Laguna Beach City Council
November 18, 2025

1. Previous and Current Contracts with the City of Laguna Beach Project Name Contact Description of Services Dates of Service CEQA On -Call Amber Dobson Planning Provide on-call CEQA August 2022 - ongoing Manager Services
749 Marl in Drive IS/ND Amber Dobson. Plarin1ng Prepa1 at ion of techn ical October 2022 • May 2023 Manager studies and an In itial
Study/ Negative
Declaration
2354 San Clemente Is; Mari'la Caron . AIC P Preparation of technical February 2023 • ongoing MN") Principal Planner studies and an In tial
Study/M itigated Negative
Declaration
385 Nyes Place IS/MND Marina Caron. AICP. Preparation of technical March 2023 - ongoing Princ ipal Planner studies and an In itial
St udy/Mitigated Negative
Declara tion
820 Gainsborough Drive Manna Caron AICP Pre paration of technical July 2023 · ongoing IS/MND Pr1nc1pal Planner stud ies and an In itial
Study/Mitigated Negat·ve
Declaration
Ceanothus Drive EIP Anthony Vie1·a Principal Preparation of technical December 2023 -- ongoing Plann01· studies and an
Envimnmental Impact
Report
Piddle Field Park CE Alexis Braun. Recreation Preparation of technical February 2024 • lv1ay 2024 Manage1 stud ie,, and a Categorical
Exemption Report
Pickelball CEQA Alexis Braun. Recreation Preparation of an Currently on hold Manager environmental con5tra ints
evaluation for pickelball
court options

2. No disclosures to report related to any current or retired City official or employee, or City official 's or employee's immediate family member(s) that has/have ownership interest in Consultant's company or is deriving personal financial gain from this contract.

3. No disclosures to report related to any City official or employee that is contemporaneously employed or prospect ively will be employed by the Consultant or Consultant's subconsultants at any time during the Project period known to Consultant at the time the proposal is submitted.

De Novo Planning Group 66 27
221
Attachment 2
222

EDUCATION
MA, Urban and Regional Planning,
Un1vers1ty of California Irvine
BA, Urban Studies and Planning,
University of California San Diego
BA, Political Science: Comparative
Politics ,
University of Cal iforn ia, San Diego
Study Abroad Program ,
University of Sussex

ORGANIZATIONS
Urban Land Institute
International Association for Public
Part1c1pation (IAP2)
American Planning Assoc1at1on
Congress tor New Urbanism
Attachment 2
An1anda 1.,ropiano

PRINCIPAL
Amanda Tropiano is a principal with De Novo Planning Group and is responsible for leading the firm 's Southern California practice With over 15 years of professional planning experience in the region, Amanda has successfully managed a wide variety of land use and environmental planning projects for public and private sector clients including numerous General Plans specific plans corridor plans , strategic plans sustainability programs, visioning projects, transitonented development plans, zoning documents , outreach programs, and CEOA projects. Amanda is also an IAP2 trained public outreach practitioner and has completed project management training with PSMJ Amanda consistently brings to the table her passion . creativity. and strategic thinking to make sure every proiect exceeds her client's expectations Amanda also supports the land use due diligence efforts of clients throughout southern California and assists with navigat111g public agency planning procedures . reviewing existing regulatory direction facilitating the entitlement process, and serving as a l1a1son between public agencies and private developers

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
General Plan Update, Housing
Element, and EIR,
City of Lake Forest
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of La Verne
General Plan Update, Housing
Element, EIR , and CAP,
City of San Jacinto
General Plan Update, Housing
Element, Zoning Update, and EIR,
City of San Marcos
Focus General Plan Update and EIR.

City of Glendale
General Plan Update, Hawthorne Blvd
Specific Plan Update, and EIR,
City of Lawndale
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of Campbell
General Plan Update and EIR .

City of Milpitas
Housing Element Update
City of Temecula
General Plan Update and EIR ,
City of Westminster'
General Plan Update and EIR,
City of Menifee·
General Plan Update, Housing
Element and EIR,
City of Yucaipa*
Housing Element Update,
City of Santa Ana'
Irvine Neighborhood Plan,
City of Irvine
Springs Specific Plan and EIR,
Sonoma County
SAVI Ranch Land Use and Mobility
Vision Plan,
City of Yorba Linda'
Vision Plan,
City of Carson·
Crafton Hills College
Village Overlay Zone,
City of Yucaipa·
Downtown Bellflower TransitOriented Development Specific Plan City of Bellflower*
Envision Alhambra 2035 Public
Outreach Campaign and Phase I
General Plan Update,
City of Alh ambra•
Torrance Strategic Plan Update:

Community Profile and
Environmental Scan,
City of Torrance'
Downtown Transit Study ,
City of Fontana•
• Proiect was completed by Ms Tropiano while he was employed at another planning firm
De N ovo Plann i ng Group
••••
68 223

EDUCATION
8A, Engli'!i-h Lii:eratur~.

UnivEfsit:y of Washington, Seattle,
Washsig'!Dn
Master of U..-ban a;nd Re,gion.a:1
Planning,.

Cal Poly Pcmona, Pomooa Califom:.a
0 GANIZATI0N S
Associa !Oil of EnworunerrW
Professionals
Attachment 2
.li\shley Brodkin

SENIOR PLANNER
Ashley
Group and~
cx:8tin
~poosible
is a Senior
ror
P'ta.nna
!he prepara1ioo
alld project
of erwironmental
man~ with
d
De
ocu
~~o
rllE!l s
~
. as well
as a wide variety of~ prc;ects induciing General Plans. Specif.le ordinance updaEB. al1.d lo CEQA gurdelines. Wah O'ller 10 yea~ of exp,eri,ef1,ce, Ashley has prepared and managed a v.anoe-iy of CEQA and NEPA docum il:s fo.- cap5 al pruvemenis, ~ ~ loprnenis, rede"t-elopment and urban infill, warehoosel}ogisrn:s, and public pciicy oocume,m projects, and a var.e{y of pt;,wrig projects inclu,:mg General - , ~ ing Bements. Specific Plans. D~ent Ordinance Updates, and entitlements.

With experien:::e as both a private ccnsutlant a!ld in public se!'Vice. as vrell a:
ex:p~{ ~ in t.oih pc,.xy and environment.al pl-armrnq. A5J:rle.y prm,ides a holistic approach to prujecis and proa'Ctivel'f prcb _m solves.

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
General Plan Update. Zoning Update.
and BR
City of San J.a-criu
General Plan Update. Hawtho1ne Blvd
Specific Pfan Up,dilte, Zoning Update
and BR
City of 'ffldale
Downtown Core BR
Cify of ~
General iPtan Land Use and Zoning
AmenmM!nts EJR
Cify of Gardffia
General Plan Update and BR
City of La Verne
Harpel" Mixed Use Project BR
City of \.\fest 1-iofy,iOOd
2500 Hot1h Hollywood Way Hotel EIR
City of Surbri
749 Marfin Dr Road Extension 1-SJ'ND
ciiy of Laguna Bead,
385 Ny.es Place Projecl IS.Fll!ND
Cily af aflUl\a&adi
2354 San Clemente St Project ISIMND
City of l.agur1a 8E-arh
820 Gainsborough Dr Project ISJ"MND
City of Laguna 8€-adl
1500 Raymond Ave, lndusirial ISJMNO
Ci y of fulerlnn
1901 Via Burton Indus.trial 1$/MNO
Cii}' of fuJertcn
Pilot Trav.e-1 Center Projeci ElR
City of Peiris
9001-0019 Long ~ch Bawl
Residential Projed ISJMNCNEA
City of So!Ah C-.a!E
U-Haui Expam;ion l'SJMND
City of GardErla
Aµplred Medical Exp.ans,ion !SJMND
City of Lake Forest
Cireulafion E~i Up,date ISJND
City of Bell Gardffis
Shepherd North Project BR
City of Gbr6
HOU5iing Bem,ent Update (~ Cycle)
ISJKD
CityofHaw1hame
Housing Bement Upda.t!! jS- Cyde)
City of Orange•. cities a Gle:ndale.

Av..lon, lrnfliill We1s. Rancho Sama
Margarita. Stant.on. W~. lake:

Forest, ~ T anecula
HouS1ng On:linii11De<S Zoning Update
Cityof&mt~
Accessory Dwel g Unit Ordinance
Cfy of Ventura
NorthOrangeCountyCitiesSB7~
Implementation S.tudy
City of Or.;nge'
Small Lot SubdMsion Qrcfinane£:>
Cityot~•
·~was comptetea I>)' 1/h 8~"1 w1llf 6'le- wao ernpJOye-d ilflDOlEf age,ncy ar pianrar.g 11rm
D· t• 1 v o P I a n n I u g G ,. i) u p
• I 1 , I ,. • ti ,,. ,1 t t fl lj,, I , 1,, 1, , . J • ~ I I I, •• 69 224

EDU CATION
Mas er5. Urban and Regional
Plam1ing. California Sta'.e Pofytechnic
UnivF-_rsity, Pomoo.a
:8A. 81.15-iM-Ss E.ccmorn1cs. lklrvers.ty
of Califomi.a, Riverside
ORGANIZATlONS
American Planning Association
UC EN SE.SIC ERT !FICA TION S
Ameri c.at1 instjt!Jle of Certified
• t.aflfl.efS, □□ . tw . 0240w
Attachment 2
Sta1·la Barker, ,\JCP

PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Starla Barker .. 6.ICP. a pmcipal - r \\ ih Dr Now Plaming Group whO!.e ptimary responsi>c&1ies are el-we rnanagement and preparatiCfl of errvironmenral documents {lniti St,.)(B,E-S_ Neoa. ive Dec!aratioo. Environmental Impact Reports. and Emnromient.al Assessments). as well as o1her planning ~nts iocb.Jding e~
eneral Plans
St:iri
and
has
Spe(:
st>OO:!ssfu
i Plans
lly
. Wil.'h
managed
over 20
a
years
wide
of
ra,ige
pmfessioo.al
of projects
~
wilh
particular emphasis in General Plans, urban infill. downtown, and redevelopment projects. Utilizng hEf experien:::e in community plammg, Searl.a is regularly inlf'Olved ,n land use and pot.,cy pl,am;ng, lllciudmg the de~nt aoo 1mplement.ab0fl of community outreach programs, and frequently manages and prepares environmental c!~arance documents for city,wde policy planning and redev~lopment projecl:s. Througl her e.ictensi't'l< experience in both policy and environmental pl.arvmg, Stana is keenly aware, of 1he intaactioo between tflE two and COfl5.iste.lllly rakoeis a proaciiv~ and co~ sive approach to und~ianding planning and en'lirormwntal issues and developing sr.wtions..

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
General lPtan Updail:e. Zoning Upda.t.e
and BR
1500 Raymond Ave lndusmal ISIMNO
Cit;• of Fullem'l
City of San J.aooco
Downtown Gore EIR
City of Forrtara
General Plan Land Use and Zoning
Amendments EJR
Cily of Garoefia
General IPtan Update BR
City of La Vern.?
General Plan Update BR
City of~m!Jale
Sunrise Mall Specific Plan BR
City of Citrus 1-feigms
2500 Nonh Hol.llywood Way Hotel BR
City of Burbn
The Harper .Mixed Use Projecl E
Cily of West Holy,.ood
3a5 Nye,s P'!ace IS-/MND
Cily of lagtn3 i:leadl
Marlin Olive IS/NI)
Cily of Lagwa Be.ach
2354 San Clemente ISJMND
Cily of lagLlla Bead,
820 Gainsborough ISf.MND
Ci1y of Lagwa Beach
Hotel Oev-clopment .standards GPA &
Zorn! Cha:rlgE 1£1MND
City of Garner,;;i
1901 V"t.l Burton Industrial CEQA
Cit,• of Fullertoo
Gener:a1 Plan Transportation &
Mobility Element UpcL;ite NO
Cit)' of B efl Gan:! ens
Genera1 Plan Update and EIR
Adde11dum
City of P.am:J10 Santa Marga!ita
General Plan Update and ElR'
City of Rancho Santa Margarita
.Applied Medical Expansion ISJMND
City of Lak.e Forest
Lodi & Leave Seif Stor<11JE lSIHIND
City of Lake Fores.t
Melia Ev~ Residernja! lSIMND
City of Gardena
Olson T ownhomes ISJMND
City of Gardena
Pitot Tr.we! Centet- ISIWID
CityofPa~
2550 Orange Industrial ISIMHD
City of Sij;Jlal ~ I
A-Yanfi South :Specific Plan ElR
Cit)' oi lallcas!ef'
Lido House Hotel EIWCir; oi ~ Eleacii
• Pn;fed W36 co~ri b>j M6. 5-311.Ef 11,t,11~ Stl,;, waE.. E-1Tlp)Jyed a: <iflClrler pt.nlffl9r;m
D t• O V o P I .l n h I II !; G I' 41 U j)
• I ~ J j ~ I' j It,· I • J (1, i, I J 1, 1,, J ~ • 1 ~ I J I f > 70 ■
225

EDUCATION
BA , Economics
University of Western Ontario London.

Canada
Diploma , Urban and Regional
Planning Technology
Fanshawe College London , Canada
Ross Minority Program in Real
Estate
University of Southern California Los
Angeles

ORGANIZATIONS
American Planning Association
Congress for New Urbanism
Perry A. Ba11ner

PRINCIPAL PLANNER
Attachment 2
Perry Banner brings a combined 20 years of experience In local government and private practice planning to the firm with work In both the United States and Canada Perry possesses a diverse range of skills 1nclud1ng proiect management land use analysis and policy development His capabilities also include economic development and real estate development
Perry has successfully managed a wide variety of urban planning proJects. 1nclud1ng general plans. community plans. specific plans transit-oriented development plans zoning documents and public outreach programs His passion lies in l1elping communities neighborhoods. and their residents visualize the future and gIvIng them the tools to make well-informed decisions He believes in quesnoning conventional wisdom and always looking at problems from multiple angles and viewpoints to find effective and InnovatIve solutions to develop plans that create results Perry also supports private sector clients 111 navigating public agency approval processes

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
General Plan Update, Zoning Code
Update and EIR
City of Lomrta
General Plan Update and EIR
City of San Marcos
General Plan Update and EIR
City of San Jacinto
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Lawndale
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Rolling Hills Estates'
Community Plans Continuum Project
County of San Bernardino •
Housing Element Update (6th Cycle)
City of Stanton
Housing Element Update (6111 Cycle)
City of Hawthorne
Housing Element Update (6111 Cycle)
City of Westminster
Housing Element Update (6th Cycle)
City of Sausalito
Housing Element Update (6111 Cycle)
City of Sonoma
Housing Element Update (6111 Cycle)
City of Matinez
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan, Safety
Element Update and EJ Element
City of Glendora
Local Hazard Mitigation Plan and
Safety Element Update
City of Lawndale'
Meredith International Centre Specific
Plan Amendment
Craig Development Corp/City of Ontano'
Pueblo Viejo Implementation Strategy
Plan and Design Guidelines
City of Coachella'
One Metro West Specific Plan and
EIR (Peer Review)
City of Costa Mesa•
Small Lot Subdivision Ordinance
City of Orange
TOD Overlay - Marine Avenue Green
Line Station
Cities of Lawndale. Hawthorne and
Redondo Beach'
Commercial Cannabis Program
City of Pasadena·
Short-term Rental Program
City of Pasadena•
SOMO Village Development Project
City of Rohnert Park
Pilot Travel Center (Palmdale)
Pilot Company
14151 and Normandie Townhomes
Project IS/MND
The Olson Company
• Project was completed by Mr Banner while he was employed at another agency or planning firm
D e Novo Pla nnin g Grou p
••••
71 226

EDUCATION
MCP, City Planning, Urban Design
Concentration
University of Pennsylvania.

Ph1ladelph1a
BS, Urban, Rural, and
Environmental Planning ,
Brigham Young University Provo
Research,
Cambridge University (UK), Pembroke
College

ORGANIZATIONS
Urban Land Institute
AICP Certified American Planning
Association
AICP Certification# 35377
U S. Green Building Council
LEED AP BD+C
Credential Id# 10433552-AP-BD+C
Attachment 2
l\1egan Thorne, AICP, LEED AP BD+c
SENIOR PLANNER+ DESIGNER
Megan Thorne is a senior planner and project manager with De Novo Planning Group. With over 15 years of professional planning experience. Megan has worked on a wide variety of planning projects for public and private sector clients including numerous specific plans. general plans corridor plans , site plans design guidelines. strategic plans. sustainability programs. visioning projects. transitoriented development plans , zoning documents, outreach programs. and 3D vIsuahzatIons Megan possesses the ability to think creatively and envision change while keeping projects grounded with achievable bencl,marks and implementable policy goals She excels at communicating complex information and policy ideas In a compelling and simple manner As a designer Megan has differentiated herself with her hand-drawing abilities as well as her technical skills Her technical expe:i1se includes 3D modeling. graphic design. and web design She continues to pioneer ways new technology can improve old processes from community outreach approaches to the web-publ1cat1on of planning documents

RELEVANT PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Burbank Media District Specific Plan
City of Burbank·
Rialto Specific Plan Update
City of Rialto'
River Walk Specific Plan
Stanislaus County
Downtown Bellflower TransitOriented Development Specific Plan City of Bellflower•
West Carson Transit-Oriented
Development Specific Plan
City of West Carson'
Morena Corridor Specific Plan
City of San Diego•
Long Beach Southeast Area (SEASP)
Specific Plan
City of Long Beach'
Stanton Plaza Specific Plan
Amendment and EIR Addendum
City of Stanton*
Airport Gateway Specific Plan
Inland Valley Development Agency·
Harmony Specific Plan
Lewis Companies City ot Highland'
De Anza Revitalization Plan
City of San Diego*
Fontana Downtown Design
Guidelines
City of Fontana
Irvine Neighborhood Plan
City of Irvine
General Plan Update and EIR
City of San Jacinto
General Plan Update and EIR
City of La Verne
General Plan Update and EIR
City of Lake Forest
General Plan Update and EIR
City oi Westminster•
General Plan Update and EIR
City of San Marcos
South El Monte Zoning Code Update
City of South El Monte'
Hemet Zoning Code Update
City of Hemet'
ADU Ordinance and Guidebook
City of lone
City of Bellflower Sign Code Update
City of Bellflower
Temecula CAP Baseline Study
City of Temecula'
OCCOG Geospatial Solutions
Orange County Council of
Governments•
Housing Policy Leadership Academy
Southern California Association of
Govern men ts'
Livermore Downtown Visioning & Site
Planning
City of Livermore•
' Pro;ect was ccmpleted by Ms Thorne while she was employed at another planning t,rm De Novo Planning Group
\ I .1n1' ~" f,!.111n111'i,:, p.,-~ ~II .01,1 t n~' •1111111, nt.d I 1r 1-1 •••• 72 227

EDUCATION
BA.. PoCific.ikl Scienoe-.
!Jniv,ersity of Calif~ Los ~
Master of Oi!i; and Re,gion ~
Planning.

Cal Pofy. San l Ob!;po

ORGANIZATIONS
.A.meric..311 Planning Ass.ociat-oo
Associabcn of Errwcm,entai
Professionals
Congress fur he New U~m
UCENSES~ERTIRCAT~NS
Arneri c.a11 lnsti'tute of Certified
~. 2023. No. 34366
AWARDS
201Q CaYomia Ptan,mg Foono:iation.

CeniJ' , Coast Section Scholarsh!p
20t & 2:02tJ Errett Fish€r Foundation
Scholarship
Attachment 2
Er·k Anderso11" AIC:P

ASSOCIATE PLANNER
Erik has worked oo a rliverse range of~ for public and pm1.ate seaor clients. with a fu>.::l.ts on enw-ooment.a! and ~y JMaM.ing. !and-use planning, and policy deveiopmenl Erik prOVN:les proje-ci support in me preparation of CEQA docum8Ttation and long-r- ge p,ann- g documents. inci•.}1j ing G.ene-ral Plans, Housin,g :i:_lernen•s. and Zonir.,g upda es_ His e~ includes g--..sS1oots lobb.ying w'ith a ncm--profit enviroome oryaniZ-aAion and wcrk in me legal field.

Erik is. pasSI.Of\ate abool S>?f\ling oom!TM.lciiies and C1"e-.ating inno11ati111? rrort throogfl place-based developmem. strategies.

RELEVANT PROJE CT EXPERIENCE
General Plan Upd~. Zoning Upd~.
and BR
Dly of San J.aonto
General !Plan Update. Hawthom e Blvd
Specific PLan L.lp,date, and BR
Cd:y of l.amidale
Zor.i~ Update ,a,nd Adclie-ndum to
Gt-nera! Pi,.a,n BIR
··y of Westminster
General !Plan L.arn:f Use and Zoning
Ame-n<ments ElR
City of Garclala
General PLa.n Up,date alld El'R
~ ( uf RE<! Bluff
Downtown Core EIR
City crf footala
Mountain House lnrorpOfa-tion IS/ND
San Joaquin County
SR-120 rnterchaf11Je IS/MMD
C;1>J of LalhrcpJG.:wans
Cin::uliatioo Efemenl Update lSJNO
City of Bell Gar~ns
U-Haw Expansion lSfMND
City of Garrlena
Pifot Travel CE:nter IS:fMND
·y of MorEflO Valley
23:)4 San Clemente 1£fMr-tD
City of Laguna tle-ach
385Nye-s~ ISfMNO
City of l.ajp,a Beach
1500 Raymond Ave lndus.tJi-al lSIMND
Cit}' of Fuflertoo
1901 Via 8urton Industrial CEQA
City of F1.1Uer'.oo
Applied Medical Expansion JSJMND
Cit)' al Lake Forest
2500 North Hollywood Way BR
City of Burbank
The Harper Mixed Use Project EIR
Cit}' of We:.t Hollywooo
Focused Gen£'fal Plan Update
CityofGla"idale
Local Hazard Mitig;afion Pl an
Laguna Hills. CA
Housing and S.af;ety Element Update
City of Rancho Santa Margarita
Housi ng Bement Update {P Cyciej
c· ies. of Lawndale. Glendale.

Hawthorne. La Verne. Avalon. ~
Forest. aocho Sama Margarita,
Westminster, Martinez. Temecula, and
San Jacinro
General Plan Updat1?
City of McFarland•
Mcfarland Zoning Code Update
City of McFarland"
• Pro~ 'A'as ro<n~!Bj b)• lk Aooe,,;oo wllile eflf"Oled as a Gra~a.."2 s>.ooen: Ill City afl.<I Reglcral P1 iYJ[jng a1 C.J ;,o/y, San LU!& ~
l> (\ N o V o I' I ,l h 11 I •• g G 1• ~~ U p
• I J I J ~ I j o, , I • I [1, I/ 11 • I ," I • I , , , 11 I ~ ' t I l I, •• 73 228

JOHN KALISKI, FAIA, NCARB
Since 9raduat11g trorn Y&le ii.rch1tecture S':h% in 1982. Jor,n Kali:;k1 has r,acJ ,1 c11ve1·'..,e career .;:;s an uct-1tect. urban designer. teachH. anrJ vmter. Befo1e :;tartirg hi, own prac:1cE. r, s prc.,lessronal work ·nr_ludeo f1vE- ;ecns as a designer cl Shidr-nc.,re Owings k1e • 1. first ir Houston. then in l.u~ A ,gc !es. fol1uwed oy f ve yea's as Princ1pa1 Arc.~ tE'ct of th€' Community RedeveloprT•er-t Ager,cy of tl·,c- City 0! Loo Ange es. He began;, private p1·act,r:.0 1n 1993 as a prir1r:.ipal ot AIJV.. In 1994. he was rH:::gnizf:'d by TIME as onE· oft fty leaders wr,o will ,hap0 the twer1l"{·f1r,t c.e1l"'J'f F:;ur tirres a Fel!ow o" 1 ·1e Moye, ·, lrist1'ute on C11y Design.,. e servf:'o as f'res,oe· t in 2009 of the _:;s /.:,celEs C /-,apter of the lw1e·1ciln ln~.t1~ute of A'crirects (A lfa ). --ii' wri~ ng> on cities and arch1ter:.ture have appeared in Desrgr 8ook Review. the Harvard Gr&duate Scr;ocl of Design Magazine. Ar-<C/1. California Arc', itec:. Log and (1'.e. as well as the w·authored book. L veryday uuar, s•n. pub 1s heo 1n 199~ and 2(109. lie I a~ lcugl·,t r11sto1 /. theory. and studios at UC _A, USC. Ca, Po,y Po1Tc,n,1. :,(1-A··c. P,e UnivH~1ty oi Hou:;Lu, and Th0 u<vus-l·f r,f Mich,gcn.

Since foJnd inq .John l\oi1~ki Architect, i11 200D . ..101·,ri",, work 'icJ, 1nr:.luded des1qn guiCJel nes for thE Hollywood Boulevard D1s lrict. a v;sior pla·1 for Lo~ Angele,· Cren,haw cornmuri1ty. the Ocean Park 6oules1ard Crw,pletf'! Gr!'-er Street. de'.:ign of affordable sn'all lot subd 1v1s:on townl·,orres for r:nterpri•,e Fr,u,di:lt1on. des ig n of non-profit 1"1ed1cal clinic, for Miss ion Cit; Cornrnur 1ty ~ietwork. tt1e urba n de'.:ign of Metro·~ East San Fernando VollE•y Trc1n~1t Corridor project. privatf:' r,c.,mre,. arid o,,er 1,000 units of rnulti-f6n1 ly housiny. His design wor1<. and writings l1c1ve been recognized witr, aws rds fro1n 1r,e !>.IA and the Arnerican Plarn1nq A'.,socicJ·ior,.

On i'Joth urban rJr:,siyP cr,d arch1tr:clure projects. Jot,n ,E•eks to en, call'/ integrate cl:ent as well as pubic concuns ar,rJ aspi1at10r,s into practicable design outc.on1P',. W1:h tr1ef decades of e,p0rienc0 work1no w,1h ar,d 'or cl er ts and comrnun1t1es .. ohn ha: dPve1op0d the in,1ght to bring together rnLll 1plr, viewpoints rt:; r_onstrutt1b e ;:;rchitr::cture anc urban design that celebrates H1durn·,g corrnnunq rna\\1r10.

SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Palm Desert Residential & Mixed-Use Objective Design Standards, Palm Desert, Ca lifornia. (2023-0ngoing )
Pr i11c1pal / Produced measurabi<= and quantifiable <Jes 1gn stardaros 1n Paim De~.ert tnat reflect t1e desert ls"dscape :",rougr cor'lrnur1 ty Pnqagemer,t 'occurrinq t hroughout the proJec: t1n>e l:ne.

Attachment 2

EDUCATION
Ma~ter ol Architect ure
8anelor ot l>.rts. Arr:. h1tecturrc
Ya le Univer'.AY
New Haven. Conner.t1 ·:ut

REGISTRATIONS
Professiona ,t, rcb1tect
Calitorn1a #C1794S
l•Ci

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
Fellow, Amer:can lnst-ture of Arcr,1tect• ...

I OS Angr:,les
Merrber. !~at·or·al Cour-c-1 o1
/\rr.hiteclursi F<.e:rstratic1r, Boards
Mernber. Soutre0 r Ccl!ifJrn1,, 1>.~sor.ia\101·,
o' Nor,- Profit rlous 1n<J
Past lv1embfr. \lv rndrnr VillagE- Historic
Pre~ervatiori Oierlay District /-1dvisory
Board

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
El Segundo Multi-Family Housing Design Standards, El Segundo, California. 4o (2023-0ngoing)
Principa! / /l.nalyzed built-form (.haraclu of E-1 ~iir,g singlE- f;_;rnl/y neig hbo 1· nood~ and prepared :t-iroJgr an acr;elPrated erg ht week ~CnPoule text amendment~ to :tie er1•,t 1ia zon ng code.
74 229

JOHN KALISKI I SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE (CONTINUED)
East San Gabriel Valley Area Plan, Los Angeles County, Californi a. (2021- 2022)
F-'rinc1pal / Olr.erved th1c built 1orm condition~ of ,ingle fam•ly neigr,borhoods and put together policies that focused on building orientatio1. land~ca pe erihancement. connectivity and enhsnced gathering.

El Segundo SB9 Unit Study and Design Recommendations, El Segundo.

California. (2021)
Principal/ Analyzeo bu1,t-form character of existirg single farni1y ne,ghbo,- hoods anrJ prepare through en accelerated e1qrt week schedule- text arnendmen\S to tl,0 r-x1st ing zon ing c.odP
Santa Barbara Economic Feasibility Study, Santa Barbara, California. (2021) Princ,pal / DevelopEd 12 three diw,n,1onal diagrarrn1at1c prototype: to examine the 1rnoact to mult1-unIt prorJuurcn oy sh1tt1ng frc-,n a densItv• t;;sed zoning c.tandard to a Floor /\rea Ratio (Fl> R) stanrJ~ra.

Downey Single-Family Residentia l Design Guidelines. Downey, California. (2018-2021)
Prrnc,pal / Based on commJnitv engagerneni and public workshop feedbach. created new srnqle-farnily 20re text arrrendmrnis and de'..1gr, guidel,nes to ,·educe tJurlcJ1ng bu!, and relate riew co1structior and sec::rnd 1100· addriiors to prfvail i,-,g cond1t1on·, ir, tr,,s 195o·s ',Lburbar, town.

Culver City Single-Family Residential Development Standards and Guidelines, Culver City, California. (2020)
Prinr,ip2d / RecomrnendDtion, for R' developrnent standards and developrnen1 of de:,rgr guide ines add res'., s1nglE-ldrn1ly mass. bul~. and charor.ier to con- :;erve ~rrigle-farnily neighborhood: n lul r City
Culver Crest Single-Family Neighborhood Hillside Development Standards, Culver City, California. (2017-2018)
Principal/ ':,1ngie-1arn Ily bulk. rn;:,s~ .. one arc.hIi ect urol cr,aracter st1,dy. qeoter.rr; r.al review a1cJ rec ornnendatic:rs. cof1lparative h1 lls1d e zonir,g ar,al·1sIs. cornrriunItv outreac r. devel0prnrnt star.dords. and eduu,tIonal dEs1gn quidelrnios
Burbank Single-Family Neighborhood Compatibility Review and Design Guidelines, Burbank, California. (2015-2016)
Princ,pal / Work ng as a subconsul:ar,t tc Dyetl and Bnat a. JKA updated f~i zon ng coce ~tc,noc:;•ds and introduced new design guioe!ines to arJdre~s tre ··rnansion1zar 1on·· o1 ·esIoence;,. as •;eII ;:,~ drafted a --~Jeighborr;ood Cornpatibi!ity Rev1evr procesc and developed il Df~'gn Gu 1del ine Check 1"!.

Beverly Hills Single-Family Mass and Bulk Study, Beverly Hills, California. (2013)
Principal/ Work no as a subconsul:ant to Dyett and Br,a:1a .. XA revrewec ex1 stIn'J cond1t1on, and developed recomrnenoot1onc for stsndards c',d guideline·; t hat addres s eYcessIve -:;rngle f,:;rr:i!y 'Trass and bu'k to conserve the Centra i M,:,a·s r·Es drntial garden charr1.

Santa Monica Multifamily and Mixed-Use Land Use Designation Design Guidelines, Santa Monica, California. (2011-2016)
Principal/ JKA was a';ked by the City of Sa1ta Monica to develor:; design quidelinf?:. for multi-tarnily and nixed-use corridor di~trir.ts. 75 Attachment 2
AWARDS
Arnericar, Plan ning Association Lo>.

Ange'es. Urban Desiyn Award of Mem
for City ct Downey Single-Family
Res idential Des1qr, Guidelines. 2022
(with City of Downey).

A1ner1can lnstitut1:: o1 A,cl,itec,'..

Cine nnati. Certificate of Appreciation.

Fe b·uary <'.00':.i.

Prog1e~:,1ve Arcr,rtecture /-1ward MTA
PHJes\r1ar Bridge. 2000 (v1,1h
Mc,rp··,osIsJ.
/,rnenr;an Flanr In'.) f, ,soc1atIon i-ousron
'.:>ect,01, Highest l lonor tor Jourral1sm.
'"The lvlain lded: A C.01nµ£:>titio11 fo r
f~emaf-ing Ma rn S\reE-1". 1999.

American f'iann,n'.J A~so~iaticn 1-'ou'..ton
Sr::ct·on Highest Honor for Stratr::r;ic
Plan •r ing. The Hr,uston FrcJmework. P98.

Tirne Ma9azi-1e''.. ··50 For U-,e Future
Rc,'..ter ot I, •neI ,ca·s mo·,t prorn1sinq
leaders oge -"O anc under ... uece1nt;er ':,_
1994.

Natrona I [rdowmern tor the Arts
Ind ividual Projec1 Grant. '"An Urlion
Des1gr, lv'lanual for Los Anqr;le"
Bou levard Cor ridus··. 1992.

Chr;stoph"'' - unr, ;ird Mfmorral
SchclArship. Yale Univers·t v (presented
for ovtstand1r,g academic petorrnar,ce
in p an11ingL 1982

SELECTED PUBLISHED WRITINGS
'"Your l~fxt Fror·t Yard·· with fakE,kc
rajirria. hrnco<.v.. "c::•·K Garden Club. 2CJ 7 .
" t~ rne n '09 for L:.s Angelfs Arcr<irectJrf
arrJ Urban Des1qn·· FORM Magazine:

P1 oneeri11q De~Ign. January/Febr ua 1y
2009
'"Everytloy UI ban Design·· Writing
Urbonism: A Des1,;;n Reader. editerJ b'f
Douglas f<.elbaugh and Kit McCu llougr,.

Ro.Jtledge. 2008.
" The: o;scoments and Pleasures 01 L.A .

Now ... L.A. Now. erJ Iteo by Richard
Kcsralek. Thom Ma-1ne. and Dana Hu:t.

Univer~ity ot Californ ia Press. 2002.
230

AMEE BHATT, LEED AP ND
Amee Bhatt Joined JKA in 202i and r,as se11en years of e-xpHience in arch ,ec- :ure. urbar, des,gr. and p:anning. Ar JK.A. Amee miinages al urba:· cJes,gn or01ects. For tr,e Ea',t Sar Gcbnel ley Area Plcn. she wvrked or, the Conrnun ty Character ano Des,qn Element. which i,1,,olved ar. ar,alys,s of re:; ,d ential. co,nme rcial ond pub lic realm patterns of 24 un1ncorpora:ed cc1nmu·11t1es ano the erection ot guols. pol 1ue~. and action, to enhance u·e E-vol;ing 1,ndscope. Amee has autr,ored r-ult1-farn1ly and mi xed-use obwctive design standards thE,t corn ply wirr SP9 and rnainta, n the character of ,,,nqle-fam- y ·1eiqhb'.Jrl1ood:, in E.1 :>egunoo. Sr1: r,as a sc deve'oped !:Ju1ld 0 ,g
c-ro,otypes an(i r,alr:ulated op,n,ons of rnst fo• e0.onorn1c feas1 b1lit·1 stus,es tor a Beverly Hills Uri1i1erJ Scl1r,o! D1strict-ow1,erJ site en:lor1nq rnulr1-f,:;rn1ly r,ousmg alrernat ive,.

In her prPv1cJs experience as an Urban Des1grer at Dud Pk. l•,rnee rroce ~.ey l<Jnt· irJut1or,s to pro;E·C!$ lhroughcul Soul'ie,n C.allf0rr,1d 11\C!ud,ng lt.e City c f Burl.Jank Complete Streets Plan. Mira lvlesa C0rnrnun,ty Pio n Update. '.::outt; Colton L vc:;b e Co 0 r1dor Plan. Oso Creek Golf Course and Open Spoce V s,or P .sn in tr;<? Cty of Mission V1ejc. and the Meadcws Specif c Plcn in Sierra .aore.

Arr, ee plauis a ~pe'.1cl en-pha:,i 0
; or, the qua lity rJf ihe pub lir. rea1m a·,(1 pedestriaP exper,ence and strives to c1 eate ac:1ve. engaginq. and su~tainable places drawing en t1Er skills as an urtJ;_;n de~1gner.

SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Palm Desert Residential & Mixed-Use Objective Design Standards, Palm Desert, California. (2023-0ngoing)
Urban Design Senior P'owr:: Manager/ Produc.ed 'T1easurablf- anc quant f1 ab1e de<.1qn stardards 1n Pam Desert tt;a1. ref lee the deser: la nrJ~r,a pe trw_;ugh corr rn;_1r·ty engageme nt ou._;rrin9 throughout t he project frneline.

Signal Hill Civic Center Maste r Plan, Signal Hill, California. (2023-0ngoing) Urban Desiqn Senior Prr;3ec, Maneger / Developed alter nal1'JES for tutu re rnl,ancement ta 1he Cit y of Signal Hi,l"s Civic Ce ntE:-r. JKA r,eld a 3 day workshop 10 des·gn th·ee a terr.alive; in wh1c·1 !r,e vi,1ons anrJ goals for dft hitec ture and urban design wt?re: generated.

