirmatively Furthering Fair Housing, and Reducing Vehicle Miles Traveled. The specific metrics and plan for reporting on each of the three categories will be discussed at the project kick-off meeting.
2.3 Project Description
The Project Description will detail the site location, proposed Project characteristics, Project objectives, phasing, and agreements/permits/approvals that are required. The Project Description will present the proposed Specific Plan 56 56 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 13 Phase II, land uses, project features, development regulations, design and infrastructure improvements. This section will include a summary of the Project’s local environmental setting, existing General Plan and Zoning designations.
Exhibits depicting the regional and site vicinity will be included in the section along with photographs that are representative of the project area, including building architecture, scale and urban design. CSG will submit the draft Project Description for review and approval. CSG will revise the Project Description to address comments provided by the city and stakeholders and once finalized, the Project Description will be distributed and used by the CSG team and subconsultants. CSG assumes that once finalized, no significant modifications will occur to the Project Description.
3.0 Project Scoping
3.1 Notice of Preparation
CSG will prepare the Administrative Draft Notice of Preparation (NOP) for review. The NOP will include an overview of the Project, Project Objectives, and expected regulatory permitting and discretionary actions. The NOP will include discussion of environmental issue areas requiring analysis and a justification for exclusion of any environmental issue areas from the EIR. This Scope of Work assumes one round of review and revisions for the MND.
CSG will prepare the distribution list and work with SCAG and City Staff to confirm the distribution list for the NOP.
Once the NOP is signed by the city, CSG will work with the city to determine the appropriate distribution strategy for the NOP in order to begin the 30-day public scoping. CSG we will file the NOP at the Orange County Clerk and the State Clearinghouse on behalf of the City through CEQAnet. The city will print and mail the NOP to the distribution mailing list. Comments received in response to the NOP will be reviewed and incorporated as part of the EIR preparation.
3.2 Scoping/Community Meeting
Upon publication of the NOP (Task 3.1), a public scoping meeting, which can also involve federal, state, and local agencies, will be scheduled during the NOP public review period. The intent of the public scoping meeting is to inform the community of the Project and allow the public to provide comments on environmental concerns. The Scoping Meeting will orient the community on the CEQA review process and will be presented in a manner in which the community can gain a greater understanding of the proposal, the intent of CEQA, and the key issue areas addressed in the EIR. CSG will provide handouts and PowerPoint information to supplement the presentation. Following the presentation, the meeting will be devoted to the public sharing questions and comments. Comment forms will be made available and oral comments will be recorded and become a part of the administrative record. This scope of work assumes one-scoping meeting, however, additional meetings can be arranged and scheduled, subject to further discussions with the city.
During the 30-day public review period for the NOP, CSG will maintain clear communication regarding comments received and any effect on the scope of work. Additionally, CSG will engage with relevant agencies and stakeholders outside of the city, as appropriate. During the 30-day public review period for the NOP, CSG will prepare a distribution list of contacts required to receive Tribal Consultations notification letters in accordance with California Assembly Bill 52 and Senate Bill 18. CSG will draft the notification letters and distribute via certified mail. Additionally, CSG will assist City staff during any requested consultation with Native American tribes and prepare summary reports documenting the discussions and outcomes of such consultation.
3.3 CEQA Notices
As referenced throughout this scope of work. and in the deliverable’s subsection, CSG will prepare the Notice of Preparation, Notice of Completion, Notice of Availability, and Notice of Determination, at the appropriate time frames. CSG will be responsible for mailing the CEQA notices to public agencies, filing with the State Clearinghouse, and filing any documents with the Orange County Clerk's Office. 57 57 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 14
3.4 Public Project Page and City Eblasts
CSG will provide draft content for a city hosted public project page for the community to learn about the project and stay informed on recent developments or updates. CSG will also develop communication content for the city to release via social media channels and e-mail distribution. The content will be designed to be simple, easy to understand, and promote awareness, attendance at events, and feedback on materials. CSG will work with the Kennedy Commission to translate communication content to Spanish, as deemed necessary by the PMT.
The content will include but not limited to 1) Project introduction language, 2) Project timeline 3) announcement and publicity content for e-mail, community newsletter, and/or social media distribution, and 4) Reminders for public hearings. To ensure consistency of public information about SCAG programs and funded work products, CSG will notify and coordinate with SCAG Project Manager, who will coordinate with SCAG’s Manager of Media and Public Affairs or a specified designee on any media inquiries or plans or proactively providing information to media outlets.
CSG will also be responsible for crediting SCAG as a funder. All public facing communications materials produced under this contract will acknowledge and give credit to SCAG, whether with a logo or with language. Communication materials include, but are not limited to, site signage, printed information materials, print and online publications, websites, advertisements, video, public service announcements, social media postings, events, media advisories, news releases, and all other related materials. The project Website must provide acknowledgement of SCAG as the agency funding this planning effort.
4.0 Technical Analysis and Studies to be Prepared by the CSG Team Pursuant to SCAG’s RFP, the CSG technical team will prepare the following studies:
4.1 Aesthetics and Visual Study
CSG has retained Michael Baker to provide the technical review for Aesthetics and Visual Study. The scope of work is as follows:
Visual Impact Assessment: The existing public views, visual resources, and on-site structures and surrounding development will be characterized. A visual inventory of the project area will be conducted in order to verify the visual character and viewshed, including views of the project site and open waters and beach areas. A discussion of the existing on-site conditions and surrounding structures will be detailed. Color site photographs will be provided to illustrate on-site and surrounding views.
Short-term construction impacts will be studied, including consideration of dust and haul trucks. Michael Baker staff will confirm whether or not existing scenic views to beach or open ocean, as well as other visual resources in the area, will be impacted by the potential building heights. Michael Baker will incorporate the photo simulations prepared as part of this scope of work in order to depict potential view impacts, if any. Michael Baker staff will also consider the potential for conflict with a plan/policy or regulation governing scenic quality, including consistency with the visual resource policies of the City’s General Plan and California Coastal Act. Michael Baker will address the potential for significant impacts to be generated by the introduction of light and glare associated with the increased development of the project. Consideration of the City’s existing outdoor lighting standards established by the existing City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code will be evaluated. If potential significant impacts rise, recommended mitigation measures will be included in order to reduce impacts to the extent feasible.
Viewshed Mapping: One viewshed analysis will be performed to determine potential areas that the proposed building height increases could be visible from within a one-mile radius of the downtown area. The data for the viewshed map will be created using Geographic Information System (GIS) technology and will include Digital Surface Model (DSM) data, which considers view blockage resulting from existing structures and vegetation. When the viewshed is completed, each cell within the viewshed will be given a colored value to represent areas that can view the project site versus areas that cannot view the project site. 58 58 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 15 Shade/Shadow Diagrams: Michael Baker will perform a shade and shadow analysis of the project in order to analyze the shadow-related impacts. The project would involve allowing additional Building height (up to three stories) within the downtown area. As such, based upon the Project Description, Michael Baker will use the 3D model developed as part of other tasks for this scope of work, to prepare shade and shadow drawings for time intervals throughout the day on the summer solstice, vernal/autumnal equinoxes, and winter solstice. The analysis will reflect both existing and project build-out conditions.
Photosensitive uses in the area will be analyzed. A description of the summer and winter solstice, the most extreme conditions at the project site, will be provided. Michael Baker will prepare a written analysis of the shade and shadow effects, along with supporting graphics addressing potentially significant impacts generated by the proposed project on the surrounding area.
Photo Simulations: Michael Baker will prepare up to ten (10) photosimulations to support the environmental compliance documentation for the project. Upon project kick-off, Michael Baker will schedule site reconnaissance. At this time, professional photographs will be taken. Michael Baker will utilize a Nikon D1X digital camera with a 50mm lens; photographs will be used in high resolution electronic (jpg) format. Photograph locations will be documented with global positioning system (GPS) technology. Both on-site and off-site client specified locations will be included, as agreed upon with City staff prior to site reconnaissance. The photographs will be used to illustrate the addition of taller buildings allowed as part of the new regulations and impacts on views of the public from scenic public viewing locations. Additional reference photographs will also be taken for use to aid in the creation of the computer model and inclusion into the surrounding context. Of the photographs taken, Michael Baker will use up to ten (10) photographs to simulate the proposed project. Note that this scope of work assumes all photographs will be taken during one site visit. Should any additional site work be required to take additional photographs, such activities can be done on a time and materials basis, if requested by the Client.
One (1) three-dimensional (3D) computer model will be prepared to simulate the project from up to ten (10) Key Views, as well as for use in other modeling efforts described in this scope of work. The computer model will include a massing model of the ground and all buildings in and around the downtown area. The model will be enhanced where necessary to illustrate the areas most impacted by the proposed new regulations. The level of detail will increase as the focus narrows. We assume five areas of primary focus. The enhanced portion of the overall model will include existing ground floor, proposed second and third floor additions, parking and street alterations, as well as new landscaping.
The Client supplied landscape plans or design concepts will be utilized for the depiction of all planting and materials in and around the project. The landscaping will, as much as possible, be incorporated into the computer model. This will ensure continuity from one viewpoint to another. Some fine tuning of the landscaping will be done during the photograph compositing stage. The rendered subject will then be superimposed into the selected photographs utilizing masking techniques that blend the two together seamlessly. This scope of work assumes the subject rendered will depict architectural level detail, as provided by the Client.
Drive-Thru Animations: Michael Baker will use the 3D model developed as part of this scope of work in order to prepare up to two (2), two-minute animated street level animations depicting the existing downtown development with the new improvements. The two street segments to be stimulated will be determined by the client in consultation with Michael Baker staff recommendations. This scope of work assumes the subject rendered will depict architectural level detail, as provided by the Client. The subject file will then be saved into an electronic media format for use by the city.
4.2 Air Quality Evaluation
Michael Baker technical specialists will prepare the Air Quality Analysis. The Baker scope of work is as follows:
59 59 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 16 Existing Conditions/Regulatory Framework: The project is located within the South Coast Air Basin (SCAB), which is under the jurisdiction of the South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD). Baseline meteorological and air quality data developed through the California Air Resources Board (CARB) will be utilized for the description of existing ambient air quality. Air quality data from the nearest air quality monitoring station will be included to help highlight existing air quality local to the project area. The analysis will also describe and address the requirements set forth by the SCAQMD CEQA Air Quality Handbook.
Construction-Related Emissions: Based on data provided by the project applicant, emissions generated during earthwork, paving, and building activities will be quantified using the California Emissions Estimator Model version 2022.1 (CalEEMod). A general description of the major phases of construction and their timing will be required. The air pollutant emissions during construction will be compared to the SCAQMD Regional Thresholds of Significance.
Naturally occurring asbestos impacts will also be qualitatively discussed.
Long-Term Emissions: Operational (i.e., area, mobile, and energy source) emissions will be quantified and compared to the SCAQMD regional thresholds of significance. The emissions will be quantitatively derived utilizing CalEEMod.
Emission reductions due to project design features will be incorporated into the operational emissions inventory.
Primary sources of emissions will be related to area sources and local/regional vehicle miles traveled. Project consistency with the 2022 Air Quality Management Plan (AQMP) will also be addressed.
Localized Emissions: The project is located within the SCAQMD’s Source Receptor Area (SRA) 20 (Central Orange County Coastal). Based on localized meteorological data for SRA 17, Michael Baker will analyze localized impacts based upon the SCAQMD’s Localized Significance Thresholds (LST) methodology.
Air Emissions Health Impacts. As a result of the California Supreme Court decision for Sierra Club vs. County of Fresno (Friant Ranch L.P.), the resultant human health impacts from the project’s short-term construction and long-term operational air emissions will be analyzed.
4.3 Biological Resources Assessment
Michael Baker Biological Specialists will prepare the Biological Assessment. The Baker scope of work is as follows:
Literature Review: Michael Baker will conduct a high-level, primarily desktop-based biological resources analysis of the City’s Downtown Specific Plan area (DSP area) to determine its baseline conditions and verify existing data from the current Specific Plan. Michael Baker will conduct a database search of the California Department of Fish and Wildlife’s (CDFW) California Natural Diversity Database, the California Native Plant Society’s (CNPS) Electronic Inventory of Rare and Endangered Vascular Plants of California listings, and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service’s (USFWS) Information for Planning and Consultation online system and Critical Habitat mapper to identify special status biological resources known to occur within the City. In addition, Michael Baker will review U.S. Department of Agriculture soil data, historic/current aerial photographs, and U.S. Geological Survey topographic maps to further assess the ecological conditions within the project site. The USFWS National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) Mapper, U.S.
Geological Survey National Hydrography Dataset, and other sources will also be reviewed to identify aquatic resources within the DSP area that may fall under federal and/or state regulatory jurisdiction. Michael Baker will also conduct a review of the Central/Coastal Orange County Natural Community Conservation Plan/Habitat Conservation Plan (NCCP/HCP) to confirm the location of any existing biological constraints (i.e., Reserves, Special Linkages) and identify any requirements that would be needed for the Specific Plan Update to be consistent with the conservation goals and objectives of the NCCP/HCP.
