Agenda packet — Laguna Beach City Council, July 7, 2026 (part 6 of 9)

two items resting on discretionary coastal development permit (“CDP”) findings (the “Discretionary CDP Bucket”)1.

The Staff Report addresses each bucket.

First, the Staff Report acknowledges that the Project is consistent with each item raised in the SDBL Bucket through use of SDBL benefits. (See Staff Report, pp. 11–13, 18–23.) For good reason, the benefits of SDBL (such as a density bonus, incentives, waivers, and parking standards) are expressly preserved in SB 4 and in the HAA—and, thus, are ineligible grounds to determine the Project is inconsistent with applicable standards. (Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (j)(1)(C), (j)(2)(C); Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (j)(3), (f)(1).) Second, while the Inconsistency Letter posits that the Project’s height “would adversely impact coastal scenic resources by affecting identified public coastal views” (third CDP criterion) and “is not consistent with the prevailing neighborhood character, which is primarily defined by one- and two-story single-family residential development” (sixth CDP criterion), the Staff Report makes the opposite findings for each item raised in the Discretionary CDP Bucket2.

As it relates to the third CDP criterion, the Staff Report determines that the Project is consistent with that criterion and concludes that “[t]he proposed development will not adversely affect recreational or visitor-serving facilities or coastal scenic resources.” (See Staff Report, pp. 44, 52; see also id., p. 26 [due to the site’s inland location, existing topography, and surrounding intervening development, the project will not obstruct or impair identified public coastal views or visual access to the shoreline”].) As it relates to the sixth CDP criterion, the Staff Report determines that the Project is consistent with that criterion and concludes that “[t]he proposed development will be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and where feasible, will restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.” (Staff Report, pp. 46, 53.) In other words, the Staff Report makes the very CDP findings the Inconsistency Letter suggests may be in doubt.
* * * * *
1 Although this Firm continues to maintain that the imposition of any discretionary process within the SB 4 framework is contrary to the clear intention of SB 4 and its “use by right” streamlined, ministerial approach, Applicant does not desire to engage in any such debate here. Indeed, the point need not be resolved here. The Staff Report demonstrates that, even under a discretionary review framework, the City can arrive at the same conclusion—approval of the Project.

2 The Project’s height is expressly authorized under SB 4. (See Gov. Code, 65913.16, subd. (j)(1)(A)– (B); see also Staff Report, p. 18 [discussing same].) Using the Project’s expressly authorized height to determine the Project fails to meet these CDP criteria would frustrate operation of the statute rather than harmonizing it with the Coastal Act.
323
323 of 830
City of Laguna Beach Planning Commission
June 2, 2026

Page 3 ends

For the foregoing reasons, Applicant respectfully requests that the Planning Commission implement City staff’s recommended approval of the Project. Applicant remains excited about bringing the Project—and its 28 units affordable to lower-income households—to the City.

Applicant hopes the Planning Commission is likewise excited by the Project, as the Project would make meaningful progress toward—by satisfying over 1/3rd of—the City’s lower-income Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”) obligation.

Sincerely,
Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
Eric J. Cohn
cc: Shaveta Sharma, Senior City Planner ([email protected]) Jane Abzug, City Attorney ([email protected])
Megan K. Garibaldi, City Attorney ([email protected]) Jeremy Frimond, Assistant City Manager ([email protected]) Bill Witte, Related California
Craig Farmer, Related California )
Liane Takano, Related California )
David Miller, Nossaman LLP (
Maya K. Dunne (
Sue Cross (
Reverend Rodrick Echols, Neighborhood Congregational Church Sean Matsler, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
324
324 of 830

EXHIBIT A
325
325 of 830

PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT
June 3, 2026
Agenda Item No. 5.2
Case No: Ministerial Design Review 2026-1135, Design Review 2026- 0863, and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0864; and
Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 and Coastal Development
Permit 2026-0954
Request: Ministerial Design Review 2026-1135 for demolition of an existing parsonage building and existing surface parking lot and construction of a three-story, 30,690 sq. ft. multi-family residential building (28 affordable housing rental units and 1 manager’s unit) and 41-stall parking garage in the R-2
(Residential Medium Density) and Local Business Professional (LBP) zones. Design Review 2026-0863 for more than 20 cubic yards of grading outside the building footprint, retaining walls with more than 5 feet of exposed height, landscaping, and elevated deck. Coastal Development Permit 2026-0864 for such non-exempt development in the Coastal Zone.

A Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 to merge four parcels into two parcels in the Local Business Professional (LBP) and Residential Medium Density (R-2) zones. Coastal Development Permit 2026-0954 for such non-exempt development in the Coastal Zone.

Project Location: 340 St. Ann’s Drive | APNs: 644-034-05, 644-034-09 Applicant: Liane Takano, The Related Companies of California, LLC [email protected] | 949-660-7272
Property Owner: Neighborhood Congregational Church
Prepared By: Community Development Department
Shaveta Sharma, Senior Planner
(949) 715-0958 | [email protected]
Planning Commissioners
within a 500’ Radius: None
326
326 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 2 of 57 ends

CEQA:

The Project is within the scope of the development capacity and environmental analysis previously considered in the adopted Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration.

The Project would result in fewer residential units than the capacity analyzed for the site in the Housing Element, and the City has not identified substantial changes to the Project, substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken, or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the previously adopted Initial Study/Negative Declaration due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

Accordingly, no subsequent or supplemental environmental review is required pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

As an independent and alternative basis for the City’s CEQA determination, the Housing Development Project component of the Project qualifies for streamlined, ministerial treatment under the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023, Government Code section 65913.16, because the Housing Development Project satisfies the eligibility criteria and objective development standards as allowed by that statute and the Density Bonus Law. A qualifying housing development project approved as a “use by right” under Government Code section 65913.16 is not a “project” for purposes of CEQA. (Gov. Code, §65913.16(c), (b)(12)(B).) In addition, the Merger component is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Government Code section 65913.16, subdivision (l)(7), because the Merger is consistent with the objective subdivision standards in Chapter 21.08 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code and Density Bonus Law.

Coastal Development Permit:

The Project is located within a non-appealable area of the Coastal Zone.

Recommendation:

Conduct a public hearing and adopt the following two resolutions:
(1) Resolution No. 2026-1135 (Attachment 1), approving Ministerial Design Review 2026-1135 for demolition of an existing parsonage building and existing surface parking lot and construction of a multi-family residential building (28 affordable housing rental units and 1 manager’s unit) and 41-stall parking garage, Design Review 2026-0863 for site improvements associated with the multi-family residential building, including grading, retaining walls, landscaping, and elevated deck, and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0864 for such non-exempt development within the coastal zone at 340 St. Ann’s Drive in the Local Business Professional (LBP) and Residential Medium Density (R-2) zones; and finding that no further environmental review is required under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 or alternatively is not a project or is exempt under Government Code Sections 65913.16(c) and (b)(12)(B) and 65913.16(l)(7), respectively; and
(2) Resolution No. 2026-0865 (Attachment 2), recommending the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 to merge four parcels into two parcels and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0954 for such non-exempt development within the 327
327 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 3 of 57 ends

coastal zone at 340 St. Ann’s Drive in the Local Business Professional (LBP) and Residential Medium Density (R-2) zones; and finding that no further environmental review is required under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 or alternatively is not a project or is exempt under Government Code Sections 65913.16(c) and (b)(12)(B) and 65913.16(l)(7), respectively.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The applicant, Liane Takano, is requesting approval of the following:

1. Ministerial Design Review (DR) under SB 4 for demolition of an existing parsonage building and existing surface parking lot and construction of a three-story, 30,690 sq. ft. multi-family residential building (28 affordable housing rental units and 1 manager’s unit) and 41-stall parking garage in the R-2 (Residential Medium Density) and Local Business Professional (LBP) zones (the “Housing Development Project”).

2. Design Review for more than 20 cubic yards of grading outside the building footprint, retaining walls with more than 5 feet of exposed height, landscaping, and elevated deck (collectively, the “Site Improvements”).

3. Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for the non-exempt development, consisting of the Housing Development Project and Site Improvements, within the coastal zone.

4. Tentative Parcel Map (TPM) to allow consolidation of four existing parcels that together comprise the Neighborhood Congregational Church (“NCC”) site into two parcels, one zoned LBP and consisting of the NCC uses for exclusive use of the religious institution, and a second parcel for the Housing Development with a split LBP and R-2 zoning designation Project (the “Merger”).

5. Coastal Development Permit for the non-exempt development, consisting of the Merger, within the coastal zone (collectively, the “Project”).

The Applicant is proceeding under the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023 (“SB 4”)1, which establishes a ministerial, by-right approval pathway for qualifying affordable housing projects. The Planning Commission is tasked with applying the specific development standards within SB 4 regarding density, height, parking, and ancillary uses and the objective City planning standards and “reasonable [City] objective standards” that were in effect when the application was submitted and that are “broadly applicable to developments” 2to the Housing Development Project (or the multi-family residential building itself). The Planning Commission is not applying discretionary (or subjective) design review findings and criteria to the Housing Development Project.

The Planning Commission is further tasked with applying the discretionary (or subjective) design review findings and criteria to the Site Improvements, consisting of more than 20 cubic yards of 1 SB 4 was amended by AB 130 (effective June 30, 2025) and shall be collectively referred to herein as SB 4 for ease of reference.
2 See Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (l)(5) (emphasis added). 328
328 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 4 of 57 ends

grading outside the building footprint, retaining walls with more than 5 feet of exposed height, landscaping, and elevated deck. As such, the Planning Commission will consider whether the Site Improvements meet the design review findings and criteria set forth in Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 25.05.040(H) and (I).

Given that the Property is located in the coastal zone, the City must harmonize SB 4 and the Coastal Act, including the City’s Local Coastal Program (“LCP”), which has been certified by the California Coastal Commission (the “certified LCP”). Since the Project site is located outside of the Coastal Commission’s area of original permit jurisdiction and is also outside of the Coastal Commission’s appealable jurisdiction, the City has delegated the authority to issue coastal development permits for the Project. The Planning Commission is tasked with applying discretionary (or subjective) coastal development permit findings and criteria to the non-exempt development consisting of the Housing Development Project and Site Improvements within the coastal zone. As such, the Planning Commission will consider whether the Housing Development Project and Site Improvements comply with the coastal development permit findings and criteria set forth in Laguna Beach Municipal Code Sections 25.07.012(F) and (G).

The Planning Commission is also tasked with applying the discretionary (or subjective) findings for a tentative parcel map under the California Subdivision Map Act and Laguna Beach Municipal Code for the Merger. As such, the Planning Commission will consider whether the Merger complies with the discretionary (or subjective) findings under Government Code Sections 66473.5 and 66474 and Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 21.08.040 for the Merger. Given that the Property is located in the coastal zone, as discussed above, the Planning Commission is also tasked with applying discretionary (or subjective) coastal development permit findings and criteria to the non-exempt development consisting of the Merger within the coastal zone. As such, the Planning Commission will consider whether the Merger complies with the coastal development permit findings and criteria set forth in Laguna Beach Municipal Code Sections 25.07.012(F) and (G). In accordance with LBMC Section 21.08.040, the Planning Commission acts in an advisory capacity and shall make a recommendation to the City Council.

Staff has analyzed the Applicant’s requests and believes that all required findings can be made, as detailed in the discussion below.

BACKGROUND
General Location: 340 St. Ann’s Drive
Assessor’s Parcel Numbers: 644-034-05, 644-034-09
Related Cases: DR 74-76, CUP 76-7, CUP 00-49, VAR 460 and VAR 1498 Existing General Plan Land
Use Designation:

Zoning Designation:

Use of Property:

Local Business Professional and Village Medium Density
Local Business Professional and R-2 Residential Medium Density Religious Institution and Montessori school
329
329 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 5 of 57 ends

Surrounding General Plan Land Uses Designations, Zoning Districts, and Use of Properties:

Direction General Plan Land Use Zoning Use
North Local Business Professional and
Village Medium Density
Local Business Professional
and R-2 Residential Medium
Density
Residential
South Local Business Professional and
Village Medium Density
Local Business Professional
and R-2 Residential Medium
Density
Commercial
and Residential
East Village Medium Density R-2 Residential Medium
Density
Residential
West Local Business Professional and
Commercial tourist Corridor
R/HP Residential Hillside
Protection
Commercial
Figure 1 - Location Map
330
330 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 6 of 57 ends

Figure 2a - Existing Project Frontage, Glenneyre Street

Figure 2b - Existing Project Frontage, Catalina Street
The Existing Project Site
The Project site is irregularly shaped and comprised of four parcels owned by NCC, a religious institution. It is bounded by Glenneyre Street on the west and Catalina Street on the east. The total site is approximately 1.2 acres, and the affordable Housing Development Project will be constructed on a portion of this site, totaling 0.66 acres. The site contains three buildings and a surface parking lot with 69 spaces and is located within the LBP and R-2 zones. The parsonage, which is used for programming for the Montessori school and proposed to be demolished, was constructed in 1948, the parish hall, which is not proposed to be demolished, was constructed in 1950, and the church sanctuary, which is not proposed to be demolished, was constructed in 1963. To be eligible for ministerial approval under SB 4, a housing development project cannot require the demolition of a historic structure that was “placed on a national, state, or local historic 331
331 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 7 of 57 ends

register.”3Here, none of the structures on the site are placed on the national, state, or local historic register. Further, despite the age of these structures, the City’s decision-makers have not previously found the structures on the Property to be discretionary historic resources under CEQA.

The property is not subject to any known environmental constraints and has an average lot slope of approximately 2.1 percent.

Prior Entitlements
Previous entitlements for the property include, but are not limited to, Variance (“VAR”) 460, and VAR 1498, Conditional Use Permit (“CUP”) 76-7, and CUP 00-49.

VAR 460: On May 19, 1947, the Planning Commission granted a Variance for construction of a church and parsonage, subject to the following conditions of approval:

1. Said variance, and any uses, buildings, improvements, or parcels authorized by it, are hereby declared non-conforming as defined by Ordinance No. 209, as amended, and are subject to all provisions of said Ordinance governing non-conforming uses, buildings, parcels, and improvements.

2. The required setback for buildings shall be 20 feet from the property lines along Glenneyre Street and St. Ann’s Drive. No building shall be located less than 10 feet from any side or rear lot line other than street facing property lines.

3. The building height limit is tentatively set not to exceed 30 feet. Any height above 30 feet shall be subject to Planning Commission approval upon completion of final plans for the church buildings.

4. Off-street parking for 40 automobiles shall be provided on the property VAR 1498: On August 17, 1961, the Planning Commission approved a Variance for the addition of a sanctuary to the church and to grant a waiver of the parking requirements, subject to the following conditions of approval:

1. Outdoor lighting shall be fully shielded and will be subject to Planning Commission review.

2. The Variance shall be reviewed after two years, at which time additional parking may be required.

3. Ingress and egress to all parking areas shall be submitted to the City Traffic Commission for review.

4. Additional parking spaces shall be provided whenever feasible through development of the property to the west.

CUP 76-7: On October 21, 1976, the Board of Adjustment approved the operation of a childcare center (Montessori Method) in the existing Sunday School classrooms, operating five days a week from 9:00 a.m. to 3:00 p.m.
3 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (c)(4); Gov. Code, § 65913.4, subd. (a)(7)(C).) 332
332 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 8 of 57 ends

CUP 00-49: On September 27, 2000, the Planning Commission approved an amendment to CUP 76-7 to expand an existing private preschool to include an elementary school for Kindergarten and 1 st grade, increase enrollment from 40 to 55 students, and expand the hours of operation from 7:30 a.m. through 6:00 p.m. The following condition of approval for the Montessori School shall continue to apply to, and be complied with as part of, the proposed development pursuant to Resolution No. 2026-1135.
• Eleven on-site parking spaces shall be provided, designated with signs and maintained for the duration of the Conditional Use Permit.

Housing Element Site
The project site is identified in the City’s Housing Element as Site No. 1, a location suitable for redevelopment and future housing opportunities. Housing Element Action 5.21(e) specifically encourages incentives for 100-percent affordable housing projects on institutional properties, including those owned or operated by religious organizations.

The proposed development would also help the City meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligations for lower income housing. To date, none of the 80 low-income units allocated to the City for the current Housing Element cycle have been approved or constructed. The addition of 28 affordable units through this Project would represent meaningful progress toward fulfilling the City’s RHNA requirements and advancing broader housing affordability goals.

A city must make written findings or identify additional site capacity if a development is allowed with a lower density than what was assumed in the sites inventory of the Housing Element.4A lower residential density may result from a jurisdiction either approving a development with residential units less than what was assumed for the site or affordable to a different income category than the site was assumed to accommodate.5
At the time of approval of a development project at a lower residential density that anticipated, a city must make the following written findings supported by substantial evidence in the record6:

1. Remaining sites identified in the Housing Element are adequate to meet the jurisdiction’s remaining RHNA for the planning period by income category.

2. The findings should include a quantification of the remaining unmet need for the jurisdiction’s RHNA at each income level and the remaining capacity of sites identified in the Housing Element, to accommodate that need by income level.

If the approval of a development at a lower residential density results in the remaining sites capacity becoming inadequate to accommodate the RHNA by income category, a jurisdiction has up to 180 days from the approval to identify, or rezone, “sufficient additional, adequate, and available sites” to accommodate the remaining RHNA for each income category.7 4 Gov. Code, § 65863, subd. (c).
5 Id.
6 Id.
7 Id.
333
333 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 9 of 57 ends

Below are the findings and staff’s analysis:

1. Remaining sites identified in the Housing Element are adequate to meet the jurisdiction’s remaining RHNA for the planning period by income category.

Here, the City’s Housing Element, which was certified by the Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”), anticipated a redevelopment potential for 31 low-income units at the Property. Based on the current iteration of the Project, which proposed 28 low-income units, the City has a deficit of 3 low-income units. Per Table 4-5 of the Housing Element (Summary of Sites Inventory for 2021-2029), the proposed new sites for RHNA, pipeline residential projects, and the City’s ADU potential demonstrates that the City has adequately zoned land for 80 lowincome units, or a potential surplus of 23 units. Here, while this Project is producing 3 fewer lowincome units than anticipated, the identified surplus in the City’s Housing Element covers the deficit and the City is still exceeding the RHNA target when considering all of the inventory sites (plus ADUs) listed in the certified Housing Element.

The City continues to have a substantial remaining RHNA obligation for the 6th Cycle, consisting of 118 very low-income units, 80 low-income units, and 36 moderate-income units. Although the certified Housing Element identifies limited remaining capacity to accommodate these allocations, additional housing production remains necessary to demonstrate progress toward State housing requirements. The proposed Project would help reduce this unmet need by providing deed-restricted low-income units on a site identified in the Housing Element, thereby supporting implementation of the certified Housing Element and narrowing the gap between the City’s RHNA allocation and units constructed to date.

The City’s remaining unmet RHNA need and the remaining capacity of Housing Element sites by income category, after accounting for this approval, are described below and are shown in Table 1, which incorporates and is supported by the site inventory data in Table 4-5 of the Housing Element.

As reflected in these tables, the remaining site capacity for each income category equals the RHNA allocation plus the identified surplus. When compared to the remaining unmet need, the site inventory provides the following capacity: very low income with 140 units of remaining capacity compared to 118 units of remaining need, low income with 103 units of remaining capacity compared to 80 units of remaining need, moderate income with 82 units of remaining capacity compared to 36 units of remaining need, and above moderate income with 121 units of remaining capacity compared to a need that has already been met, as 397 units have been permitted against a 117-unit allocation. The identified site capacity therefore meets or exceeds the remaining RHNA need in every income category, including both lower-income categories. 334
334 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 10 of 57 ends

The Project will provide 28 deed-restricted low-income units. Following this approval, the City’s remaining low-income RHNA need will decrease from 80 units to 52 units, while the remaining low-income site capacity of 103 units will continue to exceed that need. Approval of the Project at 28 low-income units, which is three fewer than the 31 units assumed for this site in the Housing Element, does not render the City’s remaining site inventory inadequate to meet its remaining RHNA obligations by income category. As a result, the City is not required to identify or rezone additional sites within 180 days under Government Code Section 65863, subdivision (b).

Table 1. Progress Towards Meeting 6th Cycle RHNA 2021-2029 Income Level RHNA
Allocation
by Income
Level
Total Units to
Date
(2021-2025)
Total Remaining
RHNA
by Income Level
RHNA
Potential
Surplus8
Very Low 118 0 118 22
Low 80 0 80 23
Moderate 79 43 36 3
Above Moderate 117 397 -- 4
Total RHNA 394 -- -- 52
Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023 (“SB 4”) SB 4, also known as the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023, is a state law that established a new streamlined, ministerial approval process for qualifying affordable housing projects located on land owned by an independent institution of higher education or a religious institution on or before January 1, 2024.9
Under SB 4, eligible projects are considered a “use by right,” which means that the local government10 cannot require a conditional use permit, a planned unit development permit, or any other discretionary local government review.11 Additionally, eligible projects are not considered “projects” under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and are therefore exempt from CEQA review.12
8 Table 4-5 of the City of Laguna Beach General Plan Housing Element (2021–2029) identifies a 52-unit surplus above the City’s 394-unit RHNA, drawn from the overall sites inventory rather than any single parcel. This surplus supports No Net Loss compliance (Gov. Code § 65863) by ensuring replacement units are available when a project yields fewer units than assumed for its income category. 9 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subds. (a), (c), & (l).
10 SB 4 defines a “local government” to mean “a city, including a charter city, county, including a charter county, or city and county, including a charter city and county.” Gov. Code § 65913.16, subd. (b)(8). 11 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (b)(12)(A).
12 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (b)(12)(B).
335
335 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 11 of 57 ends

SB 4 is codified in Government Code section 65913.16. It took effect on January 1, 2024, and sunsets on January 1, 2036.13 To qualify as an SB 4 project, the project must meet all eligibility criteria in Government Code Section 65913.16(c) and is then considered a “use by right.” Here, the Housing Development Project14 qualifies as a “use by right” because it: (i) is proposed on land owned by a qualifying religious institution; (ii) is located on an eligible site within an urbanized area; (iii) is located on an eligible site that is not an environmentally sensitive site, such as certain farmland, wetlands, certain sites within a very high fire hazard severity zone, hazardous waste sites, sites within a delineated earthquake fault zone, sites within certain special flood hazard areas, sites within a regulatory floodway, certain conservation areas or easements, or sites that serve as habitat for protected species; (iv) is located on an eligible site that does not require demolition of certain protected housing; (v) is located on an eligible site that does not adjoin any site where more than one-third of the square footage on the site is dedicated to light industrial use; (vi) is located on an eligible site that is not within a certain distance of an existing or recent heavy industrial use; (vii) is located on an eligible site that is not within a certain distance of an existing or recent Title V industrial use; (viii) is located on an eligible site that is not within a certain distance of an existing or recent facility that actively extracts or refines oil or natural gas; (ix) is a housing development project, subject to certain levels of affordability; (x) complies with all objective development standards; (xi) does not require demolition of existing residential dwelling units without replacement; (xii) meets applicable labor standards; (xiii) complies with an environmental assessment; (xiv) is located on an eligible site that is not within 500 feet of a freeway; and (xv) is not located on a vacant site.15
Based upon the SB 4 checklist and application, the Housing Development Project is eligible as a use by right and is afforded the benefits and protections of the Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Lands Act of 2023, Density Bonus Law, 16 the Housing Accountability Act, 17 and the Coastal Act.18
State Density Bonus Law
Pursuant to LBMC Section 25.12.008(B) and 25.18.002(Q), the maximum density for the R-2 zone is one dwelling unit per 2,000 square feet of net lot area, with a maximum density of 21 units per acre. The LBP zone also allows for one dwelling unit per 2,000 square feet of net lot area. As both the R-2 and LBP zones allow residential uses, Government Code Section §65913.16(j)(1)(A) provides that the housing development shall be allowed a density consistent with the applicable density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households identified in Government Code Section 65583.2(c)(3)(B)(iv), which is 30 units per acre. Under California’s Density Bonus Law (Government Code Section 65915), qualifying affordable housing projects may 13 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (p).
14 Under SB 4, a “housing development project” has the same meaning as a “housing development project in the Housing Accountability Act: “residential units only.” (See Gov. Code Section 65913.16(b)(5); see also Gov. Code Section 65589.5(h)(2).)
15 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (c).
16 See Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (j)(1)(C).
17 See Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (m) [“[SB 4] shall not prevent a development from also qualifying as a housing development project entitled to the protections of Section 65589.5”].) 18 Gov. Code, § 65915, subd. (m); Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (e). 336
336 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 12 of 57 ends

request up to an 80-percent density bonus. As the proposed affordable housing development is 100 percent affordable at the low-income level, excluding one manager’s unit, it is eligible for an 80 percent bonus. The Applicant is requesting a 46 percent density bonus, which is less than the maximum bonus allowed under State law, allowing for 29 housing units on the 0.66-acre site.

Concessions and Waivers
Additionally, under California’s Density Bonus Law, qualifying affordable housing projects are entitled to concessions (incentives) and waivers or reductions of development standards intended to remove regulatory barriers and improve project feasibility. Concessions are modifications to development standards or regulatory requirements that result in identifiable cost reductions for the project, examples include reduced setbacks or lot coverage requirements, open space, landscaping, or design standards. Waivers are for eliminating or reducing development standards that would physically preclude the construction of the project as proposed and include reductions in setbacks or lot dimensions.

Concessions and waivers may be requested in addition to applicable SB 4 standards, which include parking reductions and increased height of one-story above the allowance in the Zoning Code. The City is required to grant such requests unless specific written findings can be made demonstrating a significant, unmitigable impact to public health, safety, or the environment, or a conflict with state or federal law. The applicant is requesting concessions from certain development standards applicable to the proposed development, including reductions to the required front yard setback, lot size limitations within the Local Business Professional (LBP) zone, density standards applicable to the R-2 and LBP zones, and open space requirements, in order to facilitate the feasibility of the project and the construction of affordable housing units.

Under California’s Density Bonus Law, the proposed Project which is a deed-restricted 100% affordable housing project, as required by the included condition of approval in Resolution No. 2026-1135 (i.e., a project in which all units, exclusive of a manager’s unit, are restricted to lowerincome households) is entitled to five (5) concessions (incentives) allowed by statute.19 In addition to the five concessions, a 100% affordable project may also request unlimited waivers or reductions of development standards and are entitled to a waiver of any and all development standards that would physically preclude the development at the density permitted and with the incentive(s) granted. The applicant is eligible for and is requesting the following concessions and waivers from the City’s development standards:

Concessions:

1. Reduction of the Required Immediately Accessible Open Space. Pursuant to LBMC Section 25.50.010(E) which requires that 25% of that open space shall be immediately accessible to each living unit, and shall be designed to be used primarily for the occupants of the living unit (private open space). The applicant is requesting to not provide any private open space for the Project.
19 Gov. Code, § 65915, subd. (d)(2)(D).
337
337 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 13 of 57 ends

2. Front Yard Setback. Pursuant to LBMC Section 25.12.008(C)(2), a front yard setback of at least 20 feet is required for the R-2 zone. The applicant requests a reduction of the front yard setback along Catalina Street from 20 feet to 10 feet.

3. Additional Building Setback. Pursuant to LBMC Section 25.50.004 (D), an additional foot of distance for every foot of height in excess of fifteen feet. The applicant is requesting relief from this requirement so that the structure can be stacked horizontally.

4. Required Parking Spaces. Government Code 65913.16(k)(1) provides “the proposed development shall provide off-street parking of up to one space per unit, unless a state law or local ordinance provides for a lower standard of parking, in which case the law or ordinance shall apply.” The applicant is requesting a reduction in parking requirements as a development incentive. The requested reduction includes a parking ratio for Studio and 1-bedroom units at 0.5 spaces per unit instead of 1 space per unit.

The resulting total parking space requirement for the multi-family residential structure would decrease from 29 spaces to 23 spaces.

Waiver:

1. Lot area and dimension standards of the LBP Zone. Pursuant to LBMC Section

25.28.008(A), parcels in the LBP zone shall not be merged together for development purposes that exceed ten thousand sq. ft. The LBP portion of the site is already considered existing nonconforming due to its size at 37,640 sq. ft. The proposed affordable housing parcel is proposed to be 28,937 sq. ft. in size and will continue to be a split-zone parcel with 14,781 sq. ft. in the R2 zone, and 14,156 sq. ft. in the LBP.

2. Open Space Requirements. Pursuant to LBMC Section 25.50.010(A), a minimum area of forty percent of the total gross living area on the lot shall be open space. The applicant requests a reduction from the required 11,620 sq. ft. total open space to 4,595 sq. ft.

The Density Bonus Law “does not supersede or in any way alter or lessen the effect or application of the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code). Any density bonus, concessions, incentives, waivers or reductions of development standards, and parking ratios to which the applicant is entitled under this section shall be permitted in a manner that is consistent with [Density Bonus Law and the Coastal Act].” (Gov. Code Section 65915(m).)
Housing Accountability Act
The HAA requires a city to notify a developer if the proposed housing development project is inconsistent, not in compliance, or not in conformity with an applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provisions (to objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria) within 30 days of the date that the application is determined to be complete and failure to take such action will result in the project being deemed consistent, compliant, and in conformity with the applicable plan, program, policy, ordinance, standard, requirement, or other similar provision (to objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria). (Gov. Code Section 65589.5(j)(2).) 338
338 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 14 of 57 ends

When a proposed housing development project complies with applicable, objective general plan, zoning, and subdivision standards and criteria, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, including design review standards, in effect at the time that the application was deemed complete, the city must make certain written findings to deny a project that (1) the housing development project “would have a ‘specific, adverse impact’20 upon the public health or safety unless the project is disapproved or approved upon the condition that the project be developed at a lower density”; and (2) there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the identified adverse impact, other than the disapproval of the housing development project or the approval of the project upon the condition that it be developed at a lower density. (Gov. Code Section 65589.5(j)(1).)
The HAA also has a Coastal Act carve out:

Nothing in this section shall be construed to relieve the local agency from complying with ... the California Coastal Act of 1976 (Division 20 (commencing with Section 30000) of the Public Resources Code).21
Given that the Housing Development Project consists of “residential units,” the HAA applies.

Additionally, the HAA affords the protections of the Coastal Act. (Cal. Gov't Code § 65589.5(e).) Coastal Act
The Coastal Act22 is a comprehensive scheme to govern land use planning for the state’s entire coastal zone. As part of its enactment, the Legislature made several findings related to the Act’s purpose: (1) the coastal zone “is a distinct and valuable natural resource of vital and enduring interest to all the people”; (2) that permanent protection of the state’s natural and scenic resources is of paramount concern; (3) that “it is necessary to protect the ecological balance of the coastal zone”; and (4) that “existing developed uses, and future developments that are carefully planned and developed consistent with the policies of [the Coastal Act], are essential to the economic and social well-being of the people of this state. . . .”23 The Coastal Act is to be “liberally construed to accomplish its purposes and objectives.”24 The protections are codified in Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act, entitled “Coastal Resources Planning and Management Policies” (the “Chapter 3 Policies”).25 In addition to the above-identified coastal resource protections, the Coastal Act contains its own housing protections:

Nothing in this division shall exempt local governments from meeting the requirements of state and federal law with respect to providing low- and moderate-income housing, replacement housing, relocation benefits, or any other obligation related to housing imposed by existing law or any law hereafter enacted.26 20 Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (d).)
21 Gov. Code, § 65589.5, subd. (e).)
22 Pub. Res. Code, § 30000 et seq.
23 Pub. Res. Code, § 30001, subds. (a) and (d).
24 Pub. Res. Code, § 30009.
25 Pub. Res. Code, § 30512.
26 Pub. Res. Code, § 30007.
339
339 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 15 of 57 ends

Accordingly, City staff recommends that the Planning Commission harmonize the state housing laws with the Coastal Act. In doing so, the Commission should apply the objective standards of the certified Local Coastal Program and make the required Chapter 3 findings, while approving the affordable housing at the density and intensity the State housing laws mandate and limiting any conditions of approval to those that protect coastal resources without precluding or rendering the housing development infeasible.

DISCUSSION
Proposed Project Design
The Project design is shown below in Figures 3-9:

Figure 3 - Proposed Site Plan
340
340 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 16 of 57 ends

Figure 4 - Proposed Parking Layout
Figure 5 – 3D Rendering of Proposed Project, Glenneyre Street frontage

341
341 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 17 of 57 ends

Figure 6 - 3D Rendering of Proposed Project, Catalina Street frontage Figure 7 - Proposed East Building Elevation, St. Ann’s Drive Figure 8 - Proposed West building Elevation, Cleo Street Figure 9 - Proposed Colors and Materials
342
342 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 18 of 57 ends

Ministerial Design Review – SB 4
As discussed above, the Housing Development satisfies the eligibility criteria contained in SB 4 (Government Code Section 65913.16(c)) and therefore qualifies as a use by right. The applicant has submitted a completed SB 4 checklist along with their application to establish that the Housing Development Project complies with the SB 4 specified development standards regarding density, height, parking, and ancillary uses. Additionally, the submitted SB 4 checklist and application establish that the Housing Development Project complies with the City’s objective planning standards and “reasonable [City] objective standards” outlined in LBMC Chapter 25.12 (R-2) and LBMC Chapter 25.18 (LBP), as discussed in more detail below.

Density and Height under SB 4
State law requires SB 4 projects in zones that allow residential uses to have a density up to the greater of the following: (1) the permitted density on an adjoining parcel; or (2) the “Mullin densities” (generally, 30 units per acre in urban areas).27 Here, the adjacent R-2 zone only allows for one unit for every 2,000 sq ft of net lot area (or about 21 units per acre). Accordingly, the Mullin density of 30 units per acre applies to the Project.

SB 4 projects may also build to a height of one story or 11 feet above the maximum height for the site.28 Under the City’s development standards, the maximum height above grade for the structure is 25 feet for both the R-2 and LBP zones. In addition, both zones have a height limit of 25 feet above upper curb and finished or natural grade, whichever is the most restrictive. The project design has utilized the allowed additional one-story, resulting in a two-story residential building over the parking garage, with a maximum height of 36 feet above grade.

Additionally, SB 4 projects are eligible for a density bonus, incentives, concessions, and waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios under the State’s Density Bonus Law (“DBL”).29 Projects in zones that allow any residential use may use DBL’s incentives, concessions, and waivers.30 This is discussed in further detail below.

Ancillary Uses under SB 4
Ancillary uses for any SB 4 project may include religious institutional use or any use that was previously existing and legally permitted by the city or county on the project site, provided certain criteria is met, as specified in SB 4.31 Here, the existing religious institutional use Montessori Use may continue as it is previously existing and legally permitted by the City on the Project site under CUP 00-49.

Parking under SB 4 (and AB 2244 and Density Bonus)
SB 4 projects need only provide one off-street parking space per unit, unless state or local law provides for a lower standard.32 Under SB 4, the Housing Development Project must provide 29 27 See Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (j)(1)(A)—(B).
28 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (j)(1)(A).
29 Gov. Code, § 65915.
30 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (j)(1)(C).
31 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (i).
32 Gov. Code, § 65913.16, subd. (k)(1).
343
343 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 19 of 57 ends

parking spaces (for the proposed 29 units). The Project proposes a parking garage with 41 parking stalls.

Under state law (AB 2244), a developer of a religious institution affiliated housing development project may request a reduction in required parking for the existing religious-use parking. Such request shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the number of religious-use parking spaces that are available at the time the request is made.33 There are currently 69 parking spaces provided on-site that are available to NCC. The applicant has requested a fifty percent reduction in the number of religious-use parking spaces, which would result in 35 religious-use parking spaces available. The Project proposes a parking garage with 41 parking stalls which covers the 35 religious-use parking spaces. Under state law (AB 2244), the City is further required to allow the number of religious-use parking spaces that will be available to count toward the number of parking spaces otherwise required for approval of the housing development project. Here, under SB 4, the Housing Development Project must provide 29 parking spaces (for the proposed 29 units). Therefore, the 35 religious use parking spaces are allowed to count for the 29 parking spaces for the Housing Development Project.

Under State Density Bonus law, the applicant is requesting a reduction in parking requirements as a development concession. This will reduce costs and will maintain parking spaces for the religious institution and Montessori use. The requested reduction includes a parking ratio for Studio and 1- bedroom units at 0.5 space per unit instead of 1 space per unit. The resulting total parking space requirement for the multi-family residential structure would decrease from 29 spaces to 23 spaces. This would leave 18 spaces for religious use, including Montessori use. Accordingly, based upon the City’s Coastal Act authority, City staff recommends the following condition of approval:

The church and school shall maintain coordinated operating hours such that no overlap occurs between the church’s formal Sunday services and the school’s approved hours of operation. The school’s hours shall remain limited to Monday through Friday, 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., unless otherwise approved through an amendment to CUP 00-49.

City’s Objective Standards
Applicable local development standards may be applied only to the extent they are objective and do not conflict with SB 4. For example, discretionary design criteria (e.g., “neighborhood compatibility” or “view equity”) do not apply to the affordable housing development under SB 4.

The Housing Development Project complies with the following State and City objective standards:

Standard Analysis
Senate Bill 4
Definitions for religious institution,
applicant, qualified developer.

Page 20 of 57 ends

Deed Restricted. All units, exclusive of
managers’ units, are subject to a recorded
deed restriction for at least the following time
periods: 55 years for rental units, and 45 years
for owner-occupied units. (Gov. Code Section
65913.16(c)(9).)
The application included a draft Regulatory
Agreement for the affordable housing
development for review by the City Attorney’s
Office.

Therefore, based on the information and
documents provided to date in the Application,
the City finds the Application consistent with
this standard.

Environmental Site Assessment. An
applicant must conduct a Phase I
environmental assessment to determine if a
hazardous substance has been released on
the proposed project site. (Gov. Code Section
65913.16(c)(13).) If warranted, a Phase II
environmental assessment must also be
conducted. (Id.) If a hazardous substance is
found, then the applicant must contract with
an environmental assessor to determine if it
poses any danger to future residents. (Id.) If it
does, then the hazard must be removed or
mitigated to a level complying with state and
federal requirements. (Id.)
The Application provided a Phase I ESA report
that concludes there were no recognized
environmental conditions on the project site
and that a Phase II ESA was not warranted.

Therefore, based on the information and
documents provided to date in the Application,
the City finds that the Application is consistent
with this standard.

Density. Parcels located in a zone that allows
residential use. The minimum density varies
based on the type of jurisdiction: 30 units per
acre in a metropolitan county.

As the proposed affordable housing
development is 100 percent affordable at the
low-income level, excluding one manager’s
unit, it is eligible for an 80 percent bonus. The
Applicant is requesting a 46 percent density
bonus, less the what is allowed under State
law, allowing for 29 housing units on the 0.66-
acre site.

Height. The permitted height is one story
above the otherwise-allowed local height
limits. If the local government allows for
greater density on the parcel, or greater
density or height is allowed on an adjoining
parcel, the greater density or building height
shall apply. A development also qualifies for
the provisions of State Density Bonus Law,
including incentives, concessions, or waivers
or reductions of development standards and
parking ratios.

The project complies with the applicable
height limits and allowances established
under the LBMC for the R2 and LBP zoning
districts, which permit a maximum building
height of 25 feet. Pursuant to the applicable
height allowance provisions, the proposed
building may exceed the base height limit by up
to 11 feet and has a proposed maximum height
of 36 feet.

Parking. One off-street parking space per unit
is required, unless a state or local law allows
There are currently 69 parking spaces provided
on-site that are available to NCC. Applicant
345
345 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 21 of 57 ends

less, except that no parking is required if the
project is located within 0.5-mile walking
distance of either a high-quality transit
corridor or major transit stop or within 1 block
of a car share vehicle.
requests a fifty percent reduction in the
number of religious-use parking spaces, which
would result in 35 religious-use parking spaces
available. The Project proposes a parking
garage with 41 parking stalls which covers the
35 religious-use parking spaces. Under SB 4,
the Housing Development Project must
provide 29 parking spaces (for the proposed 29
units). Therefore, the 35 religious use parking
spaces are allowed to count for the 29 parking
spaces for the Housing Development Project.

Under State Density Bonus law, the applicant
is requesting a reduction in parking
requirements as a development concession.

Ancillary and Previous Uses. Projects
located in a single-family residential zone may
include childcare centers and recreational,
social, or educational facilities operated by
community-based organizations. All other
zones may include commercial uses that are
permitted without a conditional use permit or
planned unit development permit. The
development project can include any previous
use that existed and was legally permitted if
certain criteria are met (e.g., the project
features the same operational conditions).

The existing Montessori school, originally
approved in 2000 through Conditional Use
Permit No. 00-49, will continue to operate on
the religious institution site.

Prevailing Wage and Labor Requirements.

The housing development project must abide
by prevailing wage requirements (Labor Code
sections 1720-1861), including noticing in
accordance with Labor Code section 1773.35.

The project applicant shall provide prevailing
wages for all labor utilized in the construction
of the project, in accordance with applicable
State labor requirements. Compliance with
this requirement is further ensured through
the inclusion of a condition of approval in
Resolution No. 2026-1135.

Standard Analysis
General Plan
SE Policy S-4.2 Require new developments
and major remodels to retain onsite storm
flows at or below existing conditions.

The project application included a Hydrology
and Hydraulics Study and Water Quality
Management Plan which were reviewed and
approved and ensure the development will
retain storm flows onsite.
346
346 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 22 of 57 ends

OSCE Policy 4F Water Conservation and
Native Plants Ensure that development
encourage water conservation, efficient
irrigation practices and the use of native or
drought tolerant non-invasive plants
appropriate to the local habitat to minimize the
need for fertilizer, pesticides, herbicides and
excessive irrigation. Prohibit the use of invasive
plants, and require native plants appropriate to
the local habitat where the property is in or
adjacent to Environmentally Sensitive Areas
(ESAs).

The landscape plans include a palette
consisting of only native and low-water usage
plants.

SE Policy S-3.1 Require the preparation of a
geotechnical investigation for applicable
development projects as specified in the
Municipal Code.

The application includes a Geotechnical
Report that was peer reviewed by the City’s
geotechnical consultant. The report concludes
that development of the site is feasible,
provided its recommendations are
incorporated into the final design and
construction.

Transportation, Circulation and Growth
Management Element (TCGME) Policy 2E
Require subdivisions, new commercial
developments and major commercial
renovations to include a traffic impact analysis
which identifies measures to mitigate any
identified impacts.

The application included a Traffic Report
memorandum that was peer reviewed by the
City’s traffic consultant. The analysis and
conclusions of the report support the finding
that the proposed housing development would
not result in significant traffic impacts to the
existing roadway network serving the project
site.

Standard Analysis
Municipal Code
LBMC Title 19 Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance (WELO). For applicable landscape
installation or rehabilitation projects subject to
Section 19.01.004(a), the estimated applied
water use allowed for the landscaped area
shall not exceed the MAWA calculated using
an ET adjustment factor of 0.55 for residential
areas and 0.45 for nonresidential areas, except
for special landscaped areas where the MAWA
is calculated using an ET adjustment factor of

1.0; or the design of the landscaped area shall
otherwise be shown to be equivalently waterefficient in a manner acceptable to the city; as provided in the Guidelines.

