Agenda packet, first session — Laguna Beach City Council, October 28, 2025

Scan this QR
Code for an
electronic copy of
the
City Council
Agenda
Insert QR
Graphic Here
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
OCTOBER 28, 2025
COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 505 FOREST AVENUE, LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92651 CLOSED SESSION – 3:30 P.M.

REGULAR MEETING 5:00 P.M.

ALEX ROUNAGHI, Mayor
MARK ORGILL, Mayor Pro Tem
HALLIE JONES, Councilmember
SUE KEMPF, Councilmember
BOB WHALEN, Councilmember
DAVE KIFF, City Manager
MEGAN GARIBALDI, City Attorney
LAURA PARISI, City Treasurer
ANN MARIE McKAY, City Clerk
LEVINE ACT DISCLOSURE: Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the City Council is required to disclose on the record any campaign contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $250 through December 31, 2024, and $500 commencing on January 1, 2025, made by the party or the party’s agents within the preceding 12 months to any City official. Participants and agents are requested to make this disclosure as well. The disclosure should be made when the agenda item is called and must include the name of the party, participant, or agent, and any other person making the contribution, the name of the recipient, the amount of the contribution, and the date the contribution was made. Council Members are also required to make such disclosures and recuse themselves.

Public Participation: You may submit comments in person on any agenda item or any item not on the agenda. You may also submit written comments on any agenda item or on any item not on the agenda via mail to the City Clerk at 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, CA. 92651 or by email to [email protected]. In order to allow sufficient time for members of the City Council and staff to review and consider your written comments, written comments will be accepted for consideration up until the close of business (i.e., 5:30 p.m.) on the business day before the date on which this public meeting is scheduled. Written comments WILL NOT be read aloud during the City Council Meeting. Please note that written comments are posted on the City’s website, so do not include any personal information you 1 of 67
Public Participation: You may submit comments in person on any agenda item or any item not on the agenda. You may also submit written comments on any agenda item or on any item not on the agenda via mail to the City Clerk at 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, CA. 92651 or by email to [email protected]. In order to allow sufficient time for members of the City Council and staff to review and consider your written comments, written comments will be accepted for consideration up until the close of business (i.e., 5:30 p.m.) on the business day before the date on which this public meeting is scheduled. Written comments WILL NOT be read aloud during the City Council Meeting. Please note that written comments are posted on the City’s website, so do not include any personal information you do not want posted on the web. Any comments received after the deadline for submittal may not become part of the public record for that meeting. For comments submitted on a topic not on the agenda, please indicate that you would like your comments included in the official record for this meeting.

Courtesy Virtual Broadcast: Please take notice that the City also plans to broadcast the meeting via the below listed mediums. These virtual broadcast mediums are also provided as a courtesy only and are not guaranteed to be technically feasible or uninterrupted. Thus, in order to guarantee livetime viewing, members of the public are encouraged to attend in person.

1. Online on the City of Laguna website: www.lagunabeachcity.net/meetings

2. Cox cable channel 852

3. Online on YouTube: https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCQsj8cEM7IvTH6p4uf3NUzQ STUDY SESSION FACILITIES MASTER PLAN (FMP)
************************************************
A. ROLL CALL 3:00 p.m.

B. STUDY SESSION.

1. FACILITIES MASTER PLAN (FMP) STUDY SESSION: CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE OVERALL FMP, WITH A FOCUS ON FIRE STATION #1, COMMUNITY AND RECREATION CENTER OPTIONS, AND LANG PARK OPTIONS
Recommendations:

1. Receive a presentation and update from Griffin Structures on the Facilities Master Plan (FMP);

2. Provide input on Fire Station #1 location and functionality, the Community and Recreation Center valuation options, Lang Park Design Concepts, as well as any other features of the FMP; and

3. Find that this action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines.

C. ADJOURNMENT.

ADA ACCOMMODATIONS
*************************
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disabilityrelated modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (949) 4970705 (telephone) or (949) 4970771 (facsimile). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.
2 of 67
ADA ACCOMMODATIONS
*************************
Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disabilityrelated modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (949) 4970705 (telephone) or (949) 4970771 (facsimile). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.

