Laguna Niguel, Calif. — The Laguna Niguel City Council voted 5-0 Thursday to deny an appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of a site development permit amendment for El Niguel Country Club, upholding the commission's decision to allow replacement of two aging maintenance buildings.

The decision follows staff findings that the project would replace structures more than 60 years old with modern metal buildings that include automatic fire sprinklers, and that construction traffic would be routed from Clubhouse Drive rather than a 10-foot private easement that provides operational access to the maintenance yard. Associate Planner Daniel Keswick Bajian told the council staff recommended adopting Resolution No. 2025-1518 to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval of SP 96-37 A01.

The appeal, filed on Oct. 27, 2025 by the Paseo Street Safety Coalition and presented at the hearing by Tisha Holbert, alleged gaps in the administrative record and raised specific safety and procedural concerns, including the absence of a turning-radius or fire-flow analysis, a geotechnical review described in some materials as "not approved," two leaking underground storage tank (LUST) cases in nearby records, and an asserted inconsistency between the Notice of Exemption (NOE) and a staff technical memo that references up to 36 haul-truck trips per day. Holbert asked the council why the city had not provided OCFA documentation or direct contact with the coalition during the review process.

"Where is the fire access and fire safety review? There is no OCFA approval, no turning radius analysis, no fire flow documentation," Holbert said during her presentation, and she asked the council to address those gaps and to refund the $1,550 appeal fee.

Representing the club, Kimberly Wood said the project is a straightforward replacement intended to "provide a safe and healthy workplace for our employees" without increasing operations or staffing. "We want to replace an outdated and worn facility with a modern one," Wood said, and she highlighted the club's history of environmental stewardship, including early use of reclaimed water and removal of turf for drought-tolerant landscaping.

Council members questioned staff and legal counsel about the scope of the recorded easement and whether the city could limit its use. The deputy city attorney and Planning Manager Katie Crockett told the council the 1995 Superior Court judgment referenced in the staff report adjudicated a nonexclusive easement in favor of the country club and that the city does not have authority to alter easement rights; a staff explanation cited the judgment and the administrative record in recommending denial of the appeal.

Councilmember Ray Genowitt summarized the legal and procedural posture: "If you want to change the rights and responsibilities of that easement, you gotta go to an Orange County Superior Court judge," and said he did not view the record as presenting a close call. Several council members, including Mayor Pro Tem Kelly Jennings and Councilmember Stephanie Otto, emphasized that the project includes fire-safety improvements: metal construction, automatic sprinklers and a new high-pressure water line and hydrant required by the Orange County Fire Authority (OCFA). Planning staff confirmed OCFA reviewed and signed off on the fire master plan as part of the application.

Neighbors and club members offered contrasting perspectives during public comment. Ruthie Sheffield, a longtime resident and former club president, urged approval and said the Paseo Street Safety Coalition does not represent the majority of nearby residents. Marilyn Zenner and Linda Suket — who described herself as the owner of the 10-foot easement and a longtime resident — expressed concern about large vehicle access and the narrow width at certain points, citing pinch points as narrow as 9 feet 8 inches in places.

Mayor Johns called for a motion. Councilmember Ray Genowitt moved to approve the staff recommendation; Councilmember Stephanie Otto seconded. The motion carried 5-0. The council's action affirms the Planning Commission's unanimous approval of SP 96-37 A01, and the council declined the appellant's request to refund the $1,550 appeal fee.

The meeting adjourned at 6:49 p.m.

Notes: The staff report and attachments referenced a 1995 Superior Court judgment (dated 07/14/1995) adjudicating a nonexclusive easement in favor of El Niguel Country Club, and staff identified Resolution No. 2025-1518 as the recommended instrument to deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission's approval.