Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan
Adopted December 8, 2020
1 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | i Table of Contents
Acknowledgements
Many individuals contributed to the recommendations provided in the Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan including:
City of Redondo Beach
Brandy Forbes, Community Development Director
Sean Scully, Planning Manager
Lina Portolese, Planning Analyst
John La Rock, Community Services Director
Gene Kim, Transportation Engineer
Andrew Winje, City Engineer
Ted Semaan, Public Works Director
Consultant Team
3 MacArthur Place, Suite 1100 | Santa Ana, CA 92707 | 714-966-9220 448 South Hill Street, Suite 701 | Los Angeles, CA 90013 | 213-471-2666 600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1050 | Los Angeles, CA 90017 | 213-261-3050 Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee
Leland Hyde, Kurt Hardware 2404 Artesia Blvd
Heidi Butzine, NRBBA President
Robe Reichester, District 5 Resident
John Simpson, District 4 Resident
Randolph Stern, Dance 1 Redondo 2228 Artesia Blvd/District 4 Resident
Wally Marks, Property Owner 2810 Artesia Blvd
Mike Garcia, Property Owner 2701 Artesia Blvd/District 5 Resident Mo Sharifi, Caskey & Caskey Commercial Real Estate / District 4 Resident
General Plan Advisory Committee
Nick Biro, Chair Tonya McKenzie
Bhuvan Bajaj Paul Moses
Leslie Chrzan Candace Nafissi
Howard Eller Bob Pinzler
Craig Funabashi Paul Samaras
Rob Gaddis Phil Sanchez, Vice-Chair
Jennifer Glad John Simpson
Jim Hannon Eugene Solomon
Kiran Hashmi Matt Stodder
Sam Kartounian Charlie Szymanski
Matt Kilroy Sybilla Turner
Sheila Lamb Chris Voisey
Jim Light Brad Waller
Sue Ludwig
Table of Contents
ii | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Table of Contents
Chapter 1. Executive Summary.............................................................. 3
1.1 Executive Summary ..............................................................................3
1.2 Purpose ..................................................................................................5
1.3 How to Use This Plan.............................................................................5 Chatper 2. Background ........................................................................... 9
2.1 The Location and Role of Each Corridor ..........................................9
2.2 History ................................................................................................. 12
2.3 Existing Conditions Analysis............................................................. 17
2.3.1 Existing Land Uses................................................................. 17
2.3.2 Parking Study......................................................................... 21
2.3.3 Market Analysis and Development Feasibility Study ..... 21
2.4 Related Planning Efforts................................................................... 23
2.5 Opportunities and Constraints......................................................... 26
2.5.1 Constraints.............................................................................. 26
2.5.2 Opportunities ......................................................................... 31 Chapter 3. Placemaking........................................................................37
3.1 Introduction......................................................................................... 37
3.2 Corridors As Destinations................................................................. 38
3.2.1 Creating a Destination ......................................................... 38
3.2.2 Encourage Reinvestment....................................................... 43
3.3 The Pedestrian Experience .............................................................. 44
3.3.1 Connectivity (Getting to the Corridors) ............................. 45
3.3.2 The Corridor Experience...................................................... 48
3.3.3 Identity (Making an Impression).......................................... 57
3.4 Design Guidelines.............................................................................. 65 Chapter 4. Mobility................................................................................71
4.1 Mobility Overview.............................................................................71
4.2 Existing Conditions.............................................................................72
4.3 Relationship to Other Plans..............................................................74
4.3.1 General Plan Circulation Element .......................................74
4.3.2 South Bay Bicycle Master Plan ............................................76
4.4 AACAP Mobility Objectives.............................................................78
4.5 Corridor Descriptions and Strategies.............................................79
4.5.1 The Driving and Parking Experience..................................80
4.5.2 The Walking Experience ......................................................83
4.5.3 Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Experience .............................91
4.5.4 The Transit Experience..........................................................98 Chapter 5. Funding Mechanisms....................................................... 103
5.1 Funding Mechanisms....................................................................... 103
5.1.1 Special Assessment Districts............................................... 104
5.1.2 Grant Programs.................................................................. 106
5.1.3 Impact Fees.......................................................................... 107
5.1.4 Tax Increment Fincnancing................................................. 108 Chapter 6. Implementation ................................................................ 111
6.1 Implementation................................................................................ 111 City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | iii Table of Contents
Figures
Figure 2.1 Regional Location................................................................. 9 Figure 2.2 Local Vicinity .......................................................................11 Figure 2.3 Percentage of Total Acres by Development Decade ..13 Figure 2.4 Development by Decade..................................................14 Figure 2.5 Percentage of Total Acres by Existing Land Use..........17 Figure 2.6: Percentage of Commercial Square Footage by Type within the Artesia Corridor...............................................18 Figure 2.7 Existing Land Use................................................................19 Figure 2.8 Mixed Use Concept............................................................22 Figure 2.9 Commercial Flex Concept.................................................22 Figure 2.10 Lot Depths .........................................................................28 Figure 2.11 Existing Gateway Locations...........................................33 Figure 3.1 Activity Nodes and Placemaking Elements ....................41 Figure 3.2: Existing Signage Along the Artesia Corridor ...............64 Figure 4.1 Block Length ........................................................................72 Figure 4.2 General Plan Circulation Element (2009)......................75 Figure 4.3 South Bay Bicycle Master Plan.........................................77 Figure 4.4: Artesia Boulevard Existing Configuration .....................95 Figure 4.5: Artesia Boulevard Concept with Bike Lane...................96 Figure 4.6: Artesia Boulevard Concept without Parking Lane .......97 Tables
Table 6.1 Implementation Table...................................................... 112 Appendices
Appendix A Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study
Appendix B Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard
Appendix C Recommendations from the City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018-2019)
Appendix D Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013) Appendix E Adoption Resolution
Table of Contents
iv | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 1. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 3 Executive Summary CH APTER 1. EXEC UTIVE S UMM ARY
1.1 EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Artesia Boulevard has historically served as a primary commerce center and commercial corridor for locals in North Redondo and is supported by smallerscale, local-serving retail and service commercial uses along Aviation Boulevard. Once a bustling area of successful businesses, the Corridors currently consist of a mix of marginal businesses with a few intermittent, thriving businesses.
In recent years, other areas of the City (such as Riviera Village and the recently approved Galleria project down the street) have undergone revitalization and enhancement that made them unique experiences or special destinations in Redondo Beach. The Artesia and Aviation Corridors have not experienced that same level of reinvestment and transition (planned or realized), and the residents and local merchants have expressed a desire to see the Corridors thrive once again. In addition to a desire for new businesses and restaurants, the community has also expressed a desire for physical, placemaking enhancements such as outdoor dining, pedestrian improvements (benches, landscaping, crosswalk improvements), connectivity to surrounding neighborhoods, and new gathering spaces to create place and character in this area of town.
The City has invested resources to conduct working groups over the past several years to examine the opportunities to revitalize and transform the two Corridors into the “Main Street of North Redondo.” These groups have focused on ways to make the Corridors physically attractive, well maintained, and safe. The Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013) and the City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018) were outreach efforts that engaged community experts and community partners such as the North Redondo Beach Business Association to gather input and identify priorities for action in the Corridors. These groups addressed things such as funding, branding, promoting, and designing the Corridors (see text box on the following page). The Revitalization Committee had also recommended exploring the introduction of residential uses into the Corridors as part of the General Plan update process.
The most recent effort to move forward with improvements to the Aviation and Artesia Corridors was initiated in 2018 when the City Council authorized the preparation of the Artesia and Aviation Corridors Area Plan (AACAP) to provide more focused policy and placemaking guidance to one of the city’s most prominent and travelled east-west Corridors. The AACAP effort was rolled into the General Plan Advisory Committee’s (GPAC’s) ongoing efforts and was informed by:
An existing land use analysis, including a detailed, lot-by-lot review of the land uses currently operating with the AACAP area.
A parking utilization study that included counts of all existing private and public parking within the AACAP area.
A focused economic feasibility study that built off a previous citywide analysis; further examined what types of uses and development intensities along Artesia Boulevard would result in financially feasible development projects; and identified the specific challenges and opportunities associated with redevelopment in the AACAP area. Four focused meetings of the General Plan Advisory Committee to discuss the AACAP area, its land uses, and revitalization.
This document captures the recommendations of previous efforts as well as the analysis and discussions conducted in the development of this plan to define a number of strategies and implementable actions that will guide the revitalization of the Aviation and Artesia Corridors.
Executive Summary
4 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Why haven’t the Corridors changed much over the last 10 years? As previously noted, a citywide economic study, conducted as part of the General Plan update (2017), found that the City has limited capacity to support new retail square footage, but there was a demand for office space. Subsequent to the citywide analysis, a focused development feasibility study of Artesia Boulevard (March 2019) found that the Corridors have low vacancy rates and the value of land is relatively high. One reason for the lack of turnover could be the high land value, which is sufficiently high to prohibit lower-scale types of construction as limited by current zoning development standards. Suggestions to encourage redevelopment of the Corridors included increasing the mix of uses allowed to harness market demand (allow for retail, restaurant, office, residential), leveraging the demand for additional and improved office space, reducing the number or parking spaces required, increasing the amount of square footage that is allowed on a site (increasing the required floor-area-ratio and increasing the allowable number of stories).
What are the next steps?
There are several opportunities for the City to explore to move the AACAP area forward, starting with the recommendations from the Artesia/Aviation development feasibility study. The General Plan Advisory Committee was generally open to exploring all the recommendations, except for the introduction of new residential uses into the Corridors. To make new residential uses feasible, the development standards would need to allow additional height in the Corridors, which the group did not feel was compatible with the surrounding residential neighborhoods. Therefore, the GPAC determined that the Corridors should evolve organically, with minor refinements to development standards and/or parking requirements, to help incentivize redevelopment and enhance connectivity to neighborhoods and the Galleria.
In addition to design guidelines and development standard refinements generated by the AACAP, the City can continue to build from its successful Storefront Improvement Program and can enhance the Corridors’ sense of place through its Art in Public Places funding, which was a requirement of the Galleria project and must be used along the Artesia Corridor.
DESIRED IMPROVEMENTS FOR ARTESIA AND AVIATION CORRIDORS As a result of the various studies of Artesia and Aviation Boulevards in Redondo Beach over the years, several programs or actions have been recommended for implementation to enhance the vitality and user experience.
In general, the recommendations center around three primary topics: Design, Mobility, and Economic Development. To create sustainable, feasible, and effective Corridors, these three topics must be equally considered. Aligning the three components often requires compromise and identification of ways to respond to today’s needs while assessing the trade-offs of future improvements. The AACAP is organized by these three components and addresses a series of more detailed topics, which are listed below and are expanded upon in the remaining chapters of this plan.
Design
Façade improvements, architecture, placemaking, pedestrian experience, sidewalks, outdoor dining, lighting and landscaping (for safety and aesthetics), signage programs
Mobility
Roadway configurations, bike lanes, traffic signalization, midblock crossings, parking (shared and public), transit, parking meters, micro-mobility, curb management, streetlets, neighborhood connectivity, connectivity to the Galleria
Funding Mechanisms
Harnessing of market demand, streamlined entitlement for preferred uses, permitting and impact fees, establishment of a business improvement district, organic growth by linking successful business districts and activity nodes
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 5 Executive Summary
1.2 PURPOSE
What will this plan do?