The proposed project plans submitted with the
Application demonstrate that the proposed
project meets WELO requirements, including
landscaping, irrigation, and calculations.

Therefore, based on the information shown on
Sheet L-1 of the submitted plans provided in
the Application, the City finds the Application
consistent with this standard.
347
347 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 23 of 57 ends

LBMC Title 7 Health and Sanitation.

Outdoor lighting must be hooded, fully
shielded, and aimed downward. (LBMC
Section 7.70.050(b).)
Fixtures not fully shielded shall be allowed
only if less than three thousand Kelvin and/or
seven hundred fifty lumens. (LBMC Section

7.70.060(a).)
The proposed project plans submitted with the
Application depict identified light sources as
shielded and directed downward, as required
by the City’s Good Neighbor Outdoor Lighting
ordinance that requires shields for lights
exceeding 750 lumens.

Therefore, based on the information shown on
Sheets L-2, ELP-1, ELP,-2, and ELP-3 of the
submitted plans provided in the Application,
the City finds the Application consistent with
this standard.

Standard Analysis
Residential Design Guidelines

9.10 Eliminate irrigation runoff by providing onsite infiltration.The proposed project plans submitted with the Application demonstrate that the proposed
project eliminates irrigation runoff by providing
on-site infiltration.

Based on the report information and
documents provided to date in the Application
which was peer-reviewed by the City’s
consultant, GMU Geotechnical Inc., the City
finds the Application consistent with this
standard.

9.14 Locate mechanical equipment inside of
the structure or at the rear or sides of a
property, observing required setbacks.

Ensure [noise from mechanical equipment]
does not exceed City maximums (see
Municipal Code §7.25)
The proposed project plans submitted with the
Application provide calculations that
demonstrate that the mechanical equipment
in the proposed plans do not exceed City
maximums.

Therefore, based on the information as shown
on Sheet A2.4 of the submitted plans in the
Application, the City finds the Application
consistent with this standard.

9.15 Use low-lumen fixtures.

Use full-cutoff baffles and hood accessories
to direct light.

The proposed project plans submitted with the
Application depict identified light sources as
shielded and directed downward.

Therefore, based on the information shown on
Sheets L-2, ELP-1, ELP,-2, and ELP-3 of the
submitted plans provided in the Application,
the City finds the Application consistent with
this standard.
348
348 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 24 of 57 ends

Design Review
The Site Improvements more specifically described as (i) 480 cubic yards of grading outside the building footprint; (ii) 150 feet of retaining walls exceeding five feet in height along the rear property line; (iii) landscaping improvements including groundcover, shrubs, trees, and lighting; (iv) a 180 sq. ft. elevated deck serving the second-floor residential area. The Project’s site improvements are shown below in Figures 11-14:

Figure 11 - Proposed Grading Exhibit
349
349 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 25 of 57 ends

Figure 12 - Retaining Wall Detail
Figure 13 – Landscape Plan
350
350 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 26 of 57 ends

Figure 14 - Elevated Deck
Coastal Development Permit
The Housing Development Project and Site Improvements require a coastal development permit.

The project site is located inland between Glenneyre Street and Catalina Street within an already urbanized area and, as such, the proposed development will not adversely impact coastal resources. Additionally, due to the site’s inland location, existing topography, and surrounding intervening development, the project will not obstruct or impair identified public coastal views or visual access to the shoreline.

Potential impacts associated with the proposed development were evaluated through the applicant’s submitted technical studies and corresponding peer reviews, including analyses addressing geotechnical, hydrological, sewer capacity, water quality, and traffic considerations.

The findings and conclusions of these reports demonstrate that the project can be adequately served by existing infrastructure and developed without creating adverse impacts to surrounding properties or coastal resources. The submitted technical analyses and their conclusions are discussed in further detail below.

Technical Studies
As part of the applicant’s application, several technical reports and studies were prepared, including a Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA), which is explicitly required by SB 4, to confirm that the no recognized environmental conditions existed on the property. The findings and analysis of the required studies are summarized below.

Environmental Site Assessment
A Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) dated April 10, 2026, and prepared by Altec (Attachment 5) was submitted for the City’s review. The prepared assessment determined that no recognized environmental conditions (RECs), controlled RECs, or historical RECs are present on Elevation Site Plan
351
351 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 27 of 57 ends

the project site (p. 4 and 50). Accordingly, a Phase II ESA is not warranted. The Phase I ESA also identifies certain “Potential Issues” for which additional testing is recommended, including naturally occurring radon and the possible presence of lead-based paint or asbestos-containing materials within existing structures. These items do not constitute RECs and do not require further investigation. However, such testing is recommended as a best practice. The applicant has indicated that any recommended testing will be conducted during the construction phase of the project.

Geotechnical Review
A preliminary Geotechnical Report dated December 2, 2025, and prepared by LGC Geotechnical (Attachment 6) was submitted and peer reviewed by the City’s third-party consultant, who confirmed the analysis and conclusions of the report. According to regional geologic mapping, the site is underlain by a veneer of Quaternary terrace deposits over Tertiary Topanga Formation bedrock. The report concludes that development of the site is feasible, provided its recommendations are incorporated into the final design and construction.

The report further indicates that the subject site is not located within a designated Seismic Hazard Zone, including areas susceptible to earthquake-induced landslides or liquefaction (CDMG, 2006), nor within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone (CGS, 2018). No faults were encountered during the site investigation, and none are mapped across the site based on reviewed regional geologic data. These findings support the site’s physical suitability for the proposed Housing Development Project, Site Improvements, and Merger.

Hydrology and Hydraulics Study
The Hydrology and Hydraulics Study dated February 2025 and prepared by KES (Attachment 7), determined that there are no existing water quality treatment devices on the subject site. Runoff within the Catalina Street right-of-way currently flows along the northerly property boundary and is directed west; this historic drainage pattern will be maintained under post-development conditions.

The proposed development will capture surface flows through a system of area drains located around the perimeter of the podium and within the structure. All water quality flows will be conveyed to a subsurface chamber system located at the lower level of the podium for treatment and detention. Post-construction conditions are anticipated to be similar to existing conditions, with both maintaining approximately 13 percent pervious area. The analysis concludes that the increase in 100-year peak flow rates would be less than one percent and does not require mitigation.

The study further concludes that the proposed improvements are designed in accordance with County of Orange Flood Control standards, and the drainage system is capable of accommodating runoff from a 100-year storm event. Building pads will be set above the theoretical 100-year flood elevation identified in the study, and the proposed development and parcel map will not create additional drainage impacts beyond the project boundaries.34 34 It should also be noted that the site is not located within a special flood hazard area as defined by FEMA. 352
352 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 28 of 57 ends

Sanitary Sewer Analysis
The applicant submitted a Sanitary Sewer Analysis, dated December 2025, prepared by KES (Attachment 8). The prepared analysis was reviewed by the City’s Public Works Department, and the findings and conclusions were confirmed. The proposed Project, consisting of 29 residential units and a five-unit laundry facility, is estimated to generate approximately 7,250 gallons per day, equivalent to 0.008 cubic feet per second (cfs), or 3.6 gallons per minute (gpm), of wastewater discharge.

The project site is served by one dedicated sewer lateral exiting the south side of the proposed building and connecting to an existing 8-inch sanitary sewer line within Glenneyre Street. The existing 8-inch sewer line has a calculated capacity of 1.874 cfs at 50 percent flow depth. The project’s contribution of 0.008 cfs represents an approximate 0.42 percent increase in flow.

Based on the sewer analysis, which utilized methodologies from Orange County Sanitation District and Manning’s equation, the project’s incremental increase in flow is minimal and would not be expected to adversely impact the capacity or operation of the existing sanitary sewer system.

Accordingly, the project can be adequately served by the existing sewer infrastructure without the need for system improvements, subject to final review and approval by the City Engineer.

Water Quality Management Plan
The applicant submitted a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), dated December 2025, prepared by KES (Attachment 9). The analysis was reviewed by the City’s Water Quality Division, which confirmed the report’s findings and conclusions. Stormwater from the site will be collected via area drains and conveyed to a subsurface storage system. Landscape and planter areas will include internal drains that discharge by gravity to the proposed chamber system located at the basement level. All hardscape surfaces, including concrete areas, will similarly drain to the subsurface chamber system. Roof runoff will be captured by roof drains and directed to the same system. Treated flows will be discharged to the public right-of-way, including the curb and gutter along Glenneyre Street for fronting hardscape areas, and to the easterly storm drain system.

Discharge will occur following treatment through the planter, and then conveyed via gravity piping and curb core/under-walk drains.

The WQMP concludes that post-construction conditions are comparable to existing conditions, with both maintaining approximately 13 percent pervious area. As a result, the increase in the 100- year peak flow rate is less than one percent and does not require additional mitigation.

Traffic and Circulation
The applicant submitted a Traffic Memo, dated November 26, 2025, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc (Attachment 10). The submitted report was peer reviewed by the City’s third-party consultant who concurred with the analysis and findings in the memo. Vehicular access to the site is provided from Glenneyre Street, which is classified as a primary arterial, and no new streets or off-site circulation improvements are proposed as part of the residential development or parcel map. The proposed residential project includes a 20-ft. wide driveway leading to an underground parking garage with 41 parking spaces. In order to estimate the generated traffic volumes of the 353
353 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 29 of 57 ends

proposed Project, the Institute of Transportation Engineers (ITE) Trip Generation Manual 12th Edition was used to estimate trips for the site. As shown in Table 2 below, the proposed Project is anticipated to generate approximately 140 two-way vehicle trips per day (in actual vehicles) with 11 AM peak hour trips and 14 PM peak hour trips.

Table 2. Project Trip Generation
AM Peak Hour PM Peak Hour
Land Use Quantity In Out Total In Out Total
Affordable Housing 29 units 3 8 11 8 6 14
The Project’s addition to daily and peak hour vehicle trips to the City’s arterials, local roadways, and intersections are less-than-significant and would not require additional improvements to the roadways or intersections. The two roadways, Glenneyre Street and St. Ann’s Drive, currently operate at Level of Service (LOS) A and will continue to operate at LOS A after construction of the proposed development. Consequently, the proposed residential development and parcel map would not alter the previously reviewed circulation pattern, exceed existing roadway capacity, and would not result in any significant change to traffic or circulation conditions in the surrounding neighborhood.

Tentative Parcel Map
The purpose of the parcel map is to eliminate the existing fragmented condition by merging the four lots into two legal parcels, one for the religious institution and the other for the Housing Development Project. In doing so, the proposed parcel map improves conformity with the lot area, lot width, and lot depth requirements of the R-2 and LBP zones and allows for the parcels to function as two distinct building sites.

Pursuant to LBMC § 25.12.008, property in the R-2 Zone must maintain a minimum lot area of 6,000 sq. ft., a minimum lot width of 70 feet, and a minimum lot depth of 80 feet. Properties in the LBP zone, pursuant to LBMC § 25.12.008, have a maximum lot area of 10,000 sq. ft.

As noted above, the applicant is requesting a waiver of this requirement as combining the existing lots such that the proposed Housing Development Project is located on a single parcel is required to comply with applicable California Building Code requirements, which prohibit structures from crossing property lines. Additionally, the existing LBP parcel is already non-conforming at 37,640 sq. ft. and the resulting split-zoned R-2 and LBP parcel will be 28,937 sq. ft. in size. The proposed Tentative Parcel Map would merge the four existing contiguous parcels into two legal parcels, and will not create additional parcels. The subject property consists of Lots 2,4,6,8,10,12, 18, 19, 20, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27 and with portions of lots 9, 11, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, of Block 73 of Laguna Terrace, now addressed as 340 St. Ann’s Drive (APNs: 644-034-05, 644-034-09).

As shown on the tentative parcel map, the resulting Parcel 1 for the religious institution site would be 29,027 sq. ft. in size and zoned LBP, and Parcel 2 for the affordable housing development would be split-zoned with a 14,781 sq. ft. R-2 portion and 14,156 sq. ft. LBP portion (28,937 sq. ft. total), exceeding the maximum lot area of 10,000 sq. ft. allowed in the LBP Zone. 354
354 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 30 of 57 ends

In terms of access, the proposed parcel map would not alter the site’s approved access configuration. The merged parcels would continue to take vehicular access from Glenneyre Street, consistent with the existing religious institution site. The site is currently served by safe and direct vehicular and pedestrian access from Glenneyre Street, including a 20-foot-wide driveway leading to the existing surface parking lot which minimize conflicts between vehicles and pedestrians. The proposed project also ensures adequate site visibility for ingress and egress and provides 41 parking spaces in the underground garage.

Because the current application will lead to lot consolidation and does not create additional development pads or driveways, no new access points are proposed. Accordingly, the proposed lot consolidation would not modify the existing circulation pattern.

Figure 10 – Proposed Tentative Parcel Map

ENTITLEMENT REVIEW PROCESS
Ministerial Design Review
The Housing Development Project, or residential units, consisting of the multi-family residential building requires the approval of design review under SB 4. (Gov. Code Section 65913.16(l).) Such design review must be objective and be strictly focused on assessing compliance with criteria required for streamlined, ministerial review of projects, as well as any reasonable objective design 355
355 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 31 of 57 ends

standards published and adopted by ordinance or resolution by the City before submittal of the development to the local government and must be broadly applicable to developments within the City.

Standard Reason
Senate Bill 4
Definitions for religious institution,
applicant, qualified developer.

The application has submitted documentation
that the project meets all of the definitions under
SB 4, including the definitions of “religious
institution,” “applicant,” and “qualified
developer.”
Deed Restricted. All units, exclusive of
managers’ units, are subject to a recorded
deed restriction for at least the following
time periods: 55 years for rental units, and
45 years for owner-occupied units. (Gov.

Code Section 65913.16(c)(9).)
The application included a draft Regulatory
Agreement for the affordable housing
development for review by the City Attorney’s
Office.

Therefore, based on the information and
documents provided to date in the Application,
the City finds the Application consistent with this
standard.

Environmental Site Assessment. An
applicant must conduct a Phase I
environmental assessment to determine if a
hazardous substance has been released on
the proposed project site. (Gov. Code
Section 65913.16(c)(13).) If warranted, a
Phase II environmental assessment must
also be conducted. (Id.) If a hazardous
substance is found, then the applicant must
contract with an environmental assessor to
determine if it poses any danger to future
residents. (Id.) If it does, then the hazard
must be removed or mitigated to a level
complying with state and federal
requirements. (Id.)
The Application provided a Phase I ESA report
that concludes there were no recognized
environmental conditions on the project site and
that a Phase II ESA was not warranted.

Therefore, based on the information and
documents provided to date in the Application,
the City finds that the Application is consistent
with this standard.

Density. Parcels located in a zone that
allows residential use. The minimum density
varies based on the type of jurisdiction: 30
units per acre in a metropolitan county.

As the proposed affordable housing
development is 100 percent affordable at the
low-income level, excluding one manager’s unit,
it is eligible for an 80 percent bonus. The
Applicant is requesting a 46 percent density
bonus, less the what is allowed under State law,
allowing for 29 housing units on the 0.66-acre
site.
356
356 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 32 of 57 ends

Height. The permitted height is one story
above the otherwise-allowed local height
limits. If the local government allows for
greater density on the parcel, or greater
density or height is allowed on an adjoining
parcel, the greater density or building height
shall apply. A development also qualifies for
the provisions of State Density Bonus Law,
including incentives, concessions, or
waivers or reductions of development
standards and parking ratios.

The project complies with the applicable height
limits and allowances established under the
LBMC for the R2 and LBP zoning districts, which
permit a maximum building height of 25 feet.

Pursuant to the applicable height allowance
provisions, the proposed building may exceed
the base height limit by up to 11 feet and has a
proposed maximum height of 36 feet.

Parking. One off-street parking space per
unit is required, unless a state or local law
allows less, except that no parking is
required if the project is located within 0.5-
mile walking distance of either a high-quality
transit corridor or major transit stop or within
1 block of a car share vehicle.

There are currently 69 parking spaces provided
on-site that are available to NCC. Applicant
requests a fifty percent reduction in the number
of religious-use parking spaces, which would
result in 35 religious-use parking spaces
available. The Project proposes a parking garage
with 41 parking stalls which covers the 35
religious-use parking spaces. Under SB 4, the
Housing Development Project must provide 29
parking spaces (for the proposed 29 units).

Therefore, the 35 religious use parking spaces
are allowed to count for the 29 parking spaces
for the Housing Development Project.

Under State Density Bonus law, the applicant is
requesting a reduction in parking requirements
as a development concession.

Ancillary and Previous Uses. Projects
located in a single-family residential zone
may include childcare centers and
recreational, social, or educational facilities
operated by community-based
organizations. All other zones may include
commercial uses that are permitted without
a conditional use permit or planned unit
development permit. The development
project can include any previous use that
existed and was legally permitted if certain
criteria are met (e.g., the project does not
increase total nonresidential square footage
or total parking and features the same
operational conditions).

The existing Montessori school, originally
approved in 2000 through Conditional Use
Permit No. 00-49, will continue to operate on the
religious institution site.
357
357 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 33 of 57 ends

Prevailing Wage and Labor Requirements.

The housing development project must
abide by prevailing wage requirements
(Labor Code sections 1720-1861), including
noticing in accordance with Labor Code
section 1773.35.

The project applicant shall provide prevailing
wages for all labor utilized in the construction of
the project, in accordance with applicable State
labor requirements. Compliance with this
requirement is further ensured through the
inclusion of a condition of approval in
Resolution No. 2026-1135.

Standard Reason
General Plan
SE Policy S-4.2 Require new developments
and major remodels to retain onsite storm
flows at or below existing conditions.

The project application included a Hydrology
and Hydraulics Study and Water Quality
Management Plan which were reviewed and
approved and ensure the development will
retain storm flows onsite.

The landscape plans include a palette
consisting of only native and low-water usage
plants.

SE Policy S-3.1 Require the preparation of a
geotechnical investigation for applicable
development projects as specified in the
Municipal Code.

Page 34 of 57 ends

Standard Reason
Municipal Code
LBMC Title 19 Water Efficient Landscape
Ordinance (WELO). For applicable landscape
installation or rehabilitation projects subject to
Section 19.01.004(a), the estimated applied
water use allowed for the landscaped area
shall not exceed the MAWA calculated using
an ET adjustment factor of 0.55 for residential
areas and 0.45 for nonresidential areas, except
for special landscaped areas where the MAWA
is calculated using an ET adjustment factor of

1.0; or the design of the landscaped area shall
otherwise be shown to be equivalently waterefficient in a manner acceptable to the city; as provided in the Guidelines.

The proposed project plans submitted with the
Application demonstrate that the proposed
project meets WELO requirements, including
landscaping, irrigation, and calculations.

Therefore, based on the information shown on
Sheet L-1 of the submitted plans provided in
the Application, the City finds the Application
consistent with this standard.

LBMC Title 7 Health and Sanitation.

Therefore, based on the information shown on
Sheets L-2, ELP-1, ELP,-2, and ELP-3 of the
submitted plans provided in the Application,
the City finds the Application consistent with
this standard.

Standard Reason
Residential Design Guidelines

Page 35 of 57 ends

9.14 Locate mechanical equipment inside of
the structure or at the rear or sides of a
property, observing required setbacks.

Therefore, based on the information as shown
on Sheet A2.4 of the submitted plans in the
Application, the City finds the Application
consistent with this standard.

9.15 Use low-lumen fixtures.

Use full-cutoff baffles and hood accessories
to direct light.

The proposed project plans submitted with the
Application depict identified light sources as
shielded and directed downward.

Therefore, based on the information shown on
Sheets L-2, ELP-1, ELP,-2, and ELP-3 of the
submitted plans provided in the Application,
the City finds the Application consistent with
this standard.

Design Review
The proposed Site Improvements require the approval of discretionary design review. (See LBMC Section 25.05.040(B)(1).) Specifically, discretionary design review is required for more than 20 cubic yards of grading outside the building footprint, retaining walls with more than 5 feet of exposed height, landscaping, and an elevated deck. Design review is governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 25.05.040. Design review is considered by the Planning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:

Finding No. 1: Physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are designed and located in a manner in overall consistency with the design review criteria specified in Section

25.05.040(H), as set forth below:

1. Access. Conflicts between vehicles, pedestrians and other modes of transportation should be minimized by specifically providing for each applicable mode of transportation. Handicapped access shall be provided as required by applicable statutes.

No changes are proposed to the vehicular access to the site and off-street parking would continue to be provided along Glenneyre Street. The grading and retaining walls of the Site Improvements are designed to enhance overall circulation and ensure safe and efficient movement of vehicles, pedestrians, and other modes of transportation throughout the development. The design emphasizes clear wayfinding, visibility, and safe transitions between parking, residential, and common areas. The landscaping and the elevated deck of the Site Improvements does not result in any conflicts with access. In addition, all site improvements will be designed and constructed 360
360 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 36 of 57 ends

in compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), ensuring accessible routes of travel, appropriately located accessible parking spaces, and barrier-free access to building entries and key site amenities.

2. Design Articulation: Within the allowable building envelope, the appearance of building and retaining wall mass should be minimized. Articulation techniques including, but not limited to, separation, offsets, terracing and reducing the size of any one element in the structure may be used to reduce the appearance of mass.

The proposed Site improvements consisting of grading, retaining walls, landscaping, and elevated deck collectively serve to reduce the perceived massing of the project and enhance its overall visual integration with the surrounding development. By locating the parking garage underground through site grading, the perceived height and bulk of the development are significantly minimized, ensuring compatibility with the surrounding built environment. Furthermore, the incorporation of retaining walls with metal fencing along Catalina Street, as well as six-foot-high decorative block walls along interior property lines, contributes to the reduction of perceived bulk by providing visual screening.

Additionally, the proposed landscaping along the Glenneyre Street and Catalina Street frontages, as well as along interior property lines, provides a layered visual buffer that softens views of the building from adjacent public rights-of-way and neighboring properties. This combination of planting materials and site design elements helps to break up building mass and provide a softer edge to the development. Combined, these elements work together to minimize the overall visual impact of the development.

3. Design Integrity: Consistency with the applicant’s chosen style of architecture should be achieved by the use of appropriate materials and details. Remodels should be harmonious with the remaining existing architecture.

The grading of the Site Improvements allows for the parking to be located below grade and allows the site to focus the visual interest on the overall design of the site rather than on utilitarian elements. The retaining walls of the Site Improvements are given architectural treatments through the use of compatible materials, these walls are designed to complement the architectural style of the site. The landscaping of the Site Improvements is used as an additional design element and are strategically located to screen utilitarian components, and highlight key architectural features, thereby strengthening the overall design. The elevated deck of the Site Improvements is similarly integrated into the architectural design and utilizes materials, proportions, and detailing consistent with the overall site design. This ensures that the deck is a seamless extension of the overall architectural concept.

Consequently, the Site Improvements consisting of the proposed grading, retaining walls, landscaping, and elevated deck are integral components of the project’s overall design strategy and achieves a harmonious and cohesive development that is visually compatible with the intended architectural style.
361
361 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 37 of 57 ends

4. Environmental Context: Development should preserve and, where possible, enhance the city’s scenic natural setting. Natural features, such as existing heritage trees, rock out-cropping, ridgelines and significant watercourses should be protected. Existing terrain should be utilized in the design and grading should be minimized.

The project proposes grading and retaining walls of the Site Improvements, which allows the parking garage to be placed below grade, minimizes the need for grading or alteration of the existing terrain. The proposed parking garage utilizes the site’s existing steep downward slope along Catalina Street for the parking garage. Additionally, the proposed landscaping of the Site Improvements is consistent with the existing developed site and neighborhood. The Site Improvements do not involve removal of heritage trees, modification of ridgelines, or encroachment on watercourses. Thus, the project preserves and enhances the City’s scenic natural setting by concentrating development where infrastructure already exists.

5. General Plan Compliance: The development shall comply with all applicable policies of the General Plan, including all of its elements, applicable specific plans, and the certified local coastal program.

The Project complies with all applicable policies in the City’s General Plan and Local Coastal Program. The project site is not located within any Specific Plan.

Housing Element Policy HE-1.11 Ensure that new housing will be aesthetically compatible with the surrounding environment and compatible with the size, scale and character of development in the neighborhood in which it is located.

The project’s proposed grading, elevated deck, landscaping, and retaining walls contribute to a cohesive site design that ensures aesthetic compatibility with the surrounding residential and commercial uses in the vicinity. These elements are carefully integrated to soften building massing, provide visual transitions, and reinforce a consistent architectural and landscape character along adjacent street frontages and property lines.

Accordingly, the project supports and is consistent with Policy HE-1.11 by ensuring that new development is visually compatible with the existing neighborhood context, maintaining a balanced relationship between the proposed improvements and the existing neighborhood context.

Housing Element Policy HE-2.7 Encourage the production of privately sponsored low- and moderate-income housing projects in residential and mixed-use developments.

The proposed site improvements facilitate the development of an affordable housing project that will add 28 rental units to the City’s housing inventory. The project supports and is consistent with Policy HE-2.7 by encouraging and advancing private development of low362 362 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 38 of 57 ends

income housing units, thereby contributing to the City’s overall housing goals and affordability objectives.

Housing Element Policy HE-2.8 Provide incentives (e.g., density bonus, fee reductions/exemptions, assistance with federal and other funding applications, liberalized development standards, fast-tracking) to developers of projects that include extremely-low-, verylow- and low-income housing units.

The requested incentives for the project facilitate the development of 28 low-income affordable rental housing units. The project is consistent with Policy HE-2.8 by encouraging the production of new housing units through regulatory flexibility that reduces unnecessary development constraints and helps avoid significant cost burdens, thereby supporting the feasibility of affordable housing development.

HE-2.13: Encourage the expansion of rental housing opportunities in the City.

The proposed site improvements will facilitate the addition of 28 new low-income deedrestricted rental units on an existing developed site, thereby increasing the City’s rental housing inventory. The project directly supports Policy HE-2.13 by expanding rental housing opportunities through the redevelopment efficient use of an infill site.

HE-2.17: Foster opportunities for small scale infill development as a means to expand housing opportunities and incrementally provide affordable housing.

The proposed site improvements will facilitate infill development through the addition of 28 new low-income deed-restricted rental units on an existing developed site, thereby increasing the City’s rental housing inventory. The project is consistent with Policy HE-2.17 by making efficient use of an underutilized site and introducing new housing units without the need for significant expansion of existing infrastructure or public services.

Infill development contributes to the City’s overall housing supply by supporting residential use within an urbanized area already served by transit, utilities, and municipal services. The incremental addition of 28 units enhances housing diversity within the community, expands availability, and provides increased options for a range of household types, thereby supporting broader affordability objectives.

HE-3.6: Promote the expansion of housing opportunities throughout the City.

The proposed site improvements will facilitate infill development of 28 low-income affordable rental housing units, resulting in a net increase in the City’s overall housing supply. By introducing residential units within an already developed neighborhood, the project expands housing availability in a manner that is compatible with surrounding land uses and the capacity of existing infrastructure and public services.
363
363 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 39 of 57 ends

Land Use Element Goal 6 Provide a diversity of land uses that enhance the community.

The site improvements will allow for infill development of a multi-family affordable housing building within an established business and residential corridor. By providing affordable rental units within an urbanized area, the development expands housing availability in a manner that is compatible with surrounding land uses and existing infrastructure and enhances the community.

6. Historic Preservation: Destruction or alteration to historic resources should be avoided whenever possible. See Chapter 25.45 for more information.

There are no historic resources on the property or that would be impacted by the Site Improvements consisting of grading, retaining walls, landscaping, and an elevated deck and therefore this criterion does not apply. The existing structures on the site have not been placed on the National Register, California Register, or Laguna Beach Register and therefore the Project site is eligible for SB 4.

7. Landscaping: Landscaping shall be incorporated as an integrated part of the structure’s design and relate harmoniously to neighborhood and community landscaping themes. View equity shall be an important consideration in the landscape design. The relevant landscaping guidelines contained in the City’s “Landscape and Scenic Highways Resource Document” should be incorporated, as appropriate, in the design and planned maintenance of proposed landscaping.

The proposed landscaping in the Site Improvements is integrated into the overall design of the Project, serving as both a functional and aesthetic component that enhances the site and creates visual interest. Landscaping is strategically located throughout the site to frame architectural elements, define pedestrian pathways, and relate harmoniously to neighborhood. In addition, the proposed landscaping emphasizes sustainability through the use of low-water-use, droughttolerant plant species that are well adapted to the local climate.

The plant palette is diverse and incorporates six different tree species totaling 41 trees, along with 27 varieties of shrubs and groundcover. Of the proposed trees, the Arbutus Marina (Strawberry Tree) is the largest species, reaching a mature height of approximately 40 to 50 feet, and is located exclusively along the interior property lines to provide screening while minimizing view impacts across the site. In addition, two Eucalyptus ficifolia (Red Flowering Gum) and two Agonis flexuosa (Peppermint Tree), each with a mature height of up to approximately 40 feet, are proposed at the site entrance along the primary driveway leading to the parking garage, where they will help define the entry sequence and enhance visual character. Furthermore, nine Podocarpus henkelii (Long Leaf Yellowwood), also reaching heights of approximately 40 feet at maturity, are distributed along the northern, eastern, and southern property lines to provide additional buffering and landscape continuity around the site perimeter.

Collectively, these trees have been carefully sited and spaced to balance the provision of screening and aesthetic enhancement with the preservation of existing view corridors. Their 364
364 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 40 of 57 ends

placement is intended to maintain view equity by minimizing potential impacts to coastal and canyon views across and beyond the project site, while still achieving the desired landscape massing, privacy, and visual integration with the surrounding environment. Because the proposed landscaping does not raise view concerns, there is no limitation on height of mature trees or maintenance schedules.

8. Lighting and Glare: Adequate lighting for individual and public safety shall be provided in a manner which does not significantly impact neighboring properties. Reflective materials and appurtenances that cause glare or a negative visual impact (e.g., skylights, white rock roofs, highgloss ceramic tile roofs, reflective glass, etc.) should be avoided or mitigated to a level of insignificance in those locations where those surfaces are visible from neighboring properties.

As part of the Site Improvements, six landscape lighting fixtures have been included and designed to meet applicable safety and security standards. The fixtures are fully shielded and directed downward to provide effective illumination of pedestrian pathways and key site areas while minimizing light spillover, glare, or adverse visual impacts to the surrounding neighborhood.

9. Neighborhood Compatibility: Development shall be compatible with the existing development in the neighborhood and respect neighborhood character. Neighborhood character is the sum of the qualities that distinguish areas within the City, including historical patterns of development (e.g., structural heights, mass, scale or size), village atmosphere, landscaping themes and architectural styles.

Within the context of the existing development pattern, the Site Improvements consisting of grading, retaining walls, landscaping, and an elevated deck maintains a neighborhood compatibility. The proposed grading, landscaping, and retaining walls reduce the overall massing and visibility from surrounding public vantage points and helps transition the new improvements into the surrounding neighborhood character. The perimeter landscaping and walls provide visual buffering and soften the transition between the project and adjacent residential uses. Furthermore, the Site Improvements are sited behind the existing two-story church buildings located at the higher elevation portion of the site, helping further screen and transition the Site Improvements into the surrounding neighborhood context. Collectively, these elements enhance compatibility with the surrounding context while minimizing perceived bulk and visual contrast.

10. Pedestrian Orientation: Commercial development design shall enhance and encourage pedestrian uses. Incorporation of articulated building masses, compact open spaces and courtyards, mixed use developments, use of landscaping as part of design, and orientation to pedestrian access should be maximized.

Parking and vehicular access would continue to be provided from Glenneyre Street. The Site Improvements enhance pedestrian circulation along the driveway through the incorporation of corner cutbacks on both sides of the 20-foot-wide drive aisle, improving visibility, safety, and pedestrian-vehicle separation at key conflict points. The Site Improvements create pedestrian access paths to and from the site that make it easy to access the parking garage, multifamily 365
365 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 41 of 57 ends

residential building, and the range of resident-serving amenities in the area, including retail, dining, and shopping destinations.

11. Privacy: The placement of activity areas (e.g., decks, picture windows and ceremonial or entertainment rooms) in locations that would result in a substantial invasion of privacy of neighboring properties should be minimized.

The Site Improvements, including the landscaping and perimeter retaining walls, provide effective screening and reduce impacts to existing privacy conditions between the project and adjacent residential uses located along the northern, eastern, and southeastern property lines. The installation of approximately 35 trees along these property edges provides further visual separation and enhances privacy between neighboring properties and the proposed development.

The project also includes a 180 sq. ft. elevated deck oriented toward Glenneyre Street, which is set back more than 55 feet from the property line. Given this substantial setback and its street-facing orientation, the deck is not anticipated to create privacy impacts to adjacent properties along the frontage. Overall, there is sufficient separation distance between the proposed development and surrounding residential uses, and combined with the proposed landscaping and retaining walls, the project effectively minimizes potential privacy impacts and maintains compatibility with the surrounding neighborhood context.

12. Public Art: Public art is encouraged and shall be displayed where feasible or required by the Art in Public Places ordinance.

The Project does not trigger the art in public places requirement pursuant to LBMC Section

1.09.040(b)(5), which exempts low-income housing construction from providing public art.

13. Sign Quality: Signs shall be incorporated into the architecture of the structure and shall be made of high quality materials, be simple in design and be visually compatible with the surrounding physical environment in terms of color, scale and size. Use of natural materials in the construction of signs is encouraged.

The Site Improvements do not include any proposed signs.

14. Sustainability: New development should consider architecture and building practices which minimize environmental impacts and enhance energy efficiency by: (a) reducing energy needs of buildings by proper site and structural design; (b) increasing the building’s ability to capture or generate energy; (c) using low-impact, sustainable and recycled building materials; (d) using the latest Best Management Practices regarding waste and water management; and (e) reducing site emissions.

The proposed grading of the Site Improvements minimizes alteration of the existing site topography by locating the residential improvements at the rear portion of the property, where the site naturally slopes downward from Catalina Street. Utilizing the site’s existing grade allows the project to accommodate the proposed residential density while reducing the extent of cut and grading 366
366 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 42 of 57 ends

necessary for construction. This approach helps integrate the development into the natural terrain, minimizes visual impacts associated with massing and height, and limits disturbance to the existing terrain. Additionally, the project must comply with the California Green Building Code (Title 24: Part 11) and include Best Management Practices (BMPs) throughout the construction phase, including but not limited to dust and sediment control, erosion control, and other measures as required and enforced through the standard Building Department condition of approval for the development.

15. Swimming Pools, Spas, and Water Features: Swimming pools, spas and water features shall be located, designed and constructed where:
(a) geology conditions allow;
(b) noise produced by circulatory mechanical pumps and equipment is mitigated; and (c) any associated fencing or other site improvements are compatible with neighboring properties.

The Site Improvements do not include any pools, spas, or water features.

16. View Equity: The development, including its landscaping, shall be designed to protect existing views from neighboring properties without denying the subject property the reasonable opportunity to develop as described and illustrated in the City’s “Design Guidelines.” The “Design Guidelines” are intended to balance preservation of views with the right to develop property.

The Site Improvements consisting of the retaining walls and landscaping will not result in adverse view equity impacts due to their siting and overall design integration. The retaining wall along the interior property line is a maximum of six feet in height, while the retaining wall along Catalina Street ranges from approximately 42 to 72 inches in height and is topped with a tubular steel fence varying from three to five feet. These elements are designed at a scale and massing that are consistent with typical residential and institutional site improvements and are not anticipated to obstruct public or private view corridors.

The proposed landscape palette has been carefully sited to provide privacy and visual buffering while minimizing impacts to coastal and canyon views across the project site. The Arbutus ‘Marina’ (Strawberry Tree), the largest proposed species, reaches a mature height of approximately 40 to 50 feet and is located exclusively along interior property lines to provide screening within the site.

In addition, two Eucalyptus ficifolia (Red Flowering Gum) and two Agonis flexuosa (Peppermint Tree), each reaching up to 40 feet at maturity, are located at the site entrance along the driveway leading to the parking garage, where they help define entry and enhance site character. Further, nine Podocarpus henkelii (Long Leaf Yellowwood), also reaching approximately 40 feet in height at maturity, are distributed along the northern, eastern, and southern property lines to reinforce perimeter screening. Collectively, these trees are intentionally sited to maintain privacy between adjacent residential uses while preserving existing coastal and canyon views across and beyond the site. Because the proposed landscaping does not raise view concerns, there is not limitation on height of mature trees or maintenance schedules.
367
367 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 43 of 57 ends

Finding No. 2. The physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are designed and located in a manner in overall consistency with all other applicable design guidelines.

No additional design guidelines are applicable to the Site Improvements.

Finding No. 3. The physical improvements and site developments related to the Project are characterized by appropriately scaled development, diverse and unique architectural designs, pedestrian orientation, and sensitivity to the natural conditions of the site.

The Site Improvements are appropriately scaled for the size of the lot. The Site Improvements meet zoning requirements and the design review criteria as described above and is compatible with the neighborhood.

Finding No. 4. The project is consistent with any specific plan or any other specific zoning design review criteria.

There is no specific plan or other specific zoning design review criteria for the Project area.

Coastal Development Permit
The Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements require a coastal development permit. (See LBMC Section 25.07.004.) Coastal Development Permits are governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.07. A Coastal Development Permit is considered by the Planning Commission at a duly noticed public hearing where the following findings are considered in relation to the proposed development:

Finding No. 1: The project is in conformity with all the applicable provisions of the certified local coastal program, including the following review criteria:

1. The proposed development will not encroach upon any existing physical accessway legally utilized by the public or any proposed public accessway identified in the adopted local coastal program land use plan.

The proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements will not encroach upon any existing physical accessway legally utilized by the public or any proposed public accessway identified in the adopted Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. The Project site is privately owned and does not contain any public coastal access easements, trails, stairways, walkways, or other access corridors serving the public. Additionally, the proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements do not obstruct, alter, or diminish access to nearby public streets, sidewalks, or coastal access routes. No public accessways are designated across the property in the City’s certified Local Coastal Program. Accordingly, the proposed development will not interfere with existing or planned public coastal access opportunities and is consistent with applicable Coastal Act and Local Coastal Program access policies.
368
368 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 44 of 57 ends

2. The proposed development will not adversely affect marine resources, environmentally sensitive areas, or archaeological or paleontological resources.

The proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements will not adversely affect marine resources, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, or archaeological or paleontological resources as the site has been previously developed and urbanized, contains no marine resources or environmentally sensitive habitat areas, and is not identified as containing archaeological or paleontological resources.

A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment dated April 10, 2026, prepared by Altec Testing and Engineering (Attachment 5) and Geotechnical Report dated December 2, 2025, prepared by LGC Geotechnical (Attachment 6) was peer reviewed by the City’s consultant, Kling Consulting Group.

According to the Geotechnical Report, the site identified no geologic, hazardous materials, or environmental conditions that would indicate the presence of archeological or paleontological resources or constraints to development. Additionally, the site was not identified as a historic or archaeological resource in the City’s historic inventory. The proposed development is limited to infill redevelopment within an existing developed site and will not disturb any known sensitive environmental areas.

In addition, according to the Geotechnical Report, standard construction practices and regulatory requirements ensure that any previously undiscovered archaeological or paleontological resources encountered during grading or excavation activities are properly evaluated and treated in accordance with applicable regulations. Accordingly, the proposed development will not result in adverse impacts to marine resources, environmentally sensitive habitat areas, or archaeological or paleontological resources.

3. The proposed development will not adversely affect recreational or visitor-serving facilities or coastal scenic resources.

The proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements will not adversely affect recreational or visitor-serving facilities or coastal scenic resources. The site is a previously developed infill property currently occupied by a religious institution and surface parking lot and is not designated or utilized as a recreational or visitor-serving facility. The project site is located within an urbanized area surrounded by existing development and will not obstruct identified public scenic vistas or degrade visual access to coastal resources. The proposed Housing Development Project includes a parking garage with 41 parking stalls that will provide areas for parking by affordable housing residents, the religious use, and the school use. The proposed building is consistent with all applicable objective development and design standards.

In addition, the project site does not include development on a ridgeline, blufftop, or other visually prominent coastal landform and will not adversely impact scenic coastal views from public streets or viewing areas. Accordingly, the proposed development avoids adverse impacts to recreational or visitor-serving facilities and coastal scenic resources and is consistent with the applicable policies of the certified Local Coastal Program and the California Coastal Act. 369
369 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 45 of 57 ends

4. The proposed development will be sited and designed to prevent adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive habitats and scenic resources located in adjacent parks and recreation areas, and will provide adequate buffer areas to protect such resources.

The proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements is compatible with the surrounding urban environment as it is located in an existing developed infill property located within an urbanized setting. The Project site does not contain any environmentally sensitive habitat areas, wetlands, native habitat communities, or significant scenic natural resources. Further, the proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements are confined to the existing disturbed and previously developed portions of the site and will not encroach upon any parks, open space areas, or recreational lands as none are located within the vicinity. Further, no environmentally sensitive habitat areas are identified on or adjacent to the property. The site improvements meet objective standards relating to hydrology and water quality management as analyzed in the Hydrology and Hydraulics and Water Quality Management Plan (Attachments 6 and 8), which reduces any indirect impacts such as erosion, runoff, or pollution onto surrounding properties. Accordingly, the proposed development avoids adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive habitats and scenic resources and is consistent with the applicable policies of the certified Local Coastal Program and the California Coastal Act.

5. The proposed development will minimize the alterations of natural landforms and will not result in undue risks from geological and erosional forces and/or flood and fire hazards.

The Site Improvements involves 480 total cubic yards of grading outside of the building footprint.

The Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements will not result in undue risks from geological, erosional, flood, or fire hazards. The Project site is an existing developed infill property with an average slope of approximately 2.1 percent and does not contain significant natural landforms, steep slopes, or undisturbed topographic features. Physical improvements to the site will occur within previously disturbed portions of the site and therefore will not substantially alter the existing terrain.

A Geotechnical Report dated December 2, 2025, prepared by LGC Geotechnical (Attachment 5) for the project site, and peer reviewed by the City’s third-party consultant, Kling Consulting Group, concluded that the site is suitable for the proposed development provided the recommendations contained in the report are incorporated into the project design and construction. The report determined that the site is not located within a designated Seismic Hazard Zone, liquefaction zone, earthquake fault zone, or area susceptible to earthquake-induced landslides. No active faults were identified on or adjacent to the site.

In addition, the project’s Hydrology and Hydraulics Study, dated February 2025, prepared by KES (Attachment 6) and peer reviewed by the City’s third-party consultant, GMU Geotechnical Inc. assessed the proposed drainage and water quality improvements to ensure they are designed to accommodate runoff from a 100-year storm event and to comply with applicable County of Orange Flood Control standards. The analysis concluded that the project would not create additional drainage impacts beyond the project boundaries and that finished building pads will be located 370
370 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 46 of 57 ends

above the theoretical 100-year flood elevation. The project includes stormwater treatment measures, subsurface drainage facilities, and erosion control measures that will minimize the potential for erosion or runoff-related impacts.