Field Reconnaissance: Following the literature review, Michael Baker will visit strategic and accessible open space areas within the DSP area to record the presence of any natural vegetation communities and the extent of land cover types. This field reconnaissance will primarily focus on areas that could not be verified to a certainty through Google Earth aerial and Street View imagery. The location of any special-status biological resources, if detected (i.e., plants, wildlife, vegetation communities, jurisdictional features), will be recorded. The field reconnaissance will not include 60 60 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 17 any comprehensive documentation of plant and wildlife species except as may be needed to help characterize existing vegetation communities. This field reconnaissance will provide a general understanding of the biological resources occurring within City’s DSP area and is expected to include up to two (2) field days following the literature review. The field reconnaissance survey does not include formal jurisdictional delineation or focused surveys for plant or wildlife species.
Report: A biological resources letter report will be prepared to present the results of the literature review and field reconnaissance. This report will document vegetation communities/land cover types occurring within DPS area, will note, on a general level, the special-status and non-special-status plant and wildlife species that have the potential to occur within the DSP area, and will identify the presence of major aquatic/hydrological features (e.g., streams, lakes) that occur within the DSP area and that are potentially subject to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, the Regional Water Quality Control Board, and CDFW. The report will include photographs and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) figures to enhance written text and visually depict specific biological information documented within the DSP area. GIS figures are anticipated to consist of aerial photographs that depict the DSP area boundaries; USDA soils; vegetation communities and land uses; aquatic features, and the locations of any NCCP/HCP Reserves and Special Linkages, if present in or adjacent to the DSP area. In addition, the report will analyze potential impacts of the proposed Phase II Specific Plan related to changes in building height restrictions, housing density, and lot mergers to biological resources, and identify any biological surveys, mitigation measures, regulatory approvals, and/or NCCP/HCP requirements that may be required in order to ensure the analysis of biological resources is compliant with current standards under CEQA.
4.4 Cultural, Historical and Tribal Resources Phase 1 Assessment CRM TECH will prepare the asessment for cultural and historical resources. The CRM TECH scope of work is as follows:
1. Produce maps of the planning area on appropriate current, historical, and geologic maps for use during the records search, historical background research, Native American scoping, and field inspection, as well as for inclusion in the final report.
2. Conduct a historical/archaeological resources records search at the South Central Coastal Information Center for a complete inventory of known cultural resources within the planning area.
3. Request a Sacred Lands File search from the Native American Heritage Commission and prepare draft letters to the pertinent Native American tribes on behalf of the City of Laguna Beach in accordance with AB 52 and SB 18 requirements.
4. Conduct background research to establish a historical overview of the planning area and historical, ethnohistorical, and archaeological contexts for future evaluation of potential “historical resources.”
5. Consult with the City and Client to compile a list of existing buildings within the planning area that are considered potential “historical resources” under CEQA guidelines, including street addresses, Assessor’s Parcel Numbers, and construction dates on record. (Notes: As this is a programmatic-level study, CRM TECH will not formally record or evaluate these properties.)
6. Perform a reconnaissance-level field survey of the planning area to document all potential “historical resources” and document their current conditions.
7. Prepare a final report to summarize the methods ad results of all research procedures listed above, identifying areas of different historical sensitivity, present the list of potential “historical resources” identified, and recommend subsequent courses of action in the CEQA-compliance process.
Additional services subsequent to the conclusion of the study, such as attendance and/or presentation at public hearings and written response to public comments, will be provided as needed.
4.5 Energy
Michael Baker will prepare the Energy Analysis; the scope of work is as follows:
61 61 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 18 Michael Baker will analyze the energy implications of the project pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3) and Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. These statutes and guidelines require a project to describe, where relevant, the wasteful, inefficient, and unnecessary consumption of energy caused by a project. In addition, Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines requires consistency analysis with state or local plans for renewable energy or energy efficiency. The analysis will qualitatively discuss the effects of the project on regional and local energy supply, demand, and resources, and the project’s consistency with energy standards and requirements.
4.6 Greenhouse Gas Emissions Evaluation
Michael Baker Technical Specialists will prepare the Greenhouse Gases Evaluation. The Baker scope of work is as follows:
Michael Baker will review the land use data and will prepare an inventory of the greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions (i.e., nitrous oxide, methane, and carbon dioxide) from both direct (i.e., area and mobile sources) and indirect sources (i.e., energy/water consumption and wastewater/solid waste generation). In addition, total GHG emissions from construction activities will be amortized into the GHG emissions inventory. CalEEMod will be used to quantify GHG emissions. Reductions from recently adopted programs and regulations will be included, such as improvements in fuel efficiency, State building code energy efficiency, and water efficiency. The analysis will review project consistency with applicable plans for the purpose of reducing GHG emissions, such as the California Air Resources Board 2022 Climate Change Scoping Plan and Southern California Association of Governments 2020–2045 Regional Transportation Plan/Sustainable Communities Strategy (2020–2045 RTP/SCS). Mitigation measures will be identified and incorporated, as necessary, to reduce potentially significant GHG impacts of the proposed project.
4.7 Hydrology, Drainage and Water Quality Assessment
Fuscoe Engineering will prepare the Hydrology, Drainage and Water Quality Assessment. The Fuscoe scope of work is as follows:
Project Kick-Off / Site Tour: Attend the project kick-off meeting and site tour with SCAG and City staff and consultant team staff and prepare data needs list.
Research and Data Acquisition and Review: Research and compile Phase I documentation, master plans of drainage, sewer and water and any regional infrastructure studies within the specific plan area. GIS data is preferred for utility layers. Work with SCAG/City staff and consultant team to define the limits of evaluation related to existing floodplains (Zone AE & VE), FEMA requirements and on-going sea level rise planning and adaptation strategies.
Assumptions: All existing and proposed hydrology evaluations assume the existing FIRMs maps are applicable (2019), and no additional FEMA analysis or floodplain analysis will be performed. If additional hydrology and/or hydraulic analysis is required, a separate proposal will be prepared for authorization.
Existing Condition Memorandum: Based on the master plans and regional studies provided by the City, prepare an infrastructure assessment and memorandum highlighting any major significant deficiency or capacity issues within the study area or any significant data gaps that require future analysis. Summarize any plans for improvements including funding status and anticipated schedule. Identify how existing FEMA standards and floodplain requirements are being applied for new development projects.
Proposed Condition Evaluation for Storm Drain, Water, and Sewer: Evaluate the proposed land use changes against the existing drainage, water and sewer systems. If anticipated changes in land use are provided, prepare proposed water and sewer demands using locally accepted generation values to identify potential increases in demand. In coordination with City staff and utility departments, qualitatively evaluate potential impacts on each of the infrastructure systems.
62 62 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 19 Fuscoe will coordinate with City Public Works and OC Flood Control District staff to identify any future flood control projects to reduce downtown flooding. Incorporate the most current strategies and policies for sea level rise adaptation. Summarize the findings including CEQA Thresholds Analysis into a technical memorandum for inclusion as a technical appendix to the program level EIR.
Note: Water and Sewer evaluations do not include any hydraulic modeling or use of existing city-wide water and sewer hydraulic models. If Public Works requires updating their models for assessing impacts, Fuscoe will provide updated input parameters (proposed demands) for use within the model(s).
Meetings and Coordination: Attend meetings and hearings as requested; coordinate with CSG Consultants, Inc. and SCAG/City staff as needed. Coordinate with external agencies as requested. Budget allows up to 24 hours.
4.8 Noise and Vibration Analysis
Michael Baker Technical Specialists will prepare the Noise and Vibration Analysis. The Baker scope of work is as follows:
Existing Conditions/Regulatory Framework: Michael Baker will review applicable noise and land use compatibility criteria for the project area. Noise standards regulating noise impacts will be discussed for land uses on and adjacent to the project site. Michael Baker will conduct a site visit throughout the project site. During the site visit, Michael Baker will conduct short-term noise level measurements throughout the project area. The noise monitoring survey will be conducted at up to three separate locations to establish baseline noise levels in the project area. The noise analysis will be structured to address the applicable questions from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines.
Construction-Related Noise and Vibration: Construction would occur during the implementation of the proposed project. Noise impacts from construction sources will be analyzed based on the anticipated equipment to be used, length of a specific construction task, equipment power type (gasoline or diesel engine), horsepower, load factor, and percentage of time in use. The construction noise impacts will be evaluated in terms of maximum levels (Lmax) and hourly equivalent continuous noise levels (Leq) and the frequency of occurrence at adjacent sensitive locations.
Operational Noise Sources: The project-generated off-site traffic noise levels will be compared to the applicable Noise Ordinance specifications and/or land use compatibility criteria for off-site uses. On-site noise generating activities (e.g., stationary sources, parking lot activities, etc.) will also be addressed and analyzed for potential impacts to the adjacent uses and will be assessed against the Noise Ordinance specifications. Compliance with applicable noise standards will be evaluated, with recommended mitigation measures included where appropriate.
4.9 Traffic and Transportation Study
Linscott, Law and Greenspan (LL&G) will prepare the Traffic and Circulation Study. The LL&G scope of work is as follows:
The Traffic Study and Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis will be prepared according to City of Laguna Beach requirements. Since the extent of the traffic study area cannot be determined at this time, this scope of work is based on the analysis of up to fifteen (15) intersections. At the appropriate time, City of Laguna Beach staff will be contacted to confirm the number and location of the study intersections. 63 63 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 20
4.9.1 Project Mobilization:
• Confirm the development description with the project team, SCAG, and City of Laguna Beach staff, work schedule, and assumptions to be utilized in the Traffic Study and the Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) analysis. Obtain a plan that illustrates the locations of the additional residential units to be added within the Downtown Specific Plan Area in both hard copy and digital formats. • Contact City of Laguna Beach staff to discuss the project and analysis criteria, confirm the study approach, identify pertinent traffic issues and concerns, and formalize the Scope of Work for the Traffic Study and the VMT analysis.
• In consultation with SCAG and City of Laguna Beach staff, prepare a scope of work agreement detailing the study area, assumptions and overall traffic study requirements (including VMT), and submit to SCAG and City staff for review and approval.
4.9.2 Data Collection and Research:
• Visit the project study area to inventory existing conditions with respect to current site conditions, local area development, pedestrian and bike facilities, parking use, and areas of congestion in order to verify our overall understanding of traffic and parking conditions in the area that might affect this project. • In conjunction with the above item, inventory existing roadway striping, traffic control measures, curbside parking restrictions, adjacent intersection configurations, and other pertinent roadway features within the study area. Research existing transit service provided within the project study area. • Conduct AM peak period (7:00 AM to 9:00 AM) and PM peak period (4:00 PM to 6:00 PM) manual turning movement counts at up to fifteen (15) key study intersections in the project vicinity. Should staff request additional traffic counts and/or analysis at additional study intersections beyond a total of fifteen (15) locations, an amendment to our contract will be necessary.
4.9.3 Trip Generation, Distribution, Assignment and Traffic Forecasting:
• Prepare trip generation forecasts for the proposed Project (i.e., for the additional residential units) for a typical weekday over a 24-hour period, as well as for the commuter AM and PM peak hours. The trip generation forecasts will be derived from trip rates listed in Trip Generation, 11th Edition, published by the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) in 2021. • Utilizing OCTAM 5.1 model files, prepare computer traffic model runs for Baseline conditions and Buildout conditions (without the project modifications) for the AM and PM peak periods. Buildout traffic volume forecasts will be determined through utilization of the OCTAM output via the following methodology:
a) Calculate the difference between the Baseline and the Buildout peak period traffic volumes and convert to AM and PM peak hour (i.e., one-hour) link traffic volumes. b) Link traffic volumes (i.e., two-way directional traffic volumes on each roadway segment) will be postprocessed using the County/City approved “b-turns” program and the relationship of the base year validation model run output to the base year "ground" traffic counts.
The link traffic volumes will be post-processed to determine AM peak hour and PM peak hour Buildout traffic volumes (without the project modifications) for up to fifteen (15) intersections. • Assign the forecasted AM and PM peak hour trips expected to be generated by the proposed project (i.e., the additional residential units within the Downtown Specific Plan) to the study intersections based on existing and anticipated traffic patterns to and from the project areas, and input from SCAG and City staff. The assumed distribution pattern will be submitted for review and approval by SCAG and City staff prior to finalization.
• Utilizing the traffic volume data compiled as part of Tasks 3.2 and 3.3, develop AM peak hour and PM peak hour traffic volumes for “Buildout traffic conditions” and “Buildout plus Project traffic conditions” for up to fifteen (15) intersections.
64 64 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 21
4.9.4 Project Evaluation and Mitigation Analysis:
• Prepare AM peak hour and PM peak hour Level of Service (LOS) calculations at up to fifteen (15) key intersections to determine the potential impacts of the proposed project. The following traffic analysis scenarios will be prepared:
a) Existing traffic conditions,
b) Buildout traffic conditions, and
c) Buildout plus project traffic conditions.
