CITY OF LAGUNA BEACH
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA
JULY 21, 2026
COUNCIL CHAMBERS – 505 FOREST AVENUE, LAGUNA BEACH, CA 92651 STUDY SESSION
MARK ORGILL, Mayor
HALLIE JONES, Mayor Pro Tem
SUE KEMPF, Councilmember
BOB WHALEN, Councilmember
ALEX ROUNAGHI, Councilmember
DAVE KIFF, City Manager
MEGAN GARIBALDI, City Attorney
LAURA PARISI, City Treasurer
ANN MARIE McKAY, City Clerk
JOINT CITY COUNCIL / HERITAGE COMMITTEE STUDY SESSION
************************************************
A. ROLL CALL 3:00 p.m.
B. STUDY SESSION.
1. JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND POLICIES
Recommendations:
1. Receive a joint presentation by City Staff and the City’s historic consultant, ASM Affiliates;
2. Discuss the four priority topics presented for consideration: (1) the Mills Act program and contracts, (2) Certified Local Government status, (3) preparation of a Historic Context Statement, and (4) creation of a Certificate of Appropriateness; and
3. Provide feedback and direction to City staff regarding which of the topics staff should explore further and prioritize as part of a work plan.
C. ADJOURNMENT. The Laguna Beach City Council will adjourn to its 4:00 p.m. Closed Session 1 of 15
1. Receive a joint presentation by City Staff and the City’s historic consultant, ASM Affiliates;
2. Discuss the four priority topics presented for consideration: (1) the Mills Act program and contracts, (2) Certified Local Government status, (3) preparation of a Historic Context Statement, and (4) creation of a Certificate of Appropriateness; and
3. Provide feedback and direction to City staff regarding which of the topics staff should explore further and prioritize as part of a work plan.
C. ADJOURNMENT. The Laguna Beach City Council will adjourn to its 4:00 p.m. Closed Session and 5:00 p.m. Regular Meeting.
************************************************************************************************************** Accessibility and Accommodation Requests: Pursuant to the Americans with Disabilities Act, persons with a disability who require a disabilityrelated modification or accommodation in order to participate in a meeting, including auxiliary aids or services, may request such modification or accommodation from the City Clerk at (949) 4970705 (telephone) or [email protected] (email). Notification 48 hours prior to the meeting will enable the City to make reasonable arrangements to assure accessibility to the meeting.
Levine Act Disclosure: Pursuant to the Levine Act (Govt Code Section 84308), any party to a permit, license, contract, or other entitlement before the City Council is required to disclose on the record any campaign contribution, including aggregated contributions, of more than $500 commencing on January 1, 2025, made within the preceding 12 months.
Courtesy Virtual Broadcast: The City plans to broadcast the meeting as a courtesy only:
Online: www.lagunabeachcity.net/meetings
Cox Cable Channel 852
YouTube: City of Laguna Beach YouTube Channel
ADDRESSING THE CITY COUNCIL
InPerson Public Comment:
Members of the public may address the City Council on any agenda item during the public comments portion of the meeting. Providing a name, city of residence, mailing address, or other identifying information is voluntary. If you would like a followup from the City, please provide contact information.
Written Comment:
To submit written comments on an agenda item, please email [email protected]. Include "Public Comment" in the subject line and reference the agenda item number, if applicable. Written comments will be forwarded to the City Clerk and made publicly available.
TWOWAY TELEPHONIC SERVICE
Beginning July 1, 2026, pursuant to Senate Bill 707 and California Government Code sections 54953.4 and 54954.3, members of the public may also provide public comment in real time either in person or remotely through the twoway telephonic service identified below. Remote public commenters will receive the same time allotment as members of the public commenting in person.
Join by Telephone: +1 669 900 9128
Webinar ID (changes each meeting): 839 8059 5765
Courtesy Zoom Participation: The City plans to enable participation via internet/zoom link as a courtesy only (link changes each meeting): https://lagunabeachcity.zoom.us/j/83980595765 2 of 15
remotely through the twoway telephonic service identified below. Remote public commenters will receive the same time allotment as members of the public commenting in person.