The purpose of the AACAP is to create a working document that identifies policy approaches and explicit actions that can be used by City staff or property owners to activate, energize, and revitalize the Artesia and Aviation Corridors in a coordinated and consistent manner. It is intended to be used as a tool to help inform the City’s strategic planning efforts (what items should be prioritized when, and what resources should be allocated to a task). It will serve as an interdepartmental tool/strategy document that helps to outline partnerships that are needed to accomplish a particular objective (improvements in the public right of way or sidewalks, for example), and it will also serve as a companion document to the City’s zoning requirements, outlining the special provisions or design guidelines property owners should implement as they are designing new projects or contemplating improvements to their buildings. This document aims to provide a tool that consolidates the recommendations generated from all of the prior revitalization efforts that focused on the Artesia and Aviation Corridors over the last several years (see Section 2.4, Related Planning Efforts) and a framework for decision-makers and City staff to systematically implement the ideas generated in this document.
1.3 HOW TO USE THIS PLAN
The AACAP shall be used as a companion document to the General Plan and zoning ordinance. The AACAP should be used as a starting point for the City to establish general policy direction, corridor objectives, and implementable actions along the two Corridors. It should also be used as a guide for City Staff during Strategic Planning and budgeting discussions (primarily for prioritization and resource allocation purposes), as well as for property owners and developers as they pursue new projects in the Corridors to transition uses over time.
Recommended actions may take the form of a zoning code update, preparation of a study or analyses, additional outreach with businesses and neighbors, or establishment or continuance of a City program. These actions are intended to implement the underlying intent of the AACAP:
Create “activity nodes”
Increase floor area ratio (FAR)
Relax parking standards for preferred uses
Encourage shared parking (private) / Establish shared parking (public) Improved pedestrian/vehicular access between businesses Establish a business improvement district
Improve neighborhood connectivity
Apply and develop design guidelines
Build an identity through cohesive branding, placemaking objects, wayfinding, public art, and gateways
Unify signage
Create new public spaces (such as parklettes or streetlets) Improve walking and biking infrastructure
Consider long-range transit improvements
Standards, guidelines, and recommendations related to each topic are outlined at the end of each chapter, where appropriate, and all recommended actions are consolidated in Chapter 6, Implementation. Recommendations that differ between Artesia and Aviation Boulevards for a particular topic will be called out.
Property owners are encouraged to involve Planning Division staff and adjacent property owners in the conceptual use and design process of a proposed development project prior to making a significant investment in the AACAP area.
During the review of development proposals by Planning Division staff, submittals will be checked to ascertain if the standards, guidelines, and recommendations in the AACAP have been followed and to see if the intent of the design and placemaking approach have been reasonably observed or addressed.
Developments in compliance with the standards and guidelines will receive favorable recommendations (or approval by City staff if the project falls under staff jurisdiction/authority). Developments are not expected to meet every detail of every discretionary guideline in order to be considered in reasonable compliance with the overall intent of the AACAP.
Executive Summary
6 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 2. BACKGROUND
Page intentionally left blank.
Background
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 9 CH ATPER 2. BA CK GROUN D
2.1 THE LOCATION AND ROLE OF EACH
CORRIDOR
The AACAP area is in the heart of North Redondo Beach and includes segments of both Artesia and Aviation Boulevards as well as the properties fronting each roadway. Encompassing approximately 82 acres, the AACAP area borders the cities of Hermosa Beach and Manhattan Beach to the west and the city of Lawndale to the east (Figure 2.1, Regional Location).
The AACAP area currently serves primarily two groups of users: residents who live nearby and use the amenities offered along the Corridors, and pass-through drivers who use the Corridors to get to and from destinations outside of the Area Plan.
ARTESIA CORRIDOR
Location
Artesia Boulevard originates at State Route 91 in Gardena and passes east to west through seven cities, including Redondo Beach, before terminating at Pacific Coast Highway (PCH) in Hermosa Beach. The Boulevard plays an important role in maintaining efficient east-west circulation for Redondo Beach and nearby cities, connecting local roads to the larger regional network— including State Route 91 and I-110 in Gardena, I-405 in Torrance, PCH in Hermosa Beach—and providing access to beach destinations in Redondo Beach, Hermosa Beach, and Manhattan Beach.
Artesia Boulevard is also a primary commercial corridor with shopping centers and small service-commercial-office buildings along the majority of its length.
The generally uniform pattern of development has the benefit of visual continuity but makes it difficult to distinguish one section from another. The segment of Artesia Boulevard studied in this plan (the Artesia Corridor) runs from the transportation easement (rail line) east of Inglewood Avenue to the western city boundary at Aviation Boulevard, and includes the properties fronting the right-of-way (Figure 2.2, Local Vicinity). The Kingsdale/Condon Figure 2.1 Regional Location
Map showing the location of the AACAP area in relationship to surrounding cities and the regional roadway network
Background
10 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach neighborhood and the Galleria, immediately to the east of the AACAP area boundary, provide a transition from Lawndale and Torrance to Artesia Boulevard in Redondo Beach. These areas are not included in the AACAP area because they are being studied as a separate focus area as part of the general plan update.
Role of the Corridor
With its central location in North Redondo Beach, Artesia Boulevard serves as the hub of North Redondo, providing a variety of amenities to meet the daily needs for nearby residents. With an estimated 12,089 people living within a quarter-mile walking distance of the Corridor, and 21,982 people within a halfmile bike ride, this segment of Artesia Boulevard has potential to become a thriving, pedestrian-oriented destination where residents and visitors come to fulfill their daily needs, relax in public, encounter familiar faces, and meet new people.
AVIATION CORRIDOR
Location
Aviation Boulevard provides a north-south link to Artesia Boulevard from Hermosa Beach and South Redondo Beach. As shown on Figure 2.1, Regional Location, the roadway begins at Manchester Avenue in Inglewood, terminates at PCH in Hermosa Beach, and is a primary connector between local roads and the eastwest thoroughfaresthat link to the larger regional network.
As shown in Figure 2.2, the portion of Aviation Boulevard studied in the Area Plan (Aviation Corridor) includes the segment of Aviation between Artesia Boulevard and the western city limits as well as properties fronting the roadway. Aviation Boulevard north of Artesia Boulevard abruptly changes from commercial businesses to homes and small condominium complexes. The southern boundary where Aviation enters Hermosa Beach is predominantly a mix of small-scale service-commercial buildings, a continuation of what exists in Redondo Beach.
Role of the Corridor
The Aviation Corridor is a smaller and less centralized commercial corridor than Artesia, so it primarily serves the adjacent neighborhoods. It is within walking distance of a smaller number of residents than the Artesia Corridor (6,340 estimated within one-quarter mile), and the topography of the nearby neighborhoods, combined with narrower local streets and sidewalks than in other areas of the City, may discourage some residents from biking, riding a scooter, skateboarding, or rollerblading from their homes to destinations within the Aviation Corridor. With these forces at play, Aviation Corridor serves as a local neighborhood center, but its primary role is connecting Redondo Beach to other South Bay Cities via vehicular and potential future bicycle routes.
DID YOU KNOW?
The number of people living within half a mile of the
Artesia Corridor is 21,982, which is 2,135 more than
the population of Hermosa Beach in 2019 (which was
19,847 people)!
This creates a significant opportunity to connect neighborhoods and residents to the Corridor and to convert traditional automobile trips to Artesia Boulevard to other modes of transportation such as walking or biking.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 11 Background
Figure 2.2 Local Vicinity
Background
12 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Illustration of the Redondo Villa
Tract in relationship to South
Redondo Beach and the Pacific
Ocean. Published in the Los
Angeles Herald, Volume 37,
Number 261, June 19, 1910.
2.2 HISTORY
Originally marketed under the name Redondo Villa Tract, much of North Redondo Beach was laid out by W. H. Carlson and George Peck between 1906 and 1907. Most of the now-residential lots in the Redondo Villa Tract were sold as plots of land 150 feet deep by 50 feet wide, a lot size that continues to define many North Redondo neighborhoods today.
DID YOU KNOW?
Artesia Boulevard was originally named Redondo Beach Boulevard. The name changed in 1962 when the State of California named it a State Highway and took control of the roadway. In 1994, the City began negotiations with the State to relinquish control of Artesia Boulevard due to budget issues and lack of maintenance. After 10 years of negotiation, the City resumed control of Artesia Boulevard in 2004.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 13 Background
AACAP AREA DEVELOPMENT
The development history of the AACAP area parallels the growth of North Redondo Beach and regional trends observed throughout Southern California.
As shown on Figure 2.3, Percentage of Total Acres by Development Decade, the phases of development reflect a variety of drivers—post–World War II suburbanization, the emergence of the aerospace industry, upward and downward cycles of the real estate market, commercial strip development, and increasing demand for residential development.
The street locations and land plotting were largely defined early in the twentieth century, but most of the built environment in North Redondo and the AACAP area was developed between the end of World War II and the 1980s.
Aviation Corridor saw an uptick in development activity beginning in the 1950s and lasting through the 1970s. Roughly half of the properties along the Corridor underwent some kind of transformation during this period, and many have remained mostly unchanged since.
Historical development along Artesia Corridor largely mirrors that of Aviation, but with noticeably more properties developed during the 1940s and 1950s.
The south side of Artesia between Rindge Lane and Phelan Lane still closely resembles this period because very little development has occurred since then.
Figure 2.4, Development by Decade, illustrates when and where the Area Plan area was developed and is followed by brief descriptions of the types of development in the Corridors according to the period in which they were built.
Figure 2.3 Percentage of Total Acres by Development Decade 15%
15%
11%
25%
12%
3%
4%
3%
1% 11%
Pre-1950 (15%)
1950s (15%)
1960s (11%)
1970s (25%)
1980s (12%)
1990s (3%)
2000s (4%)
2010s (3%)
Institutional (1%)
Other/Data Not Available (11%)
Background
14 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Figure 2.4 Development by Decade
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 15 Background
1945–1959
Following World War II, the 1940s and 1950s saw significant housing development in the neighborhoods surrounding Artesia and Aviation Corridors, which in turn drove commercial development within the AACAP area. Buildings in the AACAP area from this era were generally small, with connected storefronts that directly abutted the sidewalk and housed local, neighborhood-serving businesses. The image below shows an example of a commercial building developed during the 1950s.
Example of commercial building within the Artesia Corridor built in the 1950s. 1960–1969
During the 1960s, the Space Park was established along the city’s northern border, bringing with it additional housing development in North Redondo Beach and the neighborhoods surrounding Artesia Corridor as well as steady development in the AACAP area. The buildings developed in the AACAP area during the 1960s reflected the increasing importance of vehicles in daily life.
Like those of the preceding decades, the buildings were small and directly abutted the sidewalk, but many were free-standing, included individual driveways with parking in the rear, and had an entrance on the side of the building. The image below shows an example of a commercial building built during the 1960s.
This A-frame structure with surface parking is characteristic of development along the Artesia Corridor in the 1960s.
Background
16 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach 1970–1989
In the 1970s and 1980s, both the surrounding North Redondo neighborhoods and the AACAP area continued to grow. Development in the AACAP area brought strip malls and larger shopping centers, often with rows of parking in front or to the side. The image below shows an example of a commercial building developed during the 1970s.
This commercial center, built in the 1970s, is small scale and auto-oriented. Note the orientation and relationship of the residential uses adjacent to the site. 1990–Present
By 1990, housing development in the surrounding neighborhoods began to slow down, and only a handful of properties in the AACAP area have seen development in the last three decades. Projects built since 1990 include gas stations, food service with drive-thrus, modern strip centers (often with buildings fronting the sidewalk and parking to the side or rear), one mixed-use project, and one multifamily project. Today the AACAP area is a melting pot of the development trends that defined the last eight decades.