COMPLIANCE WITH GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54957.5
********************************************************* Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packets are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's Office at 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, California, during normal business hours. 3 of 67

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:

October 28, 2025

STUDY SESSION
1 SUBJECT: FACILITIES MASTER PLAN (FMP) STUDY SESSION: CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE OVERALL FMP, WITH A FOCUS ON FIRE STATION #1,

COMMUNITY AND RECREATION CENTER OPTIONS, AND LANG PARK

OPTIONS
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Receive a presentation and update from Griffin Structures on the Facilities Master Plan (FMP);

2. Provide input on Fire Station #1 location and functionality, the Community and Recreation Center valuation options, Lang Park Design Concepts, as well as any other features of the FMP; and

3. Find that this action is not a project under the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to Section 15378(b)(5) of the CEQA Guidelines.

SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
This report accompanies a study session presentation from Griffin Structures (Attachment 1) on key priority items under the City’s Facilities Master Plan (FMP), including options for Fire Station #1, the Community and Recreation Center (CRC), and Lang Park. The purpose of the workshop is to provide a progress update and obtain City Council feedback to help develop the long-term investment strategies and policy direction of the FMP.

Council input is requested on:
• Whether to confirm the Village Entrance as the preferred site for Fire Station #1 and the feasibility of co-locating the Emergency Operations Center (EOC);
• The preferred valuation and land use strategy for the CRC site (e.g., retain, sell, or lease); • Conceptual design ideas for Lang Park, including community-focused improvements and structured parking, with potential funding sources linked to CRC decisions; and • Whether to initiate discussions with the community and the Laguna Beach County Water District regarding the potential for future City or City-District use of the District building to support longterm administrative and public safety space needs.

While not included in the presentation, staff is continuing to coordinate with the County on short-term improvements to the Library, and working to schedule meetings with the Irvine Bowl Committee to discuss ADA upgrades at the Forum Theater. These topics will return to the Council for consideration at a future date.

Also, funding strategies for the FMP are still in development. Council input from this study session is important to refining that analysis and determining which concepts should advance to feasibility or funding evaluation. This study session will build on the direction provided at the June 24, 2025 study session, which prioritized Group 1 projects focused on public safety, community use, and near-term feasibility, including 1 of 64
FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY SESSION: CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE OVERALL FMP, WITH A FOCUS ON FIRE STATION #1, COMMUNITY AND RECREATION

CENTER OPTIONS, AND LANG PARK OPTIONS
October 28, 2025

Page 2 of 5 ends

Fire Station #1, the Community and Recreation Center, and Lang Park, as well as long-term planning for Fire Stations #2 and #3.

There is no fiscal impact associated with this presentation. The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), as it involves general administrative activity that does not result in a physical change to the environment.

DISCUSSION
Background
In 2024, the City Council initiated a comprehensive FMP to evaluate the condition, functionality, and future needs of 26 City-owned properties. The plan was developed through a phased process that included a Facility Condition Assessment (FCA), space needs analysis, and development of long-term facility concepts. Griffin Structures was retained to lead this effort, in collaboration with staff and the Facilities Ad Hoc Committee composed of Mayor Rounaghi and Mayor Pro Tem Orgill.

Public and stakeholder input was gathered through workshops, a Town Hall, and outreach events held throughout 2024 and early 2025 (Attachments 3 and 4). Based on this input and Council direction, Griffin Structures categorized facility concepts into three priority groups. The Group 1 projects, focused on public safety, community use, and near-term feasibility, include the relocation of Fire Station #1, planning for the CRC, and early-phase improvements at Lang Park.

At the June 24, 2025, City Council workshop (Attachment 2), the Council provided consensus direction and requested additional evaluation of specific options for Fire Station #1, including co-location with an EOC; valuation and land use alternatives for the CRC site; and a reimagined concept for Lang Park. This presentation presents progress on those topics and seeks further Council input.

Fire Station #1 – Siting and Program Potential
The Council previously expressed interest in confirming the Village Entrance as the most feasible site for Fire Station #1. Griffin Structures has reviewed other downtown locations and will present a comparative summary during the session. Griffin also evaluated the feasibility of co-locating the City’s EOC within the new Fire Station, which could relieve some space demand at City Hall.

Council’s input is requested on:
• Whether the Village Entrance should remain the preferred site for Fire Station #1; • Whether staff should continue evaluating co-location of the EOC at this site.