Join by Telephone: +1 669 900 9128
Webinar ID (changes each meeting): 839 8059 5765
Courtesy Zoom Participation: The City plans to enable participation via internet/zoom link as a courtesy only (link changes each meeting): https://lagunabeachcity.zoom.us/j/83980595765 Please be advised that the City does not guarantee that this link will work or that there will not be technical difficulties in accessing it. The only way to guarantee realtime participation is via inperson comment or via telephone callin, subject to provisions of Government Code section 54953.4.
Remote Public Comment:
To provide public comment remotely, press *9 if participating by telephone, or use the "Raise Hand" feature on Zoom if participating via internet. When called upon, the speaker will be unmuted and given the allotted time to speak. Telephone participants may press *6 to mute or unmute themselves when called to speak. Remote speakers must be present in the telephone queue or Zoom when called.
Remote participants are responsible for ensuring that they are connected and able to hear the meeting.
Remote Access Disruption:
The City Council adopted the Policy for Disruption of Telephonic or Internet Service During Public Meetings (SB 707) on March 10, 2026. If a disruption of telephonic service prevents members of the public utilizing twoway telephonic services from being able to attend or observe the meeting remotely, the City Council will follow the adopted policy. The policy may require the open session to be recessed while the City makes goodfaith efforts to restore service. If service is not restored, the City Council may continue only after making the required rollcall findings, as applicable.
Technical Assistance:
Meeting staff will monitor remote access during the meeting. If you experience remote access issues during the meeting, please notify the Zoom host as soon as possible.
Compliance with Government Code Section 54957.5: Materials related to an item on this Agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packets are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's Office at 505 Forest Avenue, Laguna Beach, California, during normal business hours.
Testimony given before the City Council is recorded.
The timer light at the podium will turn yellow and beep once when the speaker has 30 seconds remaining. The timer light will turn red and buzz when the speaker’s time has expired.
PLEASE TURN CELL PHONES OFF OR SET TO SILENT MODE.
CERTIFICATION OF MEETING NOTICE AND AGENDA POSTING
This notice and agenda were posted on the City's website and the City Hall bulletin board at least 72 hours prior to the meeting date, in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act. /s/ Ann Marie McKay, CPMC, CMC
City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach 3 of 15
hours prior to the meeting date, in compliance with the Ralph M. Brown Act. /s/ Ann Marie McKay, CPMC, CMC
City Clerk, City of Laguna Beach 4 of 15
STAFF REPORT
Meeting Date:
July 21, 2026
STUDY SESSION
1 SUBJECT: JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION
PROGRAMS AND POLICIES
RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the City Council:
1. Receive a joint presentation by City Staff and the City’s historic consultant, ASM Affiliates;
2. Discuss the four priority topics presented for consideration: (1) the Mills Act program and contracts, (2) Certified Local Government status, (3) preparation of a Historic Context Statement, and (4) creation of a Certificate of Appropriateness; and
3. Provide feedback and direction to City staff regarding which of the topics staff should explore further and prioritize as part of a work plan.
SUMMARY OF THE MATTER
At its March 11, 2025, meeting, the City Council authorized an agreement with ASM Affiliates ("ASM") to complete the Historic Property Evaluations Project, a comprehensive effort to strengthen the City's historic preservation program. The project consists of two primary tasks. Task I evaluated the 54 properties on the Laguna Beach Historic Register that did not have recorded Preservation Agreements. The City Council received the results of that evaluation on February 24, 2026. Task II is developing recommendations to improve the City's historic preservation framework, including permit review procedures, program administration, and long term preservation planning. As that work has progressed, several policy issues have emerged where early direction from the City Council and Heritage Committee would be beneficial before ASM finalizes its recommendations.
