Redondo Beach
Objective Residential
Design Standards
Community Survey Results Summary
February 2022
Community Survey
The ‘Objective Residential Design Standards’ effort commenced by seeking broad input
• Virtual Community Workshop was held in January 2022 to provide an overview and answer questions
• On-line Survey with 24 questions was made available
• Email Comments were also invited
Key Topics
• About Respondent (5 questions)
• City / Neighborhood Character (3 questions)
• Approval Process (2 questions)
• Residential Design (14 questions)
2 Respondents
3 Of the 993 who responded…
• 82% are property owners
• 55% are Redondo Beach residents
Respondents
4 Respondents
• Over 60% have been Redondo Beach residents
for at least 16 years
• Over 3% live in a historic home or district
or one that is potentially historic
• Over 40% have been through the permitting
process or currently in-process to build or alter
their home
5 City / Neighborhood Character
6 • 39% of respondents feel affected by
recent residential projects in their
neighborhood
• Almost 60% said recent projects had
improved or not really changed the
city…but just over 40% said recent
projects had negatively affected
their neighborhood
• 79% said neighborhood
compatibility is very important or
somewhat important to them
Design Topics
7 Top ten topics considered important “to promote well-designed residential buildings that positively affect neighborhood character”
1. Maximum height and stories
2. Parking
3. Setbacks from property line
4. Massing
5. Lot design
6. ADUs
7. Outdoor living spaces
8. Driveways and curb cuts
9. Landscaping (front yards)
10. Fencing height or privacy screening
Respondents were asked to
select up to 6 of 21
suggested topics. Topics 1-5
each received more than
35% of all selections made.
Topics 6-10 each received
at least 20% of all
selections made.
Design Topics
8 “Other Topics” considered important that respondents wrote in pertained to (in order of prevalence):
1. Density & Height
2. Style & Neighborhood Compatibility
3. Parking
4. Setbacks & Privacy
5. ADUs
6. Outdoors (landscape, yard, lighting, porches)
7. Sustainability / Environment
8. Garages
9. View Protection
10. Balconies & Roof Decks
Permit Process
9 • More respondents (378) believe the permit process
should be less discretionary to save time compared to
341 who felt it should be more discretionary, and 195 who believe it is just right now.
• Almost 58% want staff to have discretion to waive
standards, of which 46% wanted the waiver to be
based on specific conditions with written findings. In
contrast, 35% believe only Planning Commission
should waive standards and 8% wanted no flexibility.
Building Height
10 • Overwhelming support (83%) to keep current
height maximum at 30-feet, 2-stories especially in
low-density residential areas
• Most respondents (63%) said flat roofs shouldn’t
have a modified or lower maximum height
Roof Decks
11 • Only 31% of respondents were happy with the
current standards for roof decks, but the vast
majority (96%) want them to be allowed in some
way.
• Suggested restrictions had mixed responses:
• 35% wanted to restrict roof deck area and move back
from the building edge.
• 43% agreed that screening to protect neighbors’ privacy was needed.
• 72% wanted to allow shade structures on roof decks, of which 47% felt they should be limited in area to a portion of the deck area.
Roof Decks
12 44 “Other Comments” were provided (categorized by topic) Mezzanines
13 Responses to mezzanines were split down the middle,
with almost half satisfied with current mezzanine
standards and half wanting a change.
Mezzanines
14 55 “Other Comments” were provided (categorized by
topic)
• Don’t allow them, they look like 3rd story
• Count as additional story
• Allow if limiting house to 2 stories
• Maintain 30’ height limit
• Affects on neighboring home, views
• Lower height limit
• Clarify standards
• No change or fewer restrictions
Basement or Semi-Subterranean
15 Most (58%) want current standards maintained that do not count this level as a story. Still others (32%) want them only allowed on sloping sites, and a few (10%)
want them counted as a story.
“Other Comments” respondents wrote in
• Not on flat sites
• Construction impact concerns
• Don’t want appearance of 3 stories
• Allow them unrestricted
• Count as part of home’s square footage
Driveways & Garages
16 • Most (55%) felt garages in front or back should be at homeowner’s discretion, with others (31%) preferring
driveway access from an alley if applicable, and some
(14%) said allow driveway in front to park cars
• Overwhelming majority prefer two-car garage “side-byside” followed by two-car garage “tandem within garage” and then “one-car garage plus uncovered tandem parking
in driveway”
• Most want double curb cut allowed for front-facing
garages despite it reducing street parking
Balconies & Fences
17 • Majority of respondents (63%) said balconies should not be allowed to encroach into required setbacks
• Most (61%) believed 6-foot height limit for side or
rear property line wall or fences is appropriate,
followed by some (37%) who believe it should be
higher, and a few (2%) who thought they should be
lower.
Thanks to everyone
who took the survey!