6. The proposed development will be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and where feasible, will restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

The Project site is located within an urbanized neighborhood characterized by a mix of institutional, multi-family residential, commercial, and residential uses. The proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements would replace an aging surface parking lot and existing parsonage building with a multi-family residential structure incorporating contemporary architectural detailing, articulated building facades, landscaped setbacks, and enhanced pedestrian-oriented improvements. The proposed landscaping, right-of-way improvements, and overall site design would improve the appearance of the property and soften views from adjacent public streets and neighboring properties. Additionally, the project site is an existing developed infill property that does not contain significant scenic natural resources, ridgelines, or visually sensitive coastal landforms. The proposed structures have been sited and designed to integrate into the surrounding urban environment without obstructing identified public scenic vistas or degrading visual access to coastal resources.

The Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements is substantially setback from Glenneyre Street and the massing relates to the scale of the existing church buildings on the site. While the proposed multi-family residential building is three stories in height and larger in scale than many of the surrounding properties located to the north along Cleo Street and to the south along St. Ann’s Drive, there are no impacts to coastal resources, such as public views of the coast or access to the coast. The contemporary architectural style, landscaping, and design details enhance the visual quality of the site.

7. The proposed development will not have any adverse impacts on any known archaeological or paleontological resource.

The proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements will not adversely affect any known archaeological or paleontological resources. The Project site is not known to have archaeological or paleontological resources. Further, the Project site has been previously developed and urbanized.

A Phase I Environmental Site Assessment dated April 10, 2026, prepared by Altec Testing and Engineering (Attachment 5) and Geotechnical Report dated December 2, 2025, prepared by LGC Geotechnical (Attachment 6) were peer reviewed by the City’s consultant, Kling Consulting Group.

Page 47 of 57 ends

8. The proposed development will be provided with adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities.

The proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements is adequately served by existing and proposed utilities, access roads, drainage facilities, sewer connections and other necessary public infrastructure. The project site is located within an urbanized area currently served by existing public streets and utility systems, including water, sewer, storm drainage, electrical, telecommunications, and emergency services infrastructure.

Technical studies prepared for the project and reviewed by the City and third-party consultants confirm that existing infrastructure and utility facilities have sufficient capacity to serve the proposed development. These studies include:
• Geotechnical Report (LGC Geotechnical), dated December 2, 2025 (Attachment 6) • Hydrology and Hydraulics Study (KES), dated February 2025 (Attachment 7) • Sanitary Sewer Analysis (KES), dated December 2025 (Attachment 8) • Water Quality Management Plan (KES), dated December 2025 (Attachment 9) • Traffic Memo (Urban Crossroads, Inc.), dated November 26, 2025 (Attachment 10) The sewer analysis concluded that the Housing Development Project’s estimated wastewater discharge of approximately 0.008 cubic feet per second represents a negligible increase to the existing 8-inch sewer line capacity and will not adversely impact the operation of the sanitary sewer system. Similarly, the Water Quality Management Plan and Hydrology and Hydraulics Study analysis determined that the proposed stormwater facilities and subsurface chamber system are designed in accordance with applicable County of Orange Flood Control standards and are capable of accommodating runoff from a 100-year storm event without creating additional drainage impacts beyond the project boundaries.

9. Other public services, including, but not limited to, solid waste and public roadway capacity have been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed development.

Other public services, including solid waste collection and public roadway capacity, have been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements. The Project site is located within an urbanized area currently served by existing municipal infrastructure and public services. The Project site will continue to utilize established public roads which are designed and maintained to accommodate the additional residential density.
372
372 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 48 of 57 ends

Based on the Traffic Memo, dated November 26, 2025, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc. (Attachment 10), the project will generate 140 two-way vehicle trips per day with 11 AM peak hour trips and 14 PM peak hour trips. The traffic volume generated by the development would not exceed the capacity of the surrounding roadway network which will retain a LOS of A pre- and postconstruction, and will not substantially alter existing circulation patterns.

Adequate areas for trash storage and collection have been included on the basement level of the parking garage as well on the first level of the development in compliance with applicable City requirements and service provider standards. The site will continue to be served by existing waste collection services, and the incremental increase in solid waste generation associated with the development does not exceed the capacity of existing facilities or services.

Accordingly, public services, including roadway capacity, solid waste service, and other municipal facilities, have been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed development, consistent with applicable policies of the certified Local Coastal Program and the California Coastal Act.

The Project is consistent with all applicable policies of the Certified LCP.

LCP COASTAL VIEW POLICIES (CDP)
Land Use Element Goal 6 Provide a diversity of land uses that enhance the community.

The Site Improvements will allow for infill development of a multi-family affordable housing building within an established business and residential corridor. By incorporating residential units into a developed neighborhood, the development expands housing availability in a manner that is compatible with surrounding land uses and existing infrastructure.

Finding No. 2. Any development located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea is in conformity with the certified local coastal program and with the public access and public recreation policies of Chapter 3 of the Coastal Act.

The proposed development is not located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea. The subject property is situated inland along Glenneyre Street within an established commercial and mixed multi-family and single-family residential neighborhood and is separated from the shoreline by intervening development and public streets. Accordingly, this finding does not apply. Nevertheless, the Housing Development Project and associated Site Improvements comply with the Chapter 3 Policies. As detailed in the facts supporting Finding No. 1, the proposed development is in conformity with the certified Local Coastal Program.

Finding No. 3. The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act.

The Project is within the scope of the development capacity and environmental analysis previously considered in the adopted Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The Project would result in fewer residential units than the capacity analyzed for the site in the Housing Element, and 373
373 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 49 of 57 ends

the City has not identified substantial changes to the Project, substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken, or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the previously adopted Initial Study/Negative Declaration due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Accordingly, no subsequent or supplemental environmental review is required pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162.

Tentative Parcel Map
The merging of four parcels into two parcels requires a discretionary Tentative Parcel Map 2026- 0865. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 because the subdivision satisfies all applicable requirements of the Subdivision Map Act (Government Code § 66473.5 and 66474 et seq.) and Chapter 21.08 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code (Subdivisions), as follows:

1. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5, the proposed subdivision is consistent with the applicable General Plan and any specific plans.

Here, the project site is designated Village Medium Density (VMD) and Local Business Professional (LBP) on the General Plan Land Use Map and is zoned R-2 (Residential MediumDensity) and Local Business Professional (LBP). The parcel map does not create any new parcels or building sites. Accordingly, the map is fully consistent with the General Plan land use designation and all applicable policies of the Land Use Element and the certified Local Coastal Program.

2. None of the mandatory denial findings set forth in Government Code Section 66474 apply to the proposed Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 as demonstrated by the following:
(a) The proposed map is consistent with all applicable general and specific plans as specified in Government Code Section 65451. Here, the Project site is designated Local Business Professional and Village Medium Density on the General Plan Land Use Map and is Zoned 374
374 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 50 of 57 ends

LBP and R-2. No specific plan applies to the Project site and the parcel map complies with the General Plan and LBP and R-2 standards with the Density Bonus Law waiver. (b) The design and improvement of the proposed subdivision are consistent with the applicable general and specific plan. Here, the Project site is designated Local Business Professional and Village Medium Density on the General Plan Land Use Map and is Zoned LBP and R-2. No specific plan applies to the Project site and the parcel map complies with the General Plan and LBP and R-2 standards with the Density Bonus Law waiver. (c) The site is physically suitable for the type of development proposed (an affordable housing development). Here, the resulting parcels are capable of accommodating the proposed development without creating adverse off-site impacts, as demonstrated through the submitted technical studies and corresponding peer reviews, including analyses addressing geotechnical, hydrological, sewer, water quality, and traffic considerations. (d) The site is physically suitable for the proposed density of development. Here, the proposed density is appropriate for the site as no off-site impacts were identified in the submitted technical studies and corresponding peer reviews, including analyses addressing geotechnical, hydrological, sewer, water quality, and traffic considerations. (e) The design of the subdivision and the proposed improvements are not likely to cause substantial environmental damage or substantially and avoidably injure fish or wildlife or their habitat. Here, the technical studies submitted with the application confirm that the site contains no environmentally sensitive habitat areas or special-status species. (f) The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements are not likely to cause serious public health problems. Here, the Project will not create any public health concerns as demonstrated through the submitted technical studies and corresponding peer reviews, including analyses addressing geotechnical, hydrological, sewer, water quality, and traffic considerations.
(g) The design of the subdivision and the type of improvements will not conflict with any easements acquired by the public at large for access through or use of the property. Here, the existing sewage and waste line easement is preserved, and no public access rights are affected.

3. The proposed parcel map procedure is the appropriate and required mechanism under LBMC Section 21.08.030 and Government Code Section 66412(d). Here, the proposed parcel map consolidates four parcels into two parcels and will allow for two separate parcels for the proposed development and the existing religious institution; therefore, the parcel map procedure is the appropriate and required mechanism under Laguna Beach Municipal Code Section 21.08.030 and Government Code Section 66412(d).
375
375 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 51 of 57 ends

Coastal Development Permit for Tentative Parcel Map
The proposed non-exempt development through the parcel map requires the approval of a coastal development permit. (See LBMC Section 25.07.004.) Coastal Development Permits are governed by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapter 25.07. Staff recommends that the Planning Commission recommend City Council approval of Coastal Development Permit 2026-0954 because the change in the intensity of use of land meets the following findings and criteria:

Finding No. 1: The project is in conformity with all the applicable provisions of the certified local coastal program, including the following review criteria:

The proposed development consists solely of a Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels. The project will not encroach upon any existing physical accessway legally utilized by the public, nor will it affect any proposed public accessway identified in the adopted Local Coastal Program Land Use Plan. The subject property is located inland of the shoreline within an established residential and commercial corridor between Glenneyre Street and Catalina Street and does not contain, adjoin, or obstruct any designated public coastal accessway.

No public access easements or shoreline access routes traverse the property, and the proposed parcel map would simply merge the existing lots without altering public access rights or affecting public circulation. Accordingly, the Project complies with this review criterion.

2. The proposed development will not adversely affect marine resources, environmentally sensitive areas, or archaeological or paleontological resources.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map consolidates four existing lots into two legal parcels. The parcel map does not authorize any additional development beyond the separately considered Housing Development Project and does not introduce new physical disturbance to the site. The property is located inland within an established residential and commercial corridor neighborhood and is separated from the shoreline and marine environment by existing development and public streets. As confirmed during review of the City’s maps, the site does not contain any marine resources and no environmentally sensitive habitat areas are present on the property.

Because the proposed Tentative Parcel Map is limited to lot consolidation and does not expand the scope of physical development separately reviewed, the project will not adversely affect marine resources, environmentally sensitive areas, or archaeological or paleontological resource.

3. The proposed development will not adversely affect recreational or visitor-serving facilities or coastal scenic resources.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels will not adversely affect recreational or visitor serving facilities or coastal scenic resources. The subject property is located inland between Glenneyre Street and Catalina Street within an established 376
376 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 52 of 57 ends

residential and commercial corridor and does not contain, adjoin, or interfere with any recreational or visitor serving facilities. The site is not visible from shoreline accessways and does not block or degrade any designated coastal view corridor. Because the current application is limited to lot consolidation and simply establishes two legal parcels for the housing development and the existing religious institution, the Project will not adversely affect recreational or visitor serving facilities or coastal scenic resources.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels will not adversely affect environmentally sensitive habitats or scenic resources located in adjacent parks or recreation areas. The subject property is not located within, and does not directly adjoin, any park, recreation area, or open space preserve. The site is bordered by developed residential and commercial properties and no sensitive habitats are on or near the property. Accordingly, the Project is sited and designed to avoid adverse impacts to environmentally sensitive habitats and scenic resources and provides adequate separation from such resources.

5. The proposed development will minimize the alterations of natural landforms and will not result in undue risks from geological and erosional forces and/or flood and fire hazards.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels will not alter natural landforms and will not result in undue risks from geological, erosional, flood, or fire hazards. The application is limited to lot consolidation and does not authorize any additional grading or site disturbance beyond what was reviewed for the housing development.

The site’s geotechnical conditions were evaluated in a preliminary Geotechnical Report dated December 2, 2025 (Attachment 5). According to regional geologic mapping, the site is underlain by a veneer of Quaternary terrace deposits over Tertiary Topanga Formation bedrock. The report concludes that development of the site is feasible, provided its recommendations are incorporated into the final design and construction. The report further indicates that the subject site is not located within a designated Seismic Hazard Zone, including areas susceptible to earthquakeinduced landslides or liquefaction, nor within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone. No faults were encountered during the site investigation, and none are mapped across the site based on reviewed regional geologic data.

With respect to hydrologic conditions, the peer-reviewed Hydrology and Hydraulics Study, dated February 2025, prepared by KES (Attachment 6) found that the proposed improvements are located outside the modeled 100-year floodplain, and that the project would not increase runoff at the site outlet or adversely affect the hydrologic function of the significant watercourse. Because the proposed Tentative Parcel Map does not does not create new building sites and does not expand the scope of physical improvements evaluated for the housing development, it does not increase exposure to flood, geologic, erosional, or fire hazards. Accordingly, the Project satisfies this review criterion.
377
377 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 53 of 57 ends

6. The proposed development will be visually compatible with the character of surrounding areas, and where feasible, will restore and enhance visual quality in visually degraded areas.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels will not adversely affect the visual character of the surrounding area. The parcel map itself does not authorize any new visible physical improvements; rather, it establishes two legal parcels for the housing development and existing religious institutional use. The parcel map will not create any visual impacts to the surrounding neighborhood as the Project does not include any development for the site. Additionally, the scope of the project is limited to lot consolidation and does not expand the scope of the housing development, therefore the project is consistent with this review criterion.

7. The proposed development will not have any adverse impacts on any known archaeological or paleontological resource.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels will not have any adverse impacts on known archaeological or paleontological resources. The parcel map does not authorize any additional ground disturbance beyond what was reviewed for the housing development. As established with review of the City’s maps, no known archaeological or paleontological resources are present on the site or in the immediate vicinity and contains no identified historic or cultural resources. Because the current application is limited to lot consolidation and does not expand the scope of physical development already evaluated for the housing development, the Project will not adversely affect any known archaeological or paleontological resource.

8. The proposed development will be provided with adequate utilities, access roads, drainage and other necessary facilities.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels will be served by adequate utilities, access, drainage, and other necessary facilities. As shown on the Tentative Parcel Map, the site has frontage on Glenneyre Street and Catalina Street is currently served by existing public infrastructure, including water and sewer lines, located within or adjacent to the site. The map also identifies the applicable utility purveyors, including Southern California Edison, Southern California Gas Company, the City of Laguna Beach sewer system, and the Laguna Beach County Water District. Vehicular and pedestrian access to the parcel would continue to be provided from Glenneyre Street in conjunction with the separately reviewed housing development.

In addition, the Hydrology and Hydraulics Study, dated February 2025, prepared by KES (Attachment 6) and peer-reviewed by the City determined that the site’s drainage for the approved site improvements will not increase runoff or adversely affect the hydrologic performance of the site. Because the parcel map does not create new building sites, and because all necessary utilities and infrastructure are already available to serve the approved development, the proposed lot consolidation will be provided with adequate utilities, access roads, drainage, and other necessary public facilities.
378
378 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 54 of 57 ends

9. Other public services, including, but not limited to, solid waste and public roadway capacity have been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed development.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map to consolidate four existing lots into two legal parcels will be adequately served by public services, including solid waste collection and public roadway capacity. The parcel map does not create additional lots, dwelling units, or development intensity beyond the housing development and therefore does not generate any new demand for public services beyond what has already been evaluated for the site.

The property has frontage on Glenneyre Street and Catalina Street and will continue to be served by the existing public roadway network, including the approved vehicular and pedestrian access from Glenneyre Street. The tentative map also identifies existing utility and service infrastructure available to the site, including water, sewer, electrical, communications, and storm drain facilities.

Solid waste collection and other routine municipal services are already provided to the property in the same manner as to surrounding residential development. Accordingly, public services, including roadway capacity, solid waste service, and other municipal facilities, have been considered and are adequate to serve the proposed development.

The project is furthermore consistent with all applicable policies of the Certified LCP.

LCP COASTAL POLICIES (CDP)
Land Use Element (LU) Policy 10.1. Require that all subdivisions, including parcel maps, are compatible with neighborhood character including building pad elevations, visual and physical relationships to natural topography, open space, view corridors and surrounding residences, and neighborhood access.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with Policy 10.1 in that it consolidates four existing lots into two legal parcel for a housing development and the existing religious institutional use and does not create additional lots or alter the development pattern on the site. The parcel map formalizes one building site that is consistent with the character of the surrounding neighborhood. As detailed above under Finding Nos. 4, 6, and 7, the proposed project is compatible with the site’s natural topography, neighborhood character, and access pattern. Accordingly, the proposed parcel map is compatible with neighborhood character, including building pad elevations, visual and physical relationships to topography, surrounding residences, and access.

Land Use Element (LU) Policy 10.3 Ensure that all new development, including subdivisions, the creation of new building sites and remodels that involve building additions, is evaluated to ascertain potential negative impacts on natural resources, ESHA and existing adjacent development. Proposed development shall emphasize ESHA impact avoidance over impact mitigation. Any mitigation required due to an unavoidable negative impact should be located onsite rather than off-site, where feasible. Any off-site mitigation should be located within the City’s boundaries and in close proximity to the project. (Similar to Policy 7.4) The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with Land Use Element Policy 10.3 because it consolidates four existing parcels into two legal parcels and that the site was evaluated to 379
379 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 55 of 57 ends

ascertain potential negative impacts on natural resources, ESHA and existing adjacent development. No designated environmentally sensitive habitat areas (ESHA) are present on the site. The technical studies submitted and approved for the development (Attachments 5 through 10), concluded that the approved development would not adversely affect sensitive biological resources or negative off-site impacts.

The parcel map does not create additional building sites and allows for two legal parcels for the housing development and the existing religious institution. Accordingly, the proposed subdivision is consistent with Policy 10.3, including the Local Coastal Program’s direction to avoid adverse impacts to natural resources, ESHA, and adjacent development, with impact avoidance emphasized over mitigation.

Land Use Element (LU) Policy 10.8 Avoid creation of building sites that will result in significant adverse impacts on the community.

The proposed Tentative Parcel Map is consistent with Policy 10.8 because it does not create new building sites. Instead, it consolidates four existing parcels into two legal parcels. The parcel map creates two distinct building sites subject to the environmental, access, and site constraints evaluated above. As a result, the parcel map does not create a new building site that would result in significant adverse impacts to the community.

The proposed development is not located between the sea and the first public road paralleling the sea. The subject property is situated inland between Glenneyre Street and Catalina Street and within an established commercial and residential neighborhood and is separated from the shoreline by intervening development and public streets. Accordingly, this finding does not apply.

As detailed in the facts supporting Finding No. 1, the proposed development is in conformity with the certified Local Coastal Program.

Finding No. 3. The proposed development will not have any significant adverse impacts on the environment within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act.

The proposed merger will not result in any significant adverse environmental impacts within the meaning of the California Environmental Quality Act. As described throughout this report, the project is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Government Code Section 65913.16(l)(7), and is not a project under Government Code Section 65913.16(b)(12)(B) and (b), and no evidence in the record indicates the potential for a significant environmental effect. Accordingly, the Project is consistent with this finding.
380
380 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 56 of 57 ends

ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
The City identified the Property as the number 1 site on its inventory in the City’s adopted Housing Element:

The site is currently occupied by the Neighborhood Congregational Church. The existing buildings on site includes two church buildings built in the 1960s, a small one-story garage, surface parking lots, an interior courtyard, a small exterior patio area, and landscaping. The church leadership indicated it intends to remain as a church; however, the church requested that the City include the site and the associated parking lot in the Housing Element to potentially accommodate affordable housing, with the church remaining on site. The site for the purposes of this section does not include the parking lot, because it measures 0.35 acre in size and is zoned R-2. However, the City will work with the applicant to support appropriate zoning for the adjacent R-2 parcel and would consider this parcel as part of the overall project to encourage the redevelopment of affordable housing on this site. The expressed owner interest, age of the structures, unlimited density with a conditional use permit, and underutilized nature of the parcel make this site suitable for development during the planning period. Proposed New Residential Development Affordable units would be located on a parcel that has a zoning (Local/Business Professional) that allows unlimited density for affordable housing. With a conservative density of 45 units per acre, the site could yield at minimum 31 lower-income units:

Source: City of Laguna Beach, General Plan Housing Element 2021-2029 Here, the Project proposes 29 residential units within the Housing Development Project, associated Site Improvements, and a Merger, which were all contemplated by the Housing Element and analyzed in the City’s Initial Study/Negative Declaration. A Notice of Determination was subsequently filed on January 25, 2022, following City Council approval on January 11, 2022.

In accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act, the Project is within the scope of the development capacity and environmental analysis previously considered in the adopted Housing Element Initial Study/Negative Declaration. The Project would result in fewer residential units than the capacity analyzed for the site in the Housing Element, and the City has not identified substantial changes to the Project, substantial changes in the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken, or new information of substantial importance that would require major revisions to the previously adopted Initial Study/Negative Declaration due to new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects.

Accordingly, no subsequent or supplemental environmental review is required pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21166 and State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162. 381
381 of 830
PC Staff Report
June 3, 2026

Page 57 of 57 ends

Based on the above, staff will cause the appropriate CEQA notice(s) to be filed with the County Clerk Recorder’s Office and the Office of Land Use and Climate Innovation within five days of any approval by the Planning Commission.

NOTIFICATION
Pursuant to Title 25 (Zoning) Public Notice, a public hearing notice was mailed on May 12, 2026, in accordance with LBMC Section 25.05.065(D) and Section 25.07.014. In addition, a public hearing notice was posted on the project site on May 12, 2026, in accordance with LBMC Section

25.05.065(E). Further, a public hearing notice was published on May 22, 2026, in a newspaper of general circulation in accordance with LBMC Section 25.05.065(F).

ATTACHMENT(S)
Attachment 1 – Resolution No. 2026-1135 for Ministerial Design Review 2026-1135, Design Review 2026-0863, and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0864 Attachment 2 – Resolution No. 2026-0865 for Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0954
Attachment 3 – Plans, Color and Materials, 3-D Renderings, and Colored Elevations Attachment 4 – Application and SB 4 Checklist
Attachment 5 – Phase 1 ESA, dated April 10, 2026, prepared by Altec Testing and Engineering Attachment 6 – Geotechnical Report, dated December 2, 2025, prepared by LGC Geotechnical Attachment 7 – Hydrology Study, dated February 2025, prepared by KES Attachment 8 – Sanitary Sewer Analysis, dated December 2025, prepared by KES Attachment 9 – Water Quality Management Plan, dated December 2025, prepared by KES Attachment 10 –Traffic Memo, dated November 26, 2025, prepared by Urban Crossroads, Inc.

Attachment 11 – Public Comments
382
382 of 830
383
383 of 830
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: NCC Project < >
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2026 11:18 AM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: I support plans for affordable housing at the Neighborhood Congregational Church site! [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I support Neighborhood Congregational Church’s (NCC) plans for 29 units (28 affordable units + one resident manager unit) in Laguna Beach while rejuvenating one or both of the church’s existing buildings—Bridge Hall and the Sanctuary! Five years ago, the City of Laguna Beach General Plan Housing Element (2021-2029) identified NCC’s property as one of four sites with the potential to yield new affordable housing units. Now is the time to make this affordable housing project a reality.

Mandated by the State of California, the City of Laguna Beach is required to encourage its “fair share” of housing with the addition of 394 housing units—affordable to all economic segments—over the next five years. Of these, 198 units are needed for extremely low, very low and low-income households or those earning from about $35,550 to $125,490 a year, depending on family size. This project allows the City of Laguna Beach to make progress toward its affordable housing goals.

I'll be honest. I can't afford to 're-buy' the house I currently live in. I’m writing to express my support of the NCC Project. There is a critical need for more affordable housing throughout California, and this modest project is thoughtfully designed to accommodate people who would otherwise be priced out. Please vote in favor of this project on Wednesday, June 3.

I, Timothy Ringgold, encourage the Planning Commissioners to approve this much-needed project.

Address 1 N. Dogwood St., Orange, CA, 92869
Email
384
384 of 830
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: Marcella Lawson
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2026 4:11 PM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: Affordable housing on the NCC site - Planning Commission Agenda item 5.2 [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Dear Samantha Beier,
I am writing in support of the project to build affordable housing on the site of the Neighborhood Congregational Church. Laguna Beach has very limited space to build additional housing and there is a significant need for affordable housing in the city, with housing costs being so high. I volunteer regularly in several capacities with our low-income neighbors, so I am well aware of the struggles that they face in food insecurity, housing insecurity, financial insecurity and health insecurity. We need many more affordable homes for individuals who work in our city in a wide variety of service professions.

This is a carefully thought out and planned project that will serve the community well, including being an important step toward meeting the City's affordable housing goals. I urge the Planning Commission to approve this project.

Sincerely,
Marcella Lawson
1 Katella St.

Laguna Beach, CA 92651
385
385 of 830
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: Amy R. Taylor < >
Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2026 5:29 PM
To: Steven Kellenberg; Goldman, Steven; Dubin, Jorg; Whitin, Susan; Sadler, Ken; Beier, Samantha CD Cc: David J. Miller; Sharma, Shaveta CD; Abzug, Jane AO; Garibaldi, Megan AO; Frimond, Jeremy CM; ; ; ; ; c ;
Subject: SB 4 Project at 340 St. Ann’s Drive - June 3, 2026 Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 5.2 Attachments: Letter to Laguna Beach Planning Commission re SB 4 Project at 340 St. Ann’s Drive.pdf [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Dear Honorable Chair and Commissioners,
The attached is transmitted on behalf of David J. Miller, Esq., for Neighborhood Congregational Church. Please contact me should you have any di!iculties accessing the attachment.

Thank you,
Amy R. Taylor
Legal Secretary

NOSSAMAN LLP
1 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 1800
Irvine, CA 92612
T F
D

SUBSCRIBE TO E-ALERTS
nossaman.com
PLEASE NOTE: The information in this e-mail message is confidential. It may also be attorney-client privileged and/or protected from disclosure as attorney work product. If you have received this e-mail message in error or are not the intended recipient, you may not use, copy, nor disclose to anyone this message or any information contained in it. Please notify the sender by reply e-mail and delete the message. Thank you.
386
386 of 830
70492812.v1
June 2, 2026
Chairperson Steven Kellenberg ([email protected]) Chair Pro Tem Steven Goldman ([email protected]) Commissioner Jorg Dubin ([email protected])
Commission Susan McLintock Whitin ([email protected]) Commissioner Ken Sadler ([email protected])
City of Laguna Beach
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, CA 92651
Re: SB 4 Project at 340 St. Ann’s Drive - Response to Housing Accountability Act Inconsistency Letter Dated May 28, 2026 - June 3, 2026 Planning Commission Agenda Item No. 5.2
Dear Honorable Chair and Commissioners:

This law firm represents Neighborhood Congregational Church (“NCC”), owners of the property at 340 St. Anne’s Drive (the “Property”) in the City of Laguna Beach (the “City”), concerning the above-referenced matter. On behalf of NCC, we submit this letter concurring in full with the Related Companies of California, LLC’s (“Applicant”) comments dated June 2, 2026.

Applicant’s comments were submitted in response to the May 28 draft letter from the City (the “Inconsistency Letter”), regarding the Applicant’s proposed Senate Bill (“SB”) 4 project (the “Project”) at the Property. Applicant’s comments are incorporated herein by reference in their entirety.

We appreciate City staff’s thorough review and analysis of the Project, and we strongly support the staff report’s recommendation to approve the Project. As reflected in that report, City staff found the Project consistent with all applicable requirements and supported the necessary findings under existing law. Those conclusions are well-founded and should be relied upon by the Planning Commission to approve the Project.

To the extent the Inconsistency Letter reaches different, conclusory determinations, NCC believes it should not be afforded controlling weight, especially considering the more detailed and substantiated analysis in the staff report.

NCC values its relationship with the City and the community, and it looks forward to continuing to work collaboratively as the Project moves forward. The Project will provide muchneeded affordable housing in the City. NCC is eager to proceed with its development.

ATTORNEYS AT LAW
18101 Von Karman Avenue
Suite 1800
Irvine, CA 92612
T 949.833.7800
David J. Miller
D 949.477.7638
[email protected]
Admitted only in California
Refer To File # 000010-0606 VIA EMAIL
387
387 of 830
June 2, 2026

Page 2 ends

70492812.v1
Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
David J. Miller
Nossaman LLP
DJM:art
cc: Shaveta Sharma, Senior City Planner ([email protected]) Jane Abzug, City Attorney ([email protected])
Megan K. Garibaldi, City Attorney ([email protected]) Jeremy Frimond, Assistant City Manager ([email protected]) Bill Witte, Related California
Craig Farmer, Related California
Liane Takano, Related California
Maya K. Dunne
Sue Cross
Reverend Rodrick Echols, Neighborhood Congregational Church Sean Matsler, Cox, Castle & Nicholson LLP
388
388 of 830
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: Bob Borthwick < >
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2026 8:35 AM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: Fw: Item 5.2 PC meeting June 3, 2026 - Ministerial Design Review 2026 - 1135 [NCC / Related Residential Project] [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Please forward to Planning Commission. I sent yesterday, early evening, but it was sent back to me. thank you,
Bob Borthwick
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Bob Borthwick <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, June 2, 2026 at 07:16:33 PM PDT
Subject: Item 5.2 PC meeting June 3, 2026 - Ministerial Design Review 2026 - 1135 [NCC / Related Residential Project] Planning Commissioners:

As a 50 + year resident of the Village area and former Board member of NCC in the 1990's, we have fond memories of the church campus. We are very happy that the sanctuary and Bridge Hall are being preserved, along with the Montessori School.

Our two children were raised in the 1980's in the LBUSD, and in those days there were affordable apartments or small homes for single parents to rent and raise their kids in town, which provided a healthy demographic mix in the schools. Such affordable choices are virtually non-existent today. We support the idea of providing housing for those that cannot afford to buy a house or pay inflated rental rates, as this creates a richer community in our opinion. 28 units [as proposed] seems to fit the site and still creates a sizable array of housing opportunities.

As a landscape architect I offer the following comments:

1. Could the [1] second story unit above the clubhouse be omitted to lessen the building height and create a step-back building elevation along Glenneyre to reduce building mass?

2. Like the color palette and traditional architectural style that blends with the neighborhood.

3. The stone veneer on the materials exhibit appeared to be natural stone. If so, this is great. If the stone proposed is faux stone for cost savings, then maybe consider brick for these accent surfaces instead ?

4. The Fire Dept pedestrian access up the hill to Catalina St [north corner] at the rear of the project appears to have a gate for FD emergency use. Suggest keeping this gate "open" [or remove the gate] for use by the new residents to access the neighborhood directly...walk to high school, etc...rather than forcing residents to enter-exit the project on Glenneyre only. The residents of this new residential project should feel like they belong by not being "fenced off" from the surrounding neighborhood.

Thank you,
Bob and Vicki Borthwick
389
389 of 830
1 Beier, Samantha CD
From: NCC Project < >
Sent: Wednesday, June 3, 2026 7:41 AM
To: Beier, Samantha CD
Subject: I support plans for affordable housing at the Neighborhood Congregational Church site! [NOTICE: This message originated outside of City of Laguna Beach -- DO NOT CLICK on links or open attachments unless you are sure the content is safe.]
Dear Planning Commissioners,
I support Neighborhood Congregational Church’s (NCC) plans for 29 units (28 affordable units + one resident manager unit) in Laguna Beach while rejuvenating one or both of the church’s existing buildings—Bridge Hall and the Sanctuary! Five years ago, the City of Laguna Beach General Plan Housing Element (2021-2029) identified NCC’s property as one of four sites with the potential to yield new affordable housing units. Now is the time to make this affordable housing project a reality.

This project is a small but significant contribution to the solution of a serious problem our community. A tremendous amount of volunteer work has been invested in bringing the project to this point. Those that object should offer equally concrete alternatives. It is easy to find fault. It is difficult to offer actionable alternatives.

I, Phil Garrison , encourage the Planning Commissioners to approve this much-needed project.

Address 7 Bolsana Drive, Laguna Beach, CA, 92651
Email
390
390 of 830
PC Meeting Minutes June 3, 2026

PLANNING COMMISSION

MINUTES
June 3, 2026
DRAFT

1. CALL TO ORDER
The regular meeting of the Planning Commission of the City of Laguna Beach was called to order at 6:00 p.m. at the City Hall, Council Chambers, 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, CA 92651.

2. ROLL CALL
Commissioners Present:

Steven Kellenberg (Chair), Jorg Dubin and Susan McLintock Whitin Commissioner Participating Remotely:

Steven Goldman (Chair Pro Tem)
Commissioners Absent:

Ken Sadler
Staff Present:

Samantha Beier, Planning Manager; Patrick Donegan, Assistant City Attorney; Alyssa Suarez, Associate Planner; Tierney Doran, Recreation Supervisor; Shaveta Sharma, Senior Planner; Nancy Cardoza, Administrative Assistant

3. PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS (Non-Agendized Items)
None

4. CONSENT CALENDAR

4.1 Concept Review 2026-1002
Action:

Motion: Commissioner Dubin moved to approve staff’s modified recommendation for the continuance of Concept Review 2026-1002 to June 17, 2026.

Second: Commissioner Whitin
Vote: Kellenberg Y, Goldman Y, Dubin Y, Sadler Absent, Whitin Y Motion carried 4-0
Attachment 7
391
391 of 830
PC Meeting Minutes June 3, 2026

5. PUBLIC HEARINGS

5.1 Temporary Use Permit 2026-1050
Staff Presentation:

Alyssa Suarez, Associate Planner, presented an overview of the project and staff’s recommendation for approval.

Public Hearing:

Opened by Chair Kellenberg
Public Testimony:

None
Public Hearing:

Closed by Chair Kellenberg
Commission Discussion:

The commissioners were supportive of the short-term pilot program, viewing it as a lowrisk, positive community offering for children and families. Several noted it would be a fun, well-located activity with good accessibility and no fees.

It was highlighted that while adjacent residents may experience some short-term impacts, the limited duration and small scale made it acceptable. It was also suggested the program could benefit from additional operating days but acknowledged funding and logistical constraints. Commissioners agreed it was an appropriate test or pilot with minimal downside and expressed support for moving it forward.

Action:

Motion: Commissioner Whitin moved to adopt Resolution No. 2026-1050, approving Temporary Use Permit 2026-1050 and finding said action exempt from CEQA.

Second: Commissioner Dubin
Vote: Kellenberg Y, Goldman Y, Dubin Y, Sadler Absent, Whitin Y Motion carried 4-0
392
392 of 830
PC Meeting Minutes June 3, 2026

5.2 Ministerial Design Review 2026-1135, Design Review 2026-0863, and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0864; and Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0954
Staff Presentation:

Shaveta Sharma, Senior Planner, presented an overview of the project and staff’s recommendation for approval.

Public Hearing:

Opened by Chair Kellenberg
Public Testimony:

Pastor Rodrick Echols, Cody Engel, Kurt Weese, Adam Kaufman, Diane Harrison, Cesar Covarrubias, Bob Borthwick, Elizabeth Hansburg, Zoe Bond, Julie Hall, Carrie Reynolds and Barbara McMurray were in support of the project
Jacob Cherub opposed the project.

David Kukuk, an adjacent Cleo Street resident, stated that he had not been contacted directly by the applicant despite living next to the project site. He noted that accommodations were made for other neighboring streets and requested similar consideration for Cleo Street residents.

Sharon Fitzsimons, Richard Plavetich, Monika Merchan and Dani Palomino raised concerns with the project.

Ann Christoph urged the Commission to acknowledge the historic significance and preservation of the two existing buildings. She also supported increasing the Glenneyrefacing setback to reduce the visual impact of the upper story, expressed concerns with the proposed faux stone material, and voiced support for the project's affordable housing component.

Alan Warren requested to postpone the project.

Public Hearing:

Closed by Chair Kellenberg
Commission Discussion:

The commissioners expressed strong support for the affordable housing project, emphasizing the importance of providing housing opportunities for people who work in Laguna Beach, including teachers, public safety personnel, service workers, families, and longtime residents. Several commissioners noted that the inability of many local workers to afford housing in the community is a longstanding issue and viewed the project as an important step toward addressing that need.
393
393 of 830
PC Meeting Minutes June 3, 2026
Commissioners acknowledged that state housing laws, including SB 4, the Density Bonus Law, and the Housing Accountability Act, significantly limited the Commission’s discretion. They stated that the project met the applicable legal requirements and that they could not make the findings necessary to deny the project, density bonus concessions, waivers, or related approvals.

The Commission commended the applicant for working with neighbors and voluntarily modifying the project over time. They noted that the building height had been reduced, the density was lower than what could have been pursued under state law, and design changes had been made to address neighborhood concerns regarding views, compatibility, colors, landscaping, and overall appearance.

The Commission supported the alternative color scheme, additional landscaping enhancements, and use of textured materials such as split-face block on retaining walls.

Commissioners also encouraged continued collaboration with neighbors regarding landscaping and screening treatments.

Commissioners found that the project was consistent with Coastal Act objectives, including increasing housing opportunities for people of varying income levels within the coastal zone. They also concluded that no significant, unmitigable impacts to public health, safety, the environment, or coastal resources had been demonstrated.

The Commission expressed appreciation for the applicant’s willingness to make voluntary modifications beyond what was legally required and indicated their support for approval of the project, incorporating the design refinements and commitments discussed during the hearing.

Action:

Motion:

Commissioner Whitin moved to adopt Resolution No. 2026-1135, approving Ministerial Design Review 2026-1135 for demolition of an existing parsonage building and existing surface parking lot and construction of a multi-family residential building (28 affordable housing rental units and 1 manager’s unit) and 41-stall parking garage, Design Review 2026-0863 for site improvements associated with the multi-family residential building, including grading, retaining walls, landscaping, and elevated deck, and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0864 for such non-exempt development within the coastal zone at 340 St. Ann’s Drive in the Local Business Professional (LBP) and Residential Medium Density (R-2) zones; and finding that no further environmental review is required under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 or alternatively is not a project or is exempt under Government Code Sections 65913.16(c) and (b) (12)(B) and 65913.16(l)(7), respectively;
Commissioner Whitin further moved to also adopt Resolution No. 2026-0865, recommending the City Council approve Tentative Parcel Map 2026-0865 to merge four parcels into two parcels and Coastal Development Permit 2026-0954 for such 394
394 of 830
PC Meeting Minutes June 3, 2026
non-exempt development within the coastal zone at 340 St. Ann’s Drive in the Local Business Professional (LBP) and Residential Medium Density (R-2) zones; and finding that no further environmental review is required under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 or alternatively is not a project or is exempt under Government Code Sections 65913.16(c) and (b)(12)(B) and 65913.16(l)(7), respectively.

Second: Commissioner Dubin
Vote: Kellenberg Y, Goldman Y, Dubin Y, Sadler Absent, Whitin Y Motion carried 4-0

6. OTHER BUSINESS
None

7. COMMITTEE, COMMISSIONERS, AND STAFF REPORTS
None

8. ADJOURNMENT
Meeting Adjourned at 8:46 p.m. to the regular Planning Commission meeting scheduled for June 17, 2026.
395
395 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 1 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
I. INSTRUCTION Use this application to apply for any discretionary entitlement II. PROJECT LOCATION
Address: ________________________________ APN(s): __________________________________ III. CONTACT INFORMATION
Applicant Information
Company Name: ________________________________ Contact Name: _________________________________ Mailing Address: ________________________________ City/State/Zip: __________________________________ Phone #: ________________________________________ Email Address: __________________________________ Receive project updates by email? a Yes a No
Applicant Representative (Contact Person)
All communications will be sent to the emails on file.

Company Name: _________________________________ Contact Name: __________________________________ Mailing Address: _________________________________ City/State/Zip: ___________________________________ Phone #: _________________________________________ Email Address: __________________________________ Property Owner
Contact Name: __________________________________
Mailing Address: _________________________________ City/State/Zip: ____________________________________ Phone #: _________________________________________ Email Address: ___________________________________

FOR OFFICE USE ONLY
Z Adminstrative Use Permit
Coastal Development Permit
Z Exemption
Z Administrative
Z Non-Appealable Zone
Z Approval In-Concept
Z Major - Appealable Zone
Z Minor - Appealable Zone
Z Concept Review
Conditional Use Permit
Z Intensification of Use
Z Minor
Z Amendment/Extension of Approval
Design Review
Z Administrative
Z Design Review Board
Z Planning Commission
Z Extension of Approval
Z General Plan Amendment
Z Local Coastal Program
Z Planning Commision Interpretation
Z Revocable Encroachment Permit
Z Road Extension
Z Sidewalk Vendor Permit
Z Specific Plan Amendment
Sign Permit
Z Administrative
Z Master Sign Program
Z Planning Commission
Subdivision
Z Final Map
Z Lot Line Adjustment
Z SB 9 Urban Lot Split
Z Tentative Map Amendment
Z Tentative Parcel/Tract Map
Temporary Use Permit
Z Director
Z Planning Commission
Z Variance
Z Zone Change/Ordinance Amendment
ZPC #: _______________
Zoning Designation: ____________
General Plan Designation: ____________
Environmental Review
Z Exempt
Z Environmental Review Required
Date Received Stamp
Architectural plans will be posted on the City’s website as part of the public hearing agenda packet for the Design Review process. Please notify the City if you do not authorize posting the architectural plans online for public viewing. However, note that three full sets of 24x36 plans will be required at the time of scheduling for Design Review if authorization is not given. Failure to notify the City otherwise will allow the City assumption that authorization has been granted.
340 St. Ann's Drive, Laguna Beach, CA 92651 The Related Companies of California, LLC 18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 900 949-660-7272 The Related Companies of California, LLC 18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 900 949-660-7272 Neighborhood Church (Congregational) of Laguna Beach; ATTN: Susan E. Cross 340 St. Ann's Drive 644-034-05 and 644-034-09 Liane Takano Irvine, CA 92612 [email protected] Liane Takano Irvine, CA 92612 [email protected] Laguna Beach, CA 92651 949-464-8062 [email protected] ✔ Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 Attachment 8 396
396 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 2 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
IV. AFFIDAVIT

1. I hereby certify that all of the information contained in this application is, to the best of my knowledge and belief, true and correctly represented and I have read and understand Chapter 25.05 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. I understand that additional data and information may be required prior to final action on this application.

2. I understand that there are no assurances at any time, implicitly or otherwise, regarding final staff recommendations to the decision-making body about this application or the determination of any decision-making body.

3. I understand any changes to the project may require a new application and payment of new or additional fees.

4. If this application is approved, I hereby certify that I will comply with all conditions attached to the approval action. I understand that failure to comply with any conditions shall constitute grounds for the revocation or modification of the approval.