Example of building with drive-thru completed in 2018.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 17 Background
2.3 EXISTING CONDITIONS ANALYSIS
2.3.1EXISTING LAND USES
OVERVIEW
The discussion below describes the conditions of the existing land uses (see Figure 2.7, Existing Land Use). Additionally, a detailed discussion of the constraints and opportunities—such as the mix of land uses and small lots with shallow depth—that determine how the Corridors function and that impact future development in the AACAP area is in Section 2.5, Opportunities and Constraints.
As shown on Figure 2.5, Percentage of Total Acres by Existing Land Use, the AACAP area largely consists of commercial uses, with a handful of residential, institutional, and mixed-use properties (i.e., commercial and residential uses on a single property).
Figure 2.5 Percentage of Total Acres by Existing Land Use Residential Areas
The area surrounding the Corridors is primarily residential. Approximately 15,360 residents live within a quarter-mile radius of the AACAP area1 . The
Artesia Corridor is primarily surrounded by multifamily developments with a handful of single-family homes scattered throughout the neighborhoods. The Aviation Corridor is generally surrounded by tall and narrow single-family homes to the north and a mix of single-family and 2- to 3-unit lots to the south.
Public/Institutional Facilities
Tucked in and around the AACAP area are a number of public facilities. The Redondo Beach North Library, Recreation and Community Services Department, and United States Post Office are along the Artesia Corridor. Two schools (Birney Elementary and Maddison Elementary) sit just beyond the AACAP area boundary.
1 12,089 people live within a quarter-mile radius of Artesia Boulevard and 6,340 live within a quarter-mile radius of Aviation Boulevard. Of those, 3,069 people live within a quarter mile of both Artesia and Aviation Boulevards.
<1% <1%
10% 4%
79%
3%
3% 1%
Vacant (<1%)
Single Family Res. (<1%)
4+ Unit Res. (10%)
Mixed Use Res/Com (4%)
Commercial (79%)
Institutional (3%)
Utility & Open Space (3%)
Utility (1%)
Background
18 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Commercial Areas
The vast majority of the AACAP area is occupied by commercial uses. Serviceoriented businesses represent 38 percent of all commercial space within the Artesia Corridor, followed by retail (18 percent), restaurants (12 percent), and automotive (10 percent). Office buildings, hotels/motels, medical offices, and thrift shops make up the remaining 22 percent of commercial uses along the Artesia Corridor.
Despite the prevalence of commercial businesses throughout the AACAP area, the low intensity of development primarily serves customers passing through or arriving by automobile. The decentralization of shopping and dining opportunities, in particular, makes the Corridors less conducive for pedestrian activity. This topic is explored further in Chapter 3, Placemaking.
Example of commercial service uses within the Artesia Corridor.
THE ARTESIA CORRIDOR:
A DEEPER LOOK AT EXISTING COMMERCIAL USES
With 79 percent of the total acreage within the AACAP currently occupied by commercial uses (see Figure 2.5), there is a wide variety in the types of commercial services offered. The distribution of commercial uses along the Artesia uses is shown in Figure 2.6.
Figure 2.6: Percentage of Commercial Square Footage
by Type within the Artesia Corridor
Note: Percentages subject to rounding
Service Commercial uses combined with Automotive uses occupy nearly half of the available commercial space with the Artesia Corridor. These uses, which include hair and nail salons, dry cleaning and laundromats, gyms and fitness centers, construction services, alternative healing solutions, massage services, auto repair, etc., do not typically foster a pedestrian-oriented environment.
Service
38%
Retail
18%
Restaurant
12%
Automotive
10%
Office
8%
Hotel /
Motel
6%
Medical
4%
Thrift Shop
4%
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 19 Background
Figure 2.7 Existing Land Use
Background
20 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach N
APPROVED PROJECTS
South Bay Galleria
The Galleria is a 955,000-square-foot enclosed mall less than half a mile from the eastern edge of the AACAP area(Figure 2.2). Originally called the Galleria at South Bay, the mall boasted 150 shops when it first opened in 1985. After two decades of success, the Galleria, like most large malls, felt the effects of the 2007 recession. Anchor-tenant Mervyn’s closed following the company’s bankruptcy in 2008, and numerous small retailers closed in the same timeframe. Nordstrom’s, another anchor tenant, added to the mall’s challenges when it relocated to the competing Del Amo Fashion Center in Torrance in 2013. Plans to revitalize the Galleria have been under way for several years and recently took another step forward after the City approved a new mixed-use redevelopment project in January 2019. The new plan will add an additional 300,000 square feet of retail space, 300 apartment units, up to 175,000 square feet of office space, a 150- room hotel, and designated open space that includes a skate park.
In addition, Metro’s plan to extend the Green Line light rail to Torrance would place a transit stop at the redeveloped South Bay Galleria (official location still to be determined). Although Metro anticipates roughly ten years from selection to grand opening, an on-site transit stop would greatly expand regional access to the shops and attractions.
Southern California Edison Right-of-Way
The Southern California Edison (SCE) right-of-way consists of largely undeveloped parcels and stretches 1.75 miles from Manhattan Beach Boulevard to Rockefeller Lane, where it turns to the east and continues to the South Bay Galleria. The right-of-way intersects Artesia Boulevard between Phelan and Felton Lanes. The City currently leases portions of the right-of-way to use as a park (Dale Page Park), a bike and pedestrian pathway, and landscaping. The City currently maintains a bike and pedestrian pathway that connects the Artesia Corridor to Dale Page Park in the north and to residential neighborhoods in the south. South of the Artesia Corridor, the pathway currently terminates at the intersection of Rockefeller and Felton Lanes, but there are plans to extend the path to the Galleria in the future.
In May 2019, the City took action to further improve the right-of-way by approving construction of the North Redondo Beach Bikeway Improvements Project, which is part of the City’s current capital improvement program. The project will install landscaping, pathway improvements, and lighting improvements to the two SCE right-of-way parcels adjacent to Artesia Boulevard.
The project also includes installation of a permeable-pavement, lighted parking area on the north parcel that is intended to support nearby businesses.
The plan for the North Redondo Beach Bikeway Improvements Project within the SCE right-of-way—approved for construction May 2019.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 21 Background
2.3.2PARKING STUDY
To better understand the current parking capacity within the AACAP area, a parking study was conducted that identified a total of 2,877 parking spaces, of which 688 are on-street, public spaces and 2,189 are private, off-street spaces (see Appendix A, Parking Study).
Further analysis revealed that both on- and off-street parking spaces are generally underutilized, suggesting that the current supply can accommodate higher demand. An efficiently parked area maintains an 85 percent utilization rate, but current on-street and off-street parking rarely exceeds 68 percent and 50 percent utilization, respectively.
Despite the excess of parking spaces, the functional supply is largely restricted by the private ownership of off-street lots and the absence of public lots and structures. As redevelopment efforts progress, the City could capitalize on the abundance of existing off-street parking by seeking partnerships with the property/business owners. With more parking spaces available for general use, other targeted efforts—such as reduced parking requirements for new development—become more feasible.
The challenges and opportunities derived from the parking study are described in detail in Section 2.5, Opportunities and Constraints.
2.3.3MARKET ANALYSIS AND DEVELOPMENT
FEASIBILITY STUDY
In addition to the parking study, the AACAP was informed by a citywide market study (2017) and an AACAP development feasibility study (2019). The citywide market study found that there was a demand for more and improved office space throughout the city and noted that the nationwide changes in the retail environment would likely impact the amount of retail that would be supported.
The 2019 feasibility study evaluated the potential for redevelopment of the types of uses that are likely within the AACAP area. Analysis of four conceptual One of many underutilized lots serving a single use in the AACAP area. Background
22 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach development scenarios on a hypothetical site along Artesia Boulevard was conducted (see Appendix B).
The concepts explored the feasibility of residential-only developments (24 units and 45 units), a combination of retail and residential (Figure 2.8, Mixed Use Concept), and a combination of retail and office (Figure 2.9, Commercial Flex Concept).
The feasibility study concluded that the shallow lot depths and high land values along Artesia Boulevard significantly limited near-term redevelopment of the AACAP area (see Section 2.5.1, Constraints, for more details) unless the development standards allowed for additional height (e.g., 4+ stories), reduced setbacks, relaxed parking requirements, and increases in the allowable floor area ratio (FAR). The study determined that residential and mixed-use development with three stories or fewer were generally not financially feasible in the near term. It was assumed that the same would apply to Aviation Boulevard because the lots there are even more shallow than on Artesia Boulevard.
To overcome these limitations, the feasibility study proposed a number of recommendations(see Section 2.5.2, Opportunities, for more details), including:
Allow for flexible parking standards and increased FAR for preferred uses to encourage development of desired uses.
Introduce impact fee reduction for preferred uses to help marginally feasible projects become fully feasible.
Establish a flexible zoning designation to allow for a range of uses that accommodates a variety of businesses according to market demand.
A detailed discussion of the opportunities and constraints identified in the development feasibility study is in Section 2.5, Opportunities and Constraints.
Figure 2.8 Mixed Use Concept
Figure 2.9 Commercial Flex Concept
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 23 Background
2.4 RELATED PLANNING EFFORTS
In addition to the land use, parking, and development feasibility analysis conducted as part of the AACAP (described in Section 2.3), the opportunities and recommendations in this plan also build on the work of prior and concurrent planning efforts. Over the years, focused efforts and appointed committees have tackled the discussion about how to prompt activity and promote revitalization along Artesia and Aviation Boulevards. Those efforts included:
Artesia Vitalization Strategy (2013)
Artesia-Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018–2019) General Plan Update and Advisory Committee (2017–expected completion in 2020)
A review of the findings and recommendations from these efforts found that several previously recommended items are still relevant (for example, establishing a Business Improvement District). The AACAP will identify any observed obstacles that have prevented previous recommendations from moving forward and make suggestions to eliminate barriers and prompt implementation.
ARTESIA VITALIZATION STRATEGY
In 2013, the Artesia Boulevard Working Group (primarily made up of North Redondo Beach Business Association members) met several times to provide an overview of the challenges, concerns, and priorities of the Artesia Boulevard business community. Surveys with the Business Association’s general membership identified three priorities for the Vitalization Strategy:
Promotion and Marketing Improvements
Design and Infrastructure Improvements
Economic Restructuring
The group also developed a strategic vision:
ARTESIA BOULEVARD STRATEGIC VISION
Vitalize the Artesia Boulevard Business District as an
identifiable, safe, attractive, and inviting place to serve residents and visitors’ unique needs while building
prosperous small businesses.
Guided by the identified priorities and strategic vision, the Artesia Boulevard Working Group developed the following goals to carry out the strategic vision:
Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Goals
Enhance the Artesia Business District as a distinctive place of community pride, living, commerce, and enjoyment.
Foster business development growth on Artesia Boulevard. Create a recognized brand of customer service and care on Artesia Boulevard and successfully market that brand.
Re-imagine the quality of public and private design standards for Artesia Boulevard.
Empower organized Artesia Boulevard–based leadership. Dedicate public and private financial resources to Artesia Boulevard tasks and projects.
To achieve these goals, the working group used the National Trust’s “Main Street” approach to identify tasks and projects categorized by the four key points of the Main Street approach:
Organization. Identified the need to establish a single-purpose organization of volunteers and professional management to advocate, plan, and direct the specific vitalization tasks and projects; included a number of specific recommendations.
