WORKSHOP SUMMARY &
FINDINGS
July 21st , 2026
WORKSHOP SUMMARY
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS
OVERVIEW OF WORKSHOP
A second Community Workshop was held on July 15th at
Joslyn Community Center, from 6 pm to 8 pm. The goal of this workshop was to review concept designs developed for the Parking Lot 3 and 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard sites.
The proposed designs were developed based on a prior City engagements and a first set of design workshops in June 2026.
Event Marketing
The workshops were marketed across the Manhattan Beach
community through the City's social media accounts and widely read local publications, including the Easy Reader, OAP Newsletter, Manhappenings, and The Beach Reporter.
Postcards were distributed to residents, and the City promoted the events through community partners and the State of the City 2026 program. Combined, the outreach reached an estimated 10,000 people.
3 PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS
WORKSHOP FORMAT
Community members were invited to circulate among a
series of stations designed to explain the project and gather feedback.
Station 1: Project Overview
This station introduced the project to community members who were new to the process and provided a summary of key insights from the previous round of community engagement. The intent was to demonstrate how community feedback informed the conceptual designs being presented.
Stations 2 and 3: Conceptual Designs for 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard and Parking Lot 3
City and Gensler staff were available to explain the proposed conceptual designs, highlighting key features shown through diagrammatic plans and illustrative renderings. Community members were encouraged to share their feedback by leaving comments on sticky notes.
4 PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS
WORKSHOP PARTICIPANTS
5 The Conceptual Design Review community workshop engaged over 100 Manhattan Beach stakeholders. Participants could select multiple personas to reflect their roles in the community, including residents, business owners, families and visitors
15 23
11 12
2 24
1 Longtime
Downtown
Resident
Downtown
Regular
Business Owner or
Employee
Family with
Kids
Active
Commuter
Resident
Other/ Occasional
Visitor
WORKSHOP FINDINGS
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
7 Two different design options were
presented to the community for Parking
Lot 3.
Option
A prioritized creating a vibrant
mixed-use destination with retail and
dining uses and a rooftop community
hub aboveground, while providing 129
parking spaces.
Option
B focused on maximizing
parking capacity through a combination
of aboveground and underground
parking, providing a total of 202 parking
spaces, while incorporating the same
rooftop community hub.
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
8 Community opinions were divided between the options:
• 37% of comments supported Option A, viewing it as a more complete community investment that combines parking, retail, dining, revenue generation, and public activity.
• 35% of comments supported Option B, repeatedly stating that Downtown Manhattan Beach's foremost need is more parking. • 14% of comments wanted to see a hybrid of the two options, such as more parking with ground floor retail, or commercial uses on the rooftop patio to activate it.
• 14% of comments suggested other uses, such as a hotel, housing, or additional park space. These options had been explored during earlier phases of community engagement but did not generate sufficient community interest.
37% 35% 14% 14%
Support Scheme A Support Scheme B
COMMENTS RECEIVED
Hybrid of
schemes A
and B
Other uses
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
9 Community members also left comments on general concerns around the redevelopment of Parking Lot 3.
Key themes included:
• Rooftop Community Space Design: Suggestions to enhance the rooftop space through additional shade, natural materials, ensuring ocean views, and sustainable features such as solar energy generation. • Rooftop Operations and Activation: Concerns about how the rooftop community space would be managed, programmed, and secured to ensure it remains active, safe, and well-utilized.
• Preference for Smaller-scale Commercial Spaces: Interest in smaller, more affordable commercial unit sizes that would support local and independent businesses rather than attract larger chain tenants. • Financial Feasibility: A desire for greater clarity regarding project costs, funding sources, revenue potential, and the overall economic viability of the proposed concepts.
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
10 A mixed-use development concept was
presented to the community for 400
Manhattan Beach Boulevard.
• The concept builds on the existing small-
scale character of Manhattan Beach
Boulevard, with ground-floor retail and food-
and-beverage uses that complement the
surrounding Downtown area.
• Outdoor seating areas are integrated with a
pedestrian-focused plaza that can be
activated through the use of retractable
bollards.
• The second floor is envisioned as creative
office space, supported by an outdoor patio
that provides additional amenities for
tenants and visitors.
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 37% 26% 37%
Support design
COMMENTS RECEIVED
Support design with
concerns addressed
Oppose design
63% are supportive of the design
11 The community generally responded positively to the vision of a pedestrian-oriented, mixed-use public destination at 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard.
