N.2- Blue Folder.pdf — Redondo Beach City Council, July 18, 2023

BLUE FOLDER ITEM
Blue folder items are additional back up material to administrative reports and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
JULY 18, 2023
N.2 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING OBJECTIVE RESIDENTIAL

STANDARDS TO REPLACE CURRENT RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES

CONSIDERATION OF A PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RECOMMENDING THAT

THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT OBJECTIVE RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS AND AMEND TITLE 10, CHAPTER 2 (ZONING ORDINANCE) AND TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 (COASTAL LAND USE

PLAN IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCE) OF THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE FOR

THE IMPLEMENTATION OF OBJECTIVE RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS
CONTACT: BRANDY FORBES, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
• ORDS COMPARISON MATRIX- FEBRUARY 14, 2022
• ORDS COMPARISON MATRIX- JULY 18, 2023
• RESIDENTIAL DESIGN GUIDELINES UPDATE COMMUNITY SURVEY & RESULTS • LETTER FROM CALIFORNIA HOUSING DEFENSE FUND
• PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
R-1 Single Family Zoning District Standards

R-1A Single Family Zoning District Standards

Multi-Family Zoning District Standards (R2/R3/RMD/RH)

5 ft.

For additions on narrow lots (<50'): can match existing of <5' but not more than 10% of lot width
Side: Each side of a second story shall include an area or areas equal to no less than the length of the building on that side multiplied by 2 feet that is set back from the required setback line on that side, provided that the dimension of the setback from the building edge shall be no less than 4 feet.

A front or rear second story setback beyond the required front or rear second story setback may be counted as a second story side setback up to a depth of 8 feet.

Rear: The second story rear setback shall average at least 5 feet more than the required average rear setback, except, on upward sloping lots only, the additional five foot setback shall be applied to the second story front setback instead of to the second story rear setback.

JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES

OBJECTIVE RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS MATRIX OF CHANGES - SINGLE FAMILY *If nothing is noted under the May 2023 Version Changes column, the document will have what was proposed in the January 2023 Version column.

R-1 Single Family Zoning District Standards
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
Roof Decks: The combined total maximum area of all roof decks and mezzanines serving an individual unit shall be limited to five hundred (500) square feet. A roof deck shall be set back at least 10 feet from the required first story setbacks on all sides.

The highest point of any structure associated with the roof deck, including stairs, elevators and their enclosures, shall not exceed the height limit of 30 feet. No permanent covered structures on roof deck.

Porches: Encouraged as FAR bonus. The front entry or front of a covered porch shall be located within 3’- 6” of the front façade of a front-facing garage, except front-facing basement garages on upward sloping lots as specified in the Standards).

Parking Spaces: 2 spaces in garage. Tandem parking shall not be utilized to meet parking requirements. Carport not allowed to meet parking requirements.

Balconies:

No balcony access shall be provided from a mezzanine. A balcony shall not face an interior side property line shared with another residentially zoned property.

The sides of balconies, decks and roof decks facing a neighboring residential use shall be enclosed with a minimum 42-inch high, nontransparent, solid barrier that is designed to be consistent with the overall style of the building. The sides of balconies, decks and roof decks facing a street (front or corner side) shall have a 42-inch barrier that may be transparent or non-transparent.

The project shall comply with one of the following:
a. Set the entire building back 6 feet beyond the minimum front setback and provide balconies or other projecting features. b. Limit the amount of corrugated metal panel to 2/3 of front façade area and utilize a secondary material that has a different form and pattern for 1/3 of the area.
c. As an alternative, an applicant may propose a design with another element(s) to provide facade variation. The Director shall determine whether the proposed design meets the intent of this section. The applicant may appeal denial of such a request to the Planning Commission.

JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES

MEZZANINE STANDARDS
Defined as "mezzanine" is defined
and determined by standards in the
currently adopted and effective Building
Code of the City.

MAY 2023 VERSON CHANGES
A mezzanine is an intermediate floor within
a building interior that is open to the floor
below and has a floor area that is no greater
than one-third of the total area of the
overlooked room below. When the total floor
area of a mezzanine exceeds one-third of the
total area of the overlooked room below it
constitutes an additional story and is no longer
defined as a mezzanine.

A mezzanine open to the first floor shall be
concealed within the building, and its enclosing
walls and ceiling shall remain within the primary
roof form so as not to appear as an additional
story on the exterior.

A mezzanine open to the second floor shall be
set back 15 feet from the primary second story
front façade and 5 feet from the second story
side and rear facades.

No balcony access shall be provided from
a mezzanine.

JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
[Firmona South restriction was removed]
[TRW Tract restriction was removed]
Lower Avenues: all the same, except the following
additions:
- Garages shall be located on the rear of the lot.
- Parking access shall be provided from the rear alley
for all new and remodeled structures and no new curb
cuts shall be permitted, except that access may be
provided by a driveway accessed from the front of the
property if existing power poles or other utility
structures would obstruct parking access, as
determined by the Director.

R-1A Single Family Zoning District Standards
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
[Removed the January version limits for all second story stepback items] Roof Decks: [removed sf restriction]
A roof deck shall be set back from the required first story setbacks by a minimum of 10 feet in front and rear and 3 feet on sides.

The highest point of any structure associated with the roof deck, including stairs, elevators and their enclosures, shall not exceed the height limit of 30 feet.

No permanent covered structures shall be permitted on a roof deck.

JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
Balconies: A balcony shall not face an interior side property line shared with another residentially zoned property.

A front extended balcony on the second story may extend an additional 5 feet into the front setback, but must have a 5-foot setback from side property lines.

Mezzanines: [See specific text below regarding mezzanines] Trees: At least one 24-inch box tree selected from the City’s approved tree species list shall be shown on the landscape plan and shall be planted in-ground in the front yard area. As an alternative, applicant may provide a tree in a nearby public location with manner and location subject to approval of the Director of Public Works.

Path to Entrance: A walkway with a maximum width of 4 feet shall be provided from the sidewalk to the front door.

Trash Receptacle
Tandem Parking
MAY 2023 VERSON CHANGES
A screened area shall be provided to enclose trash cans so they are not visible from the public right-of-way. If trash receptacle area is in rear of property, where alley collections occurs, an open area within the property shall also be provided to avoid trash can placement within the alley.

Tandem parking shall not be utilized to meet
parking requirements.

JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES
JANUARY 2023 VERSION MAY 2023 VERSION CHANGES

MEZZANINE STANDARDS
Defined as "mezzanine" is defined
and determined by standards in the
currently adopted and effective Building
Code of the City.

A mezzanine open to the second floor shall be
set back 15 feet from the primary second story
front façade and 5 feet from the second story
side and rear facades.

No balcony access shall be provided from
a mezzanine.

The driveway curb cut and apron shall be the minimum width required by Code and the Department of Public Works.
2 spaces in enclosed garage. Tandem parking shall not be utilized to meet parking requirements.

Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 Redondo Beach Community Survey for the Residential Design Guidelines Update In 2019, the City of Redondo Beach adopted a strategic plan and identified residential neighborhood character as a high priority. Since 2003, the Planning Division has reviewed and approved plans for new homes and alterations based on guidelines adopted that year, with differing interpretations over time. The City Council has directed staff to take a more proactive approach to enforcing the intent of the guidelines and to undertake a community process to update and improve on these guidelines, creating standards that are more clear and objective.

Based on an SB2 grant received from the State Department of Housing and Community Development, the City is working with a Consultant on the Redondo Beach Residential Design Standards. The Consultant needs input from the community so the updated standards reflect what is most desireable for the city’s future.

A virtual community workshop was held on January 10, 2022 which included a presentation on what residential design guidelines consist of and the process for updating the document. The meeting video, and other helpful information, can be found on the project webpage at www.redondo.org/RDG.

Written comments may also be submitted to [email protected].

Other (please specify)
* 1. Which of the following best describes you (check all that apply)? Redondo Beach property owner
Redondo Beach resident
Redondo Beach business owner
Architect/designer or other professional
Redondo Beach Commission or Advisory Board
member (resident)
Other not listed (please specify)

2. Which neighborhood do you reside in?
El Nido
Golden Hills (i.e. "tall and skinny"; R-1A zone)
TRW Tract Neighborhood
Redondo Villa Tract
Beryl Heights
City Center
Gem Streets
Gertruda Avenue Historic District
Lower Avenues (West of PCH)
Upper Avenues (East of PCH)
Sister Streets
PV Blvd/Prospect Neighborhood
Not in a specific neighborhood
Not a resident
* 3. How many years have you lived in Redondo Beach?
Less than 5 years
5-15 years
16-29 years
30 years or more
Not a resident

4. Do you live in a designated historic home, historic district, or a home that has been identified as potentially historic individually or in a district? Yes
No

5. Have you had first-hand experience with any of the following (check all that apply)? I have built/made alterations to my home and have gone through the permit process I am currently going through the permit process to make alterations/build my home I have been affected by development/home alterations in my neighborhood None of the above

6. Which of the following statements most closely describes your feelings about how recent residential projects have influenced the character of the City? Recent residential projects have made Redondo Beach an even better city Recent residential projects in Redondo Beach have had a negative effect on the character of our neighborhoods
Recent residential projects in Redondo Beach have not resulted in much change to the City’s character Other topics not listed (please specify)
* 7. What are the most important topics for this process to address so that residential buildings are well-designed and positively affect neighborhood character in Redondo Beach? [Check up to 6]
Lot design
Setbacks from the property lines
Massing (the amount of floor area and
requirements that avoid full build-out to setbacks)
Cantilevered buildings over driveways
Maximum height and stories
Mezzanines
Semi-Subterranean Level/Basements
Roof Decks, including the type of access to them
Balconies
Covered shade structures
Outdoor living space
Location and design of garages
Landscaping requirements for front yards
Driveways and curb cuts (width of sidewalk cut
for driveway access)
Parking (number of spaces; enclosed/unenclosed)
Requiring access to parking from an alley where
alleys exist
Accessory structures (detached) and Accessory
Dwelling Units (ADUs)
Height of fencing and/or privacy screening
measures
Requirements for location of front doors
More specific standards for historic properties
Specific neighborhood standards (list
neighborhood and standards in the "Other" box
below)

8. Which of the following best describes your opinion of Redondo Beach processes for approving residential projects?
The process takes too long. It should be more straight-forward and less discretionary.

The process is just right – the amount of review ensures good development.

There should be more discretion for better development, even if the process needs to take longer.

9. Should Planning standards focus on neighborhood compatibility through the regulatory permit process for new housing and alterations to existing homes? Yes, this is very important
Yes, this is somewhat important
No, neighborhood compatibility should not be a consideration for individual home projects

10. Often, there are a-typical situations in which applying pure objective standards doesn’t achieve the intent of a specific requirement. In these cases, some flexibility may be appropriate. Which of the following is the most appropriate process to allow for exceptions? Full staff discretion to modify/waive standards
Staff discretion to modify or waive standards based on specific circumstances/ conditions, with written findings
Planning Commission approval through modification or variance process Require standards to be met without flexibility
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 Redondo Beach homes are designed with a variety of architectural styles. The City does not require specific styles, but does control the overall bulk (massing) through using tools such as setbacks, building offsets, height limits, and floor-area-ratio (FAR). The next questions seek to understand how you feel about current Planning requirements and how they might be revised to be more appropriate for Redondo Beach neighborhoods.

11. Do you think the current height maximum (30-feet, 2-stories) is still appropriate for Redondo Beach neighborhoods?
Yes
No

12. Which of the following is the appropriate height level for single-family and low-density neighborhoods in Redondo Beach?
Lower than the current, less than 30-feet
Higher than the current, allow 3-stories
The current height limit is appropriate
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 Currently, the 30-foot height limit applies to all roof types, whether flat or pitched.

This has the effect of modern style (flat roof) structures appearing higher/taller than traditional styles with a pitched (sloping) roof, as illustrated below:

13. Should the new standards differentiate and lower the maximum height of a flat roof? Yes
No
Currently, roof decks are permitted on the top of structures at the maximum height level with guidelines to step back and use appropriate screening, but no specific requirements.

Other (please specify)

14. Which of the following is most appropriate for the new standards for roof decks? (You may select more than one answer)
Maintain current standards allowing roof decks
without specific restriction.

Continue to allow roof decks with standards that
are specific in terms of maximum area and
required setbacks from the edge of the building.

Provide more specific standards for screening to
protect privacy of adjacent properties
Allow roof decks only above first floors and not
higher.

Do not allow roof decks at all

15. If roof decks are permitted, should shade structures or covers be allowed on them? Yes, unrestricted
Yes, but limited to a portion of the deck area
No
Mezzanines are defined by the building code, which has allowed a broad interpretation in Planning review. The following are examples of mezzanine plans that have been allowed, which may appear from the building’s exterior to be three stories, as illustrated below:

16. Which of the following is most appropriate for the new standards for mezzanines? Maintain current standards allowing enclosed and partially enclosed mezzanines to be constructed above the second story (all examples above)
Allow mezzanines as shown in the 2nd example, open to either the first or second floor below Allow unenclosed mezzanines within the envelope of the home only if open to the first floor below (no solid walls, only railing from mezzanine to room below)
Other (please specify)
Currently, semi-subterranean/basement levels are NOT counted as a story. When viewed from the street, this may create the appearance of a three-story building, even though the building does not exceed the maximum 30-feet in height from grade level, as illustrated below:

Other (please specify)

17. Which of the following is most appropriate for the new standards for semi-subterranean and basement levels?
Maintain current standards that do not count semi-subterranean/basement levels as a story Maintain this definition only for sloping lots and do not allow on lots that are substantially flat Do not allow semi-subterranean levels or basements at all (i.e. require them to be counted as a "story")

18. Should balconies be allowed to encroach into required setbacks? Yes
No
Currently, the second story is allowed to cantilever over the driveway, as long as it is within the setback area, as illustrated here:

19. Should this continue to be allowed?
Yes
No
Properties that have alley access provide an opportunity for placing the garage in the rear and avoiding a curb cut and front driveway as illustrated below:

20. Where a property can take access from an alley, should the garage be required to be located in the rear?
Yes, with no driveway access allowed from the street to park a car in front of house (access from alley only) Yes, and allow a driveway from the street frontage to park a car in front of the house No, it should be the homeowner’s option to put garage in front or in back

21. Which of the following garage arrangements do you support for new homes and major modifications? (You may select multiple options)
Two-car garage, side-by-side
Two-car garage, tandem within garage
One-car garage plus uncovered tandem parking space (in driveway)

22. A curb cut allows a driveway across the sidewalk and reduces street-parking to allow access to the property. Should the City allow a double curb cut for front-facing two-car garages?
Yes
No

23. Do you think that the current 6-foot height limit for side and rear property line fences and walls is appropriate?
Yes
No, it should be lower
No, it should be higher

24. Before you go, please share any other thoughts you have regarding standards for residential development related to either the process or the requirements you would like to see included.

Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 Thank you for taking the time to complete the survey. Your input is valuable to our process. You may also submit additional written comments by email to [email protected].

Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 1 / 68

82.28% 817

55.09% 547

5.74% 57

5.64% 56

1.41% 14
Q1 Which of the following best describes you (check all that apply)? Answered: 993 Skipped: 0
Total Respondents: 993
# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Real Estate Agent in the Community 1/31/2022 5:35 PM
2 Historical Society mamber and past president 1/31/2022 1:58 PM 3 Redondo Beach House Builder 1/28/2022 7:54 PM
4 Board Chair of nonprofit business in Riviera Village 1/28/2022 9:57 AM 5 Realtor 1/28/2022 9:38 AM
6 Concerned Citizen 1/28/2022 8:28 AM
7 Condo 1/26/2022 6:59 AM
8 Redondo beach parent 1/25/2022 3:24 PM
9 Council Member when 2003 Guidelines were adopted 1/25/2022 12:26 PM 10 Not sure 1/25/2022 10:41 AM
11 38 year resident and property owner 1/23/2022 2:57 PM 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Redondo Beach
property owner
Redondo Beach
resident
Redondo Beach
business owner
Architect/desig
ner or other...

Redondo Beach
Commission o...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Redondo Beach property owner
Redondo Beach resident
Redondo Beach business owner
Architect/designer or other professional
Redondo Beach Commission or Advisory Board member (resident) Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 2 / 68
12 Los Angeles Building Inspector 1/23/2022 10:35 AM
13 Redondo Beach CERT Alumi 1/20/2022 10:53 AM
14 General building contractor 1/20/2022 10:02 AM
15 Community Volunteer with BCHD 1/20/2022 9:59 AM
16 Native Redondo resident 1/19/2022 9:29 PM
17 Family at 2001 Mathews Avenue since 1941, in Redondo Beach since 1936 1/17/2022 7:41 AM 18 Involved , concerned citizen of RB, 31 years. 1/15/2022 7:02 AM 19 Realtor 1/12/2022 8:51 PM
20 Preservation commissioner 2 terms in the 90s 1/11/2022 4:00 PM 21 Retired Real Estate Commercial Development Manager 1/11/2022 12:53 PM 22 Boat owner; harbor tenant 1/11/2022 11:25 AM
23 Retired development and CEQA professional 1/11/2022 11:06 AM 24 retired city planner 1/11/2022 11:02 AM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 3 / 68
Q2 Which neighborhood do you reside in?
Answered: 807 Skipped: 186
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
El Nido
Golden Hills
(i.e. "tall ...

TRW Tract
Neighborhood
Redondo Villa
Tract
Beryl Heights
City Center
Gem Streets
Gertruda
Avenue Histo...

Lower Avenues
(West of PCH)
Upper Avenues
(East of PCH)
Sister Streets
PV
Blvd/Prospec...

Not in a
specific...

Not a resident
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 4 / 68

5.82% 47

13.63% 110

14.62% 118

12.02% 97

7.43% 60

2.60% 21

5.08% 41

1.36% 11

7.06% 57

12.52% 101

4.46% 36

3.97% 32

7.56% 61

1.86% 15
TOTAL 807
# OTHER NOT LISTED (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Live near Alta Vista & Wilderness parks 1/31/2022 10:20 PM 2 West end of Gates Ave, near Aviation, R2 zone - is that TRW Tract? 1/31/2022 6:40 PM 3 My office is in the Riviera on Catalina 1/31/2022 5:35 PM 4 Marina area 1/31/2022 3:38 PM
5 North Redondo Villas South 1/31/2022 11:57 AM
6 Beland to Inglewood, Redondo Beach 1/31/2022 11:53 AM 7 North Redondo 1/31/2022 10:49 AM
8 Aviation Blvd area 1/29/2022 6:21 PM
9 Franklin Park 1/29/2022 9:56 AM
10 Elvira Avenue 1/28/2022 6:29 PM
11 Ocean Villa/Artesia 1/28/2022 6:03 PM
12 North Redondo 1/28/2022 4:50 PM
13 North Redondo 1/28/2022 4:13 PM
14 redondo beach 1/28/2022 3:24 PM
15 Grant Ave 1/28/2022 2:38 PM
16 North redondo, Birney elementary area 1/28/2022 2:12 PM 17 The Esplanade 1/28/2022 1:04 PM
18 North Redondo, Perry Park 1/28/2022 11:54 AM
19 north redondo 1/28/2022 10:55 AM

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
El Nido
Golden Hills (i.e. "tall and skinny"; R-1A zone)
TRW Tract Neighborhood
Redondo Villa Tract
Beryl Heights
City Center
Gem Streets
Gertruda Avenue Historic District
Lower Avenues (West of PCH)
Upper Avenues (East of PCH)
Sister Streets
PV Blvd/Prospect Neighborhood
Not in a specific neighborhood
Not a resident
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 5 / 68
20 Near Jefferson 1/28/2022 10:48 AM
21 Not sure - franklin hills? 4 blocks north of 190th, off Inglewood 1/28/2022 10:13 AM 22 Esplanade 1/28/2022 9:57 AM
23 North redondo, Wow I guess we are not a neighborhood 1/28/2022 9:41 AM 24 FYI, my guess is most residents do not know where Villa Tract is, even if they live there :) 1/28/2022 9:38 AM 25 Harbor 1/28/2022 8:57 AM
26 Don’t know these names, a map would’ve been helpful - I live in N Redondo 90278 1/28/2022 8:50 AM 27 Birney Elementary Streets 1/28/2022 8:43 AM
28 North Redondo/Madison elementary 1/28/2022 8:32 AM
29 Esplanade and letter streets. 1/28/2022 8:29 AM
30 Redondo Adjacent 1/28/2022 8:28 AM
31 North Redondo 1/28/2022 8:25 AM
32 Mayberry aka Faye Lane 1/28/2022 8:21 AM
33 North Redondo Beach 1/27/2022 7:47 PM
34 North Redondo 1/27/2022 3:34 PM
35 Franklin park area 1/27/2022 1:20 PM
36 North Redondo 1/26/2022 7:37 PM
37 North Redondo. 90278 1/26/2022 2:29 PM
38 Don't know 190th and Phelan 1/26/2022 12:18 PM
39 I'm not sure which neighborhood, near Torrance and PCH, east of PCH 1/26/2022 10:06 AM 40 North Redondo 1/26/2022 9:44 AM
41 North Redondo 1/26/2022 7:33 AM
42 Unknown District 5, Mathews and McKay 1/26/2022 7:26 AM 43 North Redondo 1/25/2022 10:55 PM
44 Franklin Park neighborhood 1/25/2022 10:13 PM
45 Riviera 1/25/2022 8:08 PM
46 Hollywood Riviera 1/25/2022 7:56 PM
47 North Redondo Marshallfield Lane 1/25/2022 7:42 PM
48 North Redondo 1/25/2022 7:03 PM
49 Jefferson Elementary 1/25/2022 3:24 PM
50 District 3 1/25/2022 2:50 PM
51 Franklin Park 1/25/2022 2:03 PM
52 North redondo near artesia 1/25/2022 1:51 PM
53 North Redondo - north of Artesia 1/25/2022 1:49 PM
54 off Beryl between Beryl/PCH/Catalina. Closes to Beryl Heights 1/25/2022 1:35 PM 55 Villas South 1/25/2022 1:29 PM
56 north redondo 1/25/2022 12:18 PM
57 North Redondo adjacent to TRW Tract (Bataan & Green) 1/25/2022 11:58 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 6 / 68
58 I don’t know which one is my neighborhood, I live at 1908 Gates Ave. 1/25/2022 11:35 AM 59 Carneige 1/25/2022 11:28 AM
60 Alta vista 1/25/2022 11:26 AM
61 Lincoln 1/25/2022 11:20 AM
62 North Redondo 1/25/2022 11:13 AM
63 clark lane 1/25/2022 11:06 AM
64 North Redondo between Aviation & Manhattan Beach Blvd 1/25/2022 11:03 AM 65 Catalina between Knob Hill and Veteran's Park 1/25/2022 10:52 AM 66 Not sure 1/25/2022 10:41 AM
67 North Redondo between Artesia and Robinson 1/25/2022 10:39 AM 68 North Redondo/Artesia 1/25/2022 10:24 AM
69 North Redondo 1/25/2022 10:20 AM
70 South Redondo highschool area 1/25/2022 10:16 AM
71 Franklin Park 1/25/2022 10:14 AM
72 The Village 1/25/2022 10:08 AM
73 Broadway 1/25/2022 10:07 AM
74 north redondo 1/25/2022 9:57 AM
75 North RB 1/24/2022 1:59 PM
76 Artesia Blvd 1/24/2022 1:42 PM
77 Nelson and Felton 1/24/2022 12:13 PM
78 North redondo 1/24/2022 10:21 AM
79 Alta Vista 1/24/2022 10:03 AM
80 North Redondo 1/24/2022 8:36 AM
81 Prospect/Torrance Blvd 1/23/2022 10:32 PM
82 not sure .. elvira ave ?? 1/23/2022 5:05 PM
83 North Redondo 1/23/2022 4:24 PM
84 Lincoln - Anderson Park 1/23/2022 4:00 PM
85 Lincoln 1/23/2022 3:48 PM
86 Green Lane/Artesia 1/23/2022 3:34 PM
87 Robinson ST 1/23/2022 3:01 PM
88 North Redondo Beach condo near mall on Artesia 1/23/2022 2:16 PM 89 District 5 1/23/2022 1:26 PM
90 North Redondo 1/23/2022 1:09 PM
91 Riviera Village 1/23/2022 10:55 AM
92 Veteran's Park and Pier area 1/23/2022 10:34 AM
93 Near Perry Park 1/22/2022 8:48 AM
94 North Redondo 1/22/2022 8:36 AM
95 North Redondo Beach 1/21/2022 8:56 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 7 / 68
96 Esplanade 1/21/2022 4:17 PM
97 District 5, across from aviation park 1/21/2022 11:53 AM 98 Grant/Inglewood (https://www.neighborhoodscout.com/ca/redondo-beach/grant-ave) 1/21/2022 8:45 AM 99 North Redondo 1/21/2022 8:10 AM
100 Esplanade and knob hill 1/21/2022 6:52 AM
101 Lower Riviera 1/21/2022 1:05 AM
102 Seascape 1/20/2022 5:30 PM
103 North Redondo Parallel to Artesia 1/20/2022 3:45 PM 104 Upper Hollywood rivera 1/20/2022 3:31 PM
105 Between Artesia and Manhattan Beach Blvd 1/20/2022 2:50 PM 106 North Redondo 1/20/2022 1:32 PM
107 North Redondo 1/20/2022 1:01 PM
108 Jefferson Elementary School area 1/20/2022 12:40 PM 109 The Village Units 1/20/2022 12:10 PM
110 North Redondo Beach 1/20/2022 12:05 PM
111 Grant Ave 1/20/2022 11:30 AM
112 Alta vista 1/20/2022 11:24 AM
113 North Redondo 1/20/2022 11:22 AM
114 between Vail & Aviation, MB Blvd & Artesia 1/20/2022 11:19 AM 115 Belmont Lane N Redondo 1/20/2022 11:02 AM
116 North Redondo Beach 1/20/2022 10:56 AM
117 Near South Bay Galleria 1/20/2022 10:43 AM
118 Franklin Park 1/20/2022 10:35 AM
119 East of tall and skinnies in Jefferson school district (Marshallfield & Blossom) 1/20/2022 10:17 AM 120 Broadway near fire station 1/20/2022 10:16 AM
121 Need a map showing these areas 1/20/2022 10:06 AM
122 RUHS and Parras neighborhood 1/20/2022 10:02 AM
123 I know my address, but don't know my neighborhood name, where can I find that??? 1/20/2022 9:51 AM 124 Franklin park neighborhood 1/20/2022 9:50 AM
125 I think it is called Alta Vista? On Catalina before the avenues. 1/20/2022 9:50 AM 126 Ocean Villa 1/20/2022 9:49 AM
127 Ocean Villa 1/20/2022 9:48 AM
128 Alta Vista 1/20/2022 9:34 AM
129 Voorhees and Aviation 1/20/2022 6:54 AM
130 North Redondo Central near Grant 1/19/2022 10:15 PM 131 North Redondo Beach (Bataan Road between Rindge and Vail) 1/19/2022 9:32 PM 132 Grant Ave 1/19/2022 9:29 PM
133 North Redondo 1/19/2022 9:22 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 8 / 68
134 Clark and Ringe 1/19/2022 8:45 PM
135 RB Pier area 1/19/2022 8:33 PM
136 North Redondo (How is that not listed!?) 1/19/2022 4:59 PM 137 Lincoln 1/19/2022 1:39 PM
138 Artesia Blvd 1/19/2022 12:58 PM
139 North Redondo 1/19/2022 12:56 PM
140 D4 1/19/2022 12:34 PM
141 North Redondo, near Lincoln elem. 1/18/2022 9:49 PM 142 Golden Hills? Not tall and skinny neighborhood by any stretch. 1/18/2022 3:56 PM 143 N Redondo by fire station 1/18/2022 1:27 PM
144 Pruitt & Ralston Area 1/18/2022 6:09 AM
145 Much of Redondo without neighborhoods, rather a hodgepodge of home. 1/17/2022 7:41 AM 146 800 Block South Juanita 1/17/2022 7:39 AM
147 Between Artesia and Grant 1/16/2022 12:34 PM
148 North Redondo Beach - Artesia Blvd region 1/14/2022 3:46 PM 149 Clark/Grant 1/13/2022 11:05 AM
150 North Redondo 1/13/2022 10:03 AM
151 I don't know. Am I supposed to know this? District 4 1/13/2022 9:04 AM 152 North Redondo Beach 1/12/2022 9:03 PM
153 S Broadway South of Torrance Blvd 1/12/2022 8:51 PM 154 North Redondo/Artesia neighborhood 1/12/2022 8:37 PM 155 North Redondo - District 4 1/12/2022 6:03 PM
156 North Redondo 1/12/2022 3:14 PM
157 across from BCHD 1/12/2022 2:23 PM
158 Grant/Aviation 1/12/2022 12:52 PM
159 So of Torrance Blvd and east of pch 1/12/2022 8:37 AM 160 Vanderbilt Lane 1/11/2022 9:24 PM
161 north redondo 1/11/2022 8:04 PM
162 ESPLANADE 1/11/2022 5:51 PM
163 South Redondo 1/11/2022 5:30 PM
164 Golden Hills but around the corner from Gregg Parkette, not "tall and skinny" 1/11/2022 5:27 PM 165 Esplanade 1/11/2022 5:08 PM
166 North Redondo 1/11/2022 5:06 PM
167 NRB, Artesia Blvd-Slauson Lane 90278 1/11/2022 4:08 PM 168 Vincent st /Vincent park historic area 1/11/2022 4:00 PM 169 North of Artesia (not TRW) 1/11/2022 3:27 PM
170 Had no idea RB was divided into these, found the best from the list describe mine 1/11/2022 3:15 PM 171 The village condo area near the pier. 1/11/2022 3:12 PM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 9 / 68
172 El Redondo Avenue ( not sure what is the neighborhood) 1/11/2022 3:08 PM 173 Lincoln elementary area 1/11/2022 3:03 PM
174 Golden Hills Not tall skinny! 1/11/2022 2:53 PM
175 Villages 1/11/2022 2:34 PM
176 This is funny cause I grew up here and these area names I only know a couple. I bottom line I live in Redondo Beach:)
1/11/2022 2:32 PM
177 North Redondo 1/11/2022 2:26 PM
178 414 S GERTRUDA AVE 1/11/2022 2:17 PM
179 I'm not sure: I'm 600 block of S. Gertruda Ave. 1/11/2022 1:19 PM 180 Lincoln 1/11/2022 1:17 PM
181 Rockefeller and Slauson 1/11/2022 1:03 PM
182 North Redondo - google search says "Villas" - I have never heard this before 1/11/2022 1:03 PM 183 North Redondo Beach, one mile west of the South Bay Galleria 1/11/2022 12:53 PM 184 District 4 1/11/2022 12:20 PM
185 Artesia corridor 1/11/2022 12:15 PM
186 Off of Torrance Blvd two blocks up from PCH 1/11/2022 12:12 PM 187 north redondo 1/11/2022 12:01 PM
188 villages 1/11/2022 12:00 PM
189 North redondo 1/11/2022 11:58 AM
190 idiots didn't provide a map showing these so I have no idea 1/11/2022 11:52 AM 191 North Redondo 1/11/2022 11:48 AM
192 Esplanade 1/11/2022 11:48 AM
193 Sapphire 1/11/2022 11:38 AM
194 North Redondo Beach, Aviation Park area 1/11/2022 11:35 AM 195 Not sure, thought it was Golden Hills but we are not tall & skinny 1/11/2022 11:30 AM 196 Artesia/Slauson Lane/Vanderbilt Lane 1/11/2022 11:30 AM 197 Alta Vista 1/11/2022 11:30 AM
198 The forgotten neighborhood of cul-de-sacs off Earle Ln 1/11/2022 11:29 AM 199 By Jefferson Elementary 1/11/2022 11:17 AM
200 Artesia Cooridor 1/11/2022 11:14 AM
201 North Redondo (not TRW Tract) 1/11/2022 11:10 AM
202 South Redondo 1/11/2022 11:08 AM
203 North Redondo 1/11/2022 11:07 AM
204 509 Green Lane 1/11/2022 11:06 AM
205 North, Artesia corridor 1/11/2022 11:05 AM
206 Franklin Park 1/11/2022 11:02 AM
207 Seascapes 1/11/2022 11:01 AM
208 Gates Ave 1/11/2022 11:00 AM
209 North Redondo near Adams/Washington 1/11/2022 10:55 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 10 / 68
210 Artesia 15-min Neighborhood 1/10/2022 7:33 PM
211 @Curtis/Felton: near Madison Elementary, but not quite TRW Tract 1/10/2022 7:09 PM 212 Esplanade 1/10/2022 7:06 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 11 / 68