El Segundo Multi-Family Housing Design Standards, El Segundo, California. (2023-0ngoing)
l.Yban Lle, ign Senior Prr;;ect ~1ar1aqer / Analyzed built-rorrn character of eYistirg ;ingle ta'T11ly neig'lborhooos and preprire- t hroug r, an accele ra:eo e,grt week schedule texl arnr ndrnen1s lo ':'1e ex isting zon·ng code.

East Palmdale Boulevard & 40th Street East Masterplan, Palmdale, California. (2023)
Urban uesign Proj1c ct Managu / P-ov,ded a con:eptual rnastE·r pian for an approximatel·f 3?.-aur; co rner sile ir, P6 1rnda!e wrich included a rnir. of uses fro'n comme·-cial to r,!Sidernia i.
76 Attachment 2
1•¥1

EDUCATION
Master ot Architectu1e
6ashelor of Science. Architeci"Jre
Un,versiry of M ich1gan
/• 11n /,rbor, M1ch,gan

REGISTRATIONS
LE E_D AP i'Jeigr, borhood Development
AWARDS
2021 Transpo1tat1011 Plann1nq /1wa1d
APA Los A ngelrs Srcct .c,r fer ··complete
Our Strr:-ets - Bur,;ank Citywide·
Cornplf?te "itrePt'., Pfa n
202') Me, 1 Awdrd. />1rieriec,n Plonr,ing
As:.oci2tion - Inland Erroire Section.
"iouth Co 1or Livati le Corridor Pla r

PROFESSIONAL AFFILIATIONS
M1::rnber. Ameri:ar c.•1anninQ Assoua1ion

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
7 231

AMEE BHATT I SELECTED PROJECT EXPERIENCE (CONTINUED)
Santa Ana Urban Design & Architectural Consulting Services, Santa Ana, California. (2021-2023) Urban Design Project Manager/ Provided various on call architectural and urban de'.;1yn support 1nclud1ng pro_ects wcli a:; billboard design.

Metro Joint Development Housing Accelerator Strategic Planning. Los Angeles, California. (2022-2023) Urban Design Project Ma -,&ger / Identified te n priority sites based or &r estab lished uiteri& -:; t site attribu,es anrJ read r;e;s to understano what can t,e r,uilr o ong wi:r the physical l1ousing uni\ c2pacily.

Beverly Hills Unified School District Feasibility Study, Beverly Hills, California. (2022) Urban Design 8 roje<.t Manaqfr / Conducted site analysis and context ~tuliy tiy to come up with thre" aesigq ,;ltern1:tives ' or rnult1-fam1 ly hr,using that 1rrlL,Ofd 01·tere~- 0FnsI:Ies.

El Segundo SB9 Unit Study and Design Recommendations. El Segundo, California. (2021) U1l)an De~1q1 ::iroJell Manager/ Analy7eo Luilt-for1r charaLte1 oi exist ng ·;inqle tam ly neigr,borlioor.h cind prepare ll rouqh a0 accelerated e1ghl \',eek scheoule te~t ame··,drnenh to the existi-,g zonmq coce Santa Barbara Economic Feasibility Study, Santa Barbara, California. (2021) Urbcin De'.,1qn Prowct Ma r•aqF·r / DPveloped 12 tr,rrcc- cl rnrr,s1onal diaqrarnrnat1c prototypes 10 exaIrnne the 1rn pact tr, rnu lt1-u ·11l product10'1 t,t ,n1rt,n9 from o oer·,1fy·!.,n,eo zonin9 '.Ja1dard le,; Floor Arrca I~at10 iF.AR) stomJa1·d.

East San Gabriel Valley Area Plan, Los Angeles County, California. (2021 - 2022) Urtar, Jes1qn r'roject Manager/ ObSE:'rved t!ie built for'n rnnd,t1or.s of single fa11"1ly neighborhoods and pur toqc•tl",eI pol1cie~ thcil fOCU'.,<':'rj on building orientat1on. landscoµe enhanu:'rnent. connecliv1ly ar,d enhanced gathe ring.

Pa lmdale Multi-Family and Mixed-Use Design Standards, Palmdale, California. (2021-2022) Urban De'.,iqn Project Manager/ Developed mc•asurab1e criteria that re sident~. applicants and City Stai! can utilize to facil itate il commonly ur,derstoCJd and cor-,,'.,tent d2~1gn approval proces:, I hat also addI ess Palrnoale's high rJesert setting.

Burbank Citywide Complete Streets Plan, City of Burbank, Burbank, California. (2019-2020) * Urt,an Jes1gner / Prepara,;or ottl1e "Cornplete Our Street·, Pian ... With a strong focus on uban desig n and tr,e City Jt 8u1·banf:s bud\ forn1.1he pan analyzes the er,tirety ot Burbcnk''., 28() centerlinr" rniles of :.treei~ c;ncJ proposes irnp:ovements lhwugr· prio1it1zed prsjew,.

South Colton Livable Corridor Plan, Southern California Association of Governments, Colton, California. (2019) *
Urban Jes1qner / Livable Curr oor F'lar t hat a;m'., to strer,gtren gra<,sroots tactical urbanist approac11ES and create au1deline, and policiec that wi!I prov•de;; regu,atory framework for f()rrniJlizinq a de· it-yourself approach tc, neirJhborhood a·ner1t1es and improvements.

Mira Mesa Community Plan Update, City of San Diego. San Diego, California. (2019-2021) * Urban ~J<?'.;ic;ner / Corridor pl2nninc; and l.onceptual uroan '.Jesig n sturJ1es tor four tocu, cJreas witl11n tr,e cornrnun I1y that tr1,t and i!lustrete new approaches to lard use. d1=Veloprnem stanoard~. and rrobiii\y 1mpruvemenls to 1ev1talize the focus area~ and retro! t suburbar shopping rnalls with transi!-supportivrc uses and oe"elopmr,nt typoloq es.

Housing Incentive Overlay Zone, City of Fullerton, Fullerton, California. (2020-2021) * Urben De~1gner / Develcpmer,t cf a i-,ous1119 Ircent 1ve 0•1erlay zcnro plar, tor i5 separate c usters of nc,n -re:,- ident ;al parcels citywid e. The plan evaluates the feasibi lity o' res1der1ti2I de-,e io prnent on thesf parcrols and estab li<,,r, es ti-,e rJeveloprrent <,,tandards along witr, P,arket-tested inclus1onary goals. * Wo rk com pleted at previous firm.
77 Attachment 2
232
Attachment 2

TIM ERNEY, AICP, PTP, CTP I SENIOR PRINCIPAL

EDUCATION
■ MS/MCP, T·ansportar,or
EnginE:eri·•,g & Dla•,nrrig,
Un,ve, sIt1· of Calrforrna
Be,·keley
■ BS. Mecharica I Er,ginee,-ing,
Boston L:n,ve,·s,tv

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE

LICENSES/CERTIFICATIONS
■ /l.mc:1ica11 lnslitu:e of
Cert fied Planners
■ Cert fied -,ansportation
Planner
■ Profe,sional Tran::,portatron
Planner

AFFILIATIONS
• /lrnericdn Piar·n ng
Association (.uPA), Member
■ Institute of Trarsportation
Eng,nE:ers (/TE), Member
Tim Ernev is a cert if e:: rransportar,on planner with exten-:.ive E:xperienc.P ~,n pia,n ng and enginf::er ing projects in California Hi, prinvH y forn, has been (Jr, mar aging analyses arid documentation for envir•onmf'::ntal ,·eview projE:ct,, acces'.. and wcuia: 101· stuciie'.., :ustai,•aole transpo,-:atron practice, TDM rneasur e,, parhng evaluctrons, pede,u an ano bicycre I evif'::w,, and data colle,:tirJn p, ogr arm. !11 addition, he ha, don':' detailed technical analy:,e; r,,f local and, ef,!ronal I oadway fariiitre:, inc'ud;ng t•2ffr: forecasting, modal spit anal,se tr;,ffic oi,1ers10,1, ar ci operational anoly:,es. Hi:' has e>1peI iencf:' coor drnatu,g wrth local arid 1eg1onal tran:portation and env11onrnental agencies in Southrcr 1; C;;lifo ·11;; ;,nd '1a, been le3ding :he f11 ms effo1r~ or th!:' l:'va Iuatron of en1e•gwg tee! WJ!og •:S, altern,•tive E'vc lL.;;tion ri1etI ic,, and the rmp.;ct'.. of new mo!:;ilit\. servi,:f~. f 1 ,;;,,d use and c1rr.1lat1cJr• nr:tw,Jdc-:.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
Active Transportation Planning. Tim ·1;;;; seI _-eel;;:. project iJI 111cioal f.:Jr sC\lv<'- transpon21· 011 r·la1•n1ng p, ojects th oL-gh,. ut Sr_,uu--.,,-,. ,_' ,;l1fo1 nia Hf:: 'i,;o pr·rNidHJ dir ect,or of tht plarnrng, d1:s1gn ,rnd ev;;luatron 01 ac:!Vf:
t ransµon;,,I·I0I·· co, 1 rc:01 c,, anrve transpon a1I0•1 olan:., data colleclior, prrJgr·a rw .. and forr:cast1nf! T'11·0.Jgr1 the-:.e eff.,)rt,, Trr,, ha, pronrJtec thf:' nc0ed frn a h, lanr"d approach for a!i u,c•r eI c-u,·< 2r1r; t'• r:1,,ure: s;;fi:: cor,v1::n12r,t an:i CCJSleiff:'ctr,,, mobility :·pt r;r'o that :.uppo,1 tie adJan,nt la;od uses anc urban fo,,,, Travel Demand Management. Trrn has been repon,ibls: /,Jr de·,~lop11,g 1mple1nentable ar,rJ d,,ferr<.ibls: I.I aw• demand rna•·1age1nent (TDMI prCJgr i.1I11, Pr 111·,arilv, th,se ,nclude ti· f ev;;lu;:r r;r Jf i'i'e bE',t l UM e!elllentc, tc a·.:hif:'v':' t ,,,0 goa '., 'Ji the pro1e,'. suppo,ted by Oat a ar,d I e'f:arcr developed on a n;;t,or al ba:r: .. In addrtron tothE acicption of s!anrJarrJ TUM rneasure,, <.ur.h as au,ve t1a·11.pr.-rlat1on faCl'rtil':S ;,ncl oark rrg n,ariag,:rw"nt, 'rm ro.1t1re,y wrJrl s Nrth develoµer s to adjust iand u'.i:' progr ;;rn' to betlf:'r internaliz•: trrp', ar-,d to r·ir:,htc,izf':: parking to facilitate 'ahar;,d p;;r f ing :JppcJrl'unities Environmental Impact Reports. Trrn has led 1 he prr::par at,or of :1 ar rd-;,lon,:, ll a-,spoI lat ion rnpar: stuJre'., and tr'a11sc,onatiCJn/,: rcula11on c.Ntrons CJf Elks arid El'.',s :c Lppo,~ C.:Qt> a··,d NE PA pr,xf'::sse:, These projects have iric/,,oed fuii range of pr·rJJf:ct tvpe:, frorn ,ndrv OJal ceveIoprnr:nt pI Ojech, to updated citywirJ,- ul::i11\ tc, ,ig11:f1c,rnt inf1a5·-r 1e1w,., p,·oJf:Ch T;rn !,as 1•1an;;gr:d the ,er.hri,ral ;;1 ,dvs.s b, r.:I! ,nooes of tra,,ei, ,nc udrnf quaiitati,e anr:I quar1: t;,r,ve asse:,,'1,f nl:5 rJi tr a/fir.. trans rt, pedesn ran h.1cyr.l1st, lo,:1G1ne,. ro-,',t 1·wtI011 arid emer gurr-y vehicle C'J11ciit1on, In addil1u11, the,r, pi.Jjecto !,ave a <.rJ Ill eluded tl·C::
cievelcp·T1E-nt ot spPr.1ab:1:-cJ trq:; g~··1p• at;,-;,- 1 ates and use c/ reg1ori,::1I t, C\•£::' dernand rnr.,cJel~ to 01 OJ':".t fut.Jw tr2ff1c v::,lurne< Alternative Performance Metrics. "rrr· has been wor-icrng t: rdent fy ano rJe.t-lop 2it~1 r"1dl l'vE !ilf:trics to L~,·el of Ser\il{.f; H•c·1s} in the =v·aiuotic.r of /;,n;J LSE ;;nd transpoI·tcJl1CJr1 prOJi:Cts. thr'., rnriudES rhe 1dent1f1cat1on on rov, r.itr':S ;:,rrj C(JUnt ie<- neecJ to r;·1odif., i:h::ir currt:r t prog, a ns ar d pol1,:1es 1:c ac(ou1~,t for th!:"sf:
rhangEs /l.s 1,art ·;f t',;,se efforts. T,,n ha, beer, In consul•·ation wi;h ;he 'tate''.

Office of F lan·1irg and P,ese:arc h (QPR) a,d p;;rticip;itr:0 In S·:>ver ,,,! r..onf ~"-r:nu,s and panel cJ SCJS'..ior 1'.. :;,1 the C:fff:'Ct'.. oi vf:'h1cie- rnrles :r ;;vf:':ed calcu,ations and metric: m;;y ;;ffec' crty progra,r,s anc ,1c1··rsport;;,tIon ?.nr.ilvs,, gurdelrne, 78 233
Attachment 2
TIM ERNEY, AICP, PTP, CTP I Senior Pr,nc1pal

City of Lake Forest General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report; Lake Forest, U,,.. Tim managed the evaluation of the build-out of the City's land use program, which included the deterrrnnat,on of potential effects to the rnculation network throughout the city. Specialized assessments were conducted to identify the antic 1pated impact emerging transportation tc>chnologies (such as transriortation-networking companies and connected/automated vehicles) will have on the roadway networks, 111clud1ng the potential to ,educe utyw1de vehicle miles travelled.

City of Anaheim Circulation Element Upgrade., On-Call Transportation Engineering/Planning Services; Anaheim, CA.

Tin, 1s the project manager for an on rail transportation plan111nf! and traffic eng1neern1g services con tr act with lhe City of Anaheim Pubi1c Works Departnwnt. l 1m 1s managing the p, eparat1011 of an ur.date to th12 C:1rculat1on Element of the C,eneral Plan. This will include new goals, pol1c1es and infrastructure projects to support anticipated r,ew development acro,s the city, including specific approaches to address rnulttmoclal travel, active transpo, talion, tTan,1t and <J- a, f'd-1nobilitv serv1c es.

City of La Verne General Plan Update and EIR; La Verne, CA. T11n 15 leacl,ng the a,ses'. ment of the- eva 1uat1on of an updatf: to the Ceneral Plan for the C 1ty of La Verne. Kittelson 1s dewlop1ng r, ave1 demand est1rnatc>s 11smg th,, SCAC-i travel der-,and model, fo, muit1plr: land use alternatives. The proier:t tecJm is propos1,1g ad1c1stnerts to the c1rculat,on network and parking regulations to accommodate tlw fut me Metro Gold I 1ne Star1on within the City and to ,nclueie a 11ew ll,cti-•e Tr,mspo1-tat1on Pliln. Ti'l1 1< also helping thr° City addres': the proposed S8743 cha11ges Lo 111tc>1 Sf:·Ct1on ::indlV'.,1' u11de1 CE QA.

City of San Jacinto General Plan Update EIR; San Jacinto, CA, Tirn was l)IOJect prinupal to scrpprHt tr,e C,t y of San Jacinto r;eneral ?Ian Update and EIR, 111cluding traffic, rnobi11ty, m1ilti1nodal compo,wnts. In rh1< 1ole, hF provided l,1gh level of guidance and quality co,1trol
City of San Marcos General Plan Update and EIR; San Marcos, CA. 1,.n tr,lson Is developing the updated mobil,ty element for the City of San Ma, cos General Plan Update. /.\5 part of the GE?neral Pian Update effort, Tim 1s lead 1ng the multiple efforts taking place as part of this project, 1nclud1ng the development of the mobility r;iernent and its analysis as part of the EIR, as well as the City's deterrnmation of appropriate SB 743 analysis criteria and guidelines City of La Mesa General Plan Update and EIR_; La Mesa., CA. T1rn led the transportation evaluation of the proposed updatP to the General Plan for the City of La Mesa. The Kittelson proJect team developed ex1st1ng conditions for dll mock"; of travPI and estimated future roadway volumes using the S.l\NDAG mode!. The team al~o 1dentif1ed tr,,nsportat,on network impacts and oroposecJ rn1t1gat1on measur.,s to address 1ntersect1on and: Ocldway conditions.

City of Glendale Land Use and Circulation Element Update/Transportation Impact Fee/SB 743; Glendale, CA. l'.ittelson 1s cun er1tly developing an updat2d rnculation ele1nent for thE: City of Glendale dnd upd,;t1ng its citywide tr ave I der1and model. ,4s p;:irt of this l".ffo, t, Kittelson Is prepa11ng a \/MT est1mat1ng tool 'or the, .:·1ty and developing its updated S6 743-compliant t1anspor·tatIon 1rnpact study guidel111es. T11111s leading coordination efforts with the City as ,ts furnre land use plan futme rnculation plan, SB 743 gu1dr;l111es, travel demand model, and VMT est1rnating tools die IJe1ng oeve!oped to ensu, e com1str;ncy between thr:se mult1plE- overlapping effcn< City of La Verne Active Transportation Plan; La Verne, CA. Tirn was the project princ1pai for the development of thr:
first Active Transportation Plan for Lile City of La Verne. Kittelson identified existing bicycle and pcdestrnn travel patterns and ccnflict po11ts and cond11ctecl outreach to 1df:'nt1fy key de,r1nattons and wnstra1ns from tl·e public.

Th!: proiec.t team proposed new bicycle, outes, enhanced bicycle facil1t1es, and improvement pedestrian facilities to encourage add1t1onal walkng and biking utyw1de. Kittelson also coordinated policies and ObJeCT1ves with the ongoing General Plan Amendrnent.

Orange County Transportation Authority {OCTA) SB 743 Support; Orange County, CA. Tn1 as,1sted the range County Transportation Authority (OCTA) in ident1fy1ng the rr:comme11ded approach lo implement Senate Bill 743 (SB743) throughout the Co,Jnty Hf:' led the assessment of options for calc1ilat1ng vehicle-miles t,aveled (VMT) and dr:veloped map based screening tools to illustrate VMT per capita and per employee for each city and TAZ. Tim worked with OCTA staff to modify the existing Congestion Management Prograrn and tr atf1c analy~1s guidelines to 1ncorpor ate \/MT into the analysis process.
79 234
Attachment 2

FERNANDO SOTELO, PE, PTP I PRINCIPAL ENGINEER

EDUCATION
■ MS. Civil Engineering
(Transportation), Un1vers1tv
of Southern Cal1forn1a
■ BS, Naval Engineering,
Un1vers1ry of Sao Paulo,
Bl dZil

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
22 REG ISTRATION
Profess1cmal Traffic EngineH:

CA tJ lf1. 2770

AFFILIATIONS
■ Institute ofT1ansportat1on
Engineers
■ Orange County T1 aff1c
E ngi11ee1 s Council
Fernando Sotelo is a reg1~tf:'1 ed profes,1onal traffic engineer in California with a master's degree 1n transportation eng1neer1ng. Fernando Sotelo has extensive expe11encE 1n CEQA and the techrncal aspects of t1 ansportat1on pla,,ning, including travel demand forecasting, traffic impact analyses, and parking demand studies. Fernando has been involved with assisting Cities with conducting rransportat1on analyses for general plans and spf?Clfic plans. He also led prog1 an1s to 1mpl1::ment VM T metrics to comply with SB 743. ThesE- efforts ,nc ud1:: rev1ew1ng strateg1f?s to 1dr:>ntify reductions to thE use of s111gle occupancy ,1utomobile use. promote tr1e use of TDM measures to reduce VMT frorn land use projects. and 1dent1fy potential VMT reduction programs. His professional experiencE- with traffic ancJ parking analyse, r1lco include t1 a•,sportat ion analyses for Sr?' er al land developn 1ent prn1er.ts sucl- a, '.,Choo!~ wa'r:hou~1ng, mixed use, commercial, and recrf:dt1on proj1::cts w :,out he1 n and no1 thern C:ilifo· r1a. H.: fcKU'.,•'~ pdrl 1cular attt'11t1011 or1 1SSU£:'~ sucl I as v1:h1cula1 c 1rcul;..tion, sItP ;ic ce,s, quPu1ng, and p1::dr,:,tr 1an I outf''., to '.,Chool and sa'ety.

Fernando understands thr, comple}'.1\1es of transpo1tat1on planning anrl has prepared transportat1cm sections for El Rs for- n1cjor p10Iects ,uc.h d'., gr?ne1 al plar uridale·s ano '.,f)ec.1fic plans.

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of Brea Laurel Elementary School Circulation and Parking Study; Brea, CA.

Fernando served as project pr111c1pal for the prr:0 pc1rat1011 of a traffic rnculat,on a•1d parking study for Laurel Elementary School In addition to conducting the study, f ern,,ndo led stakeholder meNings with school staft and parr:nts the :,chool district, City publ1<: works ,;ncJ poller: to discuss issues and potential solutions. Physical and operational recomrnendat1ons were prepared to 1rnprove pa1k1ng and t.raffo within and In the v,cnity of the school campus Several phasf:'s of improvements wr:re p1 epa1 eel, ranging from low-cost sho1t-· term, to costly long-terrn r r:configur at ions.

City of Montebello General Plan Update, Environmental Impact Report, and Transportation Impact Guidelines; Montebello, CA. f".1ttelson 1s developing thr, updated rn culat,on ele1nent for the City of Monteb0llo General Plan UpdatE:
and their Downtown Speuf1c Plan area. Y 1ttelson 1s updilt111g the 1·nobi11ty e!errier1 t's goals.policies, a"d a cirwlat1on nr:twoi-J, to acrommodate the C1t(s env1s1onej land use c:-nd ci1culat1on buildout. The plan will provide an enhanced network of trails, enhancE pedr:strian and bicycle mobility and promotE a vibrant and walkable downtowr, arf?a and neat rail station:... Fernando 1:, sr:r,1ng as thr: lead for the techr11cal analyses to 1,oview t1 ansportation 1mpac.ts unde1 C.E Of\
City of Indian Wells General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report; Indian Wells, CA, Fernarclo 1s tre prower manager for rhe City of Indian Wells General Plan Update Kittelson 1s updating n,ob11ity element:, fo1 tl·e City of lndion Wells r~ene1a1 Plan Update and performing technical analysis in suppo1·t of the EIR document The rnobility e!ernent focuses on expanding the b1cyclr: and NEV network, integrating rr,g1onal multi-use path connections, 2nd providing cornpiE-te st-eet poliur:s fo1· residents. workers, and visitors. Fernando led thF. comrnun1ty workshop to inform the public and seek input fo1 the mobility element update. r-f0 rnando rnanages dayto-day project activ1t1es, coordinates with City staff. ;ind supports multiple tash of this project, mcluding rhe development of the mobility eler--iicrits. the SB 74.3 Vlv1T gu1dan<:e in traffic impact analysis gu1de11nes. ano p1 eparat1on of the tr ansportat,or study to su ppo1 t CE QA review City of Lawndale General Plan Update/Hawthorne Boulevard Specific Plan; Lawndale, CA. Fernando i:.. the Kittelson project mariager for the prepa1 at1 n of an updated C1rculation/Mohility Plan for the City of Lawndale. Thi, plan addresses existing and future circulation issues. 1nclud1ng the propo:..eo extension of thE Metro (Jrer~n L rne through the city. As p,Ht of this effort c1tyw1d2 goals ;;nd policies were devE:·loped to 1rnprove active transpor-tat1on and _ _ _ _ _ __ _ _ _ _ _ _ account for 11ew vPhicle-m1les traveled (VIVIT) metric: .. In addition, thr, proposed 80 235
Attachment 2
FERNANDO SOTELO, PE, PTP I f'nnop2I Engineer
Pag:7?.
rezoning of parcels along Hawthorne Boulevard is being exp! red to facilitate development of higher density res1denrial uses and mixed-use commercial zones. As LA Metro is planning for a new commuter I ail service tliroughour the area, potential rezoning and enhancemer,ts t access and circulation are being explored. Fernando led the prep;iratIon of the T1·,rnspor tation swdies for CEQ/~ review and Is cun-i:ntly preparing the mobility plan for the Hawthorne Boulevard Sped1c Plan.

Clovis SB 743 VMT Metrics lmplement.ation; Clovis, CA. Fernando served as the pI OJect manager and technical lead for the lity of Clovis VMT metric.~ implementation pro1ect. fas fYOJect manager, rernando managed the consultant team, prov1d1ng direcrion on technical work and deliverables, conducting quality control checks for analysi:. and deliver ables, and leacJ1ng communications with the City The project included establishing metrics, thresholds, so eenIng criteria and a \!MT screr:;nIng and m1tigar1on rool and the development of transportation impact study gu1del1nes. Fernando has prov1decJ sever·cd options for the City to 1rr1plen-,ent specific threshold'.. and sc.re( ning, wns1de11ng the city's cha1 actemtIc5 within the, eg,on. rli? ;;lsv assi,ted the City with OIItr each effo1 ts 111 coorciina11on with tlw building 1ndu'.,t•--v as~oc1at1on 111 thc- Fresno r1rea rJ'., a nIaioI str1keholde1 City of Los Banos General Plan Update, Los Banos, CA. Fe1 nandc wa:, Kittelson ·s pI oiect Inanager and tec.hn1c;il lhid for the-· transportation component, of the I os Banos GEneral Plan Update. fh,c; Kittelson team's tasks havc0 1nclucled ck•velop111g the C1rculat1on E!ernent of the Gener al Plan Update and the c orre'.,poncl1ng Envir onn1ental lrnpact Report {FIR) prepared for envir onn1f•nt;;I •f.·vIr,w under the C:alror 11Ia Envircinmer;t;il Quality Act (C:EOA). Kittelson has also pI ovicieci tI aff1c modeling review dnd fo1 ecd~-t,. roadwav segrnent and Vl\1T anaIysIs ;ind alternative transportatior; OI>tiom. ·:·he iesults of thE:· analysis and t•ansp,xtat or- rernrnrriendat1ons were 1ncl11ded 111 the General Plan Update dr:.cumr:;nt.

Font.ana Downtown Core Project; Font.ana, CA. K,tte,son developed a cir culat1on plan with subst ant1al mod if icilt1ons ro the dovvntown ar,-a ancJ prepared a transportation analysis for proposed Downtown Corr:; ProJect. H"rnando served as the technical lead and pIOJect rnanager. The downtown dIrca includes the Fo11tana 1V1et1oilnk Station ancl City Hall. The Project consists of trcJns1t-or1e11ted developrrent dnd c.h,rnges lo parking ;ind ar; e11hanr:E-d bike and pedestrian network to Inv1gmate I edevelopment and encourage a rrnxed-use 1?nv1ronInent. l<1 ttelson provided conceptual designs to accommodated substantial amount of traffic, bicycle and pedestrian activity In the area, while cons1der1ng constraints with the available roadway right of way Several concepts were considered 111clud1ng roundabouts at key Intersect1ons angled ;ind parallel paI king conf1gu1 ations, a11d several bike and transll facility conf1gurat1ons.

City of San Mateo General Plan Update and EIR; San Mateo, CA. f: ittelson Is developing the updated rnobi!1ty element for the City of S;;v1 Mateo Gene1al P!ar Updatf'. /'.s part oi the G2neral Plan Update effort. Fc1nando served a, ta:ck leadf:'r 101 the: deve!opnw111 of SB 743-consistent VMT nett odologie~ dnd thr eshoids, an off-model Vlv1T spreadsheet tool, arid tI affa study guidelines for proiect, In the City Fernando led efforts to ddopl C1ty-spec.dir:
metr Ics. thresholds, and the development of the City's draft gu1del,nes and d,ovelop a tool tO a~s•st the City in rnit igat1ng VIV1T impacts of development. and tr;inspo1 tat1on pI oiects.

City of Baldwin Park Downtown Transit Oriented Development (TOD) Specific Plan; Baldwin Park, CA . Fer nancio servecJ as the technical lead fo1 the tI ansportat1cn evaluatron and parking man ageIrent plan for· a tr ans1t-orientcd development specific plan 11' downtown Baldwin Park To irnprnve access and circulation to the: Baldwin Par I< IV1etrolink Station, Fernando assessed thf, potential for modifications to adjacent roadways, 111clud1ng changE:-s to the lane conf1guratrons on-street parking locations, and sidewalks/bicycle facil1t1es. The parking management plan for th,;; s1wc1fic plan Is includ ing several parking management strategie~ to better utilize th,;; existing parking supply, and to adequately accornrnodate thF: future mix of land uses while rr•eeting the obiectives of the specific plan. The rnanagr,rnent plan included strategies such as adopting parking occupancy and turnover targets, incent1v1zIng shared par king for mixed used developme11l areas, 1mbund1eo parking arid rnoI·e 81 236
Attachment 2

MICHAEL SAHIMI, AICP I SENIOR PLANNER

EDUCATION
• MURP, Tr anspor tat1on
0 oi1cy and Planning.

University of Calrfornra, Los
Angeles
• BA, Urban Studies
University of Cal1tornra,
Ir vine
■ BA, Crim1nologv. Law. and
Society, Un rvers 1ty of
California. Irvine

YEARS OF EXPERIENCE
8 CERTIFICATION
• Arner ican Institute of
ler tifred Planners

AFFILIATIONS
• Amer rcan Planning
Assocrat1on (APA), Member
Michael is an experienced transportc1l1on planner with expertise in traffic operations, environmental analysis, t1·ave! den,and rnodel,ng and forr:cast1ng, crrculat1on studies, and park 1ng studieo He is also involved 1n active transportation and transit planning. M1chaf?I works with ArcGIS, Cube, Trans( AD, Synchm, and Tranplan transportation software. Hrs worl-. has included coordination with several ;;gene res in Southern Cal1forn1a, including the San Bernardino County Tramportation Authority and the Orange County rransportar1on Authority

PROJECT EXPERIENCE
City of Anaheim Circulation Element Update; Anaheim, CA. l<ittelson rs prf:'paring dn upd~,le to the Ci1culot1on [lemE::nt of thf-' (Jer,;c,1al f'l,rn which will outline the futt.:1 e transportation network, goals and pol1c1r:s for the City for lhe next 10 vears. For J11s effon f. rttr:lson 1s cS~E:·S'. I11g eY.1sti11g dlld fu,J1 e cond1t1ons, dPterrn1nr11g how new rlPveloprnent potenl1al could affrct transportation cond1t1on,. Fron1 this il'.,Sessrne11t. f,ittelson will identify citywid0 roadwoy improvements to nw1Irn1zP congestion. le 1ttel,on rs also devPlop1ng new goal:, and polrc1>cs to plan for future mobrl1ty servrce5, 1nclud1r;g ,hared-ride vehicles, rn1cro-n1c,brl1ty, mrcro-tron'.,rt active r1ansportat1on connec.ted/autonornous vehicles, and lac.al tr an'.>1t. /.1, deputy pr OJf.Ct manager, Michael has r:001 d1nated thr: prr!parat1on of public outreach rnaterrals and rs currently devc:lop1ng rnult1rnodal I econ1me11dJt1ons.

Cityof Lake Forest General Plan Update; Lake Forest, CA. Kittelson conducted a transportation analysis for the Lake For est California, (Jenera I Plan Update a'ld Environmental Impact Report (EIR) document a, well as pr ov1di11g rnpcrt on the Gener al Plan ·s tr anspo1·tation pol icies and obJectives. M ichcJE::l's role included e:,arn1ning existing transportation conditions to establi:,h a baselinf? and understand the City's transportation needs assrstrng in Incorporat1ng land use alternative~ into the City's travel dernand model, and preparing a transportation analysis to a:;sess v,,hrc\e mrles traveled (VMT) and level of service (LOS) cond1tru11s for the EIR. Michael also led ihe effort to prepare mobility-related goals ;:ind polrcres for the Generc1I Pl;:in document.

Santa Ana Citywide Active Transportation Plan; Santa Ana, CA. Kittelson assisted 1n the update ro the Ac.trve Transportc1t1on Plan for the City of 'ianta Ana. The vIs1on of the project 'Na, to develop a pr iorrt12ed 11st of bikeway network and pedestrian focus areas, analyze costs and alternatives for· priority proiect:,, and pr ovrde designs thcit wot rid make rt ea: 1e1 to walk and 11de a bicycle in r.he r:1tv. Michaei led the conceptual design prc;ces<: for four of the ATP', pr iorrty pr OJeets. Michael worked wrth Kittf?lson designers to ,ncorpo1 ate both brcycle and pedPstrian improvement, along roadwc1y segrner.t~ as well ;is 1'lter,ect1on'., and interchanges along U-e corridors to assist the City 1n futurE grdr·,t cipplications Michael ;iiso led the cieve!or,n1L>nt of cost e'S111ndtes for the C Ity s priority proJects
Cityof Glendale Land Use and Circulation Element Update/Transportation Impact Fee/SB 743; Glendale, CA. K1ttels0'1 is developing an updated circulation element fc,r the City of Glendale and updating rto c1tyw1de travel demand model As part of this effort, rntelson 1s preparing a VMT est1matIng tool !or the City and developing its updated ':-8 743-compliant transportation imr,ac.t study guidelines. lv1rchael rs developing the City s off-modei \/MT est1111at1ng tool, which will b1: used to streamline VMT assessments for new development prnJects in place of running the full travel demand model. Michael 1s also researching applicable and effective TDM rn1:asures for projec.ts in the City which will be incorpor;,ted into the VMTestimating tool. 82 237
Attachment 2
City of San Marcos General Plan Update and EIR; San Marcos, CA. K :rte Ison 1s developing the updated rnobiiity element for the City of San Marc. s General Plan Update As part of the Gene, al Plan Update effon, Micha1:I will be leading the developmem of SB 743-consistent VMT methodologies and thresholds, an off-m del VMT sp,eadsheet tool, and traffic study gu1del1nes foi· projects 1n the City Michael will be working with the City to determ1nr: whethe1 the City sfeould adopt OPR or San u1ego Association of Governments (Sftl\JDAG) recommendations or adopt C1ty-spec.ific rnetr 1cs, th1 esholds and uite, ia. In acld1t1on, Michael will be resF?arch1ng the effectiveness of vcn ,ouc TOM measures to ,rnplernent rn San Marcos TO m1t1gate VMT impacts of development and tr,rnsportat1on proJects
City of La Verne General Plan Update and Environmental Impact Report; La Verne, CA. K ttel'.,on devr:lopnJ the c.1rculation and rnobrlrty sect1on5 oi the Ger eral Pl;,n Update for· the City, 1nciud1rig rnobilrty-relatecl oolrries ard obwct1ves with respect to auto,nobile. ,:1Ct1ve t, anspor·rat1on, tr ansrt and frc;ght c.ircula•ion, and on- ond off-street pd1k111g. Michael helped to develop the P!an Update ;ind l:nv1ronmental Impact kepor t (FIR) for this proJec.t. c:rnd his role includeJ exarni111ng E:x1st,ng t1anspo1 tat1011 c.ond1t1ons to estabiish a baseline and u11de1 stand :he City's transpor tat1on need,, develop ing the Mob1lity flemf0 nt. and cissessrng th!? Gf:ne, al Plan update'~ transpor"t;it,on rmp;irts for t.he EIR. M1chciel also assisted with gathering and analyzing ex1:.t111g cond1t1ons d,Hil.

San Bernardino County General Plan Update and EIR; San Bernardino County, CA. Mich;iel a~s1sted with the update to the General Pl,m for the County c,f San Rernard1110 the largest county rn the nation. Hrs role included resea, chrng ex1st111g conditions 111 the Countv'-s unincorporated cornrnun1t1es to establish a basel111e for the update and preparing a rnerno d1scuss1ng tutu re rmprovernents, opportunit1ec, and constraints at the county level. Michael coordrnc1ted modeling efforts for the p, OJect and tested various land use scenarios for the County. Th1< involved nurr\lcruu~ socioeconorn,c. data n,od1f1c,itions and fuli model I uns of ',Bl AM through Tr;insCAD to ;issess the potential 1mplic.at1ons of different land use g,owth patterns. Mic.hael also led traffic data collection ef-foits across the county 111 suppor·t of thr: EIR. A'S part of this effort, Michael also prepared a guidance memorandum for the County to incorporate 'ienate Bill 743 (SB 74 3) ;ind vehicle mrlf?s tr;iveled (\lt1F) 11110 their transportation impact analysis gu1dPl1ne,.