• The LOS calculations will be based on City-approved and Caltrans-approved capacity analysis methodologies (i.e., Highway Capacity Manual method for signalized and unsignalized intersections). • Assess the impact of the project based on the results of the peak hour intersection analyses, the City’s LOS standards and application of the City’s significance criteria. Based on this assessment, determine which intersections (if any) will require improvements to improve potential traffic impacts associated with the proposed project to less than significant levels. • Provide recommended mitigation measures which may include intersection and/or signalization improvements, striping modifications, the addition of auxiliary turn lanes, traffic control/limitations at site access points, etc. Please note that this proposal assumes the recommended improvement measures can be adequately described within the text of the report. Should the City request preparation of plans to further demonstrate the feasibility of the mitigation measures, an amendment to our contract will be necessary.
4.9.5 Preparation of the Traffic Impact Study:
• Prepare a Draft Traffic Report that details all of the above-mentioned items including our analysis, findings and conclusions. The Draft Traffic Report will be suitably documented with tabular, graphic and appendix material. The report will be submitted for screencheck review by the appropriate members of the project team/City staff.
• If necessary, revise the Draft Traffic Report to address project team and SCAG/City staff comments and provide a Final Traffic Report for inclusion into the project’s Environmental Document. The Final Traffic Report will be suitably documented with all tabular, graphic and appendix materials.
4.9.6 Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Analysis Memorandum:
• Coordinate with City of Laguna Beach staff to define the study area as the size and shape of the study area can affect the analysis. Determine the analysis scenarios and confirm the approach for the VMT analysis.
• Assuming the use of the Orange County Traffic Analysis Model (OCTAM), conduct with and without project VMT model runs. The without project scenario will assume existing or community plan/general plan land uses.
• Compare the project VMT for the project against the threshold (i.e., either the City VMT or County VMT).
Determine the project impact based on City of Laguna Beach Guidelines, if available and/or the OPR Technical Advisory.
• If necessary, recommend appropriate mitigation measures to reduce the impact. Provide the project team a toolbox of potential mitigation or project alternatives for consideration in the analysis. • Utilize the most current California Air Pollution Control Officers Association (CAPCOA) standards or the local guidelines and determine if the selected mitigation measures reduce the project’s VMT impacts to less than significant.
• Prepare a draft technical memorandum, which details all the above-mentioned items, our findings and conclusions. The memorandum will be suitably documented with appropriate text, tabular, graphic, and appendix materials. The draft memorandum will be submitted for review by appropriate members of the project team/City staff.
• If necessary, update the draft technical memorandum based on project team, SCAG and City staff comments, and submit a final VMT analysis memorandum.
65 65 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 22
4.9.7 Attendance at Meetings:
• This proposal assumes preparation for and attendance by LLG at up to two (2) Project team meetings and/or City meetings. This proposal allocates three (3) hours of preparation and participation by the Project Manager at each of these meetings.
4.9.8 Response to Comments:
• Coordinate with the Project team and/or City staff regarding traffic-related comments received during the circulation of the Environmental Document.
• Prepare and submit written responses to traffic-related comments received on the Traffic Section of the Environmental Document during the public review process. Update the responses if necessary, based on City and/or Project team comments and submit final written responses for inclusion in the Final Environmental Document (8 hours of Senior Transportation Engineer support and 4 hours of Principal Engineer support is allocated for this task).
4.9.9 Attendance at Public Hearings:
• Prepare for and attend two (2) City of Laguna Beach Planning Commission meetings and two (2) City of Laguna Beach City Council meetings. This component includes preparation of specific presentation materials on traffic issues. For budgeting purposes, the length of each meeting is assumed to be five (5) five hours and will be attended by the Project Manager.
5.0 Administrative Draft EIR
CSG will prepare a comprehensive, accurate, and objective Program EIR for the project, ensuring full compliance with the CEQA requirements and guidelines, and all applicable guidance and procedures established by the City of Laguna Beach for environmental review. The Administrative Draft EIR will also provide a thorough and detailed analysis of the project’s environmental impacts. Each section of the EIR will clearly describe the methodology and criteria used to assess project impacts, including any assumptions, models, or modeling techniques applied in the analysis.
5.1 Executive Summary
The Executive Summary will summarize the Project Location, Project Description, Areas of Controversy and Issues to be Resolved and Alternatives. The summary of impacts, mitigation measures, and level of significance after mitigation will be presented in a columnar format.
5.2 Introduction and Purpose
The Introduction and Purpose will cite the provisions of CEQA, the City of Laguna Beach CEQA Implementing Procedures, Project background and history, the purpose of the EIR, scoping efforts, environmental issues assessed in the EIR, the environmental review process, organization of the EIR, responsible and trustee agencies and documentation incorporated by reference.
5.3 Project Description
The Project Description section will incorporate the completed Description referenced in Task 2.3.
5.4 Thresholds of Significance
This section will provide a comprehensive description of thresholds of significance for each issue area of environmental analysis. The significance threshold criteria will be described and will provide the basis for conclusions of significance. Primary sources to be used in identifying the criteria include the CEQA Guidelines, as well as local, State, Federal and other standards applicable to an impact category. The thresholds along with standard conditions for approval will also be referenced in the impact analysis section for each environmental topic. 66 66 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 23
5.5 Cumulative Projects/Analysis
In accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15130, the environmental review for each topical issue will address cumulative considerations. A cumulative Projects list will be referenced pursuant to information available from the City of Laguna Beach, County of Orange, and local agencies in proximity to the site. The purpose of this review is to present a listing and description of projects, past and present, and those anticipated in the reasonably foreseeable future. The potential for impacts and level of significance are based upon the radius or area of interaction with the Project area. The cumulative projects will be listed by name, location and description and will be the basis for the cumulative impact analysis for each environmental topic.
5.6 Environmental Topical Areas of Study
Topical EIR sections will contain a review of existing conditions, the regulatory framework, applicable Project design standards and features, potentially significant Project and cumulative environmental impacts, mitigation measures, and conclusions of significance of impacts following mitigation.
5.6.1 Aesthetics
CSG will incorporate the technical analysis prepared by Baker under task 4.1. The Aesthetics analysis will be based on thresholds established and referenced in Appendix G, Section I, Aesthetics, of the CEQA Guidelines. The review will consider sensitive locations/uses that are in proximity to the Specific Plan area. The study of impacts will thoroughly address existing conditions, identify potential view/aesthetic effects resulting from increased building heights, and potential increases in densities and changes within the Project area. The analysis will consider designated scenic vistas that may occur in the vicinity, nearby view vantage points, analyze character and quality considerations and study potential light and glare impacts.
This section will characterize the existing aesthetic environment and visual resources in the project area, including views from surrounding public locations and right of way. A visual inventory of the Project area will be conducted to verify the visual character and viewshed. The section will include a discussion of the existing massing and building heights in the Plan area. A photo inventory will illustrate on-site and surrounding views.
The city has identified public scenic view locations throughout the community, including views along scenic transportation corridors, such as Laguna Canyon Road, as well as along Pacific Coast Highway. View locations are also depicted from vantage points extending from the hillside, open space areas and along the beachfront. Potential public scenic views of these resources, that also capture the project area, will be considered, and analyzed. Project implementation would allow increased building heights, when compared to the existing condition. The project’s potential for view blockage of scenic resources will be studied with a series of exhibits to support the analysis and conclusions for significance of impacts.
The analysis will consider the potential effects on the Character and Quality of the Project area. The compatibility and introduction of higher density of uses, when compared to the surrounding area, will be studied. The Project’s consistency with the character and quality of the local area will be considered. Consistency with applicable Municipal Codes, Standards and Regulations, as they pertain to aesthetic considerations, will be reviewed.
The potential for significant impacts to be generated by the introduction of light and glare associated with new development within the project area will be addressed. Existing lighting conditions will be identified and future lighting conditions (e.g., interior lighting, exterior security lighting, landscape lighting, and potential increases in vehicular headlights in the vicinity of project ingress and egress locations) will be considered. Existing City policies and guidelines regarding light and glare will be reviewed for inclusion within the EIR.
For each of the subtopics for Aesthetics, the analysis will conclude the level of significance for impacts and mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce potentially significant impacts. 67 67 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 24
5.6.2 Agriculture and Forestry Resources
Based on a site reconnaissance, review of aerial photography, and thresholds established in Appendix G, Section II of the CEQA Guidelines, it is confirmed that no agricultural uses or forestry resources exist on site. The review has been further verified through additional research involving the City of Laguna Beach policy documents, the National Resources Conservation Services Soil Survey, the California Department of Conservation Farmland Monitoring and Mapping program, and Williamson Act Maps. The conclusion of no potential impacts is anticipated to be presented in the Effects Found Not to Be Significant section.
5.6.3 Air Quality
Baker will prepare the Air Quality Evaluation as referenced in Task 4.2. CSG will incorporate the technical report into the EIR section. The analyses will be structured to address the applicable questions from Appendix G, Section III of the CEQA Guidelines. The analysis will present the existing conditions and regulatory framework. Construction and longterm emissions will be studied.
5.6.4 Biological Resources
Baker will prepare a Biological Resources Assessment (BRA) based on Appendix G, Section IV, of the CEQA Guidelines.
The results of the BRA, as referenced in task 4.3, will be incorporated into the EIR. The section will 1) describe the methodology used to conduct the biological assessment; 2) provide a general description of the existing vegetation and associated wildlife resources within the Project area; 3) identify potential impacts from Project development; and 4) recommend mitigation measures to reduce potential impacts to less than significant levels.
5.6.5 Cultural, Historical, and Tribal Resources
CRM TECH will prepare the cultural, historic and tribal resources review in accordance with Appendix G, Section V of the CEQA Guidelines. The results of the CRM TECH Phase I CRA, as referenced in task 4.4, will be incorporated into the EIR. The research, field surveys, historical evaluations, and tribal correspondence will be compiled and described. The EIR will include resource information, associated regulations and a discussion of the Projects’ cultural and tribal context. If potential significant impacts to resources are identified, CSG will recommend mitigation measures to address those impacts.
5.6.6 Energy
Baker will prepare the Energy analysis technical review, as referenced in Task 4.5. CSG will analyze the energy consumption implications of the Project pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21100(b)(3) and Appendix F and Appendix G, Section VI, of the CEQA Guidelines.
5.6.7 Geology and Soils
Based upon available geotechnical analysis prepared in the local area, other available studies, and related references, this section will include a review of existing regional and local geology and soils constraints (such as compressible soils, landslide hazards, disruptions, displacements, compaction or over-covering of soil and areas subject to subsidence) and overall seismic hazards. The Project will be evaluated based on Appendix G, Section VII, of the CEQA Guidelines. The evaluation will include the potential to directly or indirectly cause substantial adverse effects involving fault rupture, strong seismic ground shaking and seismic-related ground failure (i.e., liquefaction). The section will address existing conditions and impacts caused by the Project and recommend mitigation measures to reduce or avoid any significant impacts resulting from the construction and buildout of the Project.
5.6.8 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Michael Baker will prepare the Greenhouse Gas Emissions Report as presented in Task 4.6. The analyses will be structured to address the applicable questions from Appendix G, Section VIII of the CEQA Guidelines. CSG will incorporate the report into the EIR section.
5.6.9 Hazards and Hazardous Materials
The EIR section will be based on Appendix G, Section IX, Hazards and Hazardous Materials, of the CEQA Guidelines. A review of the Department of Substance Control (DTSC) EnvirStor database will be conducted to confirm any 68 68 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 25 hazardous condition sites occurring within the Project area. The section will summarize information provided in regulatory agency databases, confirming current and past hazardous conditions. The section will address existing conditions and impacts, with recommended mitigation measures to reduce or avoid any significant impacts resulting from the construction and buildout of the Project.
5.6.10 Hydrology, Drainage and Water Quality
Based on the Fuscoe Engineering technical study referenced in Task 4.7, and available references provided by the City, the section will include a review of existing regional and local hydrologic, drainage and water quality conditions. The EIR evaluation will be based on Appendix G, Section X, Hydrology and Water Quality, of the CEQA Guidelines. The local setting, topography, climate, surface waters, watershed, regional streams and water bodies will be identified.
Existing and proposed hydrology/drainage and water quality conditions will be addressed for the Project. Based on available technical information, including the Hydrology Study and Water Quality Assessment, the analysis will consider the potential for changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, storm drain improvements, and downstream effects associated with the Project. The potential for the Project to degrade water quality, interfere with groundwater recharge or expose people to water-related hazards will be identified. The section will recommend mitigation measures to reduce or avoid any significant impacts resulting from construction and build out.
5.6.11 Land Use and Planning
The downtown is recognized by distinguished characteristics in each of the areas, including Forest Avenue, Ocean Avenue, Broadway, Lower Cliff Drive, Coast Highway, Main Beach Park, Central Bluffs,Glenneyre Street, Second,Third and Mermaid Streets, City/Village Entrance and Laguna Canyon Road. Existing land uses involve a broad range of businesses, including retail shops, resident services, offices, restaurants and specialty stores. Residential uses are located primarily on Lower Cliff Drive, although there are other properties throughout the downtown that support residential uses. Within the downtown area, the General Plan land use designation is Central Business District and other land use designations which apply include Commercial and Tourist Corridor, Local Business/Professional, Public/Institutional, and Village High Density.