9.57% 95

28.20% 280

32.12% 319

29.00% 288

1.11% 11
Q3 How many years have you lived in Redondo Beach?
Answered: 993 Skipped: 0
TOTAL 993
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Less than 5
years
5-15 years
16-29 years
30 years or
more
Not a resident

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Less than 5 years
5-15 years
16-29 years
30 years or more
Not a resident
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 12 / 68

3.33% 33

96.67% 959
Q4 Do you live in a designated historic home, historic district, or a home that has been identified as potentially historic individually or in a district? Answered: 992 Skipped: 1
TOTAL 992
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 13 / 68

40.87% 405

4.64% 46

39.15% 388

32.09% 318
Q5 Have you had first-hand experience with any of the following (check all that apply)?
Answered: 991 Skipped: 2
Total Respondents: 991
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
I have
built/made...

I am currently
going throug...

I have been
affected by...

None of the
above

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
I have built/made alterations to my home and have gone through the permit process I am currently going through the permit process to make alterations/build my home I have been affected by development/home alterations in my neighborhood None of the above
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 14 / 68

29.58% 289

41.25% 403

29.17% 285
Q6 Which of the following statements most closely describes your feelings about how recent residential projects have influenced the character of the City?
Answered: 977 Skipped: 16
TOTAL 977
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Recent
residential...

Recent
residential...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Recent residential projects have made Redondo Beach an even better city Recent residential projects in Redondo Beach have had a negative effect on the character of our neighborhoods Recent residential projects in Redondo Beach have not resulted in much change to the City’s character Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 15 / 68
Q7 What are the most important topics for this process to address so that residential buildings are well-designed and positively affect neighborhood character in Redondo Beach? [Check up to 6]
Answered: 993 Skipped: 0
Lot design
Setbacks from
the property...

Massing (the
amount of fl...

Cantilevered
buildings ov...

Maximum height
and stories
Mezzanines
Semi-Subterrane
an...

Roof Decks,
including th...

Balconies
Covered shade
structures
Outdoor living
space
Location and
design of...

Landscaping
requirements...

Driveways and
curb cuts...

Parking
(number of...

Requiring
access to...

Accessory
structures...

Height of
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 16 / 68

35.75% 355

46.42% 461

43.61% 433

11.68% 116

62.24% 618

5.14% 51

6.55% 65

14.40% 143

7.35% 73

5.24% 52

26.28% 261

15.51% 154

22.66% 225

23.36% 232

56.80% 564

8.66% 86

27.39% 272

22.16% 220

3.22% 32

5.74% 57

9.57% 95
Total Respondents: 993
# OTHER TOPICS NOT LISTED (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Exterior lighting 1/31/2022 6:40 PM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Height of
fencing and/...

Requirements
for location...

More specific
standards fo...

Specific
neighborhood...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Lot design
Setbacks from the property lines
Massing (the amount of floor area and requirements that avoid full build-out to setbacks) Cantilevered buildings over driveways
Maximum height and stories
Mezzanines
Semi-Subterranean Level/Basements
Roof Decks, including the type of access to them
Balconies
Covered shade structures
Outdoor living space
Location and design of garages
Landscaping requirements for front yards
Driveways and curb cuts (width of sidewalk cut for driveway access) Parking (number of spaces; enclosed/unenclosed)
Requiring access to parking from an alley where alleys exist Accessory structures (detached) and Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) Height of fencing and/or privacy screening measures
Requirements for location of front doors
More specific standards for historic properties
Specific neighborhood standards (list neighborhood and standards in the "Other" box below) Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 17 / 68
2 you have enough regulations already. The above question made me answer. My answer would have been "none of the above"
1/31/2022 2:25 PM
3 Silly requirements, such as having to hide a spiral staircase; being required to chop off part of a historic house because the driveway is too narrow, having to demolish all or part of a historic garage because it is 6" over a property line (because the property line was determined to be in a different place 100 years ago, etcetera.
1/31/2022 1:58 PM
4 Not sufficient space to store and collect waste. Insufficient parking. Garages are not used for parking but for other purposes. Property not designed properly to assist with privacy. Property not used for intended purpose. Residential units used for commercial purposes. Single/multiple family buildings converted into boarding houses. Many dilapidated properties posing fire and saftey hazards.
1/31/2022 1:31 PM
5 landscaping in this area should take height limits into consideration and trees and bushes should be small and not exceed 30 ft. max height expected growth. There are far too many very tall trees that not only block our precious and decreasing ocean views, but they are often not maintained or trimmed and can present a fire hazard especially with structures getting built closer and closer together in this area. Once planted, owners are not willing to remove or alter them so it has to start with controlling height of what is approved to be planted. We really do need a view ordinance in this city to help protect our property values. 1/31/2022 11:26 AM
6 Overcrowding of neighborhood by the high volume of 2 on a lot buildings in North Redondo.

Suggest limit number of permits to be granted for building new 2 on a lot. Desirable to stop increase of density of houses as we are losing green space. Suggest change zoning in North Redondo to single family home all lots.
1/30/2022 4:40 PM
7 Parcels which had single home being converted to R3 1/30/2022 11:25 AM 8 Keeping R1 zoning 1/30/2022 8:32 AM
9 Balconies that overlook other houses can be awkward, when they are occupied. We shouldn't allow balconies. Off street parking must be required. Allow require more driveway area and allow wider curb cuts so two cars can use the driveway without blocking each other. Require drought tolerant landscape. No one in California should have a lawn, including businesses. Use some of this space for parking on water permeable areas. 1/29/2022 9:56 AM
10 TRW Tract. We are crammed in their 2-3 homes on a lot. And now it’s my understanding that the City has permitted 4 attached homes on a lot. There is no sense of community in North Redondo. Neighbors live next door for years and never know each other. Also, when there is dispute regarding community areas, the City has not created any type of recourse for the property owner. We feel like a dumping ground. We should have more representation on the City council given the population of North Redondo.
1/28/2022 8:25 PM
11 You've got it all wrong. I know, you're gonna say, he's a builder so disregard him. But I also built my own house in TRW tract recently and was negatively affected by arbitrary restrictions on my house. As a builder I suffer through the arbitrary inane choices or a Planning department that really doesn't want anything to change. They DO NOT envision Redondo as a World Class city of the future, rather they want a sleepy beach bungalow city. But the people that LIVE IN Redondo want more building square footage! Meanwhile Planning approves the most horrid boxy buildings that have horrible aesthetics and throws up any and all reasons to make it hard to build a classic coastal cape cod style house. All of the check boxes above are aimed at constraining our creativity and giving the customers what they really want. Every singly buyer and renter that we deal with as customers wants less of those check boxes above. 1/28/2022 7:54 PM
12 Allowing front porches to keep neighborhoods social 1/28/2022 6:22 PM 13 Very important to consider the house next to the new property. Our family/ house was really impacted by new buildings next to us.
1/28/2022 6:09 PM
14 Energy and water friendly 1/28/2022 3:02 PM
15 Making multiple dwellings with limited parking where on the curb parking is severely restricted. 1/28/2022 2:26 PM 16 architectural design committee needed to increase the quality of the homes 1/28/2022 1:33 PM 17 Single family homes appearance is preferable to a an apartment or condominium look. 1/28/2022 10:59 AM 18 Protecting at a minimum light and sunshine to existing properties. Avoid dwarfing them and 1/28/2022 10:48 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 18 / 68
having neighbors windows too close to property line to preserve some privacy. 19 Would like to avoid "McMansions" and crowded property or 2 on lots. 1/28/2022 10:13 AM 20 I would like the City to work more on updating the commercial areas of our city. 1/28/2022 9:41 AM 21 Green Space 1/28/2022 8:57 AM
22 Street is greatly affected by continuous building. 1/28/2022 8:56 AM 23 Remove the alley garage requirement - it’s punitive to a small group and decreases available street parking as few people use alley garages and they park on the street instead. A curb cut with a driveway and front garage creates four parking spaces at the cost of about 1.25 street spaces. An alley loading garage almost always results in the loss of two street spaces. Focus on creating standards that address the look and feel of homes and stop letting developers run rampant with FAR bonuses and ugly modern dwellings.
1/28/2022 8:43 AM
24 How close to the property lines structures can be built. How many single family homes are being replaced with condos.
1/28/2022 8:43 AM
25 Overcrowding 1/28/2022 8:42 AM
26 Honestly, I am fine with whatever people want to do on their property as long as it is safe.

Some parts of the city (poorly maintained homes and the pier) are more of an issue to me. If someone wants to improve these, I am fine with not controlling the rooftop deck designs, height of buildings, etc. The city could be so much more beautiful, but people are too busy bickering and trying to control what their neighbors can and cannot do on their own property. 1/28/2022 8:40 AM
27 Unappealing features such as marble driveways, giant statues in the front yard, etc. 1/28/2022 8:33 AM 28 We need enough parking. 2 on a lots and apartments put too much pressure on street parking. 1/28/2022 8:32 AM 29 Additional dwelling system 1/28/2022 8:25 AM
30 Sufficient parking is a huge concern. 1/28/2022 8:25 AM 31 Remove single family zoning 1/27/2022 9:55 PM
32 McMansions, large homes being developed that remain empty and have no design element that matches the neighborhood.
1/26/2022 7:39 PM
33 Avoid over-densification of Redondo Beach 1/26/2022 7:37 PM 34 Renters that are not considerate of homeowners and take up half of all the street spaces for their rental property
1/26/2022 2:29 PM
35 Our biggest issue has been privacy to adjacent properties that are affected by fencing, privacy screening measures, height/stories of the building, how close the building is to the fences/property lines, setbacks.
1/26/2022 2:17 PM
36 very concerned about the number of bedrooms in the units they want to build on catalina 1/26/2022 1:54 PM 37 None of this applies to N R 1/26/2022 9:44 AM
38 Not sure what you are asking. 1/26/2022 6:59 AM
39 REDONDO IS A LOST CAUSE....BIG MONEY...TRANSPLANT GREEDY INVESTORS...SCRAPING BEAUTIFUL MODEST HOMES FOR UNSIGHTLY BEHEMOTHS .. I honestly don't believe any powers that be will stop the greed and unsightly large disgusting built like crap homes/townhomes/condos in this city. I visit Santa Monica frequently...and it always amazes me how even though north of montana has been mansionized.... the owners tastefully do their work...leaving green space and creating beautiful ..large dwellings. Here? It's all cookie cutter bullshit, cheap spanish rip off / mediterranean dog shit for the most part. I grew up in this town, void of culture as it is, I still love the relatively small town feel... it's all slipping away fast and nothing can stop the power and greed of disgusting tasteless rich cocksucking assholes with too much money and no sense of style or class. 1/26/2022 2:06 AM
40 Should eliminate parking minimums and eliminate height restrictions. 1/25/2022 10:17 PM 41 Gigantic homes should not be allowed to be build on a street with normal-sized homes. Keep with the character and SIZE of original existing homes. Outlaw anything else. 1/25/2022 9:12 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 19 / 68
42 Eliminate future construction of Tall & Skinny. The maximum size of the building. The space between buildings is becoming less and less as new construction utilizes as much of the property as can be utilized. Lack of trees and more concrete! No sidewalks in residence of Tall and Skinny. And less parking as older single family homes are destroyed for tall and skinny.

Sell to developers who live in the beach areas.
1/25/2022 9:04 PM
43 Have a percentage of all new multi-family dwellings include AFFORDABLE housing for senior citizens.
1/25/2022 7:35 PM
44 No homeless encampments or shelters 1/25/2022 7:18 PM 45 Very much opposed to changing the zoning on lots for single family homes in Redondo Beach.

We are the most densely populated city on the coast & the traffic and the crowds are becoming unbearable, as we are - without the new zoning to cram more into our area. 1/25/2022 7:03 PM
46 I feel that there should be some kind of a timeline for projects. We have been living next to a development that has been going on for over three years now. The noise has been constant. I am a teacher who had to teach through this during Covid. The developer put the house extremely close to our property. I wrote an objection to the plans, but they were pushed aside because apparently the property on the other side wanted more space. Interestingly the property on the other side was already sold to another developer. I feel like there’s a lot of conspiracies going on . I don’t understand why they would not just put the driveway to separate our properties which is what I suggested. Instead I have a property that when people drive up they asked me if I built an extension to my house.
1/25/2022 4:41 PM
47 Less design restrictions is best. Private property design should be left to the owner. City should fund and support sustainable building practices. 1/25/2022 3:43 PM
48 Have flat sidewalks without driveway dip. No more apartments and 2 on a lots. More single family with outdoor space gives better parking and less dense and more greenery everywhere. 1/25/2022 3:24 PM
49 Open outdoor livable space requirement should remain the same... 1/25/2022 2:16 PM 50 Keep Front facing garages front facing. 1/25/2022 2:01 PM 51 North Redondo (TRW tracts) are cherished for their "family Homes" and "Single home, family friendly neighborhoods. The beauty of our area is that there is open air between family homes and yards for children to play in their backyards. Seniors that have lived here with open air space look forward to passing this blessing of big yards, gardens, and knowing your neighbors on to the next generations. We chose this area because we have room to truly enjoy years our years working to now enjoying the place we choose to for its open, beautiful space. We all need open air space to flourish. WE bought this location with deliberate planning for living in open space.
1/25/2022 1:58 PM
52 Need to encourage higher density and mixed use so we can live a lower car lifestyle 1/25/2022 1:51 PM 53 Diversity of materials used on exterior (seems like 90% homes built in S. Redondo in 2019- 2020 were same white paint, plywood exterior with "ribbing". Was it all same builder who used exact same materials and paint? Ridiculous to allow this.) 1/25/2022 1:35 PM
54 NOISE CONTROL - Construction workers do not care about quiet hours and it sucks. We pay a lot to live near the beach and deserve peace and quiet. 1/25/2022 1:34 PM
55 Limit to time residences are allowed to remain vacant; and limit time lots and buildings are in dis-repair.
1/25/2022 1:01 PM
56 limiting the number of cars allowed to be parked on street so that all neighbors are able to find parking if necessary. Need to park in their driveways
1/25/2022 12:45 PM
57 Density on lots and density vs available street parking 1/25/2022 12:44 PM 58 Avoiding major flat exterior surfaces resulting in a bland box. 1/25/2022 12:26 PM 59 Eliminating parking requirements. Adding protected bike lanes. Prioritize the transit and safety of city residents over commuters from other cities.
1/25/2022 12:02 PM
60 Parking, parking, parking. Too many multi-units replacing SFH's without adequate parking.

More homes are being squished into neighborhoods without ANY changes to surrounding infrastructure which causes a lot of congestion. Moreover, residents use garage as 1/25/2022 11:58 AM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 20 / 68
storage/unapproved bonus rooms which causes them to park cars on the street thereby exacerbating the parking/congestion issue.
61 Utility pipes and supply lines unable to support the increased density 1/25/2022 11:56 AM 62 The city should not be involved is developing design guidelines for most of these topics 1/25/2022 11:55 AM 63 Less oversight in general. We do not live in some historic city that should preserved in amber.

We have some of the most valuable real estate in the world, and we should act like it. Stop forcing people to build single-family houses and upzone everywhere. We have a housing shortage of historic proportions - my son will not be able to live here when he graduates from college and that is a shame. Build more, build often and stand out of the way of people developing multi-family housing on their own land.
1/25/2022 11:43 AM
64 Curb heights should be lower so that the doors of cars parked next to the curb don’t scrape when opened.
1/25/2022 11:25 AM
65 May not be germane to the topic, but heavy truck traffic and speeding cars through certain neighborhoods, especially Pearl St East of PCH to Camino Real 1/25/2022 11:24 AM
66 have wider streets with landscape on the border, and to be accessible to wheelchair and stroller.
1/25/2022 11:06 AM
67 Keep R1 designation without adding extra dwellings. Prevent increasing density too much.

Causes local traffic issues.
1/25/2022 10:19 AM
68 You are allowing south Redondo to become like north Redondo. Packed, boxed, ugly and stick out lie sore thumbs,& the characters of our neighborhoods are being compromised for money.

There should also be wider setbacks on sides specifically for multi family developments to prevent condensed feeling a look. Every multi family development should have a defined square feet of both from and back yards to maintain the integrity of our neighborhood charm.

We don’t want south Redondo to look like north Redondo. 1/25/2022 10:16 AM
69 Side set-backs 1/25/2022 10:16 AM
70 Location of affordable housing projects. Need for south redondo to share in affordable housing locations
1/25/2022 10:11 AM
71 Building right out to a street corner blocking traffic view includes bushes and planting. Very hazardous
1/25/2022 10:08 AM
72 overcrowding of the neighborhood by adding more R2 housing 1/25/2022 10:03 AM 73 I don't mind varying architectural styles as long as the property is kept up nicely. 1/24/2022 5:50 PM 74 Parking is extremely important in north Redondo-north of artesia 1/24/2022 10:21 AM 75 Adjacency to Manhattan Beach 1/24/2022 8:36 AM
76 Environmental considerations 1/23/2022 8:46 PM
77 Observing current R-1 requirements [Original] 1/23/2022 5:44 PM 78 Our city is being over saturated by allowing developers to tear down single family homes and build multiple units on the lots thereby creating more traffic, reducing available street parking and putting additional demand for water and electricity. 1/23/2022 3:47 PM
79 Allowing owners to park on their lawns or driveways rather than in their garage; i.e., allowing owners to use their garage as a living space.
1/23/2022 3:42 PM
80 If a home is well kept and nice, the rest of this is simply ridiculous. 1/23/2022 3:40 PM 81 I think people should be allowed to do what they want with their possessions, land and homes included.
1/23/2022 3:34 PM
82 Designing lots and buildings in deference to the sun's effects. 1/23/2022 3:22 PM 83 That garages ( should be renamed car/vehicle rooms) be used to park cars and NOT for storage or living areas. That all new construction have a 200 sq. ft. interior room with outside access dedicated strictly for storage AND that it cannot be converted to any sort of living space ever.
1/23/2022 3:18 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 21 / 68
84 Retention of "single family" residences 1/23/2022 2:57 PM 85 R1 zoned neighborhoods to remain for single family dwellings only. 1/23/2022 2:07 PM 86 Too much housing and not enough parking 1/23/2022 1:09 PM 87 Single family homes, no more two (or more) on a lot 1/23/2022 1:04 PM 88 Design should be sensitive to design of other homes in the area, e.g. a block with craftsman bungalows should encourage a new structure that attempts to fit in. 1/22/2022 2:43 PM
89 Put street bumps in the residential streets to slow down traffic. 1/22/2022 12:27 PM 90 Keep R-1 R-1 1/22/2022 11:17 AM
91 The negative response to the prior question is parking is bad. Even if design moving forward allows for larger driveway entrance, it does not help with street parking. Cars being built today are large and wide, for example trucks. The streets are becoming narrow and blind spots due to parking on the street. The over development is out of control. Next, landscape should be more drought tolerance, a mixture of hardscape, succulents, plant that do not need much water. Grass and roses take a lot of water to maintain. I've seen massive home being building like Mansion. We are not Beverly Hills. Condo's are now up to 3/floors? Artesia Blvd traffic is bad. Turing into businesses off Artesia can be dangerous, for example Coffee Bean and Tea Leaf due to the drive thru everyone like to use. Blind spot turning onto Felton due to cars parked on street. What happen to the small town charm, losing it to overdevelopment. Where ever there is empty space, building. Lots now have 2/3 homes for building now. Unreal. 1/22/2022 8:36 AM
92 City should be less concerned with what individuals do in regards to their property so long as it is safe by building code standards.
1/21/2022 11:58 PM
93 North Redondo: quality of construction and consistency of design 1/21/2022 8:10 AM 94 Width of sidewalks. Designing curbs to prevent parked cars from partially or entirely blocking sidewalks.
1/20/2022 5:57 PM
95 With three on a lots replacing single family homes, there are triple the cars. I love when vigilantes mark parking spaces on street. I wish they were official so individual street parking choices would be more efficient.
1/20/2022 3:45 PM
96 The box above is only checked because the survey / form will not function without a checked box- do not ascribe any meaning to the box above citing ‘neighborhood standards’. (a meaningless term I might add) Asking these questions on the topics above in my opinion is an uniformed and pointedly divisive question. Each property by definition is unique as is each building any guidelines should be addressed individually. In general the city should stay out of the design business. And the city should stay away from personal property rights and the meddling overreach that is already taking place. Further I suggest you attend to running the city and staying under budget and reducing the budget. Many jobs and duties Could be outsourced to 3rd parties who could often handle these tasks with out prejudice and bias, perform them at a lower cost and a faster speed. This could help reduce the bloated city staff and payroll. In all areas. The city is unable to hire and retain anything close to the best and brightest candidates.
1/20/2022 3:44 PM
97 Single family homes should keep the character of the neighborhood and not become huge, overpowering homes. Setbacks are important in SFR, along with parking, and keeping the character of the neighborhood (no ADU's or overdevelopment). 1/20/2022 3:41 PM
98 Hillside overlay: I am a proponent of people being able to change their properties, add second stories, basement levels, and under ground garages. Building up in the neighborhood has beautified the area, and I am happy to see multigenerational families who are able to move into houses that work for their needs. There should be fewer limitations to building additional stories and underground levels. ADUs: are an important feature for many homeowners who would otherwise be priced out of their homes. It is also a way to increase the tax base and generates good homes for those in our community who need them.
1/20/2022 3:31 PM
99 Guidelines that keep neighborhoods consistent without overdevelopment of lot 1/20/2022 2:44 PM 100 Suggest not interfering with existing ocean views. 1/20/2022 2:41 PM 101 Making sure that ADUs and other multiple units are not built. 1/20/2022 2:22 PM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 22 / 68
102 Number of units allowed in a lot size 1/20/2022 1:32 PM 103 Bicycle friendly roads, lanes, paths 1/20/2022 1:27 PM 104 Extremely concerned about Sacramento's SB-9. The end of single family zoning will be disastrous for Redondo Beach.
1/20/2022 12:40 PM
105 Over built, too many new units being built 1/20/2022 12:33 PM 106 Free Parking permits for residents living across from Lawndale. 1/20/2022 12:32 PM 107 I think we should be encouraging the development of further neighborhood standards. 1/20/2022 12:10 PM 108 Standards for trees to line the streets. Too many trees removed making streets look barren. 1/20/2022 11:44 AM 109 More new housing, particularly 3 unit properties. 1/20/2022 11:22 AM 110 Apartments should provide at least one parking space per bedroom. Residence garages should be wider and deeper to accomodate SUVs and pick up trucks, which comprise 70% of vehicles sold in California last year. This will provide more street parking. 1/20/2022 11:19 AM
111 Honestly I’d like there to be less rules around “looks” and keep it to safety and not interfering with neighbors. Would be nice to make it easier to upgrade their home without jumping through hoops would benefit the whole neighborhood. Rather than making it all about dozing homes in favor of builders who build large sfh at a steep profit for individuals be able to remodel easily. 1/20/2022 11:18 AM
112 All streets in North Redondo beach need to be repaved, not just some! 1/20/2022 10:56 AM 113 Do not allow large 3-story single-family homes to be built next to single-story homes. 1/20/2022 10:49 AM 114 Keeping neighborhoods that are zoned R1 as R1 and not allowing more than one home on the existing lots.
1/20/2022 10:31 AM
115 Neighborhood character is an excuse to limit housing and drive up prices. Let people build more and more densely if they choose to.
1/20/2022 10:22 AM
116 Maxed out DUs built on spec are the biggest problem. Right to the height and setback limits, minimal outdoor space. Yuck! No character. Roof decks are rarely used, an invasion of privacy for nearby neighbors, and an eyesore. If you can't have an enclosed habitable room at that height, why allow a roof deck?
1/20/2022 10:00 AM
117 Investors maximizing builds, with no yards have ruined the single family home 1/20/2022 9:51 AM 118 Keeping single family home areas intact do not change to multi use so we are invaded by condos
1/20/2022 9:50 AM
119 Not a fan of how many homes can be built on a lot. Cap it at 2-3 max. 1/20/2022 9:33 AM 120 Style of house-boxy,contractor design.plan for educating new construction builders about solar mandate- expense and requirements.
1/20/2022 12:53 AM
121 Remove barriers that stifle the building of more multi family units to satisfy RHNA, such as height limits and parking requirements. Streamline design guidelines for ADUs so more families can live in our city. Promote compact units at greater quantity and density over monstrous single family homes. Strongly encourage and incentivize rooftop solar, native landscaping, permeable surfaces, rainwater capture. Discourage artificial turf and grass. 1/19/2022 11:24 PM
122 New houses all looking like office buildings 1/19/2022 9:29 PM 123 North Redondo Beach / Aviation Blvd. property standards - the fact that three, three story townhomes can be built on a lot made only for two townhomes and not have to go down a level for garages in order to maintain low roof lines with previous three story properties that had to do just that. It is ruining the low-rise beach community feel and turning us into Mid-City Wilshire. Just because a property is on Aviation doesn't mean we're in a business district. 1/19/2022 4:59 PM
124 None of this matters to me. I hope Redondo can build more higher density housing at a lower price. Locals are being priced out.
1/19/2022 2:52 PM
125 To many two and three residences on a lot. Don't really know if you realize it but Redondo, especially North Redondo has a reputation of to many multi residential lots. And this is not a positive thing.
1/18/2022 8:10 AM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 23 / 68
126 Maximum building on every neighborhood lot resulting in no available street parking. 1/17/2022 1:55 PM 127 Additional dwelling unit 1/17/2022 11:29 AM
128 The individual property owner is limited to age in place in Redondo Beach. ADU could and should be two stories. For too long, develops have ruined Redondo with their massive “ ten name tag” housing designs. We have a bedroom community with bars as social setting.