City of Hayward Downtown Specific Plan; Hayward, CA. Kittelson provided transportation anaivsrs c;ipport to the City for rt: new Downtov-r, Speed 1c Plan. rh,s plan replaces six different, ov1:rl;i[Jp1ng pla!'n1ng and :on1ng documents adopted between 1987 and 200! Michael was the lead analy~t fo1 the traffic study, conducting an impact analysis on study a1ea 1nte1·sert1ons and other transport;it1on fac.il1t1es to be mitigated. This traffic crnd 1vs1s was doc.urne11ted 111 the to, n I of air ansportat1on ,rnp;ic.t study wh1c.h was inco1 po, ated rnto the full EIR. 83 238
De Novo P I a n n n g Group
------------------------■ ,\ 1. .,11J list• Pl.1 n 11 111 g 11 ,·s,g n . . 111d 1-: 11\'ll'O ll lll t:lll.l l r ,r m 239
Attachment 2
Agreement No. 24-70 - De Novo Planning
Group
Final Audit Report
Created:

By:

Status:

Transaction ID:
2024-10-14
Wendy Jung ([email protected])
Signed
CBJC HBCAABAA5ewQ_n EsmO 1 de-CqiZSg8NsZPHW1 fEm3
2024-10-15
"Agreement No. 24-70 - De Novo Planning Group" History
~ Document created by Wendy Jung ([email protected]) 2024-10-14 - 9:40:31 PM GMT
( • Document emailed to Amanda Tropiano ([email protected]) for signature 2024-10-14 • 9:40:55 PM GMT
~ Email viewed by Amanda Tropiano ([email protected]) 2024-10-14 • 9:49:30 PM GMT
6-0 Document e-signed by Amanda Tropiano ([email protected]) Signature Date: 2024-10-15 - 8:19:23 PM GMT - Time Source: server 0 Agr·eement completed.
2024-10-15 - 819:23 PM GMT
II Adobe Acrobat Sign
85 240
RESOLUTION NO. 25.XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, LIMITING THE NUMBER

OF PUBLIC HEARINGS ON PROPOSED HOUSING
DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS; AND FINDING THE ACTION
EXEMPT UNDER STATE CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15301
WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach (“City”) staff has been evaluating various measures to improve efficiency within the Community Development Department to assist with backlog issues and to improve the processing of planning applications within the City; and WHEREAS, as part of this process, the City held a community workshop on October 1, 2024 to gain feedback on potential solutions, including the development of a Design Review Efficiency Ordinance (“DR Efficiency Ordinance”); and
WHEREAS, following such workshop, the City released to the public a cover letter summarizing the DR Efficiency Ordinance changes and the DR Efficiency Ordinance itself for purposes of gathering specific feedback to incorporate into the ordinance; and WHEREAS, thereafter, City staff evaluated other considerations, such as the DR Efficiency Ordinance’s vertical consistency with the City’s General Plan, and the public comments received, and recommended changes to the DR Efficiency Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on March 12, 2025, the City held a study session among the City Council, Planning Commission, and Design Review Board on the DR Efficiency Ordinance; and WHEREAS, on April 8, 2025, the City Council considered the DR Efficiency Ordinance and directed staff to present the DR Efficiency Ordinance with additional changes read into the record to the Planning Commission; and
Attachment 6
241
-2- Reso. #
WHEREAS, on July 22, 2025, the City Council considered the development of objective design standards and City staff thereafter made additional changes to the DR Efficiency Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, on September 18, 2025, the City Council considered an updated version of the DR Efficiency Ordinance; and
WHEREAS, the City believes that removing the limitations and allowances for public hearings in the Municipal Code and adopting such limitations and allowances by resolution will assist with the backlog and efficiency issues within the Community Development Department.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH DOES RESOLVE:

SECTION 1. The City Council hereby finds and determines that the recitals above are true and correct and are each incorporated by reference and adopted as findings by the City Council.

SECTION 2. Consideration of a housing development project1 application, including a proposal to construct a single dwelling unit, shall be limited to a maximum of two public hearings and meetings by the Design Review Board or Planning Commission, as appropriate.

SECTION 3. The City Council finds that adoption of this Resolution is exempt under the California Environmental Quality Act under CEQA Guidelines Section 15301 because it consists of the operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical features, involving 1 “Housing Development Project” has the same meaning as the term is defined in Government Code Section 65905.5(b)(3).
242
-3- Reso. #
negligible or no expansion of existing or former use. Here, the adoption of this Resolution meets the exemption because it modifies how the City processes housing development projects within the City on a procedural basis and will not result in an expansion of any existing use.

SECTION 4. This resolution shall become effective when Ordinance No. XXXX (the Design Review Efficiency Ordinance) becomes effective.

SECTION 5. The City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution and enter it into the book of original resolutions.

ADOPTED this _____ day of _________, 2025.

Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ann Marie McKay, 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:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach, California
243
Edwin C. Kisiel, Esq.
1205 Victory Walk
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
(949) 549-9650
[email protected]
November 17, 2025
City of Laguna Beach
City Council
Attn: Ann McKay
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Re: Public Comment – DR Efficiency Ordinance – Lot Line Adjustment Code

Dear City Council:

I am reaching out to recommend further amendment to Laguna Beach Municipal Code (L.B.M.C.) § 21.08.030, Lot Line Adjustment, in order to reduce the City’s litigation exposure, as part of the Design Review Efficiency Ordinance under discussion at the November 18, 2025 meeting. There is significant litigation exposure due to how the current LBMC § 21.08.030 is drafted in conflict with state law, a fact that has been recognized multiple times by City Council on recent occasions.

The way the current LBMC § 21.08.030 is drafted, it imposes requirements in excess of what is permitted under the Subdivision Map Act, including Gov. Code § 66412(d). Gov. Code § 66412(d) applies to “lot line adjustment between four or fewer existing adjoining parcels, where the land taken from one parcel is added to an adjoining parcel, and where a greater number of parcels than originally existed is not thereby created, if the lot line adjustment is approved by the local agency, or advisory agency.”
Laguna’s Lot Line Adjustment Code is Inconsistent with State Law Cal. Gov. Code § 66412(d) requires that for lot line adjustments, “A local agency or advisory agency shall limit its review and approval to a determination of whether or not the parcels resulting from the lot line adjustment will conform to the local general plan, any applicable specific plan, any applicable coastal plan, and zoning and building ordinances” (emphasis added). Second, recognizing that exaction of impact fees or conditions on approval of a project can rise to the level of an unconstitutional Fifth Amendment taking of property, “An advisory agency or local agency shall not impose conditions or exactions on its approval of a lot line adjustment except to conform to the local general plan, any applicable specific plan, any applicable coastal plan, and zoning and building ordinances, to require the prepayment of real property taxes prior to the approval of the lot line adjustment, or to facilitate the relocation of existing utilities, infrastructure, or easements” (emphasis added). See also, Nollan v. Cal.

Coastal Comm., 483 U.S. 825, 837 (1987) (stating that “unless the permit condition serves the same governmental purpose as the development ban, the building restriction is not a valid regulation of land use but ‘an out-and-out plan of extortion’”). Finally, under Cal. Gov. Code § 2 66412(d), “No tentative map, parcel map, or final map shall be required as a condition to the approval of a lot line adjustment.”
Under LBMC § 21.08.030, last amended in 1991 (well before the date of the 2016 letter), “a lot line adjustment between two or more existing building sites, or between parcels of land contained within an existing building site, where the land taken from one building site is added to an adjacent building site, or where interior parcel lines are eliminated for the purpose of consolidation, and where a greater number of parcels than originally existed is not thereby created” is exempt from requirements for subdivision maps provided that the action is approved by City Council, observing nine specific requirements. The first requirement is that “[t]he project site described in the proposal consists of legal building sites.” As explained below, this building site requirement is inconsistent with and in violation of state law.

City Council’s Recognition of the Inconsistency with State Law City Council has recognized the inconsistency, and in the recent past, disregarded the requirement that a lot line adjustment be between only building sites as inconsistent with and superseded by state law. One recent example is the 2023 action (Lot Line Adjustment 2023- 0323) for 2900 and 2920 Alexander Road in Laguna Beach. That action proposed to combine two lots designated as a building site with a lot designated as a non-building site. The staff report contained the following discussion, informed by consultation with the City Attorney, which was adopted by the City Council’s Resolution 23.060 approving that lot line adjustment:

Pursuant to Laguna Beach Municipal Code (LBMC), Section 21.08.030(a) specifies that in addition to other requirements, a lot line adjustment application is required to "consist of legal building sites as defined in Title 25 of the Municipal Code." However, the California Subdivision Map Act, which governs lot line adjustment applications, provides that a lot line adjustment is available for "four or fewer existing adjoining parcels" (Government Code Section 66412(d); emphasis added). Also, as confirmed by the City Attorney, California courts have held that local governments cannot impose requirements on lot line adjustments in excess of what is provided by the Subdivision Map Act. That is, the Subdivision Map Act supersedes conflicting provisions of municipal ordinances. In this regard, the Subdivision Map Act does not require that the parcels subject to a lot line adjustment application be legal building sites.

The Subdivision Map Act compels the City to process the proposed lot line adjustment application without regard to the building site status of the affected parcels. However, the Subdivision Map Act specifies that conditions or exactions may be imposed "to conform to the local general plan, any applicable specific plan, any applicable coastal plan, and zoning and building ordinances."
Pursuant to Municipal Code Section 21.08.030 and in accordance with Government Code Section 66412(d) and other applicable laws, lot line adjustments are exempt from the requirements of the Subdivision Map Act, provided that the City Council approves the adjustment and observes the following requirements:
a) The project site described in the proposal consists of legal building sites as defined in Title 25 (Zoning) of this code. As indicated above, this provision of the Municipal Code, 3 which restricts lot line adjustment applications to parcels that are building sites, is inconsistent with and preempted by the Subdivision Map Act, and, therefore, does not apply. (emphasis added)
The City Council took the same approach in two other recent lot line adjustment actions.

This includes approval of Lot Line Adjustment 21-10961 for 1202 Noria, to merge a nonbuilding site with a building site. The City’s staff report acknowledged that “[t]he subject property consists of one legal building site and one non-building site. The proposed lot combination conforms to the required findings for lot combinations.” This was approved by City Council resolution 22.070. Also, the City Council approved Lot Line Adjustment 20-7681 for 741 Barracuda, to merge a non-building site with a building site. The City’s staff report also indicated that the “provision of the Municipal Code, which restricts lot line adjustment applications to parcels that are building sites, is inconsistent with and preempted by the Subdivision Map Act, and therefore does not apply.” Furthermore, in these approvals, the City Council had expressed a position that it would remove the offending building site prerequisite in forthcoming revisions to the Municipal Code. The Design Review Efficiency Ordinance provides City Council with the perfect vehicle to accomplish this.

Recent Litigation
This inconsistency with state law has resulted in recent litigation and will continue to present a litigation risk until the inconsistency is corrected. In October 2025, the City settled the case of Winner v. City of Laguna Beach, Case No. 30-2025-01503637-CU-WM-WJC with a landowner who applied for a lot line adjustment. This lawsuit alleged that the City’s application of the offending building site requirement to a proposed lot line adjustment in conjunction with a housing development project currently before the Design Review Board was a violation of state law. Unless the City Council takes action to modify LMBC 21.08.030 in alignment with state law by removing the building site prerequisite for lot line adjustments, the City is at significant risk from future litigation.

Conclusion
Implementing the recommended amendment to LBMC § 21.08.303 to remove the building site prerequisite for lot line adjustments as part of the Design Review Efficiency Ordinance would bring Laguna Beach into compliance with state law, reducing significant litigation exposure. I may be reached at [email protected] or (949) 549-9650 for further discussion on this matter. Thank you for your consideration of my comments and recommendation.

Kind regards,
Edwin C. Kisiel, Esq.

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:

November 18, 2025

NOT APPEAL
22 SUBJECT: CONSIDERATION OF 2025 MILLS ACT CONTRACTS FOR FOUR (4) HISTORIC

RESOURCE PROPERTIES AND FINDING THE ACTIONS EXEMPT FROM THE

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15331
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Adopt the attached Resolutions approving the Mills Act Preservation Agreements for 426 Holly Street, 501 Lombardy Lane, 503 Brooks Street, and 2646 Victoria Drive;

2. Authorize the City Manager to sign the contract agreements with the owners of the subject properties; and

3. Find the recommended actions exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to state CEQA Guidelines section 15331 and direct staff to cause the notice of exemption to be filed with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse.

SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
The Mills Act (Government Code sections 50280-50290) is a State program that was adopted in 1976 by the State Legislature to establish an alternative method for determining assessment values as an incentive for the preservation of historic properties. The Mills Act authorizes cities to enter into contracts for a minimum term of 10 years. Four (4) Mills Act contracts have been prepared for the City Council's consideration and approval, as recommended by the Heritage Committee, for the following historic properties:

1. 426 Holly Street (HCR 25-0954)1

2. 501 Lombardy Lane (HCR 25-0952)2

3. 503 Brooks Street (HCR 25-0535)3

4. 2646 Victoria Drive (HCR 25-0955)4
The Mills Act contract provides a property tax reduction incentive to owners of historic properties, with the intent that cost savings are re-invested into the historic property to restore, improve, and preserve their 1 On July 29, 2025, 426 Holly Street (HCR 25-0954) was designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code through the recordation of a Historic Preservation Agreement.
2 On September 7, 1999, 501 Lombardy (HCR 25-0952) was designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code through the recordation of a Historic Preservation Agreement through the recordation of a Historic Preservation Agreement. 3 On May 10, 2001, 503 Brooks Street (HCR 25-0535) was designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code through the recordation of a Historic Preservation Agreement.
4 On July 29, 2025, 2646 Victoria Drive (HCR 25-0535) was designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code.

Consideration of Approval for 2025 Historic Property Preservation Agreements (Mills Act) for Four (4) Properties
November 18, 2025

buildings and grounds, pursuant to a 10-year term workplan. If approved, the projected future property tax loss to the General Fund from the four (4) properties will be approximately $32,227 per year. This action is exempt from CEQA pursuant to section 15331 of the state CEQA Guidelines.

DISCUSSION
In September 1993, the City Council approved the use of the Mills Act as an incentive for the preservation of "E"-rated historic structures. In 2022, the Historic Preservation Ordinance went into effect making any property on the Historic Register eligible for a Historic Property Preservation Agreements, regardless of its rating. Since the adoption of this program, the City has entered into 138 contracts with the owners of qualified properties. Historic Property Preservation Agreements run for a ten-year term, with automatic yearly extensions. In effect, the term of the contract continues to extend unless and until the property owner or the City submits a notice of non-renewal. Owners of qualified historic structures must comply with specific restrictions that remain in effect even if the property is sold or transferred. It is estimated that the "lost" City property tax revenue for all contracts in 2025 is approximately $743,014.

The Mills Act application process requires the Heritage Committee to review all Mills Act applications submitted for the year and make recommendations to the City Council. In 2025, the owners of the following properties submitted requests to enter into a contract with the City to further preserve and maintain the Historic Register properties: 426 Holly Street, 501 Lombardy Lane, 503 Brooks Street, and 2646 Victoria Drive. The draft contracts are provided as Exhibit 1 to Attachments 1, 3, 5, and 7, respectively.

The estimated total of $32,227 in property tax reductions for the City is based on a preliminary estimate by the County Tax Assessor’s office.9
Heritage Committee Summary and Recommendations
The City requires Historic Property Preservation Agreement applicants to submit a description of work, timeline, and cost estimates for the rehabilitation of the property during the first ten-year term of the contract. High-priority maintenance items, such as structural and historical components, are specified in the contract to be addressed within the first several years, while cosmetic improvements are scheduled toward the end of the ten-year term. The Heritage Committee reviewed all four applications on two meeting dates:

August 18, 2025 and September 15, 2025, as discussed in more detail below.

On August 18, 2025, the Heritage Committee reviewed the applications and historic assessments and proposed workplans for the following three (3) Historic Register properties: (1) 503 Brooks Street; (2) 426 Holly Street; and (3) 2646 Victoria Drive.
9 The Orange County Assessor’s Office evaluates the property tax-savings based on the income-producing potential of the property. Assessment values are conducted on January first of every year, meaning that a property must enter into a Mills Act contract by December 31st of the previous year to receive tax savings on the property by the following year. The exact amount of the reduction is calculated by the County Tax Assessor after the property is evaluated, based on the executed agreement.

Consideration of Approval for 2025 Historic Property Preservation Agreements (Mills Act) for Four (4) Properties
November 18, 2025

The Committee recommended approval of the application as proposed for 503 Brooks Street (Attachment 6) and recommended approval with modifications to the applications (specifically the workplans) for 426 Holly Street and 2646 Victoria Drive. Following the August 18, 2025 Heritage Committee meeting, City staff informed the property owners of the Committee’s recommendations for their properties, as neither owner attended the meeting. The owner of 426 Holly Street did not agree with all recommendations and requested reconsideration by the Committee at its September meeting. The owner of 2646 Victoria Drive agreed with all but one of the Committee’s recommendations: the addition of a requirement to replace a non-original window at the front of the residence, above the front door. In response, City staff spoke with the City’s historic consultant, who prepared the historic assessment for 2646 Victoria Drive, about the nonoriginal window. The historic consultant stated that the existing window is compatible with the residence and stated replacement is not required for the Historic Property Preservation Agreement approval. While the workplan for 2646 Victoria Drive does not include the Committee’s suggested window replacement, the City Council can deliberate regarding whether the window replacement should be added to the workplan for this Mills Act application (Attachment 8).

On September 15, 2025, the Heritage Committee reconsidered the workplan for 426 Holly Drive and recommended approval with modifications to their previously recommended changes. The owner is in agreement with the proposed workplan (Attachment 2). The Heritage Committee also recommended approval of the application for 501 Lombardy Street as proposed (Attachment 4). The updated historic assessments and workplans for each property are summarized below:

Property
Address
Property
Description
Maintenance
Plan Items
Estimated
Maintenance
Plan Cost
Projected Future
Annual Revenue
Cost
426 Holly Street
Single-family
residence with
semi-detached
garage.
15 $173,500 $7,934
501 Lombardy
Lane
Single-family
residence.
12 $100,750 $5,518
503 Brooks Street Single family
residence.
13 $192,250 $9,050
2646 Victoria
Drive
Single-family
residence above
garage.
17 $311,500 $9,725
Consideration of Approval for 2025 Historic Property Preservation Agreements (Mills Act) for Four (4) Properties
November 18, 2025

It is recommended that the City Council adopt the attached Resolutions approving Historic Property Preservation Agreements for 426 Holly Street, 501 Lombardy Lane, 503 Brooks Street, and 2646 Victoria Drive, and authorize the City Manager to sign the contract agreements with the owners of the subject properties.

Council Options:

The City Council has numerous options in consideration of this matter, which are as follows. Because there are four applications under consideration, the City Council may take different actions for some or all of the applications.
• Adopt resolutions authorizing the City Manager to execute the subject Historic Property Preservation Agreements, as proposed.
• Adopt resolutions authorizing the City Manager to execute the subject Historic Property Preservation Agreements, with modifications.
• Continue the City Council’s consideration of the proposed Historic Property Preservation Agreements and direct staff to provide additional information. A continuance to the December 9, 2025 City Council meeting would maintain the possibility that the Historic Property Preservation Agreements are entered into for the 2025 tax year, if City Council approval is granted on that date.

Deny the request for Historic Property Preservation Agreements.

FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
If approved, the projected future property tax loss to the General Fund from the four (4) properties will be approximately $32,227 per year.

ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") Guidelines section 15331 exempts maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources. These activities must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Accordingly, the approval of the attached Resolutions and execution of the Historic Property Preservation Agreements is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331 as each the Historic Property Preservation Agreement requires that the owners "shall preserve, maintain, and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the [property] and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City", and further requires that all changes to the properties "conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code." Consideration of Approval for 2025 Historic Property Preservation Agreements (Mills Act) for Four (4) Properties
November 18, 2025

ATTACHMENTS

1. 426 Holly Street (HCR 25-0954) - Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Mills Act Contract (Pgs. 6- 17)

2. 426 Holly Street (HCR 25-0954) - Mills Act Application, Assessment and Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan (Pgs. 18-60)

3. 501 Lombardy Lane (HCR 25-0952) - Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Mills Act Contract (Pgs. 61-73)

4. 501 Lombardy Lane (HCR 25-0952) - Mills Act Application, Assessment and Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan. (Pgs. 74-108)

5. 503 Brooks Street (HCR 25-0935) - Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Mills Act Contract (Pgs. 109-121)

6. 503 Brooks Street (HCR 25-0935) - Mills Act Application, Assessment and Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan. (Pgs. 122-156)

7. 2646 Victoria Drive (HCR 25-0922) - Resolution Authorizing Approval of the Mills Act Contract (Pgs. 157-198)

8. 2646 Victoria Drive (HCR 25-0922) - Mills Act Application, Assessment and Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan (Pgs. 199-211)

9. Minutes from the Heritage Committee Meeting of August 18, 2025 (Pgs. 212-215)

10. Draft Minutes from the Heritage Committee Meeting of September 15, 2025 (Pgs. 216-218) Submitted By: Matt Schneider Approved: .David A Kiff
Matthew Schneider, Director of
Community Development
Dave Kiff, City Manager
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:

Heather Steven, Senior Planner Anthony Viera, Deputy Director Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney
Erin Fabian, Administrative Analyst
Samantha Beier, Principal Planner
-1- Reso. #
RESOLUTION NO. 25.XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA

BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PURSUANT TO AN EXEMPTION
FROM CEQA UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15331, A

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND THE OWNER OF THE HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 426 HOLLY

STREET, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO EXECUTE

THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, an application was filed by the owner of the property located at 426 Holly Street requesting approval of a Historic Property Preservation Agreement (also known as a Mills Act Contract) in accordance with Resolution 25.XXX; and WHEREAS, 426 Holly Street is listed on the City’s Historic Register as a historic property on the basis of it being a key example of a Minimal Traditional Cottage; and WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach has determined that preservation of the City’s historic resources in general, and 426 Holly Street in particular, is important to the City and contributes to the welfare of current and future generations; and WHEREAS, the Historic Resources Element of the City of Laguna Beach General Plan and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.45) recognize the importance of historic preservation and provide incentives for the protection and preservation for continued use, including Historic Preservation Agreements; and WHEREAS, the execution of a Historic Preservation Agreement is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331, as it concerns the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; and
Attachment 1 6
-2- Reso. #
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2025, the Heritage Committee voted to recommend that the City Council approve the requested Historic Property Preservation Agreement for 426 Holly Street;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH does RESOLVE and ORDER as follows:

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.

SECTION 2. 426 Holly Street is a “qualified historical property” and is eligible for favorable valuation by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as an enforceable restricted historical property under the provisions of California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. and California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 439.1 et seq.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute an Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City of Laguna Beach and the owner of 426 Holly Street, attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 4. Based on its review of the entire record before it, the City Council hereby finds and determines that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15331 – Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation, in that Section 15331 exempts maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources.

These activities must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Accordingly, the approval of the attached Resolutions and execution of the Mills Act Contracts is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331 as each the Mills Act Contract requires that the owners "shall preserve, maintain, Attachment 1 7
-3- Reso. #
and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the [property] and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City", and further requires that all changes to the properties "conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code." ADOPTED this 18
th of November, 2025.

Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 25.XXX was duly adopted at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of said City held on November 18, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

RECUSED: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, CA
Attachment 1 8
55852.00004\42757030.1
1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Laguna Beach
Attn: City Clerk
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Municipality, exempt from SB2 fees pursuant to GC 27388.1(a)(2)(D)

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT
(MILLS ACT CONTRACT)

AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND SINDI RAE SCHWARTZ, TRUSTEE OF THE R&S SCHWARTZ FAMILY TRUST, OWNER OF A DESIGNATED HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 426 HOLLY STREET, LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA (“Agreement")
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Laguna Beach is authorized by California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. (commonly known and referred to as "the Mills Act") to enter into contracts with the owners of qualified historical properties to provide for appropriate use, maintenance and rehabilitation such that the properties retain their historic characteristics; WHEREAS, Sindi Rae Schwartz, Trustee of the R&S Schwartz Family Trust ("Owners") possesses fee title in and to that certain qualified real property, together with associated structures and improvements thereon, located at 426 Holly Street and designated by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as Assessor’s Parcel No. 496-155-20 (the "Historic Register Property"); and WHEREAS, on July 29, 2025, the Historic Register Property was officially designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this Agreement to limit the use of the Historic Register Property to prevent inappropriate alterations and ensure that character-defining features are preserved and maintained in an exemplary manner, and to carry out the purposes of "the Mills Act", and to qualify for an assessment of valuation pursuant to Section 439 et seq. of the California Revenue and Taxation Code NOW THEREFORE, the City of Laguna Beach (the "City") Owner agree as follows:

Section 1. Effective Date and Initial Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective and commence on November 18, 2025 (the "Effective Date"), and shall remain in effect for Attachment 1 9
55852.00004\42757030.1
2 an initial term of ten (10) years thereafter.

Section 2. Renewal.

A. Each year on the anniversary of the Effective Date of this agreement, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the initial term of the Agreement unless written notice of nonrenewal is served as provided herein.

B. If Owner or the City desires in any year not to renew the term of the Agreement, Owners or the City shall serve written notice of non-renewal of the Agreement on the other party. Unless such notice is served by Owner to the City at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by the City to Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the term of the Agreement as provided herein.

C. Owners may make a written protest of notice of non-renewal served by the City. The City may at any time prior to the annual renewal date of the Agreement, withdraw its notice to Owner of non-renewal.

D. If either the City or Owner serves notice to the other of non-renewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from the Effective Date or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply.

Section 3. Standards and Conditions. During the term of this Agreement, the Historic Register Property shall be subject to the following conditions:

A. Owner shall preserve, maintain, and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the Historic Register Property and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City.

B. All proposed changes to the Historic Register Property shall comply with applicable City regulations and guidelines and the specific requirements for structural rehabilitation and maintenance attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A, and shall conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code, and shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Community Development Director.

C. Owner shall notify the City of changes to character-defining exterior features of the Historic Register Property prior to their execution, such as but not limited to major landscaping projects, exterior door replacement or exterior alterations, regardless of whether a building permit is required.

Attachment 1 10
55852.00004\42757030.1
3 D. The following are prohibited: Demolition of the house or garage on the Historic Register Property; exterior alterations or additions not in keeping with the standards listed above; dilapidated, deteriorating or unrepaired structures, such as but not limited to fences, roofs, doors, walls and windows; storage of scrap lumber, junk, trash, debris, discarded or unused objects, such as but not limited to cars, appliances or furniture; stagnant water and unfilled excavations; any other device, decoration or structure that is unsightly by reason of its height, condition or inappropriate location.

E. Owner shall allow inspection of the interior and exterior of the Historic Register Property by representatives of the County Assessor and the City prior to the Effective Date and every five (5) years thereafter to determine Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 4. Furnishing of Information. Owner hereby agrees to furnish the City with any and all information requested by the City that may be necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 5. Cancellation.

A. The City, following a duly noticed public hearing by the City Council in accordance with Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this Agreement if it determines that Owner has breached any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, including but not limited to the provisions of Section 3 hereof, or has allowed the Historic Register Property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property. If this Agreement is canceled because of Owner's failure to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate the Historic Register Property as specified by this Agreement, Owner shall pay a cancellation fee to the County Auditor as set forth in and in the amount required by Government Code Section 50286. No penalty shall be imposed if deterioration of the Historic Register Property is due to fire, disaster, or other factor beyond Owner's control.

B. If the Historic Register Property is acquired by eminent domain and the City Council determines that the acquisition frustrates the purpose of this Agreement, the Agreement shall be canceled and no fee imposed, as specified in Government Code Section 50288.

Section 6. Enforcement of Agreement.

A. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, the City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms and conditions of the Agreement. In the event of a default, or in the event the City has grounds to cancel this Agreement under Section 5.A. above, the City shall give written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address set forth in Section 8 below; and if such default or breach is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the City within thirty (30) days thereafter, or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default (provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within thirty (30) days and shall thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by the owners), then the Attachment 1 11
55852.00004\42757030.1
4 City may, without further notice, declare a default under the terms of this Agreement and may either (i) pursue cancellation of the Agreement under Section 5.A. above (after a duly noticed public hearing of the City Council) or (ii) bring any action necessary to specifically enforce Owner's obligations required under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, apply to any appropriate court for injunctive relief against any violation by Owner or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate.

B. The City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if the City does not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity that are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in the City's regulations governing historic register properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by the City of any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder.

Section 7. Binding Effect of Agreement. Owner hereby agrees to and subjects the Historic Register Property to all of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement. The City and Owner hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon Owner's heirs, successors and assigns in title or interest to the Historic Register Property. Every contract, deed or other instrument hereafter executed, delivered and accepted shall be subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement regardless of whether such covenants, restrictions and reservations are recited or referred to in such contract, deed or other instrument.

Section 8. Notice. Any notice required by the terms of this Agreement shall be sent to the address of the respective parties as specified below or at other addresses that may be later specified by the parties hereto.

To City: City of Laguna Beach
Attn: Community Development Director
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
To Owners: ______________________
______________________
Section 9. General Provisions.

A. None of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or members of any joint enterprise.

B. Owner agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees from liability for damage or claims for damage for Attachment 1 12
55852.00004\42757030.1
5 personal injuries, including without limitation death, and claims for property damage that may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations of Owner or those of Owner's contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on Owner's behalf, or that otherwise relates to the use, operation and maintenance of the Historic Register Property. .

C. The foregoing defense, indemnity and hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the use, operations and activities referred to in this Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications, permits or other documents for the Historic Register Property.

D. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the Historic Register Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever.

E. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations or restrictions contained in this Agreement, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorneys' fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to costs, litigation expenses and other relief ordered by the court.

F. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be effected thereby.

G. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Section 10. Recordation. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties execute and enter into this agreement, the City shall cause this agreement to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange.

Section 11. Signatures. The City and Owners shall sign this Agreement, which shall be notarized.

Attachment 1 13
55852.00004\42757030.1
6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owner have executed this agreement on the day and year written below.

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
Date: ____________________ By: __________________________ City Manager
_________________________
Date: ____________________ By:___________________________ Trustee/ or Owner
Attachment 1 14
55852.00004\42757030.1
7 State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature (Seal)
________________________________
State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

Attachment 1 15
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 29

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property. $20,000

2. 2026 Chimney Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of chimney and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimney is structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$6,500

3. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $10,300 *

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$18,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Gutters/Downspouts Property owner to inspect gutters and downspouts for damage or deterioration and clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed. Make any necessary repairs in a timely manner to prevent water damage to building.
$4,400*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors,
and Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint.

Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair.

Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $30,000*

7. 2026-2036 Columns at Covered
Walkway
If the two columns in the breezeway need repair or replacement in the future, the property owner should consider replacing with the original slender posts per documentary evidence $1,000

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and Doors Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight. If the property owner chooses to replace the front door in the future, the property owner should consider restoring with an original style paneled wood door. (Pending)

9. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. $ 5,000* Exhibit A
Attachment 1 16
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 30 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

10. 2025-2035
(annually)
Mechanical Complete repairs to HVAC as needed to prevent risk of potential water damage to historic fabric. Replace existing HVAC if it exceeds its useful life. Commence and complete work in a sensitive manner to avoid damage to historic fabric.
$15,000*

11. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Fences and Gates Inspect wood fences and gates for damage and/or peeling paint and repair/repaint as needed. $6,800*

12. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick Hardscaping Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$3,500*

13. 2030-2036
(centennially)
Stucco Property owner to inspect stucco for damage and make related repairs as needed. Prep, patch, and repaint stucco in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color and texture. $12,000*

14. 2036 Exterior Paint Repaint exteriors of residence and ADU. $26,000

15. 2036 Vinyl Windows Replace all vinyl windows (ADU; three total) with new windows that are compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials (i.e. wood clad). $15,000
TOTAL: $173,500
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attachment 1 17
Attachment 2
18 426 Holly Street
Laguna Beach, CA
Mills Act Application Report
Prepared by:

July 2025
Attachment 2
19 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Purpose and Methodology.............................................................................................................1

1.2 Qualifications ................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation ..................................................................2

1.4 Definitions and Terminology ..........................................................................................................3

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE...........................................................................................................................................5

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 6

3.1 Location Map ................................................................................................................................6

3.2 Property Description .....................................................................................................................6

3.3 Current Photographs .....................................................................................................................7

3.4 Construction History....................................................................................................................14

4. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS..................................................................... 18

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary ...................................................................................18

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations ........................................................................................18

4.3 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments......................................................19

4.4 Incompatible Features ................................................................................................................28

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN).....................29

6. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE................................................................................................................31

7. SOURCES .................................................................................................................................................................................. 32

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Résumés
Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric Appendix C: Historic Register Application and Historic Resources Assessment Report Attachment 2 20
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Methodology
426 Holly Street is located within the Laguna-North neighborhood of the City of Laguna Beach (City) and is associated with Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 496-155-20 (property). The property comprises a one-story single-family residence with semi-detached garage constructed in 1950. 1 The owners of the subject property
submitted an application to the City to place it on the City’s Register. It was placed on the City’s Historic Register (Register) on July 29, 2025. As such, it is eligible for a Mills Act Historic Property Contract (Mills Act Contract).

The Mills Act was enacted in 1972, giving local governments the authority to grant property tax relief to owners of “qualified” historic properties. In Laguna Beach, a ”qualified” historic property is one that is listed on the Register. To pursue the historic preservation tax reduction incentive, an owner of a qualified historic property must enter a Mills Act Contract with the City. Under this contract agreement, the property owner agrees to protect, preserve, and maintain the property in accordance with specific preservation standards and other conditions in exchange for property tax relief.

GPA Consulting (GPA) was retained by the City to prepare this Mills Act Application Report (report) as part of the Mills Act Contract application for the property. In the preparation of this report, GPA performed the following tasks:

1. Reviewed Mills Act Contract application materials prepared by the property owner(s).

2. Reviewed existing information, including building permit records, planning documents, and historic maps.

3. Conducted a site visit to ascertain the current condition of the property and all buildings and features thereon. Digital photographs were taken for use in this report.

4. Prepared a detailed table of architectural features to document existing conditions, identify character-defining features, and provide recommended treatments following the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards).

5. Coordinated with the City and property owner(s) regarding the Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline for the property and provided recommendations for prioritization of work. The Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline (work plan) included in this report (see Section 5) is based on the work plan submitted by the applicant to the City in the initial Mills Act Application Form. The applicant-submitted work plan was reviewed by GPA for consistency with the intent of the Mills Act program and revised based on a review of existing information and observations made on site. GPA provided a draft of the revised work plan to the applicant to review and to provide the cost estimates included in this report.

1.2 Qualifications
Phoebe Rayburn, Architectural Historian I at GPA, was responsible for the preparation of this report. Audrey von Ahrens, Senior Architectural Historian at GPA, reviewed the report for quality assurance and quality control.

They both meet the qualifications for a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 61. Their résumés are included as Appendix A. 1 The garage has been converted into an accessory dwelling unit (ADU).

Attachment 2
21 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 2

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation In exchange for the Mills Act property tax incentive, property owners must protect, preserve, and maintain the historic property following the Standards, among other specific contract conditions. 2 The definition of
“rehabilitation” assumes that at least some repair or alteration will be needed in order to provide for an efficient, contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy the materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the property’s historic character. The Standards for Rehabilitation are as follows:

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.

The Standards and associated Guidelines can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website using the following address: https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/secretary-standards-treatment-historicproperties.htm. 2 The Standards are codified at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section 68.

Attachment 2
22 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 3

1.4 Definitions and Terminology
Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
This report discusses the architectural features of the property and specifically identifies the CDFs, which are the physical components that contribute to a property’s sense of time and place. For Laguna Beach Mills Act Application Reports, they include two categories: the overall visual character, and exterior materials and craftsmanship.

Some CDFs are more important than others in conveying the significance of a property. This report ranks each CDF as primary or secondary, which are defined as follows:

Primary CDF
• The most essential physical elements to conveying the significance of the property. • Generally includes features that date from the period of significance; directly relate to the original use, type, and style; display craftsmanship; are highly visible; and retain integrity.

Secondary CDF
• Generally includes features that date from the period of significance but may not directly relate to the original use, type, and style; are common features or materials; and/or are less visible due to location on rear elevations.
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that maintains or restores the historical appearance and does not detract from its historic character and significance.
o New features on the historic portions of the property were only considered if they were replaced in kind, or if they were placed within original openings. Such features may compromise the property’s integrity of materials but contribute to its integrity of design. • Materials and/or features that were historically located on the property based on physical or documentary evidence.

Non-Character-Defining Features
Non-historic additions and/or ancillary buildings and their individual features were eliminated from consideration as character-defining, since they do not contribute to the to the Mills Act property’s historic character.

Incompatible Features
This report identifies incompatible features when they are relevant to the Mills Act application and proposed work plan. Incompatible features include the following:
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that deviates from the historical appearance.
• Materials that were not, or would not have been, historically located on the property, such as materials that were not utilized for the style or type of building, or contemporary materials that did not exist at the time of construction.