Background
24 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Promotion. Identified the need to implement a quality communications, marketing, and advertising plan; outlined specific projects that could be implemented.
Design. Identified the need to create a “sense of place” and establish a cohesive and quality function and form for the business district; listed a handful of improvement projects to enhance the Artesia Corridor. Economic Restructuring. Identified the need to support existing businesses and recruit desirable new businesses to the Artesia Corridor; recommended a number of related tasks and projects.
All of the recommendations of the working group were presented to the North Redondo Beach Business Association, which selected three priority actions from the tasks and projects associated with each key point:
Rename Artesia Boulevard to Redondo Beach Boulevard.
Determine the feasibility and process for establishing a Business Improvement District (BID).
Develop a sign plan and standards.
Since 2013, investigation and outreach associated with renaming Artesia Boulevard have been initiated, but the idea has not gained widespread support and remains a subject of ongoing discussion. Plans to establish a BID and develop a sign plan and standards have not been implemented, but are folded into this Area Plan, along with other tasks and projects identified by the vitalization committee. See Appendix D for the full report.
ARTESIA-AVIATION REVITALIZATION COMMITTEE
In 2018, eleven people representing Redondo Beach businesses, residents, and property owners were appointed by the City manager to evaluate the challenges facing the Artesia and Aviation Corridors and to gather information pertaining to:
Public safety
Current retail trends
The impacts of the general plan update on prospective development and growth opportunities in the Corridors
The meetings of the Artesia-Aviation Revitalization Committee included group discussions of national and regional economic changes and how they played out in the Artesia/Aviation Corridors, then considered the challenges that are unique to the area. The group’s recommendations included suggestions for ongoing, short-term, and longer-term projects, many of which have been folded into the strategies and action items in this Area Plan. See Appendix C for the full report.
The Artesia-Aviation Revitalization Committee was assisted by staff from the City Manager’s Office, Waterfront and Economic Development, Community Development, Public Works, and the Police and Fire departments. The same internal City staff team will be responsible for the implementation of the AACAP.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 25 Background
GENERAL PLAN UPDATE AND ADVISORY COMMITTEE
The General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) consists of 27 members whose charge is to provide input into the update of the City’s land use map and assist staff in the preparation of goals, policies, and action items for a focused general plan update to the land use, noise, safety and open space, recreation and conservation elements. As a part of the general plan update work program, the City Council authorized the preparation of the Artesia and Aviation Corridors Area Plan to provide more focused policy and placemaking guidance to two of the city’s most prominent and traveled corridors. This document is a result of those efforts.
Although the general plan will not be adopted by the time this Area Plan is completed, several of the GPAC meetings and general plan community workshops revealed a need to focus some of the City’s revitalization efforts in North Redondo (versus solely at the Galleria or the AES site). As a result, the AACAP is moving forward and will be tied back to the general plan document when the latter is adopted.
GPAC Recommendations for the AACAP
The GPAC’s preference for the types of uses was a blend of commercial and office uses throughout the AACAP area (no residential or mixed use that also allows residential). However, they felt the existing mixed use could remain and should not be considered nonconforming.
The GPAC carefully considered the findings of the 2017 citywide market study, which identified a need for new and improved office facilities, as well as the 2019 development feasibility study, which concluded that residential development with three or fewer stories was not financially feasible in the near term. Based on these findings, GPAC preferred to allow the area to evolve organically over time instead of creating significant changes to (or increases in) the area’s development capacity to prompt immediate change. The group heard feedback from the City’s economic feasibility consultant and property/business owners along the Artesia Corridor and agreed that a slight increase in FAR (from 0.50 FAR to 0.60 FAR, for example) would help by providing added development capacity needed to induce property owners to reinvest and redevelop commercial uses that have reached the end of their useful lifespan (discussed in more detail in Chapter 3).
The GPAC expressed concerns about the impacts that existing and future housing legislation could have on the allowable heights in the area (density bonus laws, potential impacts of Senate Bill 50 proposed in 2019), which was a factor in their decision to not include new residential uses in the AACAP area. They determined that the focus of the Corridors should be primarily restaurant and office, with some general retail and service commercial, thus catering to and creating connectivity with the adjacent residential neighborhoods.
The group was generally opposed to increasing building heights above three stories to accommodate new residential uses because of the effect additional stories would have on adjacent residential uses. They also expressed concern that the scale of taller buildings would alter the aesthetic character of the existing neighborhood.
The characteristics of the AACAP area must also be factored into redevelopment considerations. The Artesia and Aviation Corridors are commercial-heavy and accommodate large traffic volumes. This places practical limitations on the types of uses that complement and harmonize with existing development. The GPAC provided additional policy and/or implementation measures focused on:
A pedestrian-focused/priority environment.
A bike lane and multimodal access along Artesia.
Enhanced physical connections to the adjacent community, commercial businesses, and nearby residential neighborhoods.
Alternative streetscape and street section design options. Opportunities to create temporary or permanent gathering spaces along the Corridors (streetlet/parklet in part of a cross-street to the Artesia Corridor). Spaces could be tried out temporarily, then permanently installed if they are actively used by the community and funding could be secured to install and maintain.
Background
26 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
2.5 OPPORTUNITIES AND CONSTRAINTS
The analysis of existing land uses, parking, and development feasibility revealed a number of constraints that limit redevelopment potential and prevent other revitalization efforts from gaining traction in the AACAP area. In addition, opportunities were identified, some of which mitigate constraints. Others address challenges that face the commercial corridors and other issues identified through analysis, prior planning efforts, and discussions.
2.5.1CONSTRAINTS
The following constraints were identified, and are described in detail in this section:
Existing mix and location of uses does not serve the local community. High land values and limited development potential due to regulations. Lot depths and configurations limit what can be developed. Low vacancy means there is limited financial incentive to redevelop. Inefficiently utilized parking results in excess parking spaces in some areas and a shortage in others.
Revitalization projects are difficult to implement because responsible parties have not been established.
In addition to the constraints noted above, all of the related planning efforts noted that the existing character of the Corridors did not invite pedestrian activity and recommended placemaking and mobility improvements to help transform the physical quality of the Corridors.
EXISTING MIX AND LOCATION OF COMMERCIAL USES
When a critical density of complementary amenities, services, and activities comes together (including businesses, civic uses, and public spaces), corridors become desirable destinations. Today, neither the Artesia Corridor nor the Aviation Corridor has a distinct density of complementary uses that could attract a higher number of visitors. Additionally, the existing mix of commercial uses, shown in Figure 2.6, does not currently meet the needs and desires of the local community, as identified by the Artesia-Aviation Revitalization Committee and the GPAC. Presently, there are only a few destinations in the AACAP area frequented by residents, and even fewer that entice locals to walk to the Corridors. Many of the establishments that could support a more active pedestrian atmosphere are separated by significant distances, which discourages people from approaching on foot.
HIGH LAND VALUES
The land values estimated in the development feasibility study are high ($6.9 million/acre), which means that a redevelopment project would need to generate enough cash flow (usually in the form of rent) to offset the cost and risk of development. Generating more cash flow is often achieved by increasing the amount of leasable space and/or by raising rental rates. Because the rental market is competitive, there is a limit to how high rental rates can be set and still attract tenants. Together, the expected rental rates and the amount of leasable square footage available must result in enough cash flow to incentivize landowners to redevelop properties. Existing parking and FAR requirements (described later in this section), however, limit the amount of leasable building square footage that could be developed on a property and thus limit the cash flow it could generate. If a property cannot generate more revenue than the cost of development and the risk of investment, it is unlikely to be developed.
The 2019 development feasibility study (see Appendix B) concluded that the majority of projects were not currently feasible without changes to current FAR and parking standards that would allow property owners to develop projects with more leasable square footage.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 27 Background
In this example, an
abutting rear parking
lot serves as an
extension of two of
the shallowest parcels
along Artesia Corridor.
LOT DEPTHS
The lots within the AACAP area were generally established at the same time that the residential area was plotted, and the dimensions in the Corridors mirror those of adjacent neighborhoods. The neighborhoods were laid out shortly after the turn of the twentieth century, when a very different commercial model prevailed, and minimum parking requirements would not be conceived for more than half a century.
Artesia
As illustrated on Figure 2.10, Lot Depths, the majority of lots within the Artesia Corridor are 130 to 150 feet deep. Fewer than ten properties in the Corridor are less than 50 feet deep. Of those, all but two properties are adjacent to parcels that are used for rear parking, effectively extending the length of the lot to mirror the 130- to 150-foot depth common along the Corridor.
This lot within the Aviation Corridor is approximately 100 feet deep. The building is only 900 square feet, and the remainder of the property is dedicated to off-street parking.
Aviation
Because the Aviation Corridor cuts diagonally along the edge of the original grid laid out in 1906 (described in Section 1.2, History), lot depths along the Aviation Corridor generally mirror the newer, smaller residential lots of the adjacent tall-and-skinny homes rather than the prevailing lot size of the 1906 tracts. As depicted on Figure 2.10, properties generally range from 80 feet to 120 feet deep. The notable exceptions to this pattern are seen in the two multifamily developments1 and the large, auto-oriented shopping complex at the intersection of the Corridors.
1 The two multifamily developments are located at: 1) The southwest corner of Artesia Blvd. and Aviation Blvd.; 2) Along Aviation Blvd. between Goodman Ave. and Stanford Ave. Background
28 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Figure 2.10 Lot Depths
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 29 Background
VACANCY
Vacant sites often present the best opportunities for development. The construction costs are lower, and the administrative process is easier than for an already developed site. Unfortunately, no vacant sites currently exist within the AACAP area. This tells us that redevelopment of existing commercial sites is the primary opportunity to facilitate change in the Corridors.
Commercial vacancy rates in the AACAP area, however, are currently low, hovering around 3.8 percent (see Appendix B). This indicates that businesses are performing well and that property owners are able to find tenants with relative ease. Unfortunately, high occupancy rates generally deter property owners from reinvesting in assets because the current product is still profitable, even if the mix of uses is not desired by the local community.
Compounding the issue is that the majority of current land owners in the AACAP area are long-standing owners with little debt, which allows for positive cash flow even though the rental rates are lower in the AACAP area than in other parts of the city (see Appendix B).
One of very few vacant storefronts within the Artesia Corridor.
PARKING REQUIREMENTS AND FLOOR AREA RATIO
Most of the parcels along both Corridors are too shallow to attract development of significant scale, and this challenge is complicated by the existing parking and FAR standards, which require a certain number of dedicated parking spaces on-site and restrict the size of buildings that can be developed proportional to the lot size. Real estate brokers have affirmed these challenges and expressed that desirable businesses looking to locate in the AACAP area are often unable to do so. Establishing the correct balance of building size and parking relative to lot sizes and anticipated visitors is critical to a quality corridor.
Off-street parking requirements are particularly problematic for development on narrow, midblock properties because there are no alleys to provide rear access. A 130-foot by 50-foot lot along Artesia Corridor must dedicate nearly 40 percent (18 feet) of the available frontage to provide a two-way drive with access to rear parking. This requirement limits design flexibility, disrupts the rhythm of storefronts, and encourages each property to maintain at least one curb cut, which reduces on-street parking potential and disrupts the pedestrian experience.
LACK OF RECENT DEVELOPMENT
The land sales data studied in the feasibility assessment (see Appendix B) included very few recent transactions. This is also reflected in Figure 1.3, Development by Decade, which shows only a handful properties in the AACAP area were developed after 2010. Developers, in general, are reluctant to invest in areas without other recent and successful projects, so the lack of recent development increases the risk associated with a redevelopment project. Developers would need a greater incentive to offset this perceived risk of investing in the AACAP area.