Redondo, look what Hermosa and Manhattan have done. Can we not do better? 1/17/2022 7:41 AM
129 Parking should be required for ADU's 1/15/2022 7:02 AM 130 Additional dwelling units 1/14/2022 6:13 PM
131 Street lighting 1/14/2022 3:56 PM
132 Parks 1/14/2022 3:03 PM
133 drip irrigation to save water 1/14/2022 11:19 AM
134 Replacing mature trees, not allowing front access garage is ridiculous, upkeep of dilapidated properties, outrageous cost of so many unnecessary requirements 1/13/2022 9:25 PM
135 Requirements should treat Golden Hills lots differently than other areas where lots are larger wider, etc...
1/13/2022 10:03 AM
136 Traffic, increased water usage, increased electricity requirements, increased strain on overburdened sewer systems already dumping raw sewage into the ocean.1/13/2022 9:04 AM 137 Traffic is a big concern. You bring more people in , we're going to have more traffic. I live, own on 190th and Anza. It's crazy.
1/12/2022 9:03 PM
138 All new structures should address climate change in a positive way (drought tolerant landscaping, solar power, water capture, natural gas hookups). 1/12/2022 6:03 PM
139 Sapphire Street has garages almost to the sidewalk. However, I'm unable to build a roof over my deck because of setback requirements. Some properties need to be individually evaluated based on the street not a standard code.
1/12/2022 2:46 PM
140 I do not understand enough about many of the topics to speak about it, but this form is making me select a box so I selected lot design.
1/12/2022 10:01 AM
141 No overcrowding. Can’t handle more population. It’s too dense already. No 2 on lots for existing R1 lots
1/12/2022 8:37 AM
142 No to monster house 1/12/2022 1:35 AM
143 The city must have signage standards to update the rubble on PCH within the city. Too many rusty facades and temporary vinyl signage is allowed on PCH which give the city a really shabby appearance. Businesses (including Leasing companies within tenant leases) must be held to higher standards. PCH is looking like "Stinkin Lincoln" Ave in Santa Monica! 1/11/2022 10:09 PM
144 Ugly modern designs do not fit RB! 1/11/2022 9:31 PM 145 Allowing SFD lots to be converted to multi family homes will have a significant negative impact on Redondo community
1/11/2022 9:06 PM
146 Minimizing the presence of cars on streets, parking maximums 1/11/2022 8:28 PM 147 Continuity in appearance and usage to existing residential properties 1/11/2022 8:21 PM 148 Remove the Hight limits, remove the minimum parking requirements, allow for fewer setbacks and allow for more cantilevered buildings over driveways. allow for detached and attached ADUs
1/11/2022 8:01 PM
149 I wish they would stop over building so many multiunit town homes on one lot. I am starting to feel like I live in New York.
1/11/2022 7:50 PM
150 Stop requiring so much parking on site 1/11/2022 7:20 PM 151 I'd like to see some guidelines for use of front yard areas and lawn equipment left there. I'd like to see more micro parks for kids to meet and play. I feel bad seeing kids limited to a little sidewalk space.
1/11/2022 7:15 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 24 / 68
152 I'm more about freedom than rules. I wouldn't want to tell any homeowner what to do with their property, as long as they take care of it and it's safe. 1/11/2022 5:30 PM
153 Use of Utilities 1/11/2022 4:41 PM
154 Create and Enforce rules with regards to privacy screens and fences. Several people in the city, including my neighbor, have planted Giant Timber Bamboo along the property line. The practical effect of this is a 30-40ft. fence, located 3ft. from the neighboring home. This is in effect a wall, blocking sunlight and air movement. The city should mandate that nothing over 10 feet in a continuous linear fashion be allowed within 10ft. of the property line. The use of these types of plants has a negative impact on both the property next door as well as the surrounding lots. Bamboo drops it's leaves 100% of the year, not in a seasonal fashion. This mess blows to at least the 4th property west of the current bamboo installation. Under no circumstances should someone be allowed to plant a linear wall that exceeds the height of any allowable residential building along the property line. 1/11/2022 4:26 PM
155 The ability to build additional living space above a dethatched garage 1/11/2022 4:21 PM 156 When existing bldgs are demo’ the new structure should fit in to the existing architecture and size of the surrounding neighborhood especially historic streets and homes 1/11/2022 4:00 PM
157 Keeping R1 areas R1. Not allowing ADU's in neighborhoods with primarily single car garages. 1/11/2022 3:35 PM 158 tearing down a single family home and building 3 tall skinny homes on 1 lot is too much! 1/11/2022 3:06 PM 159 We have a fire sprinkler code- not being addressed if you add greater congestion. The rebuilding of the same home design over and over again, lessens the beauty/growth potential and interest in the city for new buyers and then less tax monies to our city for home sales should the over and over design not be of interest. Height limits next to schools so they are visible to police and fire for emergencies. 2nd unit on property should be limited so that the schools don't get over crowded.
1/11/2022 2:53 PM
160 Impact of ADU's on parking, traffic, impact of potential increase in student numbers 1/11/2022 2:17 PM 161 View preservation ordinances. 1/11/2022 2:11 PM
162 Adequate parking, supporting infrastructure e.g. wider streets to handle additional traffic, open green spaces, aggressive non-law-abiding drivers and lack of policing or traffic enforcement - seems to have become non-existent.
1/11/2022 1:59 PM
163 All are actually important! 1/11/2022 1:33 PM
164 Overcrowding due to residential zoning changes will create parking problems. Residential street parking permits are needed.
1/11/2022 1:17 PM
165 Design parking garage space large enough to park specified number of cars. If it is a two car garage, design/build it big enough to park two normal size cars (not two Mini-Coopers or Priuses). I tired of everyone parking their cars in front of their garage doors and driveways. 1/11/2022 12:53 PM
166 Too many townhomes and condos to a lot 1/11/2022 12:36 PM 167 Density reduction is important to us. I heard that lots the size of ours were being approved for four units rather than two. Yikes?! We are viewing and hearing into our neighbors' homes from inside our home already.
1/11/2022 12:27 PM
168 Too many cars parked on streets because zoning is too dense so there’s not enough street parking and parking on peoples own properties
1/11/2022 12:15 PM
169 Sidewalks in the Golden Hills section are atrocious. They might as well not even exist. Also, overhead power lines are a menace to achieving a nice place to call home. 1/11/2022 12:08 PM
170 21/2 stories isn't 2 stories 1/11/2022 12:00 PM
171 The new builds look like dental offices and have parking spaces for mid-size to compact vehicles. SUVs are so commonplace, people in 3-on-a-lots have to park in the street. Also, the minute space allowed for new builds/remodels is insufficient. 1/11/2022 11:59 AM
172 Based on the need for more housing, standards should maximize the density of units on a lot.

Goals should be to encourage additional residents to come to Redondo Beach and grow our community.
1/11/2022 11:52 AM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 25 / 68
173 I think the most important item to consider when building and being part of the community, is having a well thought out project, using appropriate professionals, like architects, designers and builders, so that the expression of individuality is clear, purposeful, clean, attractive and makes sense. Half the building in RB looks retrofitted and "mish-moshed" together. 1/11/2022 11:38 AM
174 Excessive "noise" from homeowners who use their garages for "business purposes". I have a neighbor who periodically seems to be grinding tiles or other industrial stuff and makes quite a noise in the early mornings. Also, the neighbor across the street runs some sort of "business" where large trucks deliver and pickup large items and causing a bit of a traffic nuisance on our narrow residential street.
1/11/2022 11:35 AM
175 none. 1/11/2022 11:25 AM
176 High density housing negates the desireability of the neighborhood due to increased traffic and noise.
1/11/2022 11:19 AM
177 Limited number of units on one lot!!!! 1/11/2022 11:17 AM 178 Density downgrades in existing R3 Zones along The Artesia Cooridor 1/11/2022 11:14 AM 179 Sidewalk accessibility. 1/11/2022 11:14 AM
180 we must make sure that curb cuts for double garages do not eliminate any street parking spots--critical on 40 ft wide lots. also that garage requirements are not eliminated or lessened for ADUs.
1/11/2022 11:14 AM
181 Converting single homes into MDUs 1/11/2022 11:13 AM 182 Not allowing 2-on-a-lot builds for neighborhoods that aren't zoned to allow for that. 1/11/2022 11:11 AM 183 allow parking anywhere on property, not just in line with driveway (but not vehicles with expired licences or junk vehicles)
1/11/2022 11:11 AM
184 Quality of build 1/11/2022 11:08 AM
185 The current Beryl Heights RDGs appear to be sufficient for residential construction. However, the adjoining 100+ foot tall, 800,000 sqft Staples Center sized expansion of BCHD is wildly out of scale with the height, bulk and mass of the surrounding neighborhoods. RDGs need to bind at some level for the protection of surrounding neighborhood character, especially when the BCHD $12,500 per month senior housing is being commercially developed of 90%+ nonresidents of Redondo Beach. 1/11/2022 11:06 AM
186 Walking trails. 1/11/2022 11:05 AM
187 House design conforms to neighborhood. 1/11/2022 10:58 AM 188 The city is a total mess when doing construction or dealing with inspectors. NONE of them are consistent. They all make it up as they go. One tells you one thing and you do it and the next tells you no they were wrong you need to do this. It is beyond frustrating. Some of the things the city is asking for is ridiculous. If your entire street has an apron curb and you put your garage in the back they try to tell you that you now need to put a curb. ALSO why is the homeowner responsible for the curb and up to half the street when remodeling their home. That is the cities responsibility. So many frustrating experiences especially when you are trying to follow the "rules".
1/11/2022 10:58 AM
189 In general, we should trust our neighbors to make good decisions. Parking is difficult in our neighborhood, but perhaps we could address it by making more streets one-way and allowing parking on both sides.
1/11/2022 10:56 AM
190 No builder should be allowed to construct tall and skinny houses with windows that are perfectly lined up to give homeowners a direct view into their neighbors' house. In the early to mid-1970s, that was acceptable. (I have owned such a home for 40+ years.) Also, on hillsides, there should be some reasonable limit on how high above the house directly below it on the hill a new house can be. When my husband and I bought our house, a one-story single family home was our backyard adjacent neighbor. Soon after we moved in, that house was torn down and a 3-story one was built (two stories measured on its street side). It towers over our house, robbing us of any hope of privacy on our small patio as well as our bedroom on the second floor of our house, in the back, which faces this residential behemoth. We have no choice but to keep the blinds closed most of the day. Building height and design standards should be revised, if they haven't been yet, to prohibit this.
1/10/2022 11:14 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 26 / 68
191 Please do the following: * End single-family zoning * Increase allowed density and remove height maximums * End parking minimums * End single-use zoning 1/10/2022 10:11 PM
192 Compatibility to neighboring property, planning staff information inconsistencies, cozy relationships between developers and staff, environmentally friendly structures. 1/10/2022 8:05 PM
193 Removal of restrictions for Tandem parking configurations by removing the "clear back up space" requirement for single family residences as a vehicle parked in the driveway in front of the garage is no different than two vehicles parked in one in front of the other in a garage 1/10/2022 7:43 PM
194 Specific neighborhood characters are why people choose certain neighborhoods over others.

Every neighborhood had different characteristics, because of roads, hills, lot sizes, views.

Allowance of exterior stairs.
1/10/2022 7:40 PM
195 Reduce parking requirements, allow tandem parking, allow more height/volume so we can house more people
1/10/2022 7:33 PM
196 Golden Hills 1/10/2022 7:14 PM
197 Sidewalks, landscape palette for backyard too unless there is a list of trees, shrubs and grasses that are allowed and disallowed to avoid sidewalk uplift and plumbing issues from tree roots and invasive plant species (that could then also attract invasive pests) Would like to see as much permeable opportunities as possible to address design/aesthetics but also water quality
1/10/2022 7:12 PM
198 multi-family: size and # of bedrooms parking: reduce by requiring property owners to park in at least 1 of their 2 spaces in their garage; limit # of street parked cars to # of bedrooms, less garage size. Example, if 4 cars for a 2-car garage, 2 max on street. 1/10/2022 7:09 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 27 / 68

41.36% 378

21.33% 195

37.31% 341
Q8 Which of the following best describes your opinion of Redondo Beach processes for approving residential projects?
Answered: 914 Skipped: 79
TOTAL 914
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
The process
takes too lo...

The process is
just right –...

There should
be more...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
The process takes too long. It should be more straight-forward and less discretionary.

The process is just right – the amount of review ensures good development.

There should be more discretion for better development, even if the process needs to take longer.

Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 28 / 68

45.80% 447

33.09% 323

21.11% 206
Q9 Should Planning standards focus on neighborhood compatibility through the regulatory permit process for new housing and alterations to existing homes?
Answered: 976 Skipped: 17
TOTAL 976
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes, this is
very important
Yes, this is
somewhat...

No,
neighborhood...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes, this is very important
Yes, this is somewhat important
No, neighborhood compatibility should not be a consideration for individual home projects Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 29 / 68

12.23% 118

45.49% 439

34.72% 335

7.56% 73
Q10 Often, there are a-typical situations in which applying pure objective standards doesn’t achieve the intent of a specific requirement. In these cases, some flexibility may be appropriate. Which of the following is the most appropriate process to allow for exceptions?
Answered: 965 Skipped: 28
TOTAL 965
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Full staff
discretion t...

Staff
discretion t...

Planning
Commission...

Require
standards to...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Full staff discretion to modify/waive standards
Staff discretion to modify or waive standards based on specific circumstances/ conditions, with written findings Planning Commission approval through modification or variance process Require standards to be met without flexibility
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 30 / 68

83.32% 799

16.68% 160
Q11 Do you think the current height maximum (30-feet, 2-stories) is still appropriate for Redondo Beach neighborhoods?
Answered: 959 Skipped: 34
TOTAL 959
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 31 / 68

14.15% 136

13.94% 134

71.90% 691
Q12 Which of the following is the appropriate height level for single-family and low-density neighborhoods in Redondo Beach?
Answered: 961 Skipped: 32
TOTAL 961
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Lower than the
current, les...

Higher than
the current,...

The current
height limit...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Lower than the current, less than 30-feet
Higher than the current, allow 3-stories
The current height limit is appropriate
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 32 / 68

37.33% 321

62.67% 539
Q13 Should the new standards differentiate and lower the maximum height of a flat roof?
Answered: 860 Skipped: 133
TOTAL 860
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 33 / 68

31.38% 268

35.13% 300

42.62% 364

12.30% 105

4.57% 39
Q14 Which of the following is most appropriate for the new standards for roof decks? (You may select more than one answer)
Answered: 854 Skipped: 139
Total Respondents: 854
# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 Current standards for roof decks are ok but they should govern resident-installed temporary/makeshift structures (e.g. gazebos, awnings, tenting, lighting arrays) that exceed the structure height restrictions. And the brightness of exterior lighting should be restricted. 1/31/2022 7:36 PM
2 Have more consistency. One property grandfathered in is not going to work. This is not fair. 1/31/2022 1:38 PM 3 ensure that decks and top floor enclosures in lieu of decks do not cause the structure to exceed the height limit
1/31/2022 11:49 AM
4 Privacy is super important. If the deck can be properly screened so the sight and sounds of people up there doesn't bother the neighbors. A roof top deck is a great way to allow more outdoor space. 2nd floor decks may be even better for privacy. But don't allow this outdoor space to count for the FAR requirements and make the house bigger. 1/29/2022 10:10 AM
5 Allow all roof decks that are structurally sound. Reduce the current restrictions. 1/28/2022 8:25 PM 6 I have no opinion on this now 1/28/2022 6:30 PM
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Maintain
current...

Continue to
allow roof...

Provide more
specific...

Allow roof
decks only...

Do not allow
roof decks a...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Maintain current standards allowing roof decks without specific restriction.

Continue to allow roof decks with standards that are specific in terms of maximum area and required setbacks from the edge of the building.

Provide more specific standards for screening to protect privacy of adjacent properties Allow roof decks only above first floors and not higher.

Do not allow roof decks at all
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 34 / 68
7 don't care 1/28/2022 11:01 AM
8 Certain sections of city could benefit from roof decks, other sections would compromise the privacy of residents and visitors.
1/28/2022 10:09 AM
9 Protecting and respecting the privacy of adjacent properties is valuable in our neighborhoods. 1/26/2022 2:24 PM 10 Rooftop decks should never be situated as too look down into the adjacent yard or windows!!!! 1/26/2022 1:34 PM 11 Rooftop decks are too high on the 2nd floor. They become an even more behemoth eyesore from an aesthetic perspective, and they are a menace to neighbors' privacy and visibility of the sky. A rooftop deck allowed means it goes even higher than the 30 feet once a shade is put up, and this breaks the 30 foot rule and is unacceptable. 1/25/2022 9:32 PM
12 Is the roof deck the same as a mezzanine? On the Summary of Zoning Amendments Nov. 20, 2003, #11 states Roof Decks and mezzanines prohibited in R-1 south of Knob Hill, why not in District 3. The roof decks are three stories, great for the owner of the home, what about those residents who live in single/two story homes? No view!! Is that fair??? At one time, there was a view of fireworks, with the addition of the third-floor, someone has a view, not me! 1/25/2022 9:25 PM
13 increase the OLS bonus on roof top decks 1/25/2022 2:10 PM 14 Consider noise, visual privacy but don't need arbitrary max area since roof style and architectural design of building affects that. Setbacks could be standard 1/25/2022 1:44 PM
15 It would be hard on residents with a view if new standards allowed neighbors to build in front of their view. I think some sense of grandfather clause is useful here. I have no problem with different rules if there were new buildings with no old neighbors, such as new construction at the galleria or the power plant.
1/24/2022 6:05 PM
16 I do think there needs to be consideration of neighbors privacy and views. Everyone should have equal access to advantages of their properties.
1/24/2022 10:46 AM
17 Require roof decks be accessed from the second floor, or third floor if permitted. Prohibit roof decks on the top floor. Then a shade structure would remain below the building's overall roofline.
1/23/2022 3:56 PM
18 Roof decks above second story houses should not exceed the maximum second story height. 1/23/2022 3:10 PM 19 Roof decks are a great use of space and residential homes should be able to take advantage of that space.
1/23/2022 10:48 AM
20 Roof decks facing the street with railings can provide "Eyes on the street". Having setbacks here would defeat this purpose.
1/22/2022 9:51 PM
21 If we lived at the beach, it would be nice, however not close if in Redondo Beach (North). 1/22/2022 9:05 AM 22 Once again stay out of the design business you are not good at it and you are not professionals
1/20/2022 4:01 PM
23 As it is, newer homes are talker and take away sunlight from neighboring lower/older structures. Roof decks are not really safe either and further reduce privacy from dwelling to dwelling.
1/20/2022 3:20 PM
24 IMO in Golden Hills houses are so close and we have so little outdoor space and almost no sizeable parks. We support roof decks for families to enjoy fresh air and views. Privacy is an issue, but mandating screenings would be difficult in many cases since you are always able to be seen by neighbors due to proximity of houses.
1/20/2022 2:38 PM
25 Require more transparent, not walled railing, to minimize blocking views of other residents. 1/20/2022 11:54 AM 26 A roof deck would be a flat roof and should be lower per question 13. 1/20/2022 11:29 AM 27 No opinion. 1/20/2022 9:53 AM
28 Definitely allow and encourage roof decks for multi family buildings to be used as common areas and as green/living roofs to cool the building.
1/19/2022 11:36 PM
29 Also make sure real estate agents are aware of the current and new regulations. When we were looking at houses, we were told by many agents that while the roof deck(s) may have a setback when viewing, once we purchased we could remove them for a better view or to 1/19/2022 5:10 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 35 / 68
personalize the home. There also appeared to be limited safety regulations on all the roof decks.
30 Limit roof decks on commercial structures that are only attempting to add another story. Ex:
the Legado property is adding a roof deck on top of their hotel, which in essence is adding another story to the hotel.
1/14/2022 8:57 PM
31 It seems that roof decks result in 3 story houses which seem too high 1/13/2022 9:32 PM 32 No to monster houses 1/12/2022 1:44 AM
33 Cannot have umbrellas or structures that impede view of others from rooftops 1/11/2022 10:18 PM 34 Expand the roof decks without setbacks from the edge of a building. 1/11/2022 8:13 PM 35 There is no privacy from my neighbor's roof decks. 1/11/2022 7:47 PM 36 Roof decks should fall within the 30 ft height restriction. 1/11/2022 4:35 PM 37 Dangerous - understand the attraction but dangerous 1/11/2022 1:44 PM 38 We live in a higher than normal density in North Redondo Beach without too much outdoor living space. I think an appropriately designed roof deck with views is a great idea for homeowners.
1/11/2022 11:51 AM
39 The privacy of the surrounding homes is very important, but due to the density of the area, it is hard, plus, the homeowner should be able to maximize their living space, especially considering the amount they spend of a home and the beauty of the surrounding. 1/11/2022 11:26 AM
40 allow roof decks as they are allowed now, with the limitation that any solid fencing or railing around the deck must fall within the 30 ft height limitation. 1/11/2022 11:25 AM
41 If there is a roof deck in the design, the height of the house, including the deck's privacy and safety screening walls should not exceed the city's current 30- foot height limitation. The same method of calculating a building's height should apply to any shade cover constructed or installed later over the deck. Also, any shade cover should not obstruct the views of the surrounding homes.
1/10/2022 11:35 PM
42 And should not exceed maximum height limits (rather than be in addition to maximum height) 1/10/2022 9:03 PM 43 This needs to be addressed by neighborhood specific impacts and look at the overall common sense approach. If you can look out your window into a neighbors yard than there is no reason to restrict having a balcony that requires screening beyond safety rails nor a side or rear setback restriction different from the building it is on. The Roof decks might be better controlled by counting it as part of the overall FAR so that there is less built footprint on the lot allowing for more storm water retention / percolation on site? The goal should not be to restrict the amount of exterior space being developed but to increase it and reduce building footprints. 1/10/2022 8:26 PM
44 Require reduction of roof run-off by incorporating landscaping on the roof deck 1/10/2022 7:20 PM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 36 / 68

26.02% 224

46.92% 404

27.06% 233
Q15 If roof decks are permitted, should shade structures or covers be allowed on them?
Answered: 861 Skipped: 132
TOTAL 861
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes,
unrestricted
Yes, but
limited to a...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes, unrestricted
Yes, but limited to a portion of the deck area
No
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 37 / 68

48.86% 407

24.37% 203

20.17% 168

6.60% 55
Q16 Which of the following is most appropriate for the new standards for mezzanines?
Answered: 833 Skipped: 160
TOTAL 833
# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 An enclosed mezzanine should be regarded as an additional story. 1/31/2022 2:20 PM 2 Maintain current standards as long as the mezzanine roof does not exceed the 30' height limit 1/31/2022 11:49 AM 3 NO mezzanines! 1/29/2022 11:46 AM
4 Mezzanines should not be allowed; they look like a third story. If flat roof houses are held to a height shorter than 30' from the previous question, this would be resolved. 1/29/2022 10:10 AM
5 Stop this silly waste of a requirement. It's just a stupid game you are playing with the interior design of the house. Let people do what they want with the floor plan of their house. 1/28/2022 8:25 PM
6 Don’t like to have mezzanines because it block building next door. 1/28/2022 6:40 PM 7 Don’t know 1/28/2022 6:30 PM
8 question is not clear, i.e. illustrations 1/28/2022 3:37 PM 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Maintain
current...