Attachment 2 23
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 4 Existing Conditions
This report also analyzes the overall existing condition of the property and each of its CDFs. The existing conditions are ranked on a scale of good, fair, and poor. These terms are defined as follows:

Good
• Intact, structurally sound, and performing its intended purpose; and • Needs no repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance.

Fair
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration; and
• Needs repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance; but • Structurally sound and performing its intended purpose overall.

Poor
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration to the point that it is no longer structurally sound or performing its intended purpose.

The condition of non-character-defining and incompatible features is not assessed in this report.

Attachment 2
24 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 5

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE
On September 9, 2024, the owners of the property submitted an application to the City to voluntarily place it on the City’s Register. The application was accompanied by a Historic Resources Assessment (HRA) prepared by Historic Resources Group (HRG), dated January 14, 2025. The HRA evaluated the property under the appliable criteria for designation identified in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 25.45 of the Municipal Code) and assessed its physical integrity.

The HRA concluded the property met City criterion (1), owner consent, and appeared eligible for listing under Criterion 5 as an excellent example of architect Aubrey St. Clair’s later work in Laguna Beach, and under Criterion 6 as an intact example of a Minimal Traditional cottage in Laguna Beach. 3 The period of significance
identified in the HRA is 1950, the date of construction. 4 The Heritage Committee subsequently recommended
approval of the request for placement of the property on the City's Register on January 27, 2025, which was approved at the Administrative Community Development Director Meeting on April 16, 2025.

Figure 1: Site Plan. 1946/1950. Source: HRG, 38. Figure 2: East elevation. 1946/1950. Source: HRG, 41.

Figure 3: North and south elevations. 1946/1950. Source: HRG, 41 3 Historic Resource Group (HRG), Historic Resource Assessment 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach (Laguna Beach: City of Laguna Beach, January 2025), 23.
4 HRG, 9.

Attachment 2
25 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 6

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

3.1 Location Map
The property is in the Laguna-North neighborhood of the City of Laguna Beach, formerly known as Laguna Cliffs, and is located at the center of the neighborhood northeast of North Coast Highway. The area is characterized by single-family residences of varying architectural styles, primarily built between the 1920s and 1930s. 5 The
property is on the east side of Holly Street between Monterey Drive to the south and High Drive to the north. It is a rectangular parcel bounded by Holly Street on the east and an alley on the west (see Figure 4).

Figure 4: 2025 aerial photo showing subject property outlined in orange.

3.2 Property Description
The following property description was adapted from Historic Resource Group, Historic Resource Assessment 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach, January 14, 2025.
6 The property comprises a rectangular parcel with a single-family residence situated toward the east facing Holly Street with a semi-detached ADU (historically a garage) situated on the southwest corner of the parcel and connected to the residence by a covered walkway. The residence is “L”-shaped in plan and one story in height.

It has a cross-hipped roof clad with composition shingles and exterior walls primarily clad with rough troweled stucco. Fenestration is asymmetrically arranged and consists primarily of partially glazed wood doors and 5 HRG, 2.
6 HRG, 16-17.

Attachment 2
26 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 7 various groupings of multi-light wood, fixed and casement sash windows. Wood shutters adorn the window openings on the primary (east) elevation.

The main entrance is located on the east (primary) elevation and consists of a wood Dutch door within a recessed entryway. Flanking the entrance are multi-light wood windows including a tripartite window on the south and paired casements to the north, located on the south-facing wall of the east-projecting volume. On the north end, centered on the east elevation of the projecting volume, is a single-light picture window. A wood arbor wraps around the southwest corner of the residence above a brick patio with vertical V-groove wood siding.

An exterior chimney clad in stucco is located on the east end of the north elevation. Secondary entrances on the east end of the south elevation and north end of the west elevation have fully glazed double doors with horizontally divided lights. A side entrance on the north elevation consists of a partially-glazed wood paneled door.

The covered walkway connecting the ADU to the residence has a gabled roof supported by round columns on the north and partially enclosed on the south by a vertical wood paneled wall. Entrances within the covered walkway (west elevation of the residence and east elevation of the garage) have Dutch doors like that of the main entrance.

There are no other openings on the east elevation of the ADU. Wood and vinyl casement windows are located on the north and south elevations. The are no openings on the west elevation.

The front yard is enclosed by a painted metal picket fence with brick piers flanking a decorative metal entrance gate. A brick walkway leads to the main entrance patio which wraps around to part of the south yard. The north side yard of the house and south side yard of the ADU are paved with concrete. Landscaping consists of small fruit trees, palms, low shrubs, flowers, and other vegetation.

3.3 Current Photographs
Figure 5: Photo Key. Photographs of building(s) indicated in blue and landscaping indicated in green.

Attachment 2 27
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 8 Photo 1. View of property from Holly Street, looking northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 2. East (primary) elevation, view facing west. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 2
28 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 9 Photo 3. South (side, at left) and east (primary, at right) elevations, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 4. West (rear) elevation, view facing east. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 2
29 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 10 Photo 5. North elevation, west end, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 6. North elevation, east end, view facing southeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 2
30 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 11 Photo 7. Covered walkway, view facing south. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 8. Semi-detached ADU, east elevation, view from covered walkway facing west. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 2
31 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 12 Photo 9. ADU, north elevation, view facing south. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 10. ADU, west and south elevations, view facing northeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 2 32
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 13 Photo 11. Front yard landscaping, view facing south. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 12. Side yard landscaping and patio, view facing west. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 2
33 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 14 Photo 13. Rear yard landscaping and hardscaping, view facing southwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

3.4 Construction History
The residence and garage at 426 Holly Street were designed by local architect Aubrey St. Clair for Mr. and Mrs.

A.J. Webster in January 1946 (see Figure 1 to Figure 3) and constructed between 1949 and 1950 (see Figure 6 and Figure 7).
7 According to building permit records, no alterations occurred during the first two decades after initial construction. In 1970, a prefabricated greenhouse (later demolished) was built in the rear yard, adjacent the garage.8In 2010, the residence was re-roofed and the original cedar shakes were removed and replaced with composition shingles.
9 In 2014, one window was infilled on the rear (west) elevation and the wood fence in the rear yard was replaced in like kind.
10 More recently, in 2022, a metal fence with a decorative metal gate was added to the front and west perimeters of the property between existing piers that were heightened and faced with brick. 11 In 2023, the garage was
converted to an ADU which entailed enlarging the garage westward thereby removing two garage doors and their openings, addition of two window openings on the south elevation, removal of three windows on the north elevation and reconfiguration of the openings with two pairs of vinyl casements, and infill of one pedestrian door 7 HRG, 15; City of Laguna Beach Building Permit No. 11784, issued November 11, 1949; Chain of Title, 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach. Orange County Archives.
8 Building Permit No. 70-091, issued March 19, 1970.
9 Building Permit No. BP10-01746, issued October 6, 2010. 10 Building Permit No. RBP-2014-0443, issued March 13, 2014; Building Permit No. RBP-2014-1091, issued June 16, 2014.
11 HRG, 16; Building Permit No. RBP-2014-1091, issued June 16, 2014.

Attachment 2
34 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 15 opening on the east elevation. No other alterations are documented in building permit records (see Table 1 for a list of relevant building permits).

Figure 6: 1948 historical aerial photo showing property (outlined in orange) prior to construction of existing buildings.

Source: Flight PAI_2_1, Frame 17-249, May 14, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Figure 7: 1960 historical aerial photo showing property (outlined in orange) after construction of existing buildings.

Source: Flight PAI_133V_1, Frame 7, October 3, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Figure 8: 1963 historical aerial photo showing property (outlined in orange). Source: Flight pai-199v_1, Frame 30, February 20, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Additional modifications identified through review of existing information, a comparison of historical and current photographs and architectural drawings, and visual observations made during the site visit conducted by GPA, are listed below. Because these alterations are not documented in permit records, exact dates are unknown; however, estimate dates of completion are provided when available.

Attachment 2
35 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 16 • Replacement of almost all original windows in like kind, unknown date. 12 Primary (East) Elevation:
• Replacement of original wood paneled main entrance door with existing wood Dutch door, circa 2014-2018.
13 • Replacement of original arched, multi-light focal window on the north end of the elevation with a trabeated single-light window within enlarged opening and replacement of original shutters, circa 1951-August 2011.
14 • Non-original decorative shutters of focal window on north end of the elevation replaced and new shutters added to all other windows , circa 2011-2014.
15 Secondary Elevations:
• Replacement of two original doors: one original partially-glazed wood panel door on the west elevation of the residence and one original wood paneled door on the east elevation of the garage (both doors within covered walkway) with existing wood Dutch doors, circa 2020-2024.16 • Removal of one small window and infill of opening on the west end of the south elevation, circa 1964-2020.
17 • Addition of one new window opening on the west end of the north elevation, unknown date. 18 • Removal of rear entrance porch covering with wood lattice side walls on north end of the west elevation, unknown date.
19 • Replacement of horizontal wood boards from south end of west elevation (within covered walkway) with smooth stucco, unknown date.20
• Replacement of original lattice enclosure and door along south elevation of covered walkway with existing vertical wood paneling, sometime before 2020.
21 • Replacement of simple wood posts on north elevation of covered walkway with existing round columns, sometime before 2020.
22 12 HRG, 18.
13 Google Street View, January 2018 and May 2014, Google Maps, accessed June 2025, https://www.google.com/maps. 14 Aubrey St. Clair, Residence for Mr. and Mrs. A.J. Webster, 1946, East Elevation; HRG, 18, 41; Google Street View, August 2011.
15 HRG, 18; Google Street View, August 2011 and May 2014. 16 St. Clair, West Elevation and East Elevation Garage; HRG, 42; “426 Holly St, Laguna Beach, CA 92651,” Redfin, March 2020, accessed June 2025, https://www.redfin.com/CA/Laguna-Beach/426-Holly-St-92651/home/4751900. 17 St. Clair, South Elevation; HRG, 41; Flight pai-199v_1, Frame 30, February 20, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection; “426 Holly St, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.”
18 St. Clair, North Elevation; HRG, 41.
19 St. Clair, North Elevation and West Elevation; HRG, 41-42. 20 St. Clair, West Elevation; HRG, 42.
21 St. Clair, South Elevation; HRG, 41.
22 St. Clair, North Elevation; HRG, 41; “426 Holly St, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.” Attachment 2
36 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 17 • Cupola added on roof of covered walkway, circa 1964-2020. 23 Table 1: Building Permit History24
Date Permit Work Completed Architect (A)/
Builder (B) Owner
1949/11/09 11784 Construct new one-story, single-family residence.

Aubrey St. Clair
(A)
Mr. and Mrs. A.

J. Webster
1970/03/19 70-091 Construct new greenhouse (of aluminum preconstructed siding, to be bolted together). Owner (B) Alexander Hook 2010/10/06 BP10-01746 Tear off wood shingle roof, install 7/16” OSB sheathing, install 1 new layer 30# felt, install new
40 yr. comp shingles in brownish gray color on
7:12 pitch, all class “A” installation.

Norland Roofing
Company (B)
Paul Townsend
2014/06/16 RBP-2014-
1091
Replace 6’ high max wood fence and 6’ high
gate at rear yard and 4’ high max fence at side of
garage within property lines per approved plan
N/A Daniel O Bryant
2019/10/10 RBP-2019-
3840
Install 32” pilasters with picket fence at front
yard.

Owner (B) Daniel O’Bryant
2022/04/07 RBP-2022-
0493
Construct a new 4’ fence on the front and west
yard. Add 16” to each (2) pilasters, not to exceed
4’.

Owner (B) Sindi & Ronald
Schwartz
2023/06/28 R23-0432 Expand the existing 469 sq. ft. garage by 75 sq. ft. to create an ADU.

Owner (B) Sindi & Ronald
Schwartz
23 St. Clair, South Elevation; HRG, 41; Flight pai-199v_1, Frame 30, February 20, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection; “426 Holly St, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.”
24 The building permit history table is not a complete list of all building permit records on file for the subject property. It includes only those permits pertaining to alterations to the building(s) exterior, site, and only major electrical and/or MEP upgrades.

Attachment 2
37 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 18

4. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS
The property’s CDFs, their existing condition, and recommended treatments are summarized below and detailed in table format in Section 4.3. See Section 1.4 for definitions of the terminology used throughout this section.

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary
The property and building thereon appear to be in good condition overall. The exterior cladding materials, and all windows and doors appear to be in good condition. The roof was last refinished in 2010, and no visible signs of leaks were observed.

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations
All work, including maintenance and repair, should be completed following the Standards (see Section 1.3).

Generally, all primary CDFs identified in this report (see Section 4.3) should be retained to the greatest extent feasible and inspected annually to determine if maintenance or repair is necessary as the building ages. If deterioration necessitates replacement, the feature should be replaced in kind. Secondary CDFs should be retained or may be replaced with an option that is equally compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials. Additionally, if documentary evidence is or becomes available, restoring original features that were previously removed or replaced is encouraged.

Because the property is in good condition overall, as detailed in Section 4.1, the proposed work primarily entails continued maintenance and as-needed repairs of the historic features. Features expected to need the most regular maintenance are primarily those constructed of wood, though stucco, and masonry will require monitoring and as-needed repairs. Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric includes guidance adapted from the Standards as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs, specific to the materials that contribute to the historic character of the property. Additional preservation guidance and links to resources are included in Section 6. This guidance should be consulted when planning and carrying out applicable work on the property.

Attachment 2
38 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 19

4.3 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments The following table identifies all existing exterior CDFs of the property. If applicable, incompatible features that detract from the historic character and are recommended for removal/replacement in the proposed Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Maintenance Plan (Section 5) are addressed in Section 4.4. Any minor or utilitarian features (e.g., crawlspace covers, contemporary light fixtures, attic vents) not identified in this report may be assumed to be non-character-defining; however, any proposed modifications to these features should be compatible with the historic character of the building and comply with the Standards.

Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment OVERALL VISUAL CHARACTER Massing
• L-shaped in plan
• One story in height
• Asymmetrically
arranged elevations
• Semi-detached garage
(ADU) with covered
walkway
☒ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☐ N/A
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

OVERALL VISUAL

CHARACTER
Roof Form
• Hipped roof
• Boxed eaves
☒ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☐ N/A
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

OVERALL VISUAL

CHARACTER
Garage Building (ADU)
• Rectangular in plan
• One story in height
• Hipped roof

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

Attachment 2
39 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 20 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment OVERALL VISUAL CHARACTER Covered Walkway
• Gabled roof
• Partially enclosed
• Open truss ceiling

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Exterior Cladding Type A
• Stucco
• Hand-troweled texture
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• Periodically replace in kind as
needed. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Exterior Cladding Type B
• Wood siding
• Vertical V-joint boards
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 2
40 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 21 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Door Type A
• Secondary entrances
• Double doors
• Wood
• Fully glazed
o Four horizontally
divided lights
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type C
• Secondary entrance
• Wood
• Partially glazed
o Three horizontally
divided lights
o Wood panel
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Main Entrance Opening
• Recessed
• Trabeated
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair
original opening as needed.
• Non-original door may be
replaced with an equally
compatible option.
• Consider restoring original door
based on documentary evidence.

Attachment 2 41
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 22 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Rear Entrance Opening
• Flush with elevation
• Trabeated
• Wood surround

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair
original opening as needed.
• Non-original door may be
replaced with an equally
compatible option.
• Consider restoring original door
based on documentary evidence.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Garage Entrance Opening
• Flush with elevation
• Trabeated
• Wood surround

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair
original opening as needed.
• Non-original door may be
replaced with an equally
compatible option.
• Consider restoring original door
based on documentary evidence.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Entrance Stoops
• Secondary entrances
• Elevated
• Brick
o Stack bond
pattern
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 2
42 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 23 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Window Type A
• Wood
• Tripartite
o Fixed, six divided
light at center
o Side casement
sash, three
horizontally
divided lights
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type B
• Wood
• Tripartite
o Fixed center
o Side casement
sash
o Three horizontally
divided lights
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type C
• Wood
• Corner
o Group of two
paired casements
o Three horizontally
divided lights
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 2
43 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 24 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Window Type D
• Wood
• Corner
o Fixed, six divided
light
o Window Type B
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type E
• Wood
• Paired casements
• Multi-light
o Three horizontally
divided lights
• Wood surround
• Wood sill

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type F
• Wood
• Paired casement sash
o Three horizontally
divided lights
o Textured glazing
• Wood surround
Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 2
44 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 25 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Window Type G
• Wood
• Paired casement sash
o Two horizontally
divided lights
o Textured glazing
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Chimney
• Exterior
• Stucco cladding

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Arbor
• Main entrance patio
• Wood posts and beams

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ ADU
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 2
45 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 26 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment SITE Front Walkway
• Curvilinear
• Brick paving
o Basketweave
pattern

☒ Front
☐ Rear
☐ Side
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair compatible
replacement stairs as needed.
• May be replaced if desired with
equally compatible option/
configuration or consider
restoring appearance of original
stairs based on documentary
evidence.

SITE
Southeast Patio
• Brick paving
o Basketweave
pattern

☒ Front
☐ Rear
☐ Side
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair compatible
replacement stairs as needed.
• May be replaced if desired with
equally compatible option/
configuration or consider
restoring appearance of original
stairs based on documentary
evidence.

SITE
Retaining Wall/Steps
• Stucco clad wall with
brick coping
• Brick stairs
☐ Front
☒ Rear
☐ Side
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, continue to maintain, and
repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in like
kind.

Attachment 2
46 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 27 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment SITE Patio and Raised Planter
• Brick planter walls
o Running bond
pattern
• Brick paving
o Basketweave
pattern
☐ Front
☒ Rear
☐ Side
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, continue to maintain, and
repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in like
kind.

Attachment 2
47 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 28

4.4 Incompatible Features
The following table identifies only those incompatible non-character-defining features that detract from the historic character of the property, and should therefore be addressed as part of the potential Mills Act contract and proposed Work Plan (see Section 5).

Incompatible Features
Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Recommended Treatment Vinyl Windows
• Three total
• Multi-light casements (paired and
individual)

☐ Total Structure
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ ADU
• Replace incompatible vinyl windows
with new windows that are compatible
with the historic character of the
property in terms of materials.

Vinyl Fence and Gate ☐ Front
☐ Rear
☒ Side
• Remove or replace incompatible vinyl
fence with new option that is more
compatible with the historic character of
the property in terms of materials.

Attachment 2
48 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 29

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property. $20,000

2. 2026 Chimney Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of chimney and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimney is structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$6,500

3. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $10,300 *

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$18,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Gutters/Downspouts Property owner to inspect gutters and downspouts for damage or deterioration and clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed. Make any necessary repairs in a timely manner to prevent water damage to building.
$4,400*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors,
and Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint.

Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair.

Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $30,000*

7. 2026-2036 Columns at Covered
Walkway
If the two columns in the breezeway need repair or replacement in the future, the property owner should consider replacing with the original slender posts per documentary evidence $1,000

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and Doors Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight. If the property owner chooses to replace the front door in the future, the property owner should consider restoring with an original style paneled wood door. (Pending)

9. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. $ 5,000* Attachment 2 49
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 30 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

10. 2025-2035
(annually)
Mechanical Complete repairs to HVAC as needed to prevent risk of potential water damage to historic fabric. Replace existing HVAC if it exceeds its useful life. Commence and complete work in a sensitive manner to avoid damage to historic fabric.
$15,000*

11. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Fences and Gates Inspect wood fences and gates for damage and/or peeling paint and repair/repaint as needed. $6,800*

12. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick Hardscaping Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$3,500*

13. 2030-2036
(centennially)
Stucco Property owner to inspect stucco for damage and make related repairs as needed. Prep, patch, and repaint stucco in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color and texture. $12,000*

14. 2036 Exterior Paint Repaint exteriors of residence and ADU. $26,000

15. 2036 Vinyl Windows Replace all vinyl windows (ADU; three total) with new windows that are compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials (i.e. wood clad). $15,000
TOTAL: $173,500
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attachment 2
50 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 31

6. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE
Preservation Briefs25
In addition to the Standards and Guidelines, the National Park Service has produced a variety of publications, including the Preservation Briefs (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm) and Preservation Tech Notes (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-by-topic.htm), on a broad range of topics and techniques for the treatment of historic buildings and their materials. They can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website.

Some Preservation Briefs that may be relevant to the subject property are:
#2 Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings. #3 Improving Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings.
#4 Roofing for Historic Buildings.
#6 Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Buildings.
#9 The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows.
#10 Exterior Paint Problems on Historic Woodwork.
#14 New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns. #15 Preservation of Historic Concrete.
#16 The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors. #17 Architectural Character- Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character.
#22 The Preservation and Repair of Historic Stucco.
#24 Heating, Ventilating, and Cooling Historic Buildings: Problems and Recommended Approaches. #35 Understanding Old Buildings: The Process of Architectural Investigation. #39 Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings. #41 The Seismic Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings.
#47 Maintaining the Exterior of Small and Medium Size Historic Buildings.

State Historical Building Code
One of California’s most valuable tools for the preservation of historic buildings is the State Historical Building Code (SHBC). While the California Building Code (CBC, section 3403.5) makes provisions for the special treatment of qualified historic buildings, the SHBC amplifies and codifies this protection. The SHBC recognizes and endorses the need to find and adopt reasonable alternatives or reasonable levels of equivalency on a caseby-case basis for situations where strict compliance with the regular code would negatively affect a historic building’s appearance or jeopardize its economic viability. The City includes use of the CHBC as an incentive that may be requested by owners of properties listed in the Register. 25 “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs,” U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, accessed June 2025, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

Attachment 2
51 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach 32

7. SOURCES
California Code of Regulations, California Office of Administrative Law, State of California Government.

City of Laguna Beach. “Historic Preservation.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.lagunabeachcity.net/government/departments/community-development/planningzoning/historic-preservation.

City of Laguna Beach Community Development Department Building Division. Building Permits. Various Dates.

City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code. Chapter 25.45.

Google Maps. Street View Images. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. https://www.google.com/maps.

Historic Resource Group (HRG). Historic Resource Assessment 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach. Laguna Beach: City of Laguna Beach. January 2025.

Redfin. “426 Holly St, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.”March 2020. Accessed June 2025. https://www.redfin.com/CA/Laguna-Beach/426-Holly-St-92651/home/4751900.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. www.proquest.com.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. fims-historicalinfo-com.

St. Clair, Aubrey. Residence for Mr. and Mrs. A.J. Webster. 1946. Drawing Set.

UCSB Geospatial Collection. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/.

US Department of the Interior, National Park Service. “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

US Department of the Interior. National Park Service. “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.” Accessed June 2025.
https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-2017.pdf.

Attachment 2
52 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix A

APPENDIX A
Résumés

Attachment 2
53 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix A

AUDREY VON AHRENS
Audrey von Ahrens is a Senior Architectural Historian at GPA. She has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2013. Audrey graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation and City Planning where she focused on preservation planning and community economic development. She has since worked in private historic preservation consulting in California. Audrey joined GPA in 2017 and her experience has included the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; historic context statements; Secretary of the Interior’s Standards analysis; large-scale historic resources surveys; and evaluations of eligibility for a wide variety of projects and property types throughout Southern California. Audrey is also experienced in coordinating with property owners and local governments in the preparation and review of Mills Act Property Contract applications and the inspection and reporting of properties applying for or with existing contracts.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• M.S., Historic Preservation, University of Pennsylvania, 2016
• Master of City Planning, University of Pennsylvania,
2016
• B.A., Architectural Studies and Urban Studies,
University of Pittsburgh, 2013
• 20 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019.
• 26 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019
• 34-38 E. Holly Street, Pasadena, Mills Act
Application, 2022
• Casa de Rosas, Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit,
2017-2022
• City of Anaheim, Mills Act Program, Inspections of
Existing Contracts, 2024-2025
• City of Costa Mesa, Mills Act Program, Applications
Processing and Contract, Costa Mesa, Orange
County, 2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Pre-Approval Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Periodic Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Inspections of Existing Contracts, Los
Angeles, 2017-2025
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Pre-Contract Services, Los Angeles, 2018-
2020
• North Beach Historic District, San Clemente, National Register Nomination, 2021
• Whittier Public Library, Construction Monitoring,
2021-2023
• Vortox Co. Building, 121 S. Indian Hill Boulevard,
Claremont, CEQA Historical Resource Documentation
Report, 2022
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Senior Architectural Historian, 2024- Present
― Associate Architectural Historian, 2021-2024
― Architectural Historian II, 2017-2021
• Heritage Consulting, Inc., Intern, 2015-2016
• Tacony Community Development Corp., Intern, 2014
• Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, Intern,
2013
• University of Pittsburgh, Teaching Assistant, 2012-
2013
• Pittsburgh Planning Department, Intern, 2012
• Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, Intern, 2011
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for history and architectural
history pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
• National Preservation Institute, Section 106: An
Introduction
Professional Activities:
• Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council,
Planning and Land Use Committee (DLANC), 2018-
2024
• DLANC, Board of Directors, Alternate, 2019-2024
Attachment 2
54 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix A

PHOEBE RAYBURN
Phoebe Rayburn is an Architectural Historian I at GPA. She has been involved with the field of historic preservation since 2024. Phoebe graduated from the College of Charleston with a bachelor’s degree in historic preservation and community planning and a minor in art history. At GPA, she assists the architectural historian team with the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS). Prior to GPA, Ms. Rayburn was a preservation intern at the Historic Charleston Foundation, where she performed historic property inspections, coordinated inspection schedules, prepared and mailed inspection reports, and performed archival research on endangered historic properties for presentation. She is proficient in a number of software programs, including AutoCAD, Adobe InDesign, SketchUp, Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom, and Microsoft Office. She uses these skills to add depth to her analyses and reports in the form of maps, illustrations, and graphics.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• B.A., Historic Preservation and Community Planning,
Minor in Art History, College of Charleston, 2024
• 5679 Corso di Napoli, CEQA Historical Resource
Evaluation Report, Long Beach, 2025
• Kensington Historic District, National Register of
Historic Places Nomination Form, San Diego, 2025
• 8910-8924 Ardendale Avenue, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, San Gabriel, 2025
• Lodi Downtown Specific Plan Historic Resources
Inventory, Lodi, 2025
• Telegraph Road over San Gabriel River Bridge, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• 1323 South Pacific Street, CEQA Historical Resources
Evaluation Report, Oceanside, 2025
• Henningsen-Lotus Road Multi-Use Trail, Section 106
Historic Property Survey Report, El Dorado County,
2025
• I-405 Auxiliary Lanes from I-110 to Wilmington, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• Max Berg Plaza Park Fountain Rehabilitation, Section
106 Historic Property Survey Report, San Clemente,
2025
• Washington Boulevard Bridge over Rio Hondo Channel,
Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Pico
Rivera, 2025
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Architectural Historian I, February
2025 – Present
• Historic Charleston Foundation, Preservation Intern,
January 2024 – May 2024
Attachment 2 55
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix B

APPENDIX B
Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric
The following guidelines are derived from the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs.

Attachment 2
56 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Wood
Retain all original wood features such as siding, window and door surrounds, windows, doors, decorative features, and trim, as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all wood elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture and/or insect damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from wood elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If insect or moisture damage is discovered, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair wood members immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by an extermination specialist, contractor, and/or experienced practitioner. • Repaint (or stain) regularly to protect the wood from moisture, sunlight, and other elements that cause deterioration.
o Remove any damaged or deteriorated paint to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g., hand scraping and hand sanding).
o Apply compatible coating by hand following proper surface preparation. o Repaint (or stain) with a color that is consistent with the age and style of the building.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials and appropriate construction methods such as by patching, piecing-in, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the wood using recognized preservation methods.

Replace
• If a wood element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide. Replacement wood feature should match the historic as closely as possible in design, color, texture, and other qualities to retain the building’s architectural character.

Attachment 2
57 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Stucco
Retain all original stucco features such as walls, brackets, steps, columns, and chimneys as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all stucco elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage or cracks.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away the building by means of flashing, gutters, etc.

Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s).
o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as loss of bond, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair stucco immediately to prevent widespread damage.

Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner.
• Clean only when absolutely necessary using the gentlest means necessary, e.g., to halt deterioration or to remove heavy soiling.
o Clean surface with low-pressure water, gentle (non-ionic) detergent, and natural bristle brushes.
o Spot-test cleaning methods over a sufficient period of time to determine any potential longterm effects of the cleaning process/solution. o Do not apply harsh chemicals or sandblast. Stucco is particularly susceptible to abrasive cleaning.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials, appropriate construction methods, and experienced practitioners to avoid damage to the historic fabric. o Repair hairline cracks in the stucco with a thin slurry of finish coat ingredients or even paint.
o Repair larger areas of damage by patching over with a similarly textured stucco of an appropriate mix.
o Finish coat should be worked to match the texture of the original stucco. o Do not use Portland cement.
o Limit areas of repair to the areas that are damaged.
o Repaint as needed.

Replace
• Total replacement of stucco is likely only to be necessary when 50% or more of the stucco is failing, or when it was previously replaced with an incompatibly textured stucco.

For more information and guidance, see Preservation Brief #22. The Preservation and Repair of Historic Stucco.

Attachment 2 58
Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Masonry
Retain all original masonry features such as such as walls, brackets, steps, columns, window sills, and chimneys as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all masonry elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from masonry elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as efflorescence or mildew, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair masonry immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner.
• Clean only when absolutely necessary using the gentlest means possible, e.g., to halt deterioration or to remove heavy soiling.
o Clean masonry surface with low-pressure water, gentle detergent, and natural bristle brushes. o Spot-test cleaning methods over a sufficient period of time to determine any potential longterm effects of the cleaning process/solution. o Do not apply harsh chemicals.
o Never sandblast. Masonry can be irreparably damaged.

Repair
• Repair when necessary using in-kind materials, appropriate construction methods, and experienced practitioners to avoid damage to the historic fabric. o Repair brick by patching or piecing-in limited masonry units using recognized preservation methods.
o If repointing is needed, use a mortar that duplicates the existing in binder type, aggregate type, strength, composition, color, and texture. Duplicate existing mortar joints in width and joint profile.
o Regularly repaint only if feature was historically painted.

Replace
• If a masonry element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide.

For more information and guidance, see the following Preservation Brief 1. Cleaning and Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic Masonry Buildings, 2. Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings, 6. Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Building, and 15. Preservation of Historic Concrete.

Attachment 2
59 Mills Act Application Report – 426 Holly Street, Laguna Beach Appendix C

APPENDIX C
Historic Register Application and Historic Resources Assessment Report Attachment 2 60
-1- Reso. #
RESOLUTION NO. 25.XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA

BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PURSUANT TO AN EXEMPTION
FROM CEQA UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15331, A

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND THE OWNER OF THE HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 501

LOMBARDY LANE, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, an application was filed by the owner of the property located at 501 Lombardy Lane requesting approval of a Historic Property Preservation Agreement (also known as a Mills Act Contract) in accordance with Resolution 25.XXX; and WHEREAS, 501 Lombardy Lane is listed on the City’s Historic Register as a historic property on the basis of it being a key example of a Victorian Bungalow; and WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach has determined that preservation of the City’s historic resources in general, and 501 Lombardy Lane in particular, is important to the City and contributes to the welfare of current and future generations; and WHEREAS, the Historic Resources Element of the City of Laguna Beach General Plan and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.45) recognize the importance of historic preservation and provide incentives for the protection and preservation for continued use, including Historic Preservation Agreements; and WHEREAS, the execution of a Historic Preservation Agreement is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331, as it concerns the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; and
Attachment 3 61
-2- Reso. #
WHEREAS, on September 15, 2025, the Heritage Committee voted to recommend that the City Council approve the requested Historic Property Preservation Agreement for 501 Lombardy Lane;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH does RESOLVE and ORDER as follows:

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.

SECTION 2. 501 Lombardy Lane is a “qualified historical property” and is eligible for favorable valuation by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as an enforceable restricted historical property under the provisions of California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. and California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 439.1 et seq.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute an Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City of Laguna Beach and the owner of 501 Lombardy Lane, attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 4. Based on its review of the entire record before it, the City Council hereby finds and determines that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15331 – Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation, in that Section 15331 exempts maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources.

These activities must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Accordingly, the approval of the attached Resolutions and execution of the Mills Act Contracts is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331 as each the Mills Act Contract requires that the owners "shall preserve, maintain, Attachment 3 62
-3- Reso. #
and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the [property] and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City", and further requires that all changes to the properties "conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code." ADOPTED this 18
th of November, 2025.

Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 25.XXX was duly adopted at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of said City held on November 18, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

RECUSED: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, CA
Attachment 3 63
55852.00004\42757030.1
1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Laguna Beach
Attn: City Clerk
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Municipality, exempt from SB2 fees pursuant to GC 27388.1(a)(2)(D)

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT
(MILLS ACT CONTRACT)

AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND THE R&R ASSETS, LLC, A UTAH LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY OWNER OF A DESIGNATED HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 501 LOMBARDY LANE, LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA (“Agreement")
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Laguna Beach is authorized by California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. (commonly known and referred to as "the Mills Act") to enter into contracts with the owners of qualified historical properties to provide for appropriate use, maintenance and rehabilitation such that the properties retain their historic characteristics; WHEREAS, R&R Assets, LLC, a Utah Limited Liability Company ("Owners") possessesfee title in and to that certain qualified real property, together with associated structures and improvements thereon, located at 501 Lombardy Lane and designated by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as Assessor’s Parcel No. 644-097-32 (the "Historic Register Property"); and WHEREAS, on September 7, 1999, the Historic Register Property was officially designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, the City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this Agreement to limit the use of the Historic Register Property to prevent inappropriate alterations and ensure that character-defining features are preserved and maintained in an exemplary manner, and to carry out the purposes of "the Mills Act", and to qualify for an assessment of valuation pursuant to Section 439 et seq. of the California Revenue and Taxation Code NOW THEREFORE, the City of Laguna Beach (the "City") Owner agree as follows:

Section 1. Effective Date and Initial Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective and commence on November 18, 2025 (the "Effective Date"), and shall remain in effect for Attachment 3 64
55852.00004\42757030.1
2 an initial term of ten (10) years thereafter.

Section 2. Renewal.

A. Each year on the anniversary of the Effective Date of this agreement, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the initial term of the Agreement unless written notice of nonrenewal is served as provided herein.

B. If Owner or the City desires in any year not to renew the term of the Agreement, Owners or the City shall serve written notice of non-renewal of the Agreement on the other party. Unless such notice is served by Owner to the City at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by the City to Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the term of the Agreement as provided herein.

C. Owners may make a written protest of notice of non-renewal served by the City. The City may at any time prior to the annual renewal date of the Agreement, withdraw its notice to Owner of non-renewal.

D. If either the City or Owner serves notice to the other of non-renewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from the Effective Date or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply.

Section 3. Standards and Conditions. During the term of this Agreement, the Historic Register Property shall be subject to the following conditions:

A. Owner shall preserve, maintain, and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the Historic Register Property and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City.

B. All proposed changes to the Historic Register Property shall comply with applicable City regulations and guidelines and the specific requirements for structural rehabilitation and maintenance attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A, and shall conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code, and shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Community Development Director.

C. Owner shall notify the City of changes to character-defining exterior features of the Historic Register Property prior to their execution, such as but not limited to major landscaping projects, exterior door replacement or exterior alterations, regardless of whether a building permit is required.

Attachment 3 65
55852.00004\42757030.1
3 D. The following are prohibited: Demolition of the house or garage on the Historic Register Property; exterior alterations or additions not in keeping with the standards listed above; dilapidated, deteriorating or unrepaired structures, such as but not limited to fences, roofs, doors, walls and windows; storage of scrap lumber, junk, trash, debris, discarded or unused objects, such as but not limited to cars, appliances or furniture; stagnant water and unfilled excavations; any other device, decoration or structure that is unsightly by reason of its height, condition or inappropriate location.

E. Owner shall allow inspection of the interior and exterior of the Historic Register Property by representatives of the County Assessor and the City prior to the Effective Date and every five (5) years thereafter to determine Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 4. Furnishing of Information. Owner hereby agrees to furnish the City with any and all information requested by the City that may be necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 5. Cancellation.

A. The City, following a duly noticed public hearing by the City Council in accordance with Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this Agreement if it determines that Owner has breached any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, including but not limited to the provisions of Section 3 hereof, or has allowed the Historic Register Property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property. If this Agreement is canceled because of Owner's failure to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate the Historic Register Property as specified by this Agreement, Owner shall pay a cancellation fee to the County Auditor as set forth in and in the amount required by Government Code Section 50286. No penalty shall be imposed if deterioration of the Historic Register Property is due to fire, disaster, or other factor beyond Owner's control.