Community and Recreation Center (CRC) – Valuation and Land Use Options Griffin Structures will present a market valuation and analysis of potential future uses for the CRC site. The options under review include:
• Retaining the site for City recreation and community services as originally planned; • Selling all or a portion of the site, with or without entitlement; • Leasing the property for private development.
2 of 64
FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY SESSION: CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE OVERALL FMP, WITH A FOCUS ON FIRE STATION #1, COMMUNITY AND RECREATION

CENTER OPTIONS, AND LANG PARK OPTIONS
October 28, 2025

Page 3 of 5 ends

Each option has different implications for public use, revenue potential, and project complexity. Revenue generated from sale or lease options could be allocated toward other City priorities, such as Lang Park, Fire Station #1, or other capital needs.

Council’s input is requested on:
• Which land use scenarios merit further exploration;
• Whether to prioritize public use, revenue generation, or a hybrid model.

Lang Park
Lang Park is currently programmed for long-term upgrades, including structured parking and enhanced recreation space. As part of the FMP, staff has developed a concept that would integrate community programming with improved parking capacity.

Council’s input is requested on:
• Whether Lang Park remains a priority for future reinvestment; • How funding strategies tied to CRC decisions might influence Lang Park timing and scope.

Laguna Beach County Water District – Future Use
Although not included in tonight’s presentation, staff welcomes any Council and community input on whether to initiate discussions with the Laguna Beach County Water District regarding the potential longterm use of the District building for City or combined City-District purposes. One preliminary concept involves the District relocating most operations to a site north of El Morro Elementary School, while maintaining an administrative presence at the current location. This could create an opportunity for the City to expand administrative and public safety functions in the space, including a potential expansion of Police Department facilities. Doing so may avoid a need for a full refurbishment or expansion of the current City Hall building(s).

Update on Other Topics Not Included in Presentation:

Laguna Beach Library
Staff is coordinating with the County of Orange on a set of short-term improvements to the Laguna Beach Branch Library, including HVAC system upgrades, interior lighting improvements, new carpet installation, and updated shelving. These improvements should address immediate functional needs while longer-term planning efforts continue.

The City Council expressed support for a more aspirational vision at the same Library location, preserving the Library’s anchoring role for the town, but expanding it to meet user needs. An approximately $20 million expansion may reimagine the library as a modern, flexible community learning and gathering space. In the coming months, staff will meet with the County to assess its interest in participating financially in the development of the aspirational vision. Any proposals would be returned to the City Council for direction and consideration. 3 of 64
FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY SESSION: CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE OVERALL FMP, WITH A FOCUS ON FIRE STATION #1, COMMUNITY AND RECREATION

CENTER OPTIONS, AND LANG PARK OPTIONS
October 28, 2025

Page 4 of 5 ends

Forum Theater – ADA Accessibility
The Facilities Master Plan includes a conceptual proposal for ADA accessibility improvements at the Forum Theater, located on the Festival of Arts grounds. Working with the Facilities Master Plan Ad Hoc Committee, staff will present the proposed improvements for discussion at the next scheduled meeting of the Irvine Bowl Committee in January 2026. The purpose of the meeting is to review the concept and explore potential cost-sharing or partnership opportunities to advance the improvements.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
There is no fiscal impact as a result of this action. Any future funding decisions will be brought forward for separate Council consideration.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The proposed action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378(b)(5), as it constitutes general administrative activity that does not commit the City to a specific project or result in a physical change to the environment.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Presentation (Pgs. 5-32)

2. June 24, 2025 Study Session Staff Report and minutes Staff Report:
https://lagunabeachcity.granicus.com/MetaViewer.php?view_id=3&clip_id=2703&meta_id=227796 Minutes:
https://lagunabeachcity.granicus.com/DocumentViewer.php?file=lagunabeachcity_34c031a7294dfb3f 8fd48da64e1cda99.pdf&view=1

3. October 22, 2024 Facility Master Plan Workshop Agenda Report https://www.lagunabeachcity.net/home/showpublisheddocument/20846/638699587447770000

4. November 24, 2024, Facilities Master Plan Update
https://www.lagunabeachcity.net/home/showpublisheddocument/20848/638699589466870000