5. If this application is approved, I hereby understand that a standard condition of approval will be imposed requiring me to defend, hold harmless, and indemnify, at my expense, the City, the City Council and other City bodies and members thereof, officials, officers, employees, agents, and representatives from and against any and all third-party claims, actions, or proceedings to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval, or any associated determination made pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act, including the City’s defense costs and expenses as well as costs, expenses, or damages a court may require the City to pay as a result of such claim, action, or proceeding.

6. I understand that it is my responsibility to ensure that discrepancies do not exist between the project’s description on the permit, the design/architectural plans, and the structural plans.

If discrepancies exist between the design/architectural plans and structural plans, the design/ architectural plans shall take precedence. Ultimately, the scope of work, as described on the permit that authorizes construction, takes precedence over the plans. If there is a discrepancy between the plans and the description on the permit, the permit governs.

7. The property owner further certifies that they are the legal owner of the property and consents to the filing of this application.
_____________________________________ _____________________________________ APPLICANT’S SIGNATURE OWNER’S SIGNATURE
V. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Briefly describe the proposed use and improvements. (For non-residential projects, a detailed description and purpose of the project must be included in the Letter of Intent, see Appendix A). _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ _____________________________________________________________________________________________________ VALUATION ($ Estimate) ____________________
The proposed project consists of the construction of a two-story 30,690 SF residential building with 28 affordable housing units and 1 manager's unit constructed over a podium parking garage containing 41 parking spaces. See Appendix A and the Supplemental Project Narrative for detailed information. $36,800,000 Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 397
397 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 3 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
VI. USE AND DISCLOSURE OF ARCHITECTURAL DRAWINGS*
I am the architect/designer for the project and property described in this application and hereby authorize the planning agency for the City of Laguna Beach permission to display a copy on the internet on the City’s website as part of the agenda packet of all submitted architectural drawings/plans. ___________________________________________________________ _____________________ Architect/Designer’s Signature Date
____________________________________________________________ _____________________ Landscape Architect’s Name (if applicable) Signature Date _____________________________________________________________ ______________________ Engineer’s Name (if applicable) Signature Date
*Refusal of authorization allows the City to post a site plan that identifies property lines, setbacks, topography, easements, drainage, utilities, lighting, driveways, streets, parking, landscaped areas, outlines of buildings, and signage, and a massing diagram that displays a 3D form of the building with the profile, bulk, setbacks, and size, without specific architectural details.

Three full sets of 24x36 plans will be required at the time of scheduling for Design Review. Failing to submit both documents (site plan and massing diagram) would result that the planning agency is deemed to have obtained the permission of the architect for purposes of allowing copying and posting of architectural plans.

VII. FILING INSTRUCTIONS This application includes a comprehensive list of information that is required to submit an application for a project, and not all information will apply to every project. The application should include all required information to the best of the applicant’s knowledge at the time of initial submittal. Planning staff is available at the Planning and Building counter during the posted counter hours to discuss application submittal requirements based on the specifics of your request.

New applications require submittal through the Public Permit Portal. A planner will screen the application for the minimum required information based on the application requirements checklist below. Applications with missing information will not be accepted.

It is highly recommended that purchase agreements or leases not be executed until final approval of any required entitlements have been obtained. It is also recommended that the applicant be present at all public meetings at which the request is being considered.
12/09/25 12/09/25 12/09/25
Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 398
398 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 4 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
VIII. REQUIREMENTS This checklist must be completed and submitted with the filing of an application. The checklist is provided as a convenience for preparing the application, and the Zoning Code and other applicable regulations remain the governing documents.

TABLE 1 - APPLIES TO ALL APPLICATIONS

ITEM/ACTION EXPLANATION
a Completed Planning
Application form
Fully complete the Planning Application form. No sections of this form may be left blank.

Fields may be addressed as “Not Applicable” where appropriate to indicate that this requirement is not relevant to the request. Applicant and property owner signatures are both mandatory.
a Title Report (when
topographic survey
required)
Must be dated within one year of the application date. A title report is required for projects that require a topographic survey.
a Letter of Intent Describe the project/proposal and reason for the request. For businesses uses, include a description of business operations, number of employees, hours of operation, alcohol requests, and other pertinent information related to the use. See Appendix A for more information.
a Basic Site and Floor
Plans (commerical
projects only)
For land use changes that do not involve exterior building alterations, site improvements, or intensifications of use where additional parking is required, see Appendix B. All other projects require more detailed plans (Table 2).
a Digital Photographs Includes interior and exterior project site photos. Label file names with the direction of the photo and a description (e.g., west view of existing parking lot). Internet photos such as Google Maps are not acceptable because they may not show current conditions. a Tenant Mix Table
(commercial projects
only)
For multi-tenant sites, provide a table with the following information for each tenant:
(1) business name; (2) type of business; (3) size of tenant space (square feet); and (4) for restaurants, provide the seat count. For vacant tenant spaces, provide this information for the most recent occupant. Note that changes of use, such as a change from retail to food service, may increase a property’s parking requirements. See Section 25.52.012(G) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code for parking requirements by land use type. Additional parking may also be required when a building is enlarged, or when outdoor retail display or outdoor dining are proposed.
a Hazardous Waste
Form (commerical and
multi-family projects
only)
Complete and return the Hazardous Waste & Substances Form. See Appendix D.

TABLE 2 - APPLIES TO NEW CONSTRUCTION, BUILDING ADDITIONS, AND SIGNIFICANT BUILDING AND SITE

ALTERATIONS

ITEM/ACTION EXPLANATION
N/A
To be provided
N/A
✔
✔
✔
✔
✔
Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 399
399 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 5 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
a Architectural
Plans, Survey,
and Preliminary
Grading and
Drainage Plans
Refer to the Project Submittal Requirements for Planning Review. The required plan sheets will vary based on project type. For each required plan sheet, cross-reference the Zoning Plan Check Submittal Requirements Checklist. The Checklist identifies information required to be shown on the plans.

TABLE 3 - OTHER DOCUMENTS OR STUDIES

ITEM/ACTION EXPLANATION
a Tentative
Map
If the project includes a new condominium or subdivision, submit a Tentative Map as described in Section 21.08.090 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. Refer to the section on SB 9 for urban lot splits. a Lot Line
Adjustment
Lot Line Adjustments are regulated by Section 21.08.030 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. Refer to the Filing Instructions for Lot Line Adjustment for the required application materials. a Road
Extension
Road extension projects have development standards, review criteria, and review/approval processes established by Laguna Beach Municipal Code Chapters 11.40, 21.12, and 25.53, and Title 22. Design plans must demonstrate compliance with the adopted standards of street and grading design. If the proposed road extension is intended to reclassify a non-building site as a legal building site, the application must also demonstrate that the project meets the minimum requirements established by Section 25.08.004 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. This application type often requires the submission of one or more technical studies (geotechnical, hydrological, biological, etc.) due to the presence of sensitive environmental conditions.
a Bluff Edge
Determination
Applications for new development (including accessory structures), major remodels, and additions on oceanfront or oceanfront bluff properties are required to submit a bluff edge determination. Refer to the Bluff Edge Determinations Quick Guide for more information. aCoastal
Hazards Study
Applications for new development on an oceanfront or oceanfront bluff property are required to assess the potential for flooding or damage from waves, storm surge, or seiches by submitting a wave uprush and impact report prepared by a licensed civil engineer with expertise in coastal processes. The conditions that shall be considered in a wave uprush study are: a seasonally eroded beach combined with long-term (75 years) erosion; high tide conditions, combined with long-term (75 year) projections for sea level rise; storm waves from a 100-year event or a storm that compares to the 1982/83 El Nino event.
a Geological
Report
For vacant and oceanfront sites, submit a geological report which specifically addresses improvements proposed for the subject site and adjacent right-of-way. Geological reports must include characterization of geological site conditions and analysis of slope stability, and recommendations for appropriate foundation and grading design.

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Included ✔
✔
Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 400
400 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 6 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
a Hydraulic
Report for
Floodplain/
Floodway
Development
Significant improvements within a floodway or 100-year floodplain require “No-Rise/No-Impact” certification stating that the proposed development will not impact the pre-project base flood elevations, regulatory floodway elevations, or regulatory floodway widths. The certification must be provided by a professional engineer and supported by hydrologic and hydraulic analyses. The study must also demonstrate compliance with the Chapter 25.38 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. a Parking and
Traffic Studies
Applications for shared parking, four or more in-lieu parking certificates, or innovative parking solutions as prescribed by Section 25.52.006 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code require traffic studies prepared by a qualified professional.
a Sign Plans
(commercial
and
multifamily
only)
Sign permit applications are subject to the requirements of Chapter 25.54 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. Several key considerations are summarized in the Sign Permit Informational Guide.

Refer to the Downtown Specific Plan for additional requirements when a sign is proposed in the Downtown area.

Required sign plan information:

1. Prepare a scaled drawing of all proposed signs. For new and amended Master Sign Programs, include all existing signs. Indicate the dimensions, area computation of each sign, location, height above ground, sign copy (including any graphics), letter size, font style, sign materials, colors, and lighting elements, if any.

2. Prepare a scaled site plan and elevation drawing showing the building or suite. Indicate the length of the building or suite frontage along the street(s).

3. Provide colored photographs of the elevations and all existing signs.

4. Provide lighting specifications. Signage may be illuminated by shielded fixtures mounted above the sign face (e.g., gooseneck lamps) or via halo illumination provided that both the sign face and return are opaque.
a Short-Term
Lodging
Applications for short-term lodging use, as regulated by Chapter 25.23 of The Laguna Beach Municipal Code, are required to include the information specified in Appendix C. a Planning
Commission
Concept
Review
If a concept review hearing is recommended by Planning staff, complete and return the Concept Review Application with all applicable submittal items required by the checklist form. Please consult with staff prior to submitting a concept review application for recommended submittal information, which will be based on both the checklist and specific project concept. a Revocable
Encroachment
Permit
Complete and submit a Revocable Encroachment Permit application packet. A revocable encroachment permit is required when a project proposes private encroachments into an otherwise unimproved, unused public right-of-way, and is subject to the requirements of Chapter 11.50 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. This class of project is limited to minor structures such as low fences and retaining walls, walkways, stairs and construction incidentally related to landscape activities such as stepping stones, walking surfaces, planter areas and irrigation systems. a Sidewalk
Vendor Permit
Applications for a roaming or stationary sidewalk vendor permit are required to submit a completed Sidewalk Vendor Permit Application. Sidewalk vending is regulated by Chapter 5.27 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code.

N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
N/A
Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 401
401 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 7 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
a Temporary
Uses
Provide a full description of the temporary activities as well as information relevant to the mitigation of event impacts, such as parking and noise. Submittal requirements will necessarily vary based on the nature of the event, but may include information on the anticipated number of attendees, parking, dates and times (set-up, event hours, and clean-up), food/alcohol service, music (stage location, amplified or acoustic, live or prerecorded), and use of a P.A. system. The site or floor plan should label the location of all temporary improvements and uses consistent with the written event description.

If insufficient parking is provided at the property to accommodate all attendees, describe how transportation will be managed. Note that building permits and inspections may be required before the event.

Temporary uses that are five days or less in duration can generally be processed administratively, while longer-duration uses are subject to Planning Commission approval. The Director may also refer any Temporary Use Permit application to the Planning Commission. Temporary Use Permit applications should be submitted at least 30 days prior to the event date, or 90 days prior if Planning Commission approval is required.
a Variance
Justification
Variances are appropriate when special circumstances create hardships to development under the standard regulations, provided that the variance would only bring the disadvantaged property up to the level of use enjoyed by nearby properties in the same zoning district.

Section 25.05.025(F) of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code requires that the decision-making body make four findings in order to grant the variance request.

In order to determine if special circumstances exist, and to assist the decision-makers arrive at a decision, please provide a justification to answer each of the following questions, as fully and completely as possible, and include a brief description of the requirement and code reference.

Justification must be provided for each separate variance request.

1. Identify any special physical characteristics of the property such as shape, topography, location, or surroundings that cause the requested development to not meet zoning regulations.

2. Do other properties in the vicinity have the same type of physical characteristics as this property? If so, please identify a few of them.

3. Identify any other neighboring properties that have the same type of improvement that you are requesting.

4. Identify the cause of the special characteristics of the site that limits the ability to comply with code requirements (e.g., natural slope of the land or placement of other structures). a Senate Bill
9 (SB 9) Urban
Lot Splits and
Two-Family
Development
Applications for urban lot splits and two-family development under SB 9 are required to submit a completed SB 9 Application Package.

N/A
N/A
N/A
Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 402
402 of 830
CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH Application Form
Updated August 2025

Page 8 of 8 ends

PLANNING APPLICATION
a Staking
Requirements
(additions
and new
connstruction)
(a) A staking plan shall be prepared as a requirement of the application in accordance with the following requirements:
a Staking Plan (required scale of 1/8” = 1’0”) (LBMC Section 25.05.015) • Show all property lines, building footprint, street names, north arrow and location of story poles. Poles should be placed to clearly represent the proposed building envelope. Roof ridges, eaves, decks, chimneys and other features that would be of significance to an analysis of coastal resources and the findings for the coastal development permit should be staked. • Note the fixed datum point (same as used on the site plan). • Note that appropriate height elevation of the top of each pole relative to the datum point. • Provide horizontal dimensions to at least one pole relative to the property lines as a reference point to assure the poles are correctly located on the site. • Note that story poles shall be string and connected with ribbon or string to depict the building outline.
• Include a certification table, with the pole number and proposed maximum elevation columns completed, and signature forms.
(b) Staking poles and connecting ribbons, which accurately represent the full extent of the proposed development, including decks and eaves, shall be constructed at least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing. At least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing, the location and height of the staking poles must be certified as accurate by a registered land surveyor or registered civil engineer licensed to conduct land surveys in the State of California. If complete and certified project staking is not in place at least 21 calendar days prior to the first Design Review Board or Planning Commission public hearing date or 14 calendar days prior to the administrative coastal development permit public hearing, the project shall be continued to a later date. Neither the applicant, a relative of the applicant, nor any other person possessing a financial interest in the property or the project may certify the location and height accuracy of the staking poles. If the project is modified during the coastal development permit process because of a coastal development permit finding or fact concerns or other coastal resource concerns that the decision-making body or official determines is necessary to restake, the project shall be re-staked and re-certified at least 14 calendar days prior to any subsequent public hearing.

Municipal Code Section 25.05.015 provides the Director of Community Development with discretion to determine if staking is required for a coastal development permit application. Specifically, Section

25.05.015, provides that “(1) The Director of Community Development shall prescribe the form and scope of all.... development applications as identified in Chapter 25.05, and of accompanying data to be furnished so as to assure the fullest practicable presentation of facts for proper consideration of the matter and for the permanent record...”
Special Studies: Please note that additional studies may be required to be submitted in order to conduct the preliminary environmental assessment for the project, including but not limited to biological assessments, parking and traffic studies, and historic resource assessments.

FYI - Building Permit Required: Planning approval, which may include approvals by the Design Review Board, Planning Commission, or by staff through an administrative process, does not authorize you to begin construction. Once the Planning approval process has been completed and all applicable appeal periods have lapsed, please submit complete construction drawings for building plan check. The Building Division will confirm compliance with local and state building safety standards prior to issuance of a building permit. Building permits are generally required for mechanical, electrical, plumbing, and structural improvements, and for new building signage. ✔
Docusign Envelope ID: E724E945-9422-4580-BE15-A9E53CE0AEA9 403
403 of 830
1 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026

NCC AFFORDABLE HOUSING
SUPPLEMENTAL PROJECT NARRATIVE & SB 4 CHECKLIST
340 St. Ann’s Drive
Laguna Beach, CA, 92651

ENTITLEMENT REQUEST
The Related Companies of California, LLC (the “Applicant”) respectfully requests the following entitlements for the demolition of a church parking lot and former parsonage and construction of a residential affordable housing community consisting of a 3-story 50,180 SF residential building ("Affordable Housing Development") with 28 affordable housing units for lower income households and one (1) manager’s unit, and a parking garage providing 41 parking stalls (the “Project”):

1. Design/Development Review Ministerial Approval - Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65913.16 (“SB 4”), the Applicant requests the ministerial approval of the Project as a “use by right” on split-zoned property owned by the Neighborhood Church (Congregational) of Laguna Beach (“Owner”).

2. Incentives/Concessions/Waivers - Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65915 (“Density Bonus Law”), the Applicant requests approval of a density bonus, 4 Incentives/Concessions, and 2 waivers of development standards in order to develop the affordable housing.

3. Parcel Map – A parcel map is required to consolidate and divide the site into 2 parcels, one for the affordable housing development and a second parcel for the remaining religious buildings.

Pursuant to various LBMC sections and other relevant policies, the Applicant will request approvals and permits from other City agencies and decisionmakers for Project actions which may include, and not be limited to, demolition, excavation, shoring, grading, haul route, foundation, and building and tenant improvements, as well as contracts, grants, subsidies, loans, or other forms of assistance from one or more public agencies. 404
404 of 830
2 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026

PROJECT SUMMARY
Ownership Information
The Project Site is owned by the Neighborhood Church (Congregational) of Laguna Beach (“NCC”). Neighborhood Congregational Church has been part of the fabric of the Laguna Beach community for more than 80 years, with a legacy of being a convenor of community activity including church services, weddings, memorials, dance and music events, meditation and sound baths, and other exciting gatherings. Once the project site is delineated by way of a parcel map, NCC will lease the site to the Applicant for the development of the project.

ApplicantInformation
The Related Companies of California, LLC (“Related California” or “Related”) is a fully-integrated real estate firm with a 32-year track record of delivering top-quality affordable housing, mixed-income housing and mixed-use developments across California. Related has more than 17,000 residences completed or under construction and more than 2,700 affordable units and 3,800 market rate units in predevelopment in its Irvine, Los Angeles, and San Francisco offices.

As long-term property owners committed to sustainability and stewardship, our mission is to form strong publicprivate partnerships, work with our public sector partners, world-class architects and designers to create distinctive urban spaces that fit seamlessly into the fabric of existing communities. Related is committed to building more inclusive cities and increasing diversity, equity and inclusion within the company and the broader real estate industry.

Related has extensive experience in public-private partnerships to develop large-scale and phased affordable and market rate multifamily housing. We have structured deals under Disposition and Development Agreements, as well as on land leased from public agencies and through ground lease structures with churches, cities, counties and transportation agencies. As each development is unique, our team can provide flexibility in the structure of our public sector and community partnerships to provide creative solutions for each unique opportunity at hand.

Ultimately, each development is an asset for the communities we invest in.

Related has an impeccable track record for bringing projects in on time and within budget. This track record is attributable to the strength of our diverse team which includes industry veterans in every discipline of the real estate development process ranging from planning, entitlements, architecture, cost estimation, finance, construction management, development project management, asset management and property management.

The breadth of our collective in-house capabilities allows us to take a fully- integrated approach to project planning, construction, budgeting, scheduling, and long-term ownership.

Project Description
The Applicant proposes to redevelop a property located in the center of the City of Laguna Beach. The property is currently improved with a church campus which consists of a sanctuary (southwest side), church offices (northwest side), Bridge Hall (northeast side), and a former parsonage (central).

The reimagined site will allow the opportunity to create affordable housing while maintaining the existing religious use. The Applicant proposes dividing the property into 2 separate parcels by way of a parcel map, demolition of the existing former parsonage, and construction of a residential project on the existing church parking lot and former parsonage site. The development will consist of a 2-story 50,180 SF residential building ("Affordable Housing Development") with 29 affordable housing units (excluding a manager’s unit) constructed over a 1-story 405
405 of 830
3 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
semi-subterranean podium parking garage.

The church sanctuary, offices, and Bridge Hall will remain in place and are not part of the proposed development, however great care has been taken to integrate the two uses into the design, including a “Community Plaza” area off Glenneyre which will be accessible to both residents and the church. The remaining church campus will allow for the continuation of NCC’s legacy as a community gathering place for religious/spiritual activities, weddings, memorials, as well as ongoing scheduled programs.

The unit mix will consist of a variety of studios, 1, 2, and 3-bedroom apartments with a preference for incomequalified employees who work in Laguna Beach. By offering affordable housing to those who contribute to the local economy, the Project is strengthening the fabric of the Laguna Beach community while ensuring the community remains a place where working families and seniors can live affordably and thrive. The location of the site allows residents to walk, bike or bus to work, reducing pollutants on commute routes into town.

Figure 1.Aerial View of the Project Site
N
406
406 of 830
4 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
Automobile vehicle parking with 41 parking spaces will be provided within a single-level podium parking garage.

Vehicle access to the parking garage will be provided with access from Glenneyre Street.

The Project will include approximately 4,720 SF of total open space, including a landscaped ground floor plaza area which may be available for use by both the apartment residents and NCC. The ground floor courtyard and playground areas in the interior of the affordable housing development will be explicitly restricted for use by the residents.

Ground-level open spaces on Glenneyre will be attractively landscaped with a variety of trees and droughttolerant plants and will include integrated seating. Common open space areas exclusive to residents total approximately 3,120 SF and are generally located within the residential component’s interior. Additional nonexclusive areas open to residents include side yards of 5,880 SF, a Community Plaza of 1,600 SF, and a Community Deck of 140 SF.

GENERAL PLAN CONSISTENCY
LAGUNA BEACH HOUSING ELEMENT 2021-2029
The California Legislature has declared that “the availability of housing is of vital statewide importance, and the early attainment of decent housing and a suitable living environment for every Californian, including farmworkers, is a priority of the highest order.” To accomplish this housing goal, California Government Code, Article 10.6 Housing Elements (§65580) mandates that each local government adopt a Housing Element as part of its General Plan.

The City of Laguna Beach adopted its present Housing Element 2021-2029 on January 24, 2023 with a subsequent revision on June 11, 2024. The City of Laguna Beach is in its 6th planning cycle1that covers the period October 15, 2021 to October 15, 2029. The City adopted its first Housing Element on October 2, 1974.

The Housing Element is required to identify an adequate number of and property zoned sites to facilitate housing production of the City’s regional fair share of housing. As part of the Housing Element 2021-2029, the City of Laguna Beach has a Regional Housing Needs Allocation (“RHNA”) of 394 units, including 118 for very low, and 80 for low-income households.

As part of its new sites for RHNA, the City identified Site No. 1 as 340 St. Ann’s Drive (Section 4 RHNA and Housing Resources, p. 76) as the 0.85-acre portion of the Neighborhood Congregational Church property. The Element states with a “conservative density of 45 units per acre” the 0.85-acre portion of the site “could yield at minimum of 31 lower-income units.”
The Element makes it clear that “any such development of the site, in order to be feasible, would likely include the adjoining R-2 zoned parking lot which is a 0.35-acre parcel.” The project site for the proposed Affordable Housing Development is in fact the parking lot site and a portion of Site No. 1 identified in the Housing Element.

The proposed project is also consistent with new programs and policies contained in the housing element to incentivize development of affordable housing on religious institution sites including:
• Program 5.2-1(e.) incentives for religious institutions that provide 100% affordable housing; 407
407 of 830
5 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
• Policy HE-2.14 to encourage housing on religious institutions; and
• Program 5.2-7(a.) which requires outreach to religious institutions Affordable housing is of great necessity in Laguna Beach, a city which has not completed any 100% affordable housing development in the past 21 years. Laguna Beach is one of the most expensive cities to live in the U.S..

According to the Housing Element, 48.6% of renters in the City are cost burdened, spending more than 30% of their household income on housing.

The approval of the Project willsupply the City with 29 new affordable housing unitsfor lower income households, with the exclusion of the manager’s unit. It will alleviate residents of severe housing cost burden and aid the City in meeting their RHNA requirement of 394 units in this Housing Element cycle ending in 2029.

PROJECT SITE INFORMATION
The Project Site is located at 340 St. Ann’s Drive in the City of Laguna Beach, two blocks from the beach and approximately one-half mile from Downtown Laguna Beach. It is bounded by Glenneyre Street on the southwest, St. Ann’s Drive on the southeast, and Catalina Street on the northeast. The area around the site is topographically varied, with much higher elevations to the northeast. The total site owned by the church is approximately 1.2- acres and is characterized with the corresponding Assessor Parcel Numbers 644-034-05 and 644-034-09. The affordable housing project will be constructed on a portion of that site, totaling .66 acres.

Bridge Hall was constructed in the 1940’s and is the original portion of the church campus. The sanctuary was constructed in the 1960’s. The existing church buildings have no current historical designation under federal, state or local guidelines.

The parking lot comprising the proposed project site is composed of two, relatively flat areas, and is accessed from Glenneyre Street. The parking lot currently has 69 parking stalls. Between the front and rear parking lots is a freestanding former parsonage which would be demolished as part of the affordable housing project.

ZONING CONSISTENCY
Use
Permitted
The Project Site is located within the R-2 and Local Business Professional zones (“LBP”).

The R-2 zone allows for “residential housing, special needs” as a permitted use.

The LBP zone allows for both residential housing and “residential housing, special needs” as permitted uses subject to a conditional use permit.

Pursuant to LBMC 25.08.032 “Residential housing special needs” means “dwelling units that accommodate specific demographic or occupational groups…” including “extremely low, very low, low and moderate-income persons, as defined in the city's housing element.” The project as proposed satisfies the definition of residential housing special needs because the project targets and will be reserved for lower-income households. 408
408 of 830
6 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
Additionally, because the proposed project satisfies the criteria contained in SB 4 (Govt. Code 65913.16) a “housing development project” shall be a use by right. See the attached SB 4 Checklist contained in this application for details of SB 4 compliance.

Proposed
The Applicant is proposing a residential development comprised of a 100% affordable housing community targeting lower-income households located on land owned by a nonprofit religious institution, in accordance with Govt. Code 65913.16.

Lot Size
The entire church-owned site is comprised of 4 separate legal parcels totaling 52,436 SF, or approximately 1.2 acres. The proposed project will require the lots to be consolidated and then divided to form two distinct parcels.

The resulting affordable housing project site will be 28,937 SF (.66 acres) and will have dual zoning. The dual zoned housing site is comprised of 14,156 SF of LBP zoned area, and 14,781 of R-2 zoned area.

LBMC 25.28.008(A) states parcels in a LBP zone shall not be merged together for development purposes that exceed ten thousand square feet. Because a portion of the project site is comprised of 14,156 SF in the LBP zone, the applicant is requesting a waiver of this development standard and a parcel size greater than 10,000 Sq. Ft. in the LBP zone. This waiver is requested pursuant to Govt. Code 65915(e)(1). See the section “FINDINGS FOR DENSITY BONUS LAW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915” below for more details.

Density
Permitted
The affordable housing project site has dual zoning and is comprised of 14,156 SF of LBP zoned area, and 14,781 SF of R-2 zoned area.

The R-2 zone allows for 1 dwelling unit per 2,000 SF with a maximum of 2 units per lot. The LBP zone also allows for 1 dwelling unit per 2,000 SF.

However, as a 100% affordable housing development project serving lower income households, the project meets the criteria of Govt. Code 65913.16 (SB 4) and 65915 (Density Bonus Law), and is allowed a density pursuant to those code provisions.

The project site is in the R-2 and LBP zones, both of which allow residential uses. As such, Govt. Code §65913.16(j)(1)(A) provides that the development project shall be allowed a density of the applicable density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households identified in Gov’t Code 65583.2(c)(3)(B)(iv).

In addition, Govt. Code §65913.16(j)(1)(C) provides that a housing development project that is in a zone that allows residential uses, including in single-family residential zones, shall be eligible for a density bonus, incentives, concessions, or waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios, pursuant to Section 65915.

The permitted density is therefore calculated as follows:
409
409 of 830
7 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
Allowed Base Density per 65913.16 & 65583.2(c)(3)(B)(iv) 30 Units/Acre Allowed Density Bonus per 65915(f)(3)(D)(i) (100% low-inc.) 80% Increase Total Allowed Density: 30 X 1.8 54 Units/Acre
Total Allowed Units after Density Bonus @ .66 Acres 36 Units Proposed
The project as proposed seeks the application of SB 4 and Density Bonus Law allowances as follows:

Base Density per 65913.16 & 65583.2(c)(3)(B)(iv) 30 Units/Acre Requested Density Bonus per 65915(f)(3)(D)(i) (100% low-income) 46% Increase Total Proposed Density: 30 X 1.46 44 Units/Acre
Total Proposed Units after Density Bonus @ .66 Acres 29 Units Height
Permitted
The zoning districts applicable to the project site are LBP and R-2 which both allow residential uses. As such, Govt.

Code 65913.16(j)(1)(A) allows the development to be one story above the zoning requirementsif located in a zone that allows residential uses. The additional height applies to the “housing development project,” as defined by Section 65589.5(h)(2), and qualifying as a “use by right” pursuant to SB 4.

Height Limit Tabulation:

Zone Zoning Height Limit
LBP 25’-0” above Catalina Curb
R2 25’-0” above Catalina Curb
Proposed
Zone Zoning
Height
Limit
Proposed Project
As Single Story
Over parking Gar.

Proposed Project
With additional
one story per SB 4
LBP 25’-0” above Catalina Curb 22’-0” (complies) 36’
R2 25’-0” above Catalina Curb 23’6” (complies) 36’
*Story height defined as 11’
The proposed affordable housing building height meets the both the LBP and R2 limits as a single-story building over the podium parking garage. However, pursuant to SB 4 (Govt. Code 65913.16(j)(1)(A)), an additional one story is permitted above zoning limits. The project design has utilized the allowed additional one story, resulting in a two-story residential building over the podium parking garage. See plan sheet A4.0 BUILDING ENVELOPE DIAGRAMS for details.

Yards and Setbacks
The project has required and provided setbacks as shown in the following table:
410
410 of 830
8 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
(Setback location determination based on clockwise direction starting at Glenneyre – See Setback Exhibit)

SETBACK LOCATION REQUIRED PROPOSED
1) LBP ZONE - FRONT YD (Glenneyre property line) 5'-0" (MIN) 55’-0" 2) LBP ZONE - SIDE YD - ABUTTING LBP (West property line - partial)
2'-6" (MIN) 6’-6"
3) LBP ZONE - SIDE YD - ABUTTING R2 (West property line - partial)
10% of Lot Width - 75ft. 7’6’
(MIN)
10'-6”
4) R2 ZONE – SIDE YD – ABUTTING R2 (South property line extending West)
10% of Lot Width – 25 ft.
4’-0” (MIN)
12’-0”
5) R2 ZONE – SIDE YD – ABUTTING R2 (West property line) 10% of Lot Width – 137’-6” ft. 12’-0” (MAX)
12’-0”
6) R2 ZONE - FRONT YD (North property line along Catalina) LBMC 25.50.004(E)
20'-0" (MIN) 10'-0" *
7) R2 ZONE - SIDE YD - ABUTTING R2 (East property line) E.

Side
10% of Lot Width – 106 ft. 10'-
6" (MIN)
11'-6"
8) LBP ZONE - SIDE YD - ABUTTING LBP (South property line - partial)
2'-6" (MIN) 5'-0"
9) LBP ZONE - SIDE YD - ABUTTING LBP (East property line - partial)
2'-6" (MIN) 8'-9"
10) PARKING GARAGE SETBACK (below exterior finished
grade)
0’-0” (MIN) 0’-0”
ADDITIONAL BUILDING SETBACKS (Catalina Front Yard
Setback)
1’ for every 1’ height > 15’ NA *
*Applicant requests a Density Bonus Law Incentive/Concession for this condition.

Proposed
The project as proposed meets the required setbacks except for the Additional Building Setbacks. Pursuant to Govt. Code 65913.16(j)(1)(C), and 65915(d)(2)(D), the applicant is requesting relief from these setback requirements in the form of an incentive/concession. See the section “FINDINGS FOR DENSITY BONUS LAW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915” below for more details.

SETBACK EXHIBIT FOLLOWS
411
411 of 830
9 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026

SETBACK EXHIBIT
412
412 of 830
10 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
Open Space
Required
LBMC 25.50.010 requires the affordable housing project to meet the following open space standards:

A. It shall contain a minimum area of forty percent of the total gross living area on the lot; B. At least sixty percent of the total area required shall be located at ground level and shall be open from ground to sky;
C. It shall be contained entirely within the buildable area of the lot.

D. It shall not include land or structures devoted to parking, storage, trash areas, driveways or other uses, except those uses normally considered as outdoor living: decks, patios, terraces, atriums, gardens, ornamental and natural landscaped area, barbecues, athletic areas, and similar active and passive outdoor living and recreation space;
E. At least one-quarter of the open space requirement shall be immediately accessible to each living unit on the lot and shall be designed to be used primarily for the occupants of the living unit; F. To qualify as open space, the minimum dimension must be six feet, or ten feet if the area is designed for through pedestrian traffic or access.

Summary of required open space:

Area SF Open Space
Factor
Required Open
Space SF
Residential Gross Living Area LBMC

25.50.010
29,050 40% 11,620
Residential Immediately Accessible Open
Space
11,620 25% 2,905
Open Space Ground-to-sky 11,620 60% 6,972
Proposed
Residential Open Space Required SF Proposed SF
Residential Courtyard 1 3,120
Residential Side yard
Community Plaza 1,600
Total Open Space 11,620 4,720*
Immediately Accessible Open Space 1,180 (25% of provided) 0 ** Open Space Ground-to-sky 2,832 *** 4,720
*Applicant requests a Density Bonus Law Waiver for this condition. **Applicant requests a Density Bonus Law Incentive/Concession for this condition. *** Required Open Space Ground-to-sky = 60% of Open Space – due to waiver request, provided open space is 4,720 SF. Required open space ground-to-sky = 4,720 * 60% = 2,832 SF. All the open space provided (4,720 SF) is open Ground-to-sky (100%).
(
413
413 of 830
11 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
LBMC 25.50010(A) requires 40% of the Proposed Living Area to be open space, which is equal to 11,620 sf. The open space provided is 4,720 sf. In accordance with Govt. Code 65915(e)(1), the applicant is requesting relief from this requirement in the form of a Waiver. The open space requirements in LBMC would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted.

LBMC 25.50.010(E) requires 25% of the residential open space be immediately accessible. The applicant is requesting relief from this particular open space requirement in the form of an incentive/concession pursuant to Govt. Code 65913.16(j)(1)(C), and 65915(d)(2)(D). See the section “FINDINGS FOR DENSITY BONUS LAW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915” below for more details.

Vehicle Parking
There are currently 70 parking spaces provided on-site for the existing religious facilities.

Govt. Code 65913.6(b)(2)(A) (aka AB 2244) provides that a developer of a religious institution affiliated housing development may request a reduction in required parking for the existing religious-use parking. Such request shall not exceed “(A) In the case of an existing place of worship to be retained, 50 percent of the number of religioususe parking spaces that are available at the time the request is made.”. Pursuant to 65913.6(b)(2)(A), we request a 50% reduction in required existing religious-use parking to 35 spaces.

Additionally, Govt. Code 65913.6(d) allows the number of religious-use parking spaces to count toward the number of parking spaces otherwise required for the housing development. Consequently, up to 35 of the religious-use parking spaces may be utilized to satisfy the affordable housing required spaces.

Govt. Code 65913.16(k)(1) provides “the proposed development shall provide off-street parking of up to one space per unit, unless a state law or local ordinance provides for a lower standard of parking, in which case the law or ordinance shall apply.” In an effort to reduce costs and to provide additional spaces to uses other than residential in the parking garage, the applicant is requesting a reduction in parking requirements as a development incentive.

See the section “FINDINGS FOR DENSITY BONUS LAW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915” below for more details.

The parking tabulations and government code applicability follow:

Residential Use Parking requirement:

Occupancy: Units Required Parking
Ratio
Spaces
Required
Proposed Parking
Ratio
Spaces
Proposed
Multi-family
Residential
(affordable)
29 1/Unit* 29* 2/3 Beds -1 /Unit**
Studios/1 Beds - .5/unit
23**
Religious 50% of Existing 35 41***
* 1 space per unit per Govt. Code 65913.16(k)(1).
** Incentive request - Reduced Parking Requirement Incentive request (shared with religious use). *** Total Spaces for all uses.

The development is providing 41 parking spaces in the podium parking garage. It is contemplated that 23 spaces would be shared between the housing and religious use as allowed by Govt. Code 65913.6(d). The remaining 414
414 of 830
12 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
spaces may be utilized by the religious use and/or others (through a separate agreement).

Staking Plan/Story Poles
LBMC 25.05.040(C)(2)(a) requires a staking plan to be prepared including staking poles and connecting ribbons which accurately represent the full extent of the proposed structure, including decks and eaves, and story poles shall be constructed at least 21 calendar days prior to the first public hearing. A staking plan has been prepared and submitted as part of this application which outlines the design and placement of story poles which reflect the scale and height of the proposed project.

The staking plan has revealed that a significant number of story poles will be required to comply with the intentions of the code. As the construction of the poles will need to accurately reflect the outline of the buildings, the base supporting many of the poles will be substantial and will inhibit the accessibility to, and the operation of, the Church and Montessori school. Story poles will likely be required to be placed in the parking areas, Montessori drop-off/pick-up locations, and outside playground of the Montessori school resulting in a safety concern for the children which attend the school on a daily basis, as well as attendees of the Church facilities. The construction of the poles, and the requirement that they be in place for a minimum of 21 days, will have a substantial impact on the operations of both the Montessori school, Montessori families and the Church, potentially requiring closing the functions of both, with severe financial and operational hardship. The property owner and applicant are concerned about these potential impacts and request the City consider alternative approaches to the staking requirements.

Historic Resource
The development plan for the property preserves all structures on the property except for the former parsonage, which will be demolished.

SB 4 (65913.16(c)(4)) and, subsequently, Gov Code Section 65913.4(a)(7)(C), require that the structure has not been placed on a national, state, or local register.

Local
The City of Laguna Beach maintains a register of local historic resources in the City of Laguna Beach. The register is attached as Exhibit A-1. No buildings at the subject property (340 St. Ann’s) are listed in the register.

State
The applicant contacted the local Information Center of the California Historical Resources Information System (CHRIS) to inquire about the buildings being a state historic resource. The response received stated “The address does not appear on the directory. This means that it hasn’t been evaluated for historical significance.” This response indicates the buildings at 340 St. Anns are not listed as a state historical resource. The response from CHRIS and a section of the Build Environment Resources Directory (BERD), a database of historical resources in California, filtered for Laguna Beach, is attached as Exhibit A-2. The subject property is not in the database.

National
A search of the National Register Database revealed that the subject property at 340 St. Anns is not listed on the National Register of Historic Places. See Exhibit A-3, an excerpt of the database which lists all resources in the City 415
415 of 830
13 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
of Laguna Beach. The subject property is not in the database.

Roadway Capacity
A roadway capacity and traffic analysis was performed for the proposed project. The analysis indicates that sufficient capacity exists in the adjacent roadways to handle the expected trips generated by the project. See Exhibit B “Roadway Capacity”.

Sewer Capacity
A sewer capacity analysis was performed in December 2025. The analysis confirms the proposed development does not negatively impact the adjacent sewer system. See Exhibit C “Sewer Capacity” FINDINGS FOR DENSITY BONUS LAW PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 65915 Pursuant to Section 65915 of the California Government Code, the City shall approve a Density Bonus and requested Incentive(s) unless the City finds that:

A. The concession or incentive does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code, or for rents for the targeted units to be set as specified in subdivision (c).

The record containssubstantial evidence that would allow the City to make a finding that the requested incentives are necessary to provide for affordable housing costs per State Law. The California Health & Safety Code Sections 50052.5 and 50053 define formulas for calculating affordable housing costs for Very Low, Low, and ModerateIncome households. Section 50052.5 addresses owner-occupied housing and Section 50053 addresses rental households.

The Project substantially complies with the applicable regulations, standards and provisions of the State Density Bonus Law. The Applicant is proposing 29 affordable housing units with the exception of 1 manager’s unit designated for lower-income households. According to Government Code Sections 65915-65918, a project meeting the criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b) is entitled to five incentives or concessions:

Criteria of subparagraph (G) of paragraph (1) of subdivision (b):

One hundred percent of all units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, but exclusive of a manager’s unit or units, are for lower income households, as defined by Section 50079.5 of the Health and Safety Code, except that up to 20 percent of the units in the development, including total units and density bonus units, may be for moderate-income households, as defined in Section 50053 of the Health and Safety Code.

By setting aside 100% of the units, excluding the manager’s unit, for Lower-Income households, the Project meets the criteria and is entitled to five development incentives/concessions, which can be used to facilitate the construction of the proposed Project.

The requested incentives will allow the Project’s building envelopes to accommodate the desired allowable density and will result in identifiable cost reductions.

Incentives/Concessions
Incentive/Concession 1
416
416 of 830
14 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
Immediately Accessible Open Space Open Space (private): LBMC Section 25.50.010(A) provides that a minimum area of 40% of the gross living area shall be open space, and 25.50.010(E) requires that 25% of that open space shall be immediately accessible to each living unit, and shall be designed to be used primarily for the occupants of the living unit (private open space). The project meets the overall open space requirements of 25.50.010(A), however we request relief from the requirement of 25.50.010 (E) as incorporating private open space for each unit would require the construction of patios, decks, and/or balconies for each unit. Omitting private patios, decks, and/or balconies will result in a significant, identifiable cost reduction to the overall project.

Incentive/Concession 2
Front Yard Setback (Catalina St.): The portion of the residential building adjacent to Catalina St. is located in the R-2 zone. LBMC 25.12.008(C)(2) requires a front yard or yards of at least 20 feet (the setback) in the R-2 zone. In order to achieve our density goals for the project, we request a reduction in the front yard setback along Catalina St. to 10 feet. By reducing the setback to 10 feet, we are able to achieve our desired density without having to build a 3rd story in the residential buildings as is allowed by SB 4 (Govt. Code 65913.16(j)(1)(A)). By keeping the residential buildings limited to 2 stories, a significant, identifiable cost reduction is achieved.

Incentive/Concession 3
Additional Building Setbacks: LBMC 25.50.004 (D) requires an additional foot of distance for every foot of height in excess of fifteen feet. In order to meet this requirement, the upper floors of the buildings would be required to be staggered back approximately 5 ft. for each story above the ground floor. We are requesting relief from the requirements of 25.50.004 (D) in order to allow the residential units to be “stacked” (similar units above/below each other). The stacking of units provides an efficiency of construction thereby allowing a significant and identifiable cost reduction.

Incentive/Concession 4
Parking reduction: Govt. Code 65913.16(k)(1) provides “the proposed development shall provide off-street parking of up to one space per unit, unless a state law or local ordinance provides for a lower standard of parking, in which case the law or ordinance shall apply.” In an effort to reduce costs and to provide additional spaces to uses other than residential in the parking garage, the applicant is requesting a reduction in parking requirements as a development incentive. The requested reduction includes a parking ratio for Studio and 1-bedroom units at .5 spaces per unit instead of 1 space per unit. The resulting parking space requirement would change from 29 spaces to 23 spaces. A reduction in parking spaces results in a smaller garage space, more efficient land use, and a higher allowed density, thus allowing a significant cost savings.