• 37% of comments strongly supported the design, citing the new public spaces, strong community orientation, and potential for the City to generate revenue.
• 26% of comments supported the design if specific concerns were addressed, such as public access to the 2nd level patio, feasibility of the creative office, prioritizing the commercial spaces for local businesses, and resolving traffic circulation.
• 37% of comments opposed the design, primarily due to concerns about impacts on nearby residents, increased traffic and circulation challenges, and a preference for alternative uses such as parking, arts uses and park spaces.
400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 12 Community members also left comments on general concerns around the redevelopment of 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard.
Key themes included:
• Fairness to Existing Restaurants: Community members emphasized the need to expand patio and al fresco seating opportunities for existing downtown restaurants alongside the introduction of new restaurant spaces and outdoor public spaces.
• Public Access and Community Benefit: Community members expressed a desire for greater public access to the 2nd floor patio, and suggested programming that provides broader community use rather than being dedicated to commercial office tenants.
• Smaller-scale Commercial Spaces: Community members recommended smaller commercial spaces that support local businesses and reflect the scale and character of Downtown Manhattan Beach.
• Market Feasibility of Creative Office Use: Community members were concerned about assessing the market demand for creative office space before implementing it.
400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
APPENDIX:
COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR PARKING LOT 3
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
14 Comments in support of Option A
Like mixed-use development
• Pick A. Love multi-use. I hate emphasis on parking and too much car dependency
• Option A is good. Option B stinks. Putting an open space on top with no commercial space makes no sense!
• Love option A. Mixed use and parking is a great idea
• Love the mixed-use option to maximize usage. Love the option of the City having income revenues from retail
spaces. Love all underground spaces
• +2 votes for mixed use!
• Love mixed use, not just parking
• All parking not best use
• As a local resident, I would like more stores / cafes – but I don’t need more parking
• We need to generate more revenue – so maybe A. Parking structures are ugly
• Compare to Option B, may be more revenue and looks
prettier
Like that parking is underground
• Like that all parking is underground
• Don’t like above-grade parking
• Parking only underground
• Option A – you cannot break down an active parking
structure and then not replace it with any parking!
• Prefer option A but need to match parking space demand • [Option B may] potentially increase more traffic
Like public space, outdoor dining and street activation • Option A better than option B. Need visual to match town vibe
• Choose 12th Street to activate. Ground level activation is nice. 12th Street boutique hotel – activating 12th Street feels more natural
• No more wasted outdoor spaces
• Love outdoor dining and retail. Bring back outdoor dining deck areas
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
15 Comments in support of Option A, with modifications
Modify design of commercial spaces
• Ground floor retail stores too big! Only big chains will afford high rent
• Make commercial spaces smaller so small local businesses can afford the lease
• How can we keep retail space affordable for local
businesses? Keep big chains out!
• Smaller boutique retail on the ground floor, not chain. And create parking spaces on the ground floor
• Retail space too big – don’t want national chains – need smaller [businesses]
• Commercial space are too large. No more Beyond Yoga
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
16 Comments in support of Option B
Like increasing parking supply
• More parking
• I want more downtown parking. There isn’t enough parking • Need more parking
• Vote for more parking option
• Love B. Parking, parking, parking
• Option B because more parking
• Downtown Manhattan Beach needs parking more than we
need more retail / restaurant space so I prefer Lot 3 Option B (Option A is nice, but does not address primary need)
• Prefer all parking. Don’t give our land to commercial development!
• No patio, just parking. These concepts are ridiculously over ambitious
• Prefer all parking
• Make it all parking please
• Should be all parking
• Parking preferred
• 2 levels of parking tied into Metlox, 3 levels of parking above • More parking here versus 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard – open space (but activate it or no use for it)
• I like Lot Option B because the extra parking will make the area more accessible
• More parking
• Option B provides needed parking plus provides community space
• B is where it’s at! Way to go! Thanks for involving the community. Love the parking, love the community room!
• More parking here versus 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard – open space (but activate it or no use for it)
Oppose additional commercial uses
• Downtown Manhattan Beach needs parking more than we need more retail / restaurant space so I prefer Lot 3 Option B (Option A is nice, but does not address primary need)
• Prefer all parking. Don’t give our land to commercial development!