Separately, on November 18, 2025, during consideration of the annual Mills Act applications, the City Council directed staff to conduct a comprehensive review of the City's Mills Act Program, including maintenance work plans, compliance monitoring, property valuation practices, and administrative procedures. Staff also provided an update during the January 30, 2026, Strategic Planning Session. Because this work falls outside ASM's contract scope, staff has independently researched Mills Act best practices and incorporated those findings into this report.
The purpose of this joint study session is to present four foundational policy topics for discussion that are drawn from both the Historic Property Evaluations Project and prior City Council direction: (1) the Mills Act Program, (2) Certified Local Government status, (3) preparation of a Historic Context Statement, and (4) creation of a Certificate of Appropriateness process. Staff is seeking policy direction on these topics to help prioritize future work and refine ASM's final recommendations. No formal action is requested other than direction to staff regarding the issues that should be further evaluated and developed for future City Council consideration.
1 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
DISCUSSION
Background: The Historic Property Evaluations Project and its Recommendations The Historic Property Evaluations Project was initiated through Request for Qualifications No. CD-24-1 and awarded to ASM Affiliates in March 2025. The Historic Property Evaluations Project was structured around two primary tasks. Task 1 evaluated the 54 properties listed on the Laguna Beach Historic Register that lacked recorded Preservation Agreements to determine their continued eligibility for designation and whether Preservation Agreements should be recorded. Task 2 focused on developing a streamlined, legally defensible framework for evaluating permit applications for properties not listed on the Historic Register in a manner consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) and the City's Historic Preservation Ordinance.
Task 1 has been completed, and the results were presented to the City Council on February 24, 2026, along with recommendations for property owner outreach and administrative updates. The results of Task 2 will be informed by the direction provided at the joint study session and incorporated into a report that will be presented to both the City Council and Heritage Committee once complete. While these recommendations fulfill the original objective of streamlining permit review, they also strengthen the City's historic preservation program more broadly. Implementing even a subset of them would enhance the program and provide greater certainty and consistency in outcomes. They include the establishment of a tiered permit review framework incorporating a Certificate of Appropriateness process; implementation of a color-coded inspection card program for designated historic properties; identification of project types eligible for ministerial review; application for Certified Local Government (CLG) status; ongoing training for staff and advisory bodies; preparation of a Historic Context Statement; an evaluation of the benefits to the City for undertaking citywide reconnaissance-level and intensive-level historic resource surveys; development of comprehensive illustrated historic design guidelines; and evaluation of the need for a qualified historic preservation planner within the Community Development Department.
Because these recommendations identify more initiatives than can reasonably be implemented simultaneously, staff has identified four foundational and interrelated topics for initial discussion.
Advancing these topics would establish a stronger framework for the City's historic preservation program, improve the consistency and efficiency of future historic resource evaluations, and reduce the cost of administering the program over time. Given their significance, staff is seeking input from both the City Council and the Heritage Committee before determining priorities for future implementation. Each topic is introduced with a brief background discussion followed by the specific questions and policy considerations for which staff is seeking direction.
Topic 1: Mills Act Program and Contracts
The Mills Act, authorized by California Government Code Sections 50280 et seq., enables local governments to enter into contracts with owners of qualified historic properties. In exchange for a commitment to preserve, maintain, and rehabilitate the property in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, the County Assessor values the property using the income-based methodology established under Revenue and Taxation Code Sections 439 et seq., which 2 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
typically results in reduced property taxes. In practice, this means the property is valued based on its potential income rather than on its market sale price, which usually lowers the amount of property tax owed.
Mills Act contracts have an initial term of ten years and automatically renew each year unless either party files a notice of non-renewal, creating a rolling ten-year obligation that runs with the property and is binding on future owners.