B. The concession or incentive would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households.

The proposed incentives will not have specific adverse impacts upon the public health and safety or the physical environment. The Applicant is proposing a project designed to satisfy the requirements of the underlying zoning, General Plan and the LBMC without requesting significant entitlements that would relax or deviate from the code required standards.

The Project will be developed to the current Building Code standards that would result in a residential development that is safe and will not jeopardize the health of its residents. In addition, the proposed housing development will/ not adversely impact the public health of the surrounding area because the uses are consistent with the zoning uses in the area. There are no proposed uses on the Project Site that are inconsistent with the 417
417 of 830
15 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
residential and commercial uses and zones in the immediate vicinity that would jeopardize the health, safety or physical environment by emitting smoke, noise, vibration, odors, use toxics materials, create excess traffic or other incompatible impacts.

The Project Site is not listed on the California Register of Historic Resources and it will not have specific adverse impacts on any real property that is listed on the California Register of Historic Resources. There are no historic properties in the immediate vicinity that would be negatively affected by the Project.

C. The concession or incentive is contrary to state or federal law.

There is no evidence that the proposed incentives will have a specific adverse impact. A “specific adverse impact” is defined as a significant, quantifiable direct and unavoidable impact, based on objective, identified written public health or safety standards, policies or conditions as they existed on the date the application was deemed complete.

WAIVERS
Govt. Code 65915 (e) (1) Provides that in no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section.

The section further provides that the project applicant may request a waiver or reduction in development standards that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted.

The following waivers are requested:
(1) Merging of Parcels – LBP Zone: The proposed project site is comprised of 4 separate legal parcels. A portion of the site is zoned LBP. LBMC 25.28.008(A) states parcels in a LBP zone shall not be merged together for development purposes that exceed ten thousand square feet. We request a waiver of this development standard and a parcel size greater than ten thousand square feet. The LBP portion of the site is already considered existing nonconforming due to its size at 37,640 sq. ft.. In order to allow the intended affordable housing development project, the LBP parcel will be divided and merged with the three R2 parcels to create only 2 separate parcels for the housing and religious campus. The total parcel size for the for the residential will equate to 28,937 sq. ft. and will continue to be a split-zone parcel with 14,781 sq. ft. in the R2 zone, and 14,156 sq. ft. in the LBP. As 4 separate parcels (the existing condition), the project as proposed would be physically infeasible as a result of having to apply zoning standards to each individual parcel. The waiver of this standard is necessary to allow the project to be physically built.
(2) Minimum Open Space - An additional waiver is requested from the minimum open space requirement of LBMC 25.50010(A). The required open space is 40% of Proposed Living Area which is equal to 11,620 sf. The open space provided is 4,720 sf. The open space requirements in LBMC would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted. 418
418 of 830
16 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
SB 4 Project Checklist
Affordable Housing on Faith and Higher Education Land (Government Code § 65913.16) Overview
Senate Bill 4 (SB 4, 2023) requires that, upon the request of an applicant, a housing development project be a “use by right” on land owned by an independent institution of higher education or a religious institution, if specified criteria are met. This checklist provides an overview of the requirements of SB 4 that provide a streamlined and ministerial approval process for eligible affordable housing development projects under Government Code Section 65913.16.

Purpose
The purpose of this material is to provide guidance, which agencies and other entities may use at their discretion.

This guidance does not alter lead agency discretion in decision-making, independent judgment and analysis, and preparing environmental documents for project or governmental action subject to CEQA requirements. This material is for general information only and should not be construed as legal advice or legal opinion. 419
419 of 830
17 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
SENATE BILL 4 PROJECT CHECKLIST

AFFORDABLE HOUSING ON RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION AND

HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTION LAND
If any of these responses are “no,” then the project is not eligible. For any statement with a response of “yes,” the applicant must demonstrate through providing supplemental exhibits, as appropriate, how that determination was rendered.
[Note to cities: This checklist assumes SB4 provisions have been adopted in the Municipal Code, so that definitions/further explanations are not necessary here. For example, the term “urbanized area” should be defined in the Code. Consider referencing the specific Code section next to the item. If changes are not made to the Municipal Code to address SB4, further explanation/definitions should be provided here as necessary].

Eligibility Requirements Yes No

1. Multi-Family Housing. The project is a multi-family housing development of 2 or more units.

The proposed project is a 29-unit affordable multi-family housing community. Please refer to the site plan.
☒ ☐

2. Affordable Housing Units. The applicant has dedicated 100% of the units as affordable to lower income households, OR has dedicated a minimum 80% of the total units as affordable to lower income, and a maximum of 20% of the total units as affordable to moderate income, households. Managers’ units are exempt from affordability requirements. (Note: a maximum of 5% of the total units may be for staff of the higher education or religious institution). [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(9)].

Other than the Manager’s unit, 100% of the units are dedicated to “lower income households”. Lower income households as referenced by Gov. Code 50079.5 are defined by HUD policies as families whose incomes do not exceed 80 percent of the median family income for the area. No units are reserved for staff of the religious institution.

The income levels targeted by this project will range from 30% to 60% of median income as detailed below:

Income Level Units
30% AMI 9
60% (and below) AMI 19
Manager 1
Total 29
The dedication of affordable units will be accomplished through a deed restriction and regulatory agreements with the City, various other lenders, and the California Tax Credit Allocation Committee. ☒ ☐

3. Deed Restricted. All units, exclusive of managers’ units, are subject to a recorded deed restriction for at least the following time periods: 55 years for rental units, and 45 years for owner-occupied units. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(9)(A) and (B)].

All units will be subject to a recorded deed restriction for a minimum of 55 years. ☒ ☐
420
420 of 830
18 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026

4. Urban. The site is an “urbanized area” or “urban cluster.” [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(2)].

The site is located in the City of Laguna Beach in Census Tract 0626.05 Block 3016. The entire Census Tract is in the Mission Viejo – Lake Forest – Laguna Niguel, CA Urban Area according to 2020 Census data. See Exhibit 1 – Census Tract, Block, Urban Area Map. ☒ ☐

5. Urban Perimeter. A minimum 75% of the site perimeter is developed with urban uses. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(2)].

All of the parcels adjoining the site perimeter are developed with urban uses. The uses include single and multi-family homes on parcels immediately adjoining the site, and single-family homes and commercial uses across the adjoining streets. See Exhibit 2 - Aerial Photo which confirms those urban uses.
☒ ☐

6. Religious or Higher Education Institution. The project is located on a site that, as of January 1, 2024, was owned by either of the following: (1) an independent institution of higher education; or (2) a religious institution. (Note: the project may be located on the same site as an existing religious or higher education institution, or the same site as any use previously existing and legally permitted, provided all of the following are met: the total square footage of non-residential space on the site does not exceed the amount previously existing or permitted with a conditional use permit; and the total parking requirement for non-residential space on the site does not exceed the lesser of the amount existing or of the amount required by a conditional use permit; and the new uses abide by the same operational conditions as contained in the previous conditional use permit). [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(1) and (b)(6) and (b)(10) and (i)].

The project site is owned by Neighborhood Church (Congregational) of Laguna Beach, a nonprofit religious corporation. The entity is lawfully operating as a nonprofit pursuant to Section 9110 of the California Corporations Code. See Exhibit 3 - Preliminary Title Report dated 2-4-25 and Exhibit 4 – Nonprofit Status Documentation
The additional conditions are satisfied as follows:

Square Footage
The total square footage of non-residential space (religious institution) does not exceed the amount previously existing:

Existing non-residential space (religious) Sq. Ft. 18,051 Existing non-residential space to be demolished (parsonage) (1,780) Proposed non-residential space (religious) Sq. Ft. 16,271 Parking
The required parking for the proposed non-residential space does not exceed the existing required parking.

The total existing parking for the non-residential religious use campus is 70 parking spaces. The proposed project requests a reduction of 50 percent for an existing place of worship pursuant to Govt.

Code 65913.6 (b)(2)(A) (aka “AB 2244”). Therefore, the total parking requirement for the religious use as proposed after the application of Govt. Code 65913.6 is 35 spaces. The proposed parking garage accommodates 41 spaces.
☒ ☐
421
421 of 830
19 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
Operational Conditions
The existing non-residential religious institution structures will remain in place except for the former parsonage which will be demolished. The use of the non-residential space will abide by the same operational conditions as existing (it should be noted that the existing religious institution use is not subject to a conditional use permit).

7. Light Industrial Use. The development does not adjoin a site where more than 1/3 of the square footage on the site has a light industrial use; where light industry is the most recently permitted use; or the General Plan designates the property for light industrial use. (Note: Parcels separated by only a street or highway are considered to be adjoined). [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(5)(A) and (B)].

All adjoining sites do not have a light industrial use. All adjoining sites have land use designations of:
• Village Low Density
• Village Medium Density
• Local Business Professional
The industrial section of the City is confined to Laguna Canyon, where approximately 65 acres of land is zoned for light industrial and limited commercial activities.

See Exhibit 5 - General Plan Land Use Map
☒ ☐

8. Heavy Industrial Use. The housing units are not located within 1,200 feet of a site that is either currently used for heavy industry or where the most recent permitted use was heavy industry. [Govt.

Code §65913.16(c)(A) and (B)].

The housing units are not located within 3,500 feet of a site that is either currently used for heavy industry or where the most recent permitted use was heavy industry.

See Exhibit 6 - GP Land Use 3,500 Ft. Radius Map
☒ ☐

9. Title V Industrial Use. The housing units are not located within 1,600 feet of a site that is currently a Title V industrial use, or where the most recent permitted use was a Title V industrial use. [Govt. Code §65913.16(b)(11) & (c)(7)(A) and (B)].

According to the South Coast AQMD Title V Facility Map, the housing units are not located within 1,600 ft. of a current or recent permitted Title V industrial use.

See Exhibit 7 - South Coast AQMD Title V Facilities Map. ☒ ☐

10. Oil and Gas Facility. For a site where multi-family housing is not an existing permitted use, the housing units are not within 3,200 feet of a facility that actively extracts or refines oil or natural gas. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(8)].

The site is comprised of two zoning districts, LBP and R-2. The R-2 zoning district allows multifamily housing as a permitted use. The LBP district allows multi-family housing as a permitted use subject to a conditional use permit.
☒ ☐
422
422 of 830
20 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
There are no facilities within 3,200 feet of a facility that actively extracts or refines oil or natural gas.

According to the California Department of Conservation - California Geologic Energy Management Division’s electronic database, the closest facility is an idle well (API 0405901041) located at latitude

33.53525925, longitude -117.76483917 which is over 3,900 ft from the housing and has not been active since 1978.

See Exhibit 8 - CalGEM Well Finder map.

11. Qualified Developer. The project will be developed by a “qualified developer” consisting of any of the following: (1) a local public entity; (2) a nonprofit corporation, a limited partnership where a managing general partner is a nonprofit corporation, or a limited liability company where a managing general partner is a nonprofit corporation; (3) a developer that at the time of submission of an application for development owns property or manages housing units on property exempt from taxation pursuant to the welfare exemption; (4) a developer that contracts with a nonprofit corporation that has received a welfare exemption; or (5) a developer that the religious or higher education institution has contracted with before to construct housing or other improvements to real property. [Govt. Code §65913.16(b)(9)].

The project will be developed by The Related Companies of California, a qualified developer pursuant to Govt. Code §65913.16(b)(9)(D) “A developer that the religious institution or independent institution of education, as defined in this section, has contracted with before to construct housing or other improvements to real property.”
☒ ☐

12. Sensitive Areas. The development is not located on a parcel that has any of the following. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(3) and (4)]
The development is not located on a parcel with sensitive areas. See individual details below:
☒ ☐
• Prime farmland or farmland of statewide
importance
The parcel is fully developed with an urban use
and does not have farmland.
• Protected species habitat
The parcel is fully developed with an urban use
and does not have any protected species habitat.
• Wetlands as defined under federal law
The parcel is fully developed with an urban use
and does not have wetlands.
• Land under a conservation easement
The parcel is fully developed with an urban use
and does not have a conservation easement.
• Earthquake fault zones
The site does not fall within an earthquake fault
zone. See Exhibit 9 - CA Geological Survey
Earthquake Zones map.
• Land designated for conservation in a
habitat conservation plan
The parcel is fully developed with an urban use
and is not designated for conservation.
• High or very high hazard severity zones,
except where sites are excluded by a local
agency pursuant to Govt. Code §51179(b),
or sites that have adopted fire hazard
mitigation measures per existing building
standards or state fire mitigation measures
applicable to the development. [Govt. Code
§65913.5(a)(6)(C)]
The parcel does not have a high or very high
• A site that would require the demolition of (a)
housing subject to recorded rent restrictions,
(b) housing subject to rent control, (c)
housing occupied by tenants within the past
10 years, or (d) an historic structure placed
on a local, state or federal register
The parcel does not require the demolition of
housing or an historic structure. The site is not
listed on any local, state, or federal register.
423
423 of 830
21 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
hazard severity zone. See Exhibit 10 - Calfire
Hazard Severity Zones Map.
• Hazardous waste site
The parcel does not have a hazardous waste site.
• FEMA designated flood plain or floodway
The parcel is located in FEMA Zone X; not a
designated flood plain or floodway. See
Exhibit 11 - FEMA Flood Hazard FIRMette.
• A site that previously contained housing
occupied by tenants within the past 10 years
The parcel is fully developed as a religious
institution and does not contain housing occupied
by tenants within the past 10 years.

13. Demolition of Housing. If the project requires the demolition of existing residential units, or is located on a site where residential units have been demolished within the last 5 years, all of the following apply: (1) the project creates at least as many units as will be demolished; (2) the project includes at least as many units that existed on the site within the last 5 years; (3) any existing occupants will be allowed to occupy their units until 6 months before the start of construction activities with proper notice; (4) any existing occupants that are required to leave their units are allowed to return at their prior rental rate if the demolition does not proceed and the property is returned to the rental market; and (5) the developer agrees to provide relocation benefits to the existing occupants of any protected units that are lower income households, and a right of first refusal for a comparable unit available in the new housing development affordable to the household at an affordable rent or housing cost, except that the following are exempted from the right of first refusal: a project that consists of a single-family residential unit on a site where a single protected unit is being demolished; and units in a housing development where 100% of the units, exclusive of managers’ units, are reserved for lower-income household. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(11)].

There are no existing residential units located on the site thus the project will not require the demolition of existing residential units.
☒ ☐

14. Objective Standards. The project meets the objective design and development standards, and objective subdivision standards, established by the city. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(10)]. [Note to cities:

Consider referencing Code section or other location where these standards can be found].

The project has been designed to meet most objective design and development standards established by the city pursuant to municipal code. However, the project does request certain Concessions/ Incentives, and/or Waivers in accordance with Govt. Code 65915.

CONCESSIONS/INCENTIVES:

Pursuant to Govt. Code 65915(d)(2)(D) the project is allowed to request up to 5 Concessions/Incentives because 100% of the units (excepting the manager’s unit) are designated for lower income households as defined by CA HSC 50079.5 (80% AMI).

Section 65915(k) identifies a Concession or Incentive as a reduction in site development standards, modification of zoning code requirements, or architectural design requirements including such items as setbacks, square footage requirements, parking ratios and other regulatory incentives that result in identifiable cost reductions.
☒ ☐
424
424 of 830
22 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
As a result, we are requesting the following Concessions/Incentives for reductions in site development standards as follows:

Incentive/Concession 1
Immediately Accessible Open Space Open Space (private): LBMC Section 25.50.010(A) provides that a minimum area of 40% of the gross living area shall be open space, and

25.50.010(E) requires that 25% of that open space shall be immediately accessible to each living unit, and shall be designed to be used primarily for the occupants of the living unit (private open space). The project meets the overall open space requirements of

25.50.010(A), however we request relief from the requirement of 25.50.010 (E) as incorporating private open space for each unit would require the construction of patios, decks, and/or balconies for each unit. Omitting private patios, decks, and/or balconies will result in a significant, identifiable cost reduction to the overall project.

By reducing the setback to 10 feet, we are able to achieve our desired density without having to build a 3rd story in the residential buildings as is allowed by SB 4 (Govt. Code 65913.16(j)(1)(A)). By keeping the residential buildings limited to 2 stories, a significant, identifiable cost reduction is achieved.

Incentive/Concession 4
Parking reduction: Govt. Code 65913.16(k)(1) provides “the proposed development shall provide off-street parking of up to one space per unit, unless a state law or local ordinance provides for a lower standard of parking, in which case the law or ordinance shall apply.” In an effort to reduce costs and to provide additional spaces to uses other than residential in the parking garage, the applicant is requesting a reduction in parking requirements as a development incentive. The requested reduction includes a parking ratio for Studio and 1- bedroom units at .5 spaces per unit instead of 1 space per unit. The resulting parking space requirement would change from 29 spaces to 23 spaces. A reduction in parking spaces results in a smaller garage space, more efficient land use, and a higher allowed density, thus allowing a significant cost savings.

WAIVERS:

Govt. Code 65915 (e) (1) Provides that in no case may a city, county, or city and county apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the 425
425 of 830
23 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
concessions or incentives permitted by this section.

We are requesting the following waivers:

Waiver 1
Merging of Parcels – LBP Zone: The proposed project site is comprised of 4 separate legal parcels. A portion of the site is zoned LBP. LBMC 25.28.008(A) states parcels in a LBP zone shall not be merged together for development purposes that exceed ten thousand square feet. We request a waiver of this development standard and a parcel size greater than ten thousand square feet. The LBP portion of the site is already considered existing nonconforming due to its size at 37,640 sq. ft.. In order to allow the intended affordable housing development project, the LBP parcel will be divided and merged with the three R2 parcels to create only 2 separate parcels for the housing and religious campus. The total parcel size for the for the residential will equate to 28,937 sq. ft. and will continue to be a split-zone parcel with 14,781 sq. ft. in the R2 zone, and 14,156 sq. ft. in the LBP. As 4 separate parcels (the existing condition), the project as proposed would be physically infeasible as a result of having to apply zoning standards to each individual parcel. The waiver of this standard is necessary to allow the project to be physically built.

Waiver 2
Minimum Open Space - An additional waiver is requested from the minimum open space requirement of LBMC 25.50010(A). The required open space is 40% of Proposed Living Area which is equal to 11,620 sf. The open space provided is 4,720 sf. The open space requirements in LBMC would have the effect of physically precluding the construction of the development at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted.

15. Building Height. For projects in a zone that allows residential uses, a height of no more than one story above the maximum height otherwise applicable to the site is provided. [Govt. Code §65913.16(j)(1)(A)].

The zoning districts applicable to the parcel are LBP and R-2 which both allow residential uses. As such, Govt. Code 65913.16(j)(1)(A) allows the development to be one story above the zoning requirements if located in a zone that allows residential uses. The additional height applies to the “housing development project,” as defined by Section 65589.5(h)(2), and qualifying as a “use by right” pursuant to SB 4.

The proposed affordable housing building height meets the both the LBP and R2 limits as a single-story building over the podium parking garage. However, pursuant to SB 4 (Govt.

Code 65913.16(j)(1)(A)), an additional one story is permitted above zoning limits. The project design has utilized the allowed additional one story, resulting in a two-story residential building over the podium parking garage.

See plan sheet A4.0 BUILDING ENVELOPE DIAGRAMS for details. ☒ ☐
426
426 of 830
24 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026

16. Parking. No parking is required if the development parcel is located within ½-mile walking distance of public transit, either a high-quality transit corridor or a major transit stop, OR if there is a car share vehicle located within one block of the parcel. Otherwise, the development provides at least 1 parking space per unit. [Govt. Code §65913.16(k)]. [Note to cities: a city can adopt an ordinance to require less than 1 space – if your city does, adjust the text] There are currently 70 parking spaces provided on-site for the existing religious facilities.

Govt. Code 65913.6(b)(2)(A) (aka AB 2244) provides that a developer of a religious institution affiliated housing development may request a reduction in required parking for the existing religious-use parking. Such request shall not exceed “(A) In the case of an existing place of worship to be retained, 50 percent of the number of religious-use parking spaces that are available at the time the request is made.”. Pursuant to that code, we request a 50% reduction in required existing religious-use parking to 35 spaces.

Additionally, Govt. Code 65913.6(d) allows the number of religious-use parking spaces to count toward the number of parking spaces otherwise required for the housing development.

Consequently, up to 35 of the religious-use parking spaces may be utilized to satisfy the affordable housing required spaces.

Govt. Code 65913.16(k)(1) provides “the proposed development shall provide off-street parking of up to one space per unit, unless a state law or local ordinance provides for a lower standard of parking, in which case the law or ordinance shall apply.” In addition, the applicant has requested a development incentive to reduce the parking requirement for Studios and 1-bed units to .5 spaces per unit.

The parking tabulations and government code applicability follow:

Residential Use Parking requirement:

Occupancy: Units Required
Parking
Ratio
Spaces
Required
Proposed Parking
Ratio
Spaces
Proposed
Multi-family
Residential
(affordable)
29 1/Unit* 29* 2/3 Beds -1
/Unit**
Studios/1 Beds -
.5/unit**
23**
Religious 50% of
Existing
35 41***
* 1 space per unit per Govt. Code 65913.16(k)(1).
** Incentive request - Reduced Parking Requirement Incentive request (also shared with religious use pursuant to Govt. Code 65913.6(d)).
*** Total Spaces for all uses.

The development is providing 41 total parking spaces in the podium parking garage. It is contemplated that 23 spaces would be shared between the housing and religious use as allowed by Govt. Code 65913.6(d). The remaining spaces may be utilized by the religious use and/or others (through a separate agreement).

By providing a total of 41 parking spaces, the development exceeds the required parking spaces after application of Govt. Code standards by 6 spaces. ☒ ☐
427
427 of 830
25 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026

17. Public Work Project. The housing development project is either entirely a public work project or the development contains more than 10 units and is not in its entirety a public work for the purposes of prevailing wage law. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(12)].

The development contains more than 10 units and is not in its entirety a public work for the purposes of prevailing wage law.
☒ ☐

18. Environmental Site Assessment. The development proponent completes a Phase I and 2 environmental assessment. If a recognized environmental condition is found, the proponent undertakes an endangerment assessment and any hazardous release or exposure is mitigated to a level of insignificance. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(13)].

A Phase I environmental assessment was completed by Altec Testing & Engineering, Inc. in June, 2023. The report indicates that no recognized environmental conditions were found.

See Exhibit 12 – Phase I ESA Summary.
☒ ☐

19. Air Quality. If the development is within 500 feet of a freeway, all regularly occupied areas of any buildings incorporate air filtration media for outside and return air that provides a minimum efficiency reporting value (MERV) of 13. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(14)].

The development is not within 500 feet of a freeway.
☒ ☐

20. Tribal Cultural Resources. For a vacant site, the site does not contain tribal cultural resources that could be affected by the development project that were found pursuant to a consultation, and the effects of which cannot be mitigated. [Govt. Code §65913.16(c)(15)].

Not applicable, the site is not vacant and is fully developed with an urban use. ☒ ☐

21. Ancillary Uses. If the project is in a single-family residential zone, and if a childcare center and facility is provided, it is located on the ground floor of a residential building and is operated by a community-based organization for the recreational, social or educational services for use by the residents of the development and members of the local community. If the project is in a non-singlefamily residential zone, any commercial uses provided are located on the ground floor of a residential building. (Note: No other ancillary uses beyond those listed are permitted). [Govt. Code §65913.16(h)].

There are no ancillary uses and no commercial uses as part of the project. ☒ ☐

22. Density. The project density is no more than 40 units/acre if the site is located in a zone that does not allow residential uses, and no more than the density the city has deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households in the adopted Housing Element [Note to cities: best to identify that specific density here – e.g., 20 du/acre, etc.] if the site is located in a zone that allows residential uses, including single-family residential zones. (Note: a housing development project located in a zone that allows residential uses, including in a single-family residential zone, shall be eligible for a density bonus, incentives, concessions, and/or waivers of development standards and parking ratios pursuant to State Density Bonus Law). [Govt. Code §65913.16(j)]. [Note to cities: a city can adopt higher density allowances and more stories for these projects, and, if a city allows greater residential density ☒ ☐
428
428 of 830
26 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
or building heights on that parcel or an adjoining parcel than the defaults noted above, the greater density or building height shall apply – therefore, this provision may need adjusting.] The project site is in the R-2 and LBP zones, both of which allow residential uses. As such, Govt.

Code §65913.16(j)(1)(A) provides that the development project shall be allowed a density of the applicable density deemed appropriate to accommodate housing for lower income households identified in Gov’t Code 65583.2(c)(3)(B)(iv) and a height of one story above the maximum height otherwise applicable to the parcel.

In addition, Govt. Code §65913.16(j)(1)(C) provides that a housing development project that is in a zone that allows residential uses, including in single-family residential zones, shall be eligible for a density bonus, incentives, or concessions, or waivers or reductions of development standards and parking ratios, pursuant to Section 65915.

The allowable density pursuant to the applicable Gov’t Code Sections is determined as follows:

Allowable Density per 65583.2(c)(3)(B)(iv): 30 units per acre.

Site Size: .66 Acres
Allowed units (before Density Bonus): 20
Density Bonus per 65915(f)(3)(D)(i) (100% of units for lower income households): 80% Total Allowed Density: 30 X 1.8 = 54 units per acre
Allowed Total Units after Density Bonus:

Site Size: .66 Acres
Density: 54 units per acre
Allowed Units: 36
Proposed Project:

Provided Units: 29
Provided Density: 44 units per acre
Actual Requested Density Bonus: 46%
429
429 of 830
27 December 8, 2025
Revised May 12, 2026
REQUIRED APPLICATION ITEMS:
[Note to cities: list here the application form(s) needing to be completed, and the application submittal requirements (plans, reports, other materials), and reference any application fees. Also, consider requiring applicants to submit an affidavit declaring the owner or authorized agent signature, information is true and accurate, etc.] APPLICATION REVIEW PROCESS:

1. Ministerial Review. Projects complying with SB4 are reviewed on a ministerial basis.

2. CEQA Exemption. Development projects complying with SB4 are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). If the project is consistent with all objective standards in the Subdivision Ordinance, an application for a subdivision pursuant to the Subdivision Map Act is also exempt from CEQA.

3. Application Review Timing: Depending on the project size, the following deadlines shall be observed:
• Small projects (150 units or less) – the City shall provide the applicant with a list of all inconsistencies with objective planning standards and an explanation for the reason(s) the project conflicts with the standard(s) within 60 days of the application submittal to the City. • Large projects (over 150 units) – the City shall provide the applicant with a list of all inconsistencies with objective planning standards and an explanation for the reason(s) the project conflicts with the standard(s) within 90 days of the application submittal to the City.

4. Design Review Timing: The City may conduct design review of the proposed project. The design review shall be objective and focused on assessing compliance with criteria required for streamlined, ministerial review of projects, and adopted objective design standards. The following deadlines shall be observed:
• Small projects (150 or less units) – the City shall complete design review within 90 days of the application submittal to the City.
• Large projects (over 150 units) – the City shall complete design review within 180 days of the application submittal to the City
430
430 of 830
REVISIONS T&M SURVEYING 340 SAINT ANN'S DRIVE LAGUNA BEACH, CALIFORNIA ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ SITE LOT 11 LOT 9 LOT 7 LOT 5 LOT 3 LOT 1 LOT 12 LOT 10 LOT 8 LOT 6 LOT 4 LOT 2 LOT 24 LOT 25 LOT 26 LOT 27 LOT 20 LOT 19 LOT 18 LOT 22 LOT 23 LOT 21 LOT 99 LOT 17 LOT 16 LOT 15 LOT 14 LOT 13 PARCEL 2 PARCEL 3 PARCEL 4 PARCEL 1 PARCEL 1 LAGUNA TERRACE MM 4/80 12/15/25 Attachment 9
431
’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ ’ SITE LOT 11 LOT 9 LOT 7 LOT 5 LOT 3 LOT 1 LOT 12 LOT 10 LOT 8 LOT 6 LOT 4 LOT 2 LOT 24
LOT 25
LOT 26
LOT 27
LOT 20
LOT 19
LOT 18
LOT 22
LOT 23 LOT 21 LOT 99 LOT 17 LOT 16 LOT 15 LOT 14 LOT 13 PARCEL 2
PARCEL 3 PARCEL 4
PARCEL 1 PARCEL 1 LAGUNA TERRACE MM 4/80 TENTATIVE PARCEL NO. 2025-118 FOR LAND SUBDIVISION PURPOSES CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH COUNTY OF ORANGE STATE OF CALIFORNIA EXISTING MAPPING CONDITION PROPOSED MAPPING CONDITION 432

S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W 433
W

W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W W WWW W W W W W W W W W W W W W S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S S 434
435
April 10, 2026
Mr. Craig Farmer

THE RELATED COMPANIES OF CALIFORNIA, LLC
18201 Von Karman Ave., Ste. 900,
Irvine, CA 92612
RE: NCC Laguna Beach – 340 St. Ann’s Dr.

Phase 1 ESA
Dear Mr. Farmer:

Altec Testing and Engineering performed a Phase 1 ESA for the site of the proposed affordable housing community located at 340 St. Ann’s Dr. in Laguna Beach. This letter is written to answer some questions you raised regarding the conclusions of the Phase 1 ESA.

RECOGNIZED ENVIRONMENTAL CONDITIONS
The definitions of the types of recognized environmental conditions (“RECs”) according to the ASTM guidelines are:

3.2.73 recognized environmental conditions, n—(1) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release to the environment; (2) the likely presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property due to a release or likely release to the environment; or (3) the presence of hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at the subject property under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.

3.2.17 controlled recognized environmental condition, n—recognized environmental condition affecting the subject property that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or authorities with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to implementation of required controls (for example, activity and use limitations or other property use limitations). For examples of controlled recognized environmental conditions, see Appendix X4 (ASTM E1527-21).

3.2.39 historical recognized environmental condition, n—a previous release of hazardous substances or petroleum products affecting the subject property that has been addressed to the Attachment 10
436
436 of 830
satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or authorities and meeting unrestricted use criteria established by the applicable regulatory authority or authorities without subjecting the subject property to any controls (for example, activity and use limitations or other property use limitations). A historical recognized environmental condition is not a recognized environmental condition. For examples of historical recognized environmental conditions, see Appendix X4 (ASTM E1527-21).

The Phase 1 ESA for the proposed development determined that there were no recognized environmental conditions, no controlled RECs, and no historical RECs, identified at the project site (see pages 4 and 50 of the Phase 1 ESA). As such, a Phase 2 ESA is not warranted.

The Phase 1 ESA further concludes that there are other “Potential Issues” for which testing is recommended, such as naturally occurring radon, and the possible existence of lead or asbestos in the existing building. However, it should be noted that these “Potential Issues” are not RECs, and further testing is not required, but is recommended as a “Best Practice”.

SB 4 – ENVIRONMENTAL SITE ASSESSMENT REQUIREMENTS
The environmental site assessment requirements of SB 4 are stated in California Government Code 65913.16.(c)(13), and paragraph (B) of that section states:
“(B) If a recognized environmental condition is found, the development proponent shall undertake a preliminary endangerment assessment, as defined in Section 78095 of the Health and Safety Code, prepared by an environmental assessor to determine the existence of any release of a hazardous substance on the site and to determine the potential for exposure of future occupants to significant health hazards from any nearby property or activity.”
Because the Phase 1 ESA concludes there are no RECs of any type identified, it is our further conclusion that a preliminary endangerment assessment is not required.

If you have any further questions or need additional clarification, please don’t hesitate to contact me.

Best regards,
Lynn A. Laborde, Senior EE/IH/PM
Altec Testing & Engineering, Inc. - 6035 Fremont Street, Riverside, California 92504 USA Mobile 909.645.3826
[email protected]
437
437 of 830
Phase I Environmental Site Assessment
Subject property
Neighborhood Congregational Church (NCC)
340-342 St. Ann’s Drive and 726 Glenneyre Street
Laguna Beach, California 92651
APN 644-034-05 and APN 644-034-09

1.20 acres
Submitted to
The Related Companies of California, LLC
18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 900
Irvine, California 92612
Prepared by
Altec Testing & Engineering, Inc.
6035 Fremont Street
Riverside, California 92504
(951) 352-6510
June 12, 2023
Project No. 505-2023224
438
438 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
2 TABLE OF CONTENTS

1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY.............................................................................................3

2.0 SUMMARY OF RECOGNIZED CONDITIONS (RECs)................................................4

3.0 INTERVIEWS, USER PROVIDED INFORMATION, LIENS.........................................6

4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS ...........................14

5.0 REGULATORY DATABASE RECORDS .....................................................................16

6.0 AGENCY RECORDS ..................................................................................................25

7.0 HISTORICAL MAPS AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS .................................................32

8.0 GEOLOGY/HYDRGEOLOGY......................................................................................39

9.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY RECONAISSANCE................................................................42

10.0 ADJOINING & SURROUNDING PROPERTIES..........................................................47

11.0 EVALUATION/ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS..........................................................50

12.0 REFERENCES............................................................................................................51

13.0 DEVIATIONS...............................................................................................................53

14.0 SIGNATURES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS.........................................54

15.0 QUALIFICATIONS OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS...................................55

16.0 LIST OF COMMON ACRONYMS................................................................................56 Attachments
Appendix A Maps
Figure 1 - Site Location
Figure 2 - Current Site Photos
Figure 3 - Parcel Map
Figure 4 - ALTA Survey Map
Figure 5 - Site Map
Figure 6 - Adjacent Properties Map
Figure 7 - Sanborn Maps
Figure 8 - Proposed Site Plan
Figure 9 - Garage Level Plan
Figure 10 - Second & Third Levels
Figure 11 - Elevation Sketches
Appendix B Site Photographs
Appendix C Historical Resources
Aerial Photographs
Topographic Maps
City Directories
Sanborn Maps
Property Tax Map
Building Permit Report
Environmental Liens
EDR Radius Map
Appendix D Agency Records Documentation
Agency Request and Response Documentation
Agency File Documents
Appendix E Additional Information
Owner and Buyer Questionnaires
Assessment Purpose-Scope of Work-Assumptions
439
439 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
3 1.0 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Altec Testing and Engineering, Inc. (Altec) performed a Phase I Environmental Site Assessment (ESA) on behalf of Related California for the planned development property identified as NCC (Neighborhood Congregational Church) which has the street addresses of 340-342 St. Ann’s Drive (formerly Euterpe Street), and 726 Glenneyre Street, in Laguna Beach, California 92651. The Assessor Parcel Numbers associated with the property are APN 644- 034-05 (all) and APN 644-034-09 (portion). The land area occupies approximately 1.2 acres.

The property is bordered by St. Ann’s Drive to the south, Glenneyre Street to the west, Catalina Street to the east and residential houses to the north. The local site topography slopes to the northwest.

The Phase I ESA was performed in general conformance with industry-accepted practices, American Society of Testing Materials (ASTM) Designation E1527-21, and the All Appropriate Inquiry (AAI) Rule (Title 40 Code of Federal September 27, 2021).

Current Site Use
At the time of this assessment (performed in May-June 2023), the NCC site was developed with a main church building (sanctuary) connected to parish house known as Bridge Hall, and a separate parsonage building (dwelling and garage). There is an asphalt-paved parking lots located north of the structures.

Previous Site Use
The earliest site information was obtained from a 1925 Sanborn Company Fire Insurance Map and showed a single-family dwelling at the subject property (street address of 342 Euterpe Street). This first single-family dwelling was demolished around 1946. Neighborhood Congregational Church purchased the subject property in March 1947. A single story six-room 1,400 square foot house and garage (24’ by 54’, 16’ high) was constructed in 1948 soon after the purchase. It was noted to be a parsonage with the street address of 726 Glenneyre Street.

Construction of the first church building was the parish house (now called Bridge Hall) which began in 1950. The larger sanctuary structure was constructed in 1961-1962. The existing structures have had some interior/exterior and roofing upgrades over the years, but the building footprints have remained the same.

No Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CRECs) and Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs) were identified. See Section 2.0 for further details.
440
440 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
4 2.0 SUMMARY OF RECOGNIZED CONDITIONS (RECs)
Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs)
REC refers to the presence or likely presence of any hazardous substances or petroleum products in, on, or at a property due to release to the environment; under conditions indicative of a release to the environment; or under conditions that pose a material threat of a future release to the environment.

No RECs were identified during this Phase I ESA.

Controlled Recognized Environmental Condition (CREC)
CREC refers to a REC resulting from a past release of hazardous substances or petroleum products that has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority, with hazardous substances or petroleum products allowed to remain in place subject to the implementation of required controls.

No CRECs were identified during this Phase I ESA.

Historical Recognized Environmental Condition (HREC)
HREC refers to a past release of any hazardous substances or petroleum products that has occurred in connection with the property and has been addressed to the satisfaction of the applicable regulatory authority or meeting unrestricted use criteria established by a regulatory authority, without subjecting the property to any required controls.

No HRECs were identified during this Phase I ESA.

Other Potential Issues
The items listed below do not qualify as RECs but do warrant identification, further discussion, consideration, and planning.

Radon - There is a potential for the presence of radon gas or radon decay products at the subject property which poses a health risk to current and future occupants. Testing is recommended to determine site-specific radon levels before the new building is occupied.

Altec recommends that testing be performed in the existing church buildings to help aid in pre-construction mitigation planning and decision making if radon gas is detected at the site.

Asbestos-containing materials (ACMs) – ACMs may be present in the current structures at the subject property. Asbestos sampling is recommended before demolition occurs. In addition, ACMs may have been present in the original dwelling that was formerly located at the property (demolished in 1946-1947). Asbestos-containing materials would not have been identified and/or removed at the time that structure was demolished. If any buried construction debris is present onsite, the debris could contain asbestos. A soil management plan (SMP) is recommended for implementation prior to the start of asphalt removal-grubbinggrading to identify any buried suspect ACMs.

Lead paint – Lead paint may be present in the current structures at the property. Lead paint testing is recommended before demolition occurs. In addition, lead is often found in surface soils around the former footprints of previous buildings owing to demolition without paint stabilization and/or to delamination over the lifetime of the structures. Lead paint may have 441
441 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
5 been present in/on the house that was formerly located on the property. The paint would not have been stabilized (peeling paint scrapped off and contained) at the time of demolition in the late 1940s. We recommend that the SMP referenced should include inspection for and testing of the onsite soil using an XRF analyzer to identify lead in soil from the previous lead paint.

442
442 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
6 3.0 INTERVIEWS, USER PROVIDED INFORMATION, LIENS

3.1 Interviews

Agent for Owner - The agent for Neighborhood Congregational Church (NCC) was Maya Dunne of Maya Dunne and Associates. Ms. Dunne put Altec in contact with NCC Pastor, Reverend Rodrick Echols, helped to answer general questions posed for the property and maintained contact with Altec through the Phase I ESA process.

Current Occupant/Owner - The NCC Congregation is the property owner. NCC has owned the property since March 1947 and the property was occupied by NCC and the Montessori School of Laguna Beach at the time of this assessment. NCC uses the property for worship and fellowship services mostly on Sundays and the Montessori School uses portions of the property as a day care facility during the weekdays. Historically, at least one offsite restaurant has leased portions of the church parking lot for valet parking during the evening hours.

Key Site Manager - The key site manager was identified as NCC’s Pastor, Reverend Rodrick Echols. Reverend Echols completed Altec’s Owner Questionnaire on May 30, 2023. The completed questionnaire is included in Appendix D.

Name, mailing address, contact information for
the current subject property owner.

Rev. Rodrick Echols (Pastor, NCC,
340 St. Anns Drive, Laguna Beach)
(949) 494-8061
The property is owned by the NCC
Congregation
Other than what is referenced above for the
property identification, are you aware of any
other street addresses, parcel numbers, etc.
for the subject property?
No, please note the property is owned by the
congregation. Pastor Rod is the main contact.

When did the current owner purchase the
subject property?
March 1947
Who was the subject property purchased
from?
Not to our knowledge
Provide the utility services company names
(water, gas and electric).

SoCalGas
Southern CA Edison
Laguna Water District
Provide the construction date of any onsite
buildings.

Sanctuary - 1962
Bridge Hall - 1948
Parsonage - 1948
Describe all heating and cooling systems. Not to my knowledge Names of the current occupant(s). Neighborhood Congregational Church Montessori School (rental agreement in place)
443
443 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
7 Reverend Echols provided “yes” responses to the following question:

Is the subject property in an earthquake zone? Yes
Reverend Echols provided “not to my knowledge” responses to the following questions:

Describe any manufacturing/industrial use associated with the subject property. Not to my knowledge.

Describe the past use(s) of the subject property. Not to my knowledge.

Do you have any knowledge that the subject property has been used for industrial purposes in the past? Not to my knowledge.

Has any soil been imported to, moved onto the property, or has the property been graded? Is or has the subject property been used for agricultural purposes? Not to my knowledge.

Are there or have there been any industrial-type drums stored/located on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are there currently or have there been any waste treatment or waste disposal ponds, pits or lagoons on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Is there currently or has there been any stained or odorous soil, stained asphalt or concrete on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are there or have there been any floor drains or storm water outfalls/drains at the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are there currently or have there been any underground or aboveground storage tanks at the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are there or have there been any fuel dispensers, vent pipes, fill pipes, fill ports, or metal covers indicating possible fill ports on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are there or have there been any oil wells, pipeline or related sumps or pits at that subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Aside from water, sewer, and natural gas utilities, are there or have there been any pipelines on, beneath, or adjacent to the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are there any wastewater treatment systems (clarifiers, oil/water separators, grease traps, filtration systems at the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Do you know of any damaged or discarded industrial or automotive batteries on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.
444
444 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
8 Has hazardous waste or special waste been generated on and disposed of from the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

If hazardous or special wastes are/were generated at the property, how are/were they stored? Not to my knowledge.

Have pesticides or herbicides been stored, mixed, used or disposed of on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are there any building materials on the subject property known or suspected to contain asbestos? Not to my knowledge.

Has an asbestos survey been performed at the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Has asbestos removal taken place at the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Is there any known or suspected lead-based paints present at the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Has radon testing been performed at the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Are you aware of any current or past hazardous substances or petroleum products on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Do you have knowledge of any spills, leaks, or other releases of any hazardous substances or petroleum products from the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Do you have knowledge of any environmental cleanups that have taken place at the property? Not to my knowledge.

Do you have knowledge of any environmental violations on the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Do you have any knowledge of environmental liens or governmental notifications relating to violations of environmental laws with respect to the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Do you have knowledge of any past, threatened, or pending lawsuits, enforcement actions, or administrative proceedings concerning the subject property? Not to my knowledge.

Is the subject property in a flood zone? Not to my knowledge.

Is the subject property in a methane hazard area? Not to my knowledge.

Does the purchase price being paid for the subject property reasonably reflect the fair market value of the property? Not to my knowledge.

Describe the present and past use(s) of adjacent properties. Not to my knowledge. 445
445 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
9 Reverend Echols reported that the following reports/types of report were not are available for the NCC property.