• Plenty of retail already
• Add green roof and/or solar panels. No retail
• Plenty of retail already
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
17 Comments supporting neither option and suggesting alternate uses A+B: Preference for parking with ground floor retail
• Want a hybrid with more parking and a tiny bit of retail on ground floor
• Could still do 1-2 street level retail spaces [on Option B] – enough for local boutique
• Combo of A & B
• Want a hybrid of both
A+B: Preference for commercial uses on rooftop
• Who will use this open space except homeless people?
Need revenue generating uses.
• Would prefer hybrid between community and monetized
space
• Hybrid of 4 floors of parking with retail and dining. Dining and patios on roof. No community space, won’t be used
enough
• Keep the street level parking, make retail 2nd floor and dining on top floor
• We need a rooftop beer garden
• Need to generate revenue on roof
Other uses: Preference for parking and hotel
• Drive revenue. Need hotel and parking.
• No hotel option?
• Build hotel and parking
• Important to generate revenue. Boutique hotel, restaurant on top, parking below
• Should be a hotel and parking
• Hotel option, increase revenue, rooms, food & beverage, parking
Other uses: Preference for parking and housing
• Where is the housing? What a wasted opportunity, Perfect site for affordable housing + parking
Other uses: Preference for green space
• Why not make it a green space? It’s selfish to demand more parking at the expense of the planet and community living.
Why not make it bicycle parking like Utrecht or Amsterdam? Other uses: Preference for parking only
• Option B, but only if top floor is also parking instead of outdoor area. Top floor will likely be unused if the other floors are just parking. If all 5 are not parking, I prefer Option A
Other: Preference to maintain current surface lot
• There’s no money for any of this. Just keep the current surface lot – no build
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS PARKING LOT 3
18 Other comments
Suggested modifications to rooftop community space
• More shade needed on roof
• Solar energy harvest on the roof, water features, deck without shade is too hot
• Lack of shade for people on outdoor decks. Wood like park bench preferred.
• Let DBPA (Kelly) operate and run the community space.
The Downtown Business Association knows the
community!
• Ensure there is a beach view above adjacent buildings • Like outdoor ocean view community space
• The scale of the design options looks good! I’d like to see more spaces available to the public for weddings, parties and special events! Would be good to have more spaces
and programming available for older adults (55+)
• Ocean view from patio?
Concerns about rooftop community space
• Community patio event space??? Who runs it? When will community space be open? Needs activation up there or it will be empty
• Roof deck might be duplicative to [Metlox] – might be a ghost town
• Community space seems redundant to current Metlox
Coutyard. Not high value use
• Will the roof deck get used? Seems like not the best use. It will be empty
• Is there a time to limit open space use? No retail
• Accessing during off hours to roof deck needs to be secured to limit delinquency
• Upper level common spaces seem like they would never be used
• Rentable top floor event space is an incredibly niche use. Who will benefit from this?
Parking concerns
• Concern: Insufficient parking for new retail / restaurant / office, let alone community needs
• Bank space replacing enough parking to support business given plans for Lot 3? Are we covered?
Fiscal and feasibility concerns
• Need to weigh the financial costs / advantages of mixed use (Scheme A) versus parking only option (Scheme B).
Which creates better revenue?
• Get a grip on what is realistic + feasible – what will this cost??
• Concerned about financial investment of parking
[underground]
• There appears to be a lack of thought on financing. As we don’t want to overextend ourselves, these plans should be reduced in scope
• Spend the money to do it right
• These concepts are economically unfeasible. Just keep it simple and put more parking
Other
• It’s just ugly.
• New restaurants getting outdoor dining when current
businesses are without a path to outdoor dining is unfair • In 10-20 years, will parking be obsolete due to Uber/Lyft economics?
APPENDIX:
COMMENTS RECEIVED FOR
400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
20 Comments in support of design
Like the pedestrian plaza
• Likes the open pedestrian plaza!
• Love the plaza!!!
• Like the pedestrian plaza
• Really like the plaza space
• Love the pedestrian plaza
• Love the pedestrian area – keep in use at all times
• Love the pedestrian area and outdoor dining! Rooftop deck for sunset views would be nice too!
• Open space and mixed use – best idea
• Open space option is good / usable
• Close Morningside [Drive] and Manhattan Beach Boulevard “permanently” except emergencies, etc.
Like the outdoor dining and seating
• Like the outdoor dining
• More green space with outdoor dining, public seating space, public art
• Attractive benches for seating to look at the ocean view • Likes the open patio on 2nd floor!