The City Council established the City's Mills Act Program in September 1993, initially limiting eligibility to properties rated "Exceptional" on the Historic Register. In 2012, the Council amended the program to establish a more formal application process, including a mandatory pre-application meeting, an application fee and consultant review deposit, application deadlines, and a priority ranking process requiring recommendations from the Heritage Committee before City Council consideration. In 2022, following adoption of the Historic Preservation Ordinance, eligibility was expanded to include all properties listed on the Historic Register, regardless of their historic rating. The purpose of the City's Mills Act Program is to encourage owners to reinvest the resulting property tax savings into the preservation, rehabilitation, and long-term maintenance of their historic properties through implementation of an approved ten-year work plan. Since the program's inception, the City has executed 142 Historic Property Preservation Agreements.
A Historic Property Preservation Agreement is the formal name for a Mills Act contract, and it should not be confused with the separate Preservation Agreement that a property owner records as a condition of listing on the Historic Register. Because the contract renews automatically, participating property owners remain subject to the contract's preservation obligations for as long as the agreement remains in effect, including following the sale or transfer of the property. For 2026, the estimated reduction in the City's property tax revenue attributable to active Mills Act contracts is approximately $743,014. This figure represents the annual value of the tax savings provided to participating property owners, which reflects the public investment the City makes in preserving these historic resources.
Under the current program, all Mills Act applications are reviewed by the Heritage Committee, which forwards a recommendation to the City Council for final consideration. According to the Task I analysis, approximately 116 Mills Act contracts were recorded between 1995 and 2023. The two figures differ because the 142 agreements represent all contracts executed since the program began, while the approximately 116 contracts reflect those identified in the Task I analysis for the period 1995 through 2023.
Mills Act contracts are distinct from Preservation Agreements, which serve a separate purpose within the City's historic preservation program.
During prior City Council discussions, several policy questions were raised regarding the administration of the Mills Act Program, including the scope of the property tax benefit, the preparation and review of maintenance work plans, whether updated work plans should be required at the conclusion of each ten-year term, and how Laguna Beach's program compares with those of other jurisdictions. To inform this discussion, staff completed a review of Mills Act programs administered by the Cities of Anaheim, Orange, and Redlands and incorporated those findings into the policy considerations presented below. • Assessed value and the historic portion of the property. Based on information provided by the Orange County Assessor, the construction of a new accessory dwelling unit (“ADU”) or other new structure on a property subject to a Mills Act contract is treated as new construction for assessment 3 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
purposes. Upon completion, the new improvement is assessed using the cost approach to determine its market value as of the date construction is completed. That assessed value then establishes the new base year value for the improvement and is subsequently subject to the annual limitations on assessment increases established by Proposition 13.
In practice, this question is shaped mainly by how the County Assessor values these properties, and there is no separate rate or proportion that the City sets or provides to the County. The Orange County Assessor determines the taxable value and applies the reduced Mills Act value, which is based on income rather than market sales, to the qualified historic property described in the contract.
Under State Board of Equalization guidance, non-historic new construction, such as an addition or accessory dwelling unit, is valued separately at its market value and added to the historic value, so it does not receive the reduced rate unless the contract specifically includes it. To date, however, the City's practice has generally presented the entire property for consideration rather than distinguishing the historic resource from later, non-historic development. Defining the qualified historic property more precisely in future contracts would help direct the benefit to the historic resource. Other California cities typically address this issue at the application stage rather than by adjusting the assessment itself. Common practices include clearly defining the qualified historic property and the scope of work within the contract and supporting historic resource report; requiring applicants to identify any new construction or accessory dwelling units and confirm their treatment with the County Assessor before applying; expressly excluding new buildings and accessory dwelling units from the Mills Act valuation; and limiting eligibility to properties below a certain assessed value so the program does not extend to very high-value or substantially redeveloped properties.
