Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM
August 26, 2026 Project# 30640
To: Wendy Jung, Principal Planner
Anthony Viera, Deputy Director of Community Development City of Laguna Beach
From: David Laurens
CC: Ashley Brodkin (De Novo), Tim Erney (Kittelson)
RE: Laguna Beach Comprehensive Zoning Code Update –
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses 1 Purpose and Overview
This memorandum recommends blended, location differentiated off-street parking requirements for nonresidential uses in the commercial areas of Laguna Beach outside the Downtown Specific Plan (DSP) boundary, which were disaggregated into six districts. The recommendation is that the City adopt a blended non-residential parking standard for the study area, differentiated by location, replacing the current use-by-use minimums for general commercial uses. Districts 2 and 3, which function as an extension of the Downtown Specific Plan, would carry the same 3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet of nonresidential floor area adopted for the DSP. The remainder of the study area would be set at 2.75, with District 6 optionally separated at 2.25 to reflect its lower observed demand.
The recommendation was based on three measured ratios for the study area: the parking that is actually used during peak periods, the parking that is actually built, and the parking that the current Laguna Beach Municipal Code would require for the uses on the ground. Observed peak demand is 2.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet, the parking actually built is 3.6 per 1,000 square feet, and the current Code would require an aggregate code-implied rate of 4.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet based on the actual mix of land uses in the study area and their corresponding parking requirements. Overall, the City's existing minimum parking requirements call for more than twice the parking that non-residential uses in the study area use.
Consistent with the methodology the City used to modernize parking downtown, this analysis derives the recommended rate from local conditions rather than from standard ratios. The observed demand is the primary basis for the recommendation; the built ratio and the code-implied requirement frame the gap between what the current standards assume and what the non-residential uses actually need.
Blended rates ranging from 2.25 to 3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet align with the standard adopted for the Downtown Specific Plan and sit below the retail and office standards used by comparable coastal cities. For Laguna Beach, this approach will result in a simpler, more predictable requirement that reduces barriers to tenant change and reinvestment in older, built-out buildings, while still requiring more parking than the study area uses at its summer peak. This memorandum should be read together with the Task 1.5 recommendations for other parking code elements and the Task 1.6 recommendations for the in-lieu 750 The City Drive, Suite 410
Orange, CA 92868
P 714.468.1997
126
August 26, 2026 Page 2
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
parking certificate program, as a coordinated package. Several Task 1.5 elements, including the fractionalrounding, intensification-of-use, and floor-area provisions, bear directly on how the recommended rate would be applied.
2 Methodology and Data Sources
2.1 ANALYTICAL FRAMEWORK
The analysis follows the right-sized parking approach the City used in the 2017 Downtown Parking Actual Demand Study to develop the Downtown Specific Plan. In general, this approach compared the amount of parking built against the number of parking spaces that are typically used and set a single blended requirement that was less than the traditional use-by-use parking minimums. The analysis was based on three ratios, each expressed as parking spaces per 1,000 square feet of non-residential gross floor area (GFA):
◼ Observed Demand Ratio: The peak parking occupancy divided by the occupied non-residential GFA. This measures how much parking is actually used at peak periods and is the primary basis for the recommendation.
◼ Built Parking Ratio: The total parking supply divided by the total non-residential GFA. This measures how much parking exists relative to the built commercial floor area. ◼ Code-Implied Requirement: The current Laguna Beach Municipal Code (LBMC) use-by-use ratios applied to each classified parcel, summed and divided by total non-residential GFA. This measures what the current standard would require given the actual mix of uses in the study area.
Since a parking standard should rest on demonstrated use rather than on what happens to be built or on what the current code assumes, the observed demand ratio carries the recommendation. The built ratio and the code-implied requirement establish the surrounding context and provide study-area-wide evidence that does not depend on the more limited demand sample. Where observed demand sits below both the built ratio and the code-implied requirement, the current minimums overstate real need and a lower rate is justified.
All ratios are computed at the district-aggregate and study-area level, consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan and the 2017 Downtown Parking Actual Demand Study. Demand and floor area are summed within geographics areas and then divided, rather than matched on a parcel-by-parcel basis. This aggregation absorbs individual parcel data gaps and produces more stable ratios than parcel-level pairing would.