B. If the Historic Register Property is acquired by eminent domain and the City Council determines that the acquisition frustrates the purpose of this Agreement, the Agreement shall be canceled and no fee imposed, as specified in Government Code Section 50288.

Section 6. Enforcement of Agreement.

A. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, the City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms and conditions of the Agreement. In the event of a default, or in the event the City has grounds to cancel this Agreement under Section 5.A. above, the City shall give written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address set forth in Section 8 below; and if such default or breach is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the City within thirty (30) days thereafter, or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default (provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within thirty (30) days and shall thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by the owners), then the Attachment 3 66
55852.00004\42757030.1
4 City may, without further notice, declare a default under the terms of this Agreement and may either (i) pursue cancellation of the Agreement under Section 5.A. above (after a duly noticed public hearing of the City Council) or (ii) bring any action necessary to specifically enforce Owner's obligations required under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, apply to any appropriate court for injunctive relief against any violation by Owner or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate.

B. The City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if the City does not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity that are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in the City's regulations governing historic register properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by the City of any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder.

Section 7. Binding Effect of Agreement. Owner hereby agrees to and subjects the Historic Register Property to all of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement. The City and Owner hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon Owner's heirs, successors and assigns in title or interest to the Historic Register Property. Every contract, deed or other instrument hereafter executed, delivered and accepted shall be subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement regardless of whether such covenants, restrictions and reservations are recited or referred to in such contract, deed or other instrument.

Section 8. Notice. Any notice required by the terms of this Agreement shall be sent to the address of the respective parties as specified below or at other addresses that may be later specified by the parties hereto.

To City: City of Laguna Beach
Attn: Community Development Director
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
To Owners: ______________________
______________________
Section 9. General Provisions.

A. None of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or members of any joint enterprise.

B. Owner agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees from liability for damage or claims for damage for Attachment 3 67
55852.00004\42757030.1
5 personal injuries, including without limitation death, and claims for property damage that may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations of Owner or those of Owner's contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on Owner's behalf, or that otherwise relates to the use, operation and maintenance of the Historic Register Property. .

C. The foregoing defense, indemnity and hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the use, operations and activities referred to in this Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications, permits or other documents for the Historic Register Property.

D. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the Historic Register Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever.

E. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations or restrictions contained in this Agreement, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorneys' fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to costs, litigation expenses and other relief ordered by the court.

F. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be effected thereby.

G. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Section 10. Recordation. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties execute and enter into this agreement, the City shall cause this agreement to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange.

Section 11. Signatures. The City and Owners shall sign this Agreement, which shall be notarized.

Attachment 3 68
55852.00004\42757030.1
6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owner have executed this agreement on the day and year written below.

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
Date: ____________________ By: __________________________ City Manager
_________________________
Date: ____________________ By:___________________________ Trustee/ or Owner
Attachment 3 69
55852.00004\42757030.1
7 State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature (Seal)
________________________________
State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

Attachment 3 70
55852.00004\42757030.1
8 I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature (Seal)
________________________________
Attachment 3 71
Mills Act Application Report –501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 22

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property.
$8,000

2. 2026 Chimney Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of chimney and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimney is structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$2,000

3. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $10,000*

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$3,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Gutters/Downspouts Property owner to inspect gutters and downspouts for damage or deterioration and clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed. Make any necessary repairs in a timely manner to prevent water damage to building.
$5,000*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors, and
Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint. Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair. Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $22,000*

7. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and Doors Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight.
$10,000*

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Metal Weathervane
and Cresting
Clean metal of corrosion by gently sanding, make any necessary repairs, and refinish. $750*

9. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. $30,000*

10. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Fences and Gates Inspect wood fences and gates for damage and/or peeling paint and repair/repaint as needed. $6,000* Attachment 3
Exhibit A
72 Mills Act Application Report –501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 23 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

11. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick Hardscaping
(Driveway and
Walkways)
Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$3,000*

12. 2036 Vinyl Windows Replace all vinyl window(s) with new, historically appropriate, compatible multi-light wood windows within existing opening(s).
$1,000*
TOTAL: $100,750
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attachment 3 73

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT
505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Tel. (949) 497-0713 Fax. (949) 497-0759

MILLS ACT CONTRACT APPLICATION
REVISED: JANUARY 2025 Page | 2
GENERAL INFORMATION (must be typed):

Property Address:

Property Owner
(as noted on Grant Deed):

Mailing Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Telephone No: E-Mail:

Applicant:

Address:

City: State: Zip Code:

Telephone No: E-Mail:

PROPERTY INFORMATION:

Address of property: Assessor Parcel No(s):

Tract: Block: Lot(s):

Legal
Description:

HISTORIC DESIGNATION CATEGORY:

Staff Only: Application No.: _____________ HR Designation No.: ___________ Date of Designation: _________ REQUIRED MATERIALS (must be submitted with this application):

COMPLETED AND SIGNED APPLICATION FORM
$3,201 APPLICATION FEE

COPY OF GRANT DEED, INCLUDING LEGAL DESCRIPTION
$4,000 DEPOSIT FOR HISTORIC ASSESSMENT (must be a separate check)1 The assessment will include current photographs of street views, each exterior or side elevation and all other improvements/features on the parcel. The photographs will be used to create a table identifying character-defining features and provide recommendations for treatments. The assessment will also include a recommended rehabilitation/maintenance plan and timeline which includes all work to be completed within the next 10 years.

DRAFT 10-YEAR REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND COST ESTIMATE OF ITEMIZED WORK

COPY OF MOST RECENT PROPERTY TAX BILL

MOST RECENT REAL PROPERTY REPORT
I hereby certify that I am the present owner of the subject property described above and that I have reviewed the subject application and apply for consideration for a Mills Act Contract. I further understand that a Mills Act Application does not result in an automatic entitlement and each application is evaluated on its own merits on its historical significance and inclusion in the City’s program.

Owner’s Signature: Date:
1 Properties with more than two historic-age buildings (including ancillary buildings such as a garage or guest house) will require an additional fee to be determined based on the size and complexity of the property and number of historic-age buildings.

Attachment 4 74
501 Lombardy Lane R&R Assets LLC 8026 Terrace Ridge Dr Tampa FL 33637 863-398-3083 [email protected] Susan Rogers, R&R Assets LLC 8026 Terrace Ridge Dr Tampa FL 33637 863-398-3083 [email protected] 501 Lombardy Lane 644-097-32 844 10 HCR-25-0952 ✔ 8/22/2025 N TR 844 BLK LOT 10 TR 844 LOT 10 ALL -INC 20 FT STRIP ADJ ON SW- 501 Lombardy Lane
Laguna Beach, CA
Mills Act Application Report
Prepared by:

July 2025
Attachment 4
75 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Purpose and Methodology.............................................................................................................1

1.2 Qualifications ................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation ..................................................................2

1.4 Definitions and Terminology ..........................................................................................................3

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE...........................................................................................................................................5

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 6

3.1 Location Map ................................................................................................................................6

3.2 Property Description .....................................................................................................................6

3.3 Current Photographs .....................................................................................................................7

3.4 Construction History....................................................................................................................12

4. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS......................................................................14

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary ...................................................................................14

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations ........................................................................................14

4.1 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments......................................................15

4.2 Incompatible Features ................................................................................................................21

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN)..................... 22

6. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE...............................................................................................................24

7. SOURCES .................................................................................................................................................................................. 25

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Résumés
Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric Attachment 4
76 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Methodology
501 Lombardy Lane, Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 644-097-32 (property), is located within the Laguna-South neighborhood (historically known as Arch Beach) in the City of Laguna Beach (City). The property comprises a one-story single-family residence constructed between 1927 to 1931.1It was placed on the City’s Historic Register (Register) on September 15, 1999. As such, it is eligible for a Mills Act Historic Property Contract (Mills Act Contract).

The Mills Act was enacted in 1972, giving local governments the authority to grant property tax relief to owners of “qualified” historic properties. In Laguna Beach, a ”qualified” historic property is one that is listed on the Register. To pursue the historic preservation tax reduction incentive, an owner of a qualified historic property must enter a Mills Act Contract with the City. Under this contract agreement, the property owner agrees to protect, preserve, and maintain the property in accordance with specific preservation standards and other conditions in exchange for property tax relief.

GPA Consulting (GPA) was retained by the City to prepare this Mills Act Application Report (report) as part of the Mills Act Contract application for the property. In the preparation of this report, GPA performed the following tasks:

1. Reviewed Mills Act Contract application materials prepared by the property owner(s).

2. Reviewed existing information, including building permit records, planning documents, and historic maps.

3. Conducted a site visit to ascertain the current condition of the property and all buildings and features thereon. Digital photographs were taken for use in this report.

4. Prepared a detailed table of architectural features to document existing conditions, identify character-defining features, and provide recommended treatments following the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards).

5. Coordinated with the City and property owner(s) regarding the Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline for the property and provided recommendations for prioritization of work. The Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline (work plan) included in this report (see Section 5) is based on the work plan submitted by the applicant to the City in the initial Mills Act Application Form. The applicant-submitted work plan was reviewed by GPA for consistency with the intent of the Mills Act program and revised based on a review of existing information and observations made on site. GPA provided a draft of the revised work plan to the applicant to review and to provide the cost estimates included in this report.

1.2 Qualifications
Phoebe Rayburn, Architectural Historian I at GPA, was responsible for the preparation of this report. Audrey von Ahrens, Senior Architectural Historian at GPA, reviewed the report for quality assurance and quality control. Ms. von Ahrens meets the qualifications for a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 61. Their résumés are included as Appendix A. 1 Kathleen Les, “Laguna – South,” California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Form Set, Environmental Coalition, Laguna Beach, California, April 1980, 72.

Attachment 4
77 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 2

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation In exchange for the Mills Act property tax incentive, property owners must protect, preserve, and maintain the historic property following the Standards, among other specific contract conditions. 2 The definition of
“rehabilitation” assumes that at least some repair or alteration will be needed in order to provide for an efficient, contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy the materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the property’s historic character. The Standards for Rehabilitation are as follows:

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
2 The Standards relevant to the Laguna Beach Mills Act program are codified at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section

68. Attachment 4
78 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 3 The Standards and associated Guidelines can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website using the following address:
https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/secretary-standards-treatment-historic-properties.htm.

1.4 Definitions and Terminology
Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
This report discusses the architectural features of the property and specifically identifies the CDFs, which are the physical components that contribute to a property’s sense of time and place. For Laguna Beach Mills Act Application Reports, they include two categories: the overall visual character, and exterior materials and craftsmanship.

Some CDFs are more important than others in conveying the significance of a property. This report ranks each CDF as primary or secondary, which are defined as follows:

Primary CDF
• The most essential physical elements to conveying to the significance of the property. • Generally includes features that date from the period of significance; directly relate to the original use, type, and style; display craftsmanship; are highly visible; and retain integrity.

Secondary CDF
• Generally includes features that date from the period of significance but may not directly relate to the original use, type, and style; are common features or materials; and/or are less visible due to location on rear elevations.
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that maintains or restores the historical appearance and does not detract from its historic character and significance.
o New features on the historic portions of the property were only considered if they were replaced in kind, or if they were placed within original openings. Such features may compromise the property’s integrity of materials but contribute to its integrity of design. • Materials and/or features that were historically located on the property based on physical or documentary evidence.

Non-Character-Defining Features
Non-historic additions and/or ancillary buildings and their individual features were eliminated from consideration as character-defining, since they do not contribute to the to the Mills Act property’s historic character.

Incompatible Features
This report identifies incompatible features when they are relevant to the Mills Act application and proposed work plan. Incompatible features include the following:
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that deviates from the historical appearance.

Attachment 4
79 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 4 • Materials that were not, or would not have been, historically located on the property, such as materials that were not utilized for the style or type of building, or contemporary materials that did not exist at the time of construction.

Existing Conditions
This report also analyzes the overall existing condition of the property and each of its CDFs. The existing conditions are ranked on a scale of good, fair, and poor. These terms are defined as follows:

Good
• Intact, structurally sound, and performing its intended purpose; and • Needs no repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance.

Fair
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration; and
• Needs repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance; but • Structurally sound and performing its intended purpose overall.

Poor
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration to the point that it is no longer structurally sound or performing its intended purpose.

The condition of non-character-defining and incompatible features is not assessed in this report.

Attachment 4
80 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 5

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE
501 Lombardy Lane was identified in the 1981 Laguna Beach Historic Resources Inventory (LBHRI) and was automatically listed in the Register as a “K” rated property, which at the time referred to a building that strongly maintained its original integrity and demonstrated a particular architectural style or time period.3 However, a revised Historic Preservation Program and ordinance approved by City Council in April 2022 and certified by the California Coastal Commission in July 2022 no longer assigns a rating system to historical resources and eliminated all references to the 1981 LBHRI.4
Never-the-less, the property was officially listed on the City’s Register on September 15, 1999, as a “Victorianized Bungalow.” The assumed periods of significance are 1927-1931, encompassing initial construction, and circa 1945-1972, capturing the period during which Victorian elements were added.

Figure 1: Photo of 501 Lombardy Lane, view facing east. Source: 1981 LBHRI. 3 Les, 65.
4 Laguna Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 25.45 Historic Preservation, 25.45.004 General Provisions.

Attachment 4
81 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 6

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

3.1 Location Map
The property is in the Laguna-South neighborhood of the City of Laguna Beach, formerly known as Arch Beach.

The area is primarily beach cottages and second houses. 501 Lombardy Lane is located near the center northwest portion of the Laguna-South neighborhood, east of South Coast Highway. It is a rectangular parcel bounded by Lombardy Lane on the north and neighboring parcels on the east, south, and west (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: 2025 aerial photo showing subject property outlined in orange.

3.2 Property Description
The property comprises a rectangular parcel with a one-story single-family residence. The residence has an irregular shaped plan, asymmetrical massing, and fills the parcel. It has a multi-gabled roof with front, shed, flat, and mansard gables clad in composition shingles. Metal cresting runs along the roofline with wood cresting above the eaves. There are decoratively carved wood brackets under the eaves on the west portion of the primary elevation that wrap around to the north portion of the west elevation. The exterior walls are clad in straight edged wood shingles with half-round wood shingles within the gable peaks. Fenestration consists of ribbon windows, a fixed leaded window, multi-light picture windows, multi-light casements, multi-light sidelights, single-light casements, fixed single-light, fixed multi-light window, fixed multi-light pentagon-shaped window, and multilight wood doors.

The main entrance is located on the north (primary) elevation and is centered beneath the front-facing gable. It consists of partially glazed, multi-light wood double doors that are flush with the elevation and articulated by a fixed multi-light pentagon-shaped window above. West of the main entrance is a canted bay that projects from the rest of the elevation and has four arched windows with fixed one-over-one divided lights with decoratively carved wood mullions. The east portion of the elevation is set back and has a fixed leaded glass window.

Attachment 4
82 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 7 Toward the south end of the west elevation is a box bay window with fixed multi-light center and multi-light side casement sash. The rear (south) elevation has a secondary entrance on the west with partially glazed wood double doors flanked by casement windows with four horizontally divided lights. To the east, the elevation projects slightly at an angle where an arched window with paired multi-light casements and transom are located adjacent a rectangular projecting volume. The south face of the projecting volume has three single-light casement windows. On the east end of the elevation is a vinyl window with paired casements. There are no openings on the east elevation.

The front yard is enclosed by a metal picket fence and entrance gate. The rear and side yards are enclosed with a wood fence. There is a brick driveway and a brick front porch that wraps around to the rear and side yards.

Landscaping consists of vines and shrubs along the picket fence in the front yard and west side yard.

3.3 Current Photographs
Figure 3: Photo Key. Photographs of building(s) indicated in blue and landscaping indicated in green.

Project North
Attachment 4
83 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 8 Photo 1. View of property from Lombardy Lane, looking southwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 2. North (primary) elevation, main entrance, looking southeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 4
84 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 9 Photo 3. East (side) elevation, view facing southwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 4. South (rear) elevation, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 4
85 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 10 Photo 5. South (rear, at left) and west (side, at right) elevations, view facing northeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 6. North (front) yard hardscaping, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 4
86 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 11 Photo 7. South (rear) yard hardscaping, view facing southwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 8. Southwest (rear, side) hardscaping, view facing south. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 4
87 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 12

3.4 Construction History
The single-family residence at 501 Lombardy Lane was initially constructed between 1927 and 1931 (see Figure 4).
5 The original building permit is not on file with the City, and the original builder and architect, if any, are unknown. The earliest building permit dates to May 1945 when a skylight was added to the living room roof and indicates that the residence had board and batten exterior walls and a shingle roof.6In September of 1945, a one-room addition with mansard roof and Victorian elements was constructed on the northwest (see Figure 5). 7 In 1956, the residence was “remodeled” and an addition was constructed on the southwest (see Figure 7). 8 In
2001, what is described in the building permit as a “solarium” was demolished and replaced with a new dining room and sunroom addition on the southwest.
9 The existing fence and entrance gate were replaced in 2002.10 See Table 1 for a summary list of relevant building permits.

Figure 4: 1931 historical aerial photo showing property soon after initial construction. Source: Flight X_8, Frame 26, May 22, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Figure 5: 1948 Sanborn showing property with northwest
addition. Source: Sanborn Map Company, Laguna Beach,
Sheet 16, courtesy of Historical Information Gatherers, Inc.

Figure 6: 1962 Sanborn showing property prior to
construction of southwest addition. Source: Sanborn Map Company, Laguna Beach, Sheet 16, courtesy of Historical Information Gatherers, Inc.

Figure 7: 1973 historical aerial photo showing property with southwest addition. Source: Flight WAS_G14, Frame 83,
January 19, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection. 5 Les, 72.
6 City of Laguna Beach, Building Permit No. 8406, May 31, 1945. 7 Building Permit No. 8617, September 29, 1945.
8 Building Permit No. 14992, August 10, 1956.
9 Building Permit No. 14992, August 10, 1956.
10 Building Permit No. B00-0320, November 11, 2001.

Attachment 4
88 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 13 No other alterations are documented in building permit records; however, additional modifications identified through a comparison of historical and current photographs, and visual observations made during the site visit conducted by GPA are listed below:
• Original board and batten exterior wall cladding replaced with wood shingles and application of Victorian features “salvaged from old Pasadena homes,” circa 1945-1972. 11 • Replacement of main entrance door (north elevation), unknown date. • New window opening added above main entrance door with fixed multi-light wood window on the north elevation, circa 1980-2007.
12 • Replacement of straight edge wood shingle cladding on the north elevation within the front-facing gable with half-round wood shingles, circa 1980-2007.
13 • Replacement of roof cresting on northwest addition with existing metal cresting, circa 1980- 2007.
14 Table 1: Building Permit History15
Date Permit Work Completed Architect (A)/
Builder (B) Owner
1945/05/31 8406 Construct sky light in living room. Ross Shattuck (B)
Margaret E.

Shattuck
1945/09/29 8617 Construct a 17’ x 20’ one-room addition to existing residence.

Owner (B) Margaret E.

Shattuck
1956/08/10 14992 Construct addition to kitchen and remodel existing residence.

Clifford R. Hill
(B)
Ross Shattuck
1998/07/06 B98-1259 Remove existing roof and re-roof with composition shingles.

Joe Smalldon
(B)
Robert A. Di
Tullio
2001/11/29 B00-0320 Demolish existing solarium and add new dining room/sunroom.

Ron Guley (A);
Owner (B)
Robert and
Mary Di Tullio
2002/03/04 B02-409 In kind replacement of approximately 10’ to 12’ of fence and gate, with the max height of 6’ on side &
year yard.

Owner (B) Robert A Di
Tullio
11 “Emphasis on Charm: Group Plans Tour of Eight Laguna Homes,” Los Angeles Times, November 16, 1972, 10, Newspapers.com, accessed June 2025, https://www.newspapers.com/image/386034829/; Building Permit No. 8406, May 31, 1945.
12 Les, 72; Google Street View, September 2007, Google Maps, accessed June 2025, https://www.google.com/maps. 13 Les, 72; Google Street View, September 2007.
14 Les, 72; Google Street View, September 2007.
15 The building permit history table is not a complete list of all building permit records on file for the subject property. It includes only those permits pertaining to alterations to the building(s) exterior, site, and only major electrical and/or MEP upgrades.

Attachment 4
89 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 14

4. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS
The property’s CDFs, their existing condition, and recommended treatments are summarized below and detailed in table format in Section 4.1. See Section 1.4 for definitions of the terminology used throughout this section.

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary
The property and building thereon appear to be in good overall condition. No visible signs of damage to the roof or foundation were observed. The exterior wood shingles and decorative features such as wood brackets and trim and metal cresting, and windows and doors all appear to be in good condition.

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations
All work, including maintenance and repair, should be completed following the Standards (see Section 1.3).

Generally, all primary CDFs identified in this report (see Section 4.1) should be retained to the greatest extent feasible and inspected annually to determine if maintenance or repair is necessary as the building ages. If deterioration necessitates replacement, the feature should be replaced in kind. Secondary CDFs should be retained or may be replaced with an option that is equally compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials. Additionally, if documentary evidence is or becomes available, restoring original features that were previously removed or replaced is encouraged.

Because the property is in good condition, as detailed in Section 4.1, the proposed work primarily entails continued maintenance and as-needed repairs of the historic features. Because the roof was last refinished in 2010, full re-roofing will likely be needed within the next ten years. Features expected to need the most regular maintenance are primarily constructed of wood and metal, though masonry features require monitoring and asneeded repairs. Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric includes guidance adapted from the Standards as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs, specific to the materials that contribute to the historic character of the property. Additional preservation guidance and links to resources are included in Section 6. This guidance should be consulted when planning and carrying out applicable work on the property.

Attachment 4
90 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 15

4.1 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments The following table identifies all existing exterior CDFs of the property. If applicable, incompatible features that detract from the historic character and are recommended for removal/replacement in the proposed Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Maintenance Plan (Section 5) are addressed in Section 4.2. Any minor or utilitarian features (e.g., crawlspace covers, contemporary light fixtures, attic vents) not identified in this report may be assumed to be non-character-defining; however, any proposed modifications to these features should be compatible with the historic character of the building and comply with the Standards.

Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment OVERALL VISUAL CHARACTER Massing
• Irregular in plan
• One story in height
• Asymmetrically
arranged elevations
☒ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

OVERALL VISUAL

CHARACTER
Roof Form
• Multi-gabled
o Front-gabled
o Mansard
o Shed
• Flush and overhanging
eaves
• Wood corbels
• Metal and wood
cresting
☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

Attachment 4
91 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 16 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Exterior Cladding Type A
• Wood shingles
• Straight edge
☒ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Exterior Cladding Type B
• Wood shingles
• Half-round
• Gable peaks and below
roof perimeter
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type A
• Main entrance
• Wood
• Double doors
• Fully glazed
o Ten divided lights
• Projecting wood
surround; decorative
molding
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 4
92 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 17 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Door Type B
• Rear entrance
• Wood
• Double doors
• Fully glazed
o Eight divided lights
• Wood casement
sidelights
• Dual pane
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• May be replaced with new,
compatible option. Consider
replacing with single panes, which
would be more compatible with
the historic character of the
property.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type A
• Canted bay
• Group of four
o Rounded arch
o One-over-one
divided lights
• Wood surround
• Decorative wood
moldings
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type B
• Wood
• Fixed
• Leaded glass
• Wood surround
• Wood sill

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 4
93 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 18 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Window Type C
• Wood
• Tripartite
o Fixed center
o Side casement
sash
• Multi-light
• Dual pane
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• May be replaced with new,
compatible option. Consider
replacing with single panes, which
would be more compatible with
the historic character of the
property.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type D
• Wood
• Paired casements
• Rounded arch transom
• Multi-light
o Three divided
lights
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• May be replaced with new,
compatible option. Consider
replacing with single panes, which
would be more compatible with
the historic character of the
property.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type E
• Wood
• Casement
• Single light
• Wood surround
• Wood sill

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• May be replaced with new,
compatible option. Consider
replacing with single panes, which
would be more compatible with
the historic character of the
property.

Attachment 4
94 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 19 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Decorative Cresting Type A
• Metal
• Low railing
• Filagree
• Rooftop perimeter
(mansard roof)

☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Decorative Cresting Type B
• Wood
• Carved
• Roof perimeter
(mansard roof)

☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Decorative Corbels
• Wood
• Carved
• Eaves of mansard roof

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 4
95 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 20 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment SITE Brick Hardscaping
• Herringbone pattern
• Basketweave pattern

☒ Front
☒ Rear
☒ Side
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• May be replaced if desired with
equally compatible option/
configuration.

Attachment 4
96 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 21

4.2 Incompatible Features
The following table identifies only those incompatible non-character-defining features that detract from the historic character of the property, and should therefore be addressed as part of the potential Mills Act contract and proposed Work Plan (see Section 5).

Incompatible Features
Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Recommended Treatment Vinyl Window ☐ Total Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
• Replace incompatible vinyl window with
new windows that are compatible with
the historic character of the property in
terms of materials
Concrete and Tile Planters/Fountains ☒ Front
☒ Rear
☒ Side
• Consider removing or replacing
incompatible hardscaping with new
options that are more compatible with
the historic character of the property in
terms of style and materials.

Attachment 4
97 Mills Act Application Report –501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 22

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property.
$8,000

2. 2026 Chimney Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of chimney and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimney is structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$2,000

3. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $10,000*

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$3,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Gutters/Downspouts Property owner to inspect gutters and downspouts for damage or deterioration and clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed. Make any necessary repairs in a timely manner to prevent water damage to building.
$5,000*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors, and
Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint. Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair. Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $22,000*

7. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and Doors Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight.
$10,000*

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Metal Weathervane
and Cresting
Clean metal of corrosion by gently sanding, make any necessary repairs, and refinish. $750*

9. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. $30,000*

10. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Fences and Gates Inspect wood fences and gates for damage and/or peeling paint and repair/repaint as needed. $6,000* Attachment 4
98 Mills Act Application Report –501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 23 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

11. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick Hardscaping
(Driveway and
Walkways)
Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$3,000*

12. 2036 Vinyl Windows Replace all vinyl window(s) with new, historically appropriate, compatible multi-light wood windows within existing opening(s).
$1,000*
TOTAL: $100,750
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attachment 4
99 Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 24

6. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE
Preservation Briefs16
In addition to the Standards and Guidelines, the National Park Service has produced a variety of publications, including the Preservation Briefs (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm) and Preservation Tech Notes (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-by-topic.htm), on a broad range of topics and techniques for the treatment of historic buildings and their materials. They can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website.

Some Preservation Briefs that may be relevant to the subject property are:
#2 Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings. #3 Improving Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings.
#4 Roofing for Historic Buildings.
#6 Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Buildings.
#9 The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows.
#10 Exterior Paint Problems on Historic Woodwork.
#14 New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns. #16 The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors. #17 Architectural Character- Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character.
#24 Heating, Ventilating, and Cooling Historic Buildings: Problems and Recommended Approaches. #33 The Preservation and Repair of Stained and Leaded Glass. #35 Understanding Old Buildings: The Process of Architectural Investigation. #39 Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings. #41 The Seismic Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings.
#47 Maintaining the Exterior of Small and Medium Size Historic Buildings.

State Historical Building Code
One of California’s most valuable tools for the preservation of historic buildings is the State Historical Building Code (SHBC). While the California Building Code (CBC, section 3403.5) makes provisions for the special treatment of qualified historic buildings, the SHBC amplifies and codifies this protection. The SHBC recognizes and endorses the need to find and adopt reasonable alternatives or reasonable levels of equivalency on a caseby-case basis for situations where strict compliance with the regular code would negatively affect a historic building’s appearance or jeopardize its economic viability. The City includes use of the CHBC as an incentive that may be requested by owners of properties listed in the Register. 16 “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs,” U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, accessed June 2025, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

Attachment 4
100
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach 25

7. SOURCES
California Code of Regulations, California Office of Administrative Law, State of California Government.

City of Laguna Beach. “Historic Preservation.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.lagunabeachcity.net/government/departments/community-development/planningzoning/historic-preservation.

City of Laguna Beach Community Development Department Building Division. Building Permits. Various Dates.

City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code. Chapter 25.45.

Google Street View Images. Various Dates.

Les, Kathleen. “Laguna – South.” California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Form Set.

Environmental Coalition. Laguna Beach, California. April 1980.

Newspapers.com. “Emphasis on Charm: Group Plans Tour of Eight Laguna Homes.” Los Angeles Times.

November 16, 1972. 10. Accessed June 2025. https://www.newspapers.com/image/386034829/.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. www.proquest.com.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. fims-historicalinfo-com UCSB Geospatial Collection. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/.

US Department of the Interior, National Park Service. “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

US Department of the Interior. National Park Service. “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.” Accessed June 2025.
https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-2017.pdf.

Attachment 4
101
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Appendix A

APPENDIX A
Résumés

Attachment 4
102
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Appendix A

AUDREY VON AHRENS
Audrey von Ahrens is a Senior Architectural Historian at GPA. She has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2013. Audrey graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation and City Planning where she focused on preservation planning and community economic development. She has since worked in private historic preservation consulting in California. Audrey joined GPA in 2017 and her experience has included the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; historic context statements; Secretary of the Interior’s Standards analysis; large-scale historic resources surveys; and evaluations of eligibility for a wide variety of projects and property types throughout Southern California. Audrey is also experienced in coordinating with property owners and local governments in the preparation and review of Mills Act Property Contract applications and the inspection and reporting of properties applying for or with existing contracts.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• M.S., Historic Preservation, University of Pennsylvania, 2016
• Master of City Planning, University of Pennsylvania,
2016
• B.A., Architectural Studies and Urban Studies,
University of Pittsburgh, 2013
• 20 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019.
• 26 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019
• 34-38 E. Holly Street, Pasadena, Mills Act
Application, 2022
• Casa de Rosas, Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit,
2017-2022
• City of Anaheim, Mills Act Program, Inspections of
Existing Contracts, 2024-2025
• City of Costa Mesa, Mills Act Program, Applications
Processing and Contract, Costa Mesa, Orange
County, 2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Pre-Approval Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Periodic Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Inspections of Existing Contracts, Los
Angeles, 2017-2025
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Pre-Contract Services, Los Angeles, 2018-
2020
• North Beach Historic District, San Clemente, National Register Nomination, 2021
• Whittier Public Library, Construction Monitoring,
2021-2023
• Vortox Co. Building, 121 S. Indian Hill Boulevard,
Claremont, CEQA Historical Resource Documentation
Report, 2022
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Senior Architectural Historian, 2024- Present
― Associate Architectural Historian, 2021-2024
― Architectural Historian II, 2017-2021
• Heritage Consulting, Inc., Intern, 2015-2016
• Tacony Community Development Corp., Intern, 2014
• Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, Intern,
2013
• University of Pittsburgh, Teaching Assistant, 2012-
2013
• Pittsburgh Planning Department, Intern, 2012
• Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, Intern, 2011
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for history and architectural
history pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
• National Preservation Institute, Section 106: An
Introduction
Professional Activities:
• Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council,
Planning and Land Use Committee (DLANC), 2018-
2024
• DLANC, Board of Directors, Alternate, 2019-2024
Attachment 4
103
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Appendix A

PHOEBE RAYBURN
Phoebe Rayburn is an Architectural Historian I at GPA. She has been involved with the field of historic preservation since 2024. Phoebe graduated from the College of Charleston with a bachelor’s degree in historic preservation and community planning and a minor in art history. At GPA, she assists the architectural historian team with the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS). Prior to GPA, Ms. Rayburn was a preservation intern at the Historic Charleston Foundation, where she performed historic property inspections, coordinated inspection schedules, prepared and mailed inspection reports, and performed archival research on endangered historic properties for presentation. She is proficient in a number of software programs, including AutoCAD, Adobe InDesign, SketchUp, Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom, and Microsoft Office. She uses these skills to add depth to her analyses and reports in the form of maps, illustrations, and graphics.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• B.A., Historic Preservation and Community Planning,
Minor in Art History, College of Charleston, 2024
• 5679 Corso di Napoli, CEQA Historical Resource
Evaluation Report, Long Beach, 2025
• Kensington Historic District, National Register of
Historic Places Nomination Form, San Diego, 2025
• 8910-8924 Ardendale Avenue, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, San Gabriel, 2025
• Lodi Downtown Specific Plan Historic Resources
Inventory, Lodi, 2025
• Telegraph Road over San Gabriel River Bridge, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• 1323 South Pacific Street, CEQA Historical Resources
Evaluation Report, Oceanside, 2025
• Henningsen-Lotus Road Multi-Use Trail, Section 106
Historic Property Survey Report, El Dorado County,
2025
• I-405 Auxiliary Lanes from I-110 to Wilmington, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• Max Berg Plaza Park Fountain Rehabilitation, Section
106 Historic Property Survey Report, San Clemente,
2025
• Washington Boulevard Bridge over Rio Hondo Channel,
Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Pico
Rivera, 2025
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Architectural Historian I, February
2025 – Present
• Historic Charleston Foundation, Preservation Intern,
January 2024 – May 2024
Attachment 4
104
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Appendix B

APPENDIX B
Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric
The following guidelines are derived from the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs.

Attachment 4
105
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Wood
Retain all original wood features such as siding, window and door surrounds, windows, doors, decorative features, and trim, as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all wood elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture and/or insect damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from wood elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If insect or moisture damage is discovered, determine and abate the cause right away.

Treat and/or repair wood members immediately to prevent widespread damage.

Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by an extermination specialist, contractor, and/or experienced practitioner. • Repaint (or stain) regularly to protect the wood from moisture, sunlight, and other elements that cause deterioration.
o Remove any damaged or deteriorated paint to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g., hand scraping and hand sanding). o Apply compatible coating by hand following proper surface preparation. o Repaint (or stain) with a color that is consistent with the age and style of the building.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials and appropriate construction methods such as by patching, piecing-in, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the wood using recognized preservation methods.

Replace
• If a wood element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide. Replacement wood feature should match the historic as closely as possible in design, color, texture, and other qualities to retain the building’s architectural character.

Attachment 4
106
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Masonry
Retain all original masonry features such as such as walls, brackets, steps, columns, window sills, and chimneys as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all masonry elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from masonry elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as efflorescence or mildew, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair masonry immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner. • Clean only when absolutely necessary using the gentlest means possible, e.g., to halt deterioration or to remove heavy soiling.
o Clean masonry surface with low-pressure water, gentle detergent, and natural bristle brushes.
o Spot-test cleaning methods over a sufficient period of time to determine any potential long-term effects of the cleaning process/solution.
o Do not apply harsh chemicals.
o Never sandblast. Masonry can be irreparably damaged.

Repair
• Repair when necessary using in-kind materials, appropriate construction methods, and experienced practitioners to avoid damage to the historic fabric. o Repair brick by patching or piecing-in limited masonry units using recognized preservation methods.
o If repointing is needed, use a mortar that duplicates the existing in binder type, aggregate type, strength, composition, color, and texture. Duplicate existing mortar joints in width and joint profile.
o Regularly repaint only if feature was historically painted.

Replace
• If a masonry element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide.

For more information and guidance, see the following Preservation Brief 1. Cleaning and Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic Masonry Buildings, 2. Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings, 6. Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Building, and 15. Preservation of Historic Concrete.

Attachment 4
107
Mills Act Application Report – 501 Lombardy Lane, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Metals
Retain all original metal features such as windows and door, railings, light fixtures, brackets, and door/window hardware as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all metal elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage or deterioration.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from the metal feature and is not accumulating or pooling on any curved or flat surfaces. o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as corrosion or loose/broken joints, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair metal element immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner. • Cleaning may be necessary prior to repair or repainting/recoating. o Clean surface with wire brush or by hand scraping. If more extensive cleaning is needed, hire an experienced practitioner to assist with other appropriate methods such as lowpressure grit blasting or chemical rust removal. o Immediately after cleaning, protect the newly cleaned metal with a new layer of an appropriate paint or coating. If a metal was not historically painted, use a clear protective coating.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials and appropriate construction methods such using patching compounds or limited replacement in kind (e.g., a single baluster in a railing) using the existing feature as a guide.

Replace
• If a metal element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide. Replacement feature should match the historic as closely as possible in design, color, texture, and other qualities to retain the building’s architectural character.

For more information and guidance, see Preservation Brief #13. The Repair and Thermal Upgrading of Historic Steel Windows.