If directed, staff would coordinate with the Orange County Assessor and the City Attorney to align the City’s application requirements and contract language with these practices. • Development and vetting of work plans before Council. Establish a standardized process for the preparation, review, and refinement of Mills Act work plans before they are presented to the Heritage Committee and City Council for consideration. Such a process could include an initial completeness review, verification that the proposed work is appropriate for the property's historic character and consistent with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, evaluation of the appropriateness of the proposed scope and associated costs, and an opportunity for an informal preapplication meeting with staff to identify deficiencies and resolve issues before a formal application is submitted. A range of alternatives is available for the City Council and Heritage Committee to consider, either individually or in combination, including a standardized work plan template and application checklist; a defined list of eligible maintenance and rehabilitation activities together with a list of items that are ineligible for Mills Act credit; a requirement that work plans be prepared or reviewed by a qualified preservation professional meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards; independent review of the proposed scope and cost by an on-call consultant funded through the application deposit; and ranking or prioritization criteria for use when the number of applications exceeds the number of contracts the City intends to approve in a given cycle.
Implementing a structured review process would improve the consistency and quality of work plans 4 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
while ensuring that proposed preservation activities meaningfully support the objectives of the Mills Act Program. It would also respond to concerns documented in the City's records during the 2013 and 2014 Mills Act application cycles regarding the quality, consistency, and level of detail contained in consultantprepared assessment reports.
A review of other California Mills Act programs demonstrates that early staff involvement is a common best practice. For example, the City of Redlands incorporates an informal staff pre-review process and requires a recommendation from its Historic and Scenic Preservation Commission before City Council consideration. Similarly, the City of Anaheim requires pre-application coordination, identifies categories of improvements that are ineligible for Mills Act credit, and provides guidance identifying common maintenance and rehabilitation activities that are appropriate for inclusion in a property's maintenance plan. These practices help establish clear expectations for applicants, improve the quality of submitted work plans, and reduce the need for revisions during the public review process.
• New work plan for each ten-year term. Consider whether property owners should be required to prepare and submit a new or updated ten-year work plan at the conclusion of each ten-year contract term, rather than relying solely on the work plan approved at the time of the initial Mills Act application. Requiring periodic updates would allow the City to evaluate the property's current preservation needs, account for work completed during the preceding term, and establish new preservation, maintenance, and rehabilitation priorities for the next ten-year period. An updated work plan would also provide an opportunity to reassess project costs, address deferred maintenance, and ensure that the property's condition and proposed improvements remain consistent with the objectives of the Mills Act Program and the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties. Because Mills Act contracts automatically renew annually unless a notice of non-renewal is filed, the City would need to establish an administrative process for reviewing and approving updated work plans at each ten-year milestone while maintaining continuity of the underlying contract. Such a process should include a property inspection, staff review, and Heritage Committee recommendation prior to City Council consideration, if desired.
A review of comparable Mills Act programs indicates that periodic updates to maintenance and rehabilitation plans are a common administrative practice. For example, the City of Orange requires participating property owners to submit an updated ten-year Rehabilitation Plan every ten years.
Likewise, several California jurisdictions require a current ten-year maintenance or preservation plan that remains with the property and is updated periodically as ownership changes or preservation priorities evolve. Requiring periodic updates would help ensure that Mills Act tax benefits continue to support meaningful preservation activities throughout the life of the contract, rather than relying on work plans that may no longer reflect the property's condition or preservation needs. • Audit mechanisms and inspections. Establish a formal compliance monitoring and audit program to verify continued compliance with Mills Act contract obligations. A range of audit and inspection alternatives is available for the City Council and Heritage Committee to consider, either individually or in combination, including annual owner self-certification with supporting documentation such as 5 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
photographs and receipts; periodic staff inspections conducted on a defined cycle, at each ten-year renewal, or upon transfer of ownership; exterior or public right-of-way inspections in place of full on-site reviews to reduce staff burden; use of a qualified preservation consultant or a partnership with a local preservation organization to assist with inspections; a risk-based approach that reviews a sample of contracts each year rather than the entire portfolio annually; and periodic audits confirming that the property tax savings are being reinvested in the preservation and maintenance of the resource. Such a program would confirm that required maintenance, preservation, and rehabilitation work identified in approved work plans is being completed in a timely manner, that the property continues to be maintained in accordance with the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, and that any alterations remain consistent with the Historic Preservation Ordinance and the terms of the contract. A structured monitoring program would also improve accountability by documenting completed work, identifying deferred maintenance or unauthorized alterations at an early stage, and providing an opportunity for staff to work proactively with property owners to resolve compliance issues before they become more significant. Periodic inspections would help ensure that the public benefit provided through reduced property taxes is resulting in the intended preservation of the City's historic resources. Inspections would also help identify new construction or additions that should be reported to the Orange County Assessor for separate valuations.