Allow
mezzanines a...

Allow
unenclosed...

Other (please
specify)

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Maintain current standards allowing enclosed and partially enclosed mezzanines to be constructed above the second story (all examples above)
Allow mezzanines as shown in the 2nd example, open to either the first or second floor below Allow unenclosed mezzanines within the envelope of the home only if open to the first floor below (no solid walls, only railing from mezzanine to room below)
Other (please specify)
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 38 / 68
9 Mezzanines are ok if current height limit is lowered. 1/28/2022 11:06 AM 10 don't care 1/28/2022 11:01 AM
11 I don’t know 1/28/2022 9:09 AM
12 No mezzanines 1/28/2022 8:56 AM
13 none of the above 1/27/2022 8:06 PM
14 none 1/26/2022 3:41 PM
15 NO MEZZANINES PERIOD!!!!!! 1/26/2022 1:34 PM
16 No mezzanines, period, especially since they give the impression of 3 stories. The level limit is 2 in Redondo Beach. Allowing a mezzanine is a blatant breaking of the 2 level rule. 1/25/2022 9:32 PM
17 How is it possible to have a third floor (mezzanine) and stay under 30 feet? I would like to suggest that someone look at recent plans for newer construction and actually say they are 30 feet??? The home next to these are two-story and the newer construction with a mezzanine is so much higher! Don't claim it's on a slope!!
1/25/2022 9:25 PM
18 I'm not sure I get it, but basically a mezzanine in example 1 is like an enclosed roof deck. so I would say you have to work on roof decks and mezzanines and make a consistent policy for both.
1/24/2022 6:05 PM
19 Mezzanines should not be allowed. They are just a way to get 3 stories and more footage 1/24/2022 1:06 PM 20 Not sure—don’t feel I know enough 1/24/2022 10:46 AM 21 Do not allow mezzanines if they restrict the view of other houses in the neighborhood. 1/24/2022 10:09 AM 22 The definition of a mezzanine seems to have been misused. The roof should not bump up to create a mezzanine. Illustration 1. & 3. create a third floor 1/23/2022 3:56 PM
23 Does not matter 1/23/2022 3:51 PM
24 I don't understand mezzanine concept, so am not able to respond intelligently to above question.
1/23/2022 3:10 PM
25 No mezzanines. From a neighbor's point of view, this is like having a three-story house next to you.
1/22/2022 1:25 PM
26 Only 2 stories allowed 1/22/2022 8:37 AM
27 Please stay out of the design business and stay out of personal property rights. Also hiring a consultant to put this survey together is a colossal a waste of money and time. The perfect example of meddling overreach yet again.
1/20/2022 4:01 PM
28 Only allow mezzanines where there is an actual view, not your next door neighbor’s house interior.
1/20/2022 3:20 PM
29 These all seem like they are a 3rd story to me. Don't see much difference of which type of mezzanine for light and blocking views. Seems like allowing a 3rd floor IMO. Not really in favor of exceeding the current max height allowable in new builds. Many of the newest homes in Golden Hills are enormous and loom over the 80's tall and skinny homes and completely dominate the few small bungalows that remain in the neighborhood. 1/20/2022 2:38 PM
30 Allow mezzanines as long as they stay within the height limit of 30 feet. 1/20/2022 11:29 AM 31 I favor up to 3 stories so mezzanine could not act as a 4th story 1/19/2022 10:44 PM 32 Don't allow mezzanines at all. 1/18/2022 1:33 PM
33 No mezzanines. 1/17/2022 2:08 PM
34 no opinion 1/15/2022 10:06 PM
35 No that familiar with this issue to make a good selection. 1/14/2022 8:57 PM 36 I don't understand this enough to render an opinion. 1/13/2022 9:12 AM 37 Allow mezzanines only if under the 30ft limit 1/12/2022 7:51 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 39 / 68
38 Do not allow mezzanines. 1/11/2022 10:02 PM
39 allow all options but above 2nd and 3rd floors. 1/11/2022 8:13 PM 40 All of the above are okay 1/11/2022 5:33 PM
41 So long as they meet all the other requirements, they should be fine. 1/11/2022 4:35 PM 42 Mezzanines should not be allowed. 1/11/2022 4:08 PM
43 The first picture is the "ugliest" in that it makes a totally boxy appearance 1/11/2022 3:48 PM 44 No mezzanines, limit overall structure to 30 Ft. 1/11/2022 2:07 PM 45 So long as house is no more than 30' - 2 stories, okay 1/11/2022 1:44 PM 46 I would prefer no allowance of mezzanines given the density of our neighborhoods. 1/11/2022 12:38 PM 47 I don't know, looks like 3 floors to me 1/11/2022 12:06 PM 48 allow maximum owner flexibilty 1/11/2022 11:57 AM
49 Mezzanines should not be enclosed on the 2nd story above the 30'. The options you give above are not easily understood.
1/11/2022 11:38 AM
50 Decrease maximum height limit to 27 feet. 1/11/2022 11:30 AM 51 They should not go above the 30 feet. 1/11/2022 11:26 AM 52 Don't allow mezzanines. They are a 3 story permit dodge 1/11/2022 11:21 AM 53 Not sure 1/11/2022 11:19 AM
54 Mezz should never be allowed to exceed 30 feet. Current standards are fine. 1/11/2022 11:10 AM 55 Too many recent new builds are done with bathrooms and closets on the mezzanine level which essentially circumvents the 3rd story. So just allow a 3rd Story within the current height restrictions but require it to be open to below but restrict it from having full bathrooms and closets so that it does not become a sleeping room.
1/10/2022 8:26 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 40 / 68

57.58% 486

32.46% 274

9.95% 84
Q17 Which of the following is most appropriate for the new standards for semi-subterranean and basement levels?
Answered: 844 Skipped: 149
TOTAL 844
# OTHER (PLEASE SPECIFY) DATE
1 allow semi-subterranean/basement levels based on neighborhood topography and surrounding buildings
1/31/2022 5:15 PM
2 allow semi-subterranean levels and basements and require them to be counted as a story...why aren't they counted as a story? Is a mezzanine counted as a story if on top of the 2nd floor? what is the purpose or consequence of not counting a level as a story? 1/31/2022 11:49 AM
3 As long as it isn't allowed to just dig down on a flat lot to make a subterrain garage like in Hermosa Beach
1/29/2022 10:10 AM
4 Let people build whatever size basement they want. Why does the city get out of limiting the internal living space of a house. If someone wants to build three levels of basement, let them! 1/28/2022 8:25 PM
5 I do not think basement should be allowed to dug out especially on a flat lot. I have experienced the noise and damage to my home living next door to this type of construction which did not follow current design guidelines and many other points. 1/28/2022 3:20 PM
6 don't care 1/28/2022 11:01 AM
7 I don't know. 1/28/2022 10:16 AM
8 ?? 1/26/2022 3:41 PM
9 Anything creating the perception of 3 stories, regardless of what the cause is, should be avoided.
1/25/2022 9:32 PM
10 I don't know much about this one. I would like to hear more pros/cons. How does the 1/25/2022 9:25 PM 0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Maintain
current...

Maintain this
definition o...

Do not allow
semi-subterr...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Maintain current standards that do not count semi-subterranean/basement levels as a story Maintain this definition only for sloping lots and do not allow on lots that are substantially flat Do not allow semi-subterranean levels or basements at all (i.e. require them to be counted as a "story") Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 41 / 68
construction effect other homes. Is there/will there be a problem with erosion? How much distance between the homes?
11 not qualified to answer what is structurally safe. 1/25/2022 1:43 PM 12 as long as the building is structurally sound and the neighborhood looks good, go for it. this is a great way to add square footage without impacting the beauty. 1/24/2022 6:05 PM
13 Not sure—do not have enough knowledge to give informed opinion 1/24/2022 10:46 AM 14 Allow all lots to have subterranean levels for properties that develop ADUs and second units.

Subterranean levels are naturally cooler, which will be valuable on extremely hot days. 1/23/2022 3:56 PM
15 Why do we have basements, we do not live in weather like the EAST Coast? 1/22/2022 9:05 AM 16 Please stop asking stupid questions like those above stay out of the design business stay out of the interpretation business stay out of personal property rights. The choices given on most of these questions are oversimplified and lend themselves to a lopsided result in my opinion. 1/20/2022 4:01 PM
17 Not sure. 1/20/2022 2:38 PM
18 Also let them build 3 stories or more so who cares. 1/20/2022 10:30 AM 19 Allow 1/20/2022 9:54 AM
20 To be clear - semi-subterranean or basements are acceptable, however they must be counted as a story. Thank you.
1/19/2022 5:10 PM
21 We have one of these and it does make the building appear taller 1/12/2022 11:24 AM 22 allow for basement-level dwellings on all levels. 1/11/2022 8:13 PM 23 Your picture does not show where 30 feet height starts and stops. Hard to tell what you mean. 1/11/2022 3:48 PM 24 Allow subterranean basements (if finished) to be counted as square footage! If it’s used as living space, it should count towards the overall sq footage of the house. 1/11/2022 11:26 AM
25 Either allow 3-stories as too many places use this as habitable space (game rooms, family rooms, etc) or count the floor area so to restrict it with the FAR requirements. 1700 Carlon Ln was built as 3rd Story w/ kitchen and advertised such buy the developer when selling it. But technically this qualified as basement and was not considered a "story". The FAR could have restricted this on such a small lot.
1/10/2022 8:26 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 42 / 68

36.93% 315

63.07% 538
Q18 Should balconies be allowed to encroach into required setbacks? Answered: 853 Skipped: 140
TOTAL 853
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 43 / 68

73.61% 636

26.39% 228
Q19 Should this continue to be allowed?
Answered: 864 Skipped: 129
TOTAL 864
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 44 / 68

30.77% 264

13.75% 118

55.48% 476
Q20 Where a property can take access from an alley, should the garage be required to be located in the rear?
Answered: 858 Skipped: 135
TOTAL 858
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes, with no
driveway acc...

Yes, and allow
a driveway f...

No, it should
be the...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes, with no driveway access allowed from the street to park a car in front of house (access from alley only) Yes, and allow a driveway from the street frontage to park a car in front of the house No, it should be the homeowner’s option to put garage in front or in back Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 45 / 68

87.84% 751

47.13% 403

35.67% 305
Q21 Which of the following garage arrangements do you support for new homes and major modifications? (You may select multiple options) Answered: 855 Skipped: 138
Total Respondents: 855
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Two-car
garage,...

Two-car
garage, tand...

One-car garage
plus uncover...

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Two-car garage, side-by-side
Two-car garage, tandem within garage
One-car garage plus uncovered tandem parking space (in driveway) Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 46 / 68

63.94% 548

36.06% 309
Q22 A curb cut allows a driveway across the sidewalk and reduces streetparking to allow access to the property. Should the City allow a double curb cut for front-facing two-car garages?
Answered: 857 Skipped: 136
TOTAL 857
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 47 / 68

61.23% 529

2.20% 19

36.57% 316
Q23 Do you think that the current 6-foot height limit for side and rear property line fences and walls is appropriate?
Answered: 864 Skipped: 129
TOTAL 864
0% 10% 20% 30% 40% 50% 60% 70% 80% 90% 100%
Yes
No, it should
be lower
No, it should
be higher

ANSWER CHOICES RESPONSES
Yes
No, it should be lower
No, it should be higher
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 48 / 68
Q24 Before you go, please share any other thoughts you have regarding standards for residential development related to either the process or the requirements you would like to see included.

Answered: 341 Skipped: 652
# RESPONSES DATE
1 1. Regulate exterior lighting, both brightness and hours - many of the newer houses have embraced excessively bright and too many exterior lights - these lights shine into neighboring windows through curtains and blinds, and if there are multiple residences illuminated, the aggregate light is a virtual daylight. 2. City code 5-2.105(e) requires trash bins not be visible from the street except for the three days around trash day. Should there be something in a building's plans that identifies provision for trash bin storage to meet the code? 1/31/2022 7:36 PM
2 We don't want Redondo Beach to ever become like Manhattan Beach where gigantic houses fill the lots in every way. We value outdoor space around houses and outdoor space without houses. Thank you.
1/31/2022 7:22 PM
3 Stop with the dense housing and ADU’s! Parking is horrible. 1/31/2022 6:11 PM 4 allow A/C units within setback if they meet a reasonable noise level to be established with a future study
1/31/2022 5:15 PM
5 The residential development recently has seemed to accelerate to the point where the older, more modest, yet charming styles have given way to these offensively grandiose styles of new homes at an alarming rate. This greatly affects the feeling of the neighborhood in a negative way. It helps fuel the consumerism that ultimately exacerbates the upward pressure on home prices in the area, which will continue to drive out working and middle-class families and forever alter the character of the city.
1/31/2022 3:13 PM
6 please, no more regulations. your planning process is so complicated even the city planners have a hard time interpreting the code.
1/31/2022 2:29 PM
7 In north Redondo many sidewalks are not friendly to moms with infants, elderly, couples, or young families out for a walk, or young children on trikes/bikes, because they are narrow, have power poles and signs mounted on them and are uneven from driveways due to no parkways. (Probably originally developed to maximize sellable acreage as an unincorporated area outside of city zoning controls.) Please look into options to improve the situation. Also, 7 ft side and rear fencing in north Redondo would provide more privacy in neighborhoods consisting of more than one condominium townhome on a single lot, and tall & skinnies on a narrow lot. 1/31/2022 2:20 PM
8 On question 8, I believe you missed an option; the choice is basically rigid-and-quick or flexible-and-slow. It should be flexible-and-quick. If you give front-line staffers the discretion to make choices on certain simple alteration requests, things should go quickly. Right now, it seems like every obvious modification has to go through some big committee meeting. 1/31/2022 2:09 PM
9 The standards are not followed. There are violations all over the city in every city block. It makes no sense to have different standards for adjacent lots of similar size but we do. 1/31/2022 1:38 PM
10 1. reduce the large curb cuts that are being done with new construction and eat more street parking 2. disallow planting of trees or bushes that grow to over 20-30' (except the tall palm trees) 3. Add a view and fire safety ordinance to require homeowners to maintain and trim large trees if a complaint is raised 4. ensure that garages are functional for new construction or remodels, meaning do the residents have room to pull in and back out of their garage easily so that they don't end up not using their garage and parking on the street instead. This happens with the 2 or more on a lot situation as space is so limited. 1/31/2022 11:49 AM
11 I support controlling density to preserve the quality of life in Redondo 1/31/2022 10:00 AM 12 Just Noticing that the "Sleepy little Beach Town" Feel is GONE 1/30/2022 5:13 PM 13 limit growth of 2 on a lot buildings in north redondo. 1/30/2022 4:44 PM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 49 / 68
14 With more and more single family homes being torn down and 2 on a lot homes going up, street parking for guests is becoming difficult. Especially on streets where you can only park on one side. Permit parking, with a limited number per household, may become necessary. 1/30/2022 11:43 AM
15 Central Redondo is being overpopulated by builders buying old single family homes and converting to R3 condos causing parking problems and overcrowding 1/30/2022 11:37 AM
16 Thank you 1/30/2022 7:03 AM
17 Do away with your mandatory tree selection process. If owners are to pay for tree then they shall pick what is suitable for them to maintain. NOT THE CITY 1/29/2022 3:11 PM
18 Thank you for using community input 1/29/2022 11:51 AM 19 Planning commission should also address the noise, dirty, parking issues during building. 1/29/2022 11:46 AM 20 Redondo Beach is a beautiful city. Parking will continue to be a problem, so please continue enforcement of RV's and unused vehicles on the street and require more off street parking for new developments.
1/29/2022 10:10 AM
21 Trees should be maintained as much as possible 1/29/2022 9:08 AM 22 Maintain the charm and local flair of the community. Thank you 1/28/2022 8:31 PM 23 The city needs to consider the fact that most of the residential inventory was built post-war late 40's and early 50's. ALL of this housing is at END OF LIFE. Every house we have rehabbed or demoed was a structural and infrastructural mess. The ONLY VIABLE economic outcome is to allow complete rebuilding and START HELPING the people that are trying to fix all of this rather than CREATING NEW impediments. Do the math. Count all of the houses and determine the rate at which they are currently being fixed or replaced. We aren't even coming close to maintaining an average 50-year life span of a house! Planning will be FORCED to WAKE UP to these hard facts. Sooner or later. If RB really wants to be a premier city it should really sit back and imagine what that city would look like. This slow moving train wreck of termite infested, rusted water and sewer piped, dangerously wired, cramped, low-ceilinged, tiny bathroomed, crazy floorplanned housing inventory isn't A PREMIER CITY. RB is going to have to allow builders to redevelop this place and consider reaching out to builders as a group and ask us what makes housing so expensive. The answer is the Planning and Building, and Engineering Depts! And really high Park fees for a new unit are ridiculous when we have the Best Park in the World: The BEACH! City needs to ask for our help to BUILD REDONDO and into a premier city. It hasn't been a sleepy beach bungalow city for a long time. It's time to grow up and accept that it is uniquely situated in the heart of the South Bay with a unique deep water marine canyon leading to what could be a one-of-a-kind feature in the entire Santa Monica Bay - a deep water marina. Our Beach Life should be facilitating the enjoyment of our best assets: beach and port. We need a mass transit system that helps people get from the 405 to the neighborhoods, and from the neighborhoods to the beach, marina, and pier. We also need to plan for a revolution in transportation that is coming inside the next 10 years: VTOL aircraft replacing automobiles. RB should LEAD the South Bay by building VTOL Ports at several locations: South Bay Galleria, RUHS/Civic Center, Marina/Pier, Anderson Park, Green Line station, and Riviera Village. These will connect with LAX, Torrance, and Long Beach airports. See, this is what a premier city would be doing and then supporting its residents with new housing and transportation. Lead, follow, or get out of the way. David Fahrney 310-720- 3247
1/28/2022 8:25 PM
24 Parking - close to beach replacing old bungalows with multi unit buildings make sure no street parking spaces are taken away. Parking - make sure any new units have garage space in the property for at least 2 cars per unit
1/28/2022 7:33 PM
25 My major concern was the 10 fts. alley between houses around it. Even tho that is the standard law but have to consider the height, windows and vents that are being build and facing the neighbors house. That’s what happen to my house when new building was build right next to ours. Their fire place vent and window was all facing directly to my kids rooms windows. It was really impacted our life living there. So please make the new planning structure more strict and consider other people live next door. 1/28/2022 6:40 PM
26 As a new resident I find RB to be a hodgepodge of housing. Cottages, condos, apartment building and single family homes all on the same block. I have no idea how it came to this but I don't see how you can go back now.
1/28/2022 6:35 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 50 / 68
27 Do not allow concessions because there will be low income housing included. Keep the density rules & parking requirements in place for all projects. 1/28/2022 6:32 PM
28 When new buildings are being permitted, please be sure balconies are not placed in view of adjacent properties private bedrooms. This has been a VERY disturbing issue for us with a 2017 completed construction project. Encroaching on our personal space is maddening. 1/28/2022 5:22 PM
29 I want to live in a city that allows homeowners & builders the freedom to choose the shape, style and amenities they want in their home and not live in a cookie cutter looking neighborhood dictated by "well intended" bureaucrats. Allow architects to create and you will be amazed at what you will get. Enough with the hand cuffs. 1/28/2022 5:09 PM
30 none to share 1/28/2022 4:15 PM
31 Development in the last 10 years has not come close to following existing design guidelines.

The planning department seemed to favor the developers over homeowners when interacting with the department. The developer were allowed to max out their lots and not follow existing design guidelines to the detriment of nearby homeowners. I have remodeled my home several times in the 30+ years I have owned my own. My remodels were held to a strict interpretation of the design guidelines when at the same time I watch nearby developers get away with building homes that did meet guidelines and building codes. Your planning staff is very familiar with my issues as I was visiting the building department several times a week with issues with home built next door to me. Please feel free to contact me for more detail. Anna Conway 310- 748-5228
1/28/2022 3:20 PM
32 New construction and upgrades/modifications to existing homes should be architecturally designed such that horizontal hard surface (driveways, walkways, etc.) square footage be kept to a minimum.
1/28/2022 3:17 PM
33 Limit the materials used for fencing. A lot of variation in RB makes it look inappropriate. 1/28/2022 2:32 PM 34 Parking and views are so important! There was a note on Nextdoor today about a healthcare person who got home from a shift at midnight & regularly has to park in red zone and gets parking tickets because there is no street parking. Proximity to the ocean and having a little open space and seeing the water from one's home is one of the features that makes Redondo such a treasure and helps everyone's mental health. When lots are built out to the maximum limit where there is no more green space or trees, and we are separated by fences into our little boxes, erodes the overall well being of a community. I understand the need for more housing, but question density at the expense of the other features that promote the mental well being in a community and make Redondo Beach such a gem. When you approve developments please make sure there is enough parking. We know that there will be at least 2- 3 cars per household, even if there is public transit available. And do not allow driveways to take up all of the street area leaving no place for street parking, it is just not a feasible model. I am a 3rd generation Redondo resident and homeowner. There is no place like this. You are the stewards of our city. Please don't forget this.
1/28/2022 2:22 PM
35 You asked me to share my thoughts...... Release all the current Planning Commission members whom have allowed/passed permits which have enabled builders to destroy our neighborhoods! YES!!! Here is a perfect example: when approximately 1,000 sq ft homes were originally built, dad had a car and mom stayed home to raise the children, cook, clean. do volunteer work and be a neighbor. So, if there were 10 homes on a block there were 10 cars registered to 10 residents. I happen to own a unit in 3-on-a-lot. This is what it looks like on my typical block..... Unit-A: mom. dad. teenage son= 3 vehicles Unit -B: Mom, Dad, 2 adult children+ mother-in-law,( garage now turned into a "family room")this equals 6 vehicles. Opps, daughter just got married so "new" son moves in with his van. Unit-C: 2adults =2cars This is a typical number of residents that own a total of 10-11 vehicles (2 trucks + 1 suv + 1 van+ 7 regular) and live on 50 ft frontage (minus 12 ft drive /access) = less than 40 ft in front of their residence. Next door to us is a 7 unit apartment building... another 10 cars!!! You know where I am going... Just doing simple math; originally back-in-the-day, 10 small homes=10cars on a block. On one side of the street ! ! ! Ever think about that? Only one side! And...now do the simple math x2 for both sides of the street !!! I commend you folks for taking the steps to hopefully improve "the system". Your survey is most insightful. Thank you for your time and all that you do :) Please stop the developers and those commissioners that might be indirectly filling their pockets. Redondo will never be the same... never...can't go backwards...but, now it is your responsibility! Most Sincerely
1/28/2022 1:50 PM
36 Thank you for allowing my participation. 1/28/2022 1:19 PM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 51 / 68
37 I appreciate you engaging the community here, but please take the results of this survey with a grain of salt. With these types of hot issues (Housing and Development in Redondo) you are likely to get a skewed number of responses from a vocal minority who are critical of the current standards and situation. Reality is most people will respond with their own self-interest based on their current property’s situation. The more ambivalent majority will likely have a more rational, open-minded perspective.
1/28/2022 11:45 AM
38 Not sure if one exists, but it worked be beneficial for homeowners to have access to a checklist of requirements.
1/28/2022 11:28 AM
39 Smaller homes would result in a smaller footprint, which would help the environment as well as our natural resources.
1/28/2022 11:06 AM
40 most of this doesn't matter to me 1/28/2022 11:01 AM 41 I believe there should be greater help in permitting existing homes to be updated and new standards should apply to new builds. The density is a problem and the original zoning should be respected and not so easily considered for development companies to destroy the quaintness of the area. Blighted homes should be handled but perfectly fine single family homes that are leveled and 3 units replace creates overcrowding and impacts the privacy of the surrounding neighbors negatively.
1/28/2022 10:22 AM
42 Current conditions (previous 5 years) have reduced knowledge and experience of Building Department employees.
1/28/2022 10:09 AM
43 No multi family housing permitted. Single dwelling on single lots only! 1/28/2022 10:05 AM 44 I didn't answer the question if development was good, bad or nothing. The question is too restricted. Some development if the city has made an improvement but not all. There are areas in the city that are underdeveloped and are eyesores like the power plant, them you see a huge project underway on 190th , which is already overcrowded. Sorry , typing this on my phone:) It would be nice to see a balance of development throughout the city. Also, the permit process is so very slow , they always seem to be understaffed.
1/28/2022 9:53 AM
45 There should be less parking access to those who don’t live on the street (I.e. students from neighboring school parking on residential street)
1/28/2022 9:21 AM
46 Thank you for allowing input in this manner. 1/28/2022 9:14 AM 47 Redondo Beach needs much more green space and trees. The setbacks are too small Curb cuts have nearly eliminated public parking on many streets. Over building has given many neighborhoods a crowded, oppressive feeling.
1/28/2022 9:09 AM
48 Require off-street parking based on number of beds/baths. Require a percent of low-water use landscape on every lot.
1/28/2022 8:56 AM
49 I would like to discuss more. Some of my answers needed more education... 1/28/2022 8:52 AM 50 The RDG focus on all of the wrong things. Massing is running rampant while you worry about where to put a garage. Working with the city is extremely difficult and a horrible process. 1/28/2022 8:48 AM
51 Redondo is so crowded. Please change construction rules to encourage garages and parking on your property versus the street. I also detest the flat-roof modern homes that appear so much taller than neighbors. Slim-line a/c units should have broader placement options. 1/28/2022 8:39 AM
52 Refrain from lot splitting. Enforcement of zoning near businesses. Traffic slowing process to make RB safer for families.
1/28/2022 8:38 AM
53 Taking care not to build so it blocks someone's view. 1/28/2022 8:33 AM 54 the square footage allowed is too high. the townhomes being built now are ridiculously large.

The visual and parking impact is harming the city.
1/27/2022 11:17 PM
55 Delete single family zoning and make more affordable housing. Costs are insane. 1/27/2022 9:59 PM 56 We would like to see the zoning preserved in residential neighborhoods and not allow R1 to convert to apartments or higher density housing. We live on the avenues within 500 ft of a bus stop and this should not allow the redevelopment of more housing. Keep the neighborhoods charming and with the family and beach town feel. We do not want to see zoning changed in these areas to build more housing. Out community needs better design standards- look at PV 1/27/2022 5:29 AM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 52 / 68
and the beautiful neighborhoods. Some areas of Redondo are so out of character for our lovely beachside City.
57 I would like to see a limit of no more than 2 townhomes per lot. 1/26/2022 8:48 PM 58 Parking is an issue all over the place, the city needs to fix this problem. Homeowners have so many people living in houses, all with multiple cars parking in front, street, etc. Big problem.