2.2 DATA SOURCES AND COVERAGE
The analysis draws on two datasets that cover different portions of the study area. The observed demand data comes from parking occupancy counts collected in Task 1.2 at 35 off-street parking lots1 attributable 1 Of the 37 off-street lots inventoried in Task 1.2, 35 are carried into this analysis. The two excluded lots (6.7 and 6.8) are hospital shared-use lots that serve general public parking under the City-hospital agreement rather than the parking demand of a specific non-residential use.
127
August 26, 2026 Page 3
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
to specific non-residential parcels, distributed across the six study districts. The broader parcel inventory, assembled from the City's parcel database, supplies the built parking ratio and the code-implied requirement across the confirmed non-residential inventory where floor area is available.
The parcel database was compiled at the tenant and building level. Many records represent residential parcels or the residential portion of mixed-use buildings, which are not included in the non-residential parking analysis, and a single parcel is often represented by several rows, one per tenant or building component. As such, the database was restricted to the non-residential uses only: residential parcels and the residential floor area of mixed-use parcels were removed so that only non-residential floor area was used for the ratio denominators, and multi-row parcels were consolidated so that shared parking and building floor area are counted once rather than duplicated. The resulting inventory of confirmed nonresidential parcels was the basis for the built and code-implied ratios. Note that this parcel-level treatment is a refinement over the district-aggregate estimation used in the 2017 study as it resolves use and occupied floor area at the individual tenant level across the inventory.
Appendix A documents the classification logic and the processing rules applied where the source data was ambiguous or inconsistent.
2.3 STUDY AREA
The study area comprises the six parking districts established in Task 1.2, spanning the primarily commercial segments of the Coast Highway corridor to the north and south of the Downtown Specific Plan boundary. The districts and their boundaries are carried forward unchanged from the Task 1.2 analysis. Each district represents a continuous segment of Coast Highway frontage and adjacent side streets that share similar land-use and access characteristics. Figure 1 shows the six districts in relation to the City limits and the Downtown Specific Plan boundary. 128
August 26, 2026 Page 4
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Figure 1 Study Area and Parking Districts
Source: Kittelson, 2025
129
August 26, 2026 Page 5
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
3 Non-Residential Land Use and Supply Inventory
Table 1 summarizes the non-residential land use and parking inventory by district.
The first set of data, from the parcel database, is the classified non-residential inventory: parcels assigned to a Municipal Code use with usable Gross Floor Area (GFA) and parking data. Parcels lacking a clear Municipal Code use assignment or usable floor area and parking data were excluded, so the inventory reflects the parcels with complete, reliable records rather than the full non-residential stock in each district. This keeps the ratios grounded in verified data.
The second set of data is the off-street parking lots where field inventory and four-day parking counts were conducted. Parking occupancy data were collected across the six study districts on four representative dates:
◼ Summer Weekend: Saturday, August 23, 2025
◼ Summer Weekday: Wednesday, August 27, 2025
◼ Fall Weekend: Saturday, September 27, 2025
◼ Fall Weekday: Wednesday, October 1, 2025
Counts were conducted between 12:00 p.m. and 9:00 p.m. to capture both midday and evening activity periods. The initial Parking Supply and Demand study captured as many of these spaces as could be observed in the field. The table ties each parking lot to its non-residential uses and reveals additional associated parking that was not visible during the field inventory. The result is a more complete accounting of supply than field observation alone.
