City Council on 2023-10-17 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER Meeting Time: 10-17-23 18:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council on 2023-10-17 6:00 PM -
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
10-17-23
18:00
73 6 1 1 2
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
City Council on 2023-10-17 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER 10-17-23 18:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
J.1. 23-7033 For eComments and Emails Received from the Public 2 0 0 1 L.1. 23-7006 PUBLIC HEARING FOR INTRODUCTION AND FIRST
READING OF ORDINANCES TO AMEND THE REDONDO BEACH
MUNICIPAL CODE (RBMC) TITLE 10 CHAPTER 2 ZONING AND LAND USE AND TITLE 10 CHAPTER 5 COASTAL LAND USE PLAN
IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES CONSISTENT WITH
STATE LAW AND CONSIDERATION OF A CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) EXEMPTION FOR THE
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEQA
GUIDELINES
PROCEDURES:
1. Open the public hearing and take testimony;
2. Close the public hearing and deliberate;
3. Introduce the following two ordinances by title only; and
4. Adopt by title only the Resolution submitting the Ordinance to the Coastal Commission.
INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NO. 3264-23 AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 2 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW
INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NO. 3265-23 AN
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 OF THE
MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES IN THE COASTAL ZONE, CONSISTENT
WITH STATE LAW
ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. CC-2310-109 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA,
FORWARDING TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION THE AMENDMENTS
TO THE COASTAL LAND USE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE
(TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE) PERTAINING TO
ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES IN THE
COASTAL ZONE, CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW AND
INCORPORATING CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION
MODIFICATIONS
3 1 1 0
N.3. 23-6992 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING
APPROVAL OF A REDESIGNED CITY LOGO
1 0 0 1
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for J.1. 23-7033 For eComments and Emails Received from the Public Overall Sentiment
Brandee Keith
Location:
Submitted At: 4:11pm 10-17-23
Check Before You Burn season is just around the corner. Each year from November through the end of February, residents of the South Coast Air Basin are asked to check before burning wood in their fireplaces to limit emissions of fine particulate matter (PM2.5). Smoke from residential fireplaces is a significant source of PM2.5 during the winter months.
Residents can do their part to improve air quality by choosing not to burn wood when No-Burn Days are announced. A No-Burn day is a 24-hour ban on wood-burning in residential fireplaces, stoves, or outdoor fire pits in the South Coast Air Basin. South Coast AQMD forecasters call for residential No-Burn Days when PM2.5 is expected to reach elevated levels due to air emissions and stagnant weather conditions. High PM2.5 episodes are most common on calm and cool winter days, especially during holiday periods. Additional pollution from wood burning can turn air quality conditions on No-Burn days to “unhealthy”.
For more information, please visit our Check Before You Burn page at https://tinyurl.com/cbyb2023. You can also sign up for alerts at www.airalerts.org or download our mobile app for notifications.
Regards,
Brandee L. Keith
she/her
Sr. Public Affairs Specialist,
Geographic Outreach Team, South Bay Cities
South Coast AQMD
Sara Martin
Location:
Submitted At: 12:58pm 10-17-23
Public Comment on Non-Agenda Item – City’s unfunded Aquatics Center grant & “no responsive records” For years, the City has routinely been awarded Aquatics Center grants (approximately $20,000/yr) from the California Department of Parks and Recreation, Division of Boating and Waterways (DBW). These help to further subsidize the city sailing school.
For the first time, the City’s grant application was not funded last year. In response to a public records request (PRR) asking why the grant was denied, the city responded that there were “no responsive records”. A PRR query to DBW on the same topic revealed several responsive records, including e-mails to city staff explaining that the city needed to provide documentation as to how it spent previous years’ grant funding before being given more money.
Recommendations:
1. For transparency, the city should revise its e-mail retention policy to at least match the state
2. For the sake of city taxpayers, please improve management practices so that grant related expenses get properly accounted for and reimbursed by the state as the terms of the grant require, instead of being buried and absorbed by the city.
3. Improve practices quickly enough that future Aquatics Center grants can be funded.
Supporting documentation submitted via e-mail to City Clerk.
1. State why grant not funded Jan-Jun 2023*
2. Grant Agreement C8964329 9_14_23
3. State Response to PRR 9_14_23
4. State Qs Citys Reimbursement Claim 2_3_2023
5. City reqs changes to grant
6. City No responsive records to PRR 7_18_23
*We are making our 22-23 grant award decisions and cannot make a formal award to the City of Redondo Beach at the present time because the City has 4 grant agreements spanning 5 grant years totaling $100,367 for which no invoices have been received.”