5. April 24, 2025 Town Hall Presentation and You Tube video • Facilities Master Plan Town Hall Agenda and Facility Concepts https://www.lagunabeachcity.net/home/showpublisheddocument/21912/63 8803 029528670000 • Facilities Master Plan Town Hall Meeting YouTube
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4FrVRVTbU_Q
Submitted By: Approved: .David A Kiff
Gavin Curran, Assistant City
Manager
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By:

Coordinated With:
4 of 64
FACILITIES MASTER PLAN STUDY SESSION: CONTINUED DISCUSSION OF THE OVERALL FMP, WITH A FOCUS ON FIRE STATION #1, COMMUNITY AND RECREATION

CENTER OPTIONS, AND LANG PARK OPTIONS
October 28, 2025

Page 5 of 5 ends

Gavin Curran, Assistant City Manager
5 of 64
Follow-Up Analysis
O c t ob er 2 8 , 2 0 2 5
Laguna Beach Facilities Master Plan
5 Attachment 1
6 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Meeting Goals & Agenda
• Summarize Council’s Requested follow-up items:
• Fire Station 1
• Lang Park
• Community & Recreation Center (CRC)

01. Fire Station 1

02. Lang Park

03. Comm. &
Rec. Center

04. Next Steps
6 7 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Council Meeting Feedback
Housing
Preserve Gym &
Field
Public Private
Partnership Model
Structured Parking
Broader
Development
Consider Other
Viable Sites as
Current Location is
Inadequate
Pursue Accessible
Upgrades
FIRE STATION 1 CRC LANG PARK FORUM THEATRE
Aspirational
Restoration/
Expansion
Leverage School
District & County
Partnerships

LIBRARY

FUTURE UPDATES
7 8 of 64
Fire Station 1

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Council Feedback
• Existing Location is inadequate
• Council supports exploring other
viable sites (e.g., Proposed Site,
Christmas Tree Lot, private property)
• Council Concerns
• Relocation Feasibility
• EOC Integration
• Parking Impacts
• Highest and best use for site north of
City Hall (proposed site)
8 9 of 64
Alternative Locations Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

CRITERIA EXISTING SITE VILLAGE ENTRANCE CHRISTMAS TREE LOT TENNIS COURT

COST HIGH MEDIUM HIGH MEDIUM

RESPONSE TIME FAST FAST SLOW MEDIUM

ZONING COMPATIBLE COMPATIBLE NOT ZONED NOT ZONED

BIGGEST CONCERN TIGHT SITE/HISTORIC HIGHEST/BEST USE BRIDGE/ACCESS ACCESS/LEASE Note: Private lots were not originally considered due to cost/timeline implications. 9 10 of 64
Downtown Options

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

CRITERIA GOODYEAR SITE FORMER BUS STOP PEPPERTREE LOT NORTH LAGUNA

COST HIGH HIGH HIGH XXX

RESPONSE TIME FAST FAST FAST SLOW

ZONING NOT ZONED NOT ZONED NOT ZONED XXX

BIGGEST CONCERN TIGHT SITE/

ACQUISITION COSTS

TIGHT SITE/

ACQUISITION COSTS

TIGHT SITE/

ACQUISITION COSTS

STANDARD OF

COVERAGE/

ACQUISITION COSTS
10 11 of 64
Shared Facility Option with PD/EOC

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Key Takeaways
• Feasible but significantly
more expensive
• Requires City Hall
Renovation
• Requires Parking Structure
• Cost Estimate*
• $91M-121M
*All costs are expressed in current dollars and are subject to escalation based on project timing 11 12 of 64
EOC Integration Feasibility

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• EOC currently is at City Hall and CRC
(awaiting backup generator)
• Ability to incorporate into FS 1
• Building Height Constraint (36 FT)
• $24-27M + $6M for EOC = $30-33M*
App Bay Living / Admin
EOC
32’-36’
28’-32’
Fire Admin
*All costs are expressed in current dollars and are subject to escalation based on project timing 12 13 of 64
Community & Recreation Center (CRC)

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Council Feedback
• Support Housing at CRC
• Some support for preserving the
gym and field
• Explore economic analysis
scenarios for development and
lease opportunities
13 14 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$3.9M – $4.3M
Redevelopment Options CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 1
CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2
DENSITY 123-126
units 270 units
14 15 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$12.2M – $13.5M
Redevelopment Options Redevelopment Options CONCEPT 2 (LEVEL 1) CONCEPT 2 (LEVEL 1) CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2
DENSITY 123-126
units 270 units
15 16 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$12.2M – $13.5M
Redevelopment Options CONCEPT 2 (LEVEL B-1)
CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2
DENSITY 123-126
units 270 units
16 17 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
CRC Program Relocation

