Laguna Beach reviews downtown streetscape plan forced by California 'daylighting' law; parking loss and safety concerns dominate public comment

Laguna Beach city staff and consultants presented a downtown streetscape vision on the council’s study-session agenda that would implement curb extensions and related changes required by California Assembly Bill 413, commonly called the daylighting law. The plan, developed by SWA Group at council direction, maps bulb‑out opportunities, parklet and public‑art treatments, and alternative packages that vary in scale and parking impacts.

City staff told the council that AB 413 requires a 20‑foot no‑parking zone on the approach side of any marked or unmarked crosswalk (reduced to 15 feet where a curb extension exists). SWA Group presenters described a "kit of parts" approach—three bulb‑out strategies (planting, parklets, public art), six parklet types, tree‑well options and a choice between a minimum compliance package and a more comprehensive, higher‑impact alternative that would remove additional on‑street stalls.

"These bulb outs could present a great opportunity for some additional bicycle parking and locking," said Steve Chatham, chair of the Environmental Sustainability Committee, urging designs that pair bike parking and public art. Several other commenters praised pedestrian and beautification goals but pressed the council on outreach, maintenance and parking loss.

Public commenters and council members cited concrete parking estimates from the consultant materials and public remarks: the more aggressive alternatives were described by residents as removing "up to about 30" on‑street spaces overall, while a single proposed mid‑block crossing near the bus depot was estimated by presenters to remove roughly four stalls and several parklet adjustments were described as removing one to three stalls, depending on configuration. Multiple speakers urged a cautious, phased approach that begins with required elements and evaluates effects before adding optional measures.

Speakers raised safety and logistics concerns. One commenter asked whether AB 413 applies to charter cities and flagged a dangerous downhill approach at a Third Street crosswalk; a landscape architect, Bob Borthwick, recommended more flexible tree‑well details to avoid long‑term maintenance problems and trip hazards. Several speakers suggested using fire‑department turning tests and radius models to verify that bulb‑outs would not impede emergency or delivery vehicles.

Council members agreed on key constraints and next steps: they want staff to return with a prioritized matrix showing where spaces would be removed if the council pursues options beyond the state‑required minimum, to identify potential offset locations for lost stalls, to coordinate early with the Coastal Commission and Caltrans where streets are under their jurisdiction, and to include CIP cost estimates. Councilors expressed differing preferences—some favoring a pedestrian‑first approach and more streetscape work, others urging caution about removing additional parking.

City staff noted the project is high level and could be programmed into the city's Capital Improvement Program for detailed design and implementation; staff also said additional public outreach is planned and that a related outdoor‑dining policy would be discussed later in the regular meeting.

The council adjourned the study session to closed session; the published agenda lists closed‑session real‑property negotiations for properties on Laguna Canyon Road with Agency Negotiator Dave Kiff and negotiating party George Burkhardt.