Also, the height of new buildings should be limited and adhered to so that neighborhoods are nicer and more evenly distributed with un-restricted views. 1/26/2022 3:41 PM
59 They are tearing up Mission style SFR to put 2 on a lot, as tall as they can go. Losing the neighborhood history and residential feel. Is looking so cramped and no sunlight in street due to all the structures. It's becoming like NY city, all concrete. We are not considering the available amount of water vs how many people are living in a neighborhood. Removing SFR and making 2 to 3 on a lots is infringing on resources available. eg. Water for a neighborhood with 20 homes is reasonable. Now, tear all those down to add 40-50 more families restricts garbage, sewers, water, street traffic, etc. People are just racing through the streets now, not stopping for stop signs, etc. So many more accidents than before. Do we want to cram as many people as we can into the neighborhood or do we want a nice, friendly community? 1/26/2022 2:43 PM
60 The height limit for fences on the sides is important especially with school-children and other pedestrians walking on the sidewalk. When the fences or shrubbery is too high near the driveways, etc, it obstructs the visibility of the driver and with electric cars that are quieter it becomes dangerous for pedestrians. Privacy is very important in single family homes especially and with the larger builds, neighborhoods are losing their privacy within their own homes. The fencing limitations in the rear and rear-sides allow for these large windows and balconies to invade in the personal space of the neighbors' properties. 1/26/2022 2:24 PM
61 I believe the standards should be by neighborhood & more flexible based on the intent of developing a cohesive friendly Comunity. Currently we have a system of unilateral rules, that developers work to circumvent and to violate the intent!!! It seems that directly affected neighbors & the planning committee should work with home owners to develop equitable solutions for the good of the community.
1/26/2022 1:34 PM
62 For privacy and dog safety, I would like to be able to enclose my front yard. I am on The Lower Avenues where my front yard is elevated. Currently, this restricts our ability to add a safe enclosure for our dog due to height restrictions from sidewalk. 1/26/2022 10:40 AM
63 Many RB properties value their existing views. This should be taken into account when a new or rebuild takes place.
1/26/2022 9:48 AM
64 Properties should be evaluated for driveways. If driveways are parellel from the driveway across the street makes it easy to enter/exit. However if a drive is not parallel to a driveway across the street, allow 15 feet for turn ability. Recommend removing 1 way streets in ALL neighborhoods for safety purposes.
1/26/2022 7:38 AM
65 I just hate seeing perfectly sound modest structures with adequate green space and style and even some history ..and no structural issues or blight...MOWED down for a disgusting 10 bedroom block of dog shit for some asshole from Florida or somewhere to inhabity with his fake tits whore wife and 2 yapping dogs. It's Bullshit. 1/26/2022 2:12 AM
66 Fence along the front yard should be limited to lower than 2 ft tall 1/25/2022 10:41 PM 67 Flexibility should be allowed with neighbor concurrence if neighbors could be impacted. 1/25/2022 10:23 PM 68 Make it easier to build housing. 1/25/2022 10:20 PM
69 Parking is terrible. And yet you allow more and more two or more residences on a lot. Each one bring two or more cars, one of which WILL wind up on the street. It is time to REMOVE red zones. If people can not get out of there driveways safely then MIRRORS are a cheap and easy fix.
1/25/2022 10:15 PM
70 I would love to see chain link fences not permitted. They are very unsightly and can also become rusty and unsafe.
1/25/2022 10:15 PM
71 Make open space to plant trees and plants a higher priority. We need these things to fight global warming, and it's known that open space and plants help people feel less stressed.

Allowing monstrous houses with no regard for setbacks and clearly over-massed, is a hazard to the people in the neighborhood and the general community. These giant MERIT-type homes 1/25/2022 9:32 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 53 / 68
MUST BE STOPPED. Plus they're killing regular people's chances to buy a home, since these are maximum square footage with the intent to charge as much as possible. All market value and no regard to affordability.
72 I appreciate the opportunity to provide input. I appreciate that your committee is trying to standardize the codes. In my neighborhood, which I enjoy, I am frustrated by the lack of respect for the neighbors who also live here. I did not see and timeline for completion of a structure - two years and still not completed is an issue. Also, the narrow streets and lack of parking is an issue for the trucks and construction crews. PLEASE eliminate further development of tall and skinny. This structure is ruining the character of the beach community. 1/25/2022 9:25 PM
73 How is it that developers projects get expedited and are allowed more alternatives than for homeowners??
1/25/2022 9:13 PM
74 The trend has been to pack too many houses into too little space. I would never want to live in Golden Hills.
1/25/2022 7:56 PM
75 When developing multi-family dwellings, have a percentage of the units dedicated to affordable low-income senior residents.
1/25/2022 7:45 PM
76 I disagree with ADUs and substantial add-ons in backyards. If necessary to have ADUs due to legal imperatives, there should be stringent standards as to access to them, setbacks, site shielding, and many other factors.
1/25/2022 6:12 PM
77 I think that before any decision is made that any party that emailed a suggestion should be notified if somebody made an opposing suggestion. I think you should have an opportunity to refute what someone else has written. I also do not think people in the housing department should be allowed to disclose what individuals have written to other property holders without their knowledge.
1/25/2022 4:48 PM
78 Properties near heavy traffic areas should be able to put higher fences or walls . Homes near light rail should be provided with sound walls at Metros cost. City should insist this is a requirement of Metro if the green line extension is a go. I think the city should promote sustainability through solar, drought tolerant design in all civic buildings and grant property owners for getting rid of grass. City should encourage use of prefabricated structures and create streamlined process for that to increase housing. 1/25/2022 3:56 PM
79 Less dense. More single family. More outdoor space and greenery. Full sidewalks that do not dip with driveways please!
1/25/2022 3:30 PM
80 Builders should be held responsible for the damage, length of time to build and have insurance so if funding runs out or bankruptcy occurs that neighbors are not left with an eyesore, inconvenience of half built projects, etc.
1/25/2022 3:29 PM
81 The process of submittal and review should be streamlined to allow review status available and digitized to be accessible online. The process of different departments should be unified to avoid multiple submittals and approvals.
1/25/2022 3:26 PM
82 Forbid the construction of two units in one piece of land. That creates more concentration of people, problems with traffic, parking, etc.
1/25/2022 3:10 PM
83 Stricter enforcement of construction hours (between 7am - 6pm) and no commercial construction on weekends or Sundays
1/25/2022 2:54 PM
84 Outdoor livable space requirements should remain as they are. Mezzanine requirement as well. 1/25/2022 2:19 PM 85 My main concern with the current residential development is the 2, 3, 4 on a lot problem. I do not believe the current RB infrastructure (ie, schools, roads, parking, emergency) can handle the massive amount of development. In addition, there are so many restrictions on SFR development that seems to be "Not Applicable" if you create a Townhouse situation.

Development in North Redondo is out of control.
1/25/2022 2:14 PM
86 Respect the choices of the TRW neighborhood property owners who chose and continue to choose to live in a family-oriented environment. We do not want or appreciate changes to the nature and atmosphere of the traditional family-oriented community. The Property size and nature is exactly why we purchased in this area. Please don't make this into an overcrowded concrete jungle.
1/25/2022 2:14 PM
87 keep the current standards in place 1/25/2022 2:10 PM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 54 / 68
88 I would like the permitting process to be sped up. After application for a permit, it should be reviewed and in the system earlier so that once work is done, inspector can access it for review.
1/25/2022 2:07 PM
89 Need more housing so we can reduce costs, so we should stop putting arbritrary restrictions on personal property preventing this
1/25/2022 1:54 PM
90 I would like developers to have to contribute proportionally to a fund for undergrounding utilities.
1/25/2022 12:53 PM
91 Please allow manufactured housing as technology has advanced to the point where these structures are desirable to existing neighbors, let alone support the environmentally-friendly stance we embrace in Redondo Beach. Thanks very much for opening this up to us. 1/25/2022 12:46 PM
92 The upper and lower avenues cottage and ranch houses are getting ripped down and the new builds are not in character with the neighborhoods. Please set some standards to preserve the look and feel of these neighborhoods.
1/25/2022 12:45 PM
93 Original RDG was for only specific North Redondo neighborhoods. Were they extended to the entire City? Are you proposing one size fits all for the entire City? I would not agree with that. I see nothing except restrictions on single family dwellings. What about 2 or more units on a lot.

What are their guidelines? What about ADUs. What are their guidelines? 1/25/2022 12:34 PM
94 Needs to be denser, more mixed use, and bike friendly for residents. 1/25/2022 12:06 PM 95 Start mandating subterranean power and communication lines. North Redondo's power and communication line are a sight for sore eyes and needs clean-up. Start this with all the new homes that are being built. Stop exacerbating the current issue which will require more investment to fix later on.
1/25/2022 12:05 PM
96 In our situation, we live in a 2 on a lot, when we built we were held to a kind of arbitrary standard in which as long as did not try to build over a certain square footage the planning commission would ok our plans and then recently another project across the street was allowed to build more square footage. I am ok with the new project I just feel that there should be set guidelines that are the same for everyone.
1/25/2022 12:00 PM
97 Please minimize the design guidelines and give residents and building owners as much flexibility as possible.
1/25/2022 11:58 AM
98 Redondo Beach should allow much taller buildings to maximize the potential for ADUs and SB9 projects
1/25/2022 11:48 AM
99 Priority for me is sunlight, airflow, and parking. Tall, bulky homes (and multiple large homes on a lot) block sunlight and add to mold problems. When people move to the coast from other areas, they don't know that this will be a problem for themselves and their neighbors.

Regarding sub-terannian building, I think it should be allowed only if the goal is to create a garage that is actually used for parking. Same with double-wide driveways and front-facing garages. I'm not sure how to enforce it, but residents need to be encouraged to use the garages and carports for actual cars (not additional rooms). 1/25/2022 11:47 AM
100 Make it easier to build! 1/25/2022 11:46 AM
101 NA 1/25/2022 11:34 AM
102 Off street parking should be included in building permits…. 1/25/2022 11:33 AM 103 None at this time. 1/25/2022 11:11 AM
104 Remove turf grass (fake). It is bad for environment and health. Water can be conserved in other ways. Having living natural plants or grass helps clean the air to give a better environment. Also fake grass destroys ecosystems. Whether microorganisms, insects, butterflies, bees, squirrels, raccoons or other animals they all deserve nature and a chance to live. Fake grass gases off toxins from sunlight exposure. This is a very short sighted trend that is more negative than positive that will have many harmful to effects. People talk about climate change but continually do things to dirty (trash) the earth. This trend is shockingly bad in so many ways. Children shouldn't be brought up without nature because it takes some effort to maintain and instead a plastic habitat. This is convenient till it gets ugly and needs to be disposed of. Very wasteful and unhealthy.
1/25/2022 11:00 AM
105 It's unfortunate that this process wasn't followed when the huge monstrosities were built on 1/25/2022 10:57 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 55 / 68
Catalina and the Esplinade - appartment buildings that are giant as well as The Villages 106 population density is already at the max in North Redondo, state required additional units should be built in South Redondo
1/25/2022 10:48 AM
107 If a property has an alley, there should be no curb cuts. All garages should be in the alley. 1/25/2022 10:43 AM 108 Reduce some of the variability between inspectors. More specific requirements. Have seen quite a bit of differing “opinions” on what is appropriate design. Allows for unnecessary and arbitrary demands on the owner or contractor. Also, need to take into consideration traffic with all residential requirement - we are not adding streets to the city. The denser the city, the bigger the traffic headaches.
1/25/2022 10:35 AM
109 Is there a place to find all these codes? I didn't realize that there is a 6ft max height for fences! Thank you for taking opinions from the neighborhood. :) 1/25/2022 10:31 AM
110 Better Drainage for runoff rain 1/25/2022 10:30 AM
111 Plenty of studies have documented the deleterious effects of increasing population density of a confined area. In general, humans do not respond well to a seemingly-cramped living arrangement.
1/25/2022 10:27 AM
112 My thoughts are that the less micromanagement by government for residents and mush higher management for developers so our neighborhood integrity is maintained. Thanks 1/25/2022 10:26 AM
113 I realize there's a housing shortage in CA but we are tearing down small, sometimes quaint homes for giant mansions. It's invasive and isolates the neighbors. It would be nice if there was a historic society that helped preserve 100 year old homes or special architectural designs.
1/25/2022 10:24 AM
114 None 1/25/2022 10:19 AM
115 Unit density will require a multi-story solution 1/25/2022 10:16 AM 116 There should be a limit for how much property one builder can build in the area because a lot of the new properties look alike.
1/25/2022 10:15 AM
117 I am concerned that more 3 on a lot homes will be built to replace older, smaller beach cottages and the population (hence, traffic) will grow exponentially in the area. 1/25/2022 10:11 AM
118 On street parking is significant problem 1/25/2022 10:10 AM 119 North Redondo is overcrowded and there isn't sufficient parking on some streets. This could be due to apartments or single family homes with more than 2 cars. 1/25/2022 10:09 AM
120 public works process after all other construction was done was overly difficult. would like to see public works fall in line with building department in terms of the process as a whole. 1/24/2022 6:05 PM
121 I love our community, and we should continue to develop and update it with respectful and attractive designs. This is what attracts others to come to RB, the ability to buy/live in a nice, newer home in a great community
1/24/2022 2:07 PM
122 Building standards need to prevent the claustrophobic feel of 'too much house packed into too little space. 'The tall and skinnys in Golden hills and the Two-plus on a lots in the area South of Grant are over-built and cramped, with too little parking. They are not pleasant neighborhoods to walk around or live in.
1/24/2022 1:06 PM
123 Parking access is critically important. Please keep this in mind when creating new standards. I understand de airy is important but density must be viable from a parking and quality of life perspective. I also think it is important to retain a commitment to creating a well organized, clean, and nice looking neighborhood. It is a frontline offensive to prevent crime and disorder and increase a nice quality of life for all Residents. I also think there should be a balance between what those with lots of resources want to do and what creates a nice living environment for all.
1/24/2022 10:46 AM
124 When building in a view area, buildings should first be drakes out so neighbors can have input whether their view is blocked or not. We are currently affected by a new build that kills our ocean view. It’s very distressing.
1/24/2022 10:09 AM
125 ADUs should be able to be built on top of garages again. Many families have multiple generations under one roof these days and this allows private space while maximizing outdoor 1/24/2022 9:32 AM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 56 / 68
space on the small lots in our community. Subterranean garages would also be a great option for everyone considering remodel as it would maximize indoor and outdoor living space. Most houses are older and don’t meet today’s living standards. Many families today enjoy entertaining in their homes and there simply isn’t enough space to accommodate that in the older homes. We plan to remodel in next two years and aren’t looking forward to what we hear is an extremely painful and long process. Hoping this survey to community addresses those concerns.
126 Requirements seem to vary by inspector which is confusing. 1/24/2022 1:22 AM 127 Many driveways have very steep ramps up to sidewalk that cause cars to scrap bumpers and drag and scrap the undercarriage. Allow owners to fix these driveways and blend the sidewalks so both pedestrians and cars have safe, clear access.
1/23/2022 11:06 PM
128 I believe a complete survey of all legal residents should come before the city officials prior to all/any major changes.
1/23/2022 5:54 PM
129 I recommend not changing the standards. We designed (with a local architect) and built our home 24 years ago. Although we were not allowed to include everything we wanted, the permitting process was fair and reasonable. We don't need to add more regulations. 1/23/2022 4:14 PM
130 Appreciate this being done and taking our thoughts into consideration. 1/23/2022 4:05 PM 131 Would like the process to be expedited 1/23/2022 3:56 PM 132 An unenclosed parking requirement is preferrable to an enclosed parking requirement. Even on new large homes, garages are frequently used for purposes other than vehicle parking. Corner properties' fence heights should be limited to 42" along both streets not just the primary front yard. A 6' high wall/fence for the length of a property creates a closed and tunnel-like corridor.

The reason for the 42" height restriction in the front yard should apply to the property's other street-side. The second-story setback requirement is not necessary. There are many beautiful architectural styles that have the second story along the same vertical plane as the first floor. 1/23/2022 3:56 PM
133 There should be more discretion before enacting these rules on homeowners. We built a beautiful home on our street and have been harassed by code after code enforcement. It’s sad to have built such a nice home that we planned to pass on to our children, only to be repeatedly sent to the Planning Office to stall us and cost us more money. It shouldn’t be this difficult to build a residential home for a married couple with 3 children who both work full time.

We are not a company trying to flip a house, we are a family trying to build a home. 1/23/2022 3:51 PM
134 People want to control what others do with property they own. This is ridiculous. We do not live in an HOA community. People should be allowed to do what they want. Consult immediate neighbors if you want to be decent, but overarching rules that blanket across the entire city is just another way for South Redondo to strangle and stifle North Redondo. 1/23/2022 3:41 PM
135 Because of a culture change from 80 years ago - the sidewalks are to narrow as many more people walk their neighborhoods then in the past and walking across curb cuts for driveways gets more difficult as one gets older.
1/23/2022 3:30 PM
136 State has screwed up the zoning so my R1 is effectively R3 with ADU and JADU. 1/23/2022 3:18 PM 137 Do not allow the construction of a second residential structure on property currently or precurrently designated as a "single-family" residence.1/23/2022 3:10 PM 138 Appreciate the opportunity to provide input. 1/23/2022 2:13 PM 139 I don’t like that small single family houses are allowed to be torn down and massive homes are being built in their place. We don’t have the capacity for this to keep happening. Redondo is overgrown!!
1/23/2022 1:32 PM
140 1. Redondo doesn't need more condos and more multiple family homes on one lot. 2. Raise rear fence height or change way it is measured. Currently if my yard is 2' lower than my neighbors, the wall is measured from my side. Resulting in a 4' high wall on his side of the yard. 3. No parking in front yard.
1/23/2022 1:19 PM
141 The park On Huntington Lane is dangerous and needs to be updated. 1/23/2022 1:12 PM 142 We should be allowed to have taller fences in front of our homes. The 42” limit is too low.

Alternatively, we should be allowed 42” front fences with shrubs behind them that can be 8ft. I was born and raised here. RB is not what it once was. We need more privacy and security, as 1/23/2022 1:00 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 57 / 68
well as better barriers from the speeding cars for children. Smaller front set backs would also be ideal. The cost of living here is high and the front yards are mostly useless and often a waste of water to maintain. It would be nice to have smaller front gardens with more room for backyards and living space.
143 The Los Angeles Zoning Code states the as long as your lot width is greater than 40 feet your fence can be 8 feet tall except in a Hillside Building Zone where the maximum is 6 feet tall. 1/23/2022 10:48 AM
144 We should encourage more roof decks for our city. This allows more outdoor space for plants and people.
1/22/2022 9:51 PM
145 Allow a public process for design review of commercial properties being built on lots next to single family homes. Do not allow commercial access/egress onto a residential street when the commercial property address is on a commercial zoned street. E.g. when the commercial property fronts a commercial street like PCH but extends to a residential street in the back.

Property owner should be required to build access/driveway from PCH per the address of the property, not impact the residential street.
1/22/2022 2:52 PM
146 Keep residential areas R1 1/22/2022 12:39 PM
147 Thank you for asking for our input. 1/22/2022 10:19 AM 148 It would be nice to see over developing control. Over developing does not make it safe but crowded in more ways than one
1/22/2022 9:05 AM
149 Only 2 homes per lot-no more please!!!! 1/22/2022 8:37 AM 150 . 1/21/2022 9:50 PM
151 No mezzanines, only 2 story, no roof top decks as it proves no privacy. Landscaping to facilitate privacy
1/21/2022 4:00 PM
152 Excellent survey. Thank you for taking the time and effort to gather community input. 1/21/2022 9:42 AM 153 My bottom-line goal is for RB to facilitate the construction of housing that increases density and improves the quality of housing stock in the city. Refurbishing and building new housing-- particular multi-family units like townhouses and apartments--should be easier. 1/21/2022 8:54 AM
154 study environmental impact and changes in traffic density & pattern changed for new projects.

Historic integrity and restoration vs demolition
1/21/2022 5:13 AM
155 It took longer than expected to respond to the survey questions. I’m guessing lots of people will give up part of the way through the survey. For future such surveys, suggest simplification so that it requires less time.
1/21/2022 12:01 AM
156 I think new builders cheat the system by building out as far as they can and adding lofts and pretending it’s not a 3rd floor.
1/20/2022 11:35 PM
157 Too many older single-story homes are being torn down to build ugly, oversized houses that destroy the property of the surrounding houses and are not in character with the neighborhood.

This must stop! My property was massively destroyed by an extremely ugly, oversized McMansion built 5ft closer to the driveway side of my house with a garage put in front extending 12 ft in front of my house along the driveway and view side of my house blocking my beautiful street view and also creating a possible safety hazard to me. We need a moratorium on tearing down older single-story homes and replacing them with these ugly oversized McMansions that take up the entire lot with no decent sized front and backyards! There also needs to be a code on architectural style because so many of the new builds are so ugly especially the contemporary mostly glass square box houses that are being built everywhere!
1/20/2022 8:48 PM
158 New projects should be required to have low maintenance/ low watering landscaping and gutters with rain barrels.
1/20/2022 8:14 PM
159 Love our city! 1/20/2022 7:50 PM
160 I and neighbors find the Merit builders to be very UGLY!!! They have no consideration for the views I have enjoyed to the East and North, blocking with UGLY stucco structures. Also leave no street parking, knocking down a lovely cottage or two and jamming 3 on what was a nice lot. Also strip out any trees and vegetation. They are terrible!! Recently took out an historic 1/20/2022 7:42 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 58 / 68
home off of Diamond. This is not NYC, nor do we want to be!!! Redondo Beach is already overbuilt!! Dreadful from Grant north to Artesia.
161 All new development should be required to widen existing sidewalks. 1/20/2022 6:07 PM 162 ADU’s create too much density for Redondo Beach 1/20/2022 4:34 PM 163 The city should require people to keep yards maintained. Also - trees are growing so high in certain yards that they are not only blocking views for other homeowners that have paid significant money for their home bc of the view, but some of the trees cause damage during the yearly Santa Ana winds. Can we consider a height limit on trees too? Why shouldn’t they be the same as houses?
1/20/2022 4:09 PM
164 Fire the consultant get rid of the survey stop over simplifying things stay out of the design business and stay out of personal property rights. Please hire competent companies that you can outsource building and planning to. Then focus on running an efficient city government by reducing staff and payroll. This survey is perfect example of why it’s almost impossible to get anything done if the city is involved. The survey questions are oversimplified and divisive at best. Please stay out of the design business and out of personal property rights. 1/20/2022 4:01 PM
165 Use common sense. The R1 district does not want a lot of change, but would like to see single family homes expand. Allow for 2 car garages on the front of the R1 zone. 1/20/2022 3:50 PM
166 It should be easier to build beautiful homes that fit the needs of you and your family—decided by you and your family. We should allow basements and ADUs and decks to be built so people can enjoy their homes. It’s expensive to live here and if people can’t build here, they won’t stay. On that same note, ADUs allow for more people to live and enjoy this area. Many of the anti-ADU rhetoric I have heard in this are has been elitist at best and discriminatory at worst.

This is a great city and it looks like it’s stuck in the past. Thank you. 1/20/2022 3:42 PM
167 New construction should blend in to what most homes look like on the block. A lot of new homes look out of place and not well-made. They are out up so fast that many times buyers get taken in by the look and not the quality. In addition, just as the city wants hone to look good, perhaps it should spend money on all streets so that they are smooth and safe to drive on. In north Redondo, many streets were left in bad shape while others got resurfaced. It’s unacceptable for the amount of taxes we pay.
1/20/2022 3:20 PM
168 More consistent roofline heights, setbacks, standards. Damage has already been done to RB through the years due to inconsistent or weak guidelines. Thank you for asking residents! 1/20/2022 2:53 PM
169 For Golden Hills: 1) please consider allowing a permit for a higher fence than 6 feet between very small yards in GH. The hills in this neighborhood mean that some neighbors have no privacy in their backyard if the house behind them is at a higher elevation. Would be good to have some flexibility if both neighbors agree to a taller fence. As is, many homeowners do unpermitted higher fencing. 2) Please consider allowing front balconies to go past the required set back in front of golden hills homes. we have nearly zero outdoor space and the more we can create the better for our families to relax in. Helpful bc we have almost no parks to use of any sizable nature without crossing a major road. Also, this could create partial carport over driveway which keeps cars clean given the nightly marine layer on vehicles parked in driveways.
1/20/2022 2:38 PM
170 Re-think low income housing placement 1/20/2022 1:09 PM 171 North Redondo- (Trw track) is family friendly property. We chose this area because of its single family homes. We Do NOT want the proposed crowded, over populating multiple units on a lot.

Everyone who is a property owner should be mailed the proposal for the increased density of their neighborhood. Slipping multiple structures on each lot without fair notice and publication of intent is deceitful. Each resident deserves to be informed of this in writing and meetings held to inform everyone.
1/20/2022 1:01 PM
172 Again, SB-9 is a huge concern. Redondo Beach will turn into a congested, over-crowded, eye sore. It's such a beautiful and family friendly town right now. Please do all that you are able to in order to work with the residents to maintain that charm. Thank you very much. 1/20/2022 12:51 PM
173 The current development projects on the south 200 blocks of Irena and Helberta have dramatically changed the quality of life for the whole neighborhood. Reduction in light to many surrounding homes. I would like the city to protect this from happening further. 1/20/2022 11:54 AM
174 Residents are concerned their kids will not be able to live in Redondo when they grow up. We 1/20/2022 11:32 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 59 / 68
need to come up with a plan to provide areas where we can have taller buildings with affordable housing. Put them on the east side all across N and S Redondo, not just next to Lawndale on the other side of the 405.
175 Stop allowing bonus. Keep as much open space as possible. 1/20/2022 11:28 AM 176 The fence allowance definitely needs to be higher especially when you are a corner lot with a front yard or when you are on a slope. Also if you allow higher buildings, roof balconies etc then higher fences should be allowed.
1/20/2022 11:24 AM
177 Expecting the general population to have any expertise in urban planning is a dubious endeavor.
1/20/2022 10:49 AM
178 No additional comments 1/20/2022 10:36 AM
179 Before making any restriction ask yourself "Will this result in less housing being built?" Since being able to afford to live in a place is about the most important thing in a residents life, any restriction where you answer "yes" better be about something even MORE important like serious health and safety risk.
1/20/2022 10:30 AM
180 Houses are close together here and yards are small. I think you should allow people to put up fences and privacy structures with little restriction to allow them to enjoy their outdoor space as much as possible
1/20/2022 10:23 AM
181 Don’t allow SFD lots to be split. 1/20/2022 10:16 AM 182 I appreciate the city making an effort to retain, as our Mayor has more than once stated, "What little charm is left."
1/20/2022 10:10 AM
183 Keep Sacramento out of zoning Redondo Beach! Keep it local because we have local needs and know our area's needs best.
1/20/2022 10:08 AM
184 Since the City is largely built out, the real issue is neighborhood compatibility. Roof decks on upper floors should be prohibited. Duplexes and smaller apartments should have a streetfriendly facade. FAR should be reduced, and max only allowed with serious design review. No more neo-Mediterranean crap. Architecture should be consistent. Modern or traditional, there is an established pattern that should be followed.
1/20/2022 10:06 AM
185 N/A 1/20/2022 9:59 AM
186 Notifications to neighbors where obstructing views may be affected 1/20/2022 9:54 AM 187 1. Flexible rules can be applied depending on specific circumstances. 2. Parking stickers or hangers is a good approach to avoid current parking issues. 3. This is a beach city and ocean view is important: no 3-floor structures, roof patio is ok. Doing a great job, keep it up! 1/20/2022 9:53 AM
188 If RB is considering adding a Neighborhood Compatibility process, I strongly urge RB staff to speak with other cities that currently utilize it such as PVE to learn the pros & cons in practice (theirs has been in effect since 1990). From, a PVE staff member who resides in South Redondo.
1/20/2022 9:47 AM
189 Garages should be used for cars not be an extra room, ie don’t allow people to take up street parking for their car(s) while they use their garage space for what should be in their house or discarded.
1/20/2022 9:46 AM
190 RB needs more staff to get the approvals through more quickly 1/20/2022 9:41 AM 191 Enforcing use of garages would be ideal, or require parking for at least two cars, maybe even three. Many new builds do not use their garages and park in the driveway/street. 1/20/2022 9:39 AM
192 Less density in these 2 on a lot neighborhoods, and converting these narrow streets to one way traffic
1/20/2022 7:15 AM
193 16ft garage door width is insufficient for auto access and car door opening when 2 cars are inside. Especially when garage is not front-facing.
1/20/2022 7:02 AM
194 Solar should be required for new and remodeled structures. CA law passed in 2020 requiring solar. Implementation by 2023. What planning is occurring? Drought tolerant gardens should be required.
1/20/2022 1:07 AM
195 I don’t like sb9 or 10. We need parking and keep ing single family home 1/20/2022 12:11 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 60 / 68
196 Would like to reiterate the need for naturally affordable housing via gentle density like duplexes, fourplexes, and small apartments on lots throughout the city, including in single family neighborhoods. For example, the neighborhood apartment building at 530 S Irena Ave.