Environmental site assessment report (Phase I or Phase II) - no Environmental compliance/audit report - no
Geotechnical assessment report - no
Risk assessment report - no
Earthquake fault report - no
Environmental permits - no
Underground and aboveground storage tanks registrations - no Hazardous waste generator documents - no
Safety data sheets (SDS) for stored/used/manufactured chemicals - no Hazardous material business plans/community right-to-know plan - no Environmental violation notices - no
Environmental liens notifications or activity or use limitations - no Reverend Echols provided “no” responses to the following questions:

Does the subject property or associated business have any pending, threatened, or past litigation relevant to hazardous substances or petroleum products? No Does the subject property or associated business have any pending, threatened, or past administrative proceedings relevant to hazardous substances or petroleum products? No Does the subject property or associated business have any notices from governmental entities regarding possible violations of environmental laws or possible liability relating to hazardous substances or petroleum products? No
Is the property used as a landfill or a waste treatment, storage, processing, recycling, or disposal facility? No
Do you know of any solvents, paints, fuels, pesticides, herbicides, or other chemicals used on or stored at the subject property? No
Does the subject property produce wastewater other than domestic sewage and storm water runoff? No
Does the subject property contain a backup electrical generator? No Does the subject property produce solid waste other than domestic trash? No Are there any transformers or hydraulic equipment on the subject property that are known or suspected of containing PCBs? No
Is the subject property served by a private water well or a non-public water system? No Is or has any adjoining property been used as a gasoline station, auto repair facility, printing facility, dry cleaning, photo developing, or auto salvage? No 446
446 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
10 Is or has any adjoining property been used as a landfill, or for waste treatment, storage, processing, recycling, or disposal? No
Are there any oil refineries or large facilities of environmental or safety concern in the vicinity? No
Past Owner - The property has been developed with the church structures and occupied by the church since 1947-1948. No past owners or occupants were identified for interviewing purposes.

Buyer/User – Randy Mai, representative with Related California (as the buyer/user), completed a probative questionnaire regarding their knowledge of the environmental condition of the site.

This questionnaire was developed from the inquiries required/recommended in the ASTM 1527 Standard. The intent of the questionnaire was to obtain information about uses and conditions as described in ASTM 1527 Section 9, as well as information described in 10.8 and 10.9.

Mr. Mai completed the questionnaire and reported no knowledge of the following:
• Activities and use limitations
• Environmental liens
• Specialized knowledge related to the site
• Significant chemical spills or releases
• Environmental cleanups
• No indicators of environmental contamination
Related did not provide details regarding the purchase price of the subject property. They provided a conceptual site plan for the proposed development, an Alta/NSPS Land Title Survey, and a preliminary title report with a parcel map for Altec’s review.

The subject property is located in the City of Laguna Beach and is covered by Flood Insurance Map Panel Number 06059C0417K having an effective date of 9/21/2019. The property is located in Flood Zone X, an area of minimal flooding according to the Alta Survey document.

The subject property is comprised of APN 644-034-05 and a portion of APN 644-034-09 according to the Preliminary Title Report document. Title is vest in the Neighborhood Congregational Church of Laguna Beach, California.

3.2 Title Records
Professional services for obtaining chain of title documents or title summary information were not included as a part of this Phase I ESA scope of work and are not part of our environmental expertise. Chain of title documents were not obtained or provided for our review.

A Preliminary Title Report prepared by Old Republic Title Company (April 5, 2023) was provided by Related California for our review; it is included in Appendix E. The parcel descriptions are shown below:
447
447 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
11 3.3 Alta/NSPS Survey
The ALTA/NSPS survey documents indicated the following parcels and associated square footages-acreage were part of the property, but their document did not show specific Assessor Parcel Numbers. The number of individual parcels does not coincide with the information obtained from the Preliminary Title report.

Parcel Area
1 5600 SF or 0.13 Acres
2 2428.10 SF or 0.06 Acres
3 6767.74 SF 05 0.15 Acres
4 37,640.90 SF or 0.86 Acres
TOTAL 52,436.83 or 1.20 Acres
448
448 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
12 The 2023 ALTA/NSPS survey map is shown below:

3.4 Proposed Development
The tentative development plans are detailed below (and shown in Figures 8-11):

Lot Size: +/- 52,125 SF or 1.19 acres
Proposed 3-story and 4-story structures to include:
76 Family Apartment Units (square footages are approximate) 12 studio apartments (400 SF)
25 1-bedroom apartments (600 SF)
449
449 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
13 20 2-bedroom apartments (900 SF)
19 3-bedroom apartments (1140 SF)
Resident Community Room (1200 SF)
Spiritual Center (2336 SF)
Administration (1144 SF)
Classrooms (3536 SF)
Parking 113 spaces on the garage level

3.5 Specialized Knowledge
The buyer does not have any specialized knowledge or experience related to the subject property’s environmental condition.

3.6 Commonly Known or Reasonably Ascertainable Information The buyer is not aware of the past uses of the subject property prior to the church’s purchase in 1947. Their knowledge is limited to the use history ascertained during their consideration of purchase. All available information has been obtained and documented in this Phase I ESA report.

3.7 Valuation Reduction for Environmental Issues
The purchase price for the site was not provided to Altec but there does not appear to be any value reduction for environmental contamination or issues. Related will eventually ground lease the land from NCC.

3.8 Hazard Disclosure Report
Altec did not review a Property Hazard Disclosure Report for this Phase I ESA. The subject property is reportedly in an earthquake zone per information provided by Rev. Rodrick Echols.

3.9 Reason for Performing Phase I ESA
Altec performed this Phase I ESA in order to identify RECs at the subject property, or in association with the subject property so that the buyer and any future users can better understand the potential environmental liabilities associated with the subject property. 450
450 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
14 4.0 ENVIRONMENTAL LIENS OR ACTIVITY AND USE LIMITATIONS The current owner and the buyer are not aware of any environmental cleanup liens against the subject property that are filed or recorded under federal, tribal, state, or local law. The current owner and the buyer are not aware of any activity and use limitations (AULs), such as engineering controls, land use restrictions or institutional controls in place at the subject property and/or on file. Environmental lien research was performed for the two identified site parcels by EDR and revealed no liens or AULs. The APNs for the two parcels (644-034-05 and 644-034-09) were obtained from Related, NCC and from the Preliminary Title report provided to Altec for the subject property.

APN 644-034-05
APN 644-034-09
451
451 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
15 452
452 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
16 5.0 REGULATORY DATABASE RECORDS
EDR is a data retrieval service that was used to identify past land use, and properties where hazardous substances or petroleum products were used, transported, stored, disposed, or released that could potentially impact the subject property. EDR was founded in 1990, and provides environmental information gathered from federal, state, local, tribal, and proprietary databases to real estate and environmental professionals, lenders, attorneys, corporations, insurance companies, and government agencies.1 A summary of the databases that were reviewed, and the search distances used by EDR are provided in the EDR report within Appendix D. No listings were found for the subject property.

A search for environmental records was performed by EDR to satisfy the government record search requirements of ASTM Standard E1527. ASTM Standard search distances are onequarter, one-half and one mile, depending on the particular government database where the information was obtained. For example, a property contained in the National Priority List (NPL) Superfund database may potentially impact areas larger than the typical one-mile database search distance, whereas properties identified from the historical underground storage tank (UST) database may potentially impact only a localized area and have a one-quarter mile search distance. All of the other sites listed in the EDR database were reviewed using the above criteria.

Some sites and/or reported releases were determined to have low potential to impact the subject property. For these reasons, no further evaluation appears warranted. Other sites were determined to have a higher potential for releases and impacts to the soil gas, soil and groundwater in the local vicinity. A summary of preliminary screening results for other potentially contaminated properties up to one mile from the subject property is provided below.

EDR provided information from standard record sources using the following minimum search distances:

SUMMARY OF EDR SEARCH DISTANCES
Source Minimum Search
Distance (miles)
Meets ASTM
Criteria?
Federal NPL site list 1.0 yes
Federal CERCLIS list 0.5 yes
Federal CERCLIS NFRAP site list 0.25 yes
Federal RCRA CORRACTS facilities list 1.0 yes
Federal RCRA non-CORRACTS TSD facilities list 0.5 yes
Federal RCRA generators list 0.25 yes
Federal ERNS list Subject property yes
State-equivalent NPL list 1.0 yes
State-equivalent CERCLIS list 0.5 yes
State landfill and/or solid waste disposal site lists 0.5 yes State leaking UST sites 0.5 yes
State registered UST sites 0.25 yes
A summary of the number of sites identified in the EDR report, along with their distances and directions from the subject property is given in the following table. 1 http://www.edrnet.com.
453
453 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
17 A summary of nearby sites identified in the EDR database search and their potential for impact on the subject property is given in the following table.

SUMMARY SITES WITHIN ¼ MILE OF SUBJECT PROPERTY

AND POTENTIAL FOR IMPACT
Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
This listing is related to the business’
hazardous material and universal waste
inventory. This is not an underground
storage tank site, and they are not a
hazardous waste generator. Some
violations were listed relating to failure to
report hazardous materials inventory.

Stored chemicals include helium,
propane, and R-22 refrigerant. It does
not appear to pose any significant risk to
the subject property.

X
Former auto repair:

This former business was located about
one block to the west of the subject
property. It does not appear to pose any
significant risk to the subject property.

X
454
454 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
18 Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
(now Laguna Beach Cleaners)
Dry cleaner:

This dry cleaner business is located to
the west of the subject property and is
still in business. The dry-cleaning
location is considered to be
downgradient from the church location.

If dry cleaning solvents have been or are
released at the location, the associated
contamination could migrate offsite to
nearby properties. The risk of released
chemicals migrating to the subject
property appears to be low to moderate
owing to possible tidal influences.

Soil gas testing at the proposed
development site would be necessary to
make further determinations.

X X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
455
455 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
19 Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
Leaking underground storage tank –
case closed. This site is located
approximately 2 blocks to the southwest
of the subject property and does not
appear to pose any significant risk to the
subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Leaking underground storage tank –
case closed. This site is located
approximately 2 blocks to the southwest
of the subject property and does not
appear to pose any significant risk to the
subject property.

X
456
456 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
20 Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
Dental office waste storage and disposal.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Undetermined located at a hotel. It
does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
457
457 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
21 Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Leaking underground storage tank –
case closed. This site is located to the
northwest of the subject property and
does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
458
458 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
22 Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
No information provided X
General auto repair and associated
chemicals/wastes. This site does not
appear to pose any significant risk to the
subject property.

X
Leaking underground storage tank –
OPEN.

The potential for impact appears to be
low due to the distance (over 1000 feet)
and the direction (northwest).

X
459
459 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
23 Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Asbestos removal on a nearby
residential property prior to renovation.

It does not appear to pose any significant
risk to the subject property.

X
Leaking underground storage tank –
case closed.

This site does not appear to pose any
significant risk to the subject property.

X
460
460 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
24 The remaining sites located beyond ¼ mile of the subject property do not appear to have a significant potential for impact.

Direction
Distance
Site Name Database(s) Details Potential for
Impact
high med low
This site is a dry cleaners that has used
perchloroethylene (PCE). The potential
for impact is low due to the distance and
direction from the subject property.

X
461
461 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
25 6.0 AGENCY RECORDS
ASTM Practice E-1527-21 indicates that requested information must be reasonably ascertainable. Reasonably ascertainable per ASTM means that information will be provided by the source within 20 calendar days of receiving a written, telephone, or in-person request.

Where agency files are not available online, local and state agencies were contacted via phone, letter or in person to determine whether files were available for review. The agencies contacted and their responses are included in the table below.

Agency Information Provided
Department of Toxic Substances
Control (DTSC)
Cypress Regional Office
5796 Corporate Avenue
Cypress, CA 90630
No files were found for the subject property on
Envirostor. No records were found for the subject
property on Cal EPA’s Site Portal
(https://siteportal.calepa.ca.gov) or the HWTS portal.

Altec accessed Envirostor, HWTS and the Regulated
Site Portal on May 25, 2023. DTSC sent an email reply
to our written request for subject property information indicating that have no records on file for the Site
addresses.

Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB)
Riverside, California
No files were found for the subject property on the
RWQCB’s Geotracker website. Altec accessed
Geotracker on May 31, 2023. RWQCB sent an email
reply to our written request for subject property
information indicating that have no records on file for the Site addresses.

South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD)
21865 Copley Drive
Diamond Bar, CA 91765-4178
No files were found for the subject property on
SCAQMD’s FINDs website. Altec accessed FINDs on
May 25, 2023.

City of Laguna Beach Building
Department
505 Forest Avenue
Laguna Beach, California
(949) 497-0715
The available building permits for the subject property were obtained and reviewed and are described in
Section 6.3. Copies are included in the appendix
section.

Orange County Health Care AgencyOCHCA/ Custodian of Records P.O. Box 355
Santa Ana, CA 92702
An electronic request for health department records for the subject property (hazardous waste and
underground tanks) was submitted on May 31, 2023, to
OCHCA. The health department replied by email
indicating no records were found for the site addresses.

Department of Conservation
Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal
Resources
5816 Corporate Avenue, Suite 200
Cypress, CA 90630
No active, inactive or abandoned oil wells within
approximately one mile of the subject property, search
of Well Finder online showed no wells within ½ mile of
Site. Altec accessed Well Finder on May 25, 2023.

According to ASTM E 1527, information that has been requested must be reasonably ascertainable as part of performing a Phase I ESA. Information that is reasonably ascertainable per ASTM means that information will be provided by the source within 20 calendar days of receiving a written, telephone, or in-person request. Copies of the requests submitted to the 462
462 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
26 agencies and responses received are included in Appendix D. Local and state agencies were contacted via phone, letter, via email or online requests or in person to determine whether files were available for this site.

Agency-specific information for the subject property or adjoining and nearby sites is shown below.

Cal/EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)

ENVIROSTOR
Altec searched the Cal/EPA DTSC’s ENVIROSTOR website/database for any records associated with the known subject property addresses. No files were identified for the known street addresses or adjoining properties. There were no Envirostor sites shown in the nearby surrounding area.

Cal/EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)

REGULATED SITE PORTAL
Altec reviewed the Cal/EPA DTSC Regulated Site Portal for the subject property area. The system was searched for all sites in Laguna Beach, California, along with the street names (Saint Ann’s Drive and Glenneyre Street). There were no listings found for the subject property and no listings for nearby surrounding sites.

Cal/EPA Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)

HAZARDOUS WASTE TRACKING SYSTEM (HTWS)
Altec also reviewed the Hazardous Waste Tracking System (HWTS) database maintained by Cal/EPA DTSC. The system was searched for all sites in Laguna Beach, California, along with the street names (St. Ann’s Drive and Glenneyre Street). There were no listings found for the subject property and no listings for nearby surrounding sites.

California, Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB)

GEOTRACKER
Altec searched the RWQCB’s GEOTRACKER database for any records associated with the known property addresses and nearby sites. No files were identified for the subject property street addresses. The following listings were found in the nearby area; these sites were also identified in the EDR database and are evaluated in Section 5:

Jiffy Gas Station
890 Coast Highway (at Thalia Street)
Two Blocks Southwest of Subject property
Laguna BMW
1009 S. Pacific Coast Highway
Laguna Beach, California
Chevron #9-1966
604 South Pacific Coast Highway
463
463 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
27 Laguna Beach, California
Chevron #11-1787
590 South Pacific Coast Highway
Laguna Beach, California
These former leaking underground storage tank cases are closed and have been remediated to the satisfaction of the regulatory agency.

Orange County Health Care Agency

PUBLIC RECORDS REQUEST
Orange County Health Care Agency
Altec submitted a request for records for all subject property addresses/parcel numbers to Orange County Health Care Agency. No records were identified by OCHCA for the subject property.

South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)

FINDS DATABASE SEARCH
South Coast Air Quality Management District (SCAQMD)
SCAQMD’s Facility Information Detail (FIND) database was reviewed to identify sites of concern at or in the area surrounding the subject property. None of the known site addresses were listed in the FIND database. The FIND database information showed the following information from nearby businesses/former businesses:

No files were identified for the subject property or in the surrounding area.

City of Laguna Beach Building Department
Online Building Permit Records Review
The Laguna Beach Building Department made available permit documents for the Site address 340 St. Anns Drive and 726 Glenneyre Street. The subject property is zone as Local Business Professional-LBP, one of the commercial zonings in the city of Laguna Beach.

Available Building Permits:

Year Description Owner/Occupant
1948 726 Glenneyre Street, 6 Room House (Parsonage) and Garage, 24’ by 55’, 1,400 SF, single-story wood frame construction with stucco. No other buildings on the lot.

Congregational Church
1948 726 Glenneyre Street, trench, plumbing, wiring, plastering sign offs NCC 1948 726 Glenneyre Street, sewer permit from house to property line NCC 1950 340 St. Ann’s Drive, new construction, construction of church building
NCC
1950 340 St. Ann’s Drive, sidewall, foundation, framing, plumbing, wiring, lathing sign offs
NCC
1951 340 St. Ann’s Drive, storm drain NCC
1951 340 St. Ann’s Drive, site plan showing current and future construction
NCC
464
464 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
28 Year Description Owner/Occupant
1952 340 St. Ann’s Drive, plumbing NCC
1956 340 St. Ann’s Drive, footing trench, cement conduit, plumbing NCC 1956 340 St. Ann’s Drive, storm drain NCC
1966 340 St. Ann’s Drive, repair/alter 280 SF, single story, church NCC 1966 340 St. Ann’s Drive, electrical NCC
1968 340 St. Ann’s Drive, plumbing for kitchen remodel NCC 1972 340 St. Ann’s Drive, sign located at the grocery store for the church parking
NCC
1973 340 St. Ann’s Drive, plumbing gas system replacement NCC 1976 340 St. Ann’s Drive, church/school electrical NCC
1978 340 St. Ann’s Drive, letter regarding splitting off lots and construction residential homes. The city indicated there is a 25’ set back from the flowline of the drainage channel to the north of the property. A flood hazard analysis and geological study was required.

NCC
1978 340 St. Ann’s Drive, Preliminary Soils and Geologic Report, Church Property Lot 21, Tract 870 on Cleo and Catalina Streets.

NCC
1979 340 St. Ann’s Drive, parking lot revision NCC
1979 340 St. Ann’s Drive, disco lessons at church on weekday evenings to be discontinued
NCC
1982 340 St. Ann’s Drive, install new lighted cross over the existing cross on the front brick wall
NCC
1987 340 St. Ann’s Drive, tear off hot roof area, tear off old shakes, replace with Class B Shakes with 18” shake liners interlaced NCC
2002 340 St. Ann’s Drive, electrical NCC
2003 340 St. Ann’s Drive, gas line repair NCC
2008 340 St. Ann’s Drive, fire extinguishers or other devices – fire suppression system for church
NCC
2011 340 St. Ann’s Drive, replace existing fence 6 feet high, 50-footlong picket fence for school, located along St. Ann’s DriveNCC 2013 340 St. Ann’s Drive, replace existing fence 6 feet max. height with new security gate in center, construction on APN 644-034-09. Site plans provided.

NCC
2013 340 St. Ann’s Drive, repair damaged utility cabinet, SoCal Gas NCC 2018 340 St. Ann’s Drive, add ceramic tile to the face of the concrete retaining wall along Glenneyre Street.

NCC
Site Plan dated 1951 - showed the presence of the “Parsonage” building located on the east side of the property. There was a “Parish House” (now called Bridge Hall) identified on the east side of what is now the sanctuary with a “future addition” shown on the west side of the Parish House. The future addition area included a proposed courtyard in the middle of the main building. The parking area located north of the main church building was depicted as part of the site but the parking lot that is currently a part of the property (northeast of the Parsonage building) was not depicted on the site map.

There is a storm drain that bisects the eastern side of the subject property. See the map below:
465
465 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
29 City of Laguna Beach Planning Department
Online Record Review
The Laguna Beach Planning Department made available documents for the Site addresses 340-342 St. Anns Drive and 726 Glenneyre Street.

The earliest documents were dated 1947 for construction of a church and a church sign. The property was listed as “vacant” in 1947.

Another set of documents dated 1961 concerned a variance for parking at the church. The sanctuary portion of the building was being planned/constructed at that time. The variance was related to a reduction of the required parking spaces for the new sanctuary from 95 to 81. The variance included that outdoor lighting would be shielded.

In 1974 a request was granted for a redwood church sign and sign pole on the corner of St.

Ann’s Drive and Glenneyre Street.

In 1978 there was an application and approval for realignment of the NCC parking lot.

In 1977 a conditional use permit was issued for the Montessori school/day care center for children 2.5 and 7 years of age. In 1978 there was a one-year review of this permit, and it was approved.

In 1992 the Montessori school applied to conduct training of teachers at the NCC property (Montessori Teacher Training Institute) and the application was approved.

In 1998, a complaint was filed by a homeowner located adjacent to the north of the church regarding that NCC was permitting use of 11 feet of his property (located adjacent to the parking lot) during their leasing of the parking lot to a neighboring restaurant for valet parking. His property was identified by the street address of 361-3 Cleo Street. In 1978, NCC had owned this portion of land. NCC mentioned their efforts to retain and occupy the 11-foot strip of land as 466
466 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
30 part of their parking lot prior to splitting off the lot for residential development (Lot 21 Block 73).

At the time in 1978, two residential properties already existed on Cleo Street, adjacent (west of) to Lot 21.

The subject property outline sketched over a plot map shown below was included in the planning dept. file.

Included in the package of planning department documentation was the lease and conditional use perform for Odessa Restaurant and their use of 80 parking spaces at NCC and a map showing the approved spaces. The following is an excerpt of the map. 467
467 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
31 In 2001 code enforcement received a call from the owner of 363 Cleo Street who reported illegal activities that were happening at the NCC property. This appeared to be related to evening use of the parking lot for unapproved parking.

Department of Conservation, Division of Oil, Gas & Geothermal Resources DOGGR WELL FINDER Online - Geothermal and Oil Wells
Altec reviewed the database listing of geothermal wells and springs published by the California Department of Conservation (DOC), Department of Oil and Gas (DOGGR) Well Finder site.

There were no oil or gas wells within one-half mile of the subject property.

Munger Map Book - California and Alaska Oil & Gas Fields No oil and gas wells were identified on the Munger Map at the subject property or in the immediate area.

U.S. DOT, Pipeline and Hazardous Material Safety Administration (PHMSA) National Pipeline Mapping System (NPMS) Gas and Liquid Petroleum Pipelines PHMSA online mapping system (Public Viewer) for gas transmission pipelines and hazardous liquid pipelines was reviewed (https://www.npms.phmsa.dot.gov/PublicViewer/). No pipelines were identified on the subject property or adjacent properties. There is a gas transmission pipeline shown along the Pacific Coast Highway easement, southwest of the subject property. 468
468 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
32 7.0 HISTORICAL MAPS AND AERIAL PHOTOGRAPHS
In an effort to identify past land uses and evidence of environmental concern within and near the subject property, fire insurance maps, aerial photographs, topographic maps and relevant databases provided by EDR and others were reviewed. These are discussed below.

7.1 Fire Insurance Maps
Sanborn fire insurance maps were obtained by EDR. The Sanborn fire insurance map collection consists of a uniform series of maps, dating from 1867 to the present, and depicts commercial, industrial, and residential sections of approximately twelve thousand cities and towns in the United States, Canada, and Mexico to assist insurance agents and underwriters in determining the degree of fire hazard associated with a particular property. Sanborn fire insurance maps are typically available for areas that were densely populated prior to the 1980s but may not be available for other areas. Where available, Sanborn maps show size, shape, and construction of dwellings, commercial buildings, factories, fire walls, locations of windows and doors, sprinkler systems, types of roofs, widths and names of streets, property boundaries, building use, house and block numbers, water mains, fire alarm boxes, hydrants, and features that may represent a fire hazard. Each map generally includes many properties. 1962
The same dwelling and garage (present in 1948, 1951 and 1962 maps) are depicted onsite along with the first NCC church building present on the east side of the property. There were three dwellings located offsite within the block area of St. Ann’s Drive (formerly Euterpe), Glenneyre, Cleo and Catalina; those addresses were 370 St. Ann’s Drive and 339 and 399 Cleo Street.
469
469 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
33 1951
The same dwelling and garage (as seen in the 1962 and 1948 maps) are depicted onsite along with the first NCC church building present on the east side of the property. There were three dwellings located offsite within the block area of St. Ann’s Drive (formerly Euterpe), Glenneyre, Cleo and Catalina; those addresses were 370 St. Ann’s Drive and 339 and 399 Cleo Street.

1948
The parsonage dwelling and auto garage are located at the subject property. There were three dwellings located offsite within the block area of Euterpe, Glenneyre, Cleo and Catalina. 470
470 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
34 1925
There is a single-family dwelling located on the subject property. The street address of the house was 342 Euterpe Street. There were no other structures located within the block area of Euterpe, Glenneyre, Cleo and Catalina at this time.

See Appendix C for the Sanborn Map Report.

7.2 Aerial Photographs
Historical aerial photograph coverage (1928-2016) was provided by EDR and other photographs covering the period of 2000-2023 were reviewed from Google Earth. Copies are included in Appendix C. The aerial photograph site findings are summarized below:
1963-2023
The aerial photographs dated from 1963 to 2020 show the subject property contained the parsonage building (dwelling and garage), the Bridge Hall (original church building) and the sanctuary (newer church addition), as well as the paved parking lots. 471
471 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
35 2020 Aerial Photo
1963 Aerial Photo
1952
The 1952 aerial photograph showed that the subject property contained the parsonage building and the Bridge Hall (original church building), as well as the paved parking lot located along Glenneyre Street.
472
472 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
36 1952 Aerial Photo
1938-1946
The 1946 and 1938 aerial photographs showed that the subject property contained a singlefamily dwelling. 1946 Aerial Photo
473
473 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
37 1938 Aerial Photo

7.3 Topographic Maps
Historical topographic map coverage was provided by EDR. The USGS topographic quadrangle maps were reviewed to identify evidence of man-made structures, fill areas, and natural features that may have an adverse effect on the environmental condition of the site. The topo maps are included in Appendix C. Findings are summarized as follows:
2018 – This recent topographic map does not specifically depict any structures at the property or in the area. Streets and some street names are depicted. The property is located within Township 8 South, Range 9 West.
2015-2012 – No site use is depicted on these topographic maps. 1981-1965 – The property was depicted as a church on these topographic maps. 1949-1942 – No site use is depicted on these topographic maps. 1896-1902 – These early topographic maps do not show the presence of any structures at the site. Structures were depicted along the coastline and further north near Laguna Canyon Road (Hwy 133).

7.4 City Telephone Directories
City telephone directories (also called a reverse phone directories) are/were published for cities and towns across the United States since the 1700s and are sometimes used to locate individuals and businesses in a particular urban or suburban area. The directory lists the name of a resident, and/or the name and type of business at certain addresses. The specific 474
474 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
38 directories referenced for this site were dated from 1973 to 2020. Altec searched the entries and all of those listed for 340 St. Ann’s Drive refer to Neighborhood Congregational Church and Montessori School-Laguna Beach. There was an entry for Roxanna Ward at 340 St. Ann’s Drive in 2000. For the street address 726 Glenneyre Street, there were individual entries for the following people: Leigh Havas, 1982, 1987 and Barry Woodward, 1976.

City Directories Adjacent/Adjoining Properties
The city directory entries were reviewed for the adjacent/adjoining property addresses to determine if any prior uses could be associated with industrial uses or soil contamination.

Those entries which are or could be associated with the storage or use of environmentally hazardous chemicals are highlighted in yellow/green.

The CD listings for the adjoining properties appeared to be individual property owners for the single-family homes. No significant chemical use appears to be associated with the other former adjoining property occupants.

The complete city directory report is provided in Appendix C. 475
475 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
39 8.0 GEOLOGY/HYDRGEOLOGY
The NCC site is located north of St. Ann’s Drive, east of Glenneyre Street, west of Catalina Street, and south of Cleo Street in Laguna Beach, California. From Catalina Street the subject property slopes west a short distance to a level pad, which was created by previous grading.

The church (sanctuary and Bridge Hall) is situated on the street level of St. Ann’s Drive.

Parking lots are both on the lower level on the north side of the property.

The subject property slopes to the northwest and surface water drainage appears to be sheet flow along existing contours towards Glenneyre Street. There is a buried storm drain located onsite. Site vegetation consists of trees and shrubs located in planter areas. The landscaping onsite is well maintained. It is our understanding that the proposed development will consist of 3 and 4-story multi-family residential structures and will be constructed at or near present grade and above.

The physical setting of the subject property including the topography, surface water, geology, and hydrogeology is discussed below.

The subject property topography slopes and the general elevation is approximately 70 feet above mean sea level (amsl) according to USGS digital topographic data provided by EDR. It lies on the USGS Laguna Beach, CA topographic quadrangle map. It is located in Township 8 South and Range 9 West. The topographic data is included in the physical setting portion of the EDR report presented in the Appendix section.

Geology
The subject property vicinity lies within the southeastern edge of the Los Angeles Coastal Plain, a sedimentary basin which is bounded to the east by the Santa Ana Mountains. This area is located within the Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province, which includes northwest-southeast trending fault systems and mountain ranges (California Division of Mines and Geology [CDMG], 1966). Regional geology consists of Quaternary-Age alluvium which consists of stream, river, and fan deposits (CDMG, 1966).

General lithologies encountered during field investigations conducted at the nearby Chevron Station No. 9-1966 located at 604 South Pacific Coast Highway in 2006 were reported as consisting of sandy silt, clay, and sand to a total exploration depth of 20 feet below ground surface ([bgs]; SECOR International Incorporated, 2006). 476
476 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
40 The subject property is at an elevation of approximately 70 feet above mean sea level (MSL).

The topographic gradient in the site vicinity is to the southwest toward the Pacific Ocean (United States Geological Survey [USGS], 2018; from Environmental Data Resources [EDR], 2023).

Oil and gas field maps provided by the California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas (DOGGR) were reviewed in an effort to determine if the site is located within an active oil field. Based on a review of DOGGR maps, the site is not located within an active oil field.

The closest oil exploration well, located approximately 4 miles north, is the Cal Resources LLC “Irvine One” well, which is reported to be a plugged and abandoned dry hole (DOGGR, 1998).

Given the types of wells in the area and their distant locations, oil and gas wells are not considered to be an environmental concern at the site.

Altec reviewed the Map of Geothermal Resources in California (DOGGR, 2001) in an effort to determine if the subject property is located within a geothermal resource area. Based on this review, Altec concludes that the site is not within a geothermal resource area and did not consider geothermal activity to be an environmental concern at the subject property.

A Preliminary Soils and Geology Report was issued in 1978 by Soils International to support the development of residential homes to the north of the NCC parking lot (former church property, Lot 21, Tract 870). The geologist present onsite in 1978 observed exposures of bedrock in the open drainage course area that was present at that time. The northern portions of the lot contained compact fine to medium sands believed to be remnants of an Older Terrace Deposit.

Dense sandstone bedrock is believed to exist beneath the Older Terrace Deposits. An excerpt of the plot plan and test location map is shown below:

Soils International recommended that a flood hazard analysis be made due to the water course location. The water course (in 1978) should have a 25-foot set back on either side. 477
477 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
41 Hydrogeology
The subject property is located in the South Coast Hydrogeologic Region, in the San Juan Valley Groundwater Basin (Department of Water Resources [DWR] 2004). Average annual precipitation in the San Juan Valley Groundwater basin is 11 to 15 inches (DWR 2004). The nearest surface water feature is the Pacific Ocean, located 400 feet downgradient from the site (USGS 2012). Water bearing subunits in this basin in the Laguna Beach area include Quaternary Alluvium and fractured, Miocene-aged, sedimentary basement rocks (DRW 1967).

Water quality in the quaternary units is classified as marginal to inferior due to high total dissolved solids (TDS). Water quality generally decreases westward, toward the coast, in both water-bearing horizons as a result of elevated concentrations of TDS, sulfate, fluoride, sodium, and chloride (DWR 2004; DRW 1967).

Groundwater occurrence in the subject property area is restricted to a 12- to 19-foot thick zone of unconsolidated sands perched atop the relatively impermeable, Miocene-aged bedrock. The saturated zone beneath the area is of limited lateral extent due to the limited extent of the water bearing sand unit as well as the limited availability of water for infiltration. The subject property area is located between Laguna Canyon to the north and a small unnamed canyon to the south (Bechtel 1997).

Depth to groundwater in the area of the subject property has historically ranged between approximately 4 to 20 feet below ground surface (bgs). During recent monitoring events (2010), groundwater levels ranged from 6.5 to 16.1 feet bgs at nearby former leaking gasoline station sites. The hydraulic gradient in the vicinity of the subject property is to the west at approximately 0.04 foot/foot.

Groundwater inland of the Pacific Coast Highway is designated for beneficial use and groundwater on the seaward side of PCH is not designated for beneficial use due to elevated concentrations of total dissolved solids-TDS (DWR 1967). According to the SWRCB GeoTracker website (http://geotracker.swrcb.ca.gov), and the LBCWD, there are no water supply wells within a 1/2-mile radius of the subject property. 478
478 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
42 9.0 SUBJECT PROPERTY RECONAISSANCE
Mr. Patrick Adams, Qualified Environmental Professional, conducted a site walk on June 6, 2023. The subject property was physically accessible, and Mr. Adams performed a thorough site walk and review and was accompanied by Pastor Nichols. Weather conditions at the time of the property visit were clear with an approximate outside air temperature of 70°F.

The areas occupied by the Montessori school were not readily accessible during the site visit because the school personnel were present and were planning for the upcoming graduation.

Those interior areas are generally excluded from this Phase I ESA due to the limited observation, but this is not deemed to be a significant data gap as the uninspected areas were described to be school rooms.

Below is a summary of the site visit observations and findings. Current site photographs are provided in Appendix B.

The property occupies approximately 1.2 acres of land. There are three buildings present onsite: Parsonage, Bridge Hall and the Sanctuary. Bridge Hall and the Sanctuary are connected.

Site Observation Checklist
Feature Observed Not Observed Comments
Abandoned chemical containers None
Abandoned or stored electrical equipment None
Aboveground storage tanks (ASTs) None
Agricultural use None
Air compressors None
Air pollution control equipment None
Antennas None
Areas of drainage run-on from
neighboring properties
Areas of suspicious ground settlement None
Asbestos-containing materials YespotentialSampling
recommended
prior to demolition
Battery storage None
Chemical attack of concrete paving None
Chemical stains None
Clarifiers/Grease Traps None
Closed depressions None
Concrete corrosion or pitting None
Cooling towers None
Cutting/Machine oil on floor None
Dip tanks None
Drainage ditches/outfalls None
Drains or openings None Exterior storm
drains observed
479
479 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
43 Site Observation Checklist
Feature Observed Not Observed Comments
Degreasers None
Drums or other chemical containers 5-
gallons or more
None
Dry wells None
Electrical transformers None Pole mounted
transformer
present along
Glenneyre Street
at driveway
entrance
Emergency supplies
(earthquake, etc.)
Yes Stored in
polyethylene
containers in the
parking lot
Endangered species or threatened
species - animals
None
Endangered species or threatened
species - plants
None
Erosion None
Evidence of refuse disposal None
Excessive cracking of slab None
Excessive noise sources None
Eye wash station None
Flood zones None
Fluorescent lighting Yes Removal is
recommended
prior to demolition
Freeway property None
Fuel dispensers None
Hazardous waste storage areas None
Hazardous materials storage areas None
Heating & cooling systems Yes –
appears
to be
heating
only
If found, removal
of refrigerants and
switches is
recommended
prior to demolition
High tension power lines None
Historical features or structures None
Hummocky ground surface None
Hydraulic lift systems None
Landfilled areas None
Lead-based paint YespotentialTesting
recommended
prior to demolition
Lead in drinking water None
480
480 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
44 Site Observation Checklist
Feature Observed Not Observed Comments
Machine pits None
Metal machining equipment None
Mechanics’ pits None
Metal plating tanks/activities None
Metal shavings or scrap containers None
Monitoring wells None
Municipal Waste Yes Dumpsters, waste
containers
serviced weekly
Odors None
Outdoor lighting Yes Mounted to
building roofs
Patches in slabs where USTs or remote
fills may have been removed
None
Pits, ponds, lagoons None
Present or former hazardous waste
storage areas
None
Present or former hazardous materials
storage areas
None
Pooled liquid None
Polychlorinated biphenyls Yes Possible in
ballasts, switches,
etc., removal
recommended
before demolition
Potable water sources Yes Laguna Water
District
Roads/driveways None
Rail siding None
Remnant AST footings, pads or
secondary containments
None
Septic tanks, cesspools or sewage
disposal system
None Possible
abandoned
cesspools
associated with
the historic
dwelling
Signage indicating hazardous or
dangerous conditions
None
Shoreline property None
Sloping or hilly land areas Yes A portion of the
property is on a
slope. Property is
not flat.

Solar power sources None
481
481 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
45 Site Observation Checklist
Feature Observed Not Observed Comments
Spray paint booths None
Spills, leaks or other chemical releases None
Spill containment kits None
Stressed vegetation None
Storm water Yes Subgrade storm
water channel
runs under the
property
Storm water pollution prevention plans in
use
None
Sumps None
Sunken structural features such as
loading docks, storm cellars, basements
visible from exterior
None
Surface water retention structures None
Underground pipe stub outs None
UST fill ports, man ways or vent pipes None
Vegetation, crops, lawns or landscaping Yes The property is landscaped
Vehicle wash racks None
Vent pipes or other pipes that cannot
readily explained
None
Wastewater treatment equipment None
Water leaks/mold None
Wetlands None
At the time of the site visit, the subject property contained buildings associated with the church (Sanctuary and Bridge Hall), a former dwelling (Parsonage) that currently has classrooms (Sunday school on the weekends and Montessori school during the weekdays) and surfaced parking areas.

9.1 Asbestos-Containing Materials
Asbestos-containing materials may be present in the structures at the subject property.

Asbestos sampling is recommended before demolition occurs.

Asbestos-containing materials may have been present in the house that was formerly located at the site. It is likely that these materials were not removed at the time the structure was demolished in the 1940s. If any building construction debris was buried onsite, the debris could contain asbestos.

9.2 Lead-Based Paint
482
482 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
46 Lead paint may be present in the structures that are present at the subject property. Lead paint testing is recommended before demolition occurs.

Lead is often found in surface soils around the former footprints of older buildings owing to demolition without paint stabilization and/or years of sanding prior to repainting. Lead paint may have been present in/on the house that was formerly located at the site. It is likely that these materials were not stabilized (peeling paint scrapped off and contained) at the time the structure was demolished in the 1940s.

9.3 Radon
Radon is a decay product of uranium which occurs naturally in soils and rock. Radon and radon decay products cause radon-induced lung cancer, even at fairly low levels.

In the 1950s, studies confirmed an increased incidence of radon-induced lung cancer for workers in underground mines. In the 1980s, studies found that exposure to radon in homes can exceed exposures found for mine workers. This discovery resulted in the Indoor Radon Abatement Act (1988) that authorized U.S. state and federal activities to reduce citizen risk of lung cancer caused by indoor radon concentrations. In accordance with Sections 307 and 309 of the Indoor Radon Abatement Act of 1988, United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) listed and identified areas of the U.S. with the potential for elevated indoor radon gas levels. The research resulted in the generation of EPA Radon Zones and associated maps that have been used to plan areas where new building construction should include radon mitigation measures.

Zone 1 - indoor air level ≥ 4.0 pico-curies per liter (pCi/L) Zone 2 - indoor air level ≥ 2.0 and ≤ 4.0 pCi/L
Zone 3 - indoor air level < 2.0 pCi/L
Since 1988, the EPA and the U.S. Surgeon General have recommended that all homes be tested for radon. Since the early 1990s, the EPA has advised all U.S. schools to test for radon and to reduce levels to below 4 pCi/L.

In 1999, with publication of the “Biological Effects of Ionizing Radiation” (BEIR VI Report) study, the National Academy of Science confirmed that any exposure to radiation, including any concentration of radon, carries risk. In 2009, the World Health Organization’s “WHO Handbook on Indoor Radon” confirmed the association between indoor radon exposure and lung cancer, even at the relatively low radon concentrations found in residential buildings.

Orange County is in EPA Radon Zone 2, which has predicted average indoor radon concentration greater than or equal to 2.0 but below 4.0 pCi/L within the continental U.S.

Altec recommends that the current structures be tested for radon prior to demolition to get early warning if an elevated radon gas risk exists at the property and allow for incorporation of radon mitigation measures into the design of the planned building prior to the start of construction. We also recommend that the completed buildings be tested for radon after they are completed but before they become occupied.
483
483 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
47 10.0 ADJOINING & SURROUNDING PROPERTIES
Properties adjoining the site are described in the following table:

Direction Property
North Single-family dwellings on the south side of Cleo Street South St. Ann’s Drive, bank and single-family dwellings East Single-family dwellings and Catalina Street, followed by additional dwellings
West
Glenneyre Street, Laguna Women’s Club, Ralphs grocery store, commercial businesses including a dry cleaner and dwellings located in the direction of the Pacific Ocean

10.1 Area Description
This area of Laguna Beach contains primarily single-family residential and commercial land uses. The Pacific Ocean is located approximately 2 blocks to the west of the property. The land area slopes to the northwest.
484
484 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
48 Residential properties surround the site to the north, east and south. Commercial uses were noted to the west, south and southwest.

10.2 Adjoining/Adjacent Properties
None of the adjoining/adjacent properties were identified with existing contamination or appear to pose a high risk of contamination to the subject property.

Historical Use Information on Adjoining Properties
Historical use information on the adjoining properties is limited to single-family residential to the north, east and south. Commercial uses were noted historically to the west. None of the commercial uses on the adjoining properties to the west pose a high risk of contamination to the subject property.

10.3 Nearby Properties
Research and area reconnaissance revealed the presence of a dry cleaner (Laguna Beach Cleaners) located at 752 S. Coast Highway; the closest cross street to the cleaner’s is St. Ann’s Drive. It is located 240 feet west of the subject property in a generally downgradient direction and therefore poses a low risk of impact to the subject property.

Laguna Beach Cleaners-752 S. Coast Highway, at St. Ann’s Drive Altec reviewed the Cal/EPA DTSC’s Envirostor database and the California RWQCB Geotracker database to identify sites in the vicinity that have been associated with 485
485 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
49 contamination releases. Although there were historical leaking underground storage tank sites located in the nearby area, none were located on adjoining properties or in upgradient locations.

10.4 Vapor Encroachment Conditions
ASTM E2600 Standard Guide for Vapor Encroachment Screening (VES) on Property Involved in Real Estate Transactions is intended for use on a voluntary basis by parties who wish to conduct a VES on a parcel of real estate to determine if a vapor encroachment condition (VEC) is identified. A vapor encroachment condition is defined as the presence or likely presence of vapors in the subsurface of the subject property caused by the release of vapors from underlying media on or near the subject property. Although there is a dry cleaner located 250 feet to the southwest and historical leaking underground storage tank sites in the nearby area (northwest, west and southwest), none are/were located on adjoining properties or in upgradient positions where chemical releases would cause vapor encroachment conditions at the subject property.