Attachment 4
108
-1- Reso. #
RESOLUTION NO. 25.XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA

BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PURSUANT TO AN EXEMPTION
FROM CEQA UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15331, A

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND THE OWNER OF THE HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 503

BROOKS STREET AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, an application was filed by the owner of the property located at 503 Brooks Street requesting approval of a Historic Property Preservation Agreement (also known as a Mills Act Contract) in accordance with Resolution 25.XXX; and WHEREAS, 503 Brooks Street is listed on the City’s Historic Register as a historic property on the basis of it being a key example of a Cottage; and WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach has determined that preservation of the City’s historic resources in general, and 503 Brooks Street in particular, is important to the City and contributes to the welfare of current and future generations; and WHEREAS, the Historic Resources Element of the City of Laguna Beach General Plan and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.45) recognize the importance of historic preservation and provide incentives for the protection and preservation for continued use, including Historic Preservation Agreements; and WHEREAS, the execution of a Historic Preservation Agreement is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331, as it concerns the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; and
Attahment 5 109
-2- Reso. #
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2025, the Heritage Committee voted to recommend that the City Council approve the requested Historic Property Preservation Agreement for 503 Brooks Street;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH does RESOLVE and ORDER as follows:

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.

SECTION 2. 503 Brooks Street is a “qualified historical property” and is eligible for favorable valuation by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as an enforceable restricted historical property under the provisions of California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. and California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 439.1 et seq.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute an Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City of Laguna Beach and the owner of 503 Brooks Street, attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 4. Based on its review of the entire record before it, the City Council hereby finds and determines that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15331 – Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation, in that Section 15331 exempts maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources.

These activities must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Accordingly, the approval of the attached Resolutions and execution of the Mills Act Contracts is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331 as each the Mills Act Contract requires that the owners "shall preserve, maintain, Attahment 5 110
-3- Reso. #
and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the [property] and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City", and further requires that all changes to the properties "conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code." ADOPTED this 18
th of November, 2025.

Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 25.XXX was duly adopted at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of said City held on November 18, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

RECUSED: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, CA
Attahment 5 111
55852.00004\42757030.1
1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Laguna Beach
Attn: City Clerk
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Municipality, exempt from SB2 fees pursuant to GC 27388.1(a)(2)(D)

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT
(MILLS ACT CONTRACT)

AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE,

STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND ELAN CAMERON SIEDER, TRUSTEE OF THE SIEDER TRUST, DATED DECEMBER 3, 2024, OWNER OF A DESIGNATED HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 503 BROOKS STREET LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA (“Agreement") WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Laguna Beach is authorized by California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. (commonly known and referred to as "the Mills Act") to enter into contracts with the owners of qualified historical properties to provide for appropriate use, maintenance and rehabilitation such that the properties retain their historic characteristics; WHEREAS, Elan Cameron Sieder, Trustee of the Sieder Trust, dated December 3, 2024 ("Owners") possesses fee title in and to that certain qualified real property, together with associated structures and improvements thereon, located at 503 Brooks Street and designated by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as Assessor’s Parcel No. 644-192-13 (the "Historic Register Property"); and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2001, the Historic Register Property was officially designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this Agreement to limit the use of the Historic Register Property to prevent inappropriate alterations and ensure that character-defining features are preserved and maintained in an exemplary manner, and to carry out the purposes of "the Mills Act", and to qualify for an assessment of valuation pursuant to Section 439 et seq. of the California Revenue and Taxation Code NOW THEREFORE, the City of Laguna Beach (the "City") Owner agree as follows:

Section 1. Effective Date and Initial Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be Attahment 5 112
55852.00004\42757030.1
2 effective and commence on November 18, 2025 (the "Effective Date"), and shall remain in effect for an initial term of ten (10) years thereafter.

Section 2. Renewal.

A. Each year on the anniversary of the Effective Date of this agreement, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the initial term of the Agreement unless written notice of nonrenewal is served as provided herein.

B. If Owner or the City desires in any year not to renew the term of the Agreement, Owners or the City shall serve written notice of non-renewal of the Agreement on the other party. Unless such notice is served by Owner to the City at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by the City to Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the term of the Agreement as provided herein.

C. Owners may make a written protest of notice of non-renewal served by the City. The City may at any time prior to the annual renewal date of the Agreement, withdraw its notice to Owner of non-renewal.

D. If either the City or Owner serves notice to the other of non-renewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from the Effective Date or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply.

Section 3. Standards and Conditions. During the term of this Agreement, the Historic Register Property shall be subject to the following conditions:

A. Owner shall preserve, maintain, and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the Historic Register Property and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City.

B. All proposed changes to the Historic Register Property shall comply with applicable City regulations and guidelines and the specific requirements for structural rehabilitation and maintenance attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A, and shall conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code, and shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Community Development Director.

C. Owner shall notify the City of changes to character-defining exterior features of the Historic Register Property prior to their execution, such as but not limited to major landscaping projects, exterior door replacement or exterior alterations, regardless of whether a building permit is required.

Attahment 5 113
55852.00004\42757030.1
3 D. The following are prohibited: Demolition of the house or garage on the Historic Register Property; exterior alterations or additions not in keeping with the standards listed above; dilapidated, deteriorating or unrepaired structures, such as but not limited to fences, roofs, doors, walls and windows; storage of scrap lumber, junk, trash, debris, discarded or unused objects, such as but not limited to cars, appliances or furniture; stagnant water and unfilled excavations; any other device, decoration or structure that is unsightly by reason of its height, condition or inappropriate location.

E. Owner shall allow inspection of the interior and exterior of the Historic Register Property by representatives of the County Assessor and the City prior to the Effective Date and every five (5) years thereafter to determine Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 4. Furnishing of Information. Owner hereby agrees to furnish the City with any and all information requested by the City that may be necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 5. Cancellation.

A. The City, following a duly noticed public hearing by the City Council in accordance with Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this Agreement if it determines that Owner has breached any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, including but not limited to the provisions of Section 3 hereof, or has allowed the Historic Register Property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property. If this Agreement is canceled because of Owner's failure to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate the Historic Register Property as specified by this Agreement, Owner shall pay a cancellation fee to the County Auditor as set forth in and in the amount required by Government Code Section 50286. No penalty shall be imposed if deterioration of the Historic Register Property is due to fire, disaster, or other factor beyond Owner's control.

B. If the Historic Register Property is acquired by eminent domain and the City Council determines that the acquisition frustrates the purpose of this Agreement, the Agreement shall be canceled and no fee imposed, as specified in Government Code Section 50288.

Section 6. Enforcement of Agreement.

A. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, the City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms and conditions of the Agreement. In the event of a default, or in the event the City has grounds to cancel this Agreement under Section 5.A. above, the City shall give written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address set forth in Section 8 below; and if such default or breach is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the City within thirty (30) days thereafter, or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the breach or default (provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within thirty Attahment 5 114
55852.00004\42757030.1
4 (30) days and shall thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by the owners), then the City may, without further notice, declare a default under the terms of this Agreement and may either (i) pursue cancellation of the Agreement under Section 5.A. above (after a duly noticed public hearing of the City Council) or (ii) bring any action necessary to specifically enforce Owner's obligations required under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, apply to any appropriate court for injunctive relief against any violation by Owner or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate.

B. The City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if the City does not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity that are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in the City's regulations governing historic register properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by the City of any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder.

Section 7. Binding Effect of Agreement. Owner hereby agrees to and subjects the Historic Register Property to all of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement. The City and Owner hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon Owner's heirs, successors and assigns in title or interest to the Historic Register Property. Every contract, deed or other instrument hereafter executed, delivered and accepted shall be subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement regardless of whether such covenants, restrictions and reservations are recited or referred to in such contract, deed or other instrument.

Section 8. Notice. Any notice required by the terms of this Agreement shall be sent to the address of the respective parties as specified below or at other addresses that may be later specified by the parties hereto.

To City: City of Laguna Beach
Attn: Community Development Director
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
To Owners: ______________________
______________________
Section 9. General Provisions.

A. None of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or members of any joint enterprise.

B. Owner agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its elected and appointed Attahment 5 115
55852.00004\42757030.1
5 officials, officers, agents and employees from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including without limitation death, and claims for property damage that may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations of Owner or those of Owner's contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on Owner's behalf, or that otherwise relates to the use, operation and maintenance of the Historic Register Property. .

C. The foregoing defense, indemnity and hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the use, operations and activities referred to in this Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications, permits or other documents for the Historic Register Property.

D. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the Historic Register Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever.

E. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations or restrictions contained in this Agreement, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorneys' fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to costs, litigation expenses and other relief ordered by the court.

F. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be effected thereby.

G. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Section 10. Recordation. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties execute and enter into this agreement, the City shall cause this agreement to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange.

Section 11. Signatures. The City and Owners shall sign this Agreement, which shall be notarized.

Attahment 5 116
55852.00004\42757030.1
6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owner have executed this agreement on the day and year written below.

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
Date: ____________________ By: __________________________ City Manager
_________________________
Date: ____________________ By:___________________________ Trustee/ or Owner
Attahment 5 117
55852.00004\42757030.1
7 State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature (Seal)
________________________________
State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

Attahment 5 118
55852.00004\42757030.1
8 upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature (Seal)
________________________________
Attahment 5 119
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 22

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property. $20,000

2. 2026 Chimney Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of chimney and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimney is structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$10,000

3. 2026 Roof Perimeter
(Gutters/Downspo
uts)
Install visually compatible gutters, downspouts, and/or leaders to ensure roof has sufficient drainage and water is diverted away from the building exterior surfaces and foundation. Clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed.
$20,000

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $16,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$1,000*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors,
and Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint.

Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair.

Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $76,000*

7. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and
Doors
Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight.
$6,000*

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. Trim hedges at the front of the property to match the fence height. $2,000*

9. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Chimney Brick Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$10,000*

10. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Fences and Gates Inspect wood fences and gates for damage and/or peeling paint and repair/repaint as needed. $2,000* Attahment 5
Exhibit A
120
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 23 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

11. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick
Hardscaping
Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$4,000*

12. 2036 Chimney Investigate condition of chimney brickwork by testing paint removal to determine original finish. If determined appropriate and feasible, carefully remove paint using the gentlest means possible to restore original appearance of brick as determined by investigative work. $5,000

13. 2036 Vinyl Windows Replace all vinyl windows (four total) with new windows that are compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials (i.e. wood clad). $20,000

14. 2036 Historic Plaque Add a plaque to the property indicating its inclusion in the City’s Historic Register $250 TOTAL: $192,250
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attahment 5 121
Attachment 6 122
503 Brooks Street
Laguna Beach, CA
Mills Act Application Report
Prepared by:

July 2025
Attachment 6
123
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Purpose and Methodology.............................................................................................................1

1.2 Qualifications ................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation ..................................................................2

1.4 Definitions and Terminology ..........................................................................................................3

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE...........................................................................................................................................5

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 6

3.1 Location Map ................................................................................................................................6

3.2 Property Description .....................................................................................................................6

3.3 Current Photographs .....................................................................................................................7

3.4 Construction History....................................................................................................................12

4. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS......................................................................15

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary ...................................................................................15

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations ........................................................................................15

4.3 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments......................................................16

4.4 Incompatible Features ................................................................................................................21

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN)..................... 22

6. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE...............................................................................................................24

7. SOURCES .................................................................................................................................................................................. 25

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Résumés
Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric Attachment 6
124
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Methodology
503 Brooks Street is located within the Laguna-South neighborhood of the City of Laguna Beach (City) and is associated with Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 644-192-10 (property). The property is comprised of a one-story single-family residence constructed in 1930. It was placed on the City’s Historic Register (Register) on April 25, 2001. As such, it is eligible for a Mills Act Historic Property Contract (Mills Act Contract).

The Mills Act was enacted in 1972, giving local governments the authority to grant property tax relief to owners of “qualified” historic properties. In Laguna Beach, a “qualified” historic property is one that is listed on the Register. To pursue the historic preservation tax reduction incentive, an owner of a qualified historic property must enter a Mills Act Contract with the City. Under this contract agreement, the property owner agrees to protect, preserve, and maintain the property in accordance with specific preservation standards and other conditions in exchange for property tax relief.

GPA Consulting (GPA) was retained by the City to prepare this Mills Act Application Report (report) as part of the Mills Act Contract application for the property. In the preparation of this report, GPA performed the following tasks:

1. Reviewed Mills Act Contract application materials prepared by the property owner(s).

2. Reviewed existing information, including building permit records, planning documents, and historic maps.

3. Conducted a site visit to ascertain the current condition of the property and all buildings and features thereon. Digital photographs were taken for use in this report.

4. Prepared a detailed table of architectural features to document existing conditions, identify character-defining features, and provide recommended treatments following the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards).

5. Coordinated with the City and property owner(s) regarding the Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline for the property and provided recommendations for prioritization of work. The Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline (work plan) included in this report (see Section 5) is based on the work plan submitted by the applicant to the City in the initial Mills Act Application Form. The applicant-submitted work plan was reviewed by GPA for consistency with the intent of the Mills Act program and revised based on a review of existing information and observations made on site. GPA provided a draft of the revised work plan to the applicant to review and to provide the cost estimates included in this report.

1.2 Qualifications
Phoebe Rayburn, Architectural Historian I at GPA, was responsible for the preparation of this report. Audrey von Ahrens, Senior Architectural Historian at GPA, reviewed the report for quality assurance and quality control. Ms. von Ahrens meets the qualifications for a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 61. Their résumés are included as Appendix A.

Attachment 6
125
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 2

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation In exchange for the Mills Act property tax incentive, property owners must protect, preserve, and maintain the historic property following the Standards, among other specific contract conditions. 1 The definition of
“rehabilitation” assumes that at least some repair or alteration will be needed in order to provide for an efficient, contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy the materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the property’s historic character. The Standards for Rehabilitation are as follows:

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
1 The Standards relevant to the Laguna Beach Mills Act program are codified at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section

68. Attachment 6
126
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 3 The Standards and associated Guidelines can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website using the following address:
https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/secretary-standards-treatment-historic-properties.htm.

1.4 Definitions and Terminology
Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
This report discusses the architectural features of the property and specifically identifies the CDFs, which are the physical components that contribute to a property’s sense of time and place. For Laguna Beach Mills Act Application Reports, they include two categories: the overall visual character, and exterior materials and craftsmanship.

Some CDFs are more important than others in conveying the significance of a property. This report ranks each CDF as primary or secondary, which are defined as follows:

Primary CDF
• The most essential physical elements to conveying the significance of the property. • Generally includes features that date from the period of significance; directly relate to the original use, type, and style; display craftsmanship; are highly visible; and retain integrity.

Secondary CDF
• Generally includes features that date from the period of significance but may not directly relate to the original use, type, and style; are common features or materials; and/or are less visible due to location on rear elevations.
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that maintains or restores the historical appearance and does not detract from its historic character and significance.
o New features on the historic portions of the property were only considered if they were replaced in kind, or if they were placed within original openings. Such features may compromise the property’s integrity of materials but contribute to its integrity of design. • Materials and/or features that were historically located on the property based on physical or documentary evidence.

Non-Character-Defining Features
Non-historic additions and/or ancillary buildings and their individual features were eliminated from consideration as character-defining, since they do not contribute to the to the Mills Act property’s historic character.

Incompatible Features
This report identifies incompatible features when they are relevant to the Mills Act application and proposed work plan. Incompatible features include the following:
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that deviates from the historical appearance.

Attachment 6
127
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 4 • Materials that were not, or would not have been, historically located on the property, such as materials that were not utilized for the style or type of building, or contemporary materials that did not exist at the time of construction.

Existing Conditions
This report also analyzes the overall existing condition of the property and each of its CDFs. The existing conditions are ranked on a scale of good, fair, and poor. These terms are defined as follows:

Good
• Intact, structurally sound, and performing its intended purpose; and • Needs no repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance.

Fair
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration; and
• Needs repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance; but • Structurally sound and performing its intended purpose overall.

Poor
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration to the point that it is no longer structurally sound or performing its intended purpose.

The condition of non-character-defining and incompatible features is not assessed in this report.

Attachment 6
128
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 5

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE
503 Brooks Street was identified in the 1981 Laguna Beach Historic Resources Inventory (LBHRI) as a “K” rated property, which at the time referred to a building that strongly maintained its original integrity and demonstrated a particular architectural style or time period.2 However, a revised Historic Preservation Program and ordinance approved by City Council in April 2022 and certified by the California Coastal Commission in July 2022 no longer assigns a rating system to historical resources and eliminated all references to the 1981 LBHRI.3 Never-the-less, the property was officially listed on the City’s Register on April 25, 2001, when the owner at the time signed an Agreement for Use of Structure for Historic Preservation. The assumed period of significance is 1930, the year of construction.

Figure 1: 1980 photograph of 503 Brooks Street, view facing east. Source: Les, 60. 2 Kathleen Les, “Laguna – South,” California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Form Set, Environmental Coalition, Laguna Beach, California, April 1980, 60.
3 Laguna Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 25.45 Historic Preservation, 25.45.004 General Provisions.

Attachment 6
129
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 6

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

3.1 Location Map
The property is located in the Laguna-South neighborhood of the City of Laguna Beach, historically known as Arch Beach. The area is primarily beach cottages and second houses. 503 Brooks Street is located near the northern edge of the neighborhood, east of South Coast Highway (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: 2025 aerial photo showing subject property outlined in orange.

3.2 Property Description
The property comprises a rectangular parcel with a one-story single-family residence set back from Brooks Street by a large front yard. The residence is “L”-shaped in plan with multiple rear additions. The original portion of the residence has a cross-gabled roof clad in composition shingles and exterior walls clad with wood shingles and wood clapboard. Fenestration is asymmetrically arranged and consists of wood doors and windows, including paired casements with single-light sash and one fixed multi-light window. Windows on the rear addition are vinyl.

The main entrance is located near the center of the primary (north) elevation and consists of a recessed porch with simple wood post and railings, and a wood door with small leaded vision light. On the east wall within the porch are three pairs of single-light casements. A secondary entrance is centered beneath the front facing gable on the east end of the elevation fully glazed, multi-light wood double doors flanked by decorative wood shutters.

A fixed multi-light window is on the west end of the elevation. The west and east elevations face narrow side yards and have paired casement windows. An exterior brick chimney is located toward the north end of the east elevation.

Attachment 6
130
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 7 The rear addition, an attached ADU, projects from the west elevation of the original portion of the residence and has an elevated main entrance with concrete stoop facing north. On the west elevation is a recessed secondary entrance. Both entrances have partially glazed wood Dutch doors.

The front yard has a grassy lawn with stone landscaping, a brick walkway, and concrete stairs leading to the front porch. The west side yard has a gravel and stone walkway, and the rear and east side yards consist of gravel walkways. Landscaping consists of small trees with low shrubs and flowers within brick planters and elevated patio with stone retaining walls.

3.3 Current Photographs
Figure 3: Photo Key. Photographs of building(s) indicated in blue and landscaping indicated in green.

Project North
Attachment 6
131
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 8 Photo 1. View of property from Brooks Street, looking south. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 2. Primary (north) elevation, view facing south. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 6
132
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 9 Photo 3. Side (west) elevation, view facing southeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 4. East (side) elevation, view facing southeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 6
133
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 10 Photo 5. East elevation, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 6. Rear (south) elevation, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 6
134
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 11 Photo 7. North (front yard) landscaping, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 8. West (side yard) landscaping, view facing southeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attachment 6
135
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 12

3.4 Construction History
The property was originally developed in 1930 when the existing single-family residence was initially constructed with a detached, one-room dwelling (demolished) located at the rear of the property (see Figure 4). 4 The original
building permit is not on file with the City, and the original builder and architect, if any, are unknown. The earliest building permit dates to 1946 but is limited to interior alterations. 5 In 1959, the residence was re-roofed.
6 In
1977, a 160 square-foot rear addition with shed roof was constructed. 7 In 1993, the front fence was replaced
with a new redwood fence and the residence was re-roofed with asphalt shingles. 8 Sometime prior to 2000, three
windows on the west elevation, one window on the rear of the east elevation, and all windows and doors on south elevation (demolished) had been replaced with aluminum and in 2001, they were replaced with historically compatible wood windows and doors within the existing openings.9 The residence was re-roofed again in 2010, and the wood fence and gate were replaced in the rear yard.10 More recently, in 2024, a large rear addition (attached ADU) was constructed and various site improvements were completed, including: replacement of perimeter fences with the existing wood fence, replacement of the brick front porch steps with poured concrete stairs, and in-kind replacement of the wood steps of the front patio.
11 No other alterations are documented in building permit records. See Table 1 for a summary list of building permits and associated work.

Figure 4: 1931 historical aerial photo showing property soon after initial construction. Source: Flight X_8, Frame 26, May 22, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Figure 5: 1948 Sanborn showing property with northwest
addition. Source: Sanborn Map Company, Laguna Beach,
Sheet 16, courtesy of Historical Information Gatherers, Inc. 4 Les, 60.
5 City of Laguna Beach, Building Permit No. 9218, July 8, 1946. 6 Building Permit No. 16471, September 18, 1959.
7 Building Permit No. 77-365, September 19, 1977.
8 Building Permit No. 93-542, June 29, 1993; Building Permit No. 93-698, August 6, 1993. 9 Building Permit No. B00-1933, January 22, 2001.
10 Building Permit No. BP10-00356, February 25, 2010; Building Permit No. BP10-00931, May 19, 2010. 11 Building Permit No. R24-0847, June 5, 2024; Building Permit No. R24-1511, August 20, 2024; Building Permit No. R24- 1578, August 30, 2024.

Attachment 6
136
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 13 Figure 6: 1962 Sanborn showing property prior to
construction of southwest addition. Source: Sanborn Map Company, Laguna Beach, Sheet 16, courtesy of Historical Information Gatherers, Inc.

Figure 7: 1973 historical aerial photo showing property with southwest addition. Source: Flight WAS_G14, Frame 83,
January 19, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Additional modifications identified through a comparison of historical and current photographs, and visual observations made during the site visit conducted by GPA are listed below. Because these alterations are not documented in permit records, exact dates are unknown; however, estimate dates of completion are provided when available.
• Paint applied to original brick chimney, unknown date.

Table 1: Building Permit History12
Date Permit Work Completed Architect (A)/
Builder (B) Owner
1959/09/18 16471 Re-roof residence with roll roofing 90lb J.M. Moore Constr., Siding Div. (B)
Robert H.

Leitfred
1977/09/19 77-365 Construct 160 sq. ft. addition to extend kitchen, bath, and bedroom.

A. E. Smith (B) Maurice
Stevens
1993/06/29 93-542 Re-roofing of the residence in new asphalt shingles. Primo Roofing Company (B)
Virgina Stevens
1993/08/06 93-698 Replace the existing fence with a 6’ redwood fence. Whitten Fence (B) Virginia Stevens
2001/01/22 B00-1933 Replace all windows and doors from aluminum to wood within existing openings.

Demos
Construction (B)
Virginia
Stevens
2010/02/25 BP10-
00356
Cover the existing single layer pitched roof with 1
layer 15# underlayment, new 30 yr. class “A”
shingles in tan color. Install 1 layer 40# base sheet
and modified torch cap with hot torch in tan color,
all class “A”, on the flat roof.

ABC Construction
Co. (B)
Judith Andrus
2010/05/19 BP10-
00931
Replace the existing 4’ high wood fence and gate in
the rear yard.

The Fencing Pro,
Inc. (B)
Judith Andrus
2024/06/05 R24-0847 Construct 453.05 sq. ft. ADU Unit B attached to rear.

CMT Home
Improvement:

Chad Carter (B)
Judith Andrus
12 The building permit history table is not a complete list of all building permit records on file for the subject property. It includes only those permits pertaining to alterations to the building(s) exterior, site, and only major electrical and/or MEP upgrades.

Attachment 6
137
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 14 Table 1: Building Permit History12
Date Permit Work Completed Architect (A)/
Builder (B) Owner
2024/08/20 R24-1511 Install a new wood fence around the perimeter that is 6’ high and 64’ long at the rear and sides, 4’ high
and 80’ long at the front yard, and reface the 96’
long existing fence at the rear and side yards.

CMT Home
Improvement:

Chad Carter (B)
Judith Andrus
2024/08/30 R24-1578 Replace the brick stairs with poured concrete stairs and replace the wood steps at the patio door with
redwood steps in the same location.

CMT Home
Improvement:

Chad Carter (B)
Judith Andrus
Attachment 6
138
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 15

4. EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS
The property’s CDFs, their existing condition, and recommended treatments are summarized below and detailed in table format in Section 4.3. See Section 1.4 for definitions of the terminology used throughout this section.

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary
The property and building thereon appear to be in overall good condition. The exterior cladding materials appear to be in good condition overall with minor damage to some individual wood shingles. The roof was last refinished in 2010, and no visible signs of leaks were observed.

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations
All work, including maintenance and repair, should be completed following the Standards (see Section 1.3).

Generally, all primary CDFs identified in this report (see Section 4.3) should be retained to the greatest extent feasible and inspected annually to determine if maintenance or repair is necessary as the building ages. If deterioration necessitates replacement, the feature should be replaced in kind. Secondary CDFs should be retained or may be replaced with an option that is equally compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials. Additionally, if documentary evidence is or becomes available, restoring original features that were previously removed or replaced is encouraged.

Because the property is in overall good condition, as detailed in Section 4.1, the proposed work primarily entails continued maintenance and as-needed repairs of the historic features. Features expected to need the most regular maintenance are primarily constructed of wood though masonry and metal features require monitoring and as-needed repairs. Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric includes guidance adapted from the Standards as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs, specific to the materials that contribute to the historic character of the property. Additional preservation guidance and links to resources are included in Section 6. This guidance should be consulted when planning and carrying out applicable work on the property.

Attachment 6
139
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 16

4.3 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments The following table identifies all existing exterior CDFs of the property. If applicable, incompatible features that detract from the historic character and are recommended for removal/replacement in the proposed Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Maintenance Plan (Section 5) are addressed in Section 4.4. Any minor or utilitarian features (e.g., crawlspace covers, contemporary light fixtures, attic vents) not identified in this report may be assumed to be non-character-defining; however, any proposed modifications to these features should be compatible with the historic character of the building and comply with the Standards.

Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment OVERALL VISUAL CHARACTER Massing
• “L”-shaped in plan
• One story in height
• Asymmetrically
arranged elevations
☒ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

OVERALL VISUAL

CHARACTER
Roof Form
• Cross-gable roof
• Flush and open
overhanging eaves
• Exposed rafters
☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Exterior Cladding Type A
• Wood shingles
• Painted
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• Periodically replace in kind or with
equally compatible material.

Attachment 6
140
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 17 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Exterior Cladding Type B
• Wood siding
• Painted
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type A
• Main entrance
• Wood
• Vertical boards
• Leaded art glass vision
light
• Wood surround
• Original hardware
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type B
• Secondary Entrance
• Wood
• Double doors
o Ten divided lights
• Wood surround
• Original hardware
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 6
141
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 18 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Window Type A
• Wood
• Paired casements
• Single lights
• Wood surround
• Various sizes
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type B
• Wood
• Fixed
• Multi-light
o Eight divided lights
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Shutters
• Decorative
• Wood
• Louvered

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attachment 6
142
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 19 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Chimney
• Exterior
• Brick

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.
• If determined appropriate and
feasible, carefully remove paint
using the gentlest means possible
to restore original appearance of
brick.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Main Entrance Porch
• Shed roof
• Square, wood post and
lintel
• Simple wood railing
• Score concrete floor

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

SITE
Front Yard Setback
• Deep setback

☒ Front
☐ Rear
☐ Side
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain.

Attachment 6
143
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 20 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment SITE Planters
• Brick retaining walls

☒ Front
☐ Rear
☐ Side
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, continue to maintain, and
repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

SITE
Front Walkway
• Brick

☒ Front
☐ Rear
☐ Side
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Continue to maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in like kind.

Attachment 6
144
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 21

4.4 Incompatible Features
The following table identifies only those incompatible non-character-defining features that detract from the historic character of the property, and should therefore be addressed as part of the potential Mills Act contract and proposed Work Plan (see Section 5).

Incompatible Features
Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Recommended Treatment Vinyl Windows
• Four total
• Rear addition (attached ADU)
• Single-light casements (paired and
individual)
☐ Total Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
• Replace incompatible vinyl windows with
new windows that are compatible with
the historic character of the property in
terms of materials.

Attachment 6
145
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 22

5. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property. $20,000

2. 2026 Chimney Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of chimney and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimney is structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$10,000

3. 2026 Roof Perimeter
(Gutters/Downspo
uts)
Install visually compatible gutters, downspouts, and/or leaders to ensure roof has sufficient drainage and water is diverted away from the building exterior surfaces and foundation. Clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed.
$20,000

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $16,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$1,000*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors,
and Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint.

Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair.

Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $76,000*

7. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and
Doors
Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight.
$6,000*

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. Trim hedges at the front of the property to match the fence height. $2,000*

9. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Chimney Brick Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$10,000*

10. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Fences and Gates Inspect wood fences and gates for damage and/or peeling paint and repair/repaint as needed. $2,000* Attachment 6
146
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 23 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

11. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick
Hardscaping
Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$4,000*

12. 2036 Chimney Investigate condition of chimney brickwork by testing paint removal to determine original finish. If determined appropriate and feasible, carefully remove paint using the gentlest means possible to restore original appearance of brick as determined by investigative work. $5,000

13. 2036 Vinyl Windows Replace all vinyl windows (four total) with new windows that are compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials (i.e. wood clad). $20,000

14. 2036 Historic Plaque Add a plaque to the property indicating its inclusion in the City’s Historic Register $250 TOTAL: $192,250
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attachment 6
147
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 24

6. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE
Preservation Briefs13
In addition to the Standards and Guidelines, the National Park Service has produced a variety of publications, including the Preservation Briefs (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm) and Preservation Tech Notes (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-by-topic.htm), on a broad range of topics and techniques for the treatment of historic buildings and their materials. They can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website.

Some Preservation Briefs that may be relevant to the subject property are:
#2 Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings. #3 Improving Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings.
#4 Roofing for Historic Buildings.
#6 Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Buildings.
#9 The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows.
#10 Exterior Paint Problems on Historic Woodwork.
#14 New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns. #16 The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors. #17 Architectural Character- Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character.
#24 Heating, Ventilating, and Cooling Historic Buildings: Problems and Recommended Approaches. #33 The Preservation and Repair of Stained and Leaded Glass. #35 Understanding Old Buildings: The Process of Architectural Investigation. #39 Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings. #41 The Seismic Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings.
#47 Maintaining the Exterior of Small and Medium Size Historic Buildings.

State Historical Building Code
One of California’s most valuable tools for the preservation of historic buildings is the State Historical Building Code (SHBC). While the California Building Code (CBC, section 3403.5) makes provisions for the special treatment of qualified historic buildings, the SHBC amplifies and codifies this protection. The SHBC recognizes and endorses the need to find and adopt reasonable alternatives or reasonable levels of equivalency on a caseby-case basis for situations where strict compliance with the regular code would negatively affect a historic building’s appearance or jeopardize its economic viability. The City includes use of the CHBC as an incentive that may be requested by owners of properties listed in the Register. 13 “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs,” U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, accessed June 2025, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

Attachment 6
148
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach 25

7. SOURCES
California Code of Regulations, California Office of Administrative Law, State of California Government.

City of Laguna Beach. “Historic Preservation.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.lagunabeachcity.net/government/departments/community-development/planningzoning/historic-preservation.

City of Laguna Beach Community Development Department Building Division. Building Permits. Various Dates.

City of Laguna Beavmk8ch Municipal Code. Chapter 25.45.

Google Maps. Street View Images. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. https://www.google.com/maps.

Les, Kathleen. “Laguna – South.” California Department of Parks and Recreation (DPR) Form Set.

Environmental Coalition. Laguna Beach, California. April 1980.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. www.proquest.com.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. fims-historicalinfo-com.

UCSB Geospatial Collection. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/.

US Department of the Interior, National Park Service. “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

US Department of the Interior. National Park Service. “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.” Accessed June 2025.
https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-2017.pdf.

Attachment 6
149
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Appendix A

APPENDIX A
Résumés

Attachment 6
150
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Appendix A

AUDREY VON AHRENS
Audrey von Ahrens is a Senior Architectural Historian at GPA. She has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2013. Audrey graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation and City Planning where she focused on preservation planning and community economic development. She has since worked in private historic preservation consulting in California. Audrey joined GPA in 2017 and her experience has included the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; historic context statements; Secretary of the Interior’s Standards analysis; large-scale historic resources surveys; and evaluations of eligibility for a wide variety of projects and property types throughout Southern California. Audrey is also experienced in coordinating with property owners and local governments in the preparation and review of Mills Act Property Contract applications and the inspection and reporting of properties applying for or with existing contracts.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• M.S., Historic Preservation, University of Pennsylvania, 2016
• Master of City Planning, University of Pennsylvania,
2016
• B.A., Architectural Studies and Urban Studies,
University of Pittsburgh, 2013
• 20 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019.
• 26 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019
• 34-38 E. Holly Street, Pasadena, Mills Act
Application, 2022
• Casa de Rosas, Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit,
2017-2022
• City of Anaheim, Mills Act Program, Inspections of
Existing Contracts, 2024-2025
• City of Costa Mesa, Mills Act Program, Applications
Processing and Contract, Costa Mesa, Orange
County, 2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Pre-Approval Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Periodic Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Inspections of Existing Contracts, Los
Angeles, 2017-2025
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Pre-Contract Services, Los Angeles, 2018-
2020
• North Beach Historic District, San Clemente, National Register Nomination, 2021
• Whittier Public Library, Construction Monitoring,
2021-2023
• Vortox Co. Building, 121 S. Indian Hill Boulevard,
Claremont, CEQA Historical Resource Documentation
Report, 2022
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Senior Architectural Historian, 2024- Present
― Associate Architectural Historian, 2021-2024
― Architectural Historian II, 2017-2021
• Heritage Consulting, Inc., Intern, 2015-2016
• Tacony Community Development Corp., Intern, 2014
• Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, Intern,
2013
• University of Pittsburgh, Teaching Assistant, 2012-
2013
• Pittsburgh Planning Department, Intern, 2012
• Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, Intern, 2011
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for history and architectural
history pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
• National Preservation Institute, Section 106: An
Introduction
Professional Activities:
• Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council,
Planning and Land Use Committee (DLANC), 2018-
2024
• DLANC, Board of Directors, Alternate, 2019-2024
Attachment 6
151
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Appendix A

PHOEBE RAYBURN
Phoebe Rayburn is an Architectural Historian I at GPA. She has been involved with the field of historic preservation since 2024. Phoebe graduated from the College of Charleston with a bachelor’s degree in historic preservation and community planning and a minor in art history. At GPA, she assists the architectural historian team with the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS). Prior to GPA, Ms. Rayburn was a preservation intern at the Historic Charleston Foundation, where she performed historic property inspections, coordinated inspection schedules, prepared and mailed inspection reports, and performed archival research on endangered historic properties for presentation. She is proficient in a number of software programs, including AutoCAD, Adobe InDesign, SketchUp, Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom, and Microsoft Office. She uses these skills to add depth to her analyses and reports in the form of maps, illustrations, and graphics.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• B.A., Historic Preservation and Community Planning,
Minor in Art History, College of Charleston, 2024
• 5679 Corso di Napoli, CEQA Historical Resource
Evaluation Report, Long Beach, 2025
• Kensington Historic District, National Register of
Historic Places Nomination Form, San Diego, 2025
• 8910-8924 Ardendale Avenue, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, San Gabriel, 2025
• Lodi Downtown Specific Plan Historic Resources
Inventory, Lodi, 2025
• Telegraph Road over San Gabriel River Bridge, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• 1323 South Pacific Street, CEQA Historical Resources
Evaluation Report, Oceanside, 2025
• Henningsen-Lotus Road Multi-Use Trail, Section 106
Historic Property Survey Report, El Dorado County,
2025
• I-405 Auxiliary Lanes from I-110 to Wilmington, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• Max Berg Plaza Park Fountain Rehabilitation, Section
106 Historic Property Survey Report, San Clemente,
2025
• Washington Boulevard Bridge over Rio Hondo Channel,
Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Pico
Rivera, 2025
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Architectural Historian I, February
2025 – Present
• Historic Charleston Foundation, Preservation Intern,
January 2024 – May 2024
Attachment 6
152
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Appendix C

APPENDIX B
Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric
The following guidelines are derived from the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs.

Attachment 6
153
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Appendix C Guidelines for the Treatment of Wood
Retain all original wood features such as siding, window and door surrounds, windows, doors, decorative features, and trim, as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all wood elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture and/or insect damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from wood elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If insect or moisture damage is discovered, determine and abate the cause right away.

Treat and/or repair wood members immediately to prevent widespread damage.

Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by an extermination specialist, contractor, and/or experienced practitioner. • Repaint (or stain) regularly to protect the wood from moisture, sunlight, and other elements that cause deterioration.
o Remove any damaged or deteriorated paint to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g., hand scraping and hand sanding). o Apply compatible coating by hand following proper surface preparation. o Repaint (or stain) with a color that is consistent with the age and style of the building.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials and appropriate construction methods such as by patching, piecing-in, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the wood using recognized preservation methods.

Replace
• If a wood element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide. Replacement wood feature should match the historic as closely as possible in design, color, texture, and other qualities to retain the building’s architectural character.
.