Table 1 Non-Residential Inventory by District
District
Parcel Database Off-Street Parking
Total NonResidential
GFA (SF)
Parking Supply
(spaces)
NonResidential
GFA (SF)
# Off-Street
Parking Lots
Parking
Supply
(spaces)
District 1 58,400 173 25,000 7 104
District 2 112,700 470 70,700 2 285
District 3 42,100 153 18,500 2 83
District 4 113,900 296 92,200 12 218
District 5 72,100 265 42,200 6 197
District 6 74,600 227 29,000 6 107
Total Study
Area
473,900 1,584 277,600 35 994
Source: Kittelson, 2026
Note: GFA = Gross Floor Area; SF = square feet
Two additional off-street lots in District 6, the lower hospital lot entrance and the 7th Avenue spaces along the driveway to the hospital parking structure, were inventoried in the initial Parking Supply and Demand study but are not carried into the ratio calculations. These lots form part of a shared-use agreement between the City and Providence Mission Hospital that makes hospital parking available to the general public, in part year-round and in part seasonally. Because they serve general public and hospital 130
August 26, 2026 Page 6
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
demand rather than the parking demand of a specific non-residential use, and cannot be attributed to a defined quantity of non-residential floor area, they are treated in the same manner as public on-street parking and excluded from the parcel-based ratios. However, they represent a meaningful seasonal addition to public parking supply in District 6.
4 Built Parking Ratio and Code-Implied
Requirement
The built parking ratio and the code-implied parking requirement are computed on the confirmed nonresidential inventory, and therefore have wider coverage than the observed demand ratio. However, since both are on the same set of parcels, the difference between what is built and what the code requires is directly comparable.
The built ratio is the total non-residential parking supply in each district divided by the district's nonresidential GFA. The code-implied requirement applies the current LBMC use-by-use ratios to each classified parcel (for example, one space per 250 square feet for general retail and office uses, equivalent to 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet, and one space per 100 square feet for restaurants, equivalent to 10.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet), and blends the result according to the actual mix of uses in each district.
This data is presented in Table 2.
Table 2 Built Ratio and Code-Implied Requirement by District District Non-Residential
GFA (SF)
Built Ratio
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Code-Implied Requirement
(spaces/1,000 SF)
District 1 58,400 3.0 4.1
District 2 112,700 4.2 5.1
District 3 42,100 3.6 4.4
District 4 113,900 2.6 4.5
District 5 72,100 3.7 5.6
District 6 74,600 3.0 4.6
Total Study Area 473,900 3.3 4.8
Source: Kittelson, 2026
Note: SF = square feet
Across the study area, the current code would require 4.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet given the actual mix of uses, while the parking actually built is 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet. In general, about 30 percent less parking than required by the Code has been provided; this is most likely due to various exceptions and variances, changes to the requirements over time, or other factors. The pattern holds in every district, with the code-implied requirement exceeding the built ratio by about 20 percent to 40 percent throughout.
131
August 26, 2026 Page 7
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
The same two ratios were reported in the Downtown Specific Plan, which provides a useful benchmark for the study area. The DSP found a code-implied requirement of 4.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet against a built ratio of 3.6, shown in Table 3, which is about 25 percent less parking that required. This is the same pattern seen here: the Code requires substantially more parking than the downtown uses have actually built, in the same direction and of similar magnitude to the gap in the study area.
Table 3 DSP Built and Code-Implied Ratios
Measure Calculated Parking Ratio
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Code-implied requirement 4.7
Built ratio 3.6
Source: Laguna Beach, Downtown Specific Plan Area, Parking Actual Demand Study, 2017 5 Observed Demand and Data Collected
5.1 CALCULATED OBSERVED DEMAND
The observed demand ratio is the primary basis for the recommended parking rate. It applies the peak parking occupancy for the 35 surveyed lots to the occupied non-residential floor area within each district.
Occupancy was recorded on four survey days spanning the summer and non-summer seasons in 2025, and the parking conditions accounted for reserved and otherwise restricted spaces as occupied at the peak. Consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan approach, the demand ratio is reported for the analyzed periods.
As shown in Table 4, for the study area, the peak demand is the summer weekday at 2.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet, followed by the summer weekend at 2.1 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Non-summer demand was 2.1 spaces per 1,000 square feet and 1.9 space per 1,000 square feet on weekdays and weekends respectively. Overall, the summer weekday data is most conservative and would allow for sufficient capacity for the rest of the year. The highest parking ratios were in District 3 and the lowest in Districts 2, 4, and 6.