CSG will evaluate the proposed Project in consideration of uses within the Plan area and surrounding land uses and will analyze the relationship of the Project to applicable planning policies and standards. The review will be based on Appendix G, Section XI, Land Use and Planning, of the CEQA Guidelines which refers to review of a proposed action to determine if it can cause a significant environmental impact due to a conflict with any land use policy or regulation adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating environmental effects. The analysis will consider adjacent and nearby land uses and determine any implications that may arise out of implementation of the Specific Plan. The review will include regional policy considerations including consistency with SCAG’s Regional Comprehensive Plan and Guide policies.
5.6.12 Mineral Resources
There are no known Mineral Resource conditions onsite. Pursuant to Appendix G, Section XII, Mineral Resources, of the CEQA Guidelines, CSG will document that there is not a known loss of availability of known resources or an important mineral recovery site. The results of the review are expected to be presented in the Effects Found Not to Be Significant section.
5.6.13 Noise
Baker will prepare the Noise technical report as presented in Task 4.8. The analysis will be structured to address the applicable questions from Appendix G, Section XIII of the CEQA Guidelines. The analysis will consider potential mitigation to reduce construction and operation impacts. If construction and/or buildout noise emissions exceed City of Laguna Beach thresholds of significance, CSG will work with the City to determine feasible mitigation measures.
The results will be provided in the EIR and include summaries of noise terminology, applicable noise regulations, ambient noise environment, and increases in existing noise levels. 69 69 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 26
5.6.14 Population, Housing and Growth Inducement
The section will be based on Appendix G, Section XIV, Population and Housing, as well as Section 15126.2 (d), Growth Inducement, of the CEQA Guidelines. The analysis in this section will be based on data from the City of Laguna Beach, County of Orange, the California Department of Finance, and U.S. Census. The section will discuss ways in which the Project could foster economic or population growth, either directly or indirectly, in the surrounding environment.
Potential growth-inducing impacts from the Project will be analyzed as they relate to population, housing and employment factors. The analysis will address growth-inducing impacts in terms of whether the Project influences the rate, location and amount of growth. Growth-inducing impacts will be assessed based on the Project’s consistency with adopted/proposed plans that have addressed growth management from a local and regional standpoint.
5.6.15 Public Services and Recreation
CSG will contact public service providers to confirm relevant existing conditions and potential Project impacts. The discussion will focus on potential alterations of existing facilities, extension or expansion of new facilities and any possible increase in demand for services. The evaluation will include potential impacts for proposed/required new or physically altered government facilities, fire safety, police protection, schools, parks, recreational and other facilities.
The section will be based on Appendix G, Sections XV, Public Services, and Section XVI, Recreation, of the CEQA Guidelines. The Section will address existing conditions and impacts caused by the Project and recommend measures to reduce or avoid any significant impacts resulting from construction and buildout of the Project, as applicable.
5.6.16 Traffic and Transportation
The traffic and transportation study to be prepared by LL&G and referenced in Task 4.9 will be incorporated into this section. The EIR section will be based on Appendix G, Section XVII of the CEQA Guidelines.
5.6.17 Utilities and Service Systems
CSG will contact affected service providers to confirm relevant existing conditions and potential effects. The analysis will address both wet (water, sewer, and stormwater) and dry (electricity, natural gas, and telecommunication) utility infrastructure. The discussion will include on and off-site utility line upgrades, existing capacities, and availability of supply to meet demand. The analysis will also address whether the Project would have sufficient water supplies available from existing entitlements and resources and new or expanded facilities would be needed. Landfill capacity and compliance with solid waste regulations will be addressed.
The section will be based on Appendix G, Section XIX, Utilities and Service Systems, of the CEQA Guidelines. The section will address existing conditions, impacts caused by the Project and recommend measures to reduce or avoid any significant impacts resulting from the construction and buildout of the Project.
5.6.18 Wildfire
The Wildfire analysis will be based on thresholds established and referenced in Appendix G, Section XX, Wildfire, of the CEQA Guidelines. The Project’s potential to exacerbate wildfire risks will be reviewed. Pursuant to existing regulations, new electrical lines would be required to be underground. Existing regulations and standards of the California Building Code, California Fire Code, the City’s General Plan, Municipal Code, Hazard Mitigation Plan, and Emergency Operations Plan, and the standards and codes of the Orange County Fire Authority will be reviewed and referenced.
This section will analyze potential effects to evacuation routes and capability within the Project area, as a result of the proposed increase in human activity and vehicle traffic at the site, and the introduction of habitable structures. Our scope of work includes an optional detailed review of evacuation impacts resulting from project implementation, subject to further discussions with SCAG and the City of Laguna Beach. Refer to Optional Task 8.1 for additional information.
70 70 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 27 For each of the subtopics for Wildfire, the analysis will conclude the level of significance for impacts and mitigation measures will be recommended to reduce potentially significant impacts.
5.6.19 Alternatives to the Proposed Project
In coordination with SCAG and City Staff, CSG will develop project alternatives designed to avoid and/or substantially reduce impacts. Pursuant to Section 15126.6 of the CEQA Guidelines, the range of Alternatives is expected to include the “No Project,” a “Reduced Density Alternative,” and a possible “Design and/or Use Alternative,” subject to further discussions with SCAG and the City.
In addition, as an optional task and to address potential project variations, we can prepare a Comparative Summary subsection, which can be incorporated as an Appendix in the Program EIR. Our team members have used this tool while at another firm for the City of Walnut Creek Mixed Use Special District Project. A copy of that subsection has been included in this proposal for reference. Refer also to Optional Task 8.2.
5.6.20 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
In order to comply with Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 (AB 32180), CSG will prepare a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP). The MMRP checklist will serve as the foundation of the MMRP. The checklist will outline the mitigation measure number, as referenced in the EIR, the mitigation measure/condition of approval, the Monitoring Milestone (what agency/department is responsible for verifying the implementation of the measure), the Method of Verification (documentation, field checks, etc.), and a verification section for the initials of the verifying party, date of verification, and pertinent remarks. A draft MMRP will be prepared for review by staff and CSG will respond to one set of City Staff comments in order to finalize the MMRP.
5.6.21 Additional CEQA Sections
CSG will provide additional EIR sections to meet CEQA and City requirements, including the following: Significant Irreversible Environmental Changes; Effects Found Not to Be Significant; Inventory of Unavoidable Adverse Impacts; Organizations and Persons Consulted and Prepares of the EIR.
5.6.22 Graphic Exhibits
The EIR will include graphic exhibits to enhance the written text and clarify the Project and potential impacts. For the purpose of budgeting, it is anticipated that up to 30 exhibits will be created. CSG will use state-of-the-art computer design equipment and techniques to create professional quality black and white and/or full-color exhibits, dividers, and cover for the EIR document.
6.0 Screencheck and Public Review Draft EIR
6.1 Screencheck Draft EIR
CSG will respond to one complete set of comments on the Administrative Draft EIR. CSG will revise the document and will provide the Screencheck Draft EIR as a WORD file, with all changes presented in track changes to assist with the final check of the document. A PDF of the Screencheck Draft EIR will also be provided, including all exhibits.
6.2 Completion of the Public Review Draft EIR
Following one complete set of comments on the Screencheck Draft EIR, CSG will revise the document and prepare the Public Review Draft EIR for distribution. This task assumes that all substantive comments will have been raised as a part of Task 6.1 above. CSG will prepare the Draft EIR for the 45-day public review period. This scope of work assumes that CSG will provide the Draft EIR electronically to SCAG and the City, for local distribution. CSG will log the Public Review Draft EIR into the State Clearinghouse and file the Notice of Availability (NOA) and the Notice of Completion (NOC). CSG will also file the document with the Orange County Clerk and Recorder. It is assumed that the SCAG and the city will be responsible for any distribution, radius mailing, site postings, and newspaper noticing required for the Project. Should the SCAG and the City request that CSG coordinate any of those activities, the scope of work and budget can be modified prior to entering into a consultant's agreement. 71 71 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 28
7.0 Final EIR
7.1 Responses to Comments
CSG will respond to all written comments received on the Draft EIR and all testimony received at the Planning Commission public hearing during the 45-day public review period. CSG will prepare thorough, reasoned, and sensitive responses to relevant environmental issues. The Draft responses to comments will be prepared by CSG, in partnership with our consulting technical team, for review by SCAG and City staff.
This task also includes the preparation of a matrix of comments, which shall include the comment letter, the comment number within the comment letter, the issue area to which it applies, and whether the response will be an individual response or a topical/master response. All comments will be numbered (to indicate comment letter and comment number), and the responses to those comments will be similarly numbered to allow easy correlation. CSG will address one complete set of comments from SCAG and City staff and will provide revisions in track changes for ease of review. The updated Response to Comments section will be incorporated as a section into the Final EIR.
The extent of public and agency comments that will result from the public review process is unknown at this time.
Should the extent of responses to comments exceed the budget estimate, additional funding may be required. The scope of work does not assume any further supplemental technical studies or extensive analysis will be required for the response to comments. If it is determined that supplemental technical analysis is required, CSG will work with SCAG and City staff to determine the associated scope of work and additional funding required.
7.2 Administrative, Screencheck, and Public Final EIR
The Administrative Final EIR will consist of the Response to Comments, MMRP, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (see Task 7.3) and revisions to the Draft EIR text, as determined necessary. To facilitate the review, CSG will format the Final EIR with bold/underline text for any new or modified text, and “strike out” any deleted text. The Administrative Final EIR will be provided for review.
CSG will respond to one complete set of comments on the Administrative Final EIR. CSG will revise the document and will provide the Screencheck Final EIR as a WORD file, with all changes presented in track changes to assist with the final check of the document. A PDF of the Screencheck Final EIR will also be provided, including all exhibits.
CSG will respond to editing requests to finalize the Final EIR and provide it as a PDF for distribution approval. It is assumed that CSG will prepare the Notice of Determination (NOD) and file with the State Clearinghouse and County Clerk within five days of EIR certification.
7.3 Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations CSG will provide administrative assistance to facilitate the CEQA process including the preparation of the Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, if required, for use in the project review process. The Findings will be prepared in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 and 15093 and in a City specified format.
8.0 Optional Tasks
The following are additional tasks that may be incorporated into the work program, subject to further discussions with SCAG and the City of Laguna Beach. Budgeting for the optional tasks is not included at this time but may be provided as directed by the client.
8.1 Evacuation Review
8.1.1 Confirm the fire scenarios with City of Laguna Beach staff and/or City Fire Department staff. Based on the provided fire scenarios, obtain the evacuation area for the worst case fire scenario from the Fire Consultant. The evacuation area will be confirmed with City of Laguna Beach staff. 72 72 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 29
8.1.2 Coordinate with City of Laguna Beach staff to determine the evacuation routes and the roadway capacities for all roadways that will be utilized as part of the evacuation area routes.
8.1.3 Develop “Peak Condition Traffic Evacuation Volumes” for without and with project traffic conditions. It should be noted that these traffic volumes will be consistent with the traffic analysis project area.
8.1.4 Utilizing TransModeler simulation software, determine the travel time for the evacuation area without and with the project. The difference between the two will be the travel time increase with the project and represents the impact threshold. The travel time impact threshold will be determined in conjunction with City of Laguna Beach staff.
8.1.5 Prepare a draft technical memorandum, which details all the above-mentioned items, our findings and conclusions. The memorandum will be suitably documented with appropriate text, tabular, graphic, and appendix materials. The draft memorandum will be submitted for review by appropriate members of the project team/City staff.
8.1.6 If necessary, update the draft technical memorandum based on project team/City staff comments, and submit a final Evacuation Analysis memorandum to SCAG/City of Laguna Beach for incorporation into Draft EIR being prepared by the Environmental Consultant.
8.2 Preparation of Comparative Summary of Potential Impacts As stated in task 5.6.18, Alternatives to the Proposed Project, CSG will develop a comparative summary of potential impacts resulting from the proposed project, in comparison to alternatives. This optional task will address potential project variations through the tool of a comparative summary subsection. Our team has used this tool for the City of Walnut Creek Mixed Use Special Districts project. A copy of that subsection is included with this proposal.
DELIVERABLES
For budgetary purposes, the following is a breakdown of all deliverables pursuant to the Request for Proposal. The listing can be adjusted, as requested by SCAG and the City of Laguna Beach. CSG can also provide costs per document and can provide billing on a time and material basis, as requested.
Project Management
1. Monthly Progress reports and Invoices
2. Project Close out files and Excel files
Project Meetings
1. Meeting agendas for up to 16 PMT meetings
2. Meeting notes with list of attendees (up to 16)
3. Meeting materials, including presentations or handouts (up to 16)
4. Additional check-ins (up to 12 hours)
Project Kick-Off
1. Electronic submittal of project kick-off meeting agenda
2. Attendance at project kick-off meeting
3. Electronic submittal of project kick-off meeting minutes
4. Kick-off presentation and handout materials
5. Project Work Plan
6. Date Certain Project Schedule
Data Review and Needs Request
1. Electronic submittal of a Data Needs Request document
2. Photograph database organized by category
73 73 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 30
3. Baseline evaluation and reporting of identified REAP 2.0 measurable outcome.
Project Description
1. Draft Project Description submittal including two rounds of review/comments Notice of Preparation
1. Electronic submittal in MS Word or Excel format of the NOP Distribution list
2. Electronic submittal of the Administrative Draft NOP
3. Electronic submittal of the Public Review NOP to the City and State Clearinghouse CEQAnet web portal, and hardcopy submittal to the County Clerk.
