Redondo Beach
Objective Residential
Standards
City Council Discussion
of Planning Commission
Recommendation
July 18, 2023
Goals for Tonight
• Review of background on project
• Presentation on how the Residential Design Guidelines have transformed to Objective Residential Standards
• Discussion of Planning Commission recommendations
• Direction to staff on revisions to Objective Residential Standards document
Final Draft Document Link:
https://www.redondo.org/news/ then click on Residential Design Guidelines Update item and click on “latest version” document 2 Why Update our Residential Guidelines?
• City Council Strategic Plan identified a need to update Residential Design Guidelines (last updated in 2003).
• Funding from Senate Bill 2 (SB2) Planning Grants Program • For California cities and counties to prepare, adopt, and implement plans and process improvements that streamline housing approvals and accelerate housing production.
• City Council hired Consultant Cityworks Design to update the City’s Residential Design Guidelines, with input from a Focus Group, Planning Commission, Community Workshops and online survey.
• Senate Bill 330 (SB330) adopted in 2019 restricts any development requirements adopted after January 1, 2020 to be objective, quantifiable, and written development standards.
3 Overall Goal for ORS
To streamline the residential application process and
achieve compatible development through objective
building and landscaping standards
Proposed to be achieved by…
• Replacing the 2003 Residential Design Guidelines with Objective Residential Standards (turning subjective into objective) • Adding Standards for R-1A Zone
• Eliminating confusion and uncertainty of existing guidelines • Clarifying Accessory Dwelling Unit (ADU) Ordinance
4 Process to Date
5 July – Nov 2021 Background/Existing Conditions Research, Content Development for Initial Engagement Events
December 2021 Focus Group #1 and Planning Commission #1 Early - Mid 2022 Community Meeting #1, Public Survey, Prepare Draft ORS Fall 2022 - Spring 2023 Planning Commission Subcommittee Input January - March 2023 ORS Public Draft and FAQs Released, Input on Public Draft March 2023 Focus Group #2, Joint Planning Commission #2 and Community Meeting #2
May 18, 2023 Planning Commission #3
May - June 2023 Staff Prepared Zoning Amendments
June 15, 2023 Planning Commission #4 - recommendations to City Council on Zoning Amendments and Final Draft ORS
July 18, 2023 City Council discussion and input on draft August - Sept 2023 City Council / Public Hearing: Zoning Amendments and Adopting ORS Note: Schedule is driven by SB2 Grant
“involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are 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 before submittal.”
Government Code Sections 65913.4 and 66300(a)(7)
Using straight-forward criteria that aim to reflect existing character of neighborhood so new buildings are compatible with old buildings What are “Objective” Standards?
6 How Standards differ from Guidelines
Enforceability
• Use of “shall” or “must” – indicates “REQUIRED”
• Use of “should” or “may” – indicates “RECOMMENDED”
Examples of Standards
• The entire second floor must be set back from the front building line by a minimum of 10 feet.
• The front setback shall include at least 40 square feet of planted area.
Guideline Example
• The design of the primary dwelling should reflect the neighborhood character.
• Design may include features such as balconies, porches and bay windows.
7 Examples of Guideline to Standard
EXAMPLE 1: Existing Guideline for Roof Deck Location (R-1) • Should be stepped back from the building edge above the second floor; • Should be oriented away from neighbors’ yards as much as possible; Proposed Standard
• A roof deck shall be set back at least 10 feet from the required first story setbacks on all sides.
EXAMPLE 2: Existing Guideline for Multi-Family Landscaping • Landscaping shall emphasize water-efficient plants.
Proposed Standard
• Multi-Family landscaped areas shall include drought tolerant live plants in 75% of the area.
8 Outline of Objective Residential Standards
9 • SECTION I: Introduction
• SECTION II: Standards Applicable to All Residential Districts • SECTION III: R-1 Single Family Zoning District Standards • SECTION IV: R-1A Single Family Zoning District Standards • SECTION V: R-2 and R-3 Multi-Family Zoning District
Standards
• SECTION VI: RMD and RH Multi-Family Zoning District
Standards
• SECTION VII: R-1 Character Area Design Guidelines
• SECTION VIII: Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs)
Planning Commission Recommendations
10 FLOOR AREA RATIO (FAR):
• *Eliminate FAR bonuses where
that option in the zoning code
would now be required in the
ORS (e.g., for 2nd story rear and
side setbacks). –OR- Consider
eliminating all FAR bonuses in
the R-1 zones (e.g., side parking
and front porch bonuses).
• *To provide an objective
standard to address the current
subjective guidelines regarding
“bulk and mass” and
“compatible with the
neighborhood”, add FAR limits
for R-1A, R-2, and R-3 zones.
The recommended FAR levels
are:
• 0.94 for R-1A zones.
• 1.14 for R-2 and R-3
zones.
* Items Planning Commission felt necessary, others were general recommendations These FAR recommendations would
require additional study/testing – can
be considered separately from ORS
Planning Commission Recommendations (cont.)
11 HEIGHT, MEZZANINES, AND ROOF DECKS:
• *Add additional objective standards in R-1A regarding maximum height flat roof and pitched roof; no mezzanines since these are distinctly different in traditional development in R-1A than in R-1:
• To maintain the compatibility with the established neighborhood character, revise maximum height to 24’ for flat roof designs in R-1A and revise maximum height to 28’ for pitched roof designs in R-1A. Define “flat roof” and “pitched roof.” • Only mezzanines open to the first floor shall be permitted in R-1A. Mezzanines open to the second floor are not permitted, to maintain compatibility with the neighborhood character.