With the passage of SB 9 (and SB 10) the city should use this residential design process to develop template designs for streamlining of duplexes and fourplexes. The population of South Redondo is aging as retirees choose to remain and “age in place” yet we need affordable housing for their caretakers, for school teachers, nurses, first responders, and young families.

I am disheartened to see one story homes, bit by bit, swallowed by massive three story home developments and would instead love to see triplexes and neighborhood apartments be built to house more people.
1/19/2022 11:36 PM
197 We have to allow for more densification (RHNA…) AND have more space for veggie gardens, trees, recycled water reservoirs and why not fields? The solution can only be to go up (3-story) and down (basement). Also, cars will soon be autonomous. That means parking space and garage space will be less required than today. This land needs to be reclaimed for sustainable densification. I would love to see Redondo Beach lead the nation in this endeavor. 1/19/2022 10:44 PM
198 Stop putting 3 units on a lot. There is not enough public parking for this density 1/19/2022 9:35 PM 199 Thank you SO MUCH for doing this survey! I have been a South Bay resident for over 20 years. This is crucial to maintain the South Bay for the next generation while modernizing responsibly. In addition, we have noticed many lots go straight to developers vs local residents. It would be nice if residents or individuals had a chance to purchase properties before major conglomerates. Lastly, if the city approves all these developers buying lots, then there has to be discretion in design. It is WAY TOO COOKIE CUTTER. It's becoming beach Irvine. Drive down any street in North Redondo and you'll see the copycat two on a lot townhouses down to the sconces. If residents can apply to be on any neighborhood design committees please let us know.
1/19/2022 5:10 PM
200 The current height limit for front property line fences should be higher like in other cities so you can have more privacy!
1/19/2022 1:49 PM
201 I think homeowners should be allowed to build on their property how they like, as long as they get a permit. However I would like to see more flexibility in what is allowed. Thank you! 1/19/2022 1:41 PM
202 The 6 foot height limit is not being enforced at all. My neighbor has a 8 foot “organic” fence which blocks my visibility coming out my driver, hence I got hit by a car entering the street the other week. Near driveways, the fence or landscaping height limit should be 4 feet maz to allow a sitting driver have full visibility of the road and the driveway. Would be happy to demonstrate live to anyone including RBPD that found me at fault for not seeing through a 8 foot high hedge and parked SUV’s while coming out my driway! 1/19/2022 1:07 PM
203 Up to 6 foot walls no permit over 6 foot walls permitted up to 8 feet with inspection. 1/19/2022 8:33 AM 204 The ship has sailed to avoid high density housing looming over older homes. Do anything possible to improve street parking availability since few people park in garages. 1/18/2022 9:58 PM
205 Residential properties should have yard space in either front or back, I.e. no building out to property setbacks on all sides.
1/18/2022 6:17 PM
206 N/A 1/18/2022 3:57 PM
207 In the golden hills section (tall and skinny homes), roof top decks are the owners only chance of having any real livable outdoor space. Our back yards are small and useless. Build in shade, Gas fire pits, BBQ’s and other normal back yard amenities should be allowed. 1/18/2022 2:14 PM
208 1. Reduce the amount of setback. 2. In new 2+ on a lot constructions, garages not to be next to each other in back but kept separate to allow each owner to park in their garage and in front of their garage. 3. Each two+ on a lot to have its own backyard. 4. Each two+ on a lot to have separate utilities and meters attached to their own unit and not on the front unit. 5. Each two+ on a lot to have their own water, plumbing, gas lines, etc. instead of sharing the same system.

6. Each two+ on a lot to have the mailbox on their own unit and not just on the front unit. 1/18/2022 1:55 PM
209 It's a pity that homeowners modifying current structures are restricted by new standards just because the state is dead-set on overbuilding, thus majorly affecting parking and quality of life.

Changing set-backs is a gross violation of the current fire code, and unfortunately it'll take a catastrophe to make that clear. I know many who plan to leave CA because of the overcrowding being foisted on us by a greedy government. 1/18/2022 1:33 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 61 / 68
210 Require garages to always allow parking for number of cars and space not to be used for storage only
1/18/2022 7:12 AM
211 Some home designs stick out like a sore thumb in the neighborhood they are in. Require some design continuity within the neighborhood.
1/18/2022 6:21 AM
212 Trees planted on fence lines. Overgrowth not maintained by resident. Neighbors loosing light and have to do leaf and yard work not their trees. Specify what trees may be used. Root barriers and tree maintenance must occur
1/17/2022 8:14 PM
213 Side facing garage is not safe due to not having eyes on the street 1/17/2022 4:09 PM 214 Either upgrade existing utilities; water, electric and gas or STOP increasing the burden. Also stop this insane overdevelopment now before we all have to park in Torrance! 1/17/2022 2:08 PM
215 I thin if the garage is face on the side, because a lot of concrete is used it is not considered green by any means. Having a longer than current driveway invites residents to park their RVs and boats in front of the driveway.
1/17/2022 1:40 PM
216 Side facing garage creates more space for multiple cars, RV, boats, equipment etc. I’m strongly against this proposal
1/17/2022 12:42 PM
217 Create a Redondo Beach that is beautiful and functional. We are the largest Of the three Beach Cities and honestly, Redondo Beach is a dump with a few neighborhood exceptions. 1/17/2022 7:56 AM
218 I personally think a homeowner should be allowed as much freedom as possible as long as it doesn’t negatively impact their neighbors. I also think that with the amount of apartment buildings and multiple people living in a home, as much street parking as possible should be considered as a priority.
1/16/2022 12:41 PM
219 Lets get more of those Prop 9 & 10 petitions circulated & signed. We must stop 9 & 10. If necessary , we must be allowed to use the whole city for development, Not just N. RB 1/15/2022 7:08 AM
220 Limits on FAR in order to limit density. Relook what current FAR regulations are and reduce them for multi-unit projects.
1/14/2022 8:57 PM
221 Thanks for all the work you have put into this project 1/14/2022 7:31 PM 222 Thank you for this survey. 1/14/2022 4:01 PM
223 I advise you define different residential neighborhood regions for height limitations. Near the major blvds 3 stories could be allowed, whereas the quieter neighborhoods should be kept at 2 stories.
1/14/2022 3:53 PM
224 Keep the standards and do not allow exceptions, like abound all over the city that are a tragedy. I can give a tour of those examples that are unacceptable!!!! 1/14/2022 2:59 PM
225 Developers should be held to the same standards that owner-builders are expected to abide by (ie setbacks, height limits etc.).
1/14/2022 2:49 PM
226 I'm so happy you are reaching out to ask residents what is important. After dealing with the city permit process, I think the system is broken and many, many people are unhappy. I know people who have built their house and then moved because they are so very unhappy with the Redondo permitting process. Redondo now has a very poor reputation because of this and I know you can do better.
1/14/2022 11:28 AM
227 For homeowners that want to expand their current liveable sq ft. , and only have 1 car garage with driveway access and alley access on a slope, they should be allowed to add moving back or up without having to move the garage. I’ve heard the city insists that garage should be moved to the back but that’s an additional cost that some homeowners don’t have. And having a driveway on a property allows for additional parking. I’ve seen homes that have had to get rid of their driveway but only allows for one additional parking space on the street which doesn’t make sense. These homes have 23 cars but don’t really store their cars in the garage and end up parking on the street which causes overcrowding of cars. And there is really no logical explanation for removing driveway access just because there’s access to an alley but Access to the alley is on the slope meaning additional costs for the homeowner. 1/14/2022 9:38 AM
228 3 story houses due to mezzanine look too big. Front facing garages should be allowed - it makes efficient use of space
1/13/2022 9:32 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 62 / 68
229 When my wife and I built our home we felt as if the building department staff were not working with us, but instead trying to prove they had power over us by not informing us of everything we would need to complete for each next step. It led to many unnecessary trips back and forth and a lot of wasted time. I feel it's important for the department to have more patience and to help homeowners through their projects. I am a public servant myself (Firefighter) and I never forget where my paycheck comes from. It would be great to see the publicly funded building department staff treat their "paying" customers in a helpful manner . "How may I help you today" might be a good start.
1/13/2022 1:40 PM
230 Flexibility is important because every site has its own particular characteristics. But, flexibility can lead to favoritism and unfair decisions. They need to be restricted and monitored. 1/12/2022 8:19 PM
231 I appreciate the wider sidewalks for new construction. It makes walking in the neighborhood much easier. Thank you for being proactive about this topic. 1/12/2022 6:10 PM
232 Max building height should vary based on roof slope to minimize mass and scale 1/12/2022 3:18 PM 233 stop the building at BCHD 1/12/2022 2:29 PM
234 I'm interested in seeing more of the community style properties that have several smaller homes on a big lot and the entrances face each other. There are several of these developments in South Redondo already and I would like this to continue to be allowed. 1/12/2022 1:46 PM
235 I live on South Irena Ave. There are many residential construction sites in progress now. Sites are unkempt, trash filled, I see workers emptying 5-gal tubs of paint onto the property, work on Sundays occurs as well.
1/12/2022 1:43 PM
236 Mass, to me, is the requirement that should either be kept as is or reduced. 1/12/2022 1:02 PM 237 thanks for the opportunity to submit my opinions. 1/12/2022 11:46 AM 238 We are in an area where single family homes are being replaced by 3-on-a-lot townhomes. We are becoming concerned about parking. I'm happy for any developments that encourage new residents to park in their own garages or driveways, so there is enough street parking. (Many people use their garages for storage and park on the street. Some places are designed to allow for parking just outside the garage, which is helpful in reducing the # of cars parked on the street).
1/12/2022 11:24 AM
239 ADUs should NOT be allowed in R-1 neighborhoods. Turning single family neighborhoods into multi-family neighborhoods unfairly devalues the properties of current owners and places an undue burden on parking
1/12/2022 9:57 AM
240 Don’t let us become like MAnhattan beach ! Massive homes out to the curb w tiny setbacks.

Looks awful
1/12/2022 8:44 AM
241 Speed and quick timing of inspections should be paramount 1/12/2022 8:31 AM 242 rethink ADU impact.....not all positive 1/12/2022 8:31 AM 243 maintain single family zoning in existing areas 1/12/2022 7:51 AM 244 Permit process should be streamlined to allow you to to have the freedom to design and build/renovate your home to match or emulate the features of the homes around you. Placing new restrictions on what you can and can’t do only makes the process more difficult to navigate and drives up costs unnecessarily.
1/12/2022 3:16 AM
245 No to monster houses 1/12/2022 1:44 AM
246 Hate the idea of overbuilding the area and adding traffic, reducing parking and overusing the resources for current residents.
1/11/2022 11:40 PM
247 When new construction or modification occurs and a curb cut is "abandoned" owner must put curbs and cuts back to pre-cut condition
1/11/2022 9:34 PM
248 Should not be allowed to pave part of the front yard for car parking. 1/11/2022 8:50 PM 249 No questions were directed toward traffic and street witdth. Redondo Beach is permitting development on narrow, high traffic streets that causes problems for traffic, parking and pedestrians. More thought needs to be directed towards the traffic levels and the conditions of existing residential streets.
1/11/2022 8:34 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 63 / 68
250 Remove all minimum lot sizes and eliminate all setback requirements. Yards are wasteful and requiring them makes homes more expensive for no reason. 1/11/2022 8:33 PM
251 get rid of the height limits in Redondo, allow for more housing upward, get rid of parking maximums. make the city more walkable with more amenities with opportunities to have ADUs as well as business in mixed-use units.
1/11/2022 8:13 PM
252 Please cut down on the amount of town houses on one lot. We have way too many of them in the city. I don’t want to spend over $1 million to buy one of those. I’d rather move out of the city and buy my own single-family home with a yard.I like having yards for kids. It keeps them out of trouble.
1/11/2022 8:00 PM
253 SB9 and SB10 have the potential to ruin my nice neighborhood. Please do whatever you can to mitigate their impact.
1/11/2022 7:47 PM
254 Keep it simple please. Over complicated regulations cost everyone time and money, and create loop holes.
1/11/2022 7:28 PM
255 Just not appreciating the hulking nature of new homes here, I feel sorry for those in smaller homes having to live next to them. Really sad to see the loss of yards, and really wish new homes were required to have more trees and actually keep them alive. Very bright house lights affecting neighborhood character too. Thank you!
1/11/2022 6:08 PM
256 VERY INTERESTING 1/11/2022 5:57 PM
257 Please make it as easy as possible for people and businesses to improve this beautiful city! We could look so much better!!! Thank you for asking
1/11/2022 5:35 PM
258 Neighbors should be notified if a building will encroach on the view. 1/11/2022 4:50 PM 259 I think a property owner should be able to do what that person wants to do with the property, but also understand the desire to not have "Mc Mansions" on these lots. I also feel the City must do a better job of "enforcing" it's rules and once these are adopted, make sure they stick.

Additionally, the FAR was not addressed? The current is .65 as the standard with many bonus opportunities that can lead to .85, and that's not a lot of open space for these lots. Additionally, if the City truly wants to increase open outdoor space on properties, allowing a homeowner to build up on a garage, removing the current height restriction of 14' (I think) on a detached unit on a property, as well as considering increasing the 800 square foot limitation on those units - which could yield more open, outdoor space.
1/11/2022 4:35 PM
260 Since question 23 referred to fences, please see my comment from earlier in the questionnaire. The installation of anything along the property line, deemed to look or function as a fence, should be limited to 6ft.
1/11/2022 4:30 PM
261 The property sizes are too big and too tall currently. For smaller homes we have no privacy and construction next door has caused our property to lose sunlight, our house to crack and less parking. The need for tighter restrictions is imperative 1/11/2022 4:28 PM
262 Been in Redondo since 1977 we bought a 1903 colonial revival single story bungalow. The preservation commission passed preferred architectural guidelines for builders,architects back in the 90s but….. Redondo could only make the recommendations not enforce them for they were not mandatory guidelines. We moved here 47 years ago because of the scale and charm of the Vincent park area soon most older homes fell to the wrecking ball. Nothing worse than two monster mansions go up on each side of you. This should never be allowed but it does to this day. If you try guidelines education and enforcement will be the challenge 1/11/2022 4:22 PM
263 Don't allow homes to be built right up to the sidewalk/curb. They should be a distance back. 1/11/2022 4:17 PM 264 The outdoor space calculations should be revised to eliminate bonuses for balconies, and roof decks. Only ground level space should count. Rec rooms or living rooms which are open to a patio should not be included as open space. Lot coverage percentages should be strictly enforced. Driveways and hardscape should deducted before open space is calculated.

Last.....the Planning Department and the Planning Commission should not be able to change the zoning standards. Please stop allowing exceptions, which then become precedents, which lead to larger exceptions.
1/11/2022 4:08 PM
265 I think two car garages need to be wider to really accommodate two cars. I realize that will not work in R1-A, but anywhere it will work, it should be enforced. What is the width of a two car garage in a recent building, that really holds two cars? 1/11/2022 3:48 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 64 / 68
266 I believe the city has the right to regulate building with limits. Private property and ownership are fundamental American rights. Tax paying citizens should not dread or fear having to deal with the building department. And honest builders should be helped, not hindered in they’re business pursuits in our city
1/11/2022 3:46 PM
267 Let's make it a livable and destination that people want to visit and live in!!! Pretty, crime free and not let the builders have their way over city officials ;) 1/11/2022 3:37 PM
268 Don't overbuild. Going under a short-term gain is very tempting, I understand. But do you really want to be remembered as people who destroyed nice city? 1/11/2022 3:27 PM
269 tearing down a single family home and building 3 tall skinny homes on 1 lot is too much! 1/11/2022 3:11 PM 270 traffic 1/11/2022 3:01 PM
271 The weird angles on the new housing (the ones that look like they are falling over) is absolutely Functional Obsolescence and possibly economic. It doe not fit out beach community. Is t it also an earthquake hazard for homes around them?
1/11/2022 2:43 PM
272 Please allow ADUs about the garage. It is frustrating that this is not allowed. 1/11/2022 2:39 PM 273 Parking, traffic flow, street traffic density, unobstructed sidewalks are all imperative considerations in the process.
1/11/2022 2:34 PM
274 Parking is ridiculously hard in my neighborhood even though most houses have garages. I think it's time we require garages to be used for parking and not storage. 1/11/2022 2:32 PM
275 Good luck! 1/11/2022 2:10 PM
276 Designs by non-architects should not be allowed. They result in confused, ugly structures. 1/11/2022 2:07 PM 277 Older now but have remodeled homes in the area: Would like the process to get remodel plans and inspections to mover faster. We want young families to live here, build another bedroom on that tiny house, have kids. Remodeling is expensive and the longer it takes, the more it costs.

Would like some discretion that looks at practicality of something that might be slightly different than regs and see if it may be better, have a process for that which is friendly. 1/11/2022 1:44 PM
278 cannot destroy neigborhood character 1/11/2022 1:30 PM 279 Stop removing the single family homes and replacing them with multi-unit structures. Parking is bad enough, but you are putting way too many people in a small space. 1/11/2022 1:09 PM
280 Please stop the building of edge to edge on the lots. We are diminishing the green & outdoor space as well as vrowding on top of one another.
1/11/2022 12:54 PM
281 6 ft fences are usually fine - but because some of our pets can jump that height and we have coyote issues, sometimes we need more restrictive options 1/11/2022 12:41 PM
282 The permit process is nerve-racking and uncertain, and often homeowners want to avoid it if possible. This atmosphere must change to be a more collaborative one, in which homeowners feel encouraged to work with the permit office in order to ensure codes are followed, but also that homeowners feel their plans won't be thwarted.
1/11/2022 12:40 PM
283 I appreciate receiving this survey and trust my input will be considered. Thank you. We have loved our 38 years in RB. It has been a wonderful place to raise our daughter. 1/11/2022 12:38 PM
284 Roof lines should be more than 6 ft clearance from the property line for aesthetic and safety reasons.
1/11/2022 12:29 PM
285 none 1/11/2022 12:26 PM
286 Undergrounding of all utilities. Wide sidewalks. Discourage designs that look like Cracker Jack Boxes. Require some architectural flair in new buildings and remodels. 1/11/2022 12:23 PM
287 no ADU's as neighbor privacy and tenant parking is an issue 1/11/2022 12:14 PM 288 There should not be any exceptions made for setback requirements. Our neighborhood is crowded enough and there are serious noise, drainage, privacy and fire safety issues as is.

Furthermore, the increased depletion of landscape is having a devastating effect on the air quality and overall appeal of our neighborhood.
1/11/2022 12:08 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 65 / 68
289 problem is more that resident home owners park in street instead of garage or driveway 1/11/2022 12:06 PM 290 Given the current climate and the societal changes that have taken place. Privacy and a feeling of sanctuary is extremely important. Redondo beach has a unique opportunity in front of itself because Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach are becoming unattainable. RB is the next frontier in growth and community. We are so lucky to be nestled between PV and Hermosa. RB can be developed into the best of all the beach cities, instead of the "step sister". In planning our (RB) future, we need a clear vision and purpose of what we want out of our city. The grace of the Hamptons and Montecito, the creative energy of Malibu and Venice, with the upscale safety of the Upper east side (nyc) and Brentwood. RB is at the beginning of becoming great! Let's not make the mistake of the 70's where anything and everything was allowed. Allowing apartments to be built in the most expensive part of RB (esplanade, Catalina) is a real shame.
1/11/2022 12:01 PM
291 provide homeowners flexibility 1/11/2022 11:57 AM
292 I've been living in Redondo Beach for over 30 years now, and am heartened to see this reach out to the community as to how they feel about what their neighborhood looks like. Thanks. 1/11/2022 11:51 AM
293 1) The city most come up with some serious plans to allow for bike, and speed-limited e-bike and scooter friendly streets to provide a way to navigate the city safely. The use of these means of transportation is going to grow exponentially, and without adequate foresight, so will the injuries and fatalities from accidents with passenger vehicles. This isn't a residential building issue, but it is a residential development issue. The upcoming potential removal and/or under grounding of the power lines provides an incredible opportunity to reshape how people move through the city and their ability to do that on foot, scooter, skateboard, or whatever comes next could make Redondo into an even more incredible place to live. 2) For the most part, while Redondo has enjoyed a much greater density of development in general, it seems that the parking situation in most neighborhoods has stayed adequate. There are areas like the golden triangle or near larger apartment buildings that will never be solved, but keeping our streets from parked car saturation should be a priority. 1/11/2022 11:50 AM
294 Driveways should not create a slope in the sidewalk. Anything you can do to encourage offstreet parking would be great.1/11/2022 11:47 AM 295 I would like to make sure that for residential and commercial properties that are being rented out that it is a requirement to get Landlord written permission prior to any city permits being issued. Same with written HOA permission for multi unit condo complexes in regards to any permits being issued that affect HOA common areas. In my opinion, it is best to be proactive to maintaining the property owners rights rather than reactive when tenants or HOA members decide to make decisions unilaterally that affect others. 1/11/2022 11:46 AM
296 With any residential changes, traffic should be taken into consideration. Replacing a tear down house with a 3-unit building increases traffic on that street and could reduce street parking. 1/11/2022 11:43 AM
297 Multi family units get away with a lot of grandfathered old conditions that do not improve the neighborhood. Lighting is terrible throughout RB. Too bright mostly, too dark in commercial areas. Lots of run down buildings that need improvement and are neglected. 1/11/2022 11:40 AM
298 Objectivity is always better. As for fences, the question is misleading. I would like the fencing to be appropriate to the slope of the property.
1/11/2022 11:40 AM
299 Ensure infrastructure (utilities) cover the density of residents. Currently, we only have 100 amps of electricity and it severely limits our needs. Cannot put in an A/C unit due to limitations.
1/11/2022 11:40 AM
300 thanks for all the streamlining done to limit in person appearances in the permit office that have been done throughout the pandemic!
1/11/2022 11:39 AM
301 Pretty sneaky about listing ADUs way down the list. 1/11/2022 11:32 AM 302 to many large oversized designs in the planning dept . 1/11/2022 11:31 AM 303 Decrease maximum height to 27 feet. Prohibit razor wire in, and abutting, residential neighborhoods. Prohibit chain link fences in front yards. Embrace state law regarding ADUs.

Streamline permitting process.
1/11/2022 11:30 AM
304 Consider rezoning areas currently zoned for mixed use to pure residential. 1/11/2022 11:29 AM Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 66 / 68
305 In our neighborhood in No Redondo, developers are buying all of the small houses to build new 2 unit townhomes. The problem is, they let the houses sit empty for up to a year before they begin building and let them look terrible and become trash pits; or they tear down the house and not touch the property for a year and the weeds grow and the dirt runs out and makes the neighborhood a mess. There should be a certain expectation from the developers to keep their lots nice and build in a timely manner.
1/11/2022 11:28 AM
306 Require people to use their driveway when they have access to it, rather than street parking.