Conduct a Scoping Meeting
1. Presentation materials, agenda, sign-in sheet, comment cards
2. One public scoping meeting to be hosted by SCAG/City and facilitated by the CSG
3. Electronic submittal of Scoping Report summarizing comments and responses Agency/ Non-Agency Consultation and Response to Comments
1. A summary of comments shall be provided and incorporated into the Draft EIR Tribal Consultation
1. Electronic submittal of Tribal Consultation Notification Distribution List
2. Electronic submittal of Tribal Consultation Notification Letters, as required, for consultants to send via certified mail.
Prepare Technical Analyses/Reports:
Aesthetics
1. Visual Impact Assessment.
2. Existing Condition Shade/Shadow Diagrams on the summer solstice, vernal/autumnal equinoxes, and winter solstice.
3. Proposed Condition Shade/Shadow Diagrams on the summer solstice, vernal/autumnal equinoxes, and winter solstice.
4. Up to five (5) photorealistic ground level photosimulations within the downtown area.
5. Up to five (5) photorealistic ground level photosimulations from selected off-site public scenic view locations.
6. Two (2), two-minute animated street level animations depicting the existing downtown development with the new improvements. The electronic format deliverable can be posted by City staff to a public website.
Air Quality
1. Michael Baker will provide the analysis in an EIR section format to be provided by CSG.
Biological Resources
1. Michael Baker will provide the analysis in a standalone report.
Cultural/Historical/Tribal
1. CRM TECH will provide the analysis in an EIR section format to be provided by CSG.
Energy
1. Michael Baker will provide the analysis in an EIR section format to be provided by CSG.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
1. Michael Baker will provide the analysis in an EIR section format to be provided by CSG.
Hydrology, Drainage and Water Quality
1. Fuscoe Engineering will provide the analysis in an EIR section format to be provided by CSG.
Noise and Vibration
1. Michael Baker will provide the analysis in an EIR section format to be provided by CSG. 74 74 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 31 Traffic and Transportation
1. Linscott, Law and Greenspan will provide the analysis in an EIR section format to be provided by CSG.
Prepare Administrative Draft EIR
1. Electronic submittals of each Administrative Draft EIR section, to be provided separately in Word and PDF to SCAG and the City for edits and comments via OneDrive or SharePoint, as directed by SCAG and the City.
2. Provided to SCAG and the City.
Prepare Screencheck Draft EIR
1. One electronic submittal of the Screencheck Draft EIR in Word and PDF to SCAG and the City for distribution approval.
Prepare and Distribute Public Draft EIR, Notice of Availability, and Notice of Completion
1. One electronic copy and three hard copies of the Public Review Draft environmental review document, NOA, NOC, and Summary Form, as required.
2. Complete electronic submittal to the State Clearinghouse CEQAnet portal; SCAG/City is responsible for distributing hard copies for public review as required and NOA to the newspaper, agencies, and interested persons by certified mail as required.
Prepare Response to Comments
1. A matrix of comments, which shall include the comment letter, the comment number within the comment letter, the issue area to which it applies, and whether the response will be an individual response or a topical/master response. All comments will be numbered (to indicate comment letter and comment number), and the responses to those comments will be similarly numbered to allow easy correlation.
2. If required, a final response to comments shall be prepared and conveyed to commenters/ agencies via email at least 10 days prior to final certification, as required by CEQA.
Prepare Administrative Final EIR
1. Electronic submittals of each Administrative Final EIR section, to be provided separately in Word and PDF to SCAG and the City for edits and comments via OneDrive or SharePoint, as directed by SCAG and the City.
Prepare Screencheck Final Environmental Impact Report
1. One electronic version of the Screencheck Draft Final EIR in Word and PDF to SCAG and the City for distribution
Prepare Public Final Environmental Impact Report
1. One electronic copy and one hard copy of the Public Review Final EIR.
2. One electronic copy submitted by CSG to the State Clearinghouse CEQAnet portal; SCAG/City to post on the website and distribute hard copy public review documents as required.
Notice of Determination
1. Electronic copy of the NOD provided to the city for signature. CSG will submit the final version of the Notice of Determination (NOD) to the County Clerk.
Project Management and Public Hearings Project Coordination and Project Management
1. On-going weekly or bi-weekly one-hour calls to discuss Project status.
Attendance at Planning Commission and City Council public hearings.
1. Attendance and participation in two public hearings before the Planning Commission and two City Council meetings.
75 75 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 32
PRELIMINARY SCHEDULE
CSG’s proposed schedule is provided below. Our breakdown of hours for each task are provided within CSG’s budget and fee schedule, which has been uploaded as a separate attachment.
Tasks Timeline/Month
Task 1: Project and Monthly Progress Reports Monthly
Task 1: Master Schedule 1
Task 2: Kick-Off Meeting 1
Task 2: Data Needs Request 1
Task 2: Administrative Draft Project Description 1
Task 2: Review of Administrative Draft Project Description 1 Task 2: Draft Project Description 1-2
Task 3: Administrative Draft Notice of Preparation 1-2
Task 3: City Review of Administrative Draft Notice of Preparation 2 Task 3: Draft Notice of Preparation 1-2
Task 3: 30 Day Notice of Preparation Public Review 2-3
Task 3: Public Scoping Meeting During the 30-day NOP review During 30 Day NOP Public Review Period Task 4: Preparation of Technical Studies 1-4
Task 5: Administrative Draft EIR Preparation 2-5
Task 5: Review of the Administrative Draft EIR 6
Task 6: Screencheck Draft EIR Preparation 7
Task 6: Review of Screencheck Draft EIR 7
Task 6: Public Review Draft Completion 7
45 Day Draft EIR Public Review 7-9
Public Meeting During the 45-day Public Review During 45 Day Public Review Period Task 7: Administrative Draft Responses to Comments 9-10 Task 7: Review of the Administrative Draft Responses to Comments 10 Task 7: Draft Responses to Comments 10
Task 7: Administrative Final EIR 11
Task 7: Review of the Administrative Final EIR 11
Task 7: Screencheck Final EIR 11
Task 7: Final EIR Completion 11
Task 7: Final EIR to SCAG and the City 11
Task 7: Administrative Draft Findings and Overriding Considerations 11 Task 7: Review of the Administrative Draft Findings and Overriding Considerations 11
Task 7: Findings and Overriding Considerations Completion 11 Hearings To Be Determined
76 76 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 33 IV. IDENTIFICATION OF KEY STAFF AND RESUMES
Figure 1. Organizational Chart
CSG ENVIRONMENTAL STAFF
Liza Debies
Senior Environmental Planner
Kelli Allen
Associate Environmental Planner
Colby Gonzalez
Assistant Environmental Planner
Glenn Lajoie, AICP
Principal & Director of Environmental Services
PROJECT MANAGER/QA MANAGER
MICHAEL BAKER INTERNATIONAL
Eddie G. Torres
Environmental Specialist
Kristen Bogue
Environmental Specialist
Arthur Popp
Technical Manager – Natural Resources
LINSCOTT, LAW & GREENSPAN
ENGINEERS
Keil Maberry
Principal - Transportation and Traffic
CRM TECH
Bai ‘Tom’ Tang
Cultural & Tribal Consultation
FUSCOE ENGINEERING
Ian Adam
Vice President, Specialty Practices/
Stormwater Manager
SUBCONSULTANTS
Ethan Edwards, AICP
Vice President of Planning Services
PRINCIPAL IN CHARGE
77 77 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 34 OVERVIEW OF CSG’S ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING SERVICES
CSG has the environmental staff resources to manage and prepare clear, concise, and legally defensible environmental documents under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) for projects of all types, including development, infrastructure improvements, and policy adoption documents, such as General Plans and Specific Plans. CSG will serve as an extension of Agency staff to ensure that the entire environmental review process is conducted in a comprehensive manner. CSG will consider recent legislation, court decisions pertaining to CEQA and NEPA and agency requirements. Our objective is to provide premium services to our clients, along with highly accurate technical documentation and impact determination. Our approach entails an efficient process to ensure that studies are comprehensive, objective, technically accurate, and complete, while maintaining a focus on the schedule established for the review. Our approach includes consistent and regular interaction and communication between staff, our team and other interested/responsible governmental agencies and parties, as appropriate, allowing for frequent exchange of information without loss of time or resources.
Our range of types of CEQA studies includes Categorical Exemptions, Initial Studies, Negative Declarations, Mitigated Negative Declarations, Project/Program/Focused/Supplemental/Subsequent Environmental Impact Reports (EIR’s), Addenda to previously prepared environmental documents, consistency checklists, as well as mitigation monitoring programs. CSG can lead the preparation of response to comments and any required findings of facts/statement of overriding considerations. We are also ready to assist the Agency with project stakeholder coordination, filing public notices, participation in public hearings and complete project management services throughout the environmental review process.
Approach to Environmental Planning
CSG planners are environmental stewards for our natural and built environments. CSG’s approach to any environmental documentation is to understand and analyze each project based on the environmental issues that are pertinent to a project. CSG’s approach to environmental documentation emphasizes technically solid, impartial analysis, and active management to keep projects on schedule and within budget. We pride ourselves on our ability to turn products around quickly and effectively without sacrificing quality and accuracy.
Additionally, and more specifically, we embrace the following steps in the review process:
Establish a communications protocol and technical leads, including subconsultants and other key team members to ensure project critical information is efficiently and accurately conveyed across the team. Ensure roles/responsibilities are clear for efficient management of assignments and quality control of services and deliverables.
Determine key project description details with the Agency early to facilitate accurate and consistent reviews and analysis.
Agree on initial project schedule and budget and a protocol for updating status during project phases. Verify that the technical approach/scope of services, as conveyed in the proposal, meets the Agency’s expectations following completion of the Project Description. Collaborate upfront with the Agency on standard templates for project deliverables, including peer review technical memoranda and CEQA document components.
Communications and Techniques: Our management style includes consistent and regular interaction and communications between staff, the CSG team, and other interested/responsible governmental agencies and parties, as appropriate, allowing for frequent exchange of information without loss of time or resources. If we encounter a constraint or challenge, we will immediately notify the Agency and provide short and/or long-term solutions for any difficulties we encounter. We pride ourselves on our ability to turn products around quickly and effectively without sacrificing quality and accuracy.
Preparing Initial Studies: The Initial Study provides a screening and threshold review for each topical area to confirm the appropriate CEQA clearance. An Initial Study is the common supporting review documentation for a (mitigated) negative declaration determination. In this case, we understand the Agency is requesting preparation of an EIR. To 78 78 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 35 save time and reduce costs, we may recommend the preparation of an EIR without an Initial Study. However, it may be beneficial to prepare an Initial Study to help focus the EIR on the potentially significant impacts. CSG can assist the Agency in making this determination for the Project.
Preparing EIRs: CSG possesses the technical capabilities and expertise to assist our agency clients in preparing an EIR, including, but not limited to:
Defining the project description,
Identifying stakeholders and affected agencies,
Maintaining the administrative record,
Preparing and distributing the notice of preparation for a 30-day review, Conducting a scoping meeting,
Preparing supporting technical reports and Administrative Draft EIR for internal review, Preparing and circulating the Public Review Draft EIR for a 45-day review period, Drafting responses to comments,
Preparing the Final EIR and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, Preparing Findings of Facts, and, as necessary, preparing a Statement of Overriding Considerations to support a lead agency’s final decision on a project,
Attending public hearings, and
And preparing and filing required notices.
Public Input Process and Dissemination of Information: Given our unique background providing comprehensive municipal services, we have ample experience interfacing with the public and have a deep understanding of the public input process and challenges that can arise. CSG can collaborate with the Agency in preparing community outreach plans that include ongoing public engagement opportunities, and we can attend public hearings and meetings to address questions on the Agency’s behalf and/or present our conclusions to the decision-making body.
Ensuring Compliance with Processing and Legal Requirements: The CSG team has prepared CEQA documentation for controversial projects, including for mixed use projects, and we have an exemplary record of legal defensibility for the documentation we prepare. We understand that projects that include housing can be controversial, and we have experience addressing community concerns in this regard, including responding to public comment as part of the CEQA public review process. Our documents contain thorough environmental analysis and provide clear documentation for all research contacts and data sources, which reduces the potential for successful legal challenges; we can also assist the Agency in preparing the administrative record. We keep abreast of regulatory updates and court decisions, which are then incorporated into our environmental analysis, as appropriate.
Quality Assurance/Quality Control: CSG is committed to providing high quality documentation that engenders client satisfaction, meets the needs of the project, and withstands legal scrutiny. Therefore, a critical part of our delivery of technically sound and legally defensible documents includes conducting in-house QA/QC reviews concurrently with the preparation of documents. Our approach to providing quality, technically sound, and legally defensible reports includes the following steps: we assign staff members who have the appropriate technical expertise to complete the work; upon completion of the first internal draft of a document, it is reviewed by the project manager for consistency with the project description, compliance with the approved scope of work, and technical accuracy. Once the work product has been revised and updated to the satisfaction of the project manager, it is sent to our Publications Specialist for review of grammar, proper nomenclature, references, and methodologic consistency. The last step before the document is submitted to the Agency is a thorough and complete word processing review that produces a correctly formatted document, with accurate references to tables, exhibits, appendices, and the table of contents.