10.5 Methane Gas
No methane gas sources appear to be present at the subject property or nearby area. 486
486 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
50 11.0 EVALUATION/ASSESSMENT CONCLUSIONS
Summary of Findings
No Recognized Environmental Conditions (RECs), Controlled Recognized Environmental Conditions (CRECs) and Historical Recognized Environmental Conditions (HRECs) were identified.

Other Potential Issues
The items listed below do not qualify as RECs but do warrant identification, further discussion, consideration, and planning.

Radon - The potential presence of radon or radon decay products poses a health risk concern for the occupants of the subject property. Testing is recommended to determine site-specific radon levels prior to further conclusions and recommendations.

Asbestos and Lead - Asbestos and lead testing is recommended prior to building demolition.

Soil Management Plan - A soil management plan (SMP) is recommended for the grading phase of development to ensure that lead contaminated soil or asbestos-containing debris present in the top 4-5 feet at the site is properly identified-evaluated-removed prior to construction.
487
487 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
51 12.0 REFERENCES
The following documents, maps, or other publications may have been used in the preparation of this report:

1. American Society for Testing and Materials Standard Practice for Environmental Site Assessments: Phase I Environmental Site Assessment Process (ASTM E1527-21).

2. Bechtel. 1997. Site Assessment Summary Report and Request for Changes in Site Groundwater Monitoring Program for Former Gulf Oil Service Station No. 6011787 590 South Pacific Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, California, Orange County Health Care Agency Case No. 85UT38, and Chevron Service Station No. 9-1966 604 Pacific Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, California, Orange County Health Care Agency Case No. 90UT159. March 13.

3. Chevron Station No. 9-1966, 604 S. Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, California, Geotracker files, reviewed May 31, 2025.

4. Chevron Station No. 11-1787, 590 S. Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, California, Geotracker files, reviewed May 31, 2025.

5. City of Laguna Beach, California. 2012. Zoning Map. Available online at: City Maps GIS | Laguna Beach, CA (lagunabeachcity.net).

6. Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980 (“CERCLA” or “Superfund”), as amended by Superfund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (“SARA”) and Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act of 2002 (“Brownfield Amendments”), 42 U.S.C. §§9601, et. seq.

7. DWR. 1967. Ground Water Occurrence and Quality: San Diego Region. Bulletin No. 106-2, Volume 1. June.

8. DWR. 2003. California’s Groundwater – Bulletin 118. Updated.

9. DWR. 2004. San Juan Valley Groundwater Basin, South Coast Hydrogeologic Region.

California’s Groundwater Bulletin 118, California Department of Water Resources; Updated February 27.

10. DWR, Website, Current Groundwater Levels, California's Groundwater Live:

Groundwater Levels (arcgis.com), June 5, 2023.

11. Environmental Data Resources (EDR) Radius Map 2023

12. EDR Historical Resources, Sanborn Company Maps, Aerial Photographs, Telephone Directories, Topographic Maps, 2023.

13. Frank’s Mercedes, 900 S. Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, California, Geotracker files, reviewed May 31, 2025.
488
488 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
52 14. Jiffy Gas/Desert Petroleum Station No. 514, 890 S. Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, California, Geotracker files, reviewed May 31, 2025.

15. Laguna BMW, 1009 S. Coast Highway, Laguna Beach, California, Geotracker files, reviewed May 31, 2025.

16. Related California, Conceptual Site Plans, 2023.

17. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, as amended (“RCRA”), 42 U.S.C. §6901, et.

Seq.

18. T&M Surveying, ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey, 2 pages, 340 Saint Ann’s Drive, Laguna Beach, California, date prepared not included.

19. United States Department of Agriculture, Soil Conservation Service, Soil Surveys.

20. United States Geological Survey, Topographic Maps, 2021 and 2023.

21. Vedder, J. G. 1970. Summary of the Geology of the San Joaquin Hills, J. W. and Warren A. D. [eds] Geologic Guidebook, Southeastern Rim of the Los Angeles Basin, Orange County, California: Newport Lagoon, San Joaquin Hills, Santa Ana Mountains: Pacific Sections AAPG, SEPM, SEG field trip, March 21: Pacific Sections AAPG, SEPM, SEG, p. 15-19.

22. Vedder, J. G. 1975. Revised Geologic Map, Structure Sections and Well Table, San Joaquin Hills – San Juan Capistrano Area, California. USGS Open-File Report 75-552. http://pubs.er.usgs.gov/publication/ofr75552
489
489 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
53 13.0 DEVIATIONS
Except as stated herein, there were no deviations from the standard practice for Phase I ESAs.

ASTM defines data gap as a lack of or inability to obtain information required by this practice despite good faith efforts by the environmental professional to gather such information. Data gaps may result from incompleteness in any of the activities required by this practice, including, but not limited to site reconnaissance (for example, an inability to conduct the site visit), and interviews (for example, an inability to interview the key site manager, regulatory officials, etc.).

ASTM requires that this report identify and comment on significant data gaps that affect the ability of the EP to identify recognized environmental conditions and identify the sources of information that were consulted to address the data gaps. A data gap by itself is not inherently significant. For example, if a property’s historical use is not identified back to 1940 because of data failure, but the earliest source shows that the property was undeveloped, this data gap by itself would not be significant. A data gap is only significant if other information and/or professional experience raises reasonable concerns involving the data gap. For example, if a building on the property is inaccessible during the site visit, and the environmental professional’s experience indicates that such a building often involves activity that leads to a recognized environmental condition, the inability to inspect the building would be a significant data gap warranting comment.
490
490 of 830
Phase I ESA
NCC, Laguna Beach, CA
54 14.0 SIGNATURES OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROFESSIONALS
We declare that, to the best of our professional knowledge and belief, we meet the definition of Environmental Professional as defined in §312.10 of 40 CFR 312. We have the specific qualifications based on education, training, and experience to assess a site of the nature, history, and setting of the site. We have developed and performed all appropriate inquiries in conformance with the standards and practices set forth in 40 CFR Part 312.

June 12, 2023
Signature Date
Lynn A. Laborde
Senior Environmental Engineer/Industrial Hygienist, REPA #172829 This report was reviewed by:

June 12, 2023
Signature Date
Patrick Adams
President
491
491 of 830
131 Calle Iglesia, Suite 200, San Clemente, CA 92672 (949) 369-6141 www.lgcgeotechnical.com December 2, 2025 Project No. 23106-01
Ms. Crystal Villalpando
Related California
18201 Von Karman Avenue, Suite 900
Irvine, CA 92612
Subject: Updated Preliminary Geotechnical Subsurface Evaluation, Proposed Multi-Family Residential Podium Development, 340 St Ann’s Drive, Laguna Beach, California In accordance with your request, LGC Geotechnical, Inc. is providing an updated preliminary geotechnical subsurface evaluation for the proposed multi-family residential podium development located at 340 St Ann’s Drive in the City of Laguna Beach, California. This report presents the results of our limited subsurface explorations and geotechnical analysis and provides a summary of our conclusions and preliminary recommendations relative to the proposed site development.

Should you have any questions regarding this report, please do not hesitate to contact our office. We appreciate this opportunity to be of service.

Respectfully,
LGC Geotechnical, Inc.

Ryan Douglas, PE, GE 3147 Katie Maes, CEG 2216
Vice President of Engineering Director of Geology
RLD/BTZ/KTM/MDP/amm
Distribution: (1) Addressee (electronic copy)
Attachment 11
492
492 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page i December 2, 2025

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page

1.0 INTRODUCTION ...................................................................................................................................... 1

1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services ........................................................................................................... 1

1.2 Background ............................................................................................................................................... 1

1.3 Project Description................................................................................................................................. 1

1.4 Subsurface Exploration........................................................................................................................ 4

1.5 Laboratory Testing ................................................................................................................................. 4

2.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS............................................................................................................. 6

2.1 Regional Geology .................................................................................................................................... 6

2.1.1 Older Artificial Fill(Map Symbol – afo)............................................................................ 6

2.1.2 Quaternary Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol - Qt)........................................................ 6

2.1.3 Tertiary Topanga Formation(Map Symbol - Tt)......................................................... 6

2.2 Generalized Subsurface Conditions................................................................................................. 7

2.3 Groundwater............................................................................................................................................. 7

2.4 Field Infiltration Testing...................................................................................................................... 7

2.5 Seismic Design Parameters................................................................................................................. 8

2.6 Faulting....................................................................................................................................................... 9

2.6.1 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement...........................................................................10

2.6.2 Lateral Spreading ...................................................................................................................10

2.6.3 Tsunamis and Seiches...........................................................................................................11

2.7 Oversized Material................................................................................................................................11

2.8 Expansion Potential..............................................................................................................................11

3.0 CONCLUSIONS........................................................................................................................................12

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS..........................................................................................................................14

4.1 Site Earthwork .......................................................................................................................................14

4.1.1 Clearing and Grubbing ..........................................................................................................15

4.1.2 Removal and Recompaction Depths and Limits ..........................................................15

4.1.3 Temporary Excavations........................................................................................................16

4.1.4 Removal Bottoms and Subgrade Preparation ..............................................................17

4.1.5 Material for Fill ........................................................................................................................17

4.1.6 Placement and Compaction of Fills...................................................................................18

4.1.7 Trench and Retaining Wall Backfill and Compaction.................................................19

4.1.8 Footing Exavations .................................................................................................................20

4.2 Preliminary Foundation Design Parameters .............................................................................20

4.2.1 Building Structure..................................................................................................................20

4.2.2 Ground Improvement Alternative for Building Structure......................................21

4.2.3 Slab Underlayment Guidliens ............................................................................................21

4.3 Lateral Resistance ................................................................................................................................22

4.4 Lateral Earth Pressures for Basement/Retaining Walls .......................................................22

4.5 Temporary Shoring..............................................................................................................................25 493
493 of 830
TABLE OF CONTENTS (Cont’d)
Project No. 23106-01 Page ii December 2, 2025

4.6 Soil Corrosivity ......................................................................................................................................26

4.7 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations.................................................................................26

4.8 Nonstructural Concrete Flatwork ..................................................................................................27

4.9 Control of Surface Water and Drainage Control.........................................................................28

4.10 Subsurface Water Infiltration..........................................................................................................29

4.11 Pile Shafts for Shoring.........................................................................................................................29

4.12 Pier Shafts for Temporary Shoring................................................................................................29

4.13 Geotechnical Plan Review..................................................................................................................30

4.14 Pre-Construction Monitoring...........................................................................................................30

4.15 Geotechnical Observation and Testing During Construction ................................................30

5.0 LIMITATIONS .........................................................................................................................................31

LIST OF TABLES, ILLUSTRATIONS, & APPENDICES
Tables
Table 1 – Summary of Field Infiltration Testing (Page 8) Table 2 – Seismic Design Parameters (Page 9)
Table 3 – Allowable Soil Bearing Pressures (Page 20)
Table 4A – Lateral Earth Pressures – Cut Condition (Page 23) Table 4B – Lateral Earth Pressures – Conventional Backfilled Retaining Wall (Page 24) Table 5 – Preliminary Asphalt Concrete Paving Section Options (Page 27) Table 6 – Preliminary Geotechnical Parameters for Nonstructural Concrete Flatwork Placed on Very Low to Low Expansion Potential Subgrade (Page 28)
Figures
Figure 1 – Site Location Map (Page 3)
Figure 2 – Geotechnical Map (Site Plan) (Rear of Text)
Figure 3 – Geotechnical Map (Topographic Map) (Rear of Text) Figure 4 – Multi-Period Design Response Spectrum
Figure 5 – Basement Subterranean Structure Backfill/Subdrain Detail (Rear of Text) Figure 6 – Retaining Wall Backfill Detail (Rear of Text) Appendices
Appendix A – References
Appendix B – Boring Logs
Appendix C – Laboratory Test Results
Appendix D – Infiltration Testing Results
Appendix E – General Earthwork and Grading Specifications 494
494 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 1 December XX, 2025

1.0 INTRODUCTION

1.1 Purpose and Scope of Services
This updated preliminary geotechnical report is for the proposed multi-family residential podium development located at 340 St Ann’s Drive in the City of Laguna Beach, California (see Site Location Map, Figure 1). The purpose of our work was to evaluate site geotechnical conditions and to provide preliminary geotechnical recommendations with respect to the proposed development.

1.2 Background
Review of historical aerial photographs indicates the site was generally undeveloped during 1945, however Glenneyre Street and cross streets are visible (Historic Aerials, 2023). During 1952, site development occurred and some of the structures including the north half of the exiting church structure and the parsonage residence have been constructed, along with a parking lot. Based on review of background documents, an addition to the church was constructed and the parking lot was re-graded during the 1960’s (Twining Laboratories, 1962).

At that time, the existing concrete retaining walls along the northwestern boundary of the subject property were constructed, with a descending slope to the existing drainage that passes northwest of the site. Based on the referenced report (Soils International, 1978), a portion of the former church property to the northwest of the current site limits was proposed for residential construction, and residences are present there now.

1.3 Project Description
The approximately 1.2-acre site is bound to the northeast by Catalina Street, to the southeast by St Ann’s Drive, to the southwest by Glenneyre Street, and to the northwest by existing residential developments. The site is currently an existing church development with several buildings, a parking lot, and retaining walls situated throughout the site (Architectural Drawings, 2023). The main church building appears to be two levels. The parking lot is asphalt concrete. A daycare play yard and ancillary building are located on the north side of the main church building. An approximately 15-foot-tall retaining wall retains the neighboring residential property and landscape area in the eastern corner of the site adjacent to Catalina Street. An approximately 8- foot-tall retaining wall retains the church building on the southwestern property line adjacent to Glenneyre Street. The site descends to the neighboring residential neighborhood adjacent to the parking lot on the northwestern property line. A concrete retaining wall exists along a portion of the northwestern property line. Topographically the site has variable developed areas with elevations ranging from approximately 66 feet above mean sea level (msl) in the western portion of the site to approximately 84 feet above msl in the southern portion of the site and approximately 90 feet above msl in the eastern corner of the site above the existing retaining wall (T&M Surveying, 2022).

It is our understanding that the proposed development has been updated to consist of a twostory multi-family structure with a podium parking subterranean floor and other appurtenant 495
495 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 2 December 2, 2025
improvements. The proposed project excludes the existing church and will remain in place. The subterranean level is anticipated to essentially encompass the entire northern and western portions of the site and consist of 42 parking stalls. The entrance driveway to the subterranean parking will be located on the western side of the site along Glenneyre Street (Related, 2025).

The proposed building footprint is depicted on Figure 2 – Geotechnical Map (Site Plan). The structure is proposed to have two levels above ground and one level below ground (subterranean). The podium structure is anticipated to be reinforced concrete. A preliminary grading plan was not available at the time of this report. Preliminary structural (dead plus live) loads have not been provided at this time. However, we have estimated maximum (dead plus live) column and wall loads of 150 kips and 5 kips/ft, respectively.

The recommendations given in this report are based upon the preliminary proposed layout and estimated structural loading information above. We understand that the project plans are currently being developed at this time; LGC Geotechnical should be provided with updated project plans and the final structural loads when they become available, in order to either confirm or modify the recommendations provided herein. 496
496 of 830
Approximate
Site Location
FIGURE 1
Site Location Map
DATE December 2025
ENG. / GEOL.

PROJECT NO.

PROJECT NAME
SCALE
RLD
Not to Scale
Related - 340 St. Ann's, Laguna Beach
23106-01
497
497 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 4 December 2, 2025

1.4 Subsurface Geotechnical Evaluation
A limited geotechnical field evaluation was performed by LGC Geotechnical in June of 2023. This program consisted of drilling and sampling four small-diameter exploratory hollow-stem borings (HS-1 through HS-4) and three hand-auger borings (HA-1 through HA-3) for the purpose of obtaining samples for evaluation and laboratory testing of site soils. Two of the borings (I-1 and I-2) were excavated for infiltration testing.

Four hollow-stem auger borings (HS-1 through HS-4) were drilled by 2R Drilling under subcontract to LGC Geotechnical. The depth of the borings ranged from approximately 25 to 45 feet below existing grade. Boring HS-1 was terminated at a depth of approximately 45 feet below existing grade due to auger refusal. An LGC Geotechnical representative observed the drilling operations, logged the borings, and collected soil samples for laboratory testing. The borings were performed using a truck-mounted drill rig equipped with 6-inch diameter hollow-stem augers. Driven soil samples were collected by means of the Standard Penetration Test (SPT) and Modified California Drive (MCD) sampler generally obtained at 2.5 to 5-foot vertical increments. The MCD is a split-barrel sampler with a tapered cutting tip and lined with a series of 1-inch-tall brass rings. The SPT sampler (1.4-inch ID) and MCD sampler (2.4-inch ID, 3.0-inch OD) were driven using a 140-pound automatic hammer falling 30 inches to advance the sampler a total depth of 18 inches. The raw blow counts for each 6-inch increment of penetration were recorded on the boring logs. Bulk samples of the near-surface soils were also collected and logged at select borings for laboratory testing. In select borings, after removal of the augers the depth of the boring due to caving was measured and is noted on the boring logs.

At the completion of drilling, the borings were backfilled with the native soil cuttings, tamped and the surface was replaced with asphalt cold patch, where necessary. Some settlement of the backfill soils/asphalt cold patch may occur over time.

Infiltration testing was performed within two borings, I-1 and I-2, to depths of approximately 5 feet below existing grade with an 8-inch auger. An LGC Geotechnical engineer installed standpipes, backfilled the borings with crushed rock and pre-soaked the infiltration holes prior to testing. Infiltration testing was performed per the South County of Orange testing guidelines (2017). Standpipes were removed and the locations were subsequently backfilled with native soils at the completion of testing. Some settlement of the backfill soils may occur over time.

Boring logs are presented in Appendix B and their approximate locations are depicted on Figure 3 – Geotechnical Map (Topographic Plan).

1.5 Laboratory Testing
Representative driven and bulk samples were retained for laboratory testing during our field evaluation. Laboratory testing included in-situ unit weight and moisture content, fines content, Atterberg limits, direct shear, consolidation, expansion index, and corrosion (sulfate, chloride, pH, and minimum resistivity).

The following is a summary of the laboratory test results. • Dry density of the samples collected ranged from approximately 99 pounds per cubic foot (pcf) to 119 pcf, with an average of 109 pcf. Field moisture contents ranged from 498
498 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 5 December 2, 2025
approximately 3 percent to 29 percent, with an average of 14 percent. • Two fines content tests indicated a fines content (percent passing No. 200 sieve) of 34 and 45 percent. Based on the Unified Soils Classification System (USCS), the tested samples would be classified as “coarse-grained.”
• Two Atterberg Limit (liquid limit and plastic limit) tests were performed. Results indicated Plasticity Index (PI) values of 16 to 18.
• Three direct shear tests were performed. The plots are provided in Appendix C. • Two consolidation tests were performed. The stress vs. deformation plots are provided in Appendix C.
• One Expansion Index (EI) test was performed. Results were an EI of 4, corresponding to “Very Low” expansion potential.
• Corrosion testing indicated soluble sulfate content less than 0.02 percent, chloride content of 41 parts per million (ppm), pH value of 7.5, and minimum resistivity of 1,950 ohm-cm.

A summary of the laboratory test results is presented in Appendix C. 499
499 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 6 December 2, 2025

2.0 GEOTECHNICAL CONDITIONS

2.1 Regional Geology
The site is located on the coastal portion of the western border of the Peninsular Ranges Geomorphic Province of California, specifically within the San Joaquin Hills. The San Joaquin Hills are the result of a theoretical uplift along a blind thrust fault at depth below the hills. The hillsides generally consist of Tertiary bedrock formations that have been faulted and uplifted to form the hillside ascending to the northeast of the subject site. The local geology has also been influenced by changes in sea level, resulting in a series of abandoned terrace deposits on wave-cut marine platforms along the coast, generally sub-horizontal. Marine terrace deposits are typically present on the base of wave-cut platforms, and soils eroded over time (non-marine) have been deposited over the marine terrace in some locations. Localized drainages have incised into the terraces and bedrock below, throughout the region.

Our review of readily available geotechnical documents indicates that the subject site is not located within a Seismic Hazard Zone, including areas of earthquake-induced landslides and liquefaction (CDMG, 2006), or a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone (CGS, 2018). No faults were encountered during our investigation and no faults are mapped across the site on the reviewed regional geologic maps.

Per the regional geologic map of the area, the site is underlain by a veneer of Quaternary terrace deposits, over Tertiary Topanga Formation bedrock (USGS, 1957; Edgington & Tan, 1976). The materials are described below.

2.1.1 Older Artificial Fill (Map Symbol - afo)
Older artificial fill soils are present on site that were placed during previous uses and development of the property and the adjacent property to the northwest. As encountered, older artificial fill soils were loose to medium dense, brown mottled clayey and silty sand, and sandy clay.

2.1.2 Quaternary Terrace Deposits (Map Symbol - Qt)
Regional geologic maps indicate Quaternary terrace deposits are present at the site; generally sandwiched between older artificial fill and the underlying bedrock unit.

Terrace deposits are typically formed by deposition of beach sand and coastal erosional deposits onto a subhorizontal, wave-cut platform of bedrock. As encountered, terrace deposits consist of olive brown to brown sandy clay, silty sand, and clayey sand.

2.1.2 Tertiary Topanga Formation (Map Symbol – Tt)
The primary bedrock formation underlying the site is the Tertiary Topanga Formation.

The material is generally described as sandstone with minor siltstone and pebble 500
500 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 7 December 2, 2025
conglomerate interbeds, weakly cemented, very dense (Edgington & Tan, 1976). As encountered, the bedrock consisted of grayish brown to brown, very dense silty sandstone, and minor amounts of hard sandy claystone.

2.2 Generalized Subsurface Conditions
The field explorations (borings) generally indicate the site contains up to approximately 15 feet of previously placed undocumented artificial fill over native Terrace Deposits overlying Topanga Formation Bedrock to the maximum explored depth of approximately 45 below existing grade.

Older artificial fill soils encountered were primarily loose to medium dense clayey and silty sands and very stiff sandy clays. Native terrace deposits are primarily stiff to very stiff sandy clays and medium dense to dense silty sands and clayey sands. Bedrock consisted of primarily very dense silty sands and hard sandy clays.

It should be noted that geotechnical explorations are only representative of the location where they are performed, and varying subsurface conditions may exist outside of each location. In addition, subsurface conditions can change over time. The soil descriptions provided above should not be construed to mean that the subsurface profile is uniform, and that soil is homogeneous within the project area. For details on the stratigraphy at the exploration locations, refer to the boring logs provided in Appendix B.

2.3 Groundwater
Groundwater was not encountered in our borings to the maximum explored depth of approximately 45 feet below existing grade. Based on the Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Laguna Beach Quadrangle (CDMG, 2006), no depth to historic high groundwater is indicated for the site. Please note, however, that a blue-line drainage is depicted as passing just west of the subject site. The nearby drainage from Bluebird Canyon that collects drainage from the ascending hillsides northeast of the subject site, has been channelized into a storm drain alignment that remains in-place northwest of the site, at a lower elevation.

It should be noted that higher localized and seasonal perched groundwater conditions may accumulate below the surface and should be expected throughout the design life of the proposed improvements. In general, groundwater conditions below any given site may vary over time depending on numerous factors including seasonal rainfall, local irrigation, and intentional infiltration of stormwater, among others.

2.4 Field Infiltration Testing
Two field percolation tests were performed in the southern and eastern portions of the site per the direction of the project civil engineer, the locations are depicted on Figure 2 – Geotechnical Map (Site Plan). Test well installation consisted of placing a 3-inch diameter perforated PVC pipe in the excavated 8-inch diameter borehole and backfilling the annulus with crushed rock including the placement of approximately 2 inches of crushed rock at the bottom of the borehole. The infiltration test wells were presoaked the day of installation and testing took 501
501 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 8 December 2, 2025
place within 24 hours of presoaking. During the pre-test, the water levels in the borings were observed to drop less than 6 inches in 25 minutes for two consecutive readings. Therefore, the test procedure for fine-grained soils or “slow test” was followed. Test well installation and the estimation of infiltration rates were accomplished in general accordance with the guidelines set forth by South Orange County (2017). In general, three-dimensional flow out of the test well (percolation), as observed in the field, is mathematically reduced to one-dimensional flow out of the bottom of the test well (infiltration). Infiltration tests are performed using relatively clean water, free of particulates, silt, etc. The results of our recent field infiltration testing are presented in Appendix D and summarized in Table 1 below.

TABLE 1
Summary of Field Infiltration Testing
Infiltration Test
Identification
Approx. Depth
Below Existing
Grade (ft)
Observed
Infiltration Rate*
(in./hr.)
I-1 5 0.0
I-2 5 0.2
*Observed Infiltration Rates Do Not Include Factor of Safety.

The tested infiltration rates provided in this report are considered a general representation of the infiltration rates at the location of the proposed infiltration boring. Please note, the testing of infiltration rates is highly dependent upon the materials encountered at the point of testing (i.e., location and depth of testing). Varying subsurface conditions may exist outside of the test location which could alter the calculated infiltration rate. Please refer to Section 4.10 for subsurface water infiltration recommendations.

2.5 Seismic Design Parameters
The site seismic characteristics were evaluated per the guidelines set forth in Chapter 16, Section 1613 of the 2025 California Building Code (CBC) and applicable portions of ASCE 7-22 which has been adopted by the CBC. The code-based Multi-Period Design Response Spectrum (MPDRS) per ASCE 7-22 is provided on Figure 4. The provided MPDRS is an envelope of the applicable site class as indicated below. For each response period, T, less than 10 seconds and not equal to one of the discrete values of period (T) provided on Figure 4, the spectral response acceleration parameter (Sa) shall be determined by linear interpolation between values of Sa.

Refer to Chapter 11 of ASCE 7-22. The structural designer should contact the geotechnical consultant if structural conditions require site-specific ground motions. 502
502 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 9 December 2, 2025
TABLE 2
Seismic Design Criteria
Selected Parameters from 2025 CBC,
Section 1613 - Earthquake Loads
Seismic
Design
Criteria
Notes/References
Distance to applicable faults classifies the site as a
“Near-Fault” site. Section 11.4.1 of ASCE 7
Site Latitude 33.537435 Degrees North
Site Longitude -117.777951 Degrees West
Shear Wave Determination, v̅s Estimated* Chapter 20 of ASCE 7 Applicable Site Classes CD, D Chapter 20 of ASCE 7
*Estimated v̅s requires deriving site class by vs/1.3 & 1.3vs, envelope (maximum) presented
A disaggregation of the PGA based on a 2,475-year average return period (MCE) indicates that an earthquake magnitude of 6.73 at a distance of approximately 8.84 km from the site would contribute the most to this ground motion. A disaggregation of the PGA based on a 475-year average return period (Design Earthquake) indicates that an earthquake magnitude of 6.56 at a distance of approximately 20.97 km from the site would contribute the most to this ground motion (USGS, 2018).

Section 1803.5.12 of the 2025 CBC (per Section 11.8.3 of ASCE 7) states that the maximum considered earthquake geometric mean (MCEG) Peak Ground Acceleration (PGA) should be used for liquefaction potential. The PGAM for the site is equal to 0.68g (SEAOC, 2025). The design PGA is equal to 0.45g (2/3 of PGAM).

2.6 Faulting
Prompted by damaging earthquakes in Northern and Southern California, State legislation and policies concerning the classification and land-use criteria associated with faults have been developed. Their purpose was to prevent the construction of urban developments across the trace of active faults. The result is the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Act. According to the State Geologist, an active fault is defined as one which has had surface displacement within the Holocene Epoch (roughly the last 11,000 years). A potentially active fault is defined as any fault, which has had surface displacement during Quaternary time (last 1,600,000 years), but not within the Holocene. Earthquake Fault Zones have been delineated along the traces of active faults within California. Where developments for human occupation are proposed within these zones, the state requires detailed fault evaluations be performed so that engineering geologists can mitigate the hazards associated with active faulting by identifying the location of active faults and allowing for a setback from the zone of previous ground rupture.

The subject site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone (i.e., AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Act Zone) and no active faults are known to cross the site. A fault is 503
503 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 10 December 2, 2025
considered “active” if evidence of surface rupture in Holocene time (the last approximately 11,000 years) is present. The possibility of damage due to ground rupture is considered low since no active faults are known to cross the site.

Secondary effects of seismic shaking resulting from large earthquakes on the major faults in the Southern California region, which may affect the site, include ground lurching, shallow ground rupture, soil liquefaction and dynamic settlement. These secondary effects of seismic shaking are a possibility throughout the Southern California region and are dependent on the distance between the site and causative fault and the onsite geology. The closest major active faults that could produce these secondary effects include the Whittier-Elsinore, San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust, Newport Inglewood, San Andreas Fault Zones, among others. The closest major active fault to the site is the San Joaquin Hills Blind Thrust Fault located at depth below the site (no surface rupture). A discussion of these secondary effects is provided in the following sections.

2.6.1 Liquefaction and Dynamic Settlement
Liquefaction is a seismic phenomenon in which loose, saturated, granular soils behave similarly to a fluid when subject to high-intensity ground shaking. Liquefaction occurs when three general conditions coexist: 1) shallow groundwater; 2) low density noncohesive (granular) soils; and 3) high-intensity ground motion. Studies indicate that loose, saturated, near surface cohesionless soils exhibit the highest liquefaction potential, while dry, dense, cohesionless soils and cohesive soils exhibit low to negligible liquefaction potential. In general, cohesive soils are not considered susceptible to liquefaction (Bray & Sancio, 2006). Effects of liquefaction on level ground include settlement, sand boils, and bearing capacity failures below structures. Dynamic settlement of dry sands can occur as the sand particles tend to settle and densify as a result of a seismic event.

The site is not located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction potential (CDMG, 1998). Based on the lack of a shallow groundwater table at the site, relatively shallow depth to formational materials, and the generally dense nature of the material below the site, there is a very low potential for liquefaction.

2.6.2 Lateral Spreading
Lateral spreading is a type of liquefaction induced ground failure associated with the lateral displacement of surficial blocks of sediment resulting from liquefaction in a subsurface layer. Once liquefaction transforms the subsurface layer into a fluid mass, gravity plus the earthquake inertial forces may cause the mass to move downslope towards a free face (such as a river channel or an embankment). Lateral spreading may cause large horizontal displacements and such movement typically damages pipelines, utilities, bridges, and structures.

Due to the lack of groundwater in the upper 50 feet and very low potential for liquefaction, the potential for lateral spreading is considered very low. 504
504 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 11 December 2, 2025

2.6.3 Tsunamis and Seiches
Based on the subject site elevation, there is a low possibility of damage to the site during a large tsunami event. The site is not located within the Tsunami Inundation Area delineated on the Tsunami Hazard Area Map for the Laguna Beach Quadrangle (CGS, 2021).

2.7 Oversized Material
Oversized material (material larger than 8 inches in maximum dimension) may be encountered during site grading. Recommendations are provided for appropriate handling of oversized materials in Appendix E. If feasible, crushing oversized materials onsite or exporting oversized materials may be considered. Incorporating oversized materials into “rock fills” (windrows, rock blankets or individual rock burial) may be feasible in some of the deeper remedial grading areas if applicable. Special handling recommendations should be provided on a case-by-case basis, if necessary.

2.8 Expansion Potential
Based on the results of our laboratory testing, site soils have a “Very Low” to “Low” expansion potential. Final expansion potential of site soils should be determined at the completion of grading. Results of expansion testing at finish grades will be utilized to confirm final foundation design.
505
505 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 12 December 2, 2025

3.0 CONCLUSIONS
Based on the results of our subsurface evaluation and understanding of the proposed development, it is our opinion that the proposed development is feasible from a geotechnical standpoint. A summary of our conclusions are as follows:
• Based on our subsurface evaluation and review of regional geologic maps and published geotechnical literature, the site contains up to approximately 15 feet of previously placed undocumented artificial fill over native Terrace Deposits overlying Topanga Formation bedrock to the maximum explored depth of approximately 45 below existing grade. Older artificial fill soils encountered were primarily loose to medium dense clayey and silty sands and very stiff sandy clays. Native terrace deposits are primarily stiff to very stiff sandy clays and medium dense to dense silty sands and clayey sands. Bedrock consisted of primarily very dense silty sands (sandstone) and hard sandy clays.
• The previously placed artificial fill soils and near-surface soils are generally loose and are not suitable for the planned improvements in their present condition (refer to Section 4.1); removal and recompaction will be required. An alternative to performing deeper removals of existing artificial fill soils is ground improvement likely consisting of Rammed Aggregate Piers (RAP). • Groundwater was not encountered in our borings to the maximum explored depth of approximately 45 feet below existing grade. Based on the Seismic Hazard Zone Report for the Laguna Beach Quadrangle (CDMG, 2006), no depth to historic high groundwater is indicated for the site.
• The site is not located within a State of California Seismic Hazard Zone for liquefaction potential (CDMG, 1998). The potential for liquefaction is considered very low due to the lack of a groundwater table, relatively shallow formational materials, and generally dense nature of the material below the site.
• The proposed development will likely be subjected to strong seismic ground shaking during its design life. The site is not located within a State of California Earthquake Fault Zone (i.e., AlquistPriolo Earthquake Fault Act Zone) and no active faults are known to cross the site. • Due to the proximity of the proposed improvements to the property line in portions of the site, temporary shoring and/or “A-B-C” slot cuts may be required to achieve required earthwork removal and recompaction. The temporary shoring will be adjacent to an existing off-site structure in a portion of the site.
• Based on the results of preliminary laboratory testing, site soils are anticipated to have “Very Low” to “Low” expansion potential. Final design expansion potential must be determined at the completion of grading.
• Field testing resulted in infiltration rate of essentially zero and 0.2 inches per hour in Infiltration Borings I-1 and I-2, respectively. Site consists primarily of fine-grained (i.e., silts and clays) soils which have very low permeability and therefore have very low infiltration rates. • The site contains soils that are not suitable for basement/retaining wall backfill due to their fines (i.e., silt and clay) content, therefore or import of sandy soils will be required by the contractor for obtaining suitable backfill soil for planned site basement/retaining walls. 506
506 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 13 December 2, 2025
• Based on the corrosion test results, soils are not considered corrosive per the Caltrans criteria (Caltrans, 2021).
• Excavations into the existing site soils should be feasible with heavy construction equipment in good working order. We anticipate that the sandy and silty earth materials generated from the excavations will be generally suitable for re-use as compacted fill, provided they are relatively free of rocks larger than 8 inches in dimension, construction debris, and significant organic material. 507
507 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 14 December 2, 2025

4.0 RECOMMENDATIONS
The following recommendations are to be considered preliminary and should be confirmed upon completion of grading and earthwork operations. In addition, they should be considered minimal from a geotechnical viewpoint, as there may be more restrictive requirements from the architect, structural engineer, building codes, governing agencies, or the owner.

It should be noted that the following geotechnical recommendations are intended to provide the owner with sufficient information to develop the site in general accordance with the 2025 California Building Code (CBC) requirements. With regard to the potential occurrence of potentially catastrophic geotechnical hazards such as fault rupture, earthquake-induced landslides, liquefaction, etc. the following geotechnical recommendations should provide adequate protection for the proposed development to the extent required to reduce seismic risk to an “acceptable level.” The “acceptable level” of risk is defined by the California Code of Regulations as “that level that provides reasonable protection of the public safety, though it does not necessarily ensure continued structural integrity and functionality of the project” [Section 3721(a)]. Therefore, repair and remedial work of the proposed structures may be required after a significant seismic event. With regards to the potential for less significant geologic hazards to the proposed development, the recommendations contained herein are intended as a reasonable protection against the potential damaging effects of geotechnical phenomena such as expansive soils, soil settlement, groundwater seepage, etc. It should be understood, however, that our recommendations are intended to maintain the structural integrity of the proposed development and structures given the site geotechnical conditions but cannot preclude the potential for some cosmetic distress or nuisance issues to develop as a result of the site geotechnical conditions.

The geotechnical recommendations contained herein must be confirmed to be suitable or modified based on the actual as-graded conditions.

4.1 Site Earthwork
We anticipate that earthwork will generally consist of demolition of existing improvements and buildings, shoring installation, required removal and recompaction, subgrade preparation, precise grading and construction of the proposed new improvements including the podium structure, site buildings, site amenities, courtyards, subsurface utilities, driveways, etc.

We recommend that earthwork onsite be performed in accordance with the following recommendations, future geotechnical reports, the 2025 CBC/City of Laguna Beach requirements and the General Earthwork and Grading Specifications included in Appendix E. In case of conflict, the following recommendations shall supersede those included in Appendix E. The following recommendations should be considered preliminary and may be revised based upon future evaluation and our review of updated project plans and/or the field conditions exposed during site grading/construction.
508
508 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 15 December 2, 2025

4.1.1 Clearing and Grubbing
Prior to earthwork of areas to receive structural fill, engineered structures or improvements, the areas should be cleared of existing vegetation, building structures, pavement, utilities, surface obstructions, existing debris and potentially compressible or otherwise unsuitable material. Vegetation and debris should be removed and properly disposed of off-site. Holes resulting from the removal of buried obstructions, which extend below proposed removal bottoms, should be replaced with properly compacted fill material. Any abandoned sewer or storm drain lines should be completely removed and replaced with properly placed compacted fill. Deeper demolition may be required in order to remove existing foundations. We recommend the trenches associated with demolition which extend below the remedial grading depth be backfilled and properly compacted prior to the demolition contractor leaving the site.

If cesspools or septic systems are encountered during earthwork, they should be removed in their entirety. The resulting excavation should be backfilled with properly compacted fill soils. As an alternative, cesspools can be backfilled with lean sand-cement slurry. At the conclusion of the clearing operations, a representative of LGC Geotechnical should observe and accept the site prior to further earthwork.

4.1.2 Removal and Recompaction Depths and Limits
In order to provide a relatively uniform bearing condition for the planned building structures and improvements we recommend the site soils be removed and recompacted. Subsurface site soils should be removed and/or over-excavated according to the criteria outlined below.

Based on the site conditions and proposed building structure, we have provided recommendations for two different earthwork/foundation design options, see below.

Option 1 – Removal of Older Artificial Fill: For Option 1, Existing artificial fill within the influence of the proposed structural improvements should be removed to suitable, competent native materials prior to placement of artificial fill to design grades. For areas with shallow competent native soils below the bottom of the proposed building, minimum overexcavation should be 4 feet below finish pad grade or 2 feet below bottom of the footings, whichever is deeper. Depth of existing fill is shown on Figure 2 & Figure 3.

Option 2 –Ground Improvement: For Option 2, the entire building structure will be supported on ground improvement such as Rammed Aggregate Piers (RAP) eliminating the requirement for deep removals. For the ground improvement option, the upper 1 foot below finish pad grade should be removed and recompacted with properly placed compacted fill.

Please refer to the encountered geologic descriptions and depths presented on the boring logs (Appendix B) and on the Geotechnical Map (Topographical Plan) (Figure 3). 509
509 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 16 December 2, 2025
Where adequate space is available, the base of removal bottoms should extend laterally a minimum distance equal to the depth of removal and recompaction below finish grade. Specifically, soils located within a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) projection of the bottom of footings must be compacted fill or competent natural ground. Building lines may be defined as the perimeter of the building proper, plus attached or adjacent foundation supported features, including canopies, elevators, or walls.

Local conditions may be encountered which could require additional removal and recompaction beyond the above-noted minimum to obtain an acceptable subgrade. The actual depths and lateral extents of removal and recompaction should be determined by the geotechnical consultant based on the subsurface conditions encountered during grading. Removal and recompaction areas and areas should be accurately staked in the field by the Project Surveyor.

4.1.3 Temporary Excavations
Temporary excavations up to approximately 10 to 20 feet are anticipated. Temporary excavations should be performed in accordance with project plans, specifications, and all Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) requirements. Excavations should be laid back or shored in accordance with OSHA requirements before personnel or equipment are allowed to enter. Based on our field investigation, the majority of site soils are anticipated to be OSHA Type “B” soils (refer to the attached boring logs). Sandy soils are present and should be considered susceptible to caving. Raveling of the sandy soils should be anticipated for temporary slopes. Flatter slope inclinations should be considered if raveling cannot be tolerated. The exposed slope surface may be kept surficially moist (but not saturated) during construction to reduce (not eliminate) potential sloughing. Soil conditions should be regularly evaluated during construction to verify conditions are as anticipated. The contractor shall be responsible for providing the “competent person” required by OSHA standards to evaluate soil conditions. Close coordination with the geotechnical consultant should be maintained to facilitate construction while providing safe excavations. Excavation safety is the sole responsibility of the contractor.

The potential for impacting the existing improvements and adjacent properties may be reduced by performing excavations using narrow “A-B-C” slot cuts. “A-B-C” slot cuts are defined as excavations perpendicular to sensitive property boundaries that are divided into multiple “slots” of equal width. If slots are labeled A, B, C, A, B, C, etc., then “A” slots should be excavated at the same time but must be backfilled before “B” slots can be excavated, etc. For preliminary planning purposes, slot cuts should be no wider than 8 feet and no deeper than 8 feet. Slot cuts are not recommended where proposed excavations are adjacent to existing building structures (and within 5 horizontal feet), Slot cuts should be backfilled immediately with properly placed compacted fill (per Section 4.1.6) to finish grade prior to excavation of adjacent slots. Due to the presence of sands at the site which are susceptible to caving, narrower slot cuts may be required.

These preliminary recommendations should be further evaluated based on the proposed grading plan. Protection of the existing improvements during grading is the responsibility of the contractor.
510
510 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 17 December 2, 2025
Surcharge loads (vehicular traffic, soil stockpiles, construction equipment, etc.) should be set back from the perimeter of excavations a minimum distance equivalent to a 1:1 projection from the bottom of the excavation or 5 feet, whichever is greater, unless the cut is properly shored and designed for the applicable surcharge load. Once an excavation has been initiated, it should be backfilled as soon as practical. Prolonged exposure of temporary excavations may result in some localized instability. Excavations should be planned so that they are not initiated without sufficient time to shore/fill them prior to weekends, holidays, or forecasted rain.

It should be noted that any excavation that extends below a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) projection of an existing foundation will remove existing support of the structure foundation. Temporary shoring recommendations are provided in Section 4.5.

4.1.4 Removal Bottoms and Subgrade Preparation
In general, removal bottoms and areas to receive compacted fill should be scarified to a minimum depth of 6 inches, brought to a near-optimum moisture condition (generally within optimum and 2 percent above optimum moisture content), and re-compacted per project recommendations.

Removal bottoms and areas to receive fill should be observed and accepted by the geotechnical consultant prior to subsequent fill placement. Soil subgrade for planned footings and improvements (e.g., slabs, etc.) should be firm and competent.

4.1.5 Material for Fill
From a geotechnical perspective, the onsite soils are generally suitable for use as general compacted fill, provided they are screened of oversized material (8 inches in greatest dimension), construction debris and significant organic materials.