Background
30 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Each property along this stretch of Artesia Boulevard (between Slauson and McKay Lanes) maintains its own private parking area.
INEFFICIENT PARKING
Despite the current excess of parking spaces, the functional supply is restricted by small, segregated, and privately owned off-street lots that are intended for the exclusive use of customers and employees of each site. In most cases, each commercial development only provides enough parking to fulfill its own parking requirements as defined in the City’s municipal code, and there are no large public or shared parking lots intended to serve customers of multiple developments in the AACAP area. Allowing more shared or public parking in the AACAP area would allow more efficient use of parking and more flexibility in site design and could help to reduce the number of overall parking spaces needed in the AACAP area.
DIFFICULT TO IMPLEMENT
Despite a good set of recommendations, many of the revitalization strategies identified by the 2013 working group and 2018 committee have not been realized because there is no driving force to advocate, plan, and direct the implementation of the identified projects. A responsible party needs to be identified to take ownership of each strategy in order see it through to realization. This was also noted as a constraint in the 2013 Vitalization Strategy.
Artesia Blvd
Slauson Ln
McKay Ln
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 31 Background
2.5.2OPPORTUNITIES
Despite the challenges limiting redevelopment and revitalization efforts in the AACAP area, a number of opportunities were also identified. The opportunities include items to help mitigate some of the challenges in Section 2.5.1 as well as strategies to transform the physical environment along the Corridors to better reflect and serve the nearby neighborhoods.
OPPORTUNITIES TO MITIGATE CONSTRAINTS
The City has limited ability to mitigate some of the identified constraints— such as lot depths, high land values, and low vacancy rates—but it does have opportunities to address others. Some of the constraints that can be mitigated include the mix and location of existing uses, inefficient parking, and parking requirements and FAR standards, which may help to stimulate redevelopment.
These constraints could be addressed through changes to the City’s municipal code and zoning standards, targeted incentive programs, and focused policy and economic development efforts.
Improve the Mix and Location of Uses
The mix and location of existing uses will change organically over time, but targeted efforts to incentivize development and encourage the clustering of preferred uses around existing desirable uses and approved projects would help to establish pedestrian destinations in the AACAP area. Strategies include:
Create activity nodes that:
Build synergy around successful desirable businesses and public assets in the AACAP area.
Capitalize on the energy created by the new Galleria development project.
Encourage pedestrian-oriented development and preferred uses around the SCE right-of-way.
Encourage Reinvestment
Many of the constraints identified in Section 2.5.1 related to development feasibility in the Corridors. Small changes to the City’s land use requirements and parking standards would enable developers to build more leasable square footage, which would help to alleviate some of the issues facing redevelopment.
These changes could include:
Relax parking requirements to incentivize development of preferred uses. Increase FAR throughout the Artesia Corridor to improve financial feasibility of redevelopment.
Allow a range of uses, including commercial, office, and residential, in the AACAP area to provide flexibility to respond to market demand and spur redevelopment.
1 Establish More Efficient Parking Solutions
The City should adopt site design guidelines and changes to the municipal code and zoning standards that encourage and facilitate shared off-street parking on private property. It should also implement a long-range parking strategy to establish public off-street parking. These actions would transform the way that parking is used throughout the AACAP area.
Enable Implementation
This document is intended to help the City, local businesses, and community members implement its strategies. As noted in the 2013 Vitalization Report, the AACAP area would also benefit from the formation of a single-purpose organization of volunteers and professional management to advocate, plan, and 1 As noted in Section 2.4, the GPAC felt that buildings with more than three stories were not compatible with the adjacent neighborhoods, and the development feasibility study (Appendix B) found that residential development with three stories or fewer was not financially feasible in the near term. As a result, the GPAC recommended that no new residential uses be introduced into the AACAP area.
Background
32 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach direct the implementation of the AACAP. One strategy is to establish a business improvement district (BID).
PLACEMAKING AND MOBILITY OPPORTUNITIES
In addition to the opportunities that directly address various constraints, a number of opportunities were identified to help establish the AACAP area as a great public space. These include ways to address challenges that commonly face commercial corridors—improving connections between business parking areas and between the AACAP area and adjacent neighborhoods; increasing the quality and safety of the pedestrian environment; establishing a distinct identity; and improving pedestrian, bike, and transit infrastructure within the AACAP area itself.
Improve Connectivity to Neighborhoods
Many nearby residents drive to the AACAP area despite the easy walking distance. Creating new connections that make walking to AACAP area more convenient and improving the physical environment and perceived safety would entice more residents to approach the Artesia and Aviation Corridors on foot. Strategies include establishing pedestrian pass-throughs and short cuts to improve access to the AACAP area.
Improve the Pedestrian Environment
The Artesia and Aviation Corridors currently attract very few pedestrians. Part of this is because neither Corridor has places where people want to spend time in public. Strategic placemaking strategies for both private development fronting the sidewalks and public improvements would work in conjunction with other identified opportunities to create a more enjoyable pedestrian experience in the AACAP area. Strategies could include:
Establish design guidelines to ensure public improvements and private development enhance the pedestrian realm.
Activate the sidewalk with outdoor dining and other temporary uses. Establish new permanent and/or temporary public spaces such as streetlets or parklets.
Establish an Identity
Commercial corridors are strongly linked to visitors’ and locals’ perceptions of the surrounding community. The AACAP area, however, does not physically reflect the vibrant neighborhoods it represents. Efforts could include:
Establish a brand
Introduce placemaking objects, wayfinding, and public art Unify signage
Improve Mobility
People are more likely to walk, bike, ride a personal scooter, skateboard, or take a ride share if the appropriate infrastructure is available. Adding bicycle lanes and installing more bicycle racks would encourage more people to bike to the AACAP area. Designating areas where ride share services can pick up and drop off passengers makes it easier for people to use those services. After some significant changes both at the Galleria and in the AACAP area, a trolley service linking desirable destinations would improve exposure and access.
Additionally, as more preferred uses move into the AACAP area, the parking demand may increase, so enabling alternative modes of transportation would help to reduce parking demand. Improvements to mobility may include:
Improve walking, biking, and other active transit infrastructure. Introduce ride share pick up/ drop off stations to reduce the number of cars needing to park.
Improve transit service and consider a long-range option of establishing a trolley service between the Galleria and AACAP area destinations.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 33 Background
Enhance Gateways
The gateways that mark entry into the Aviation and Artesia Corridors do not currently stand out from the adjacent commercial areas, so there is an opportunity to enhance the sense of arrival for all visitors and provide a visual cue marking boundaries and indicating to visitors that they are somewhere special.
Figure 2.11, Existing Gateway Locations, and the images to the right show that the gateways today have no visual indicators. This creates numerous opportunities to enhance the AACAP area’s existing gateway conditions as one piece of the AACAP area identity and coordinated arrival sequence.
Figure 2.11 Existing Gateway Locations
1: The transit underpass marks the eastern gateway to the Artesia Corridor. 2: The southeast corner of Artesia and Aviation Boulevards marks both the western gateway to Artesia Corridor and the northern gateway to Aviation Corridor. 3: The retaining wall at Stanford Avenue and Aviation Boulevard marks the southern gateway to Aviation Corridor.
1 2
2 1
3 Existing Gateway Location
3 Background
34 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach This page intentionally left blank.
Chapter 3. PLACEMAKING
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 37 CH APTER 3. PLA CEMAKING
3.1 INTRODUCTION
When corridorsfunction well, they provide opportunities for people to connect in ways that no other public space can. In the AACAP area, each Corridor aspires to become a different type of destination that serves its purpose in the regional context as well as in the surrounding neighborhoods and communities.
Focused placemaking decisions implemented with appropriate mobility improvements and economic development strategies can create Corridors that better serve community needs, ensure the continued stability of nearby residential neighborhoods, and provide a social anchor for North Redondo.
To transform the underperforming areas of the Corridors into places where people want to walk, bike, scooter, or take a rideshare service, elements must be introduced that draw people in and make people feel welcome and comfortable.
The Artesia Corridor is a long stretch of roadway (1.2 miles) that occupies a strategic location in North Redondo and presents an opportunity to become a robust, pedestrian-oriented community hub. Aspirations for the Corridor include a pedestrian-first atmosphere along the busy roadway where people come to relax in public, see familiar faces, and meet new people.
The Aviation Corridor, on the other hand, is smaller and less centrally located, and aspirations for Aviation are similarly scaled back. A pleasant and safe pedestrian realm that allows nearby residents to access local businesses is envisioned.
As discussed in Section 2.1, The Location and Role of Each Corridor, the Artesia and Aviation Corridors currently serve different purposes and, as a result, the revitalization approach and recommendations for each Corridor are a little different. Where appropriate, standards and recommendations specific to each Corridor have been individually detailed in this chapter.
Since one of the objectives to improve the AACAP area includes attraction of new businesses (office, retail, and restaurant), this chapter identifies land use strategies to incentivize new investment in the Corridors (such as allowing for an increase in buildable square footage) and outlines design improvements that can incrementally enhance the corridor experience for residents and visitors over time. Since the Corridors are not envisioned to experience a significant change in land use, most of the identified standards and recommendations in this chapter relate to design improvements to enhance the pedestrian experience.
The Artesia and Aviation Corridors also provide essential roadway linkages for the City. This section balances the need to maintain a functional roadway network with the community values of residents to create Corridors that are safe, effective, attractive to visitors, and assets to neighboring residents.
Existing roadway configurations and options for improvements are discussed in more detail in Chapter 4, Mobility.
Each topical area discussed in this chapter is followed by a series of recommendations or potential actions that the City of Redondo Beach could choose to pursue to enhance the AACAP area. General cost implications and suggested time frames for completion (short term, midterm, long term) have been included to help the City prioritize when various actions should be integrated into the City’s strategic planning and work program. Placemaking
38 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
3.2 CORRIDORS AS DESTINATIONS
Great corridors are places where people want to spend time. They offer amenities that attract visitors, provide services that people need and enjoy, and provide comfortable spaces for the community to socialize and accomplish daily tasks. When a critical density of complementary amenities, services, and activities—including businesses, civic uses, and public spaces—come together, corridors become desirable destinations. The desire is to establish the Artesia Corridor as the “Main Street” of North Redondo Beach and to establish the Aviation Corridor as a secondary or support corridor, and that both Corridors reflect the vision of the adjacent neighborhoods.
3.2.1CREATING A DESTINATION
ESTABLISH ACTIVITY NODES
Today, neither Corridor has a distinct density of uses that would attract the number of visitors needed to activate the street and make it the type of local destination the community wants itto be. The Corridors have evolved organically over time, and it is anticipated that with specific incremental improvements and investments they will continue to gradually transition into the memorable local serving destinations desired by the community. To gain the most impact from this type of organic growth, clustering preferred and synergistic uses into smaller portions of the AACAP area would help prompt more dramatic and localized transformation. These smaller “Activity Nodes” would become distinct destinations within the AACAP area, as opposed to sections of two pass-through corridors.
To facilitate a clustering of complementary uses that are desirable to the local community, the City has identified two Activity Nodes where targeted efforts will incentivize desirable development in a small area of the Corridors. This section describes the different types of users that different businesses attract, explains how complementary uses can be clustered, identifies preferred uses in the AACAP area, and defines the extent and function of the Activity Nodes.