Only then is a document submitted to the Agency for review. 79 79 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 36 Ethan Edwards, AICP
VICE PRESIDENT OF PLANNING SERVICES
Mr. Edwards currently serves as the Vice President of Planning Services at CSG Consultants. In this role, he leverages over 25 years of progressively responsible experience in land use planning and management across Orange and Los Angeles Counties, Northern California, and Oregon. His expertise encompasses current and advanced planning, design review, coastal development review, CEQA compliance, project and staff management, and professional practice development. Before joining CSG, Mr. Edwards held planning positions in both the public and private sectors, including leadership roles as Community Development Director, Planning Manager, and Principal Planner.
CSG Relevant Experience
Acting Community Development Director/Planning Manager | City of Carson, CA. As Acting Planning Manager and Community Development Director for the City of Carson, Mr. Edwards oversaw the Planning Department, including CSG staff, and managed project scheduling, budgeting, and agenda preparation. He also participated in public hearings, managed the City's on-call environmental and design consultants, and provided strategic direction for the comprehensive General Plan Update.
Principal Planner | City of El Segundo, CA. In his role as a contract Principal Planner, Mr. Edwards managed complex discretionary and administrative permits, including Development Agreement negotiations and environmental impact report management. He also prepared agendas, reviewed and authored reports, and delivered presentations to elected officials, commissions, and community groups.
Relevant Previous Experience
Planner | City of Huntington Beach, CA. At the City of Huntington Beach, Mr. Edwards managed discretionary and administrative permits, mentored staff, prepared and reviewed agendas and reports, and interpreted zoning regulations as the Zoning Administrator Liaison. He also supervised environmental consultants and developed strategies for streamlining permit processing and enhancing customer service.
Planning Manager | Baysinger Partners Architecture, Portland, OR. As Planning Manager at Baysinger Partners Architecture, Mr. Edwards supervised the planning and entitlement division, managed staff priorities and the department budget, and handled public and private development project applications. He also provided contract Planning Director services, coordinated with consultants and provided project management and professional practice development.
Planner | City of Beaverton, OR. Mr. Edwards managed current planning projects, assisted with design review code revisions, and delivered presentations to elected officials, commissions, and community groups. He also served as the City staff liaison for an inter-jurisdictional commuter rail project and committee.
Associate Planner | City of Santa Monica, CA. While at the City of Santa Monica, Mr. Edwards presented to the zoning administrator, planning commission, and architectural review board. He also prepared reports for various entitlement projects and provided customer service assistance to the public.
Education
Bachelor of Science, Urban and
Regional Planning
California Polytechnic State
University,
Pomona, California
Masters Coursework, Public Policy
& Administration, California State
University, Long Beach, California
Professional Affiliations
American Planning Association
(APA)
▪ Orange County Chapter
▪ Los Angeles Chapter
▪ Northern Chapter
▪ Central Chapter
American Institute of Certified
Planners (AICP)
International City/County
Management Association
Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP)
80 80 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 37 Glenn Lajoie, AICP
PRINCIPAL, DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNING
Mr. Lajoie has over 35 years of experience in the practice of CEQA/NEPA environmental review and Community Planning for clients and agencies throughout California. His range of environmental review studies has included policy, land development and infrastructure projects. Along with an extensive background in CEQA/NEPA, his practices have also encompassed policy planning programs, such as General Plans, Specific Plans, neighborhood studies and due diligence analysis. Mr. Lajoie’s skill set includes project and budget management, quality assurance, meeting facilitation, agency staff service assistance, and third party/peer review verification of analysis and findings. His primary objective as a professional planner has always focused on assuring integrity, quality and legal defensibility of analysis and processes, culminating in win-win solutions for clients and communities.
Mr. Lajoie has an extensive background with local and regional agencies throughout California. The geographic context is wide ranging including:
resort and destination projects in the Town of Mammoth Lakes; numerous infrastructure and water availability/desalination project reviews in the Community of Cambria; city center and neighborhood revitalization opportunities in Lancaster: over two million square feet of expansion for the Raytheon Corporate facility in El Segundo; Long Point (Terranea Resort) in Rancho Palos Verdes; downtown high rise and mixed-use proposals in Long Beach; The 2035 General Plan Update for Buena Park; buildout of the Cypress Business Park Master Plan in Cypress.
Relevant Project Experience
Amazon Delivery Station IS/MND, West Covina
Beverly Hills Gardens and Montage Hotel Mixed Use Project EIR Brookhurst/Adams Intersection Improvements EIR, Huntington Beach Dana Point Town Center IS/MND, Dana Point
Downtown Fairfield Justice Center Campus IS/MND, Solano County Historic Downtown Upland Specific Plan/EIR, Upland
Hyundai North American Corporate Campus EIR, Fountain Valley In-house CEQA Training, Laguna Beach
Janss Marketplace Hotel EIR, Thousand Oaks
Lincoln (Nelles) Specific Plan EIR, Whittier
Mammoth Yosemite Airport Regional Air Service IS/MND, Mammoth Lakes Manteca Marketplace Section 15183 CEQA Consistency Checklist, Manteca Oasis Road Specific Plan Master EIR, Redding
On-call Environmental Planning Service, Calaveras County Palmdale Transit Village Specific Plan/EIR, Palmdale
Piercy Road Industrial Warehouse IS/MND, San Jose
Robinson Ranch North EIR, Yucaipa
South Pasadena Downtown Revitalization Project EIR, South Pasadena South San Francisco 2040 General Plan Update EIR
Southeast Development Area Specific Plan Program EIR, Fresno Education
Master’s Degree in Public Policy
and Administration,
California State University,
Long Beach, California
Bachelor of Arts, Geography/
Urban Studies,
California State University,
Long Beach, California
Professional Affiliations
American Planning Association
(APA)
Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP)
81 81 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 38 Liza Debies
SENIOR ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
Liza Debies has more than 12 years of professional experience and more than 8 years of experience in managing preparation and peer review of CEQA and NEPA documents, including EIRs, IS/MNDs, Addenda, Environmental Assessments (EAs), and Categorical Exemptions and Categorical Exclusions.
She has completed CEQA and/or NEPA documentation for electronic billboards, public infrastructure, materials recovery facilities, mixed-use developments, residential, commercial, retail, transportation, industrial, recreational, and institutional projects. She has expertise in aesthetics, land use and planning and land use compatibility, transportation and circulation, utilities and services systems, and alternatives analysis, as well as in evaluating large public infrastructure projects.
CSG Relevant Experience
Janss Marketplace Specific Plan Project Environmental Documentation | City of Thousand Oaks, CA. Ms. Debies provided senior review of the Janss Marketplace Specific Plan environmental documentation for the City of Thousand Oaks to assist the City in determining further environmental and technical analysis necessary pursuant to CEQA. The Specific Plan describes allowable future land uses, infrastructure, and implementation requirements for projects within the bounds of the Specific Plan area.
Relevant Previous Experience
Walnut Creek | Mixed Use Special District Project Supplemental EIR, City of Walnut Creek, CA. Ms. Debies managed the preparation of a Supplemental EIR for the Mixed Use Special District Project in the City of Walnut Creek. The project would create an Auto Sales–Custom Manufacturing Mixed Use Special District overlay on approximately 6.2 acres owned or controlled by Toyota Walnut Creek.
At the time of environmental review, the applicant was seeking City approval of the necessary legislative entitlements to facilitate the development of the proposed project, consisting of the proposed amendments to the North Downtown Specific Plan (NDSP) and no specific individual development proposal had been submitted. Any redevelopment proposal under the NDSP (as amended) would require the applicant to enhance its auto sales, service, and ancillary facilities in accordance with the applicable criteria and policies set forth in the NDSP (as amended) and the related development agreement entered into between the applicant and the City. Ms. Debies worked with the City and the City’s attorney to prepare a comparative analysis of scenarios, which allowed flexibility by evaluating the potential environmental impacts of the reasonable worst-case scenario for each environmental topic area.
Oak Park Properties Specific Plan EIR | City of Pleasant Hill, CA. As Project Manager, Ms. Debies managed the preparation of an EIR for a 15-acre Program Area, which included a new public library, housing, and athletic fields. Key issues included lighting impacts associated with the stadium lighting for the athletics fields. Ms. Debies managed the completion of a lighting study to confirm the light emitted from the stadium lights would not exceed the City’s nighttime lighting thresholds.
Education
Bachelor of Arts,
Environmental Studies
Minor in Anthropology, with
Honors, Pitzer College, Claremont,
California
Study Abroad, visiting student in
Biotechnology, Athlone Institute of
Technology, Ireland, 2011
82 82 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 39 Kelli Allen
ASSOCIATE ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
Ms. Allen serves as an Associate Environmental Planner for CSG Consultants and is currently providing staff support to CSG clients. Ms. Allen has experience in the preparation of CEQA and NEPA documents, including EIRs, IS/(M)NDs, Categorical Exclusions, and safety elements. Ms. Allen has completed CEQA documentation for mixed-use developments, residential, commercial, retail, and industrial projects, and has conducted peer reviews of EIRs and ISMNDs for commercial and residential development projects.
Ms. Allen has experience drafting presentations and writing administrative CEQA documents, including Project Descriptions, Notices of Availability, Preparation, and Determination, and OPR summary documents.
Relevant Project Experience
Janss Marketplace Hotel Project EIR | City of Thousand Oaks, CA. Ms. Allen assisted in the preparation of an EIR to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the development of a hotel at 225 North Moorpark Road in Thousand Oaks. The proposed project includes demolition of the current two-story retail building, to be replaced by a five-story dual hotel and retail pad, the creation of a map to designate airspace rights, and a zoning change to the footprint of the hotel to increase the building’s height limitation.
ARCO Commercial Center and Car Wash Project IS/MND | City of Plymouth, CA. Ms. Allen assisted in the preparation of an IS/MND to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the development of a commercial store, gas station, and car wash at 18725 CA 49 in Plymouth.
The proposed project includes development of the currently vegetated site to construct a fuel canopy, car wash, convenience store, and parking lot, a general plan amendment, and a zoning change to accommodate the hightraffic commercial use in the downtown area. 1890 South Coast Highway IS/MND | City of Laguna Beach, CA. Ms. Allen is assisting in the preparation of an IS/MND to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the development of a mixed-use retail and residential project at 1890 South Coast Highway in Laguna Beach. The proposed project involves the demolition of an existing car wash facility to be replaced by a mixed-use retail and residential complex with a subterranean garage and approximately 5,200 square feet of deck area.
M&J Pallet Building IS/MND | County of San Bernardino, CA. Ms. Allen assisted in the preparation of an IS/MND to evaluate the potential environmental impacts of the development of a pallet building warehouse in the County of San Bernardino. The proposed project involves the demolition of all existing on-site improvements, to be replaced by an approximately 22,267 square foot commercial warehouse and parking and circulation system improvements.
Education
Bachelor of Arts Degree,
Geography/Environmental Studies
and Political Science with
International Relations
Concentration,
University of California,
Los Angeles
Minor in Global Studies,
University of California,
Los Angeles
Wildlands Studies Belize Program
Concentration in Environmental
Conservation
Environmental Wildlands Studies
Environmental Field Survey
Wildlands Environment and
Culture,
Western Washington University
Professional Affiliations
Association of Environmental
Professionals Member
83 83 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 40 Colby Gonzalez
ASSISTANT ENVIRONMENTAL PLANNER
Colby Gonzalez has 2 years of professional experience in working with CEQA documents, including EIRs, IS/MNDs, Addenda, and Categorical Exemptions. He has worked as a paralegal on behalf of local labor unions on CEQA lawsuits for a variety of different types of projects throughout the state.
Relevant Experience
Pritchard Field Improvement Project | City of Bell, CA. Mr. Gonzalez prepared the environmental assessment required by the National Environmental Policy Act for a community park project in the City of Bell which would include two new playgrounds, a dog park, and picnic area in a severely underserved community.
Iron Planet Auction | San Bernardino County, CA. Mr. Gonzalez performed a peer review of the IS/MND prepared for a surplus military grade equipment auction project in Yermo and created a memorandum detailing suggestions and revisions which should be incorporated in the final CEQA document. Mr. Gonzale’s peer review concluded that the project was located on a former leaking underground storage tank site which was not disclosed in the IS/MND.
Starbucks Project Peer Review | City of Bell, CA. Mr. Gonzalez performed a peer review of a Class 32 CEQA exemption for a Starbucks coffee shop with drive-thru in the City of Bell. Mr. Gonzalez found an issue with the project’s noise study which did not assume that the project would be open 24 hours per day, 7 days a week, and notified the preparer that the project could not include mitigation measures if the project were to be exempt from CEQA with a categorical exemption.
