Laguna Beach school board adopts mitigated negative declaration for LBHS pool modernization, 5-0

The Laguna Beach Unified School District Board of Education on March 20 adopted an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (ISMND) and associated mitigation monitoring and reporting program for the Laguna Beach High School pool modernization project, voting 5–0 to direct staff to file a Notice of Determination and continue preparing construction plans with the agreed mitigation measures.

The decision followed a technical presentation by environmental consultant Ultra Systems and a public hearing that drew students, neighbors and civic groups. Ultra Systems’ air-and-noise lead, Dr. Michael Rogerson, said field measurements showed water‑polo events produced about an 11‑decibel increase over regular swimming sessions — a difference the team described as a near tenfold change on a logarithmic scale — but that modeled average community noise levels would remain below thresholds identified in the ISMND once mitigation measures are implemented. "During the water polo measurements the pool area noise was around 11 decibels higher," Rogerson said, adding the study modeled attenuation with distance and proposed shielding and other measures to reduce community exposure.

Students and community supporters urged the board to move forward. "This pool would really help us practice, and we could do more home games here instead of driving farther," said Tegan, a Laguna Beach water‑polo player who testified at the hearing. Several student speakers and local organizations described the project as important to athletics, community programs and water‑safety instruction.

Opponents and some neighbors pressed the board for more study or stronger safeguards. Community speaker Chris Alonzo argued the ISMND underestimates cumulative noise and said a full Environmental Impact Report should be considered. Neighbors raised questions about staging, overnight equipment storage, evacuation and how construction will be managed on narrow local streets; staff said a logistics/staging plan is part of the project description, will be submitted to the Division of State Architects (DSA) as part of plan check, and will be shared with the city and affected neighborhoods once approved by state authorities.

The project scope in the adopted design concept includes a 45‑meter by 25‑yard pool, concrete bleachers with roughly 270 seats, a locker/team room building, public restrooms and a pool equipment room. Staff described a set of project‑design features (PDFs) intended to respond to community concerns — including sound‑attenuation walls at the west and east sides, scoreboard shielding, a maximum 24‑foot site lighting standard, timers on lights, and a potential reduction of up to two feet in the locker‑room roof height. Ultra Systems and district staff clarified that PDFs are design concessions to address community concerns and are not mitigation measures in CEQA terminology; the MMRP contains the project's mitigation measures for the topics CEQA identified as potentially significant without mitigation (biological resources, cultural/tribal cultural resources, geology/paleontology and related construction discoveries).

The ISMND package was circulated for public review from Jan. 17 to Feb. 17; staff said they received 12 comment letters covering noise, lighting, views, energy and property‑value concerns and prepared a response‑to‑comments document that is part of the final ISMND package. Zeta, the district’s director of facilities, told the board that after CEQA certification the next steps are completion of construction plans, DSA review (typically 4–6 months), public bidding and contract award targeting December 2025, with construction estimated to begin in March 2026.

Clerk Hills moved to adopt the resolution (identified in the meeting as Resolution 2506) to approve the initial study and mitigated negative declaration, adopt the MMRP, execute the required CEQA findings and delegate authority to staff to file the Notice of Determination; the motion was seconded and amended to include the additional mitigations presented during the March 20 staff update. After brief board discussion emphasizing oversight and accountability, the board approved the measure unanimously. The board directed staff to prepare and record the NOD and to continue working with design professionals, acoustic engineers and the city to refine noise mitigation, staging and public‑safety coordination.

The board closed the public hearing at 7:40 p.m., set the next regular meeting for April 17 and adjourned at 7:54 p.m.

What happens next: staff will prepare the Notice of Determination, continue plan development for DSA submission, finalize logistics/staging plans in coordination with the city, and report back to the board on specific mitigation design details and community distribution of the logistics plan.