Attachment 6
154
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Appendix C Guidelines for the Treatment of Masonry
Retain all original masonry features such as such as walls, brackets, steps, columns, window sills, and chimneys as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all masonry elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from masonry elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as efflorescence or mildew, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair masonry immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner. • Clean only when absolutely necessary using the gentlest means possible, e.g., to halt deterioration or to remove heavy soiling.
o Clean masonry surface with low-pressure water, gentle detergent, and natural bristle brushes.
o Spot-test cleaning methods over a sufficient period of time to determine any potential long-term effects of the cleaning process/solution.
o Do not apply harsh chemicals.
o Never sandblast. Masonry can be irreparably damaged.

Repair
• Repair when necessary using in-kind materials, appropriate construction methods, and experienced practitioners to avoid damage to the historic fabric. o Repair brick by patching or piecing-in limited masonry units using recognized preservation methods.
o If repointing is needed, use a mortar that duplicates the existing in binder type, aggregate type, strength, composition, color, and texture. Duplicate existing mortar joints in width and joint profile.
o Regularly repaint only if feature was historically painted.

Replace
• If a masonry element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide.

For more information and guidance, see the following Preservation Brief 1. Cleaning and Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic Masonry Buildings, 2. Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings, 6. Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Building, and 15. Preservation of Historic Concrete Attachment 6
155
Mills Act Application Report – 503 Brooks Street, Laguna Beach Appendix C Guidelines for the Treatment of Metals
Retain all original metal features such as windows and door, railings, light fixtures, brackets, and door/window hardware as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all metal elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage or deterioration.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from the metal feature and is not accumulating or pooling on any curved or flat surfaces. o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as corrosion or loose/broken joints, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair metal element immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner. • Cleaning may be necessary prior to repair or repainting/recoating. o Clean surface with wire brush or by hand scraping. If more extensive cleaning is needed, hire an experienced practitioner to assist with other appropriate methods such as lowpressure grit blasting or chemical rust removal. o Immediately after cleaning, protect the newly cleaned metal with a new layer of an appropriate paint or coating. If a metal was not historically painted, use a clear protective coating.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials and appropriate construction methods such using patching compounds or limited replacement in kind (e.g., a single baluster in a railing) using the existing feature as a guide.

Replace
• If a metal element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide. Replacement feature should match the historic as closely as possible in design, color, texture, and other qualities to retain the building’s architectural character.

Attachment 6
156
-1- Reso. #
RESOLUTION NO. 25.XXX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA

BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING PURSUANT TO AN EXEMPTION
FROM CEQA UNDER CEQA GUIDELINES SECTION 15331, A

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE
CITY AND THE OWNER OF THE HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 2646

VICTORIA DRIVE, AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER TO

EXECUTE THE AGREEMENT ON BEHALF OF THE CITY
WHEREAS, an application was filed by the owner of the property located at 2646 Victoria Drive requesting approval of a Historic Property Preservation Agreement (also known as a Mills Act Contract) in accordance with Resolution 25.XXX; and WHEREAS, 2646 Victoria Drive is listed on the City’s Historic Register as a historic property on the basis of it being a key example of a Monterey Revival; and WHEREAS, the City of Laguna Beach has determined that preservation of the City’s historic resources in general, and 2646 Victoria Drive in particular, is important to the City and contributes to the welfare of current and future generations; and WHEREAS, the Historic Resources Element of the City of Laguna Beach General Plan and the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.45) recognize the importance of historic preservation and provide incentives for the protection and preservation for continued use, including Historic Preservation Agreements; and WHEREAS, the execution of a Historic Preservation Agreement is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331, as it concerns the maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources in a manner consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties; and
Attachment 7 157
-2- Reso. #
WHEREAS, on August 18, 2025, the Heritage Committee voted to recommend that the City Council approve the requested Historic Property Preservation Agreement for 2646 Victoria Drive;

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH does RESOLVE and ORDER as follows:

SECTION 1. The recitals set forth above are true and correct and are incorporated into this Resolution by this reference.

SECTION 2. 2646 Victoria Drive is a “qualified historical property” and is eligible for favorable valuation by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as an enforceable restricted historical property under the provisions of California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. and California Revenue and Taxation Code Section 439.1 et seq.

SECTION 3. The City Council hereby authorizes the City Manager to execute an Historic Property Preservation Agreement between the City of Laguna Beach and the owner of 2646 Victoria Drive, attached hereto as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein by this reference.

SECTION 4. Based on its review of the entire record before it, the City Council hereby finds and determines that the Project is categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to Section 15331 – Historical Resource Restoration/Rehabilitation, in that Section 15331 exempts maintenance, repair, stabilization, rehabilitation, restoration, preservation, conservation, or reconstruction of historical resources.

These activities must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Accordingly, the approval of the attached Resolutions and execution of the Mills Act Contracts is exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15331 as each the Mills Act Contract requires that the owners "shall preserve, maintain, Attachment 7
158
-3- Reso. #
and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the [property] and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City", and further requires that all changes to the properties "conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code." ADOPTED this 18th of November, 2025.

Alex Rounaghi, Mayor
ATTEST:

Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk
I, Ann Marie McKay, City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 25.XXX was duly adopted at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of said City held on November 18, 2025 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

NOES: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

RECUSED: COUNCILMEMBER(S):

City Clerk of the City of Laguna Beach, CA
Attachment 7
159
55852.00004\42757030.1
1 RECORDING REQUESTED BY
AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO:

City of Laguna Beach
Attn: City Clerk
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Municipality, exempt from SB2 fees pursuant to GC 27388.1(a)(2)(D)

HISTORIC PROPERTY PRESERVATION AGREEMENT
(MILLS ACT CONTRACT)

AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH, COUNTY OF ORANGE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AND BRENT R. LILJESTROM AND DIANE M. LILJESTROM, AS TRUSTEES OF THE LILJESTROM FAMILY TRUST U/D/T DATED NOVEMBER 12, 1987, OWNER OF A DESIGNATED HISTORIC PROPERTY AT 2646 VICTORIA DRIVE, LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA (“Agreement")
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Laguna Beach is authorized by California Government Code Section 50280 et seq. (commonly known and referred to as "the Mills Act") to enter into contracts with the owners of qualified historical properties to provide for appropriate use, maintenance and rehabilitation such that the properties retain their historic characteristics; WHEREAS, the Brent R. Liljestrom and Diane M. Liljestrom, as Trustees of The Liljestrom Family Trust U/D/T Dated November 12, 1987 ("Owners") possesses fee title in and to that certain qualified real property, together with associated structures and improvements thereon, located at 2646 Victoria Drive and designated by the County Assessor of the County of Orange as Assessor’s Parcel No. 656-152-38 (the "Historic Register Property"); and
WHEREAS, on July 29, 2025, the Historic Register Property was officially designated on the Historic Register of the City of Laguna Beach pursuant to the requirements of Chapter 25.45 (Historic Preservation) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code; and
WHEREAS, the City and Owner, for their mutual benefit, now desire to enter into this Agreement to limit the use of the Historic Register Property to prevent inappropriate alterations and ensure that character-defining features are preserved and maintained in an exemplary manner, and to carry out the purposes of "the Mills Act", and to qualify for an assessment of valuation pursuant to Section 439 et seq. of the California Revenue and Taxation Code NOW THEREFORE, the City of Laguna Beach (the "City") Owner agree as follows:

Attachment 7
160
55852.00004\42757030.1
2 Section 1. Effective Date and Initial Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall be effective and commence on November 18, 2025 (the "Effective Date"), and shall remain in effect for an initial term of ten (10) years thereafter.

Section 2. Renewal.

A. Each year on the anniversary of the Effective Date of this agreement, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the initial term of the Agreement unless written notice of nonrenewal is served as provided herein.

B. If Owner or the City desires in any year not to renew the term of the Agreement, Owners or the City shall serve written notice of non-renewal of the Agreement on the other party. Unless such notice is served by Owner to the City at least ninety (90) days prior to the annual renewal date, or served by the City to Owner at least sixty (60) days prior to the annual renewal date, one (1) year shall automatically be added to the term of the Agreement as provided herein.

C. Owners may make a written protest of notice of non-renewal served by the City. The City may at any time prior to the annual renewal date of the Agreement, withdraw its notice to Owner of non-renewal.

D. If either the City or Owner serves notice to the other of non-renewal in any year, the Agreement shall remain in effect for the balance of the term then remaining, either from the Effective Date or from the last renewal of the Agreement, whichever may apply.

Section 3. Standards and Conditions. During the term of this Agreement, the Historic Register Property shall be subject to the following conditions:

A. Owner shall preserve, maintain, and, where necessary, restore or rehabilitate the Historic Register Property and its character-defining features, notably the general architectural form, style, materials, design, scale, proportions, organization of windows, doors and other openings, textures, details, mass, roof line, porch and other aspects of the appearance of the exterior to the satisfaction of the City.

B. All proposed changes to the Historic Register Property shall comply with applicable City regulations and guidelines and the specific requirements for structural rehabilitation and maintenance attached to this Agreement as Exhibit A, and shall conform to the rules and regulations of the Office of Historic Preservation of the State Department of Parks and Recreation, the United States Secretary of the Interior Standards and Guidelines for Historic Preservation Projects, including without limitation rehabilitation, and the State Historical Building Code, and shall be subject to the approval of the City’s Community Development Director.

C. Owner shall notify the City of changes to character-defining exterior features of the Historic Register Property prior to their execution, such as but not limited to major landscaping projects, exterior door replacement or exterior alterations, regardless of whether a building Attachment 7
161
55852.00004\42757030.1
3 permit is required.

D. The following are prohibited: Demolition of the house or garage on the Historic Register Property; exterior alterations or additions not in keeping with the standards listed above; dilapidated, deteriorating or unrepaired structures, such as but not limited to fences, roofs, doors, walls and windows; storage of scrap lumber, junk, trash, debris, discarded or unused objects, such as but not limited to cars, appliances or furniture; stagnant water and unfilled excavations; any other device, decoration or structure that is unsightly by reason of its height, condition or inappropriate location.

E. Owner shall allow inspection of the interior and exterior of the Historic Register Property by representatives of the County Assessor and the City prior to the Effective Date and every five (5) years thereafter to determine Owner's compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 4. Furnishing of Information. Owner hereby agrees to furnish the City with any and all information requested by the City that may be necessary or advisable to determine compliance with the terms and provisions of this Agreement.

Section 5. Cancellation.

A. The City, following a duly noticed public hearing by the City Council in accordance with Government Code Section 50285, may cancel this Agreement if it determines that Owner has breached any of the terms or conditions of this Agreement, including but not limited to the provisions of Section 3 hereof, or has allowed the Historic Register Property to deteriorate to the point that it no longer meets the standards for a qualified historic property. If this Agreement is canceled because of Owner's failure to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate the Historic Register Property as specified by this Agreement, Owner shall pay a cancellation fee to the County Auditor as set forth in and in the amount required by Government Code Section 50286. No penalty shall be imposed if deterioration of the Historic Register Property is due to fire, disaster, or other factor beyond Owner's control.

B. If the Historic Register Property is acquired by eminent domain and the City Council determines that the acquisition frustrates the purpose of this Agreement, the Agreement shall be canceled and no fee imposed, as specified in Government Code Section 50288.

Section 6. Enforcement of Agreement.

A. In lieu of and/or in addition to any provisions to cancel the Agreement as referenced herein, the City may specifically enforce, or enjoin the breach of, the terms and conditions of the Agreement. In the event of a default, or in the event the City has grounds to cancel this Agreement under Section 5.A. above, the City shall give written notice to Owner by registered or certified mail addressed to the address set forth in Section 8 below; and if such default or breach is not corrected to the reasonable satisfaction of the City within thirty (30) days thereafter, or if not corrected within such a reasonable time as may be required to cure the Attachment 7
162
55852.00004\42757030.1
4 breach or default (provided that acts to cure the breach or default are commenced within thirty (30) days and shall thereafter be diligently pursued to completion by the owners), then the City may, without further notice, declare a default under the terms of this Agreement and may either (i) pursue cancellation of the Agreement under Section 5.A. above (after a duly noticed public hearing of the City Council) or (ii) bring any action necessary to specifically enforce Owner's obligations required under the terms and conditions of this Agreement, apply to any appropriate court for injunctive relief against any violation by Owner or apply for such other relief as may be appropriate.

B. The City does not waive any claim of default by Owner if the City does not enforce or cancel this Agreement. All other remedies at law or in equity that are not otherwise provided for in this Agreement or in the City's regulations governing historic register properties are available to the City to pursue in the event that there is a breach of this Agreement. No waiver by the City of any breach or default under this Agreement shall be deemed to be a waiver of any other subsequent breach thereof or default hereunder.

Section 7. Binding Effect of Agreement. Owner hereby agrees to and subjects the Historic Register Property to all of the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement. The City and Owner hereby declare their specific intent that the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement shall be deemed covenants running with the land and shall pass to and be binding upon Owner's heirs, successors and assigns in title or interest to the Historic Register Property. Every contract, deed or other instrument hereafter executed, delivered and accepted shall be subject to the covenants, reservations and restrictions set forth in this Agreement regardless of whether such covenants, restrictions and reservations are recited or referred to in such contract, deed or other instrument.

Section 8. Notice. Any notice required by the terms of this Agreement shall be sent to the address of the respective parties as specified below or at other addresses that may be later specified by the parties hereto.

To City: City of Laguna Beach
Attn: Community Development Director
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
To Owners: ______________________
______________________
Section 9. General Provisions.

A. None of the terms, provisions or conditions of this Agreement shall be deemed to create a partnership between the parties hereto and any of their heirs, successors or assigns, nor shall such terms, provisions, or conditions cause them to be considered joint ventures or members of any joint enterprise.

Attachment 7
163
55852.00004\42757030.1
5 B. Owner agrees to defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its elected and appointed officials, officers, agents and employees from liability for damage or claims for damage for personal injuries, including without limitation death, and claims for property damage that may arise from the direct or indirect use or operations of Owner or those of Owner's contractor, subcontractor, agent, employee or other person acting on Owner's behalf, or that otherwise relates to the use, operation and maintenance of the Historic Register Property. .

C. The foregoing defense, indemnity and hold harmless provision applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered, or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the use, operations and activities referred to in this Agreement regardless of whether or not the City prepared, supplied or approved the plans, specifications, permits or other documents for the Historic Register Property.

D. All of the agreements, rights, covenants, reservations, and restrictions contained in this Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties herein, their heirs, successors, legal representatives, assigns and all persons acquiring any part or portion of the Historic Register Property, whether by operation of law or in any manner whatsoever.

E. In the event legal proceedings are brought by any party or parties to enforce or restrain a violation of any of the covenants, reservations or restrictions contained in this Agreement, or to determine the rights and duties of any party hereunder, the prevailing party in such proceeding may recover all reasonable attorneys' fees to be fixed by the court, in addition to costs, litigation expenses and other relief ordered by the court.

F. In the event that any of the provisions of this Agreement are held to be unenforceable or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, or by subsequent preemptive legislation, the validity and enforceability of the remaining provisions, or portions thereof, shall not be effected thereby.

G. This Agreement shall be construed and governed in accordance with the laws of the State of California.

Section 10. Recordation. No later than twenty (20) days after the parties execute and enter into this agreement, the City shall cause this agreement to be recorded in the Office of the County Recorder of the County of Orange.

Section 11. Signatures. The City and Owners shall sign this Agreement, which shall be notarized.

Attachment 7
164
55852.00004\42757030.1
6 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City and Owner have executed this agreement on the day and year written below.

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
Date: ____________________ By: __________________________ City Manager
_________________________
Date: ____________________ By:___________________________ Trustee/ or Owner
Attachment 7
165
55852.00004\42757030.1
7 State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature (Seal)
________________________________
State of California}
County of Orange} ss.

On this ____ day of _____________, 20__, before me, __________________________________, a Notary Public, personally appeared ________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

Attachment 7
166
55852.00004\42757030.1
8 authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signatures(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

Signature (Seal)
________________________________
Attachment 7
167
Mills Act Application Report –2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 27

4. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property.
$25,000

2. 2026 Chimneys Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of the chimneys and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimneys are structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$10,000

3. 2026 Exterior Drainage Property owner to engage the services of a drainage specialist to install trench drain in northside walkway to divert water away from the house.
$6,000

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $8,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$15,000*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Gutters/Downspouts Property owner to inspect gutters and downspouts for damage or deterioration and clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed. Make any necessary repairs in a timely manner to prevent water damage to building.
$10,000*

7. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors,
and Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint.

Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair. Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $70,000*

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and Doors Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight.
$20,000*

9. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. $30,000*

10. 2027-2036
(biennially)
Metal Railings Clean metal of corrosion by gently sanding, make any necessary repairs, and refinish. $20,000* Attachment
Exhibit A
7 168
Mills Act Application Report –2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 28 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

11. 2026-2036
(biennially)
Lower Brick Planter Property owner to remove exiting plants from brick planter, clear out and repair compacted weepholes and damp-proof the planter to prevent future blockage and promote proper drainage.

Homeowner will then replant the brick planter.
$7,500*

12. 2027-2036
(biennially)
Air Circulation
System
Property owner to engage the services of a ventilation specialist to service and repair as needed the existing internal air circulation system to maintain proper air flow in structure. $10,000*

13. 2026-2036
(triennially)
Chimney Brick Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$15,000*

14. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick and Stone
Hardscaping
Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks and stones and replace in kind where severely damaged or missing. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$30,000*

15. 2026 Clay Tiles Inspect clay tiles for damage and deterioration and make related repairs. Replace in kind individual tiles if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair. Repoint tiles using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$15,000*

16. 2026 Light Fixtures Replace existing incompatible exterior light fixtures (plastic/metal flood lights and porch light) with new options that are compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials. $5,000*

17. 2030-2036
(centennially)
Stucco Property owner to inspect stucco for damage and make related repairs as needed. Prep, patch, and repaint stucco in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color and texture. $15,000*
TOTAL: $311,500
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attachment 7
169
Attchment 8
199
2646 Victoria Drive
Laguna Beach, CA
Mills Act Application Report
Prepared by:

July 2025
Attchment 8
200
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Table of Contents

TABLE OF CONTENTS

1. INTRODUCTION........................................................................................................................................................................ 1

1.1 Purpose and Methodology.............................................................................................................1

1.2 Qualifications ................................................................................................................................1

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation ..................................................................2

1.4 Definitions and Terminology ..........................................................................................................3

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE...........................................................................................................................................5

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY .................................................................................................................. 6

3.1 Location Map ................................................................................................................................6

3.2 Property Description .....................................................................................................................6

3.3 Current Photographs .....................................................................................................................8

3.4 Construction History....................................................................................................................12

4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS......................................................................15

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary ...................................................................................15

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations ........................................................................................15

4.3 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments......................................................16

4.4 Incompatible Features ................................................................................................................26

4. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN)..................... 27

5. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE...............................................................................................................29

7. SOURCES ..................................................................................................................................................................................30

APPENDICES
Appendix A: Résumés
Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric Appendix C: Historic Register Application and Historic Resources Assessment Report Attchment 8
201
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 1

1. INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Methodology
2646 Victoria Drive is associated with Assessor Parcel Number (APN) 656-152-38 (property) and is located in South Laguna Beach in the Arch Beach neighborhood of the City of Laguna Beach (City). The hillside property comprises a three-story, single-family above garage constructed in 1936. It was placed on the City’s Historic Register (Register) on July 29, 2025. As such, it is eligible for a Mills Act Historic Property Contract (Mills Act Contract).

The Mills Act was enacted in 1972, giving local governments the authority to grant property tax relief to owners of “qualified” historic properties. In Laguna Beach, a ”qualified” historic property is one that is listed on the Register. To pursue the historic preservation tax reduction incentive, an owner of a qualified historic property must enter a Mills Act Contract with the City. Under this contract agreement, the property owner agrees to protect, preserve, and maintain the property in accordance with specific preservation standards and other conditions in exchange for property tax relief.

GPA Consulting (GPA) was retained by the City to prepare this Mills Act Application Report (report) as part of the Mills Act Contract application for the property. In the preparation of this report, GPA performed the following tasks:

1. Reviewed Mills Act Contract application materials prepared by the property owner(s).

2. Reviewed existing information, including building permit records, planning documents, and historic maps.

3. Conducted a site visit to ascertain the current condition of the property and all buildings and features thereon. Digital photographs were taken for use in this report.

4. Prepared a detailed table of architectural features to document existing conditions, identify character-defining features, and provide recommended treatments following the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation (Standards).

5. Coordinated with the City and property owner(s) regarding the Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline for the property and provided recommendations for prioritization of work. The Rehabilitation/Maintenance Plan and Timeline (work plan) included in this report (see Section 4) is based on the work plan submitted by the applicant to the City in the initial Mills Act Application Form. The applicant-submitted work plan was reviewed by GPA for consistency with the intent of the Mills Act program and revised based on a review of existing information and observations made on site. GPA provided a draft of the revised work plan to the applicant to review and to provide the cost estimates included in this report.

1.2 Qualifications
Phoebe Rayburn, Architectural Historian I at GPA, was responsible for the preparation of this report. Audrey von Ahrens, Senior Architectural Historian at GPA, reviewed the report for quality assurance and quality control. Ms. von Ahrens meets the qualifications for a historic preservation professional outlined in Title 36 of the Code of Federal Regulations Part 61. Their résumés are included as Appendix A.

Attchment 8
202
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 2

1.3 Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation In exchange for the Mills Act property tax incentive, property owners must protect, preserve, and maintain the historic property following the Standards, among other specific contract conditions. 1 The definition of
“rehabilitation” assumes that at least some repair or alteration will be needed in order to provide for an efficient, contemporary use; however, these repairs and alterations must not damage or destroy the materials, features, or finishes that are important in defining the property’s historic character. The Standards for Rehabilitation are as follows:

1. A property will be used as it was historically or be given a new use that requires minimal change to its distinctive materials, features, spaces, and spatial relationships.

2. The historic character of a property will be retained and preserved. The removal of distinctive materials or alteration of features, spaces, and spatial relationships that characterize a property will be avoided.

3. Each property will be recognized as a physical record of its time, place, and use. Changes that create a false sense of historical development, such as adding conjectural features or elements from other historic properties, will not be undertaken.

4. Changes to a property that have acquired historic significance in their own right will be retained and preserved.

5. Distinctive materials, features, finishes, and construction techniques or examples of craftsmanship that characterize a property will be preserved.

6. Deteriorated historic features will be repaired rather than replaced. Where the severity of deterioration requires replacement of a distinctive feature, the new feature will match the old in design, color, texture, and, where possible, materials. Replacement of missing features will be substantiated by documentary and physical evidence.

7. Chemical or physical treatments, if appropriate, will be undertaken using the gentlest means possible.

Treatments that cause damage to historic materials will not be used.

8. Archeological resources will be protected and preserved in place. If such resources must be disturbed, mitigation measures will be undertaken.

9. New additions, exterior alterations, or related new construction will not destroy historic materials, features, and spatial relationships that characterize the property. The new work shall be differentiated from the old and will be compatible with the historic materials, features, size, scale and proportion, and massing to protect the integrity of the property and its environment.

10. New additions and adjacent or related new construction will be undertaken in such a manner that, if removed in the future, the essential form and integrity of the historic property and its environment would be unimpaired.
1 The Standards relevant to the Laguna Beach Mills Act program are codified at 36 Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Section

68. Attchment 8
203
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 3 The Standards and associated Guidelines can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website using the following address:
https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/secretary-standards-treatment-historic-properties.htm.

1.4 Definitions and Terminology
Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
This report discusses the architectural features of the property and specifically identifies the CDFs, which are the physical components that contribute to a property’s sense of time and place. For Laguna Beach Mills Act Application Reports, they include two categories: the overall visual character, and exterior materials and craftsmanship.

Some CDFs are more important than others in conveying the significance of a property. This report ranks each CDF as primary or secondary, which are defined as follows:

Primary CDF
• The most essential physical elements to conveying to the significance of the property. • Generally includes features that date from the period of significance; directly relate to the original use, type, and style; display craftsmanship; are highly visible; and retain integrity.

Secondary CDF
• Generally includes features that date from the period of significance but may not directly relate to the original use, type, and style; are common features or materials; and/or are less visible due to location on rear elevations.
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that maintains or restores the historical appearance and does not detract from its historic character and significance.
o New features on the historic portions of the property were only considered if they were replaced in kind, or if they were placed within original openings. Such features may compromise the property’s integrity of materials but contribute to its integrity of design. • Materials and/or features that were historically located on the property based on physical or documentary evidence.

Non-Character-Defining Features
Non-historic additions and/or ancillary buildings and their individual features were eliminated from consideration as character-defining, since they do not contribute to the to the Mills Act property’s historic character.

Incompatible Features
This report identifies incompatible features when they are relevant to the Mills Act application and proposed work plan. Incompatible features include the following:
• A feature that replaced or modified an original or altered component of the property in a way that deviates from the historical appearance.

Attchment 8
204
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 4 • Materials that were not, or would not have been, historically located on the property, such as materials that were not utilized for the style or type of building, or contemporary materials that did not exist at the time of construction.

Existing Conditions
This report also analyzes the overall existing condition of the property and each of its CDFs. The existing conditions are ranked on a scale of good, fair, and poor. These terms are defined as follows:

Good
• Intact, structurally sound, and performing its intended purpose; and • Needs no repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance.

Fair
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration; and
• Needs repair or rehabilitation beyond routine or preventative maintenance; but • Structurally sound and performing its intended purpose overall.

Poor
• Signs of wear, failure, or deterioration to the point that it is no longer structurally sound or performing its intended purpose.

The condition of non-character-defining and incompatible features is not assessed in this report.

Attchment 8
205
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 5

2. SUMMARY OF SIGNIFICANCE
On November 13, 2025, the owners of the property submitted an application to the City to voluntarily place it on the City’s Register. The application was accompanied by a Historic Resources Assessment (HRA) prepared by Historic Resources Group (HRG), dated February 7, 2025. The HRA evaluated the property under the appliable criteria for designation identified in the City’s Historic Preservation Ordinance (Chapter 25.45 of the Municipal Code) and assessed its physical integrity.

The HRA concluded the property met City criterion 1 for owner consent, criterion 3 as an extant example of 1930s residential development in Laguna Beach, and appeared eligible for listing under criterion 5 as an excellent example of architect Aubrey St. Clair’s work in Laguna Beach, and under criterion 6 as an intact example of a Monterey Revival residence in Laguna Beach. The period of significance identified in the HRA is 1936, the date of construction.
2 The property was subsequently designated Historic Register 348 on July 29, 2025.

Figure 1: West (primary) elevation. 1936 rendering of 2646 Victoria Drive. Source: HRG, 40. 2 “Historic Resource Group, Historic Resource Assessment 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach (Laguna Beach: City of Laguna Beach, February 2025), 23, 27.

Attchment 8
206
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 6

3. PROPERTY DESCRIPTION AND HISTORY

3.1 Location Map
The property is near Victoria Beach in a neighborhood commonly known as Arch Beach. The area is characterized by single-family residences of varying architectural styles, generally constructed on irregularly shaped hillside lots on both sides of the South Coast Highway. 2646 Victoria Drive is located towards the center of the Arch Beach neighborhood southwest of South Coast Highway. It is a rectangular parcel bounded by neighboring houses on the east and Victoria Drive on the west (see Figure 2).

Figure 2: 2025 aerial photo showing subject property outlined in orange.

3.2 Property Description
The property comprises a rectangular parcel with a three-story single-family residence above garage facing Victoria Drive. It is “U”-shaped in plan with a shallow setback from the street. The residence is constructed into the hillside such that it is three-stories in height on the west, street-facing elevation, and two stories on the east, rear-facing elevation. It has a main, front-gabled roof with various hipped and shed roofs clad in wood shake shingles with clay barrel tile ridge caps. The exterior walls are primarily clad with textured, hand troweled stucco and wood horizontal Dutch lap siding. Fenestration primarily consists of fully and partially glazed multi-light wood doors, and fixed and casement sash single- and multi-light wood windows.

The main entrance is located on the second story of the west (primary) elevation and consists of a partially glazed wood paneled door with decorative leaded glass within a recessed opening with brick steps and landing. A secondary entrance is located on the north end of the first story and consists of a slightly recessed, partially glazed wood paneled door with four divided lights flanked by multi-light paired casements windows. On the south end of the elevation is the partially-subterranean garage, which projects from the elevation at street-level with Attchment 8
207
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 7 shed roof and wood paneled roll-up door. On the upper levels, there are wrap-around balconies clad with low stucco walls with clay tile coping and rectangular openings with decorative clay tile in a diamond pattern. The primary elevation also has a brick chimney on the north end.

The east (rear) and north elevations are clad in stucco on the lower level and wood clapboard on the upper level.

The fenestration is asymmetrically arranged. The rear elevation has a stucco chimney, and fenestration consists of multi-light wood casement windows, multi-light wood French doors, a wood paneled storage closet door, and a multi-light wood door with pebble glass and a multi-light pebble glass transom. The north elevation fenestration consists of multi-light wood casement windows, a multi-light wood casement window with pebble glass, and a multi-light wood door.

The property has a concrete driveway lined with brick and a series of brick steps that lead to the main and secondary entrances. Landscaping in the front yard consists of trees and shrubs. The rear yard is terraced with natural stone retaining walls, brick paving, and vegetation.

Attchment 8
208
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 8

3.3 Current Photographs
Figure 3: Photo Key. Photographs of building(s) indicated in blue and landscaping indicated in green.

Photo 1. View of property from Victoria Drive, looking east. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Project North
Attchment 8
209
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 9 Photo 2. South (side) elevation, view from second story patio facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 3. East (rear) elevation, view facing northwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attchment 8
210
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 10 Photo 4 North (side) elevation, view facing southwest. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 5. North (front yard) landscaping and hardscaping, view facing northeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attchment 8
211
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 11 Photo 6. South (side yard) landscaping and hardscaping, view facing southeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Photo 7. East (rear yard) landscaping, view facing northeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

Attchment 8
212
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 12 Photo 8. East (rear yard) landscaping, view facing northeast. Source: GPA, May 2025.

3.4 Construction History
The residence at 2646 Victoria Drive was designed by local architect Aubrey St. Clair for Henry and Olive Levinson and constructed in 1936.
3 No exterior alterations are documented in building permit records until 1984 when a 463-square-foot, two-story addition was constructed on the east end of the south elevation and a second chimney was added on the north end of the east elevation. 4 In 1999, the second-story front deck was repaired
by adding a new structural beam, installing drainage, and in-kind replacement of the brick flooring. 5 In 2021,
the wood shake roof was replaced with the existing Class A fire-rated wood shakes.6 No other alterations are documented in building permit records (see Table 1 for building permit records).

Table 1: Building Permit History7
Date Permit Work Completed Architect (A)/
Builder (B) Owner
1936/08/08 3831 Construct new single-family residence with garage.

Smith Const. (B) Henry Levinson
1984/03/13 84-120 Construct 2-story, 463 sq. ft. addition and chimney.

Morris S (A)/Bee
Rite Bldrs (B)
Edward Jussen
3 City of Laguna Beach, Building Permit No. 3831, August 8, 1936 4 Building Permit No. 84-170, March 13, 1984; Building Permit No. 84-1215, May 8, 1984. 5 Building Permit No. B99-0950, May 25, 1999; Building Permit No. B99-1419, August 2, 1999. 6 Building Permit No. RBP-2021-7184, June 30, 2021.
7 The building permit history table is not a complete list of all building permit records on file for the subject property. It includes only those permits pertaining to alterations to the building(s) exterior, site, and only major electrical and/or MEP upgrades.

Attchment 8
213
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 13 Table 1: Building Permit History7
Date Permit Work Completed Architect (A)/
Builder (B) Owner
1999/05/25 B99-0950 Remove bricks and mortar base from 2nd floor entry deck and replace with 3-layer Dex-O-Tex, relayer using ½ bricks.

John W. Verdugo
(B)
Janice Jones
2021/07/13 RBP2021-
7184
Tear off wood shake and install 2800 SF 30# felt,
72# cap sheet & wood shake for Class A rated
system.

Beach Cities
Roofing (B)
Brent
Liljestrom Trust
Additional modifications, primarily identified through research, such as a comparison of historical and current photographs and visual observations made during the site visit conducted by GPA, are listed below. Because these alterations are not documented in permit records, exact dates are unknown; however, estimate dates of completion are provided when possible.
• Removal and partial infill of three second-story windows on the north end of the primary (west) elevation, replaced with one large tripartite window, circa 1937-1963. 8 • Removal and partial infill of two second-story windows on the west elevation, south of the main entrance, replaced with one large picture window, circa 1937-2007. 9 • Removal and partial infill of two second-story windows on the west end of the south elevation, replaced with existing tripartite window, circa 1940s-2007. 10 • Removal and partial infill of third-story windows and doors on the south end of the west elevation, replaced with existing multi-light paired casement and double-doors with sidelights, 1937- 2007.
11 • Replacement of main entrance door, west elevation, circa 1963-2007. 12 • Installation of four canvas awnings on the east and south elevations, unknown date. • New metal gate and railings at main entrance walkway and steps, date unknown. 8 HRG, 40; Flight PAI_199V_1, Frame 10, February 20, 1963, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection. 9 HRG, 40; Google Street View, September 2007, Google Maps, Accessed June 2025, https://www.google.com/maps. 10 “19xx Aerial Victoria Beach – Tom Pulley Postcard Collection,” N.D., courtesy of Laguna Beach Historical Society; Google Street View, September 2007, Google Maps, Accessed June 2025, https://www.google.com/maps. 11 HRG, 40; Google Street View, September 2007, Google Maps, Accessed June 2025, https://www.google.com/maps. 12 Flight PAI_199V_1, Frame 10, February 20, 1963, courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection; Google Street View, September 2007.

Attchment 8
214
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 14 Figure 4: 1947 historical aerial photo showing property after initial construction. Source: Flight C_11730, Frame 4-77, July 31. Courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Figure 5: 1948 Sanborn showing property. Source: Sanborn Map Company, Laguna Beach, Sheet 16, courtesy of
Historical Information Gatherers, Inc.

Figure 6: ca. 1940s historical photo showing south and west elevations. Source: Source: courtesy of Laguna Beach
Historical Society.

Figure 7: 1963 historical aerial photograph of property.

Source: Flight PAI_199V_1, Frame 10, February 20.

Courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Figure 8: 1963 historical aerial photograph of property.

Source: Flight PAI_199V_1, Frame 52, February 20.

Courtesy of UCSB Library Geospatial Collection.

Figure 9: 2001 historical aerial photograph showing
property after construction of additions. Source: Flight CCC_BQK_C, Frame 29-9, May 30. Courtesy of UCSB
Library Geospatial Collection.

Attchment 8
215
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 15

4.0 EXISTING CONDITIONS AND RECOMMENDED TREATMENTS
The property’s CDFs, their existing condition, and recommended treatments are summarized below and detailed in table format in Section 4.3. See Section 1.4 for definitions of the terminology used throughout this section.

4.1 Existing Conditions Assessment Summary
The property and building thereon appear to be in overall good condition; however, some individual features and materials are in fair to poor condition. The roof was last refinished in 2021, and no visible signs of damage was observed. Exterior stucco cladding, including wood boards and stucco, generally appear to be in good condition but the wood elements are largely concealed beneath built-up layers of paint. Some of the decorative diamond patterned clay tile railings are chipped on the primary elevation porch. Additionally, cracked and spalling concrete was observed throughout the hardscaping on the property, particularly around the rear and north (side) yard.

4.2 General Treatment Recommendations
All work, including maintenance and repair, should be completed following the Standards (see Section 1.3).

Generally, all primary CDFs identified in this report (see Section 4.3) should be retained to the greatest extent feasible and inspected annually to determine if maintenance or repair is necessary as the building ages. If deterioration necessitates replacement, the feature should be replaced in kind. Secondary CDFs should be retained or may be replaced with an option that is equally compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials. Additionally, if documentary evidence is or becomes available, restoring original features that were previously removed or replaced is encouraged.

Because the property is in overall good condition, as detailed in Section 4.1, the proposed work primarily entails continued maintenance and as-needed repairs of the historic features. Repair of the existing damaged and deteriorated features, listed above, are prioritized. Features expected to need the most regular maintenance are primarily constructed of wood and clay tile, though stucco and metal features will require monitoring and asneeded repairs. Appendix B: Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric includes guidance adapted from the Standards as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs, specific to the materials that contribute to the historic character of the property. Additional preservation guidance and links to resources are included in Section 5. This guidance should be consulted when planning and carrying out applicable work on the property.