Complementary Uses
Because different commercial uses can attract different types of visitors at different times of the day, they have the potential to affect the pedestrian experience. Automotive uses (e.g., repair shops) primarily attract people who arrive and depart by vehicle during daytime business hours. Offices attract workers who arrive in the morning by car, on foot, bike, scooter, or transit; may leave the office by foot around noon; and depart the same way they arrived in the late afternoon or early evening. Grocery stores attract people who come to the Corridors in their vehicles for a single purpose before returning home.
Restaurant, most retail, and public uses attract a mix of people from midmorning and into the evening who could arrive on foot, bike, scooter, or by car.
Clustering uses that lend themselves to pedestrian, bike, and scooter access in Activity Nodes gives visitors access to more uses and more reason to enjoy the Corridors on foot, and other sections of the Corridors can accommodate businesses that are typically less pedestrian oriented, like gas stations and grocery stores.
Similarly, clustering uses that facilitate complementary activities can encourage people to approach the Corridors on foot, activate the public realm, improve business activity, and reduce the need for parking. For example, locating offices within easy walking distance of restaurant uses provides a built-in daytime population that helps support the restaurants. As discussed in Chapter 4, Mobility, offices and restaurants also see peak parking demand at different times of the day, so shared parking could be used to accommodate the influx of office workers during the day and restaurant goers in the evening.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 39 Preferred Uses
The 2017 citywide market study, prepared for the General Plan Update, found that there was an unmet demand for office space throughout the City of Redondo Beach and that the national trend of reduced retail demand would likely impact the City’s retail environment. In addition, the Artesia-Aviation Revitalization Committee and GPAC identified sit-down restaurants as some of most desirable existing destinations in the AACAP area. The detailed parking study of the AACAP area (see Appendix A) reinforced this observation, showing that clusters of restaurants were already attracting a high number of vehicles.
These findings led the GPAC to identify restaurants and offices as the preferred uses in the AACAP area. For the purposes of the AACAP, office uses may include non-traditional workspaces, such as co-working areas. It is also important to note that the preferred uses discussed in this section are a priority of future revitalization efforts; however, pharmacies, print
shops, and other uses traditionally permitted by the
General Plan and Municipal Code may still be
developed in the Corridors . As the AACAP area and
market evolve, the City may re-evaluate the
preferred uses to ensure the Corridors continue to
serve community
needs, respond to
market demand, and
reflect neighborhood
desires.
Activity Nodes
To promote the clustering of preferred and synergistic uses as the AACAP area evolves, the City has identified two areas to operate as “Activity Nodes,” where pedestrian activity is most likely to occur and most desirable, and where streetlets (see Section 4.5.2) can be installed to activate the public space. The Activity Nodes are described in the text box on the following page and shown on Figure 3.1, Activity Nodes and Placemaking Elements. Figure 3.1 also identifies streetlet locations and other placemaking components needed to create active corridors.
Although some design improvements to enhance the pedestrian experience should generally be applied throughout the AACAP area, business development strategies, incentives, design guidance, and pedestrian enhancements within the Corridors will be prioritized in these Activity Nodes. More substantial design and development standards, economic development, and incentives will focus on the Activity Nodes first because they are intended to serve as catalysts for transition of the remainder of the Corridors. Design requirements can help to build synergy between businesses and the public realm, and they will work with public realm improvements to create a memorable pedestrian experience.
Enhanced pedestrian considerations in Activity Nodes may include more substantial design guidance (see Sections 3.3, The Pedestrian Experience, and
3.4, Design Guidelines), including façade articulation; signage; setback requirements to allow for more outdoor dining and other potential “spill out” uses like retail displays; parking screening; proximity to bike, scooter, and rideshare stations; and other elements.
The identified Activity Nodes are at key locations within the Corridors. The two Nodes should be linked by sidewalks and other planned connectors, like bicycle lanes, but linkage areas outside of the Nodes may not receive the same priority or level of enhanced treatment as the Activity Nodes.
Riviera Village in South
Redondo Beach is an
example of a large Activity
Node where a critical
density of complementary
pedestrian-oriented uses
attracts visitors.
Placemaking
40 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
ACTIVITY NODES
While further study is necessary to define the exact standards for the public improvements, two locations in the AACAP area have been designated Activity Nodes, and additional Activity Nodes could be identified in the future:
MacKay Lane to Felton Lane (two blocks)
Activity Nodes can grow from areas where the existing mix of uses already attracts visitors. The parking study of the AACAP area (see Appendix A) shows that the new coffee shop at Artesia Blvd. and Felton Ln. and the mixed restaurant offerings at the adjacent Artesia Plaza are active areas based on parking demand.
There is opportunity to capitalize on the synergy and activity generated by these uses and introduce new pedestrian
enhancements that will encourage some visitors to walk to this area, possibly creating a foodie “go to” node on the Artesia Corridor.
This Activity Node includes the SCE easement, which links the Corridor to neighborhoods and parks in North Redondo, and there are plans to connect it to the Galleria.
In addition to the SCE easement, this segment includes the location of the MacKay Lane streetlet (Figure 3.1). For more information regarding streetlets, see Chapter 4, Mobility.
Flagler Lane to Blossom Lane (two blocks)
A concentration of public uses and complementary activities can also be a catalyst to activate an area. This Activity Node will capitalize on the grouping of senior services and the library. The library also has significant potential to attract visitors on foot, bike, or scooter.
This segment includes the potential location of the Green Lane streetlet (see Figure 3.1 and Chapter 4, Mobility).The streetlet is directly between the library and senior services and will synergize with the community-oriented energy already present.
The SCE easement connects to the MacKay-Felton Activity Node. The easement currently includes a multiuse trail that runs from Dale Page Park to Rockefeller Lane. Future plans include beautification and other enchancements to the two sections of the easement adjacent to Artesia Boulevard and connecting to the Galleria.
The North Redondo Branch Library, an anchor of the Flagler-Blossom Activity Node, already attracts visitors on foot and bicycle.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 41 Figure 3.1 Activity Nodes and Placemaking Elements
Placemaking
42 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $–$$$
Next Steps:
Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). Establish a BID to help facilitate focused economic development effortsto attract preferred uses to Activity Nodes.
Incentives. Identify and provide incentivesthat mitigate development obstacles and encourage preferred uses to locate within the Activity Nodes, such as:
Offer expedited permitting and streamlined applications for preferred uses within Activity Nodes (e.g., give priority to projects that include restaurant on the ground floor and office above). Facilitate a program to offer low-cost loans to finance tenant improvements for qualifying preferred uses within Activity Nodes. Reduce parking requirements for preferred uses within Activity Nodes (see Section 4.5.1).
Design Guidelines. Implement design guidelines in Section 3.4, which include measures to enhance the pedestrian experience and make the Activity Nodes more desirable destinations.
Pilot Projects and Improvements. Gather insight from local businesses, property owners, and residents regarding which Activity Nodes should be prioritized for improvements or pilot projects outlined in later sections of this document (if they need to be phased over time due to funding or resource constraints).
Long-Range Parking Strategy. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, in addition to reducing parking requirements for preferred uses within Activity Nodes, develop a long-term parking strategy to understand the cost and benefit of various parking options, including private shared parking, public structured parking, and other strategies to consolidate and improve the efficiency of parking that could be implemented in phases as the AACAP area and Activity Nodes develop.
Evaluate Activity Nodes. Evaluate the success of targeted improvements in each Activity Node annually. Consider adding 1-2 additional Nodesin the future, and identify a general timeframe to do so (mid- to long-term).
Source: SteelCraftLB
This outdoor eatery in Long Beach, built with repurposed shipping containers, is an example of pedestrian-friendly and restaurant that engages the sidewalk.
ENCOURAGING RESTAURANT DEVELOPMENT
The GPAC identified restaurants as a preferred use in the AACAP area because they attract visitors via all modes of transit, and contribute to a lively, active streetscape.
One of the biggest challenges for new restaurants is the cost required to design and install the custom finishes within a rental property, known as tenant improvements. These are typically more costly for restaurants than other uses. Kitchens must have plumbing and ventilation that meets code requirements. Electrical upgrades are usually required, and cosmetic improvements (paint, flooring, lighting) are usually necessary. Facilitating low-cost loans to help finance tenant improvements would help new businesses thrive within the AACAP area.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 43
3.2.2ENCOURAGE REINVESTMENT
REVISE LAND USE INTENSITY AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
One of the challenges facing development in both Corridors is shallow lot depths. Though very little can be done to change the depth of existing lots, changes to the City’s Municipal Code (zoning and land use regulations) could help alleviate this and other challenges that impede development projects along the Corridors.
Increasing the allowed floor area ratio (FAR) in one or both Corridors would allow new development to include more leasable square feet, which would help to offset development costs. A development feasibility study (see Appendix B) examined how a variety of different types of uses could be configured on a site in the Artesia Corridor using current intensity limits (defined by FAR) and parking requirements. The study concluded that even a slight increase in FAR (e.g., from 0.50 FAR to 0.60 FAR) would enhance feasibility along the Corridors.
In the near term, however, such small increments would need to be coupled with other changes, such as reduced parking requirements, to incentivize property owners to redevelop existing commercial uses that have reached the end of their useful lifespan.
In addition to improving development feasibility, reducing off-street parking requirements for preferred usesin Activity Nodes would allow property owners more flexibility in design, and it would result in a more pedestrian-oriented environment.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Next Steps:
Increase Allowable FAR (Artesia only). Increase FAR from 0.50 to 0.60 along the Artesia Corridor. (This was a recommendation for consideration that came out of discussions with the GPAC.) Reduce Minimum Parking Requirements. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, reduce the minimum parking requirements for preferred uses in Activity Nodes.
Long-Range Parking Strategy. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, develop a long-term parking strategy to understand the cost and benefit of various parking options—including private shared parking, public structured parking, and other strategies to consolidate and improve the efficiency of parking—that could be implemented in phases as the AACAP area and Activity Nodes develop.
Design guidelines and
identity improvements in
Activity Nodes include
introduction of street
furniture, unified signage,
landscaping, outdoor
dining, variations in the
sidewalk material, and
building storefront
requirements.
Placemaking
44 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
3.3 THE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE
Pedestrians currently experience the Artesia and Aviation Corridors by walking along the sidewalks and crosswalks. As they move through the Corridors, they not only observe the visual character of the area, but they also take in scents and noises that combine to define the experience. While some of these factors are impossible to control, strategic placemaking initiatives can contribute to a more enjoyable pedestrian experience. The placemaking strategies in this section detail various enhancements that, if implemented, could improve the pedestrian experience of the AACAP area.
Most of the possibilities explored are focused on changes to the pedestrian realm, defined as the walking environment within the AACAP area. Along both the Artesia and Aviation Corridors, the sidewalks not only comprise the bulk of the existing pedestrian realm, but, if the elements that contribute to an enjoyable pedestrian experience are enhanced, also have the potential to become great public spaces for North Redondo.
Inviting, thoughtful streetscaping and sidewalk design make great public spaces.
ELEMENTS OF AN ENJOYABLE PEDESTRIAN EXPERIENCE
The following key factors contribute to an enjoyable and memorable pedestrian experience:
Connected
A good pedestrian network has many short links that connect the different functions and public spaces of a community in a way that encourages people to walk, cycle, and scooter to local destinations.
Accessible
A quality pedestrian network provides access to people of different ages and different ability levels by removing barriers, maintaining even surfaces, and providing places to rest when necessary.