The need for a more consistent monitoring program was reinforced during the Task I field survey, which identified several properties where improvements appeared to be underway without confirmation that the work had been properly permitted or was consistent with the applicable Mills Act contract, Preservation Agreement, or Historic Register requirements. While these observations do not necessarily indicate noncompliance, they underscore the importance of establishing a regular inspection and reporting protocol to verify compliance, maintain accurate records, and ensure consistent administration of the program. Comparable Mills Act programs throughout California commonly pair annual owner reporting with periodic inspections as a best practice for confirming that preservation obligations continue to be met throughout the life of the contract. • Comparison cities and best practices. Direct staff to complete a focused comparison of peer programs, using Anaheim, Orange, and Redlands as a starting point and identifying additional jurisdictions as appropriate, addressing application and ranking procedures, work plan requirements, inspection and audit practices, and the treatment of new construction, and to return with recommended improvements to the City's program.
As next steps, staff could establish a standardized work plan review and vetting process, adopt a compliance monitoring and inspection protocol for existing contracts, and complete the peer-city comparison. This work could be completed by the end of the year so that it can be put in place for the next Mills Act application cycle. Any change to how assessed value is treated would require coordination with the Orange County Assessor and the City Attorney, and a requirement for updated work plans at each ten-year term would require revisions to the program's contract forms and administrative procedures. 6 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
Topic 2: Certified Local Government Status
The Certified Local Government (“CLG”) Program was established through the 1980 amendments to the National Historic Preservation Act to encourage local governments to play a more active role in the identification, evaluation, designation, and preservation of historic resources. The program is administered as a partnership among local governments, the California Office of Historic Preservation (“OHP”), and the National Park Service, providing participating jurisdictions with additional resources and recognition for maintaining an effective local historic preservation program.
Designation as a CLG offers several benefits. Most notably, CLGs are eligible to compete for a dedicated share of the federal Historic Preservation Fund, with at least ten percent of California's annual allocation reserved for CLG grants. These funds may be used for preservation planning activities such as historic resource surveys, preparation of historic context statements, design guideline development, ordinance updates, public education, and other preservation initiatives. Participation in the program also provides access to technical assistance and training from the California Office of Historic Preservation, promotes the consistent application of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties, strengthens public participation in local preservation decisions, and demonstrates the City's commitment to maintaining a preservation program that meets recognized state and federal standards.
Participation in the CLG Program also includes ongoing responsibilities. To qualify, a local government must maintain an effective historic preservation ordinance and establish a qualified historic preservation review body. Federal regulations require that this review body include members with demonstrated expertise in preservation-related disciplines including history, architecture, architectural history, archaeology, or planning, to the extent such professionals are reasonably available within the community.
The review body is also expected to participate in periodic training to remain current on preservation practices and applicable laws. Staff requests direction on the following policy considerations related to potential participation in the Certified Local Government Program. • Benefits and qualification requirements. Evaluate the benefits of CLG participation against the required qualifications for the review body and the associated training and reporting obligations, to determine whether the program is a suitable fit for the City. • Identification of a hearing body. The City of Laguna Beach currently distributes review of projects affecting historic resources across multiple bodies, including the Heritage Committee in an advisory capacity, the Zoning Administrator, the Design Review Board, the Planning Commission, and the City Council. To become a CLG, the City would need to identify or designate a single qualified hearing body to fulfill the responsibilities required under the program. Direction is requested on whether to explore CLG participation and which body might appropriately serve this function.