Attchment 8
216
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 16

4.3 Character-Defining Features and Recommended Treatments The following table identifies all existing exterior CDFs of the property. If applicable, incompatible features that detract from the historic character and are recommended for removal/replacement in the proposed Restoration, Rehabilitation, and Maintenance Plan (Section 4) are addressed in Section 4.4. Any minor or utilitarian features (e.g., crawlspace covers, contemporary light fixtures, attic vents) not identified in this report may be assumed to be non-character-defining; however, any proposed modifications to these features should be compatible with the historic character of the building and comply with the Standards.

Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment OVERALL VISUAL CHARACTER Massing
• U-shaped in plan
• Three stories above
garage
• Asymmetrically
arranged elevations
• Second-story deck
• Third-story balcony
☒ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

OVERALL VISUAL

CHARACTER
Roof Form
• Complex, multi-gabled
o Front, hipped, and
shed
• Flush eaves (front
gable)
• Open, overhanging
eaves, exposed rafter
tails
☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain and maintain.

Attchment 8
217
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 17 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Exterior Cladding Type A
• Wood shakes
☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• Periodically replace in kind or with
compatible material.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Exterior Cladding Type B
• Barrel clay tile
• Ridge caps

☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Exterior Cladding Type C
• Stucco
• Hand-troweled texture
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attchment 8
218
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 18 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Exterior Cladding Type D
• Wood siding
• Horizontal Dutch lap
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☒ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• Remove built-up layers of paint by
gently scraping, prep and repaint.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type A
• Secondary entrance
• Wood paneled
• Partially glazed
o Four divided lights
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind or
with equally compatible door
within existing opening.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type B
• Secondary and balcony
entrances
• Wood
• Fully glazed
o Ten divided lights
• Single and double
doors
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind or
with equally compatible option.

Attchment 8
219
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 19 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Door Type C
• Rear Entrance
• Wood
o Partially glazed
o Four vertical
divided lights over
wood panel
• Multi-light wood hopper
sash transom
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type D
• Balcony Entrance
• Wood
• Double doors
o Ten divided lights
• Ten-divided-light
sidelights
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind or
with equally compatible option.

NonFEATURE / MATERIAL
Door Type E
• Garage Entrance
• Wood paneled
• Roll-up

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind or
with equally compatible option
within existing opening.

Attchment 8
220
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 20 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Main Entrance Opening
• Recessed entry
• Rectangular opening
• Wood surround

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☒ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair
original entryway and opening as
needed.
• Door may be replaced with new
compatible door within existing
opening or consider restoring
original door based on
documentary evidence if
available. FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type A
• Wood
• Casements (single and
paired)
• Three and four divided
light sash
• Thin muntins
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind
within existing opening.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type B
• Wood
• Casements (single and
paired)
• Three and four divided
light sash
• Thick muntins
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind or
with equally compatible window.

Attchment 8
221
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 21 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Window Type C
• Wood
• Casements (single and
paired)
• Three and four divided
light sash
• Textured glazing
• Thin muntins
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind
within existing opening.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type D
• Wood
• Paired casement
• Four divided light sash
• Fixed, multi-light
transom
• Wood surround
• Thin muntins
• Wood surround
• Wood sill
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☒ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☐ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind
within existing opening.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type E
• Wood
• Group of four
o Fixed, multi-light
at center
o Three divided light
side casement
sash
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attchment 8
222
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 22 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Window Type F
• Wood
• Tripartite
o Fixed multi-light
center
o Three divided light
side casements
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☐ West el.
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Maintain and repair as needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in like-kind
or consider restoring original
window(s)/opening(s) based on
documentary evidence.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Window Type G
• Wood
• Arched
• Fixed
• Multi-light
• Wood surround
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain, and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Chimney
• Exterior (third story)
• Rectangular
• Brick

☐ Total
Building
☒ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

Attchment 8
223
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 23 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Main Entrance Stairs
• Brick risers and treads

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If individual units are ever
damaged or deteriorated beyond
repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Second Story Deck
• Half-brick flooring
o Basketweave
pattern
• Stucco and tile
perimeter wall

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Third Story Balcony
• Carved wood posts and
beams
• Carved wood outriggers
and brackets
• Stucco and tile half wall
railings

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☒ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If individual units are ever
damaged or deteriorated beyond
repair, replace in kind.

Attchment 8
224
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 24 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment FEATURE / MATERIAL Railings/Perimeter Walls
• Second-story deck and
third-story balcony
• Stucco walls
• Clay tile coping
• Rectangular openings
with decorative clay tile
in a diamond pattern
☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☒ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☐ Good
☒ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

FEATURE / MATERIAL
Attic Vents
• Clay tile tube vents
• Gable ends
• Groups of three

☐ Total
Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☒ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If ever damaged or deteriorated
beyond repair, replace in kind.

SITE
Street-Level Pedestrian
Entrance
• Stepped brick retaining
walls and planters
o Common bond
• Brick steps

☒ Front
☐ Rear
☐ Side
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☐ Good
☒ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If individual units are ever
damaged or deteriorated beyond
repair, replace in kind.

Attchment 8
225
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 25 Character-Defining Features (CDFs)
Type Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Importance Condition Recommended Treatment SITE Stone Retaining Walls and
Planters
• Terraced

☐ Front
☒ Rear
☒ Side
☒ Primary
☐ Secondary
☐ Good
☒ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If individual units are ever
damaged or deteriorated beyond
repair, replace in kind.

SITE
Brick Walkways and Walls
• Running bond
• Basketweave pattern
☐ Front
☒ Rear
☐ Side
☐ Primary
☒ Secondary
☒ Good
☐ Fair
☐ Poor
• Retain, maintain and repair as
needed.
• If individual units are ever
damaged or deteriorated beyond
repair, replace in kind.

Attchment 8
226
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 26

4.4 Incompatible Features
The following table identifies only those incompatible non-character-defining features that detract from the historic character of the property, and should therefore be addressed as part of the potential Mills Act contract and proposed Work Plan (see Section 4).

Incompatible Features
Description Location Photo (If Applicable) Recommended Treatment Main Entry Light Fixture
• Recessed metal/plastic light

☐ Total Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
• Replace incompatible light fixture within
main entry porch on primary elevation
with new light fixture in the same
location (to avoid cutting new openings
into wood siding). New light should be
compatible with the historic character of
the property in terms of style and
materials.

Metal/Plastic Flood Light Fixture ☐ Total Building
☐ Roof
☐ North el.
☐ East el.
☐ South el.
☒ West el.
• Replace incompatible utilitarian flood
lights on primary elevation with new
lights in the same location (to avoid
cutting new openings into wood siding).

New lights should be compatible with
the historic character of the property in
terms of style and materials.

Attchment 8
227
Mills Act Application Report –2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 27

4. PROPOSED REHABILITATION/MAINTENANCE PLAN AND TIMELINE (WORK PLAN) (Cost Estimates Provided by the Applicant)
Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

1. 2026 Foundation Engage a qualified structural engineer experienced in working with historic properties to inspect the foundation and make recommendations for any work, including seismic retrofit, with an implementation plan. Submit report to the City for review and execute any recommended work in a sensitive manner to avoid causing damage to historic fabric or visually impacting the historic character of the property.
$25,000

2. 2026 Chimneys Engage the services of a chimney specialist or structural engineer with experience in historic preservation to investigate the existing condition of the chimneys and prepare an implementation plan for any recommended work to ensure chimneys are structurally sound and weathertight. Commence and complete any necessary work as recommended.
$10,000

3. 2026 Exterior Drainage Property owner to engage the services of a drainage specialist to install trench drain in northside walkway to divert water away from the house.
$6,000

4. 2026-2036
(annually)
Total Building Treat property for pests such as rodents and termites. $8,000*

5. 2026-2036
(annually)
Roof Property owner to inspect roof and clean of debris. Make any necessary repairs in a timely and sensitive manner.
$15,000*

6. 2026-2036
(annually)
Gutters/Downspouts Property owner to inspect gutters and downspouts for damage or deterioration and clean out debris at least once per year, or more often as needed. Make any necessary repairs in a timely manner to prevent water damage to building.
$10,000*

7. 2026-2036
(annually)
Wood Siding,
Windows, Doors,
and Trim
Property owner to inspect all exterior wood features for chalking, blistering, peeling, or cracking paint.

Where necessary, gently scrape failing paint, inspect wood, and make any necessary repairs in a sensitive manner. Replace in kind individual wood units only if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair. Carefully repaint in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color. $70,000*

8. 2026-2036
(annually)
Windows and Doors Property owner to inspect wood windows and doors for proper operation and seal and make any necessary repairs to ensure they remain weathertight.
$20,000*

9. 2026-2036
(annually)
Landscaping Property owner to inspect landscaping and trim plants/trees away from the building exterior. $30,000*

10. 2027-2036
(biennially)
Metal Railings Clean metal of corrosion by gently sanding, make any necessary repairs, and refinish. $20,000* Attchment 8
228
Mills Act Application Report –2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 28 Contract Year Building Feature Proposed Work/Task Est. Cost

11. 2026-2036
(biennially)
Lower Brick Planter Property owner to remove exiting plants from brick planter, clear out and repair compacted weepholes and damp-proof the planter to prevent future blockage and promote proper drainage.

Homeowner will then replant the brick planter.
$7,500*

12. 2027-2036
(biennially)
Air Circulation
System
Property owner to engage the services of a ventilation specialist to service and repair as needed the existing internal air circulation system to maintain proper air flow in structure. $10,000*

13. 2026-2036
(triennially)
Chimney Brick Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$15,000*

14. 2028-2036
(triennially)
Brick and Stone
Hardscaping
Property owner inspect for loose or damaged bricks and stones and replace in kind where severely damaged or missing. Repoint as needed using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$30,000*

15. 2026 Clay Tiles Inspect clay tiles for damage and deterioration and make related repairs. Replace in kind individual tiles if severely damaged or deteriorated beyond repair. Repoint tiles using mortar to match the existing in terms of color, composition, and texture.
$15,000*

16. 2026 Light Fixtures Replace existing incompatible exterior light fixtures (plastic/metal flood lights and porch light) with new options that are compatible with the historic character of the property in terms of style and materials. $5,000*

17. 2030-2036
(centennially)
Stucco Property owner to inspect stucco for damage and make related repairs as needed. Prep, patch, and repaint stucco in the same, or similar, historically appropriate color and texture. $15,000*
TOTAL: $311,500
*Estimate total of reoccurring costs over 10-year contract.

Attchment 8
229
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 29

5. ADDITIONAL PRESERVATION GUIDANCE
Preservation Briefs13
In addition to the Standards and Guidelines, the National Park Service has produced a variety of publications, including the Preservation Briefs (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm) and Preservation Tech Notes (https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-by-topic.htm), on a broad range of topics and techniques for the treatment of historic buildings and their materials. They can be accessed online by visiting the National Park Service website.

Some Preservation Briefs that may be relevant to the subject property are:
#1 Assessing Cleaning and Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic Masonry Buildings. #2 Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings. #3 Improving Energy Efficiency in Historic Buildings.
#4 Roofing for Historic Buildings.
#6 Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Buildings.
#9 The Repair of Historic Wooden Windows.
#10 Exterior Paint Problems on Historic Woodwork.
#14 New Exterior Additions to Historic Buildings: Preservation Concerns. #16 The Use of Substitute Materials on Historic Building Exteriors. #17 Architectural Character- Identifying the Visual Aspects of Historic Buildings as an Aid to Preserving Their Character.
#19 The Repair and Replacement of Historic Wooden Shingle Roofs. #22 The Preservation and Repair of Historic Stucco.
#24 Heating, Ventilating, and Cooling Historic Buildings: Problems and Recommended Approaches. #30 The Preservation and Repair of Historic Clay Tile Roofs. #35 Understanding Old Buildings: The Process of Architectural Investigation. #39 Holding the Line: Controlling Unwanted Moisture in Historic Buildings. #41 The Seismic Rehabilitation of Historic Buildings.
#47 Maintaining the Exterior of Small and Medium Size Historic Buildings.

State Historical Building Code
One of California’s most valuable tools for the preservation of historic buildings is the State Historical Building Code (SHBC). While the California Building Code (CBC, section 3403.5) makes provisions for the special treatment of qualified historic buildings, the SHBC amplifies and codifies this protection. The SHBC recognizes and endorses the need to find and adopt reasonable alternatives or reasonable levels of equivalency on a caseby-case basis for situations where strict compliance with the regular code would negatively affect a historic building’s appearance or jeopardize its economic viability. The City includes use of the CHBC as an incentive that may be requested by owners of properties listed in the Register. 13 “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs,” U.S. Department of the Interior, National Park Service, accessed June 2025, https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

Attchment 8
230
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach 30

7. SOURCES
California Code of Regulations, California Office of Administrative Law, State of California Government.

City of Laguna Beach. “Historic Preservation.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.lagunabeachcity.net/government/departments/community-development/planningzoning/historic-preservation.

City of Laguna Beach Community Development Department Building Division. Building Permits. Various Dates.

City of Laguna Beach Municipal Code. Chapter 25.45.

Google Maps. Street View Images. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. https://www.google.com/maps. “Laguna Beach Historical Society Photos.” SmugMug. Accessed June 2025. https://lagunabeachhistory.smugmug.com/browse/.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. www.proquest.com.

Sanborn Map Company. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. fims-historicalinfo-com UCSB Geospatial Collection. Various Dates. Accessed June 2025. https://mil.library.ucsb.edu/.

US Department of the Interior, National Park Service. “Technical Preservation Services: Preservation Briefs.” Accessed June 2025. https://www.nps.gov/orgs/1739/preservation-briefs.htm.

US Department of the Interior. National Park Service. “The Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.” Accessed June 2025.
https://www.nps.gov/tps/standards/treatment-guidelines-2017.pdf.

Attchment 8
231
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix A

APPENDIX A
Résumés

Attchment 8
232
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix A

AUDREY VON AHRENS
Audrey von Ahrens is a Senior Architectural Historian at GPA. She has been involved in the field of historic preservation since 2013. Audrey graduated from the University of Pennsylvania with a Master of Science in Historic Preservation and City Planning where she focused on preservation planning and community economic development. She has since worked in private historic preservation consulting in California. Audrey joined GPA in 2017 and her experience has included the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act and Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act; historic context statements; Secretary of the Interior’s Standards analysis; large-scale historic resources surveys; and evaluations of eligibility for a wide variety of projects and property types throughout Southern California. Audrey is also experienced in coordinating with property owners and local governments in the preparation and review of Mills Act Property Contract applications and the inspection and reporting of properties applying for or with existing contracts.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• M.S., Historic Preservation, University of Pennsylvania, 2016
• Master of City Planning, University of Pennsylvania,
2016
• B.A., Architectural Studies and Urban Studies,
University of Pittsburgh, 2013
• 20 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019.
• 26 E. Colorado Boulevard, Pasadena, Los Angeles
County, Mills Act Application, 2019
• 34-38 E. Holly Street, Pasadena, Mills Act
Application, 2022
• Casa de Rosas, Federal Rehabilitation Tax Credit,
2017-2022
• City of Anaheim, Mills Act Program, Inspections of
Existing Contracts, 2024-2025
• City of Costa Mesa, Mills Act Program, Applications
Processing and Contract, Costa Mesa, Orange
County, 2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Pre-Approval Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• City of San Clemente Historic Property Preservation
Agreements, Periodic Inspections, San Clemente,
Orange County, 2018-2024
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Inspections of Existing Contracts, Los
Angeles, 2017-2025
• Los Angeles Mills Act Historical Property Contract
Program, Pre-Contract Services, Los Angeles, 2018-
2020
• North Beach Historic District, San Clemente, National Register Nomination, 2021
• Whittier Public Library, Construction Monitoring,
2021-2023
• Vortox Co. Building, 121 S. Indian Hill Boulevard,
Claremont, CEQA Historical Resource Documentation
Report, 2022
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Senior Architectural Historian, 2024- Present
― Associate Architectural Historian, 2021-2024
― Architectural Historian II, 2017-2021
• Heritage Consulting, Inc., Intern, 2015-2016
• Tacony Community Development Corp., Intern, 2014
• Pittsburgh History & Landmarks Foundation, Intern,
2013
• University of Pittsburgh, Teaching Assistant, 2012-
2013
• Pittsburgh Planning Department, Intern, 2012
• Pittsburgh Downtown Partnership, Intern, 2011
Qualifications:
• Meets the Secretary of the Interior’s Professional
Qualification Standards for history and architectural
history pursuant to the Code of Federal Regulations, 36 CFR Part 61, Appendix A.
• National Preservation Institute, Section 106: An
Introduction
Professional Activities:
• Downtown Los Angeles Neighborhood Council,
Planning and Land Use Committee (DLANC), 2018-
2024
• DLANC, Board of Directors, Alternate, 2019-2024
Attchment 8
233
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix A

PHOEBE RAYBURN
Phoebe Rayburn is an Architectural Historian I at GPA. She has been involved with the field of historic preservation since 2024. Phoebe graduated from the College of Charleston with a bachelor’s degree in historic preservation and community planning and a minor in art history. At GPA, she assists the architectural historian team with the preparation of environmental compliance documents in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act (NHPA), and the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards (SOIS). Prior to GPA, Ms. Rayburn was a preservation intern at the Historic Charleston Foundation, where she performed historic property inspections, coordinated inspection schedules, prepared and mailed inspection reports, and performed archival research on endangered historic properties for presentation. She is proficient in a number of software programs, including AutoCAD, Adobe InDesign, SketchUp, Adobe Photoshop and Lightroom, and Microsoft Office. She uses these skills to add depth to her analyses and reports in the form of maps, illustrations, and graphics.

Educational Background: Selected Projects:
• B.A., Historic Preservation and Community Planning,
Minor in Art History, College of Charleston, 2024
• 5679 Corso di Napoli, CEQA Historical Resource
Evaluation Report, Long Beach, 2025
• Kensington Historic District, National Register of
Historic Places Nomination Form, San Diego, 2025
• 8910-8924 Ardendale Avenue, CEQA Historical
Resource Evaluation Report, San Gabriel, 2025
• Lodi Downtown Specific Plan Historic Resources
Inventory, Lodi, 2025
• Telegraph Road over San Gabriel River Bridge, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• 1323 South Pacific Street, CEQA Historical Resources
Evaluation Report, Oceanside, 2025
• Henningsen-Lotus Road Multi-Use Trail, Section 106
Historic Property Survey Report, El Dorado County,
2025
• I-405 Auxiliary Lanes from I-110 to Wilmington, Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Los Angeles
County, 2025
• Max Berg Plaza Park Fountain Rehabilitation, Section
106 Historic Property Survey Report, San Clemente,
2025
• Washington Boulevard Bridge over Rio Hondo Channel,
Section 106 Historic Property Survey Report, Pico
Rivera, 2025
Professional Experience:
• GPA Consulting, Architectural Historian I, February
2025 – Present
• Historic Charleston Foundation, Preservation Intern,
January 2024 – May 2024
Attchment 8
234
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix B

APPENDIX B
Guidelines for the Treatment of Historic Fabric
The following guidelines are derived from the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for Rehabilitation as well as the National Park Service’s series of Technical Preservation Briefs.

Attchment 8
235
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Wood
Retain all original wood features such as siding, window and door surrounds, windows, doors, decorative features, and trim, as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all wood elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture and/or insect damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from wood elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If insect or moisture damage is discovered, determine and abate the cause right away.

Treat and/or repair wood members immediately to prevent widespread damage.

Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by an extermination specialist, contractor, and/or experienced practitioner. • Repaint (or stain) regularly to protect the wood from moisture, sunlight, and other elements that cause deterioration.
o Remove any damaged or deteriorated paint to the next sound layer using the gentlest method possible (e.g., hand scraping and hand sanding). o Apply compatible coating by hand following proper surface preparation. o Repaint (or stain) with a color that is consistent with the age and style of the building.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials and appropriate construction methods such as by patching, piecing-in, consolidating, or otherwise reinforcing the wood using recognized preservation methods.

Replace
• If a wood element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide. Replacement wood feature should match the historic as closely as possible in design, color, texture, and other qualities to retain the building’s architectural character.

Attchment 8
236
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Stucco
Retain all original stucco features such as walls, brackets, steps, columns, and chimneys as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all stucco elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage or cracks.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away the building by means of flashing, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s).
o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as loss of bond, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair stucco immediately to prevent widespread damage.

Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner.
• Clean only when absolutely necessary using the gentlest means necessary, e.g., to halt deterioration or to remove heavy soiling.
o Clean surface with low-pressure water, gentle (non-ionic) detergent, and natural bristle brushes.
o Spot-test cleaning methods over a sufficient period of time to determine any potential longterm effects of the cleaning process/solution. o Do not apply harsh chemicals or sandblast. Stucco is particularly susceptible to abrasive cleaning.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials, appropriate construction methods, and experienced practitioners to avoid damage to the historic fabric. o Repair hairline cracks in the stucco with a thin slurry of finish coat ingredients or even paint.
o Repair larger areas of damage by patching over with a similarly textured stucco of an appropriate mix.
o Finish coat should be worked to match the texture of the original stucco. o Do not use Portland cement.
o Limit areas of repair to the areas that are damaged.
o Repaint as needed.

Replace
• Total replacement of stucco is likely only to be necessary when 50% or more of the stucco is failing, or when it was previously replaced with an incompatibly textured stucco.

For more information and guidance, see Preservation Brief #22. The Preservation and Repair of Historic Stucco.

Attchment 8
237
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Masonry
Retain all original masonry features such as such as walls, brackets, steps, columns, window sills, and chimneys as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all masonry elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from masonry elements by means of flashing, caulking, gutters, etc. Keep all plants trimmed away from building(s). o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as efflorescence or mildew, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair masonry immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner. • Clean only when absolutely necessary using the gentlest means possible, e.g., to halt deterioration or to remove heavy soiling.
o Clean masonry surface with low-pressure water, gentle detergent, and natural bristle brushes.
o Spot-test cleaning methods over a sufficient period of time to determine any potential long-term effects of the cleaning process/solution.
o Do not apply harsh chemicals.
o Never sandblast. Masonry can be irreparably damaged.

Repair
• Repair when necessary using in-kind materials, appropriate construction methods, and experienced practitioners to avoid damage to the historic fabric. o Repair brick by patching or piecing-in limited masonry units using recognized preservation methods.
o If repointing is needed, use a mortar that duplicates the existing in binder type, aggregate type, strength, composition, color, and texture. Duplicate existing mortar joints in width and joint profile.
o Regularly repaint only if feature was historically painted.

Replace
• If a masonry element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide.

For more information and guidance, see the following Preservation Brief 1. Cleaning and Water-Repellent Treatments for Historic Masonry Buildings, 2. Repointing Mortar Joints in Historic Masonry Buildings, 6. Dangers of Abrasive Cleaning to Historic Building, and 15. Preservation of Historic Concrete.

Attchment 8
238
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix B Guidelines for the Treatment of Metals
Retain all original metal features such as windows and door, railings, light fixtures, brackets, and door/window hardware as applicable.

Protect and Maintain
• Inspect all metal elements annually as follows:
o Check for signs of moisture damage or deterioration.
o Ensure water is being properly diverted away from the metal feature and is not accumulating or pooling on any curved or flat surfaces. o If signs of moisture damage are discovered, such as corrosion or loose/broken joints, determine and abate the cause right away. Treat and/or repair metal element immediately to prevent widespread damage. Treatment should be carried out in the least invasive way possible, as determined by a contractor or experienced practitioner. • Cleaning may be necessary prior to repair or repainting/recoating. o Clean surface with wire brush or by hand scraping. If more extensive cleaning is needed, hire an experienced practitioner to assist with other appropriate methods such as lowpressure grit blasting or chemical rust removal. o Immediately after cleaning, protect the newly cleaned metal with a new layer of an appropriate paint or coating. If a metal was not historically painted, use a clear protective coating.

Repair
• When necessary, repair using in-kind materials and appropriate construction methods such using patching compounds or limited replacement in kind (e.g., a single baluster in a railing) using the existing feature as a guide.

Replace
• If a metal element is damaged or deteriorated beyond repair, it should be replaced in kind to the extent feasible using the existing feature as a guide. Replacement feature should match the historic as closely as possible in design, color, texture, and other qualities to retain the building’s architectural character.

For more information and guidance, see Preservation Brief #13. The Repair and Thermal Upgrading of Historic Steel Windows.

Attchment 8
239
Mills Act Application Report – 2646 Victoria Drive, Laguna Beach Appendix C

APPENDIX C
Historic Register Application and Historic Resources Assessment Report

Attchment 8
240
1 Heritage Committee
Minutes: August 18, 2025

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Regular Meeting of August 18, 2025

1. CALL TO ORDER
6:00 p.m.

COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Jon Stordahl, Linda Morgenlander, Cathy Jurca, James Henry II (Chair) MEMBERS ABSENT: Justin Drucker (Vice Chair)
STAFF PRESENT:

Samantha Beier, Acting Planning Manager, Shaveta Sharma, Acting Principal Planner, Heather Steven, Senior Planner, Jessica Mendoza, Assistant Planner

2. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS

2.1 None.

3. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING

3.1 July 21, 2025, Draft Minutes
HC Member Jurca made a motion to approve the HC minutes from the meeting on July 21, 2025, with request that the verbiage “The proposed improvements do not require review or compliance with SOIS for properties on the City's Historic Register” from item

4.2 be removed due to inaccuracy with regards to the project.

Second: LM
Vote: Stordahl Y, Morgenlander Y, Jurca Y, Henry Y
Motion carried: 4-0

4. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR ACTION

4.1 721 Manzanita Drive
Attachment 9 212
2 Heritage Committee
Minutes: August 18, 2025
Action:

By Motion, the Heritage Committee shall review and recommend to the Design Review Board (DRB) proposed alterations to a property on the City's Historic Register. No significant alterations are proposed to the existing single-family dwelling.

Modifications include the addition of a two-car garage, modifications to the front yard hardscape, and a new spa and patio above the new garage. The applicant's project plans and SOIS Impacts Analysis Report are attached.

Motion:

HC Chair Henry made a motion to continue Item 4.1 to the September 15th meeting of the Heritage Committee and that staff provide any/all available documents to the committee prior to the next meeting.

Second: JS
Vote: Stordahl Y, Jurca Y, Morgenlander Y, Henry Y
Motion carried: 4-0

4.2 1779-1793 South Coast Highway
Action:

By Motion, the Heritage Committee shall use the criteria depicted in Section

25.45.006(C) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code in their consideration of the application and shall adopt findings that the property does or does not meet criteria (1), as well as one or more of the criteria (2) through (11) of subsection (C). The application’s submittal is attached. A historic assessment by an architectural historian was completed with this application.

Motion:

HC Member Stordahl made a motion to recommend the approval for 1779-1793 South Coast Highway’s designation on the City’s Historic Register based on it meeting the eligibility threshold for such placement by satisfying criteria 1, 3, 4, 5, 6, and 9.

Second: LM
Vote: Stordahl Y, Morgenlander Y, Jurca Y, Henry Y
Motion carried: 4-0

4.3 Mills Act Contract Application – 426 Holly Street
Action:

By Motion, provide a recommendation to the City Council for a Mills Act Contract.

Motion:

HC Chair Henry made a motion to recommend that City Council approve the Mills Act Contract for 426 Holly Street with the following modifications:

Attachment 9
213
3 Heritage Committee
Minutes: August 18, 2025

1. Move the foundation inspection to year one.

2. Modify the front door per existing documentary evidence (year one).

3. Modify the columns in the breezeway to the original slender posts per documentary evidence (year 2).

4. Modify the fence to have design and material appropriate to the style of the house (metal or wood picket) (year 5).

5. Reduce landscaping budget amount in workplan to $5,000.

Second: CJ
Vote: Stordahl Y, Morgenlander Y, Jurca Y, Henry Y
Motion carried: 4-0

4.4 Mills Act Contract Application – 501 Lombardy Lane
Action:

By Motion, provide a recommendation to the City Council for a Mills Act Contract.

Motion:

No motion taken. Item has been continued to September 15th meeting.

4.5 Mills Act Contract Application – 503 Brooks Street
HC Chair Henry recuses himself due to potential conflict of interest.

Action:

By Motion, provide a recommendation to the City Council for a Mills Act Contract.

Motion:

HC Member Jurca made a motion to recommend to City Council that the city enter into a Mills Act contract with the property owners of 503 Brooks Street with the following modifications:

1. Amend the workplan to include the inspection and installation gutters to the property as necessary by 2026.

2. Trim the hedges at the front of the property to match the height of the fence

3. Add plaque to the property indicating its inclusion in the City’s historic register.

Second: JS
Vote: Stordahl Y, Morgenlander Y, Jurca Y
Motion carried: 3-0

4.6 Mills Act Contract Application – 2646 Victoria Dr
HC Member Stordahl recuses himself due to potential conflict of interest.

Attachment 9
214
4 Heritage Committee
Minutes: August 18, 2025
Action:

By Motion, provide a recommendation to the City Council for a Mills Act Contract.

Motion:

HC Chair Henry made a motion to approve the recommendation to City Council for a Mills Act Contract for 2646 Victoria Dr with the following conditions:

1. The window in the dining room on the primary façade (upper left) be replaced within the same opening with a picture window with flanking casements that are narrower than the current windows with mullions in the casement windows leaving the picture window open (year 2 in the workplan)

2. Replace non-compatible lights in year 1 (Item 16 in workplan)

3. Review/inspect/repair as necessary clay tiles and bricks, stone, and chimney bricks year 1 (Item 13, 14, and 15 in workplan)

4. Move up Item 11 in workplan to year 1 to address current issue Second: LM
Vote: Morgenlander Y, Jurca Y, Henry Y
Motion carried: 3-0

5. COMMITTEE AND STAFF REPORTS

5.1 Historic Preservation Promotion Subcommittee and Budget Subcommittee Updates – Have discussed doing a CEQA training/having an assessor come out and talk about the Mills Act to help keep subcommittee active every six months. Proposed using data available from approved Mills Act properties to provide estimated savings. Discussed adding additional trolley tours or self-guided tour option. Open to other ideas on how to promote interest in city history/heritage. Discussed idea of holding Historic Register info session for interested property owners (outside of heritage month).

5.2 Site Visit Discussion – Discussed importance of being able to access the property to understand condition, especially when up for Mills Act or Historic Register. Discussed providing a time window or notice to homeowners before visit takes place. Make visits best practice without formalizing action. Potential to have on Mills Act and Historic Register applications a request for site visits to be permitted for HC members. HC member Jurca offered to draft verbiage for said request on applications.

6. ADJOURNMENT

6.1 Meeting adjourned at 8:14 P.M. on Monday, August 18, 2025.

Attachment 9
215
1 Heritage Committee
Minutes: September 15, 2025

CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH HERITAGE COMMITTEE MINUTES
Regular Meeting of September 15, 2025

1. CALL TO ORDER
James Henry
COMMITTEE MEMBERS PRESENT:

Justin Drucker (Vice Chair), Cathy Jurca, Justin Drucker (Vice Chair), Linda Morgenlander, James Henry II (Chair), Jon Stordahl
MEMBERS ABSENT: NONE
STAFF PRESENT:

Shaveta Sharma, Acting Principal Planner, Heather Steven, Senior Planner, Jessica Mendoza, Assistant Planner, Patrick Donegan (City Attorney)

2. BROWN ACT PRESENTATION
Presentation by Assistant City Attorney Patrick Donegan

3. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS

3.1 None.

4. APPROVAL OF MINUTES FROM PREVIOUS MEETING
Approval of draft minutes from August 18, 2025, Regular Meeting HC Chair Henry made a motion to amend the minutes to reflect direction on the Mills Act applications and approve the minutes from the meeting on August 18, 2025.

Second: Morgenlander
Vote: Jurca Y, Morgenlander Y, Stordahl Y, Drucker Y , Henry Y Motion carried: 5-0
Attachment 10 216
2 Heritage Committee
Minutes: September 15, 2025

5. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION OR ACTION

5.1 721 Manzanita Drive
The applicant requests Heritage Committee review and recommendation to the Design Review Board (DRB) for proposed alterations to a property on the City's Historic Register. No significant alterations are proposed to the existing singlefamily dwelling. Modifications include the addition of a two-car garage, modifications to the front yard hardscape, and a new spa and patio above the new garage. The applicant's project plans and SOIS Impacts Analysis Report are attached.

Motion: Committee member Morganlander made a motion to conditionally approve the project with the gate to be changed to a wrought iron to not obscure the existing residence and fill space of the arch.

Second: Chair James Henry
Vote: Drucker Y, Jurca Y, Morgenlander Y, Stordahl Y, Henry Y Motion carried: 5-0

5.2 Mills Act Contract - 426 Holly Street The owner requests the Heritage Committee reconsider suggested changes to the Historic Assessment Workplan from the August 18, 2025 meeting, and make a recommendation to the City Council.

HC member Stordahl made a motion to recommend to the City Council for Item 5.2 to the September 15th meeting of the Heritage Committee, Replacement of panel door added to the work plan and replace column if they need replace and replace and $5000 amended.

Second: ML
Vote: Jurca Y, Drucker Y, Stordahl Y, Morgenlander Y, Henry Y Motion carried: 5-0

5.3 Mills Act Contract - 501 Lombardy The applicant requests Heritage Committee review and recommendation to the City Council for a Mills Act Contract.

HC Chair Henry made a motion to approve the recommendation to City Council for a Mills Act Contract for 426 Holly as submitted.

Second:

Vote: Jurca N, Linda Y, Stordahl Y, Drucker Y, Henry Y
Motion carried: 4-1
Attachment 10 217
3 Heritage Committee
Minutes: September 15, 2025

5.4 154 Thalia Street The applicant requests Heritage Committee review and recommendation to the Design Review Board for requested Historic Incentives for parking, setback flexibility, and open space requirements, pursuant to LBMC

25.45.008 (A)(2), (E), and (H), respectively. The proposed alterations to the historic structure were reviewed by the Heritage Committee on April 15, 2019, where the Committee recommended the Design Review Board approve the project with conditions.

Motion: Chair Henry made motion to approve request the project as presented.

Second: Stordahl
Vote: Jurca N, Linda Y, Stordahl Y, Drucker Y, Henry Y
Motion carried: 4-1

6. COMMITTEE AND STAFF REPORTS
Committee member Morgenlander shared a previous marketing flier for tours of a walking tour for the Historic Inventory.

Item 6.1 was continued to a future hearing.

ADJOURNMENT
9:50pm
Attachment 10 218

STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:

November 18, 2025
Appeal
A
SUBJECT: APPEAL OF DESIGN REVIEW BOARD APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW 24- 2113 FOR MODIFICATIONS TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING AT 1813 TEMPLE HILLS DRIVE LOCATED IN THE R-1, RESIDENTIAL LOW-DENSITY ZONE,

AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION UNDER THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES SECTION 15304 (CLASS 4) RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:

1. Continue to conduct the Public Hearing that was opened at the October 28, 2025 Council meeting, including receiving an updated staff report and taking public testimony and evidence relating to the consideration of Design Review 24-2113 for modifications to a previously approved landscape plan for an existing single-family dwelling and the California Environmental Quality Act exemption under Section 15304 of the state CEQA Guidelines; and

2. Adopt a Resolution titled, “A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DENYING THE APPEAL AND SUSTAINING THE DESIGN REVIEW BOARD’S APPROVAL OF DESIGN REVIEW 24-2113 FOR

MODIFICATIONS TO A PREVIOUSLY APPROVED LANDSCAPE PLAN FOR AN EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING AT 1813 TEMPLE HILLS DRIVE LOCATED IN THE R-1, RESIDENTIAL LOW-DENSITY ZONE, AND CATEGORICAL EXEMPTION

UNDER THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT GUIDELINES SECTION 15304 (CLASS 4),” upholding the Design Review Board’s conditional approval of Design Review 24-2113; and

3. Find the project categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15304 (Class 4 – Minor Alterations to Land)

SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
The property owners, Vella and Kavita Reddy (“Applicant”),1 of 1813 Temple Hills Drive (the “Property”) applied for Design Review (“DR”) 24-2113 to for modifications to a previously approved landscape plan associated with an existing single-family dwelling, pursuant to Laguna Beach Municipal Code (“LBMC”) Section 25.05.040(B) (1)(q) 2 (the “project”).

On February 13, 2025 the Design Review Board (“Board”) adopted Resolution No. 24-2113 conditionally approving DR 23-2114, by a 5-0 vote, including the approval of a categorical exemption pursuant to the 1 The Project’s representative is Steve Kawaratani, who is within the definition of Applicant. 2 The City of Laguna Beach (“City”) has adopted a View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance. (LBMC Chapter 12.16). It allows a property owner to establish a protected or preserved view by filing for a record of views within the City. The City may issue a view restoration order and require restoration action upon determination of a significant view impairment. Vegetation that is approved through the design review process and in which vegetation height limits are established pursuant to the design review process are exempt from the City’s View Preservation and Restoration Ordinance. (LBMC Section 12.16.080(e).) Appeal of the Approval of DR 24-2113 at 1813 Temple Hills Drive November 18, 2025