Safe
Pedestrians need to feel safe as they move through the AACAP area. Adequate lighting, separation from vehicles and bicycles, presence of other people, and the relationship between a building and the sidewalk can all influence actual and perceived safety.
Engaging
Providing a variety of visual complexity at key intervals along a corridor complements the human scale and breaks down the rhythm of the corridor. Varied programming that considers different walking speeds and activities in the pedestrian realm encourages people to walk longer distances and spend more time in the AACAP area.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 45
3.3.1CONNECTIVITY (GETTING TO THE
CORRIDORS)
A good multimodal network connects the different functions and public spaces of a community in a way that encourages people to walk or ride a bicycle to local destinations. More than 15,000 Redondo Beach residents live within a quarter mile (approximately five-minute walk) of the Artesia and Aviation Corridors. Despite this proximity, many residents currently drive to AACAP area destinations rather than walk or cycle.
People choose to drive in lieu of walking or cycling for a variety of reasons, including distance, access, convenience, and perceived safety.
Improving the connectivity between the neighborhoods and the AACAP area would encourage nearby residents to walk or ride to local destinations and leave their cars at home.
As connectivity improves with more paths in more convenient places, the walking distance between destinations decreases and route options increase.
This allows for more direct travel between destinations and creates a more accessible and convenient system, which are essential factors in encouraging residents to change their current habits.
A well-connected network has many short links, numerous intersections, and minimal dead ends.
Existing Connectivity in the Artesia Corridor
As described in Chapter 4, Mobility, sidewalks established along the traditional street grid provide a good foundation for pedestrian access to the Artesia Corridor. Standard block lengths along the Corridor and within the surrounding neighborhoods are generally 600 feet long and 300 feet deep, providing an easily traversable grid. Within the Corridor, however, there are a few locations where crosswalks along Artesia are nearly a quarter mile apart, forcing pedestrians to follow inconvenient paths and, in turn, discouraging walking.
Existing Connectivity in the Aviation Corridor
As described in Chapter 4, Mobility, sidewalks along the traditional street grid provide the foundation for pedestrian access to the Aviation Corridor. Block lengths along the Corridor vary because Aviation cuts through the traditional street grid at an angle. The grid, however, provides good pedestrian access to the Corridor. Like Artesia, crossing Aviation is inconvenient in some locations, where more than a quarter mile separates crosswalks.
Even though the existing street grid provides a good foundation to entice nearby residents to walk to the Corridors, there are opportunities to increase connectivity, reduce travel distances, and enhance the convenience of the pedestrian connections to the neighborhoods.
Placemaking
46 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
PEDESTRIAN ACCESS THROUGH PARKING AREAS
Parking areas can present a significant impediment to pedestrian connectivity because they:
Reduce the convenience of walking by increasing travel distances and time.
Frequently incorporate barrier elements, intended to define private parking areas, that limit pedestrian access.
Increase the chances that a pedestrian may be in conflict with car pathways.
Impact the pedestrian experience by interrupting the visual rhythm of buildings and the continuance of sidewalks on the Corridor.
Full-Block Pass-Throughs
Along the Artesia Corridor, there are numerous locations where parking areas extend the full depth of the block, providing access to both the Artesia Corridor and Mathews Avenue or Vanderbilt Lane. These parking areas could be used to establish pedestrian “short cuts” between the Artesia Corridor and the residential uses beyond. A similar condition does not exist along the Aviation Corridor, so this recommendation would be limited to Artesia.
Adding new pathways through private properties can be beneficial to both the pedestrian network and nearby businesses. Within the pedestrian network it can reduce travel time, improve convenience, and encourage more people to walk, and nearby businesses benefit from improved customer access, more visibility, and higher levels of foot traffic.
Optional Access to Adjacent Multifamily Projects
There are a number of multifamily projects that share a property line with a commercial use along the Artesia Corridor. The City’s Municipal Code generally requires that a six- to eight-foot wall separate these uses to dampen sound and protect the residential uses from other nuisances on the commercial property. The wall, however, requires residents to take a less convenient route to the Corridor.
Incorporating pedestrian access routes, such as pass-throughs, gates, or locked entries, into the walls separating the uses would improve pedestrian convenience and neighborhood connectivity. However, safety and liability concerns would also have to be considered.
Along the Aviation Corridor, most multifamily projects already front the roadway, and those that don’t are separated from the commercial areas by significant changes in grade. These grade changes would make installing access routes difficult or infeasible. Therefore, this recommendation does not apply to the Aviation Corridor.
Within the Artesia Corridor, when changes to a commercial property that is adjacent to a qualifying multifamily property (with four or more units) would require the issuance of a building permit, the City should require coordination between the commercial developer and the owner, HOA, or other representative of the residential property to determine if a pedestrian access route is desired by the residential property.
The yellowhighlights markpotential locations for pedestrian pass-throughs along the Artesia Corridor between Blossom and Slauson Lanes.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 47 Reduce Pedestrian Barriers Between Adjacent Parking Areas The Artesia and Aviation Corridors have numerous locations where private parking areas are separated by walls, fences, curbs, and landscaping that are intended to delineate which parking is reserved for which business. This prevents customers from using neighboring parking areas, but it also limits pedestrian movement.
Limiting the location, extent, and height of physical barriers and requiring that adjacent properties incorporate pedestrian pass-through opportunities via gates, openings, and curb cuts, when appropriate, would increase the number of routes available to pedestrians and improve the pedestrian network.
As discussed in Section 4.5.1, The Driving and Parking Experience, introducing shared parking, especially within Activity Nodes, would improve the pedestrian experience by consolidating parking into specific areas, removing the need for barriers between properties.
A pedestrian pass-through in this concrete block wall separating parking areas along the Artesia Corridor would improve pedestrian connectivity.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $$
Next Steps:
Revise Municipal Code
As detailed in Section 4.5.1, revise current parking requirements to allow and encourage shared parking between adjacent and nearby parcels within the AACAP area.
Revise the City’s Municipal Code to allow pedestrian pass-through routes in the walls separating qualifying residential properties (with 4 or more units) and adjacent commercial development, where safe and feasible.
Coordination. In the Artesia Corridor, when changes to a commercial property that is adjacent to a qualifying multifamily property (4 or more units) would require the issuance of a building permit, the City shall require the developer to make a reasonable effort to determine if a pedestrian access route is feasible, safe, and desired by the residential property via coordination with the owner, HOA, or other representative party of the residential property.
Implement Site Design Guidelines. The site design guidelines in Section
3.4 include provisions related to full-block pass-throughs, pedestrian access. and parking.
Placemaking
48 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
3.3.2 THE CORRIDOR EXPERIENCE
A good pedestrian experience should be good for all potential users, including those of different ages and ability levels. Removing barriers, maintaining even surfaces, and providing places to rest makes the walking experience along the Corridors more enjoyable for more people. In addition to accessibility, the design of the elements within and adjacent to the pedestrian realm has a profound effect on the pedestrian experience.
Elements within the pedestrian realm include the physical sidewalks and crosswalks, curbs, street furniture, lighting, and landscaping. Elements adjacent to the pedestrian realm include building storefronts and frontages and the roadside.
Ongoing maintenance of all pedestrian infrastructure is key to ensuring both accessibility for a diverse range of pedestrians and a pleasing design aesthetic.
Uneven surfaces, debris such as fallen landscaping materials, and broken concrete can make walking difficult for the elderly and disabled, limit access to those pushing carts or strollers, and make the Corridors a less desirable place to spend time. To prevent this, any improvements to either the Artesia or Aviation Corridors should ensure there is enough funding to cover ongoing maintenance prior to implementation.
Changing the sidewalk materials between linkage areas and Activity Nodes signals to pedestrians that they have arrived somewhere special. Within the Activity Node, variations in pattern and material could help to distinguish the Clear Walking Path from the Amenity Zone.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 49
SIDEWALKS
The types of activities that can be accommodated within the pedestrian realm dramatically impact the sidewalk’s aesthetic and function while also affecting its safety and navigability, so it is important to strike the right balance between the walking area and other uses or amenities. Outdoor uses like cafés and retail displays can add enormously to the sidewalk’s vitality, providing an excuse for people to stop and pause or linger for longer periods.
Approach to Artesia
Because Artesia is envisioned as a pedestrian-priority corridor, the sidewalk should accommodate a variety of different activities, especially within Activity Nodes, including walking, sitting at key points along the path, waiting for the bus, and business-related activities such as outdoor dining.
Approach to Aviation
The same recommendations for establishing defined zones and regulating design detailing suggested for Artesia are also relevant to the Aviation Corridor.
The application of each, however, would look different. Along Aviation, there are fewer opportunities to accommodate uses due to the narrow width of the sidewalks and right-of-way and the shallower depth of the lots, so there may not be many areas able to accommodate a variety of active uses and/or amenities.
Enhanced Sidewalks
The existing sidewalks in both Corridors generally provide even walking surfaces and are kept in good repair, and the City already uses quality materials that ensure continuous walkways, constant gradients, and easy-to-maintain paving.
In Activity Nodes, however, more playful and decorative sidewalk materials could be introduced to help establish a distinct sense of place and to visually distinguish different zones within the sidewalk.
Outdoor Uses (Dining, Retail Displays, Etc.)
The City of Redondo Beach has already established a sidewalk dining program in Riviera Village that should be replicated within the Activity Nodes in the AACAP area. Other outdoors uses, like retail displays, however, are not currently permitted. To evaluate the viability of such spill out uses, the City should implement a pilot program within the AACAP Activity Nodes and determine if the City’s zoning standards should be updated to allow such uses based on the success of the pilot program.
Outdoor dining should be accommodated in the sidewalk as long a Clear Walking Path is maintained.
Placemaking
50 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Sidewalk Zones
Defining different “zones” within the sidewalk provides clear direction about what activities (like outdoor dining) can and cannot be accommodated within the pedestrian realm given the various sidewalk and frontage conditions along Artesia Corridor. In many areas, the sidewalks are not wide enough to incorporate such encroachments, so outdoor uses should be restricted in dimension and allowed in the building setback area to maintain the primary function of pedestrian flow and ensure proper safety and accessibility. Sidewalk zones are:
Clear Walking Path. This is the walking area that is intended for people in motion. The minimum clear path required to accommodate pedestrian flow typically ranges from five to seven feet depending on the anticipated foot traffic in a given area. Bulb-outs, other sidewalk extensions into the parking area, and deeper setbacks could all be used to increase the depth of the sidewalk and provide more flexibility to accommodate different activities.
Amenity Zone. This is the area where low-speed activities, like sitting on a bench, waiting for a bus, browsing outdoor business displays, and outdoor dining can occur without conflicting with the pedestrian flow.
This zone could be next to the curb or in the frontage area of the adjacent property. Business-related uses like outdoor dining, however, should be adjacent to the frontage of the business property whenever possible.
This sidewalk includes a clearly defined Clear Walking Path and two small Amenity Zones on either side. Here the Clear Walking Path is not linear, but rather curves around the street trees.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 51
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $–$$$
Next Steps:
Implement Sidewalk Dining Permit Program. Expand the existing program to include businesses within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area. Establish a Pilot Outdoor Retail Display Permit Program. Based on the Sidewalk Dining Permit Program, establish a similar program (or expand the existing Sidewalk Dining Permit Program) to allow outdoor retail displays. Pilot the program in Activity Nodes to assess long-term viability.
Incentivize Outdoor Dining. Provide incentives to attract uses that include outdoor dining to Activity Nodes:
For preferred uses within Activity Nodes, reduce the amount of parking required for outdoor dining by requiring no additional parking for the first 16 seats outdoors or 30 percent of the interior seats, whichever is greater.