• *Add additional objective standard in R2 and R3:
• Only mezzanines open to the first floor shall be permitted in R2 and R3. Mezzanines open to the second floor are not permitted, to maintain compatibility with the neighborhood character.
• Consider removing limit to maximum size of roof decks, where there is currently a limit to the combined areas of roof decks and mezzanines.
* Items Planning Commission felt necessary, others were general recommendations Changes to height would require zoning change.
Changes to combined max size roof decks and mezzanines would require zoning change.
Planning Commission Recommendations (cont.)
12 SECOND STORY STEPBACKS:
*For R1, have additional second story rear setback based on an average of the depth of the lot. “The 2nd floor rear setback shall be set back an additional average of 5’ or average 5% of the lot depth, whichever is greater.”
FAYE & SUSANA CHARACTER AREA STANDARDS:
• *Add objective standards in the R-1 Standards section for the Faye & Susana character area regarding pitched roof parallel to the street; garages set forward shall have a pitched roof • A single peak roof ridge required parallel to the street/front property line. • If the garage is set forward of the main structure then the roof shall be pitched (Define “pitched”).
DEFINITIONS OF STORY AND GROSS FLOOR AREA OF BASEMENT:
• *Consider streamlining or reconciling the definition of “story” and the determination of “basement” gross floor area included in the FAR to be the same, utilizing whichever measurement is more restrictive.
* Items Planning Commission felt necessary, others were general recommendations The recommendation regarding
definitions of story and gross floor area
of basement would require additional
study/testing – can be considered
separately from ORS
Planning Commission Recommendations (cont.)
13 UPWARD SLOPING LOT AND SIDE SLOPING LOT HEIGHTS:
• *Add an overall structure height limit on upsloping and side sloping lots to be measured from the property line at the street level. An example is from San Diego:
* Items Planning Commission felt necessary, others were general recommendations The recommendation regarding
measuring height would require
additional study/testing and should be
tested on typical Redondo Beach lot
depths/slopes to understand effect–
can be considered separately from ORS
Planning Commission Recommendations (cont.)
14 PRIVACY AND APPEARANCE IN R2 AND R3:
• *To meet the general plan and municipal code requirement of light, air, and privacy, prohibit cantilever of second story for front unit in R-2 and R-3 for the width of the driveway, and a maximum overhang over driveway of 2’ for middle units. (This can be accomplished by increasing the 2nd floor side setback on the side of the driveway). • *To objectify the requirement that R-2 and R-3 multifamily have the appearance of a single family residence, the garage of the front unit (R-2, R-3) shall be located at the “rear” of the front unit (not visible from the street).
IMPACTS OF RMD AND RH (MEDIUM AND HIGH DENSITY MULTIFAMILY):
• 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.” * Items Planning Commission felt necessary, others were general recommendations The recommendations regarding
cantilever and garage placement would
require additional study/testing – can
be considered separately from ORS
This would be restrictive to multifamily
development in RMD and RH zoning
Planning Commission Recommendations (cont.)
15 MODULAR CONSTRUCTION STANDARDS:
• Revisit whether to limit the building materials for modular construction to add composites or other materials, or consider eliminating this standard that is limiting the materials.
SWIMMING POOL STANDARDS:
• Add swimming pool setbacks of a minimum of 3’ from the property lines.
PERMEABILITY AND LANDSCAPING:
• *For permeable surfaces, artificial turf is not permitted. • *For irrigation, also allow a bubbler system as an alternative to the drip system option, as recommended by the water district.
• *Add green roofs, bioswales, and greywater capture systems in the point systems in the Landscaping Matrices.
• *Specify no artificial plants or artificial turf in parkways. • Add definition of MWELO requirements in ORS to the “Applicability” description of the Front Yard Permeability and Landscaping.
• Add rain sensor monitor as another option for irrigation system in the point systems in the Landscaping Matrices.
* Items Planning Commission felt necessary, others were general recommendations Current Zoning Code references “intent” of Residential Design Guidelines :
• The project shall be consistent with the intent of residential design guidelines adopted by resolution of the City Council.
Revisions proposed to reference “comply” with Objective Residential Standards:
• 10-2.2500 [and 10-5 for coastal] Administrative Design Review. (b) Criteria. The following criteria shall be used in determining a project’s consistency with the intent and purpose of this section:
(7) The project shall comply with the Objective Residential Standards be consistent with the intent of residential design guidelines adopted by resolution of the City Council.
• 10-2.2502 [and 10-5 for coastal] Planning Commission Design Review. (b) Criteria. The following criteria shall be used in determining a project’s consistency with the intent and purpose of this section:
(7) Consistency with residential design guidelines. The project shall comply with the Objective Residential Standards be consistent with the intent of residential design guidelines adopted by resolution of the City Council.
When to use the new ORS
16 17
Items Staff will clean up for Final Draft
• Call out a reference in the ORS document that clarifies that excavation sites have to comply with the Building Code regarding noticing and protection measures to prevent impacts to adjacent properties.
• Correct drawing of mezzanine setback.
• Correct matrices for landscaped areas (50% is listed twice, where one should be 50% and the other 75%).
• Minor edits to text and graphics for clarification/consistency.
City Council Action Needed Tonight
• Review the Planning Commission Recommendations
• Direct staff on revisions to make to the Objective Residential Standards for public hearing and consideration in August 2023 18 Thank you!