This area is already too dense and all of the street parking looks awful and restricts others from parking.
1/11/2022 11:26 AM
307 I would like to see older homes that are one one lot but could fit two houses, kept as one house with a alrge house. There are too many lots turned into two houses with no space between houses and very little outdoor space.
1/11/2022 11:25 AM
308 regarding question 22, a double curb cut is OK, as long as it does not cause the loss of a steet parking spot. For instance, on a 40 ft lot, at least 17 to 18 ft of curb should be left in tack, so a street parkiing spot is not lost.
1/11/2022 11:25 AM
309 Homeowner should be allowed / have more freedom to design their own homes. Keep city permits to a minimum/ make it easier/simpler to obtain. 1/11/2022 11:23 AM
310 Redondo Beach is already a dense, over developed area, especially in the R3 Zones along the Artesia Corridor. Less development should be allowed, and existing R3 zoning should be cut back to pre- 1960's Zoning.
1/11/2022 11:21 AM
311 Suggested, with voter approval or commissioners approval, of a Redondo Beach color -- Redondo blue or red, whatever -- with a registered color formula😊 as an option for property owners. It could be used as a reminder that The North is part of Redondo Beach, too! 1/11/2022 11:21 AM
312 Too many multi dwelling structure are being approved 1/11/2022 11:19 AM 313 While I do not support a second story cantilever over the driveway, I am ok with a balcony cantilever over the driveway. For staff discretion on approving exceptions with conditions and findings, the City should consider whether such decisions should be appealable to the Planning Commission.
1/11/2022 11:19 AM
314 Better sidewalk access. 1/11/2022 11:17 AM
315 Please stop overdeveloping north Redondo 1/11/2022 11:16 AM 316 For Question 22, the driveway should be only as wide as the opening for the two car garage. 1/11/2022 11:16 AM 317 Redondo Beach should take a hard look at how their restrictive design rules have created an environment introduces massive barriers to creating affordable housing and accessibility for lower income neighbors.
1/11/2022 11:14 AM
318 Builders should not be allowed to block driveways and double park on street. Castner has a very poor record about this.
1/11/2022 11:14 AM
319 Residential development must consider setbacks, intrusions on neighboring homes, and reduce the number of cars parked in front of homes. Design of homes should "fit" the lot size whnevenr possible to avoid neghborhood crowding.
1/11/2022 11:11 AM
320 The amount of space required between the structure and the sidewalk should be reduced so houses can be expanded into the existing front lawn.
1/11/2022 11:10 AM
321 Streamline the Standards and strongly adhere to them. 1/11/2022 11:08 AM 322 Recently I had to submit plans for my remodel. Files were too large to send by email during covid. Ended up having to submit by dropbox or by USB stick in person. This is slow and is not secure or safe. Redondo IT staff should have a secure solution for submitting large files to the city.
1/11/2022 11:07 AM
323 Sue the state for changing R-1 zoning. 1/11/2022 11:07 AM 324 Consistency. Your inspectors need to all be on the same page! Also you should have 1 inspector assigned to an address so you are dealing with the same person all the time. It should not take 6+ months to get thru plan check.
1/11/2022 11:04 AM
325 Mark parking on streets 1/11/2022 11:01 AM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 67 / 68
326 We should trust our neighbors to make good decisions. 1/11/2022 10:59 AM 327 I know that 2 on a lot make more money for developers and the city but they have really ruined so much of green space in the city.
1/11/2022 10:55 AM
328 On question #23 above, the allowable height of a fence should be determined, in part, by whether the property is flat or on a hillside. In some cases 6 feet high is enough, but 7 feet high should be the upper limit. Nothing else to add at the moment. 1/10/2022 11:35 PM
329 The city desperately need Floor Area Ratios in residential zones other than R-1. Specifically need an FAR is R-1A, R-2, R-3.
1/10/2022 10:33 PM
330 Please do the following: * End single-family zoning * Increase allowed density and remove height maximums * End parking minimums * End single-use zoning 1/10/2022 10:12 PM
331 This survey would have been better served to have a comment section after each question. Q 21: This should be something permitted where a narrow lot (R1-A) would be dominated by the entire width of garages and not allow for eyes on the street. If the lot is wider than the garage should be side by side but not dominate the elevation at street level by more than 50%. Q20:

There are plenty of thoughtful designs that allow for a driveway to a rear set garage that has an alley. Alley access only restrictions is counter intuitive to encouraging designs that would stoke neighbor interaction. Q18: A Balcony should be allowed to encroach into a rear / front setback within a certain limit that does not reduce the minimum set back to be encroached upon. (when using the average set back formula) and should be allowed to be flush with the side setback requirements. Q15: Shade structures should only be allowed on roof decks within the maximum building height restrictions. The max building height should be increased to 35'-0" Q13: This was completely subjective to an aesthetic appeal of a structure and should not even been a consideration as a question. If anything, get rid of Hip Style roofs and encourage butterfly style roofs that would allow more natural daylight into a structural while still shading from direct radiation that increases cooling costs when an gable or hip roof have skylights.
1/10/2022 8:26 PM
332 Question 17- would like a user field. I would prefer to allow balconies to exceed set backs on front only, not side setbacks.
1/10/2022 8:03 PM
333 Outside Open space updated, allowance of outside stairs/other accessory allowances. 2nd story only 80% of first story. No block buildings.
1/10/2022 7:51 PM
334 Lot size should taken into consideration when designing these guidelines. Many lots in Redondo are narrow and do not support things such as a side-loaded or rear-loaded garage without greatly reducing the size of the back yard. I would also support reducing the front yard setback requirements if homeowners are incorporating a larger back yard. Outdoor space in our neighborhoods is being reduced - children and pets need a safe place to play. 1/10/2022 7:51 PM
335 Would like to see plans that are substantially similar to plans that have already been built multiple times throughout Redondo Beach streamlined for quick approval. Front facing garages should be allowed on lots that are 50ft wide or less.
1/10/2022 7:48 PM
336 Love the scorecard idea, which gives homeowners flexibility and clear guidelines on how to meet planning standards
1/10/2022 7:41 PM
337 We really should be maximizing housing for people, not cars. Our parking standards are outdated, expensive and ugly
1/10/2022 7:38 PM
338 The guidelines should include a range of architectural styles for the applicant to choose from.

Add veranda’s as an option for balconies. It will add more usable outdoor living space. Keep the height of buildings low by removing mezzanines. Also would like to see a compatibility grid.
1/10/2022 7:25 PM
339 No rain barrels; they are not needed in our region, breed mosquitoes and we don’t have enough yard space for them and then become trash. Too many ficus trees are causing uplift and plumbing issues #8 - need middle ground response—would like to see simple process but a BALANCED process #10 - also need a middle response option. Commission appointments are purely political and views/opinions/perspectives can change based on who is mayor At the same time, don’t want to empower staff too much Need a balanced approach 1/10/2022 7:24 PM
340 Rescind the ability for attached structures to encroach setbacks. There was a rear accessory structure last year where a homeowner got planning commission to approve this, and 1/10/2022 7:20 PM
Residential Design Guidelines Update Community Survey 2022 68 / 68
effectively vetoing the decision by community development. 341 Address solar panels & electric vehicle charging. 1/10/2022 7:12 PM Jul 18, 2023
City of Redondo Beach
415 Diamond St
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
By Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected]
Re: Ordinance No. 23-6324: Objective Residential Standards Dear City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter to remind the Council of its obligation to abide by all relevant state laws when considering the proposed Objective Residential Standards in Ordinance No. 23-6324 (the “proposed standards”), calendared as agenda item N.2. at tonight’s meeting. Specifically, the Council must comply with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330), Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9”), and other state housing laws. The proposed standards, as currently drafted, do not adhere to these laws: many of them fail to articulate objective standards.

SB 330 bars cities from “[i]mposing or enforcing design standards [...] that are not objective.” (Gov. Code § 66300, subd. (b)(1)(C).) SB 9 allows cities to impose “objective zoning [...] subdivision [...] and [...] design” standards (but not subjective standards) on SB 9 projects. In addition, the Housing Accountability Act (HAA) renders non-objective standards unenforceable in most circumstances. (See California Renters Legal Advocacy and Education Fund v. City of San Mateo (2021) 68 Cal. App.5th 820, 839-44 (overturning city’s denial of housing project based on design guidelines requiring “a transition or step in height” where a building is more than one story taller than its neighbors on the grounds that it was not objective).) SB 330, SB 9, and the HAA define “objective” as “being uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official.” (Gov. Code § 65589.5, subd. (h)(8); Gov. Code § 66300, subd. (a)(7); see also Gov. Code § 65852.21, subd. (i)(2) [similar language]; Gov. Code § 66411.7, subd. (m)(1) [similar language].) 360 Grand Ave #323, Oakland 94610
[email protected]
Unfortunately, several provisions in Ordinance No. 23-6324 fall short of this requirement.

CalHDF urges the Council to carefully review all the proposed standards for objectivity and specifically points out many egregious examples:
● Section IV.D.5 “Guard Rails”: “The sides of balconies, decks and roof decks facing a neighboring residential use shall be enclosed with a minimum 42-inch high, nontransparent, solid barrier that is designed to be consistent with the overall style of the building.” The phrase “designed to be consistent with the overall style of the building” is not objective. Overall styles are not cleanly defined, and what counts as “consistent” or inconsistent with the building’s style is in the eye of the beholder. An applicant cannot know ex ante and with certainty whether their proposed design will satisfy the ordinance, and thus the ordinance is unenforceable on this point. ● Section V.B.5 “Vehicular/Pedestrian Path Intersections”: “The intersection of pedestrian and automobile circulation paths shall be separate or delineated to highlight the pedestrian path through use of decorative paving or similar materials as approved by the Director.” The phrases “to highlight the pedestrian path” and “decorative paving or similar materials” are not objective. Additionally, requiring material approval from the Director means an applicant cannot know ex ante and with certainty that their proposed design will satisfy the ordinance. ● Section V.C.1 “Architectural Style”: “Each project shall have an architectural style described in the application with supporting photographic examples and design statements written by an Architect. All material selections and design details shall match that style.” This language appears in Section VI.D.1 as well. Compatibility within a style is not an objective standard, as it cannot be applied uniformly. Architectural styles, and their materials and design details, are subjectively defined and therefore cannot be enforced by the City.
● Section V.C.2 “360-Degree Design”: “The project shall have consistent design features or patterns that render it as unique with all elevations designed at the same level of architectural detail and articulation as the front elevation.” This language appears in Section VI.D.4 as well. The phrases “consistent design features or patterns,” “render it as unique,” and “same level of architectural detail and articulation as the front elevation” are not objective. It is not clear what counts as “consistent” or “unique,” and the city might, under this language, reject applications based on subjective aesthetic preferences. That is not allowed.
● Section V.F.2 “Carport Roofs”: “Carport roofs shall be designed to be consistent with the architecture of the primary residential structure. Flat carport roofs shall only be permitted if designed consistently with the primary residential structure (i.e., modern style).” This language appears in Section VI.G.2 as well. The phrase “if designed consistently” is not objective, and what counts as “consistent” or inconsistent with the building’s style is in the eye of the beholder. Therefore, an applicant cannot know ex ante and with certainty whether their proposed design will satisfy the ordinance.
2 of 4
● Section V.F.4 “Gutter/Downspout Color”: “Exposed gutters and downspouts shall be colored to match fascia or wall materials, unless designed to stand out in contrast as part of an overall architectural theme.” This language appears in Section VI.G.4 as well. Architectural themes are not clearly defined, and it is not clear what counts as coloring “to match fascia or wall materials.”
● Section V.I.5 “Tree Planting”: “Young trees shall be securely staked with double stakes.” This language applies in Section VI.J.6 as well. The term “young tree” is not clearly defined, and is therefore not an objective requirement. This section is ambiguous and unenforceable without clarification as to that definition. ● Section VI.B.3 “Pedestrian Paths”: “For projects located near compatible land uses, the Director may require gates and pathways to shorten the walking distance for residents to access these uses.” An applicant must be able to know with certainty whether their proposed design will satisfy the ordinance. Allowing the Planning Director to add discretionary requirements violates SB 9, SB 330, and the HAA. ● Section VI.D.5 “Durable Materials on the Ground Floor”: “Long-lived (higher quality) materials shall be integrated into the first floor elevations. Acceptable materials are stone, brick veneer, architectural tile, or board formed concrete for contemporary/modern styles.” While the explicit acceptable materials to constitute “long-lived” and “higher quality” are objective, architectural styles are not cleanly defined, and cannot be treated individually. The City must draft more specific language before it can impose such rules.
● Section VI.D.8 “Accessory Structures”: “Accessory structures to the primary residential building(s) on the site shall be designed in the same architectural style as the primary buildings(s) in the complex.” Compatibility within a style is not an objective standard, as it cannot be applied uniformly. Architectural styles of primary residential buildings are subjectively defined. This language, similarly found in Section VI.E.2 “Roof Decks” (“Roof decks shall be designed consistently with the building’s architectural style”), is not enforceable by the City.

CalHDF appreciates Redondo Beach’s effort to establish objective residential standards. We remind the City, however, that it must take care to follow the law in doing so. The current proposal needs many revisions before it can be finalized and implemented in accordance with state law.

CalHDF is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income households.

You may learn more about CalHDF at www.calhdf.org.

Sincerely,
3 of 4
Dylan Casey
CalHDF Executive Director
Courtney Welch
CalHDF Director of Investigations and Enforcement
4 of 4
From: Matthew Hinsley
To: CityClerk
Cc: Bill Brand; Brandy Forbes
Subject: Blue Folder Item - Item N.2 Objective Residential Standards Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 7:00:18 AM
Attachments: 07-18-23 RB_ORS_City Council Meeting.pdf
Good morning,
bcc : City Council
I would like to submit the attached pdf file as a blue folder item for Item N.2.

I do intend to speak during public comment but I do not intend to spend time on every slide.

They are there for your consideration.

Thank you,
Matthew Hinsley
(408) 981-8020

OBJECTIVE RESIDENTIAL STANDARDS
Matthew Hinsley
Planning Commission
Obj. Residential Standard Subcommittee
July 18, 2023

GOALS & OBJECTIVES
Current residential design guidelines were implemented to solve a problem with development in the city but they are largely subjective. à How have the original RDG been successful or unsuccessful? à How can the subjective RDG be translated into objective RDG? à What has been the resident feedback when working with the RDG? à What new issued have arisen with development in the city since the creation of the original RDG?
- What new areas of city could benefit similarly to Aves/Beryl? - What new zones in the city could benefit from ORS?

PURPOSE OF PRESENTING
• Tonight, I am representing myself and my opinions and not speaking for the planning commission.
• Share the visualizations of development used in determining suggestions and recommendations in the O.R.S.
• Share the neighborhood character images.
• Recommended numbers are estimates and need technical
measurements and data collected.
• Show a revised R-2 F.A.R. since the final P.C. June meeting. • Be available for any questions or clarifications.

OVERALL SUMMARY
R-2 / R-3 :
- Newly proposed floor area ratio (FAR)
The proposal of the planning commission needs further
revision for the R-2 zone
- Relocate the garage from the front unit that dominates view from the street and promote the appearance of a single-family house. - Front door of the front (”A”) unit facing the street
increases connectivity to the neighborhood.

R1-A :
- Newly proposed floor area ratio (FAR)
- Objectify the character neighborhood of existing flat roof designs - No mezzanines above open to the first floor
R-2 / R-3 PROPOSALS
Redondo Beach General Plan - Land Use Element

LOW DENSITY MULTI-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL NEIGHBORHOODS
These areas, designated "R-2" and "R-3," are intended to accommodate multiple-unit housing developments, while still maintaining a lower density character. The maximum "R-2" density of 14.6 units per acre allows two units on a 6,000 square foot lot, and the maximum "R-3" density of 17.5 units per acre allows two units on a 5,000 square foot lot.

Most of these areas were originally developed with single-family homes and have been allowed to transition to two or three condominium units on a lot to encourage revitalization and to meet a diversity of housing needs. Even though multi-family development is permitted, it is desired to maintain a lower density, single-family type of character through architectural design and limits on density.

R-2 / R-3 PROPOSALS
Redondo Beach Municipal Code
10-2.510 Specific purposes, R-2, R-3, RMD, and RH multiple-family residential zones. (a) Provide appropriately located areas for multiple-family residential development consistent with the General Plan and with the standards of public health, safety, and welfare established by the Municipal Code;
(c) Achieve a high level of design quality consistent with the surrounding neighborhood;
(d) Ensure adequate light, air, privacy, and open space for each dwelling; (h) The additional purposes of each multiple-family residential zone are:
(1) R-2, R-3 and R-3A low density multiple-family residential zones.To provide opportunities for low density multi-family residential land use, including attached or detached units in condominiums, duplexes, and apartments, and designed to convey the visual character of single family residential neighborhoods.

R-2 RESIDENTIAL ZONING
(TWO ON A LOT)
REVISION TO THE P.C. PROPOSAL – R-2 FAR
R-2 :
- Newly proposed maximum floor area ratio (FAR)
-> I started the P.C. recommendation and it had a incorrect assumption of standard/min. R-2 lot size. It needs further revision.

Revised R-2 maximum F.A.R.

My Proposal
(image)
P.C.

Recommend
Revised Suggested
R-2 FAR
Assumed Standard
R-2 Lot Size
5,000 sq. ft. 5,000 sq. ft. 6,000 sq. ft.
(Min. Lot)
7,500 sq. ft.
(Typical)
Max. Living Space 2,500 sq. ft. 2.500 sq. ft. 2,219 sq. ft. 2,864 F.A.R. 1.14 1.14 0.86 0.86
Gross Floor Area /
Unit
(2,861 sq. ft.
/ Unit)
(2,861 sq. ft.
/ Unit)
(2,580 sq.
ft. / unit)
(3,225 sq. ft.
/ unit)
Gross Floor Area : Assumes garage at min. dimensions 19’x19’ (361 sq. ft.) • Year Built : 2003
• Living Space : 2,318 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,679 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 7,494 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 0.72
• (Calculated for one unit)
R-2

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
• Year Built : 2023
• Living Space : 3,142 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 3,503 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 6,659 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 1.05
• (Calculated for one unit)
R-2

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
R-2

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
• Year Built : 2023
• Living Space : 2,039 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,400 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 7,459 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 0.64
• (Calculated for one unit)
R-2

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
• Year Built : 1998
• Living Space : 2,570 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,931 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 7,489 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 0.78
• (Calculated for one unit)
• Year Built : 1998
• Living Space : 2,386 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,727 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 7,515 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 0.73
• (Calculated for one unit)
R-2

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
• Year Built : 1988
• Living Space : 2,428 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,789 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 7,494 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 0.74
• (Calculated for one unit)
R-2

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
R-3 RESIDENTIAL ZONING
(THREE ON A LOT)
R-3

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
Cantilever of 2F to the side setback Especially noticeable when R-3 is 6 units Cantilever of 2F to the side setback Multiple recent designs implement maximum cantilever R-3

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
Cantilever of 2F to the side setback Maximum Cantilever of 2F (LEFT) compared to partial cantilever (RIGHT)
R-3

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
Example of existing R-2 design – Small cantilever New Cantilever of 2F to maximum side setback R-3

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
R-1A RESIDENTIAL ZONING
(TALL & SKINNY)
R-1A

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
• Year Built : 2019
• Living Space : 2,287 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,648 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 2,500 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 1.06
R-1A

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
• Year Built : 2020
• Living Space : 2,500 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,861 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 2,503 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 1.14
• Year Built : 2023
• Living Space : 2,185 sq. ft.
• Gross Floor : 2,546 sq. ft.
(incl. 19’x19’ garage)
• Lot Size : 2,500 sq. ft.
• F.A.R. : 1.02
R-1A

RESIDENTIAL
ZONE
R-1A RESIDENTIAL ZONE

EXISTING FLAT ROOF HEIGHT
R-1A RESIDENTIAL ZONE

RECENT FLAT ROOF HEIGHT
R-1A RESIDENTIAL ZONE

RECENT FLAT ROOF HEIGHT

FLOOR AREA RATION SUMMARY
• If adopted according to the Planning Commission necessary recommendations the F.A.R., including the R-2 correction shared tonight, for the residential zones :

R-1 R-2 R-1A R-3
Recommended
max. FAR

0.69 (w/ bonuses)

0.86 0.94 1.14
Standard Lot
(All unit(s))
5,000
sq. ft.
7,500
sq. ft.
2,500
sq. ft.
7,500
sq, ft.

Max. Gross Floor Area
(Single Unit, incl. garage)
3,450
sq. ft.
3,225
sq. ft.
2,350
sq. ft.
2,850
sq. ft.

Density 1 unit /
5,000 sq. ft
1 unit /
3,000 sq ft.
1 unit /
2,500 sq. ft.
1 unit /
2,500 sq. ft
• The garage size is assume min. requirement 19’x19’
• Max. R-1 bonus w/ P.C. recommendation to eliminate current bonuses for new ORS requirements.

CONCLUSION
• Do not adopt the objective residential standards without the additional changes recommended of the planning commission. • Decide if the ORS is objectifying the current RDG, Land use Element and Municipal code only or making new requirements. • The R-2/R-3 recommendations (FAR, Cantilever, mezzanines) are the least mature and need further discussion and refinement.
• As evidenced by the proposed revision of R-2 FAR value. • The objective recommendations are approximate. they require technical measurement and analysis to determine the final values. • The R1-A max height (Flat roof, pitched roof) intend t0 match existing neighborhood character but need measurement.
• The Faye & Susana neighborhood objective requirements require measurement to determine the appropriate values.

FURTHER CONSIDERATIONS
• Other identified character areas should be examined for objective standards to maintain their neighborhood character.
• The upper avenues are not listed currently listed as a character area in the ORS from the current RDG.
• The new sloped lot max. height measurement needs to be decided. • measurements of existing structures should be used to determine the max. height.
• The requirement of not aligning windows will be difficult to achieve for R1-A zone due to lot size and design constraints. • Consider a min. garage size above the min. (19’x19’) to ensure the garage remains a functional size with new FAR requirements.

City of Redondo Beach Tom Wooge
415 Diamond Street
Redondo Beach, CA 90277.
16 July, 2023
Re: Redondo Beach Objective Residential Standards
& Character Area Design Guide Update for TRW Tract
Dear Mayor & City Council, City Clerk,
In considering the proposed Residential Standards and Design Guide, please consider the desire of residents for attainment of fundamental aspects of better living in the City of Redondo Beach, particularly in the R-1 Single Family neighborhoods.

We seek the unfettered enjoyment of life in the special local environment, an ideal natural fresh, clean, and mild, not-too-humid coastal climate, often compared with the "Mediterranean Climate", -but without the associated plagues of insects found elsewhere; here on larger-than-usual land parcels from our early outlying farm and grazing land subdivision roots; - enabling true realization of the ideal blending of indoor-outdoor living activities known worldwide as "The California Lifestyle".

But, tragically, the proposed residential standards and guide often hamper and even contradict realization of these basic life goals in our building environment.

Modern spatial requirements for flexible continuity of great-room living activities, indirect LED lighting, corresponding higher ceilings and operable exterior glass walls benefit from consistent wide structural bays open to expansive backyard area.

The same mild climate eliminates need of traditional freeze-resisting basements and snow-shedding pitched roof attic spaces historically provided for utilities, games, hobbies and storage; instead evolving into contemporary multiple bedroom suites with walk-in closets, dressing and bath rooms, home offices, media room, rec. room, pool and spa. Enlarged first and second floor requirements must be met while maximizing open backyard living area to achieve goals of the good life.

Yet the proposed standards frustrate attainment of these life goals by instead prescribing pitched roofs and extensive intrusive setbacks as whammies to reduce a mistaken perception of external street-view bulk; resulting in the tortured spatial junk-yard dog-pile assemblages illustrated in the isometric diagrams of the proposed code and visual shifting of building mass into the backyard, where it is especially damaging to precious outdoor living space and looms over neighboring backyards to the detriment of perceived privacy.

R-1 zoned street with TRW/Northrop Grumman manufacturing buildings beyond In R-1 neighborhoods, typical wide streets and front yards render superficial street-views of 2-story house bulk or style less significant, subject more to individual needs, taste and market forces of curb-appeal. Privacy is not a front-yard issue.

City Planning has other more relevant impacts and should not require second floors be shifted back from the front and sides into the rear.

Objective Standards as Proposed
A. Key Standards (R-1)

7. Second Story Front Setback +10-ft more than required front setback (+15-ft in TRW)
• A visual rejection of the possibility that a coherent shape may be more beneficial to the building's design.
• Forced terraced "wedding cake" mass aesthetic is personal at best. • Enforced uniformity is not necessarily beneficial; "to commit a sin twice does not make it less of a sin."
• Additional front setback of the second story shifts bulk to the rear where it greatly impacts neighbors' bedroom and backyard privacy to the sides.

Nobody has privacy issues in the front.
• In suburban neighborhoods, the wide streets and front yards create a spatial vacuum, 90-ft wide between facing houses of only up to 30-ft tall makes it difficult to even see both sides in one view if there are trees and certainly not a scale or privacy issue.
(Terracing is more meaningful on narrow urban streets: for example the world famous central street of terraced homes in Acoma Pueblo, NM are only 20-ft apart as the expansive cosmic center of the universe and civilization, -the oldest continuously inhabited site in North America.) • Seismic earthquake safety standards encourage continuity of second story exterior walls down to the foundations. Inconsistent setbacks make tortured structures which, though expensively engineered to current building codes, have only a fraction of the safety of rational design. The result is periodic tightening of the structural codes after embarrassing seismic outcomes. • Modular pre-fabricated construction is frustrated by inconsistent setbacks. • To achieve an arbitrary stepped effect, it would be far kinder to reward a covered front entry porch with accommodation in a possible 6-ft reduction of the front setback. Soft Power outperforms evil coercion! • Concern about house-fronts not being in-line along the street should be addressed by optional extended open front porches, as apparently desired by the planning department.
• Suggest making a required percentage of gross second floor setback area based on first floor footprint, to be distributed as preferred to best support the overall house design.

B. Additional Second Story Setbacks

2. Second Story Side Setback +2-ft average (4-ft min.) more than each side setback
• Aggregated setback becomes a prohibited side balcony (see below). • Even if they are not easily accessible balconies, they will look like ones from the neighbor's point of view; -imagined threats to privacy are more threatening than actual visibility of neighbors.
• Diminishing efficiency of room disposition in a reduced and irregular width significantly increases the actual area / bulk needed.
• Many other concerns regarding a front setback also apply to the sides, particularly structural and modular continuity issues.

C. Mezzanines

1. Definitions (Proposed):
• Mezzanine area(s) should not be tied to 1/3 of the arbitrary overlooked room(s), as they most sensibly occur above collective low supporting areas such as bathrooms, closets and hallways and may serve as a common loft or attic for storage.
• A mezzanine is generally understood as limited to 1/3 of the relevant floor footprint area and requires two routes of emergency egress, one usually a ceiling hatch/folding stair.

2. Location of 2nd story mezzanine to have extra 15' front, 5' side & rear setback • Height is height and the internal name or story designation should be irrelevant.
• If the exterior bulk of a home is the concern, the interior should be free to resolve the most elegantly efficient solution. A sensible mezzanine can greatly reduce second story footprint -and diminish perceived bulk where it really matters!
D. Balconies and Roof Decks

2. Balcony Location: No side-facing balconies allowed on an interior lot side • Too late; side setbacks in B.2 have already required side-facing virtual balconies.

E. Other Privacy and Neighborhood Compatibility Standards

1. Second-Story Windows shall not be located opposite a window of an existing building
• When both windows are existing, which shall move or be modified? • If new construction is to be restricted by an existing neighbor, then the neighbor must at least agrees to never change the existing condition or else the first one to build could be stuck with a needlessly substandard home.

2. Comparison Drawing shall be submitted demonstrating how the proposed structures compare to the rest of the street frontage in scale and compatibility. • If a proposed structure meets stated requirements, then backward compatibility should be irrelevant. It is the City's responsibility to retain building records if desired for such comparison to correct current requirements as appropriate.

G. Garage Location and Design
Alley Access

1. A lot with a rear alley shall have a garage in the rear of the lot. • Rear parking intrudes on precious backyard living area. • Detached garage requires walking through weather to reach a home and should never be a requirement.

5. Garage Access on Corner Lots: No curb cut allowed on front • A side street curb cut places parking at the rear of the house which severs the important connection of indoors to outdoor backyard living areas that define the California good life.

I. Parking, Curb Cuts, Parkways, and Street-Adjacent Elements

2. Parkway Trees shall be preserved
• The City Public Works Dept. cut down my 30-yr old Acacia tree, on private property, well back from the parkway, without notice or permission. This standard must work both ways.

4. Tandem Parking shall not be utilized to meet parking requirements • Tandem parking is often the most efficient and beneficial use of site area and greatly improves the exterior appearance through garage door reduction.
• Tandem parking is so beneficial that the otherwise required double wide driveway should be allowed anyway if needed for parking; equivalent to what would otherwise be available.
• The expressed concern that a tandem garage could be used for storage with displaced vehicles outside would also apply to double-wides. Autonomous cars, as a service, are expected to greatly reduce the number of private cars permanently on site, a major benefit for tandem area conversion.