CRC PROGRAM SF MOVE TO
FIRE ADMIN. 2,116 NEW FIRE STATION 1
MARINE SAFETY 378 ?
POLICE DEPT. SUB ST. 248 ?
REC. CLASSROOMS 8,505

NEW LANG PARK

COMMUNITY CENTER
REC. LABS 1,696
REC. STORAGE 909
REC. OFFICES 165
GYM 7,379

EARLY CHILDHOOD
PROGRAM 1,035
17 18 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Purpose of Analysis
• Evaluate options to leverage a portion of the

6.3-acre Community & Recreation Center site
(former St. Catherine of Siena School) to
support community reinvestment.
• Two primary strategies:
• Sell “as-is” to a private developer
• Entitle and/or partner for residential reuse
to enhance value & fund public
improvements.
18 19 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Market Snapshot
• Laguna Beach remains a high-value, supply-constrained market:
• Takeaway:
• High demand + limited supply = strong redevelopment potential.

4.6% vacancy, $2.7K–$3.9K
rents, no new projects in the
pipeline.

MULTI-FAMILY

7.3% vacancy, strong
tourism-driven rents
($73–77 NNN).

RETAIL

6.1% vacancy (half the
county average).

OFFICE
19 20 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Housing & Demographics
• Takeaway
• Condo & Townhome products best align with unmet local needs Only +2% since 1991
(vs. +30% countywide)
Median income $85K;
nearly half earn >$100K.
51% are seniors, indicating
future downsizing demand
$3.5M (2025),
nearly 2x county average

AVERAGE HOME PRICE HOUSING GROWTH AFFLUENT RENTER BASE AGING HOMEOWNERS 20 21 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

OPTION DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED LAND VALUE
AS-IS SALE (1A half of site) ±123-126 UNITS, NO ENTITLEMENTS $27-$28M ($21M NET AFFORDABLE HOUSING &

PREVAILING WAGE)
ENTITLED SALE (1B entire site) SAME, WITH ENTITLEMENTS $37-$46M ($28M-$35M NET AFFORDABLE

HOUSING & PREVAILING WAGE)
AS-IS SALE (2A half site) 270 UNITS, NO ENTITLEMENTS $39-40M ($29-$30M NET AH &PW) FULL BUILD (2B) ±270-UNIT CONDO PROJECT WITH

ENTITLEMENTS
$60M LAND VALUE/~$405M TOTAL SALES
(NET $45m/$337,500,00 NET AH & PW
Fee Sale Development Scenarios
Values are sensitive to market conditions, prevailing wage, and affordable housing requirements.

Developers could contribute 4–5% of project costs toward community amenities 21 22 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

OPTION DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED LAND VALUE

PARITAL GROUND LEASE
(3A half of site) NO ENTITLEMENTS $18M (NET OF AH, PW & GROUND LEASE 35% DISCOUNT)
PARITAL GROUND LEASE (3B half of site) WITH ENTITLEMENTS $27M (NET OF AH, PW & GROUND LEASE) FULL GROUND LEASE (4A) NO ENTITLEMENTS $26M (NET OF AH, PW & GROUND LEASE) FULL GROUND LEASE (4B) WITH ENTITLEMENTS $39M (NET OF AH, PW & GROUND LEASE) Ground Lease Development Scenarios
Values are sensitive to market conditions, prevailing wage, and affordable housing requirements.

Developers could contribute 4–5% of project costs toward community amenities 22 23 of 64
Economic Analysis
Key Takeaways

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Generate
Generate
$27M–$45M+
for community
reinvestment.

Advance
Advance RHNA
housing goals (394
units).

Balance
Balance fiscal return
with public benefit.