From a geotechnical viewpoint, any required import soils for general fill (i.e., nonretaining wall backfill) should consist of soils of granular soils of “Very Low” expansion potential (expansion index 20 or less based on American Society for Testing and Materials [ASTM] D 4829), and free of organic materials, construction debris and any material greater than 3 inches in maximum dimension. Import for any required retaining wall backfill should meet the criteria outlined in the following paragraph. Source samples should be provided to the geotechnical consultant for laboratory testing a minimum of four working days prior to any planned importation.

Basement/retaining wall backfill should consist of imported or onsite clean granular (sandy) soils with a maximum of 35 percent fines (passing the No. 200 sieve) per American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) D1140 (or ASTM D6913/ASTM D422) and a “Very Low” expansion potential (EI of 20 or less per ASTM D4829). Soils should also be screened of organic materials, construction debris, and any material greater than 3 inches in maximum dimension. Some of the onsite soils are expansive and have high fines content and are not suitable for backfill of site retaining walls. 511
511 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 18 December 2, 2025
Therefore, select grading and stockpiling of the onsite soils or import or soils meeting the criteria outlined above should be anticipated by the contractor for obtaining suitable retaining wall backfill soil. These preliminary findings should be confirmed during grading.

Aggregate base (crushed aggregate base or crushed miscellaneous base) should conform to the requirements of Section 200-2 of the Standard Specifications for Public Works Construction (“Green Book”) for untreated base materials (except processed miscellaneous base), Caltrans Class 2 aggregate base or the City of Laguna Beach requirements.

The placement of demolition materials in compacted fill is acceptable from a geotechnical viewpoint provided the demolition material is broken up into pieces not larger than typically used for aggregate base (approximately 1 to 3-inches in maximum dimension) and well blended into fill soils with essentially no resulting voids. Demolition material placed in fills must be free of construction debris (wood, brick, etc.) and reinforcing steel.

If asphalt concrete fragments will be incorporated into the demolition materials, approval from an environmental viewpoint may be required and is not the purview of the geotechnical consultant. From our previous experience, we recommend that asphalt concrete fragments be limited to fill areas within planned drive aisles and courtyards (i.e., not within building pad areas).

4.1.6 Placement and Compaction of Fills
Material to be placed as fill should be brought to near-optimum moisture content (generally within optimum and 2 percent above optimum moisture content) and recompacted to at least 90 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). Moisture conditioning of site soils will be required in order to achieve adequate compaction. Drying and or mixing of very moist soils may be required prior to reusing the materials in compacted fills. In general, the site soils will require additional moisture in order to achieve the required compaction.

The optimum lift thickness to produce a uniformly compacted fill will depend on the type and size of compaction equipment used. In general, fill should be placed in uniform lifts not exceeding 8 inches in compacted thickness. Each lift should be thoroughly compacted and accepted prior to subsequent lifts. Generally, placement and compaction of fill should be performed in accordance with the local grading ordinances with observation and testing performed by the geotechnical consultant. Oversized material as previously defined should be removed from site fills.

During backfill of excavations, the fill should be properly benched into firm and competent soils of temporary backcut slopes as it is placed in lifts.

Aggregate base material should be compacted to a minimum of 95 percent relative compaction at or slightly above optimum moisture content per ASTM D1557. Subgrade below aggregate base should be compacted to a minimum of 90 percent relative compaction per ASTM D1557 at near-optimum moisture content (generally within 512
512 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 19 December 2, 2025
optimum and 2 percent above optimum moisture content).

If gap-graded ¾-inch rock is used for backfill (around storm drain storage chambers, retaining wall backfill, etc.) it will require compaction. Rock shall be placed in thin lifts (typically not exceeding 6 inches) and mechanically compacted with observation by geotechnical consultant. Backfill rock shall meet the requirements of ASTM D2321. Gapgraded rock is required to be wrapped in filter fabric to prevent the migration of fines into the rock backfill.

4.1.7 Trench and Retaining Wall Backfill and Compaction Bedding material used within the pipe zone should conform to the requirements of the current Greenbook and the pipe manufacturer. Where applicable, sand having a sand equivalent (SE) of 30 or greater (per Caltrans Test Method [CTM] 217) may be used to bed and shade the pipes within the bedding zone. Sand backfill should be densified by jetting or flooding and then tamped to ensure adequate compaction. Bedding sand should be from a natural source, manufactured sand from recycled material is not suitable for jetting. The onsite soils may generally be considered suitable as trench backfill (zone defined as 12 inches above the pipe to subgrade), provided the soils are screened of rocks greater than 6 inches in maximum dimension, construction debris and organic material.

Trench backfill should be compacted in uniform lifts (as outlined in Section “Material for Fill”) by mechanical means to at least 90 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557).

If gap-graded rock is used for trench backfill, refer to Section 4.1.6.

Utility trenches running parallel to footings should not be excavated within a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) downward projection from adjacent footings (“footing influence zone”) to avoid potential undermining. Depending on the utility line and structural loading of the footing, utility trenches running perpendicular to footings may require special provisions such as sand-cement slurry backfill of the utility trench in this zone or flexible sleeves through the footings. These conditions should be evaluated on a case-bycase basis.

Retaining wall backfill should consist of sandy soils as defined in the above section “Material for Fill.” For subterranean/basement walls the select sandy zone should extend a minimum of a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) upward projection from the bottom of the basement wall subdrain, refer to Figure 3. For conventional retaining walls the limits of select sandy backfill should extend at minimum ½ the height of the retaining wall or the width of the heel (if applicable), whichever is greater, refer to Figure 4. Retaining wall backfill soils should be compacted in relatively uniform thin lifts to at least 90 percent relative compaction (per ASTM D1557). Jetting or flooding of retaining wall backfill materials should not be permitted.

In backfill areas where mechanical compaction of soil backfill is impractical due to space constraints, typically sand-cement slurry may be substituted for compacted backfill. The slurry should generally contain about one sack of cement per cubic yard. When set, such a mix typically has the consistency of compacted soil. Sand cement slurry placed near the 513
513 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 20 December 2, 2025
surface within landscape areas should be evaluated for potential impacts on planned improvements.

A representative from LGC Geotechnical should observe, probe, and test backfill to verify compliance with the project recommendations.

4.1.8 Footing Excavations
Footing excavation bottoms should be firm, relatively unyielding, and free of loose material. Footing excavations should be observed and accepted by the geotechnical consultant prior to placement of steel reinforcement. Footing excavations in sandy soils left open and allowed to dry will be susceptible to caving.

4.2 Preliminary Foundation Design Parameters
Preliminary foundation recommendations are provided below. Please note that the following foundation recommendations are preliminary and must be confirmed by LGC Geotechnical at the completion of project plans (i.e., foundation, grading and site layout plans) as well as completion of earthwork. Lateral resistance is provided in Section 4.3.

4.2.1 Building Structure
Provided our earthwork removal and recompaction recommendations are implemented, and older artificial fill is removed to competent native materials, the proposed structure may be supported on a shallow foundation system. The following minimum footing widths and embedments are recommended for the corresponding allowable bearing pressures for both continuous wall and column spread footings.

TABLE 3
Allowable Soil Bearing Pressures
Allowable Static
Bearing Pressure
(psf)
Minimum Footing
Width
(feet)
Minimum Footing
Embedment*
(feet)
3,500 3 2
3,000 2 2
2,500 1.5 1.5
* Refers to minimum depth measured below lowest adjacent grade.

These net bearing pressures (exclusive of the weight of the footings) are for dead plus live loads and may be increased one-third for short-term, transient, wind and seismic 514
514 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 21 December 2, 2025
loading. The maximum edge pressures induced by eccentric loading or overturning moments should not be allowed to exceed these recommended values. For any bearing pressures less than 2,500 psf, a minimum footing width of 1 feet and embedment depth of 1 feet below lowest adjacent grade should be used. These allowable bearing pressures are applicable for level (ground slope equal to or flatter than 5 horizontal feet to 1-foot vertical) conditions only.

Soil settlement is a function of footing dimensions and applied soil bearing pressure.

Based on the recommended earthwork removals and estimated structural loads, foundation settlement due to structural loads (static settlement) is anticipated to be on the order of 1-inch. Differential settlement should be anticipated between nearby columns or walls where a large differential loading condition exists. Settlement estimates should be evaluated by LGC Geotechnical when foundation plans are made available.

4.2.2 Ground Improvement Alternative for Building Structure An alternative to performing deep removals below the building structure footprint is a ground improvement technique such as Rammed Aggregate Piers (RAP). Rammed aggregate piers (RAP) consist of drilled holes filled with aggregate that is mechanically compacted as it is placed. A proprietary foundation support system such as Geopiers may be feasible for support of planned structure. Advantages of this system would significantly reduce recommended earthwork removal and recompaction depths below the structure, increase soil bearing pressure, and reduce the long-term (static) settlement. Because such systems are proprietary, the work is performed on a designbuild basis by the specialty contractor. Every aspect of the design and construction of the ground improvement system is the responsibility of the specialty contractor/designer including estimated settlements of foundations bearing on the RAPs.

It is standard of practice for the geotechnical consultant to observe the construction of the ground improvement system (e.g., RAPs, etc.) to confirm that they have been installed in accordance with the approved foundation plan. A representative of LGC Geotechnical can perform these services including confirmation of the diameter of the drilled hole, specified lift thickness and compaction effort. The locations of the RAPs should be confirmed by the project surveyor.

4.2.3 Slab Underlayment Guidelines
The following is for informational purposes only since slab underlayment (e.g., moisture retarder, sand or gravel layers for concrete curing and/or capillary break) is unrelated to the geotechnical performance of the foundation and thereby not the purview of the geotechnical consultant. Post-construction moisture migration should be expected below the foundation. The foundation engineer/architect should determine whether the use of a capillary break (sand or gravel layer), in conjunction with the vapor retarder, is necessary or required by code. Sand layer thickness and location (above and/or below 515
515 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 22 December 2, 2025
vapor retarder) should also be determined by the foundation engineer/architect.

4.3 Lateral Resistance
Resistance to lateral loads can be provided by friction acting at the base of foundations and by passive earth pressure. For concrete/soil frictional resistance, an allowable coefficient of friction of 0.30 may be assumed with dead-load forces. An allowable passive lateral earth pressure of 240 pcf to a maximum of 2,400 pcf may be used for lateral resistance for properly compacted fill and suitable native soils. This allowable passive pressure may be increased to 325 pcf to a maximum of 3,250 pcf for short-duration wind or seismic loading. For isolated pole footings (e.g., sign structures, decks, etc.) generally spaced a minimum of 3 pile diameters oncenter, an allowable passive pressure of 480 pcf may be used for passive resistance. The provided passive pressure is based on an arching factor of 2 (e.g., 240 pcf x 2) and should be limited to a maximum of 10 times the value provided above (e.g., 480 pcf to a maximum of 4,800 psf). This value may be increased by one-third for short-duration wind or seismic loading. These passive pressure values are applicable for level (ground slope equal to or flatter than 5H:1V) conditions only. Frictional resistance and passive pressure may be used in combination without reduction. The provided allowable passive pressure includes a static and seismic factor of safety of 1.5 and 1.1, respectively. This increase is based on a reduced factor of safety for short duration loading.

4.4 Lateral Earth Pressures for Basement/Retaining Walls It is our understanding that basement walls up to approximately 20 feet will be required for the subterranean parking level. In addition, internal retaining walls for an access ramp may be required. Lateral earth pressures are provided as equivalent fluid unit weights, in pound per square foot (psf) per foot of depth or pcf. These values do not contain an appreciable factor of safety, so the retaining wall designer should apply the applicable factors of safety and/or load factors during design. A soil unit weight of 120 pcf may be assumed for calculating the actual weight of soil over the wall footing. At this time level backfill conditions are anticipated. If a sloping backfill condition is proposed, increased lateral earth pressures will be provided based on the planned configuration.

If the retaining wall can yield enough to mobilize the full shear strength of the soil, it can be designed for “active” pressure. If the wall cannot yield under the applied load, the earth pressure will be higher. This would include 90-degree corners of retaining walls. Such walls should be designed for “at-rest.” The equivalent fluid pressure values assume free-draining conditions and a drainage system will be installed and maintained to prevent the build-up of hydrostatic pressures. Typically, a basement wall constructed against the temporary shoring is provided with a composite drainage mat (e.g., Miradrain, etc.) placed over the lagging and collected at the wall bottom by a manifold pipe system properly outletted to a suitable discharge point. Backfilled retaining walls are backfilled with sandy soils and a subdrain pipe is wrapped in drainage aggregate and filter fabric (e.g., “burrito” subdrain) and properly outletted to a suitable discharge point (Refer to Figures 5 and 6). If a sump pump is required to outlet accumulated water behind retaining/basement walls, the owner and any subsequent owners must be made aware that it will be their responsibility to ensure the sump pump continues to perform properly for the life of 516
516 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 23 December 2, 2025
the project. Basement/retaining wall structures should be provided with appropriate drainage and appropriately waterproofed. Please note that waterproofing and specification of the drainage mat and outlet system are not the purview of the geotechnical consultant. If conditions other than those assumed above are anticipated, the equivalent fluid pressure values should be provided on an individual-case basis by the geotechnical consultant.

The following lateral earth pressures are presented on Table 4A for design of site basement/retaining walls constructed against the shoring wall (i.e., cut condition not requiring select sandy backfill).

TABLE 4A
Lateral Earth Pressures – Cut Condition
Conditions
Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf)
Level Backfill
Cut Condition w/Shoring Wall
Active 45
At Rest 70
The following lateral earth pressures are presented on Table 4B are for conventional backfilled retaining walls using approved select granular soils with a maximum of 35 percent fines (passing the No. 200 sieve per ASTM D-421/422) and a maximum Expansion Index of 20 (per ASTM D4829). Some of the onsite soils are expansive and have high fines content and are not suitable for backfill of site retaining walls. Therefore, select grading and stockpiling of the onsite soils or import or soils meeting the criteria outlined above should be anticipated by the contractor for obtaining suitable retaining wall backfill soil. The retaining wall designer should clearly indicate on the retaining wall plans the required sandy soil backfill criteria. If the limits of select sandy backfill indicated on Figures 5 and 6 cannot be extended due to property line constraints, the lateral earth pressures provided in Table 4A should be used. 517
517 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 24 December 2, 2025
TABLE 4B
Lateral Earth Pressures – Conventional Backfilled
Retaining Wall
Conditions
Equivalent Fluid Weight (pcf)
Level Backfill – Sand Backfill
Approved Backfill Material
Active 35
At Rest 55
Surcharge loading effects from any adjacent structures should be evaluated by the basement/retaining wall designer. In general, structural loads within a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) upward projection from the bottom of the proposed basement/retaining wall footing will surcharge the proposed retaining structure. In addition to the recommended earth pressure, basement/retaining walls adjacent to streets should be designed to resist vehicular traffic if applicable. Uniform surcharges may be estimated using the applicable coefficient of lateral earth pressure using a rectangular distribution. A factor of 0.33 and 0.5 may be used for the active and at-rest conditions, respectively. The vertical traffic surcharge may be determined by the structural designer. The retaining/basement wall designer should contact the geotechnical consultant for any required geotechnical input in estimating any applicable surcharge loads.

If required, the basement/retaining wall designer may use a seismic lateral earth pressure increment of 10 pcf for a level backfill. This increment should be applied in addition to the provided static lateral earth pressure using a triangular distribution with the resultant acting at H/3 in relation to the base of the retaining structure (where H is the retained height). Per Section 1803.5.12 of the 2025 CBC, the seismic lateral earth pressure is applicable to structures assigned to Seismic Design Category D through F for retaining wall structures supporting more than 6 feet of backfill height. For the restrained, at-rest condition, the seismic increment may be added to the applicable active lateral earth pressure (in lieu of the at-rest lateral earth pressure) when analyzing short duration seismic loading. It should be noted that the provided seismic lateral earth pressures are for a maximum basement/retaining wall of 20 feet in height and level backfill. While not anticipated at this time, if a basement/retaining wall greater than 20 feet in height is proposed and/or a sloping backfill condition, the retaining wall designer should contact the geotechnical consultant for specific seismic lateral earth pressure increments based on the configuration of the planned retaining wall structures. Seismic lateral earth pressures are estimated using the procedure outlined by the Structural Engineers Association of California (Lew, et al, 2010) and the Federal Highway Administration (FHWA, 2011).

Soil bearing and lateral resistance (friction coefficient and passive resistance) are provided in Sections 4.2.1 and 4.3, respectively. Earthwork considerations (temporary backcuts, backfill, compaction, etc.) for retaining walls are provided in Section 4.1 (Site Earthwork) and the subsequent earthwork related sub-sections.
518
518 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 25 December 2, 2025

4.5 Temporary Shoring
Temporary shoring will likely be required for construction of basement walls adjacent to property lines. Due to the height of the proposed excavation, bracing will likely be required in portions of the site. If the earthwork option is chosen instead of the ground improvement option, temporary shoring must incorporate heights for required remedial grading. The earth pressures provided below are only for temporary shoring conditions, for permanent retaining structures, refer to Section 4.4.

Typical cantilever temporary shoring, where deflection of the shoring will not impact the performance of adjacent structures, with a level backfill may be designed using the active equivalent fluid pressures of 35 pounds per square foot (psf) per foot of depth (or pcf). Braced shoring may be used in areas where the shoring will be located close to existing structures in order to limit shoring defections or required due to the proposed depth of excavation. Braced shoring with a level backfill without hydrostatic pressures (above groundwater) may be designed using a uniform soil pressure of 24H in pounds per square foot (psf), where H is equal to the depth in feet of the excavation being shored. Any slopes above temporary shoring will increase the above-noted lateral earth pressures and can be provided on a case-by-case basis.

Any building, equipment or traffic loads located within a 1:1 (horizontal to vertical) projection from the base of the shoring should be added to the applicable lateral earth pressure. Refer to the surcharge loading effects discussion provided in above Section 4.4. The shoring designer should contact the geotechnical engineer for any required geotechnical input in estimating any applicable lateral surcharge loads.

Continuous lagging should be provided between the soldier piles. Lagging should be placed in a timely manner during excavation in order to minimize potential spalling and sloughing. Careful installation of the lagging will be necessary to achieve bearing against the retained earth. The backfill of the lagging should consist of sand-cement slurry. Means and methods are per the contractor in order to ultimately ensure full bearing (direct contact) of retained earth to the lagging. The soldier piles should be designed for the full anticipated lateral earth pressure; however, the pressure on the lagging will be less due to soil arching between the piles. We recommend that the lagging be designed for the recommended earth pressure but may be limited to a maximum value of 400 psf if surcharge loads are not present. Lagging placed behind the solider piles will negate the soil arching effect.

For temporary shoring piles generally spaced a minimum of 2.5 pile diameters on-center, an allowable passive pressure of 550 pcf may be used for passive resistance. The provided passive pressure is based on an arching factor of 2 (e.g., 275 pcf x 2) and should be limited to a maximum of 10 times the value provided above (e.g., 550 pcf to a maximum of 5,500 psf). The passive pressure is only applicable for level (5 horizontal feet to 1-foot vertical or flatter) soil conditions. To develop the full lateral value, provisions should be made to assure firm contact between the soldier piles and the undisturbed soils. The concrete placed in the soldier pile excavation below the excavated level should be of adequate strength to transfer the imposed loads to the surrounding soils. Structural designer should incorporate appropriate factor of safety and/or load factor in design. The provided allowable passive pressure is based on a factor of safety of 1.3.

For a deadman footing a minimum of 1-foot below lowest adjacent grade (measured from the 519
519 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 26 December 2, 2025
top of the inclined footing) and a width of 4 feet inclined at 45 degrees, an allowable soil bearing of 3,000 psf may be used. To reduce the movement of the shoring, the rakers should be tightly wedged against the footings and/or shoring system.

It is difficult to accurately predict the amount of deflection of the shored mass. It should be realized, however, that some deflection will occur. The shoring should be designed to limit deflection to within tolerable limits. If greater deflection occurs during construction, additional bracing may be necessary. In areas where less deflection is desired, such as adjacent to existing settlement sensitive improvements, the shoring should be designed for higher lateral earth pressures.

The contractor should evaluate the potential drilling conditions when planning the installation methods, refer to Section 4.11.

4.6 Soil Corrosivity
Although not corrosion engineers (LGC Geotechnical is not a corrosion consultant), several governing agencies in Southern California require the geotechnical consultant to determine the corrosion potential of soils to buried concrete and metal facilities. We therefore present the results of our testing with regard to corrosion for the use of the client and other consultants, as they determine necessary.

Corrosion testing indicated soluble sulfate content less than 0.02 percent, chloride content of 41 parts per million (ppm), pH value of 7.5, and minimum resistivity of 1,950 ohm-cm. Based on Caltrans Corrosion Guidelines (2021), soils are considered corrosive if the pH is 5.5 or less, or the chloride concentration is 500 ppm or greater, or the sulfate concentration is 1,500 ppm (0.15 percent) or greater. Based on the test results, soils are not considered corrosive using Caltrans criteria.

Based on laboratory sulfate test results, the near surface soils are designated to a class “S0” per ACI 318, Table 19.3.1.1 with respect to sulfates. Concrete in direct contact with the onsite soils can be designed according to ACI 318, Table 19.3.2.1 using the “S0” sulfate classification.

Laboratory testing may need to be performed at the completion of grading by the project corrosion engineer to further evaluate the as-graded soil corrosivity characteristics.

Accordingly, revision of the corrosion potential may be needed, should future test results differ substantially from the conditions reported herein. The client and/or other members of the development team should consider this during the design and planning phase of the project and formulate an appropriate course of action.

4.7 Preliminary Pavement Recommendations
The following preliminary minimum asphalt concrete (AC) pavement sections provided in Table 5 are based on a preliminary assumed R-value of 25 for Traffic Indices of 5.0 (or less) and 6.0.

These recommendations must be confirmed with R-value testing of representative near-surface soils at the completion of earthwork and after underground utilities have been installed and 520
520 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 27 December 2, 2025
backfilled. Final street sections should be confirmed by the project civil engineer based upon the final design Traffic Index. If requested, additional sections may be provided based on other provided traffic index values. Should the City of Laguna Beach have more stringent requirements, updated pavement recommendations can be provided.

TABLE 5
Preliminary Asphalt Concrete Paving Section Options
Assumed Traffic Index 5.0 (or less) 6.0
Estimated R -Value Subgrade 25 25
AC Thickness 4.0 inches 4.5 inches
Aggregate Base Thickness 5.0 inches 7.0 inches
The pavement section thicknesses provided above are considered minimum thicknesses.

Increasing the thickness of any or all of the above layers will reduce the likelihood of the pavement experiencing distress during its service life. The above recommendations are based on the assumption that proper maintenance and irrigation of the areas adjacent to the pavement will occur through the design life of the pavement. Failure to maintain a proper maintenance and/or irrigation program may jeopardize the integrity of the pavement.

Earthwork recommendations regarding aggregate base and subgrade are provided in the previous Section 4.1 “Site Earthwork” and the related sub-sections of this report.

4.8 Nonstructural Concrete Flatwork
Nonstructural concrete flatwork (such as sidewalks, patios/entryways etc.) has a potential for cracking due to changes in soil volume related to soil-moisture fluctuations. To reduce the potential for excessive cracking and lifting, concrete should be designed in accordance with the minimum guidelines outlined in Table 6 on the following page. These guidelines will reduce the potential for irregular cracking and promote cracking along construction joints but will not eliminate all cracking or lifting. Thickening the concrete and/or adding additional reinforcement will further reduce cosmetic distress.
521
521 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 28 December 2, 2025
TABLE 6
Preliminary Geotechnical Parameters for Nonstructural Concrete Flatwork Placed on Very Low to Low Expansion Potential Subgrade
Sidewalks Patios/Courtyards City Sidewalk
Curb and Gutters
Minimum
Thickness (in.) 4 (full) 4 (full) City/Agency Standard
Presoaking Wet down prior to
placing
Wet down prior to
placing
City/Agency
Standard
Reinforcement  No. 3 at 24 inches on
centers
City/Agency
Standard
Thickened Edge
(in.)   City/Agency Standard
Crack Control
Joints
Saw cut or deep
open tool joint to a
minimum of 1/3 the
concrete thickness
Saw cut or deep
open tool joint to a
minimum of 1/3 the
concrete thickness
City/Agency
Standard
Maximum Joint
Spacing 5 feet 6 feet City/Agency Standard
Aggregate Base
Thickness (in.)   City/Agency Standard

4.9 Control of Surface Water and Drainage Control
From a geotechnical perspective, we recommend that compacted finished grade soils adjacent to proposed structures be sloped away from the proposed structure and towards an approved drainage device or unobstructed swale. Drainage swales, wherever feasible, should not be constructed within 5 feet of buildings. Where lot and building, geometry necessitates that the drainage swales be routed closer than 5 feet to structural foundations, we recommend the use of area drains together with drainage swales. Drainage swales used in conjunction with area drains should be designed by the project civil engineer so that a properly constructed and maintained system will prevent ponding within 5 feet of the foundation. Code compliance of grades is not the purview of the geotechnical consultant.

Planters with open bottoms adjacent to buildings should be avoided. Planters should not be designed adjacent to buildings unless provisions for drainage, such as catch basins, liners, and/or area drains, are made. Overwatering must be avoided.
522
522 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 29 December 2, 2025

4.10 Subsurface Water Infiltration
Recent regulatory changes have occurred that mandate that storm water be infiltrated below grade rather than collected in a conventional storm drain system. Typically, a combination of methods are implemented to reduce surface water runoff and increase infiltration including; permeable pavements/pavers for roadways and walkways, directing surface water runoff to grass-lined swales, retention areas, and/or drywells, etc.

It should be noted that collecting and concentrating surface water for the purpose of intentionally infiltrating it below grade, conflicts with the geotechnical engineering objective of directing surface water away from slopes, structures and other improvements. The geotechnical stability and integrity of a site is reliant upon appropriately handling surface water. In general, the vast majority of geotechnical distress issues are directly related to improper drainage. In general, distress in the form of movement of improvements could occur as a result of soil saturation and loss of soil support, expansion, internal soil erosion, collapse and/or settlement.

Based on the very poor results of the infiltration testing, low permeability of the onsite soils, our knowledge of the site geologic conditions, and the relatively shallow depth of very dense formational materials, infiltration of stormwater is not feasible. Therefore, we do not recommend that surface stormwater be intentionally infiltrated into the subsurface soils at this site.

4.11 Pile Shafts for Shoring
Soldier pile boreholes for temporary and permanent shoring should be plumb and free of loose or softened material. Extreme care in drilling, placement of steel, and the pouring of concrete will be essential to avoid excessive disturbance of borehole walls. The soldier pile steel section should be installed, and the concrete pumped immediately after drilling is completed. If applicable, concrete placement by pumping or tremie tube to the bottom of drill hole excavations is recommended. No soldier pile borehole should be left open overnight. We recommend that pile borings not be drilled immediately adjacent to another pile until the concrete in the other pile has attained its initial set. A representative from LGC Geotechnical should be onsite during the drilling of soldier pile boreholes to verify the assumptions made during the design stages.

Sandy soils are present at the site and these materials are generally susceptible to caving. Some caving of drilled holes should be anticipated. The contractor should anticipate that any borehole left open for any extended period of time will likely experience additional caving and possible seepage, typically from local irrigation. Refer to the boring logs in Appendix B. If caving occurs during construction of soldier pile boreholes a temporary casing may be required.

4.12 Supplemental Geotechnical Explorations
It would be prudent to perform additional geotechnical explorations (i.e., borings) to further refine the limits and depth of previously placed artificial fill. 523
523 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 30 December 2, 2025

4.13 Geotechnical Plan Review
Project plans (grading, foundation, retaining wall, temporary shoring, etc.) should be reviewed by this office prior to construction to verify that our geotechnical recommendations have been incorporated. Additional fieldwork and/or modified geotechnical recommendations may be necessary.

4.14 Pre-Construction Monitoring
Due to the proximity of the existing offsite improvements, recommended depth of remedial grading in portions of the site, and proposed retaining walls near the property lines, it is highly recommended that a program of pre-construction documentation and monitoring be devised and put into practice before the onset of any groundwork.

LGC Geotechnical can perform these services at your request. This should include, but not necessarily be limited to, detailed documentation of the existing improvements, walls, buildings, and utilities around the area of proposed excavation, with particular attention to any distress that is already present prior to the start of work. Subsequent readings should be scheduled consistent with the program of work. If shoring systems are to be constructed, routine monitoring of horizontal and vertical movement should be performed for the shoring system and adjacent improvements during construction to verify that shoring deflections are within tolerable limits.

4.15 Geotechnical Observation and Testing During Construction The recommendations provided in this report are based on limited subsurface observations and geotechnical analysis. The interpolated subsurface conditions should be checked in the field during construction by a representative of LGC Geotechnical. Geotechnical observation and testing is required per Section 1705 of the 2025 CBC.

Geotechnical observation and/or testing should be performed by LGC Geotechnical at the following stages:
• During grading (removal bottoms, fill placement, etc.); • During drilling of pier shafts for temporary shoring (if any); • During installation of ground improvements such as Geopiers (if any); • During basement/retaining wall backfill and compaction; • During utility trench backfill and compaction;
• After presoaking building pads and other concrete-flatwork subgrades, and prior to placement of aggregate base or concrete;
• After footing excavation and prior to placing concrete and/or reinforcement; • Preparation of pavement subgrade and placement of aggregate base; and • When any unusual soil conditions are encountered during any construction operation subsequent to issuance of this report.
524
524 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 Page 31 December 2, 2025

5.0 LIMITATIONS
Our services were performed using the degree of care and skill ordinarily exercised, under similar circumstances, by reputable soils engineers and geologists practicing in this or similar localities. No other warranty, expressed or implied, is made as to the conclusions and professional advice included in this report.

This report is based on data obtained from limited observations of the site, which have been extrapolated to characterize the site. While the scope of services performed is considered suitable to adequately characterize the site geotechnical conditions relative to the proposed development, no practical evaluation can completely eliminate uncertainty regarding the anticipated geotechnical conditions in connection with a subject site. Variations may exist and conditions not observed or described in this report may be encountered during construction.

This report is issued with the understanding that it is the responsibility of the owner, or of his/her representative, to ensure that the information and recommendations contained herein are brought to the attention of the other consultants and incorporated into the plans. The contractor should properly implement the recommendations during construction and notify the owner if they consider any of the recommendations presented herein to be unsafe, or unsuitable.

The findings of this report are valid as of the present date. However, changes in the conditions of a site can and do occur with the passage of time, whether they be due to natural processes or the works of man on this or adjacent properties. The findings, conclusions, and recommendations presented in this report can be relied upon only if LGC Geotechnical has the opportunity to observe the subsurface conditions during grading and construction of the project, in order to confirm that our preliminary findings are representative for the site. This report is intended exclusively for use by the client, any use of or reliance on this report by a third party shall be at such party’s sole risk.

In addition, changes in applicable or appropriate standards may occur, whether they result from legislation or the broadening of knowledge. Accordingly, the findings of this report may be invalidated wholly or partially by changes outside our control. Therefore, this report is subject to review and modification.
525
525 of 830
Figure 2 - Geotechnical Map
(Site Plan) ENG.

PROJECT NO.

PROJECT NAME
SCALE
DATE
Not to Scale
December 2025
Related - 340 St. Ann's, Laguna Beach

RLD / KTM
23106-01 LGC Geotechnical, Inc.
131 Calle Iglesia, Ste. 200
San Clemente, CA 92672
TEL (949) 369-6141 FAX (949) 369-6142
526
526 of 830
HS-3
HS-4
HS-2
HS-1
HA-3
HA-1
HA-2
I-2
I-1
T.D. = 26.5'
afo to 10'
Qt to T.D.

T.D. = 5'
T.D. = 5'
T.D. = 5'
T.D. = 7'
T.D. = 5'
T.D. = 31'
afo to 15'
Qt to 20'
Tt to T.D.

T.D. = 25.5'
afo to 5'
Qt to 20'
Tt to T.D.

T.D. = 45'
afo to 7.5'
Qt to 20'
Tt to T.D.
afo
afo
afo
Qt
Tt
Qt
Tt
LEGEND
Older Artificial Fill
Quaternary Terrace (Non-Marine and Marine,
Undifferentiated), Circled Where Buried
Tertiary Topanga Formation, Circled Where Buried
Approximate Location of Hollow Stem Auger Boring
by LGC Geotechnical, With Total Depth in Feet
Approximate Location of Hand Auger Boring by LGC
Geotechnical, With Total Depth in Feet
Approximate Location of Hollow Stem Auger
Infiltration Boring by LGC Geotechnical, With Total
Depth in Feet
Approximate Limits of This Report
HS-4
HA-3
I-2
afo
Qt
Tt
Figure 3 - Geotechnical Map
(Topographic Plan) ENG.

PROJECT NO.

PROJECT NAME
SCALE
DATE
1" = 40'
December 2025
Related - 340 St. Ann's, Laguna Beach

RLD / KTM
23106-01 LGC Geotechnical, Inc.
131 Calle Iglesia, Ste. 200
San Clemente, CA 92672
TEL (949) 369-6141 FAX (949) 369-6142
527
527 of 830
Period (s) Spectral Acceleration (g)
0 0.50

0.01 0.50

0.02 0.51

0.03 0.53

0.05 0.63

0.075 0.79

0.1 0.93

0.15 1.10

0.2 1.19

0.25 1.23

0.3 1.24

0.4 1.22

0.5 1.16

0.75 0.93
1 0.77

1.5 0.54
2 0.40
3 0.25
4 0.18
5 0.13

7.5 0.078
10 0.053
Applicable Site Classes: CD D Latitude: 33.537435
Envelope Presented Longitude: -117.777951
Reference: ASCE 7-22
Project No. 23106-01 Date: December, 2025
Figure 4:

Multi-Period Design
Response Spectrum

0.0 0.2

0.4 0.6

0.8 1.0

1.2 1.4

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 3.5 4.0 4.5 5.0 Spectral Acceleration (g) Period (sec.)
Envelope of Applicable Site Classes
5% Damping
528
528 of 830
Minimum 4" Diameter Schedule 40
Perforated PVC Pipe to Flow to Drainage
Device or Sump Pump per Project Civil
Engineer
Proposed Building Structure by Others
Backcut/Shoring per OSHA
1:1 (H:V) or flatter slope
Earthwork Per Soils Report, Slab Underlay Per
Foundation Engineer/Architect
Compacted Native Soil Cap
Select Granular Backfill (Expansion Index £ 20, maximum 35% fines) Minimum 90% Relative Compaction (ASTM D1557)
NOTE : Granular backfill may be substituted with 3/4 inch crushed compacted rock wrapped in filter fabric.

Geotechnical drainage detail will not prevent water seepage into structure, it is only to prevent build up of water pressure against wall.

EXTENT OF SELECT BACKFILL ZONE
Minimum 1 Cubic Foot Per Linear Foot Burrito Type
Subdrain, Consisting of 3
4 Inch Crushed Rock Wrapped
in Mirafi 140N or Approved Equivalent
1 foot min.

Common Backfill
Minimum 90% Relative Compaction (ASTM D1557)
Waterproofing by Waterproofing
Engineer/Architect or Design
Engineer to be Protected During
Backfill by Contractor
(12" Minimum / 18" Maximum)
1 foot min.
1 1
FIGURE 5
Basement Subterranean
Structure Backfill/Subdrain
Detail
DATE December 2025
ENG. / GEOL.

PROJECT NO.

PROJECT NAME
SCALE

RLD / KTM
Not to Scale
Related - 340 St. Ann's, Laguna Beach
23106-01
529
529 of 830
4 INCH DIAMETER, SCHEDULE 40 PERFORATED

PVC PIPE TO FLOW TO DRAINAGE DEVICE PER

PROJECT CIVIL ENGINEER

COMPACTED SAND BACKFILL
(EXPANSION INDEX £ 20,
MAXIMUM 35% FINES)

NATIVE BACKFILL COMPACTED

PER REPORT
MINIMUM 1 CUBIC FOOT PER LINEAR FOOT

BURRITO TYPE SUBDRAIN, CONSISTING OF
3/4 INCH CRUSHED ROCK WRAPPED IN
MIRAFI 140N OR APPROVED EQUIVALENT

FOOTING/WALL PER DESIGN ENGINEER

WATER PROOFING PER DESIGN ENGINEER
12" MINIMUM
18" MAXIMUM

BACKCUT PER OSHA

EXTENT OF REQUIRED IMPORTED SAND BACKFILL, MINIMUM
HEEL WIDTH OR H/2 WHICH EVER IS GREATER WALL HEIGHT, H
NOTE:

PLACEMENT OF SUBDRAIN

AT BASE OF WALL WILL NOT

PREVENT SATURATION OF SOILS

BELOW AND / OR IN FRONT OF WALL
FIGURE 6
Retaining Wall
Backfill Detail
DATE December 2025
ENG. / GEOL.

PROJECT NO.

PROJECT NAME
SCALE
RLD
Not to Scale
Related - 340 St. Ann's, Laguna Beach
23106-01
530
530 of 830
Appendix A
References
531
531 of 830
Project No. 23106-01 A-1 December 2, 2025

APPENDIX A
References
American Society of Civil Engineers (ASCE), 2022, Minimum Design Loads and Associated Criteria for Buildings and Other Structures, ASCE/SEI 7-22, 2022.

American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), 2025, Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Volume

04.08 Soil and Rock (I): D420 – D5876.

Architectural Drawings, 2023, Architectural Plans, Family Apartments and Spiritual Center, Laguna Beach California, dated January 24, 2023.

Bray, J.D., and Sancio, R. B., 2006, Assessment of Liquefaction Susceptibility of Fine-Grained Soils, Journal of Geotechnical and Geoenvironmental Engineering, ASCE, pp. 1165-1177, dated September 2006.

California Building Standards Commission, 2025, California Building Code, California Code of Regulations Title 24, Volumes 1 and 2, dated July 2025.

California Department of Transportation (Caltrans), 2021, Corrosion Guidelines, Version 3.2, dated May 2021.

California Division of Mines and Geology (CDMG), 1998, Earthquake Zones of Required Investigation, Laguna Beach Quadrangle, Official Map Released April 15, 1998. ________, 2006, Seismic Hazard Zone Report for Laguna Beach 7.5 Minute Quadrangle, Orange County California, Hazard Zone Report 013, 2001, updated January 13, 2006.

California Geological Survey (CGS), 2008, Special Publication 117A: Guidelines for Evaluating and Mitigating Seismic Hazards in California.
________, 2018, Earthquake Fault Zones, Special Publication 42, Revised 2018. ________, 2021, Tsunami Hazard Area Map, Laguna Beach Quadrangle, Orange County, California, Scale 1:24,000, dated 2021.

Edginton W.J. & Tan S.S., 1976, Geology of the Laguna Beach Quadrangle, Orange County, California, Special Report 127, dated 1976
Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), 2011, LRFD Seismic Analysis and Design of Transportation Geotechnical Features and Structural Foundation, Reference Manual, Publication No. FHWA11-032, August, 2011.

Historic Aerials, 2023, Historic Aerials photographs from 1938 to 2020, from https://www/historicaerials.com, viewed July 2023,
532
532 of 830
APPENDIX A (Cont’d)
References
Project No. 23106-01 A-2 December 2, 2025
Lew, et al, 2010, Seismic Earth Pressures on Deep Basements, Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC) Convention Proceedings.

Related, 2025, Zoning Plan Check Submittal, Building Plan – Podium, NCC Affordable Housing, 340 St Ann’s Drive, Laguna Beach, California, dated October 14, 2025.

Soils International Corporation, 1978, Preliminary Soils and Geologic Report, Church Property, Lot 21, Tract 870, Cleo and Catalina Streets, Project: S-0338-FG, Laguna Beach, California, dated June 9, 1978.

Structural Engineers Association of California (SEAOC), 2025, Seismic Design Maps, Retrieved November 25, 2025, from https://seismicmaps.org/
T&M Surveying, 2022, ALTA/NSPS Land Title Survey, 340 St Ann’s Drive, City of Laguna Beach, County of Orange, State of California, dated November 22, 2022.

Twining Laboratories, 1962, Congregational Church Parking Lot on Catalina between St. Anns Drive and Cleo Street, Laguna Beach, California, Project No. 340A-62-2327, dated October 29, 1962 United States Geological Survey (USGS), 1957, Geologic Map of the San Juan Hills, San Juan Capistrano Area, Orange County California Oil and Gas Investigation Map OM193, dated 1957. ________, 2004, Preliminary Digital Geologic Map of the Santa Ana 30’x60’ Quadrangle, Southern California, Version 2.0, Open File Report 99-172, Prepared in Cooperation with the California Geological Survey; Compiled by D.M. Morton.
________, 2018, Hazard Disaggregation, NSHM Conterminous U.S. 2018, Retrieved November 25, 2025, from https://earthquake.usgs.gov/hazards/interactive/
533
533 of 830
Appendix B
Boring and CPT Logs
534
534 of 830
THIS SUMMARY APPLIES ONLY AT THE LOCATION OF THIS BORING AND AT THE TIME OF DRILLING. SUBSURFACE CONDITIONS MAY DIFFER AT OTHER LOCATIONS AND MAY CHANGE AT THIS LOCATION WITH THE PASSAGE OF TIME. THE DATA PRESENTED IS A SIMPLIFICATION OF THE ACTUAL CONDITIONS ENCOUNTERED. THE DESCRIPTIONS

PROVIDED ARE QUALITATIVE FIELD DESCRIPTIONS

AND ARE NOT BASED ON QUANTITATIVE
ENGINEERING ANALYSIS. CN CONSOLIDATION

CR CORROSION

AL ATTERBERG LIMITS CO COLLAPSE/SWELL RV R-VALUE
-#200 % PASSING # 200 SIEVE

DIRECT SHEAR MAXIMUM DENSITY

SIEVE ANALYSIS

SIEVE AND HYDROMETER

EXPANSION INDEX
TEST TYPES: DSMD
SA
S&H
EI
SAMPLE TYPES: B BULK SAMPLE R RING SAMPLE (CA Modified Sampler) G GRAB SAMPLE

SPT STANDARD PENETRATION

TEST SAMPLE GROUNDWATER TABLE
30 25
20 15
10 5
0 Elevation (ft) Depth (ft) Graphic Log Sample Number Blow Count Dry Density (pcf) Moisture (%) USCS Symbol DESCRIPTION Type of Test Hole Diameter:

Hole Location: See Geotechnical Map
Drop:

Type of Rig:

Project Number:

Elevation of Top of Hole: Drive Weight:

Drilling Company:

Project Name:

Date:
70 65
60 55
50 Geotechnical Boring Log Borehole HS-1
6/20/2023
~74' MSL
6"
Truck Mounted Rig
30"
140 pounds
2R Drilling
Woodhart LLC- Laguna Beach
23106-01
Logged By JMN
Sampled By JMN
Checked By RLD

Page 1 of 2 ends

Laguna Beach City CouncilJuly 7, 2026

Laguna Beach City Council
July 7, 2026