Sara Martin
Redondo Beach, District 1
Agenda Item: eComments for L.1. 23-7006 PUBLIC HEARING FOR INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING OF ORDINANCES TO AMEND THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE (RBMC) TITLE 10 CHAPTER 2 ZONING AND LAND USE AND TITLE 10 CHAPTER 5 COASTAL LAND USE PLAN IMPLEMENTING ORDINANCES PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS IN
RESIDENTIAL ZONES CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW AND CONSIDERATION OF A CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
ACT (CEQA) EXEMPTION FOR THE PROPOSED AMENDMENTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH CEQA GUIDELINES PROCEDURES:
1. Open the public hearing and take testimony;
2. Close the public hearing and deliberate;
3. Introduce the following two ordinances by title only; and
4. Adopt by title only the Resolution submitting the Ordinance to the Coastal Commission.
INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NO. 3264-23 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 2 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW
INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NO. 3265-23 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES IN THE COASTAL ZONE, CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. CC-2310-109 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH,
CALIFORNIA, FORWARDING TO THE COASTAL COMMISSION THE AMENDMENTS TO THE COASTAL LAND USE PLAN IMPLEMENTATION ORDINANCE (TITLE 10, CHAPTER 5 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE) PERTAINING TO ACCESSORY DWELLING
UNITS IN RESIDENTIAL ZONES IN THE COASTAL ZONE, CONSISTENT WITH STATE LAW AND INCORPORATING CALIFORNIA
COASTAL COMMISSION MODIFICATIONS
Overall Sentiment
Maricela Guillermo
Location:
Submitted At: 8:02pm 10-17-23
I strongly recommend requiring ADUs to have individual water meters and their own utility meters. It is not a good idea to share utilities in a condo-like environment, as the smaller unit will subsidize the utility costs of the larger home unless the City provides a policy on how the utility costs should be shared.
Xavier Alexis Rivas
Location:
Submitted At: 7:44pm 10-17-23
While i support bringing these into compliance with state requirements, as currently written these are excessively restrictive and are subjective.
I suggest striking these sections:
Section e 1 "The accessory dwelling unit shall use similar exterior siding materials, colors, window types, door and window trims, roofing materials, and roof pitch as the primary dwelling." Section e 2 "If the accessory dwelling unit is attached to a primary dwelling, the accessory dwelling unit shall have an entrance separate from the primary dwelling located so that it is not visible from a public street, where feasible."
Many Redondo Beach homes are over 50 years old. Requiring homeowners match a new ADU to existing home does not make sense. What if i plan to build an ADU now, and extensively renovate my home including the exterior a few years out? Why can't i build my ADU in the style that will match my future home? This language is not necessary, adds cost to building ADUs, and hurts homeowners. Not to mention it's subjective. I request that you strike these sections, and believe many fellow homeowners in Redondo would agree.
Additionally, I ask that you generally loosen the ADU regulations, to promote much needed housing supply being built as ADUs.
Brianna Egan
Location:
Submitted At: 3:14pm 10-17-23
I support bringing the city's ADU ordinances into compliance with state law. As we're seeing, new state housing laws are passed each year with the goal of increasing the supply of housing in California to address the housing crisis and make the California dream of homeownership more accessible. Many of these state laws modify and update ADU regulations. SB 9 updates are likely coming soon. I think it would be most prudent for the city to default to state law on ADUs and SB 9 instead of spending staff time and city money creating our own city ordinances that only serve to limit the production of housing.
Agenda Item: eComments for N.3. 23-6992 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING APPROVAL OF A REDESIGNED
CITY LOGO
Overall Sentiment
Brianna Egan
Location:
Submitted At: 3:17pm 10-17-23
I appreciate the efforts of the city council and city staff in bringing forward a process to update and modernize the city's logo. I think from the survey results on the redesigned logo it's clear that the response is mixed and this is probably not going to be the strongest logo to move forward with. I would support amending the contract with the design firm for additional work to design a logo that people will enthusiastically support and connect with. I think it's a good version that can be improved with more iterations: I think it would be best to have just one color for the stripes for the "ocean" and the sail could be made more prominent and less minimalistic.