In terms of sequencing, evaluating whether CLG participation is a good fit for the City and identifying the most appropriate review body are near-term steps that staff could undertake with existing resources.
Pursuing formal certification, including establishing a qualified review body and meeting the program's ongoing training and reporting obligations, may be a longer-term objective. 7 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
Topic 3: Creation of a Historic Context Statement
A Historic Context Statement (“HCS”) is a foundational planning document that documents and explains the historical development of a community through identified themes, geographic areas, property types, and periods of significance. It establishes the historic framework against which individual properties are evaluated for significance and integrity under applicable national, state, and local designation criteria. By providing a consistent analytical basis for historic resource evaluations, an HCS promotes objective, transparent, and defensible decision-making for historic preservation planning, environmental review under the CEQA, and, where applicable, compliance with the National Historic Preservation Act. Because an HCS serves as the basis for regulatory and preservation decisions, it should be prepared by qualified professionals meeting the Secretary of the Interior's Professional Qualification Standards. Preparation of an HCS may also be eligible for partial funding through Historic Preservation Fund grants available to CLGs, thereby reducing the City's implementation costs.
Preparation of an HCS would directly address a key deficiency identified through the Historic Property Evaluations Project, namely the lack of a consistent, citywide framework for determining when historic resource evaluations are warranted and how those evaluations should be conducted. Currently, the absence of an adopted historic context can result in inconsistent evaluation methods, varying consultant conclusions, increased review times, and uncertainty for property owners, applicants, and decision-makers. Establishing a comprehensive HCS would provide a common foundation for future evaluations and improve the consistency, predictability, and defensibility of the City's historic preservation program. An HCS would define the historic themes, property types, geographic areas, and periods of significance that form the basis for evaluating historic resources. This framework would provide clear guidance for staff, consultants, property owners, and decision-makers, resulting in more consistent and objective historic resource assessments. An HCS would also improve efficiency and reduce costs for staff and residents. By providing standardized historical research and evaluation criteria, an HCS would reduce the scope, time, and cost associated with preparing future historic resource evaluations. It would also improve consistency among reports prepared by different consultants, streamline staff review, and provide greater predictability for applicants during the entitlement process.
Staff requests direction on the following policy considerations:
• Near-term implementation strategies. As an initial step, the City could prioritize preparation of focused historic context studies for areas experiencing redevelopment pressure – as may be identified – or for specific historic themes where additional documentation is needed. These efforts could be complemented by pursuing grant funding and developing interim guidance to improve consistency while a comprehensive HCS is being prepared. • Long-term implementation strategy. The City is undertaking a comprehensive update to its General Plan, which may include revisions to the Historic Resources Element. Preparation of a Historic Context Statement (HCS) could be coordinated with this effort to ensure that both documents are informed by a consistent understanding of Laguna Beach's historical development and preservation priorities. As a long-term initiative, the City could pursue preparation of a comprehensive, citywide 8 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
HCS supported by reconnaissance-level and intensive-level historic resource surveys. A reconnaissancelevel survey is a broad overview that identifies potential historic resources across the City, while an intensive-level survey is a detailed, property-by-property evaluation. This work could be partially funded through CLG grants and informed by robust community engagement, including recognition of the area's First Peoples, documentation of underrepresented histories, and educational outreach to owners of historic properties. Together, these efforts would establish a durable foundation for the City's historic preservation program and provide a more comprehensive understanding of Laguna Beach's historical and cultural resources.
Topic 4: Creation and Use of a Certificate of Appropriateness A Certificate of Appropriateness (COA) is a preservation planning tool used by many jurisdictions to evaluate whether proposed alterations, additions, demolition, relocation, or new construction affecting designated historic resources are compatible with the property's historic character and significance. Rather than determining whether a project may proceed, a COA establishes whether the proposed work is appropriate based on adopted preservation standards and design criteria, typically including the Secretary of the Interior's Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties and applicable local design guidelines.