CRC

6.3-acre Community
& Recreation Center
• Recommendation
• Rezone to maximum
high-density within the
30-ft height limit to
preserve flexibility and
value.
23 24 of 64
Lang Park Comprehensive Redevelopment Options

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Council Feedback
• Do not pursue the light improvement
option ($12M-$13M)
• Structured parking & broader
redevelopment of Lang Park
preferred
• Action Items
• Develop a comprehensive Lang Park
concept, including sub parking
POTENTIAL PLAN COST*
Community Center, Pool, Fields, Tennis
Courts, Pickleball + Sub Parking $66.2M – $73.5M
Community Center, Pool, Tennis Courts,
Pickleball + Sub Parking $65.3M - $72.5M
*All costs are expressed in current dollars and are subject to escalation based on project timing
24 25 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$66.2M - $73.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options SITE PLAN OPTION C
25 26 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$66.2M - $73.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION C (LEVEL-1)
26 27 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$66.2M - $73.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION C (LEVEL-P1) 27 28 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$65.3M - $72.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION D
28 29 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$65.3M - $72.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION D (LEVEL-1)
29 30 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$65.3M - $72.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION D (LEVEL-P1) 30 31 of 64
Next Steps

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Receive and integrate Council feedback
• Finalize Facilities Master Plan Report
• Final Council Presentation and Adoption
31 32 of 64
City of Laguna Beach
Facilities Master Plan
THANK YOU!
Questions?
32 33 of 64
Follow-Up Analysis
O c t ob er 2 8 , 2 0 2 5
Laguna Beach Facilities Master Plan
5 Attachment 1
34 of 64

01. Fire Station 1

02. Lang Park

03. Comm. &
Rec. Center

04. Next Steps
6 35 of 64

LIBRARY

FUTURE UPDATES
7 36 of 64
Fire Station 1

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Council Feedback • Existing Location is inadequate • Council supports exploring other viable sites (e.g., Proposed Site,
Christmas Tree Lot, private property)
• Council Concerns • Relocation Feasibility • EOC Integration • Parking Impacts • Highest and best use for site north of City Hall (proposed site)
8 37 of 64
Alternative Locations Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

CRITERIA EXISTING SITE VILLAGE ENTRANCE CHRISTMAS TREE LOT TENNIS COURT

COST HIGH MEDIUM HIGH MEDIUM

RESPONSE TIME FAST FAST SLOW MEDIUM

ZONING COMPATIBLE COMPATIBLE NOT ZONED NOT ZONED

BIGGEST CONCERN TIGHT SITE/HISTORIC HIGHEST/BEST USE BRIDGE/ACCESS ACCESS/LEASE Note: Private lots were not originally considered due to cost/timeline implications. 9 38 of 64
Downtown Options

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

CRITERIA GOODYEAR SITE FORMER BUS STOP PEPPERTREE LOT NORTH LAGUNA

COST HIGH HIGH HIGH XXX

RESPONSE TIME FAST FAST FAST SLOW

ZONING NOT ZONED NOT ZONED NOT ZONED XXX

BIGGEST CONCERN TIGHT SITE/

ACQUISITION COSTS

TIGHT SITE/

ACQUISITION COSTS

TIGHT SITE/

ACQUISITION COSTS

STANDARD OF

COVERAGE/

ACQUISITION COSTS
10 39 of 64
Shared Facility Option with PD/EOC

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Council Feedback • Support Housing at CRC • Some support for preserving the gym and field
• Explore economic analysis
scenarios for development and
lease opportunities
13 42 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$3.9M – $4.3M
Redevelopment Options CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 1
CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2
DENSITY 123
-126
units 270 units
14 43 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$12.2M – $13.5M
Redevelopment Options CONCEPT 2 (LEVEL B-1)
CONCEPT 1 CONCEPT 2
DENSITY 123-126
units 270 units
16 45 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
CRC Program Relocation

CRC PROGRAM SF MOVE TO
FIRE ADMIN. 2,116 NEW FIRE STATION 1
MARINE SAFETY 378 ?
POLICE DEPT. SUB ST. 248 ?
REC. CLASSROOMS 8,505

NEW LANG PARK

COMMUNITY CENTER
REC. LABS 1,696
REC. STORAGE 909
REC. OFFICES 165
GYM 7,379

EARLY CHILDHOOD
PROGRAM 1,035
17 46 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Purpose of Analysis • Evaluate options to leverage a portion of the

6.3-acre Community & Recreation Center site
(former St. Catherine of Siena School) to
support community reinvestment.
• Two primary strategies: • Sell “as-is” to a private developer • Entitle and/or partner for residential reuse to enhance value & fund public
improvements.
18 47 of 64
Economic Analysis

4.6% vacancy, $2.7K–$3.9K
rents, no new projects in the
pipeline.