Ronan Infill Exemption | City of Gilroy, CA. Mr. Gonzalez prepared the environmental review for an 8,393-square foot multi-family unit apartment building project in the City of Gilroy. The proposed project included removal of an existing single-family residence and construction of a two-story apartment building with six units. He confirmed that the project qualified for a Class 3 CEQA exemption. The focus of environmental considerations included tribal cultural resources due to the site testing positive on a sacred lands file search with the NAHC and biological resources due to the potential for bats to roost on site.
Loma Linda University School of Nursing Addition Project | City of Loma Linda, CA. Mr. Gonzalez is currently preparing the environmental documentation for the Loma Linda University School of Nursing Addition Project in the City of Loma Linda. The project would remove an existing academic building and replace it with a new three-story, 58,750-square foot academic building.
9505 Baseline Road Exemption | Rancho Cucamonga, CA. Mr. Gonzalez is currently preparing a Class 32 CEQA exemption for fifty three-story for sale dwellings in the City of Rancho Cucamonga. The focus of environmental considerations has been on potential impacts to biological resources and geotechnical impacts.
Education
Bachelor of Arts in
Environmental Studies,
Graduated Magna Cum Laude
Montana State University,
Bozeman, Montana
Professional Affiliations
Association of Environmental
Professionals (AEP) member
since 2024
84 84 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 41
SUBCONSULTANTS
Michael Baker International Founded in 1940 and celebrating more than 75 years of supporting our local communities, Michael Baker International, Inc. (Michael Baker) is a leader in environmental, planning, engineering, consulting, and technical/professional services with a local focus and global expertise. We offer a full continuum of innovative solutions in construction, survey, planning, architectural, environmental, program management and life cycle support, as well as information technology and communications services.
Michael Baker is a multi-disciplinary planning and engineering firm with more than 6,000 employees in over 90 offices located across the U.S. and internationally. With nine local offices in Southern California our firm is prepared to assist clients with planning and engineering challenges throughout the region.
Michael Baker has in-house expertise in disciplines including Environmental Analysis, Planning, GIS Services, Surveying, Aerial Photogrammetry, Mapping, Real Estate Assessments, Transportation/Traffic Engineering, Civil Engineering (including Grading, Public Works, Water/Wastewater, Hydrology), Mechanical/Electrical/Energy Services, Computer Aided Design and Drafting (CADD) and Media Services. More than 200 professionals are dedicated to Environmental, Planning, and Urban Design services company-wide.
As a leader in the environmental consulting field, Michael Baker offers an extensive array of services associated with environmental compliance and documentation. Michael Baker provides evaluation for the full spectrum of environmental effects for all types of projects, including California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) documentation, air quality and health risk assessments, greenhouse gas analyses, noise studies, regulatory agency permitting, biological resources, visual assessments and photosimulations, traffic studies, drainage/water quality assessments, community/socioeconomic analyses, and biological mitigation/monitoring.
Air Quality Studies/Health Risk Assessments
Michael Baker utilizes air quality models that are developed by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, California Air Resources Board, and local Air Pollution Control Districts.
Michael Baker’s air quality services include project-specific analysis of regulatory impacts, short-term construction emissions, long-term operational emissions, and computer modeling of source-specific pollutant emissions and dispersion analysis. Additionally, Michael Baker has carried out mitigation programs for commercial, transportation, and industrial projects, as well as General Plan Air Quality Elements.
Greenhouse Gas Studies
Michael Baker’s climate change experts are at the forefront in developing sound scientific regulatory assessments and strategies within the rapidly changing regulatory environment. We advise both government and private industry on greenhouse gas (GHG) policies and methodologies and the impact that they have on the new carbon constrained business future. To ensure a sustainable future, there is a great need to understand and manage GHG emissions in ways that promote economic growth. As the climate change debate and private sector market solutions evolve, Michael Baker continues to offer its clients unparalleled analytical, policy, and business management services. 85 85 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 42 Biological/Regulatory Resources
Our team also includes a range of environmental permitting staff whose focus is on resource agency permits required from the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW). Our vast experience allows us to leverage agency relationships in preparing and processing USACE Section 404 permits, RWQCB Section 401 certifications, and CDFW Section 1602 Streambed Alteration Agreements for impacts to Waters of the U.S. and State.
Key regulatory permitting tasks include regulatory kick-off, a due-diligence review (wetland delineation, biological constraints survey), pre-application agency coordination and site reconnaissance, and preparation/processing of permit applications. Our primary goal when applying for project permits is to fully streamline the process. Michael Baker expedites the permit process by utilizing existing relationships with agency staff, proactively coordinating with the agencies through pre-application field meetings, submitting complete application packages, and maintaining a responsive regulatory staff that works directly with agency representatives and the applicant.
Hazardous Materials/Environmental Site Assessment
Michael Baker provides a range of Hazardous Materials Assessments to meet our clients’ needs for various project types. Michael Baker has prepared hundreds of Hazardous Materials Assessments for a variety of projects throughout California utilizing the American Society for Testing & Materials (ASTM) standards for commercial real estate transactions (E1527-05 and E1528-06), All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI), as well as appropriate protocol from lending institutions and regulatory agencies. The comprehensive capabilities and professional experience of our in-house staff allows Michael Baker to effectively and efficiently complete Hazardous Materials Assessments for any type of property.
Noise and Vibration
Michael Baker’s acoustical services include instrument-assisted noise and vibration field surveys, commercial and industrial stationary sources noise impact analyses, Federal Highway Administration (FHWA) computer modeling of motor vehicle noise impacts for roadway and freeway projects, and rail noise impact analysis.
Michael Baker’s acoustical staff also evaluates sound insulation performance, manufacturing and industrial noise impact mitigation, building exterior and interior sound and vibration isolation analysis, room acoustics, and prepares General Plan Noise Elements. Services typically provided include technical analysis for NEPA or CEQA documents, or focused studies used in planning and civil design projects.
MICHAEL BAKER KEY STAFF
EDDIE G. TORRES, ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
Mr. Torres oversees and prepares Environmental and Planning studies for public and private sectors clients, under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA). Mr. Torres’ responsibilities also include staff training, public hearing presentations, and coordination of our extensive in-house team of experts as well as various subcontractors. Mr. Torres draws on his broad background and understanding of environmental constraints to provide technical and CEQA compliance review and environmental documentation, in addition to research, analysis, and writing. Mr. Torres has managed a wide range of environmental planning projects, including environmental documents for major infrastructure and land development projects, air quality and noise studies, and coastal development projects.
Mr. Torres also serves as the Director of Technical Studies, with a specialty in Acoustics, Air Quality, Climate Change, and Visual Impact Assessments.. In addition to analyzing climate change impacts, Mr. Torres has led the development of numerous greenhouse gas inventory models which calculate greenhouse gas emissions from such sources as vehicular traffic, stationary sources, electricity consumption, water consumption, wastewater treatment, and construction processes.
86 86 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 43
KRISTEN BOGUE, ENVIRONMENTAL SPECIALIST
Ms. Bogue is a senior project manager and assists in the preparation of environmental and planning studies, with a focus on due diligence planning activities. Ms. Bogue has experience in the research, analysis, and writing of CEQA/NEPA documentation. Ms. Bogue’s Project Management background includes a variety of projects involving mixed-use, hotel/resort, residential, commercial, redevelopment, infrastructure, and industrial uses for both public and private sector clients. In addition to being a CEQA/NEPA generalist, she specializes in the preparation of hazardous materials studies and visual analysis services. Other visual services Ms. Bogue has prepared include photosimulations, shade/shadow studies, viewshed mapping, and light and glare studies.
As a specialist in these specific environmental topic areas, Ms. Bogue has extensive experience with projects involving sensitive planning and environmental issues including aesthetics/light and glare, shade/shadow, and hazards and hazardous materials considerations.
ARTHUR POPP, BIOLOGIST
Mr. Popp’s qualifications as a Natural Resource technical manager includes 27 plus years of experience as a biologist and project manager. Mr. Popp has experience in conducting general plant and wildlife surveys, focused surveys for sensitive plant species, aquatic bioassessments, and wetland determinations. He has assisted clients in understanding and complying with regulations that govern impacts to sensitive biological resources and provided options that may avoid or minimize such impacts, permitted the activities that propose impacts, and coordinated mitigation projects that satisfy both the client and regulatory agencies.
Linscott Law & Greenspan Engineers provides transportation planning, traffic engineering and parking consulting services to public agencies and the private sector. LLG is a wellrespected firm of medium size, comprised of over fifty-five dedicated professionals, many with Professional Registration in Traffic Engineering, Civil Engineering, and/or both. LLG offices located in Pasadena, Irvine, and San Diego serve their clients on a wide variety of complex issues. Since our founding in 1966, in excess of 15,000 engagements have been completed involving a wide variety of projects throughout the United States and Overseas, with the core of our practice in Southern California.
LLG’s specialties include:
• Traffic Impact Analysis Reports for
CEQA Documents
• Traffic Impact Analysis Reports
• SB 743/VMT Analyses
• Travel Demand Modeling
• Site Access and Circulation
• Multimodal Planning and Analysis
• Complete Streets Consultation and Active
Transportation Plans
• Traffic Planning, Operations, and Simulation Study
• Circulation Elements for General Plans and
Specific Plans
• Preliminary/Conceptual Engineering
• Traffic Signal Design
• Traffic Signing and Striping Design
• Traffic Signal Warrant Studies
• Construction Zone Traffic Control Plans
• Shared Parking Demand Forecasting
• Parking Design and Planning
LINSCOTT, LAW AND GREENSPAN KEY STAFF
KEIL MABERRY, PE, PRINCIPAL TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
Mr. Keil D. Maberry has over 30 years of experience in the preparation of transportation planning analysis, traffic impact studies and parking studies. He is a licensed Traffic Engineer in the state of California. Mr. Maberry holds a Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from the University of Maryland. He has extensive experience in the preparation of traffic impact studies for a variety of land uses, site access and operational plans, simulation studies, parking studies, traffic and parking management plans, school operational plans and suggested route to school plans. 87 87 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 44 In addition, Mr. Maberry has provided on-call traffic and transportation engineering consultation services to the City of Anaheim (currently), City of Corona, City of Irvine and the City of Dana Point.
DANIEL KLOOS, PE, ASSOCIATE PRINCIPAL TRAFFIC ENGINEER
Daniel A. Kloos is a licensed Traffic Engineer in the state of California. He earned his Bachelor of Science in Civil Engineering from the University of California, Irvine and has over 20 years of experience working on traffic engineering projects throughout the Southern California region. Mr. Kloos has extensive experience in the preparation of traffic impact studies for a variety of land uses, site access and operational plans, parking studies and parking management plans. In addition, he currently provides on-call traffic and transportation engineering consultation services to the City of Anaheim, the City of Dana Point and the City of Long Beach. His expertise in traffic engineering helps LLG continue its tradition of excellence in the region.
CRM TECH is pleased to provide CSG Consultants with program-level historical/archaeological resources study for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan Update. The City of Laguna Beach is updating the Downtown Specific Plan EIR to eliminate the need for project-specific environmental review and thereby streamline housing production in the 115-acre study area. The proposed program-level study is designed to provide the Client and the City with the necessary information and analysis to identify all potential “historical resources,” as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) as well as guidelines on future steps to ensure CEQA compliance regarding such resources.
CRM TECH is a California corporation and a certified Small Business Enterprise (No. 33183; DIR 1000044896) that has been providing the full range of cultural resources management services to federal, state, and local public agencies; real estate developers; environmental firms; other private enterprises.
Services provided by CRM TECH include all phases of historical, archaeological, and paleontological investigations, including record searches; literature reviews; consultation with public agencies, local community representatives, and Native American representatives; historical and ethnohistorical background research; field surveys of historical, archaeological, and paleontological resources; resource recordation; historic building evaluations; evaluative and mitigative excavations at archaeological and paleontological sites; adaptive use studies and mitigative documentation on historic buildings; monitoring of earth-moving operations to protect archaeological and paleontological resources; and peer reviews of previous reports.
CRM TECH KEY STAFF
BAI "TOM" TANG AND MICHAEL HOGAN HEAD CRM TECH
These two co-owners and Principal Investigators bring over 50 years of combined CEQA/NHPA expertise in southern California Archaeology, History, Architectural History, Ethnohistory, Ethnography, Anthropology, and Paleontology.
Besides these two Principal Investigators, CRM TECH also has Project Directors, Field Directors, Principal Paleontologist, professional archaeological/paleontological technicians, and an administrative assistant on staff, and other professional Paleontologists who work on an as-needed basis.
The Principal Investigators and Project Directors are responsible for ensuring that all paleontological resources studies are completed in an efficient and timely manner, and that all proper methods and guidelines are followed throughout all phases of a project. Staff archaeologists/paleontologists are involved in background research, fieldwork, documentation of findings, preparation of the standard site records, and preparation of final reports. The GIS and graphics specialists generate maps, figures, shape files, and other visual aids for use in the field and for inclusion in study documents.
88 88 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 45 Fuscoe Engineering provides civil engineering for land development, public infrastructure and General & Specific Plan EIRs, using an eco-adaptive® approach. Specialty practices include survey & mapping services; water quality assurance; sustainable engineering; and geospatial technology.