132
August 26, 2026 Page 8
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 4 Observed Demand Ratio by District
District
Built Ratio
(spaces/1,000
SF)
Summer
Weekend Ratio
(spaces/1,000
SF)
Summer
Weekday Ratio
(spaces/1,000
SF)
Fall Weekend
Ratio
(spaces/1,000
SF)
Fall Weekday
Ratio
(spaces/1,000
SF)
District 1 4.2 2.4 2.7 2.1 2.6
District 2 4.0 1.9 2.0 1.9 2.2
District 3 4.5 4.2 3.8 3.1 3.4
District 4 2.4 1.5 1.6 1.4 1.6
District 5 4.7 2.6 2.7 2.5 2.7
District 6 3.7 2.1 1.8 1.6 1.5
Total Study
Area
3.6 2.1 2.2 1.9 2.1
Source: Kittelson, 2026
Note: SF = square feet
As presented previously in Table 1, of the 35 surveyed lots, the majority (34 percent) are located in District 4, with about 20 percent in each of Districts 1, 5, and 6. Both Districts 2 and 3 have only two surveyed parking lots (about 5 percent of the total). Due to the small number of parking facilities within District 2 and District 3, the data may not be adequately robust to calculate separate parking rates. This finding further supports the use of a single blended parking rate based on the combined study area dataset.
The observed demand results are consistent with the central finding of Task 1.2: on-street parking in the study area operates near its practical capacity during summer peaks, while private off-street facilities generally retain available capacity throughout the day. Consistent with the Task 1.2 analysis, occupancy is evaluated against an 85 percent practical-capacity threshold, the point at which parking is effectively full and users begin to experience difficulty finding a space. Off-street lots remain well below this threshold even when the curb is full, indicating substantial unused capacity in the non-residential off-street parking supply, consistent with the demand ratio sitting below the built ratio for the study area as a whole.
5.2 SAMPLE REPRESENTATIVENESS
Because the demand ratio is based on a sample of 35 lots, it is necessary to confirm that the sample represents the broader study area before generalizing the result into a code standard. This was done by reviewing the built ratio in two different ways: on the 35 surveyed lots alone, and on the full confirmed inventory. If the two are close, it can be concluded that the surveyed sample reflects the same parking conditions as the study area as a whole, and the demand measured on the sample can be applied studyarea-wide with high level of confidence.
Based on a calculation of the land use and parking databases, the two built ratios are 3.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet on the surveyed sample and 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet on the full inventory. Their closeness indicates that the surveyed lots are a representative subset; they carry a similar relationship between parking and floor area to the non-residential uses at large. 133
August 26, 2026 Page 9
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
The coverage assessment also establishes the appropriate level of analysis. With only two surveyed lots in each of Districts 2 and 3, and a modest number in several others, the sample sizes are small and thus may not be representative of overall parking characteristics. As such, combinations of parking ratios for different districts may be appropriate.
6 Blended Rate Calculations
As shown in Table 4, the peak observed parking occupancy occurred during the summer weekday period, at a total parking demand of 2.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet. To test whether parking rates should vary across the study area, the built and observed demand ratios were compared for individual districts and for several district groupings. Table 5 presents these scenarios alongside the study-area totals.
Table 5 Built and Observed Demand Ratios by District Grouping Scenario District or Group Built Ratio
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Peak Observed Demand Ratio
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Scenario 1: One Rate for All Districts
Districts 1+2+3+4+5+6 3.6 2.2
Scenario 2: Rates for North and South of DSP
Districts 1+2 4.1 2.2
Districts 3+4+5+6 3.3 2.1
Scenario 3: Separate District 6 due to Distance from Other Districts Districts 1+2+3+4+5 3.6 2.2
District 6 3.7 1.8
Scenario 4: Add District 3 to DSP; Have One Rate for All Other Districts District 3 4.5 3.8
Districts 1+2+4+5+6 3.5 2.0
Scenario 5: Separate Districts 2 and 3 due to Proximity to DSP Districts 2+3 4.1 2.4
Districts 1+4+5+6 3.3 2.0
Scenario 6: Separate Districts 2 and 3 due to Proximity to DSP Districts 2+3 4.1 2.4
Districts 1+4+5 3.3 2.1
District 6 3.7 1.8
Source: Kittelson, 2026
Note: SF = square feet
134
August 26, 2026 Page 10
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
◼ Scenario 1: The overall parking ratio would be 2.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet across the entire study area.
