RESOLUTION NO.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AMENDMENTS
PAGE NO. 1
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF
THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
ORDINANCES AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 2 ZONING
AND LAND USE AND TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 COASTAL
LAND USE PLAN IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCE
PERTAINING TO ADMINISTRATIVE DESIGN REVIEW
AND PLANNING COMMISSION DESIGN REVIEW
COMPLIANCE WITH OBJECTIVE RESIDENTIAL
STANDARDS, AND RECOMMEDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT CATEGORICAL EXEMPTIONS FROM
THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
(CEQA) FOR THE AMENDMENTS
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Residential Design Guidelines by Resolution on October 7, 2003; and
WHEREAS, in 2019 the City Council added as a Strategic Plan item to apply for SB2 Grant Funding and seek consultant to update the Residential Design Guidelines to replace the 2003 Residential Design Guidelines with objective standards, add standards for the R1A zone, and clarify ambiguities of existing document; and WHEREAS, the State Legislature adopted Senate Bill 330 (SB330) that requires that any development standards adopted by a governing body after January 1, 2020 must be objective; and
WHEREAS, the California Department of Housing and Community Development approved the SB2 Grant Funding for the City of Redondo Beach to update the City’s Residential Design Guidelines to be objective and to include clarifying language on Accessory Dwelling Units, with the grant agreement executed on June 12, 2020; and
WHEREAS, on February 8, 2021 the City initiated an RFP process, and due to no responses received, the City requested proposals and received only one from Cityworks Design on April 23, 2021; and
WHEREAS, Cityworks Design was qualified and provided a proposal within the grant budget amount, and on June 8, 2021 the City entered into a contract with Cityworks Design to prepare the update to the Residential Design Guidelines to create Objective Residential Standards; and
WHEREAS, through a public process including multiple focus group meetings with local designers, community meetings noticed through e-blasts and social media directly reaching approximately 5,000 residents, a public survey with nearly 1,000 responses, input from the Planning Commission subcommittee on the project, and multiple Planning RESOLUTION NO.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AMENDMENTS
PAGE NO. 2
Commission meetings to discuss and update the draft document; the City Council has considered the Objective Residential Standards for adoption by resolution; and WHEREAS, draft revisions to the Redondo Beach Municipal Code are necessary to effectuate the implementation of the Objective Residential Standards; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held meetings to discuss the draft Objective Residential Standards on March 29, 2023 and May 18, 2023; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing, took public testimony, and considered the draft Objective Residential Standards and the ordinance amendments on June 15, 2023 and made certain recommendations to the City Council for consideration, including determination that the amendments qualify for exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY FIND AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. FINDINGS
1. In compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended (CEQA), and State and local guidelines adopted pursuant thereto, the zoning amendments qualify for CEQA exemption under Section 15060(c)(2) because the activity will not result in direct or reasonable foreseeable physical change in the environment and Section 15060(c)(3) as the activity is not a considered a project under CEQA Section 15378.
2. The amendments to the Zoning Ordinance are consistent with the General Plan, including the Housing Element of the General Plan adopted on July 5, 2022, because there is no change that would be inconsistent with the Housing Element of the General Plan.
3. The amendments to the Coastal Land Use Plan Implementing Ordinance are consistent with the City’s Local Coastal Plan (LCP) , because there is no change that would be inconsistent with the Local Coastal Plan.
4. These amendments do not require a vote of the people under Article XXVII of the City Charter.
SECTION 2. The above recitals are true and correct, and the recitals are incorporated herein by reference as if set forth in full.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:
RESOLUTION NO.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AMENDMENTS
PAGE NO. 3
SECTION 1. AMENDMENT TO CODE. The Planning Commission recommends that Title 10 Planning and Zoning, Chapter 2 Zoning and Land Use be amended as follows:
10-2.2500 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 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.
SECTION 2. AMENDMENT TO CODE. The Planning Commission recommends that Title 10 Planning and Zoning, Chapter 5 Coastal Land Use Plan Implementing Ordinance be amended as follows:
10-5.2500 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.
10-5.2502 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.
RESOLUTION NO.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AMENDMENTS
PAGE NO. 4
SECTION 3. Any provisions of the Redondo Beach Municipal Code, or appendices thereto, or any other ordinances of the City inconsistent herewith, to the extent of such inconsistencies and no further, are hereby repealed.
SECTION 4. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause, or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City Council shall declare that it would have passed this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause, and phrase thereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses, or phrases be declared invalid or unconstitutional.
SECTION 5. The Planning Commission recommends the adoption of the Objective Residential Standards only if the following revisions are incorporated:
1. 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).
2. 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 and 1.14 for R-2 and R-3 zones.
3. 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:
a. 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.”
b. 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.
4. Add additional objective standard in R2 and R3:
a. 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.
5. 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. A single peak roof ridge required parallel to the street/front property line. b. If the garage is set forward of the main structure then the roof shall be pitched (Define “pitched”)
6. 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.
RESOLUTION NO.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AMENDMENTS
PAGE NO. 5
7. Add an overall structure height limit on upsloping and side sloping lots to be measured from the the property line at the street level. An example is from San Diego:
8. 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.”
9. 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).
10.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).
11.For permeable surfaces, artificial turf is not permitted.
12.For irrigation, also allow a bubbler system as an alternative to the drip system option, as recommended by the water district.
13.Add green roofs, bioswales, and greywater capture systems in the point systems in the Landscaping Matrices.
14.Specify no artificial plants or artificial turf in parkways.
RESOLUTION NO.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AMENDMENTS
PAGE NO. 6
SECTION 6. Below are additional recommendations from the Planning Commission for the City Council to consider in finalizing and implementing the Objective Residential Standards:
1. Consider eliminating all FAR bonuses in the R-1 zones (e.g., side parking and front porch bonuses).
2. Consider removing limit to maximum size of roof decks, where there is currently a limit to the combined areas of roof decks and mezzanines.
3. 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.
4. Add definition of MWELO requirements in ORS to the “Applicability” description of the Front Yard Permeability and Landscaping.
5. Add swimming pool setbacks of a minimum of 3’ from the property lines.
6. Add rain sensor monitor as another option for irrigation system in the point systems in the Landscaping Matrices.
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.” FINALLY RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission forward a copy of this resolution to the City Council so the Council will be informed of the action of the Planning Commission.
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this day of , 2023.
________________________
Rob Gaddis, Chair
Planning Commission
City of Redondo Beach
ATTEST:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF REDONDO BEACH )
I, Brandy Forbes, Community Development Director of the City of Redondo Beach, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. was duly passed, approved and adopted by the Planning Commission of the City of Redondo Beach, California, at an adjourned regular meeting of said Planning Commission held on the day of , 2023 by the following roll call vote:
AYES:
RESOLUTION NO.
INCLUSIONARY HOUSING AMENDMENTS
PAGE NO. 7
NOES:
ABSENT:
_______________________________
Brandy Forbes, AICP
Community Development Director
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
__________________________
City Attorney’s Office