Like the revenue-generating uses
• Love possibility of an income stream for the city with retail space
• Long-Term Redevelopment Potential
• I like that the MBB design proposal can blend in with any future redevelopment of the Vons site, potentially with underground parking on Vons site and a “refresh” of the market
• Would love to see Vons + site [400 Manhattan Beach
Boulevard] become a mixed-use development
• Good mixed use of space. More affordable dining, more outdoor community space, outdoor space [pedestrian plaza] is adjustable
Like the design
• I like the volume breakdown of open versus enclosed space • Really like the massing and parking. The patio really breaks it down!
• Design concept as presented makes great use of space and has an appealing presentation!
• I generally like the use considering the small lot size
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
21 Comments in support of design, with modifications
Improve public access
• Want 2nd floor patio open to public
• Can we make the 2nd floor patio available to the public and private special events like weddings, etc.?
• Upstairs to be more public access (office toward the back) • Rent out 2nd [floor] patio space. Space for older adults • Residents get 3000 sq ft open plaza while corporations from out of area tenants get paid access? Rethink!
• Wish 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard was more
community focused program and Lot 3 more revenue
generating
• Could 1st level be retail / restaurant? Ground level
activation
Think through traffic and operations
• Delivery trucks parking for food and beverage
Modify design of commercial spaces
• Would prefer an expansion of 1st floor parking into largest restaurant space
• Keep commercial spaces smaller to keep smaller local
businesses in touch
Modify design of creative office space
• 5400 sq ft of office space is too small
• Need info on “creative office” space – open for public use or leased?
• 2nd floor should be more than one tenant
• Concerned about outdoor patio with “creative office” and think there’s better use of this space
• A bit too “corporate”
• 2 story should not face residential
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
22 Comments not in support of design
Negative impact on residents
• This plan creates too much density for the lot, corner and residents
• Noise from restaurants, traffic from restaurants, safety risk from intoxicated patrons from restaurants
• High impact to residents
• Concern regarding rental on south side in that location • No food and beverage due to increase in traffic and limited to those dining – not open to residents
Traffic concerns
• Issues with alley off Morningside [Drive] if pedestrian plaza were implemented
• Traffic in the alleys
• This could create more pedestrian congestion at
Morningside [Drive] / Manhattan Beach Boulevard cross
walk
• If used for parking, access in/out will be difficult with the narrow streets and traffic on Valley
Prefer more parking instead
• 400 MBB should have underground parking +3 stories!!! • 1 level of parking underground and 2 levels above
• 400 MBB should be converted to parking
• Needs way more parking. 1-2 levels at Lot 3 just scratches the surface
• This plan is too ambitious for the space. We need more parking. Period!!
• We don’t need more open space. We have that with
Metlox. Just provide parking.
• We need street level parking
Prefer arts use
• Change the plan to an art center / museum and garden
• Manhattan Beach Boulevard already has an anchor,
namely Metlox. No need for another one across the street.
This space should house Manhattan Beach Art Museum, a
new entity that will act as a satellite [sp] museum to one or more of the great museums in LA. Open during the
week and weekends, year-round, it will attract an elevated crowd to Manhattan Beach. Don’t miss this!
Prefer green space
• Build a park and garden!!!
• Prefer a park – not a commercial lot
Opposition to vision and City-owned commercial development • It makes no sense to manage leases with private retail and gain only 16 spaces. The City has no business owning this property. Sell it! Use the proceeds for real City priorities. • Just flip it! Should City be owning retail space?
• Nothing exciting about this. I would not waste tax dollars to build this
PROJECT PULSE
COMMUNITY WORKSHOP #2 | CONCEPTUAL DESIGN REVIEW FINDINGS 23 Other comments
Ensure fairness to existing restaurants
• Love the outdoor dining and let’s be fair to existing restaurants by bringing back dining decks while we add all this parking. We can do something more permanent in the future but don’t miss this opportunity
• Need outdoor dining for all Downtown residents
• Doesn’t seem fair to add new restaurants with outdoor seating without getting longstanding restaurants their
outdoor seating first
• Can we tackle outdoor dining throughout Downtown
[Manhattan Beach] first?! Unfair for current F&B
businesses
• Need outdoor dining for all downtown restaurants first Fiscal and feasibility concerns
• Has anyone asked a leasing broker what the demand is for creative office and what rents they’d pay?
• Lack of office secure parking for Lot 4 [400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard] is mandatory to lease space – dealbreaker
• If used for open area or business, sewer smell of area should be solved or dealt with in some way
• Patio will be unused most of the time
400 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD
THANK YOU!