◼ Scenario 2: Looking at the conditions to the north and south of the DSP separately, the resulting parking ratios would be 2.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet and 2.1 spaces per 1,000 square feet, respectively.
◼ Scenario 3: Considering the gap between District 6 and the rest of the study area, the total ratio for Districts 1 – 5 was compared to District 6: these would be 2.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet and 1.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet, respectively.
◼ Scenario 4: Given that District 3 could be considered an extension of the DSP, this scenario separated the parking ratio for District 3 from the rest of the study area. District 3 would have a parking ratio of 3.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet, compared to 2.0 for the remainder of the study area. However, it should be noted that District 3 had only two off-street parking lots counted (including one for the Ralph’s market), and thus has a small sample size that may influence the results.
◼ Scenario 5: As both District 2 and District 3 are adjacent to the DSP, the parking ratios for those two districts were calculated separately from the rest of the study area. Districts 2 and 3 would have a parking ratio of 2.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet, compared to 2.0 the remainder of the study area. ◼ Scenario 6: This scenario grouped the districts adjacent to the DSP (Districts 2 and 3) separately from the adjacent districts 1, 4, and 5, and District 6, which sits apart from the rest of the study area.
The resulting parking ratios would be 2.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet for Districts 2 and 3, 2.1 for Districts 1, 4, and 5, and 1.8 for District 6.
Overall, the parking ratios with each of these scenarios are fairly similar, with only minor differences between the built ratios and demand ratios. The only exception is with Scenario 4, where District 3’s parking ratio is substantially higher than the rest of the study area. 7 Comparisons with Other Locations
The results of this study were also compared to the LBMC parking requirements and parking ratios developed for the DSP, plus parking ratios for similar peer cities. This comparison highlights any substantial differences in parking ratios between the rest of the Laguna Beach commercial areas and other coastal cities with similar land use and activity characteristics.
7.1 COMPARISON WITH THE DSP
The 2017 Downtown Parking Actual Demand Study documented observed demand across the same four seasonal periods, summarized in Table 6. Downtown demand peaked on the summer weekend at 2.9 spaces per 1,000 square feet and stayed below the built ratio of 3.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet in every period, confirming that even at its seasonal peak, built supply exceeded observed use. Overall, the City adopted a blended rate of 3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet. This value is slightly above the observed demand but below the study area's built ratio.
135
August 26, 2026 Page 11
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 6 DSP Built and Observed Demand Ratios by Period
Measure Calculated Parking Ratio
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Built ratio 3.6
Summer weekday demand 2.8
Summer weekend demand 2.9
Non-summer weekday demand 2.2
Non-summer weekend demand 2.1
Overall Blended Parking Rate 3.0
Source: Laguna Beach, Downtown Specific Plan Area, Parking Actual Demand Study, 2017
7.2 COMPARISON WITH PEER CITIES
Table 7 presents the parking ratios for the DSP and representatives peer cities. Among the four peer cities reviewed in Task 1.1, general retail and office standards cluster at 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet (one space per 300 square feet) in Carlsbad, Newport Beach, and Del Mar, and at 4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet in Dana Point. These values are all slightly higher than those in use in the DSP area.
Table 7 Benchmark Non-Residential Parking Standards
Source Standard
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Basis
Downtown Specific Plan – Laguna Beach 3.0 Adopted blended rate Del Mar / Newport Beach / Carlsbad 3.3 Retail / office minimum Dana Point 4.0 Retail / office minimum
Source: Kittelson, 2026
Note: SF = square feet
8 RECOMMENDED BLENDED RATE
It is recommended that the City adopt blended non-residential parking requirements for the commercial areas outside the Downtown Specific Plan, differentiated by location to reflect the demand and builtparking patterns observed across the study area. In each case the recommended rate is set above observed demand, to provide headroom for seasonal peaking and future growth, and below the parking the area has actually built, so the standard right-sizes the requirement without creating a shortfall.