Fuscoe has delivered a broad range of services for numerous General Plan & Specific Plan EIRs for Southern California agencies. Project assignments have included these services:
• Identifying opportunities and feasibility of proposed land uses and revitalization projects in urban, suburban and rural settings
• Evaluating zoning and land use changes
• Identifying measures to reduce potential impacts of proposed developments for construction and postconstruction conditions • Providing infrastructure analysis, identifying infrastructure system deficiencies and offering recommendations • Preparing hydrology, flood control, sewer and water quality technical studies related to proposed land use changes
• Prepare Water Supply Assessments and coordinate findings with local and regional wholesale water providers.
Evaluate implications of mandatory RHNA housing units on local and regional water supply providers and assess impacts on local and regional wastewater treatment providers • Drainage, sewer and water master planning
• Crafting innovative designs for preserving and stabilizing water courses while enabling mixed-use, TOD and infrastructure uses
• Developing storm water runoff management, grading and infrastructure plans • Devising low impact development (LID) strategies for land and water quality protection • Providing impact assessments for CEQA compliance
FUSCOE ENGINEERING KEY STAFF
IAN ADAM, MESM, CPSWQ, QSD, VICE PRESIDENT, SPECIALTY PRACTICES/STORMWATER MANAGER Ian Adam is Vice President, Specialty Practices and Fuscoe’s Stormwater Management team leader. His specialty is water resources, with an emphasis in water quality regulations, sea-level rise policy, Clean Water Act Citizen Suits and resource agency negotiation. Since joining Fuscoe in 2001, Ian has served as an effective leader and technical resource for numerous projects and clients. Ian has worked on over 60 General Plan Updates and Specific Plans throughout California to assist municipalities and developers with infrastructure assessments, zoning approvals, EIR technical support and long-term capital improvement planning. 89 89 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 46 VI. CSG TEAM SAMPLE ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Our team’s record of success with our clients is outstanding. The following is a small sampling of the CSG team’s Downtown and city center CEQA review experience in California communities. Additional examples and references are available upon request.
Center City Corridors Specific Plan Program EIR, Anaheim, CA:
The plan area consists of approximately 2,6oo acres in the central area of Anaheim. The specific plan is intended to guide future development by establishing a community driven vision, focusing on the corridors that traverse the area. Six newly established development areas would establish land use direction, allow for a range of residential and commercial mixed-use development and establish unique standards and allowable uses for properties. The EIR includes a comprehensive review of all topical areas, in accordance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines.
Dana Point Town Center Plan IS/MND, Dana Point, CA:
The Town Center Plan proposed to establish a more vibrant, communityoriented Town Center for residents and visitors. Project characteristics included traffic and circulation improvements, pedestrian walkways, design enhancements, development standards, and historic preservation measures. Potential impacts as a result of the project were analyzed for short-term construction activities as well as long-term operations.
Mitigation measures included compliance with SCAQMD regulations, historic preservation measures, preparation of a water quality management plan, compliance criteria with the Noise Ordinance and a traffic signal-timing plan.
Doheny Village Plan Program EIR, Dana Point, CA:
Michael Baker International assisted the City of Dana Point with the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report for the Doheny Village Zoning District Update. The purpose and intent of the proposed project was to preserve and enhance the eclectic combination of commercial, light industrial, and residential mixed uses in Doheny Village. The zoning district update provides the following three new zoning districts specific to the project area:
Village Commercial/Industrial; Village Commercial/Residential; and Village Main Street.
Doheny Village Zoning District Update EIR, Dana Point, CA:
Michael Baker International prepared an EIR for the Doheny Village Zoning District Update. The purpose and intent of the proposed project is to preserve and enhance the eclectic combination of commercial, light industrial, and residential mixed uses in Doheny Village. 90 90 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 47 The zoning district update provides the following three new zoning districts specific to the project area: Village Commercial/Industrial; Village Commercial/Residential; and Village Main Street. As part of the proposed project, allowed uses, development standards (e.g., lot size, setback, density, open space, landscaping requirements), special development standards (e.g., maximum density, accessory uses and structures, parking requirements, sign programs, and art-in-public-places program), and special use standards are also proposed.
Downtown Lancaster Revitalization Specific Plan and EIR, Lancaster, CA: The Specific Plan emphasizes the City’s goals to revitalize the unique Business Improvement District, to improve aesthetics, update infrastructure, attract new businesses, and improve the livability of the surrounding neighborhoods. The Specific Plan includes a Transit District, which is located adjacent to the City’s Metrolink Station. The Specific Plan process included an extensive community participation process, as well as economic and market analysis to arrive at a single vision for Downtown Lancaster. The plan includes form-based development regulations, which were specifically designed to implement the community-based vision for the Downtown. The Program EIR served as the master environmental document/clearance for future project applications within the Specific Plan area.
Historic Downtown Upland Specific Plan EIR, Upland, CA:
The Specific Plan included nine districts, consisting of 210 acres, and provided a clear framework for future development and public improvements in Downtown Upland. The Specific Plan serves as a tool for the City to encourage economic revitalization and create a walkable, vibrant, transit-oriented downtown for Upland. The environmental review involved aesthetics/light and glare, air quality, cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, hydrology and water quality, land use, noise, population and housing, public services and utilities, and traffic and parking.
Long Beach Redevelopment EIR, Long Beach, CA:
A Master EIR was prepared for 10 non-contiguous areas located within the downtown and central Long Beach. The proposed project involved removal of existing uses for development, adaptive reuse of existing uses and development of new uses on vacant sites. The proposed development of residential, retail, mixed-use
residential/retail and/ or office uses, an Art Exchange, live/work units and parking uses were consistent with the City Strategic Action Plan for the area. Environmental review focused on aesthetics/light and glare, traffic, air quality, noise, historic resources and water supply. 91 91 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 48 North Village Specific Plan Amendment Program EIR, Mammoth Lakes, CA: The project involved development of a destination resort facility, including lodging, commercial and residential uses on 64.1 acres.
The proposed amendment includes circulation and parking modifications, changes to height limitation and setbacks, changes to development standards, establishment of design guidelines, modifications to public facilities, and modified housing requirements. The EIR evaluation included the development application for Phase 1 of the Specific Plan. Key issues included traffic generation, aesthetics, noise and water quality, which also included a review of compliance with the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Palmdale Transit Village Specific Plan/General Plan Amendment EIR, Palmdale, CA: The project consisted of approximately 110 acres, generally located between Technology Drive and Avenue Q-3, and between 3rd Street East and the Metrolink Railroad tracks, adjacent to Sierra Highway.
With construction of the Transportation Center, the Specific Plan focused on opportunities to link land use planning policies and programs within the area. The Transportation Center anchored the opportunity to create a mix of uses surrounding a transit facility, where streets have a high level of connectivity, blocks are relatively small, and streetscapes, buildings and uses that cater to the pedestrian. Key environmental issues included traffic and air quality impacts, cultural and biological impacts.
Perris Downtown EIR, Perris CA: With the changing community and future operation of the Metrolink Station in the downtown, the City initiated an update to their Downtown Specific Plan, which established a Regulating Code, containing development specifications, regulations and design standards and guidelines for all development in the Plan area. The Regulating Code focused on the form, placement, and appropriate use of buildings. The downtown plan would allow for residential, commercial, retail, office, industrial and public uses within the area. Key environmental issues that were addressed included land use, traffic, air quality, greenhouse gases and hazardous materials.
South Pasadena Downtown Revitalization Project EIR, South Pasadena, CA: The project proposed a mix of uses on five separate building sites within the downtown, with approximately 60 condominium dwelling units and 50,000 square feet of commercial uses (restaurant, bank and office uses). A variety of residential units were proposed including senior housing and studio lofts. The project included subterranean and surface parking along with a town square and several smaller gathering spaces within a plaza setting. The existing on-site uses, including a bank and former nursery site, would be demolished as part of the project. Due to the site location within the downtown, aesthetics, parking and traffic issues were a primary concern, along with historic resources due to the site’s proximity to the Rialto Theater. 92 92 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 49 Village Entrance Project, City of Laguna Beach, CA: Michael Baker International (Michael Baker) prepared an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS/MND) for the Laguna Beach Village Entrance project (project). As a primary entryway and gateway into the City of Laguna Beach, the City proposes improvements at and surrounding Laguna Canyon Road, Forest Avenue, and City Hall to beautify the project area, enhance pedestrian connectivity, and maintain existing levels of vehicular parking. The project has been designed to be a pedestrianoriented area that links the art festival activity areas to the downtown village and Main Beach. The project includes surface parking improvements, landscape/aesthetic enhancements, pathway facilities, and center median improvements along Laguna Canyon Road. Ancillary improvements would include security lighting, vehicular/pedestrian creek crossings, and seating areas. Key issues addressed within the IS/MND air quality impacts, greenhouse gas emissions, and biological and cultural resources.
93 93 of 110
CSG Consultants – Proposal for the Laguna Beach Downtown Specific Plan, Phase II, Program EIR 50 V. CLIENT REFERENCES
Our track record of success with our clients is outstanding, and we encourage you to contact our references. The following is a partial list of references for which CSG has provided similar environmental services.
City of Laguna Beach
Anthony Viera
Planning Manager
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
(949) 497-0398
[email protected]
On-Call Environmental Services
2022-Ongoing
Project Manager: Glenn Lajoie
Key Staff Involved: Liza Debies, Kelli Allen
City of Palos Verdes Estates
Sheryl Brady
Community Development Director
340 Palos Verdes Drive West
Palos Verdes Estates, California 90274
(310) 750-9807
[email protected]
On-Call Planning and Environmental Services
2024-Ongoing
Project Manager: Liza Debies
Key Staff Involved: Glenn Lajoie, Kelli Allen, Colby Gonzales City of Carson
Saied Naaseh
Community Development Director
701 E. Carson Street
Carson, CA 90745
(310) 952-1761 x13654
[email protected]
On-Call Planning and Environmental Services
2016-Ongoing
Project Manager: Glenn Lajoie
Key Staff Involved: Liza Debies
City of Thousand Oaks
Scott Kolwitz
Senior Planner
2100 Thousand Oaks Blvd.
Thousand Oaks, CA 91362
(805) 449-2319
[email protected]
Planning Staff Augmentation and Environmental Services
2021-Ongoing
Project Manager: Glenn Lajoie
Key Staff Involved: Liza Debies, Kelli Allen, Colby Gonzalez City of San Bernardino
Gabriel Elliot
Community Development Director
290 North D Street
San Bernardino, CA 92401
(909) 384-7272 ext. 3329
[email protected]
On-Call Planning and Environmental Services
2024-Ongoing
Project Manager: Glenn Lajoie
Key Staff Involved: Kelli Allen
City of Orange
Anna Pehoushek
Assistant Community Development Director
300 E. Orange
Orange, CA 92866
(714) 744-7228
[email protected]
CEQA Peer Review Services
2023 – Ongoing
Project Manager: Glenn Lajoie
Key Staff Involved: Glenn Lajoie
94 94 of 110
95 of 110
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
October 28, 2025
BUSINESS
24 SUBJECT: CITY CONTRIBUTION, RESOLUTION OF INTENTION AND RESOLUTION
PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2021-3 (FAIRVIEW/LA BREA)
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Adopt the Resolution titled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DECLARING ITS INTENTION TO ORDER THE
CONSTRUCTION OF CERTAIN IMPROVEMENTS AND TO FORM UNDERGROUND UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2021-3 (FAIRVIEW/LA BREA) AND FINDING THE SAME EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT”;
2. Adopt the Resolution titled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, PRELIMINARILY ADOPTING, CONFIRMING, AND APPROVING THE ENGINEER’S REPORT AND APPOINTING THE TIME AND PLACE FOR
HEARING PROTESTS TO IMPROVEMENTS IN PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT NO. 2021-3 (FAIRVIEW/LA BREA) AND FINDING THE SAME EXEMPT FROM THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT”;
3. Appoint the January 13, 2026, City Council Meeting for a public hearing regarding proposed Underground Utility Assessment District 2021-3;
4. Acknowledge the intent to contribute $474,580 for the General Benefit cost, if the district is approved, and prior to bonds being sold;
5. Consider the request from the Fairview/La Brea proponents for the additional City Contribution toward a public safety benefit of undergrounding the neighborhood located near open space;
6. Direct staff to return with a funding strategy if an additional contribution is approved above the General Benefit; and
7. Determine that the action is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA guidelines sections 15301(b), 15302(c) & (d), and 15303(d); and further that this action implements the December 4, 2024 Planning Commission action, wherein the City previously conducted environmental review of the proposed undergrounding project and determined that the project was exempt and there are no changes to the project, no changed circumstances, and no new information that could not previously have been known, that would trigger the need for subsequent CEQA review.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
1 of 187
CITY CONTRIBUTION, RESOLUTION OF INTENTION AND RESOLUTION
PRELIMINARILY APPROVING THE ENGINEER'S REPORT FOR PROPOSED UNDERGROUND UTILITY ASSESSMENT DISTRICT 2021-3 (FAIRVIEW/LA BREA) October 28, 2025