Laguna Beach planning commission finds FY 2025–26 capital improvement program consistent with general plan; approves enclosed lifeguard towers and zone-7 slurry

The Laguna Beach Planning Commission on June 4 adopted a resolution finding the city's proposed Fiscal Year 2025—26 Capital Improvement Program consistent with the city's general plan and exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

Pierre Sawaya, the city's capital program manager in Public Works, reviewed the CIP and said the city had shifted from a 10-year to a 7-year planning horizon and highlighted projects including the Forest Avenue promenade, EOC relocation to the Community and Recreation Center, Aliso Beach parking-lot rehabilitation (inland and coastal lots), wastewater pipeline replacement (North Coast Interceptor Reach 5), and lift station replacements for Victoria 2 and Bluebird. "Our capital improvement program is a long range planning tool here used at the city, to plan projects, infrastructure projects in town," Sawaya said.

Why it matters: The commission's finding is the yearly determination required under state law that CIP projects conform to the general plan's goals and policies; it is the step that forwards the CIP findings to the City Council for final consideration and budgeting.

Most important actions and details - Individual votes: Because of potential conflicts, the commission recessed to consider particular projects before the full CIP vote. Project 8 (enclosed lifeguard tower installations) was considered first with Commissioners Goldman and Kellenberg recused. The motion passed 3'0yes (Commissioners Whiting, Dubin and Chair Sadler) with Goldman and Kellenberg recorded as recusals. The commission then considered Project 18 (Zone 7 street slurry seal rehabilitation) with Commissioner Kellenberg recused; that motion passed (vote recorded as yes by Commissioners Goldman, Whiting, Dubin and Chair Sadler). Finally the commission voted unanimously to find the overall CIP consistent with the general plan and exempt from CEQA.

Discussion highlights and clarifications - Lifeguard towers: The enclosed lifeguard tower installations are a citywide project ("city limits to city limits") that the commission considered under the public-safety and beach-access elements of the general plan; commissioners limited their role to making findings of general-plan consistency rather than evaluating project-level design or construction details. - Aliso Beach parking lot: Tom Perez, the city engineer, said the Aliso Beach project will address both the inland and coastal parking lots. Perez told commissioners the inland-side work would be primarily pavement rehabilitation with some minor parking changes while the coastal side would undergo more substantial redesign and likely require relocation of existing large palm trees. Staff has held a public meeting and will return to City Council for entitlement direction. - Sidewalks and future projects: Commissioners asked why many sidewalk items appear on the "future projects" list rather than the 7-year program. Staff explained the city recently adopted a "safe for all" plan and is drafting a sidewalk master plan; once the master plan is adopted staff will program specific sidewalk projects into the CIP outer years. - CEQA and general-plan linkage: Staff noted the annual general-plan consistency finding is required by the government code and that the CIP projects, as listed, did not appear inconsistent with the general plan. Commissioner Dubin added that the work and the staff'prepared matrix tying projects to multiple general-plan goals supported the consistency findings and the commission's determination that the CIP study is exempt under CEQA.

Recusals and process notes - Commissioner Goldman recused from projects that presented potential conflicts after staff noted a change of primary residence for Commissioner Whiting (staff struck the language requiring Whiting's recusal for the fire-station communications item). Commissioner Kellenberg participated remotely and recused himself from specified items as noted in the record.

What the commission decided next - The commission voted unanimously to forward the consistency findings and CEQA exemption to the City Council.

Ending note: The commission's action was procedural (general-plan consistency and CEQA finding) and does not itself allocate funds; individual CIP projects will return to Council for budget and construction approvals if programmed.