A reasonable question is why a parking standard derived for the Downtown Specific Plan should apply to the commercial areas outside its boundary. Two lines of evidence support the transfer.
First, the study area exhibits the same parking structure documented downtown. In both areas the codeimplied requirement overstates the parking actually built, the built supply exceeds observed demand, and demand sits well below what has been built. The magnitudes are close as well: the study area has a built 136
August 26, 2026 Page 12
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
ratio of 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet against the DSP's 3.6, and both areas show a code-implied requirement near 4.7 to 4.8. Where the two differ, the difference is explainable by land use rather than by any break in the underlying relationship: downtown demand peaks on the summer weekend, driven by evening and visitor activity, while the study area peaks on the summer weekday, reflecting its more daytime-commercial character. The relationship between parking and floor area is the same; only the timing of the peak shifts.
Second, the commercial areas outside the DSP share the downtown's shared-use character. They consist of continuous commercial frontage along Coast Highway with a comparable mix of retail, office, personalservice, and restaurant uses drawing on common off-street parking, the same conditions that make a single blended rate appropriate downtown. Because the areas behave alike and are built alike, the rightsizing approach the City applied downtown carries over, calibrated here to the demand this study measured locally rather than transferred as a fixed number.
Based on a review of the six scenarios and the corresponding parking ratios, Scenario 6 is recommended.
Overall, this scenario best accounts for the geographic and land use characteristics of the study area, with Districts 2 and 3 adjacent to the DSP and function as an extension of the downtown area, and District 6 over 2.0 miles south of District 5.
For the blended parking rates:
◼ Districts 2 and 3: As this would be considered an extension of the DSP, they would have the same parking ratio of 3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet. Although this would be lower than the observed demand for District 3 (3.4 spaces per 1,000 square feet), its actual sample size for this data is low and thus the overall number may not be representative.
◼ Districts 1, 4, and 5: The average observed parking rate for these districts is 2.1 spaces per 1,000 square feet, with a peak of 2.6 spaces per 1,000 square feet in District 1 and 2.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet in District 5. To ensure that the parking ratio could accommodate the peak demand, and to provide a little buffer for variability, a parking ratio of 2.75 spaces per 1,000 square feet is recommended.
◼ District 6: This district has a peak observed parking demand of 1.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet.
However, since this demand is substantially lower than the built parking ratio of 3.7 spaces per 1,000 square feet, it is recommended that the parking ratio be established between these two values. As such, a parking ratio of 2.25 spaces per 1,000 square feet would be appropriate. Note that it would be possible to combine District 6 with Districts 1, 4, and 5 if few parking requirements are preferred
Table 8 summarizes the recommendations for each of the six districts. 137
August 26, 2026 Page 13
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Table 8 Recommended Blended Parking Rates by Location
Tier Peak demand
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Built ratio
(spaces/1,000 SF)
Recommended
(spaces/1,000 SF)
District 1 2.7 4.2 2.75
District 2 2.0 4.0 3.0
District 3 3.8 4.5 3.0
District 4 1.6 2.4 2.75
District 5 2.7 4.7 2.75
District 6* 1.8 3.7 2.25
Source: Kittelson, 2026
Note: SF = square feet; * To simplify the parking requirements, District 6 could be adjusted to have the same rates as Districts 1, 4, and 5.
Overall, this approach will have substantial benefits to the City. Compared to the current code-implied requirement of 4.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet, the recommended rates of 2.25 to 3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet reduce the effective non-residential requirement by between 35 and 50 percent. In built-out commercial areas where most parcels cannot add on-site parking, that reduction is what allows an older building to change tenants, a restaurant to replace a retail space, or a modest reinvestment to proceed without triggering a parking obligation the site cannot meet. It reduces reliance on in-lieu fees and discretionary relief, replaces a use-by-use calculation with a single predictable number, and treats businesses outside the DSP on the same footing as those downtown. At the same time, because the values are higher than the peak demand (with the exception of District 3), this change right-sizes the requirement without creating a parking shortfall.