J. Modular Construction Standards

2. Building Materials limited to: Metal, Precast Concrete, Wood, Brick, Stone • Brick and Stone are unsuitable for pre-fabricated structures, unless used as wallpaper, a tacky veneer.
• For compatibility, any desired material should be allowed. • Forced conformity with mediocrity is not beneficial, without change there can be no improvement.

3. Facade Variation
a. extra 6' front setback
• Instead allow 6-ft extra encroachment, as a front porch. b. Limit corrugated metal panel to 2/3 front facade area • In the shadow of the Northrop Grumman high-rise manufacturing buildings, corrugated metal panels from ground to sky, and beyond, are the dominant environment.

K. R-1 Character Areas Defined
"starter homes"
About the turn of the millennium, the City of Redondo Beach spent over $80,000 on consultants to gather public input at workshops to develop residential design guidelines, producing a code that was word-for-word, diagram-for-diagram, identical to the City of West Hollywood's -which has since abandoned it to allow improved design quality. The generic standards were slathered over Redondo's neighborhoods regardless of appropriate needs and should never have been applied to the TRW Tract.

The vacant TRW-adjacent Tract was subdivided during World War II for factory worker housing adjacent to major aviation companies. In the shadow of massive 100-ft high manufacturing buildings, the houses are small, minimum "cracker boxes", in 3 models approx. 800sf 2-bedroom up to 1,000sf for 3-bedrooms, and devoid of "style". The lots on former grazing land are relatively large, typically 55-ft wide x 110-ft deep for over 6,000sf. With ever-rising land prices and housing scarcity, the value of these parcels approaches $2 million today; though original houses remain as obsolete "scrappers" with assessed value of the improvements as only $30 thousand. The premise that the old is somehow superior to the new and should govern style may apply in more "charming" neighborhoods of South Redondo Beach but would tragically limit quality of the TRW Tract's future.

The notion that new contemporary additions and homes should mimic the limited scale and banal features of the remaining factory houses is unfortunate; yet this is just what the proposed change from design guidelines to "Objective Residential Standards" state as their goal to require. Meanwhile, more onerous "character guidelines" are proposed:

TRW Tract Design Guidelines

1. Roof Design
"Roofs should be sloped" is a quaint old fashioned foreign visible shape for shedding excessive snow loads, not in keeping with Southern California's functional requirements to act as a horizontal sun-visor. Simply stated: "if one places one's hand above one's eyes to improve a view, then the house should do similar in a horizontal gesture of functionality".

The width of eave boards, if any, should be per design requirements to support or clad the overhang, not to match an arbitrarily imposed bureaucratic "aesthetic" criterion.

Roof material should be weather-tight, durable, energy conserving, and allow high quality & high performing materials such as architectural metal or flat reflective membrane material. To arbitrarily require shingles-for-all is dysfunctional for low slopes and contrary to good design.

2. Siding Materials
To require any siding is like something out of a black-and-white western movie set, not conducive to an honest expression of contemporary building materials and methods. Public comment has pointed out the ridiculous transient fashions of board-and-batten revival. Any arbitrary design requirement in this aspect of a house encourages perpetual mediocrity. Notable architectural examples in the TRW Tract today are panelized exterior expression or linear corrugated material which would be discouraged under the proposed restrictions.

The notion that additions should be encouraged to match existing siding material, even if practical in the future, could discourage any architectural design improvement or practical step-by-step upgrade of a property. A repetition of self-perpetuating mediocrity forever; - but easy for an unthinking clerk to enforce.

3. Windows
The best -if only- quality design feature of the original tract houses was large unbroken horizontal glass lites in exterior fenestration. New plate-glass technology was a major feature, with 2-front bedroom models featuring an expansive picture window in a living room bay. The proposed city design character guidelines that all windows now be multi-paned is a tragic throwback to high-maintenance medieval times, contradicting sensible technology-forward quality of life ideals of this safe aerospace worker tract.

4. Architectural Features
The guideline to "include one of the following features on facades facing a street such as decorative window shutters" is a tragic misunderstanding and contradiction of "Architectural" Features. A well-designed building's visible features are an expression of its intrinsic structure and system of enclosure, like a musical instrument its exterior and interior are unified without extraneous superfluous expressions. A desecration by applied non-functional ornament is abominable and should never be suggested by government.
"Simplicity and repose are qualities that measure the true value of any work ... imposed detail has ruined more fine things from the standpoint of...fine living than any one human shortcoming; it is hopelessly vulgar." - Frank Lloyd Wright

5. Second Floor
A major backfire; the proposed continuation of the requirement for an extra large front setback of a second story is extremely harmful to the quiet enjoyment of privacy. Unlike some "charming" South Redondo Beach neighborhoods, the spacious TRW neighborhood street profile is 90-ft wide between facing houses of only up to 30-ft tall, -difficult to even see both sides in one view and certainly not a scale or privacy issue. But when a second story is arbitrarily shifted halfway back from the front -it then protrudes in the back, where the second-story side wall and windows loom over adjacent backyards instead of the neighboring house; a deadly impact on personal backyard privacy. The notion that this is "compatible with the style in this character area" ignores common sense and the damage accumulated under the city-wide criterion in years past.

Earthquake safety standards encourage continuity of second story exterior walls down to the foundations. Inconsistent setbacks make tortured structures which, though expensively engineered to current building codes, have only a fraction of the safety of rational design.

Street and front yard character would be greatly enhanced by added street trees, which could locally obscure the huge Northrop Grumman manufacturing building backdrop, yet despite paying a property tax item of over $40 annually per parcel for "street tree maintenance", there are still almost none in North Redondo.

6. Compatible Styles
The prescription to be "Traditional, Modern Ranch, or Storybook" is absurd in the twenty-first century and will only get worse. See comment item #4 above.

The reference to the TRW Tract's Mid-Century Design Aesthetic is incorrect, -confusing cheap with deep. Mid-century modern homes are characterized by very wide, open spaces, floor-to-ceiling glass, exposed structure and emphasis on bringing the outdoors in, -all good statements. By contrast, the small stucco box TRW Tract starters were of minimal cost construction with very little intrinsic aesthetic expression, what are referred to as "dumb" boxes -in that they do not speak.
"Traditional" style is defined by historical 17th~18th century ideals, emphasizing social standing as vertical expression with steps up to defined living and dining rooms on the first floor with a non-functional front porch, bedrooms on the second with at least one front-facing gable pointing upward, on a protruding basement below. Stone or brick outweigh stucco. These foreign ideals are the antithesis of the TRW Tract simple laid-back worker's boxes, "married to the ground". "Modern Ranch" as a style entails relief by expansive articulation of opulent features on a scale unachievable on the frontages as subdivided. "Storybook Style" applied to the TRW Tract is an oxymoron, self-contradictory on many levels: fictitious, artificial, insubstantial, delusive, figmental, imagined, insincere, misleading, mock, notional, pretend, sham, suppositious, -not unlike the notion of a government promoted style.
"Style is a byproduct of the process....To adopt a 'style' as a motive is to put the cart before the horse...." - Frank Lloyd Wright, In the Cause of Architecture II (1914)

7. Incompatible Styles
Forbidding some styles, including Contemporary/Modern as incompatible forever condemns the neighborhood to repetition of the old lowest common denominators and no encouragement of improvement with time. Any scrap of architectural honesty and integrity of the zeitgeist or "genuine spirit of the time" is lost to "schlock".

8. Renovations or Remodels
The suggestion that an existing "style" be maintained forever is pure immurement.

Without change, there can be no life or improvement.
"In authoritarian regimes, ideas are seen as threats, not as opportunities.

Controlling what already exists is the backward focused goal of tyranny; Creating what will exist next is seen as a subject that should not be discussed." - Gregg Easterbrook (2018) It's Better Than It Looks
In summary, every item and aspect of the proposal to change design guidelines to wrong-headed zero-tolerance requirements and impose character area guidelines is the exact opposite of good planning review. As a forward-looking community of free individuals, the TRW Tract should become a safe haven from all imposed aesthetic standards.

Many of the proposed objective requirements have capricious penalties when applied without sufficient consideration of implications in possible cases. As variances would be needed for unforeseen or unequal hardships, the time and cost to the public for this remedy should be streamlined. A clear statement of planning goals and approved standards ought to accompany objective requirements to filter out arbitrary aspects when not relevant or counterproductive. The City should develop a basic generous quantitative envelope for buildings and capacity for capable professional review to assist and guide property owners to achieve their goals and who request a variance or appeal.
"There should be as many kinds (styles) of houses as there are kinds (styles) of people and as many differentiations as there are different individuals. A man who has individuality (and what man lacks it?) has a right to its expression in his own environment." - Frank Lloyd Wright, In the Cause of Architecture I (1908) Sincerely,
Tom Wooge
From: RDG Update
Sent: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 8:57 AM
To: Brandy Forbes <[email protected]>; Sean Scully <[email protected]> Subject: FW: Parking for adus
Good Morning,
Please see comment below. I will save it under the share drive.

Thank you,
Wendy Menendez
Planning Analyst
Department of Community Development l Planning Department 415 Diamond Street
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
(310) 318 - 3142
[email protected]
www.redondo.org
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important From: Anh <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, July 17, 2023 9:31 AM
To: RDG Update <[email protected]>
Subject: Parking for adus
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Hello
please allow adus to be built over detached garages like other cities.

Neighbors are converting their garages and as I speak to friends and other neighbors.

They are all converting for extra income.

Street parking is going to become like Hermosa in a few years.

If the state allows conversions let’s Atleast do it the right way.

Let’s promote to keep parking please.

Thank you
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk
Subject: Comments for Next City Council Meeting
Date: Thursday, July 13, 2023 8:00:19 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:

The revised Residential Design Guidelines remove many strong protections that existing property owners deserve. Single family and other existing residential is now at risk from excessive multifamily that will not be required to be compatible with the existing neighborhood, its character, or visual style. Please reject the May 2023 revision and direct the Planning Commission to return the following strong protections to any revision:

CURRENT PROTECTION Page STATUS IN REVISION
“…ensuring that new homes or additions to existing
homes are of high architectural quality; are compatible in mass, scale, and other design features with surrounding development; and preserve and contribute to the unique
character of established neighborhoods”
1 Removed
“All new multi-family developments should be compatible with the character of the neighborhood.”
37 Removed
“New multi-family residential development should
respect the development in the immediate area”
37 Removed
“avoid overwhelming building scale and visual
obstructions”
37 Removed
“Appropriate building siting should be used to reduce the perception of bulk”
37 Removed
The property owners of Redondo Beach deserve better than tall, commercial, multifamily buildings destroying neighborhood privacy, consistency, and character.

Thank you.

From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; [email protected]; Todd Loewenstein; Nils Nehrenheim; Scott Berhrendt; Zein Obagi; Michael Webb Cc: Kevin Cody; Lisa Jacobs; [email protected]; Garth Meyer Subject: OPPOSE: Proposed Revision of RB Residential Design Guidelines Date: Monday, July 17, 2023 10:32:53 AM
Attachments: image.png
List of signers opposed to proposed revision of residential design guidelines.docx CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Redondo Beach and Torrance Mayors, Councils, City Attorneys, Planning Commissioners:

The following letter from 50 local residents demonstrates the lack of resident consent achieved on the Redondo Beach "objective" residential design standards. The RDGs govern the strong protections of residential character and ultimately property value. The Planning Department proposes to discard those 20-year old successful RDGs merely because they have been unable to turn all of them into numbers. There is no reason to forsake strong protections. They can be included in the revision in their CURRENT form.

Please reject the proposed RDG changes and return this issue to the Planning Commission with direction to reinsert the discarded strong residential property owner protections. Thank you.

The local resident letter:

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:

Thank you for your consideration. The residents and residential property owners of Redondo Beach deserve better than uncontrolled development caused by removing successful, 20 year old development rules.

Signed by the attached list of 50 local residents.
--
StopBCHD.com ([email protected]) is a Neighborhood Quality-of-Life Community concerned about the quality-of-life, health, and economic damages that BCHDs 110-foot above the street, 800,000 sqft commercial development will inflict for the next 50-100 years. Our neighborhoods have been burdened since 1960 by the failed South Bay Hospital project and have not received the benefit of the voter-approved acute care public hospital since 1984.Yet we still suffer 100% of the damages and we will suffer 100% of the damages of BCHDs proposal.

Deorah J Whitcas [email protected]
Neil Minami [email protected]
Monika Olmos [email protected]
Jeanne Sinsheimer [email protected]
Brooke Solomon [email protected]
Sabrina Kerch [email protected]
Mark Nelson [email protected]
RA Loeffler [email protected]
Patricia Yee [email protected]
Linda Zelik [email protected]
Fred Fasen [email protected]
Jay Bichanich [email protected]
Chiaki Imai [email protected]
Mark Miodovski [email protected]
Bethany Johnsob [email protected]
Laura Woolsey [email protected]
Rosann Taylor [email protected]
Donna Evans [email protected]
Carol Friedman [email protected]
Renee Tallman [email protected]
Kathleen Dianne McLeod [email protected]
Luis E. Chaves [email protected]
Tim Ozenne [email protected]
Vishal Bamba [email protected]
George Stephen Parker [email protected]
Jackie Ecklund [email protected]
Donna israel [email protected]
Alan Israel [email protected]
Jill Klausen [email protected]
maureen anderson [email protected]
Lara Duke [email protected]
Melanie Cohen [email protected]
Glen H and Nancy N Yokoe [email protected]
Stephanie Ishioka [email protected]
priscilla sena [email protected]
Mary L Watkins [email protected]
Josephine Hrzina [email protected]
Joyce Field [email protected]
Lorraine Dibrell [email protected]
Marcio Nava [email protected]
Thomas McGarry [email protected]
Sheila Anderson [email protected]
Michele Wachtfogel [email protected]
Monette Lopez [email protected]
Jacob Tedesco [email protected]
Lauren Cotner [email protected]
Xiomara Cruz [email protected]
Amy Magnotta [email protected]
Jim magnotta [email protected]
Heather DeCristo [email protected]
Candace Nafissi [email protected]
From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; [email protected]; Todd Loewenstein; Nils Nehrenheim; Scott Berhrendt; Zein Obagi; Michael Webb Cc: Kevin Cody; Lisa Jacobs; [email protected]; Garth Meyer Subject: Re: OPPOSE: Proposed Revision of RB Residential Design Guidelines Date: Monday, July 17, 2023 11:06:02 AM
Attachments: image.png
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

We continue to receive more signatories to the letter opposing the Redondo Beach RDG update that is proposed. We will provide an update later in the day. This is a clear sign that many local residents were unaware of this revision activity. At times, the revision process was by invitation only to developers and others that profit from the development of real estate. Sadly, few people follow the planning commission agenda to gain awareness of this issue.

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:32 AM Stop BCHD <[email protected]> wrote:

Redondo Beach and Torrance Mayors, Councils, City Attorneys, Planning Commissioners:

Please reject the proposed RDG changes and return this issue to the Planning Commission with direction to reinsert the discarded strong residential property owner protections. Thank you.

The local resident letter:

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:

From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; [email protected]; Todd Loewenstein; Nils Nehrenheim; Zein Obagi; Michael Webb; Scott Behrendt Cc: Kevin Cody; Lisa Jacobs; [email protected]; Garth Meyer Subject: Re: OPPOSE: Proposed Revision of RB Residential Design Guidelines Date: Monday, July 17, 2023 7:58:55 PM
Attachments: image.png
RB Council Comments on RDGs - Google Forms.pdf
Final City Signers.docx
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Final submittal lists as of 7-17-23 - updated from original email.

The over 50 local residents below oppose adoption of the revised RDGs that surrender more power to developers and strip strong protections from residential owners.

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 11:05 AM Stop BCHD <[email protected]> wrote:

On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:32 AM Stop BCHD <[email protected]> wrote:

Redondo Beach and Torrance Mayors, Councils, City Attorneys, Planning Commissioners:

Please reject the proposed RDG changes and return this issue to the Planning Commission with direction to reinsert the discarded strong residential property owner protections. Thank you.

The local resident letter:

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:

The revised Residential Design Guidelines remove many strong protections that existing property owners deserve.

Single
family and other existing residential is now at risk from excessive multifamily that will not be required to be compatible with the existing neighborhood, its character, or visual style. Please reject the May 2023 revision and direct the Planning Commission to return the following strong protections to any revision:

Untitled Section
Thank you for your consideration. The residents and residential property owners of Redondo Beach deserve better than uncontrolled development caused by removing successful, 20 year old development rules.

1. 2.

Please sign on to send comments to the Council to

PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
The City of Redondo Beach is revising its Residential Design Guidelines that cover both single and multifamily residential. Unfortunately, the revision throws out MANY of the STRONG PROTECTIONS for existing property owners. The Council vote could be as early as Tuesday, July 18th.

PLEASE CONSIDER SIGNING ONTO THIS LETTER THAT WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE COUNCIL First Name Last Name
Your EmailAddress

3. Mark only one oval.

YES
NO
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.

Please send the Council comments on my behalf
Forms
From: Grace Peng
To: CityClerk; Scott Behrendt; Bill Brand; Nils Nehrenheim; Todd Loewenstein; Zein Obagi; Paige Kaluderovic; Sean Scully; Brandy Forbes
Subject: Item N2, Objective Residential Standards
Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 12:00:22 PM
Attachments: Objective Residential Standards.pdf
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

I have written my concerns. You can read them in this shared document or in the attached pdf below. https://docs.google.com/document/d/1VA-0tSq2cJES4kd3KLrrYdvuMTpq-v96nsTLSs1chSY/edit? usp=sharing
1 18 July 2023
Honorable Bill Brand
Mayor, Redondo Beach
415 Diamond Street
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
Re: N.2, Objective Residential Standards
Dear Honorable Mayor Brand, City Council Members, and Staff, I am, once again, asking our city not to spend money reinventing the wheel and drawing negative attention to ourselves from Housing and Community Development (HCD), the Attorney General and the press.

We have paid $212,035 to Cityworks Design to rewrite our Residential Design Standards to make them objective instead of subjective. We could have saved much time and money by eliminating all the standards that are not based on proven health and safety reasons and then replacing “should” or “may” with “shall” or “must” in the remaining ones.

We should always keep in mind, “what problem are we solving?” and “what outcome do we want?”
I have many objections, but will highlight just a few, starting with the ones that I believe violate state law.

Firstly, the city should categorically reject the Planning Commission’s Recommendation in Section 6.7:

Add a standard in RMD and RH multi-family zoning that states that “buildings shall not cast shadows onto adjacent residential uses on Winter Solstice.” If shadows are bad (and that is a subjective opinion with no basis in fact) then why should shadow regulations apply only to higher-density housing but not to single family homes or other classes of buildings? At sunset on Winter Solstice, shadows are infinitely long, which means an effective ban on RH (residential high-density) of >= 30 du/ac. How will we meet our RHNA requirement for low income housing if we do not allow Mullin density of >= 30 du/ac? The headlines write themselves: “Redondo Beach bans low-income housing.” Several changes may be violations of SB 330 or SB 9. Do not proceed without consulting HCD for guidance.

Section 5.1: The increases in required set-backs decrease allowable building envelopes, which decreases the intensity of use, which is banned by SB 330. 2 Section 5.3.a: reducing height limits on R-1A from 28’ to 24’ decreases allowable building envelopes, which decreases the intensity of use, which is banned by SB 330.

Sections 5.3b and 5.4a: Banning mezzanines that open to the second story similarly eliminates possible ADUs within the existing envelope. This may be a violation of SB 9 and SB 330.

Section 5.6: There are cases where the city has a legitimate interest in restricting excavation for safety, but adding basement floor area to FAR may be considered lowering intensity of use.

Section 5.7: Determining the structure height from the street level for up and side-sloping lots lowers intensity of use and may encourage more excavation in order to meet the new, lower height limit. This may endanger the foundations of neighboring homes.

If the intent is to discourage excavation, allow taller buildings. If the intent is for visual conformity from the street, then why not allow more stories for downsloping lots? Reducing height for upsloping lots while not increasing them for downsloping lots looks like a deliberate attempt to reduce intensity of use.

Section 5.9: Prohibiting previously allowed cantilevers over driveways in R-2 and R3 is lowering intensity of use. The cantilever in R3 provides enough room to provide a second bedroom on the second floor, allowing younger children to sleep next to their parents’ bedroom. Do not ban this pro-family floor plan.

Part of the affordability of R-2 and R-3 is standardization. Each townhome is identical. The walls and plumbing line up, simplifying construction. Requiring different setbacks and cantilever widths don’t just remove the space for an extra bedroom, but they raise the cost and complexity of construction and introduce more places prone to springing roof and plumbing leaks.

If you adopt this ordinance, the city must be prepared to prove that the existing R-2 and R-3 cantilever design does not provide sufficient light and air for safety. How much money will it cost us to lose this litigation?
Section 5.10: What is the point of objectifying the requirement that R-2 and R-3 townhomes have the appearance of single family residences? Isn’t a preference for SFRs itself a subjective opinion?
Moving R-2 garages from the front to the rear of the front townhouse increases the amount of impermeable surfaces and takes away the backyard. Other sections purport to protect access to light and air, so why require a design that will decrease light and air for R-2 townhomes? Section 5.11: Artificial turf can be permeable, more permeable than real sod. What is the rationale for the ban?
3 Section 5.14: Justify the ban on artificial plants and turf on parkways. If a metal sculpture of a dog is legal, why isn’t one of a flower?
Why are we spending time, energy and money reinventing the wheel, again? Why not just to the California Building Standards? Developers around the state are familiar with and experienced in building to the state standards. Using the state standards would allow more builders to compete in our city, possibly reducing costs.

Landscaping rules:

There is no need to micromanage water trade-offs. Why not just rely on Measure W and water budgets from our retail water company to nudge people into reducing stormwater runoff and water use?
If the objective is to reduce stormwater runoff, we need not reinvent the wheel. Measure W already taxes property owners for each square foot of impermeable surface. We also should not send mixed messages like requiring garages to not be visible from the street. That requires longer driveways and reduces permeable area on townhouse lots.

If the objective is to reduce landscape irrigation water use, why restrict the landscaping choices only for new homes? Water agencies are already moving in the direction of restricting total water use for all homes; that would have a much bigger impact than restricting the water use of at most 1% of new homes per year. CalWater Hermosa-Redondo was able to easily meet the 80 gpcd (gallons per capita per day) voluntary water budget during the recent severe drought.

California has numerous microclimates from the temperate rainforests of the northwest to the salt flats of Death Valley. California redwoods, Sequoia sempervirens, are native to California, but thirsty plants in our climate.

Requiring 75% of a yard to be planted with drought-tolerant plants restricts the ability of people to determine how they want to use their space and water. What if someone values outdoor living space (dining and lounging) over plants? Why should they landscape more area than they want or need?
Like many of my neighbors, I grow vegetables and fruit trees in my front yard. They are not California natives or drought tolerant. However, I made the trade-off of reducing irrigated square footage by using bark chips between vegetable and flower beds. I also redirect rain gutter runoff into areas planted with thirstier plants. This allows me to spend my water where it has the most value to me.
4 There is no need to micro-manage water use in multi-family homes that already use only half as much water per dwelling compared to single-family homes 12 . If the city wants to impose rules
on one class of dwellings, we should be prepared to defend the rules with facts and data.

I am also concerned by encouraging the use of gray-water. CalWater recently released the Hermosa-Redondo 2022 Water Quality Report
3 . North Redondo is served exceptionally hard
groundwater, blended with imported river water to bring down the hardness to allowable limits.

South Redondo is served softer and more expensive imported river water. (But we pay the same water rates city-wide.)
Graywater from kitchen and laundry sources add even more salts and suspended solids 4 . Most
frighteningly, “Pathogenic Escherichia coli and enteric viruses have been detected in greywater with majority of the water originating from laundry sources during a microbial monitoring programme in Melbourne Australia”
5 .

Graywater may be fine in regions where accumulated salts may be flushed by rains throughout the year, but SoCal has a 9-10 month dry season. Moreover, there is consensus in climate models predicting that the rainy season will shorten in coastal SoCal. Just a few years ago, we experienced our driest rain year ever, where the winter rains never came. Without rainwater to flush the soils, residents may lose their expensive landscaping and our community may lose our beloved tree canopy. Leave the water and salt management to the scientists, water agencies and gardeners.

Thank-you,
Grace Peng
BS Chemistry
PhD Chemical Physics
5 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6133124/ Greywater Characteristics, Treatment Systems, Reuse Strategies and User Perception—a Review
4 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6133124/ Greywater Characteristics, Treatment Systems, Reuse Strategies and User Perception—a Review
3 https://www.calwater.com/docs/ccr/2022/rd-hr-2022.pdf 2https://water.ca.gov/-/media/DWR-Website/Web-Pages/Programs/Water-Use-And-Efficiency/AB-1668-an d-SB-606-Conservation/IRWUS-Public-Review-Draft-ReportPAO7May21-v1.pdf CA DWR Indoor Residential Water Use Study Findings showed that MFH residents used significantly less water per capita than SFH residents
1 https://www.waterrf.org/sites/default/files/file/2019-07/SWMC18-Kiefer_Krentz.pdf Water Use in the Multi-Family Housing Sector. San Diego SFHs use 1.9x as much total water as MFHs.

From: Nick Eckenwiler
To: Bill Brand; Nils Nehrenheim; Todd Loewenstein; Paige Kaluderovic; Zein Obagi; Scott Behrendt Cc: CityClerk; City Attorney; [email protected]
Subject: Comment on Agenda Item N.2. (Objective Residential Standards) at Tonight"s Meeting Date: Tuesday, July 18, 2023 2:27:31 PM
Attachments: Redondo Beach - Obj. Standards Letter - 2023.07.18.pdf You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Good afternoon,
Please see attached for the California Housing Defense Fund's public comment on agenda item N.2. (Objective Residential Standards) at tonight's council meeting. Thank you! --
Nicholas Eckenwiler
Legal Fellow
Jul 18, 2023
City of Redondo Beach
415 Diamond St
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
By Email: [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected], [email protected]
CC: [email protected], [email protected]
Re: Ordinance No. 23-6324: Objective Residential Standards Dear City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits this letter to remind the Council of its obligation to abide by all relevant state laws when considering the proposed Objective Residential Standards in Ordinance No. 23-6324 (the “proposed standards”), calendared as agenda item N.2. at tonight’s meeting. Specifically, the Council must comply with the Housing Crisis Act of 2019 (SB 330), Senate Bill 9 (“SB 9”), and other state housing laws. The proposed standards, as currently drafted, do not adhere to these laws: many of them fail to articulate objective standards.

CalHDF is a 501(c)3 non-profit corporation whose mission includes advocating for increased access to housing for Californians at all income levels, including low-income households.

You may learn more about CalHDF at www.calhdf.org.

Sincerely,
3 of 4
Dylan Casey
CalHDF Executive Director
Courtney Welch
CalHDF Director of Investigations and Enforcement
4 of 4

Redondo Beach City CouncilJuly 18, 2023

Redondo Beach City Council
July 18, 2023