MULTI-FAMILY

7.3% vacancy, strong
tourism-driven rents
($73–77 NNN).

RETAIL

6.1% vacancy (half the
county average).

OFFICE
19 48 of 64
Economic Analysis

AVERAGE HOME PRICE HOUSING GROWTH AFFLUENT RENTER BASE AGING HOMEOWNERS 20 49 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

OPTION DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED LAND VALUE
AS-IS SALE (1A half of site) ±123-126 UNITS, NO ENTITLEMENTS $27-$28M ($21M NET AFFORDABLE HOUSING &

PREVAILING WAGE)
ENTITLED SALE (1B entire site) SAME, WITH ENTITLEMENTS $37-$46M ($28M-$35M NET AFFORDABLE

HOUSING & PREVAILING WAGE)
AS-IS SALE (2A half site) 270 UNITS, NO ENTITLEMENTS $39-40M ($29-$30M NET AH &PW) FULL BUILD (2B) ±270-UNIT CONDO PROJECT WITH

Developers could contribute 4–5% of project costs toward community amenities 21 50 of 64
Economic Analysis

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y

OPTION DESCRIPTION ESTIMATED LAND VALUE

Developers could contribute 4–5% of project costs toward community amenities 22 51 of 64
Economic Analysis
Key Takeaways

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Generate
Generate
$27M–$45M+
for community
reinvestment.

Advance
Advance RHNA
housing goals (394
units).

Balance
Balance fiscal return
with public benefit.

CRC

6.3-acre Community
& Recreation Center
• Recommendation • Rezone to maximum
high-density within the
30-ft height limit to
preserve flexibility and
value.
23 52 of 64
Lang Park Comprehensive Redevelopment Options

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$66.2M - $73.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options SITE PLAN OPTION C
25 54 of 64

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$66.2M - $73.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION C (LEVEL-1)
26 55 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$66.2M - $73.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION C (LEVEL
-P1)
27 56 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$65.3M - $72.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION D
28 57 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$65.3M - $72.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION D (LEVEL
-1)
29 58 of 64
Concept Presentations

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
Estimated
Budget:
$65.3M - $72.5M
Comprehensive Redevelopment Options OPTION D (LEVEL
-P1)
30 59 of 64
Next Steps

E X C E L L E N C E I N P R O J E C T D E L I V E R Y
• Receive and integrate Council feedback • Finalize Facilities Master Plan Report • Final Council Presentation and Adoption 31 60 of 64
City of Laguna Beach
Facilities Master Plan
THANK YOU!
Questions?
32 61 of 64
62 of 64
October 27, 2025
To the City Council, City Manager, and Study Committee
On behalf of our membership and South Laguna neighborhood residents, South Laguna Civic Association (SLCA) writes today to encourage the Study Committee as it considers future facilities investments to do so with a deliberate focus on resident participation in the planning process.

Of note, we are aware that there is a discussion on future use and investments at Lang Park.

We are obviously passionate about the future of Lang, as it represents South Laguna’s only local community center, our original school site, and the largest green space in this area: all artifacts of investment prior to acquisition by the city in the 1980s. Our membership deeply cares about and has advocated for more investment and placement of city resources in South Laguna. Yet, as an organization representing South Laguna residents, we are reluctant to support intensification of more constructed improvements and loss of green space at Lang Park, since it is our only play field. Thus, the committee’s discussion of Lang presents an opportunity for thoughtful, strategic decisions that have generational impacts.

For example, as consideration of Lang investments proceeds, we would hope any decisions made take into account the community’s expressed desire to add the open lots at Catalina St. as a new park site for South Laguna; as well as the use of what will be the former Fire Station #4 once the new station is built, plans for use of land near the Hospital, and potential use of the St. Catherine’s site in the long term. All of these locations and how they work together to support both the city and the South Laguna neighborhood are key pieces in a broader experience that should be considered as a whole.

We ask the city, the council, and committee to use this opportunity to develop a strategic vision for how all this works together and to have an open and transparent process in soliciting resident feedback to help shape an excellent outcome.

Thanks so much,
Greg O'Loughlin - President
63 of 64
64 of 64

Laguna Beach City CouncilOctober 28, 2025

Laguna Beach City Council
October 28, 2025