It is recommended that the blended rate apply to the general non-residential uses that are predominately found in the study area, including retail, personal services, office, and general commercial uses. Consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan, higher-demand uses, namely places of assembly, recreational and cultural uses, and lodging, should be retained on their existing use-specific standards rather than folded into the blended rate. For these uses, floor area is not an accurate predictor of parking demand. For example, the parking demand for hotels and lodging are more accurately estimated using guest rooms rather than building area; retaining lodging on the per-room standard in LBMC Section 25.52.012 keeps the requirement matched to the actual driver of demand. This treatment also matches the DSP, which excluded lodging from its blended rate. A use-based exception of this kind is more defensible than a geographic one and applies regardless of how the rate is set. It is worth noting that the surveyed lodging parcels would compute below the blended rate on a floor-area basis, so the effect of the carve-out is to price these uses on the more appropriate metric, not to require more of them than the blend would.
The blended rate is intended to work alongside the City's existing flexibility tools, including shared parking, joint-use parking, off-site parking, and in-lieu certificates, rather than to replace them. Its interaction with those tools, and with the fractional-parking, intensification-of-use, and floor-area provisions addressed in Task 1.5, should be coordinated so the recommendations form a single coherent framework together with the Task 1.6 recommendations for the in-lieu certificate program.
Because Chapter 25.52 of the Laguna Beach Municipal Code is a certified component of the City's Local Coastal Program, a change to the non-residential parking standard will likely require certification by the 138
August 26, 2026 Page 14
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
California Coastal Commission through a Local Coastal Program amendment. It is recommended that the City confirm the required approval path with legal counsel early in the adoption process. 9 CONCLUSION
The parking actually built in the commercial areas outside the Downtown Specific Plan, the parking the current code would require, and the parking observed in use during peak periods together indicate that the City's existing use-by-use minimums overstate the parking that non-residential uses in the study area actually need. The current code requires 4.8 spaces per 1,000 square feet, the study area has built 3.3 spaces per 1,000 square feet, and has an average demand of 2.2 spaces per 1,000 square feet during the summer peak. This finding is consistent with the conclusions reached downtown through the 2017 Downtown Parking Actual Demand Study and the Downtown Specific Plan, and with the conditions documented across the six districts in Task 1.2.
A blended non-residential parking requirement of 3.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet in Districts 2 and 3,
2.75 spaces per 1,000 square feet in Districts 1, 4, and 5, and 2.25 spaces per 1,000 square feet in District
6. At these values, the standard right-sizes the requirement to the City's built-out coastal setting and the demand the study area actually generates, while remaining above what these areas use and below what they have built. The recommendation should advance in coordination with the Task 1.5 and Task 1.6 recommendations and through the Local Coastal Program amendment process. 139
August 26, 2026 Page 15
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses TECHNICAL MEMORANDUM Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Appendix A
140
August 26, 2026 Page 16
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses Parcel Database Methodology and Classification Logic
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
Parcel Database Methodology and
Classification Logic
This appendix documents how the parcel database was processed and how each row was classified to a Municipal Code use line. The purpose is to make the classification reproducible and to record the rules applied where the source data was ambiguous or inconsistent. 1 DATABASE STRUCTURE
The parcel database was compiled at the tenant and building level, so a single parcel may be represented by more than one row. Single-row parcels carry all of their information on one line, while multi-row parcels use one row per tenant, building, or component. Two fields govern this structure: a field recording how many rows share the same parcel, and a sequence field recording the position of each row within its parcel group. The first row of a multi-row parcel generally carries building-level information such as total building floor area and the overall parking count, while subsequent rows carry tenant-level detail. A definitive parcel identifier, populated on every row, is used as the join and grouping key throughout the analysis.
2 REDUCTION TO THE IN-SCOPE NONRESIDENTIAL UNIVERSE
The database includes both non-residential and residential records, and the residential records do not belong in a non-residential parking analysis. Two filters were applied. First, parcels in residential zoning contexts, and the residential floor area within mixed-use parcels, were removed so that only nonresidential floor area enters the ratio denominators. Second, multi-row parcels were consolidated so that shared parking supply and building floor area are counted once: where several tenant rows share a single parking facility, that facility is counted a single time in the built ratio, and building-level floor area is not summed against individual tenant floor area. The result is a set of confirmed non-residential parcels that supports the built and code-implied ratios.