The recommendations include establishing a COA process for designated historic properties. The proposed framework would include a two-tiered review system consisting of a minor COA for routine or limited work and a major COA for projects involving more substantial alterations or new construction. The process would be supported by a planning counter checklist and a clearly defined list of project types to provide greater certainty regarding permit requirements. The discussion below focuses on the discretionary COA process applicable to projects involving new construction and significant alterations to designated historic resources.
Staff requests direction on the following policy considerations:
• Benefits of establishing a Certificate of Appropriateness process. A COA program would provide a clear and transparent review process for projects affecting historic resources, establish consistent and defensible standards for evaluating compatibility, and provide property owners with greater certainty regarding preservation expectations before project design is finalized. A COA process would also promote consistent application of the Secretary of the Interior's Standards, improve the quality of project review, and help ensure that new construction and alterations are compatible with the historic character of designated properties and historic districts. • Implementation through amendments to the Historic Preservation Ordinance. If the City wishes to establish a COA program, implementation would require amendments to Chapter 25.45 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code. Those amendments would identify the categories of projects requiring a COA, define the exterior features and types of work subject to review, establish review procedures and approval criteria, and clarify the relationship between the COA process and the City's existing entitlement procedures. The ordinance could be informed by best practices from comparable California preservation programs and tailored to Laguna Beach's existing review structure.
9 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
• Relationship to ministerial projects and State housing law. A traditional COA is a discretionary approval and therefore cannot be applied to projects that State law requires to be processed ministerially. In general terms, a discretionary approval involves case-by-case judgment by a reviewing body, often including a public hearing, while ministerial approval is issued by staff when a project meets fixed, objective standards and does not require a hearing. Certain qualifying housing developments, density bonus projects, accessory dwelling units, and other housing-related applications are exempt from discretionary design review under State housing statutes. Accordingly, if the City pursues a COA program, additional consideration will be needed to determine how historic compatibility should be addressed for ministerial projects. The most appropriate approach would likely be the development of clear, objective historic design standards that can be applied ministerially while remaining consistent with State law. This would enable the City to advance its historic preservation objectives without creating conflicts with State housing streamlining requirements.
With respect to sequencing, developing clear, objective historic design standards that can be applied to ministerial projects, including housing, may be the more immediate priority, both to advance the City's preservation goals and to maintain compliance with State housing law. Establishing the broader discretionary Certificate of Appropriateness process would be a longer-term objective, as it would require amendments to the Historic Preservation Ordinance.
FINANCIAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action, which is limited to receiving a report and providing direction to staff, has no direct financial impact at this time. Should the City Council direct staff to pursue any of the topics discussed, staff would return with the associated costs, staffing needs, and any available grant funding for consideration at that time.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The recommended action is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under State CEQA Guidelines Section 15378. The recommended action is not a "project" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15378 because it consists solely of a discussion of potential revisions to the City's Historic Preservation programs and policies and provides direction to staff. No action approving or committing the City to a course of action that may result in a physical change to the environment is being taken at this time.
Here, the recommended action is not a project because the City Council is providing direction on the scope of potential future code amendments so that a work plan can be developed for future action.
ATTACHMENTS
None
Submitted By: Matt Schneider Approved: .David A Kiff
Matthew Schneider, Director of
Community Development
Dave Kiff, City Manager
10 of 11
JOINT STUDY SESSION TO CONSIDER HISTORIC PRESERVATION PROGRAMS AND
POLICIES
July 21, 2026
Report Prepared By: Coordinated With:
Shaveta Sharma, Senior Planner Jane Abzug, Assistant City Attorney Samantha Beier, Planning Manager
Anthony Viera, Deputy Director of Community
Development
11 of 11