3 TWO-STEP CLASSIFICATION
Each in-scope row was assigned to an LBMC use line through a two-step process that reads the zoning context first and the specific use second. The first step uses the zoning designation to confirm a nonresidential context. The second step normalizes the specific-use signal recorded in the land-use category, notes, and summary fields, and maps it to the applicable LBMC use line, resolving the inconsistent category labels present in the source data.
For the code-implied requirement, each classified parcel was assigned the LBMC ratio for its use line: one space per 250 square feet for general retail, office, personal service, gallery, food-store, and financial uses 141
August 26, 2026 Page 17
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses Parcel Database Methodology and Classification Logic
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
(4.0 spaces per 1,000 square feet); one space per 100 square feet for restaurants, bars, and fitness uses (10.0 per 1,000); one space per 150 square feet for medical and dental uses (6.7 per 1,000); one space per 300 square feet for automobile-repair and library uses (3.3 per 1,000); and one space per 500 square feet for manufacturing and bulky-goods uses (2.0 per 1,000). For restaurants, both the area basis and the perseat basis were evaluated and the greater requirement applied, consistent with the Code. Lodging was assigned the per-room formula in the Code and excluded from the blended-rate calculation. 4 USE-TO-LBMC MAPPING
Table 9 sets out the mapping from the normalized use groups to the applicable LBMC Section 25.52.012 use line and its parking ratio. Consistent with the 2017 Downtown Parking Actual Demand Study, the code-implied requirement was computed by applying these LBMC ratios to the non-residential floor area in each use group and aggregating the result, rather than through parcel-by-parcel permit calculations.
The mapping is provided for confirmation; the assignments should be verified against the City's intended interpretation before the code-implied requirement is finalized.
Table 9 Use Group to LBMC Use Line Mapping
Normalized Use Group LBMC Use Line Parking Ratio
Retail, office, and
personal services
General retail; general and professional
office; personal service establishments;
galleries; food stores; financial institutions
1 / 250 sq ft (4.0 / 1,000)
Restaurant, bar, and
entertainment
Food services (restaurant, take-out, bakery);
entertainment, bar, cocktail lounge,
nightclub
1 / 100 sq ft (10.0 / 1,000)
Health and fitness Health clubs, exercise areas, aerobics studios
1 / 100 sq ft (10.0 / 1,000)
Medical and dental Clinics; dentist; medical office (Health Uses) 1 / 150 sq ft (6.7 / 1,000) Automobile repair and
service
Automobile/motor vehicle repair; service
station
1 / 300 sq ft (3.3 / 1,000)
Manufacturing and bulky
goods
Manufacturing; furniture, appliance, and
bulky-merchandise establishments
1 / 500 sq ft (2.0 / 1,000)
Lodging Hotel / motel 1 / room + 1 / 15 rooms
(retained on use-specific
standard)
Source: Kittelson, 2026
Restaurant floor area is calculated on the gross-floor-area basis (1 space per 100 square feet), consistent with the Downtown Specific Plan methodology. Lodging is retained on its use-specific per-room standard and excluded from the blended rate.
142
August 26, 2026 Page 18
Task 1.3 Calculation of Blended Parking Requirement for Non-Residential Uses Parcel Database Methodology and Classification Logic
Kittelson & Associates, Inc.
5 KEY ASSUMPTIONS AND DATA NOTES
Occupied (active) floor area is used as the denominator for the demand ratio because it reflects the floor area actually in use; total building floor area is used only as fallback when active floor area is not available.
Parking spaces recorded with mixed or narrative entries were parsed to the confirmed space count and cross-checked against the Task 1.2 field-counted inventory where lots were surveyed. Parking spaces identified as reserved or otherwise restricted are treated as unavailable to the visiting public and assumed occupied at peak, consistent with the treatment of private off-street facilities in Task 1.2. All ratios are computed at the district-aggregate and study-area level rather than by matching individual parcels, which absorbs individual-parcel data gaps and produces more stable results. 143