1 Prioritize storefront improvement grants for preferred uses within Activity Nodes, with emphasis on projects that include outdoor dining components.
Implement Streetscape Design Guidelines. The design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to sidewalk and streetscape improvements.
1 The City’s Municipal Code currently requires no additional parking for the first 12 seats outdoors or 25 percent of the interior seats, whichever is greater.
Development that incorporates deeper setbacks could accommodate additional outdoor dining and create a lively sidewalk environment.
Placemaking
52 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
PUBLIC OPEN SPACES
Allowing, encouraging, and possibly requiring a varied network of well-used, inter-connected, publicly accessible open spaces would enhance the pedestrian experience within the AACAP area. Public open spaces can create an intentional “break” in the urban landscape and provide valuable spaces where residents and visitors could sit, play, enjoy, and activate the streetscape. Furthermore, the inclusion of public open spaces could improve retail sales and increase restaurant visits by encouraging more people to spend a longer period of time within the Corridors.
Public open spaces within the AACAP area would be defined by the following characteristics:
Public open spaces would be public or semi-public outdoor spaces designed to facilitate community formation, interaction, relaxation, and contemplation through public gathering, activity, recreation, and/or leisure.
Public open spaces may or may not have areas which are sheltered from the elements.
Public open spaces should be preserved for public use through a formal agreement, such as an easement, land dedication, or condition of project approval. Depending on how the land is preserved for the public enjoyment, it can be publicly or privately owned and maintained.
Maintenance responsibility shall be determined on a case-by-case basis. Where feasible to do so, public open spaces should abut public rightsof-way, a public sidewalk, or a pedestrian pass-through, and they should be openly accessible twenty-four hours a day. The City may restrict hours of public access at its discretion.
Unless allowed under the City’s Municipal Code, on-site public open space shall not be used to comply with any park land dedication or inlieu fee requirements.
Streetlets (discussed in Section 4.5.2), which could anchor the two pilot Activity Nodes identified along the Corridors, represent one opportunity to create public open spaces within the AACAP area. Additional open spaces could also be created within commercial properties along the Corridors. Public open spaces adjacent to pedestrian pass-throughs (see Section 3.3.1) would be particularly effective in creating functional spaces within the Corridors that incentivize residents to walk and spend time within the AACAP area.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Next Steps:
Establish Public Open Space Requirements. Require new commercial projects that meet specified criteria (lot size, project size, etc.) to provide public open spaces on-site.
Purchase Land. As opportunities arise, consider purchasing land from property owners to establish public open spaces and pedestrian passthroughs. Incentivize Public Open Spaces Adjacent to Pedestrian Pass-Throughs.
Provide incentives to encourage property owners to provide public open spaces adjacent to pedestrian pass-throughs.
Consider reducing the amount of on-site parking required for properties that formally preserve land for both a pedestrian passthrough and adjacent open space area. Count the pedestrian pass through toward a public open space requirement only if it is adjacent to additional open space that enables public gathering, activity, recreation, and/or leisure. Prioritize storefront improvement grants for properties that formally preserve land for both a pedestrian pass-through and an adjacent public open space area.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 53
STOREFRONTS
When a building directly abuts the sidewalk, the details of the building design play a critical role in shaping the walking experience. The vertical rhythm, depth, and texture of the elements define the pedestrian realm. Good design can create interest by breaking up large buildings, walls, and expanses of parking to a pedestrian scale.
As described in Section 2.2, History, there are a wide variety of different storefront and frontage treatments as well as different building vintages in the AACAP area. While the aesthetic is not currently unified, establishing design guidelines for new development and encouraging revitalization of existing buildings could leverage the Corridor’s diverse history into part of the community story rather than unrelated pieces of a disparate whole.
Because the Corridors are expected to evolve organically, the effects of implementing design guidelines may take many years to be seen on a significant scale. However, implementing guidelines now will ensure that the Corridors will slowly grow into the types of destinations and environments desired by community members.
Façade Articulation and Variety
To ensure that storefronts, especially those within Activity Nodes, have a positive impact on the pedestrian experience, changes in the way a storefront is detailed can help give a block continuous variety and make buildings appear unique to both occupants and pedestrians.
Incremental shifts in plane, building material variation, and window patterns can help create small shadows that give an impression of depth and texture.
Long stretches of building with the same design can make the pedestrian experience monotonous and repetitive. Defining a vertical rhythm for buildings in the Activity Nodes will break down the scale of the block and make it feel more pedestrian friendly. New development with long storefronts should incorporate architectural detailing elements that help break down their massing.
Placemaking
54 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Transparency
In addition to architectural variety, storefronts should be transparent, allowing for a direct visual connection between pedestrians on the sidewalk and activities inside the buildings. Setting minimum transparency levels activates the street environment, providing visual interest during the day and an intimate, secondary source of lighting at night.
The correct balance of transparency and solid walls provides a link between interior uses and the street, improves the night-time lighting condition, and can help break longer surfaces down to a pedestrian scale. Transparency at the ground level is also consistent with the Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design (CPTED) principles for enhanced public safety.
Canopies, Awnings, and Shading Devices
Canopies and awnings project from the building face and add depth, interest, and variation to storefronts.
They also provide opportunities for individual establishments to use color and add to the character of the street while breaking down the scale of larger buildings. Awnings often incorporate part of a commercial establishment’s signage and help shape a specific building’s identity. Awnings, canopies, and shading devices can also provide shade during hot seasons and shelter from rain. These elements should be allowed to project over the sidewalk if they maintain a minimum clear height above the sidewalk grade.
Canopies, awnings, and shading devices are an inexpensive way to add depth, interest, and unified signage to a building or streetscape.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 55 Building Placement and Parking Lots
When a building is set back from the sidewalk (as opposed to fronting it), the design of the adjacent space can affect the pedestrian walkability of the Corridor. Measures to maintain the vertical rhythm, depth, and texture of the elements that define the pedestrian realm should be implemented where possible, and expanses of parking should be broken up or softened with landscaping or architectural details whenever possible.
Fences with pedestrian-scale articulation combined with landscaping effectively screen side parking lots and help to maintain the rythm of the streetscape.
Storefront Improvement Program
The City of Redondo Beach already offers a Commercial Storefront Improvement Program, intended to encourage organic storefront improvements within the AACAP area. The program provides a matching grant of up to 50 percent to commercial business and property owners for façade improvements on commercial properties within the AACAP area.
The amounts awarded by the City range from $2,500 for mini grants to $15,000 for multitenant properties.
Eligible improvements under the program are outlined in the program guidelines and include, but are not limited to, exterior paint, removal and replacement of old signs and awnings, repair and replacement of windows and entry doors, landscaping, construction of outdoor dining and gathering spaces, and remediation of City and State code violations. Other improvements that contribute to the overall improvement of a storefront may also be considered for grant funding on a case-by-case basis.
Expanding the existing program to include improvements to screen parking areas and other frontage areas consistent with design guidelines, and prioritizing funding for preferred uses in Activity Nodes where projects comply with the design guidelines (if applicable) would help to spur transformation in the area.
2228 Artesia Blvd. received a matching
grant for $4,450 as part of the Storefront
Improvement Program to add a mural
and anti-graffiti sealer to the storefront.
Placemaking
56 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Near Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $–$$$
Next Steps:
Continue Existing Storefront Improvement Program. Continue funding and implementation of the program in the AACAP area, with priority given to preferred uses and projects in Activity Nodes. Expand Storefront Improvement Program. Expand the program to include improvements that screen parking and other frontage areas consistent with design guidelines. Consider issuing larger grants for projects in Activity Nodes.
Amend Storefront Improvement Program. Amend the program to require that improvements be consistent with design guidelines to the extent possible.
Implement Storefront Design Guidelines. The design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to storefront design, including:
Façade Articulation
Transparency
Canopies, Awnings, and Shading Devices
Building Placement
Parking and Screening A pedestrian-scale storefront that engages the sidewalk.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 57
3.3.3 IDENTITY (MAKING AN IMPRESSION)
A distinct identity defines a community and attract others to it. The Artesia and Aviation Corridors, however, do not currently physically reflect the vibrant community and close-knit neighborhoods they represent. The visual character of each is dominated by the buildings lining the streets, which reflect a melting pot of various postwar development trends and a mix of uses that do not necessarily serve the majority of nearby residents. The Corridors lack a consistent design quality, have a variety of frontages and setbacks, use inconsistent signage, and attract some uses and visitors that do not reflect the values of the community. The result is a Corridor without a clear visual identity or cohesive community story.
Many of the strategies in this section would be eligible to use funds generated by the approved Galleria project, which is expected to contribute $1 million specifically for public art improvements along the Artesia Corridor.
The mix of building types and setbacks and the inconsistent landscaping and signage design contribute to the Artesia Corridor’s disjointed appearance. Placemaking
58 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
BRANDING
The identity of the neighborhoods around the AACAP area should be reflected in the image each Corridor conveys. Each should reflect and embody the elements that make it unique (even if those elements currently lie in potential), and the story that each Corridor portrays should serve to attract visitors, businesses, and investors who share the vision of the surrounding neighborhoods.
Merging placemaking elements (described in the following sections) with the AACAP area brand will help to establish a cohesive visual identity that unifies the visual quality along the Corridors and enforce a positive perception of the surrounding neighborhoods.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $–$$ (depending on the strategy)
Next Steps:
Engage the Community. Gather insight from local businesses, property owners, and residents about what attracted them to North Redondo in the first place as well as the specific values, challenges, and ideas for the future of business in the AACAP area.
Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). As noted in Section 3.2.1, a BID would help to create and implement a marketing strategy. Establish a brand. Work with residents, businesses, and property owners (possibly through a BID) to:
Build a cohesive brand based on the results of the community engagement.
Develop a brand/marketing strategy to effectively communicate the brand to attract visitors, businesses, and investors to the AACAP area. Collaborate with the Chamber of Commerce and businesses within the AACAP area to develop the brand.
A branding strategy should reflect the values of the community it reflects and should be incorporated into media and advertisements as well as placemaking elements in the built environment.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 59
GATEWAYS
Gateways announce arrival points and serve as an introduction to the AACAP area. Along both Artesia and Aviation Corridors, there are opportunities to enhance existing gateways to establish a defined sense of arrival and departure that can be echoed throughout the Corridor by complementary placemaking elements (see Figure 3.1, Activity Nodes and Placemaking Elements, for possible gateway locations).
Gateway Opportunities
Eastern Artesia Corridor
Most significantly, the eastern boundary of the Artesia Corridor is marked by the transit easement underpass, which could be incorporated into a gateway element through murals, mounted signage, or other appropriate elements.
Western Artesia and Northern Aviation
This dual gateway is at a wide intersection where the corner of Artesia and Aviation Corridors could be transformed with a low-profile monument announcing the arrival to the Corridors.
Southern Aviation Corridor
The southern boundary of the Aviation Corridor is at the driveway into a shopping center. The parking lot for the shopping center is elevated, exposing a support wall, which could be incorporated into a gateway element through murals, mounted signage, or other appropriate elements.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $–$$
Next Steps:
Create a Signage Master Plan. As part of a signage master plan, develop design concepts for gateways and monumentation. Work with designers, artists, and community groups to design gateway features Coordinate with Property Owners. Coordinate with owners of the properties identified as gateway locations.
The eastern boundary of the Artesia Corridor passes under the transit easement, presenting an opportunity to create a memorable arrival experience.
This muraled underpass in Toronto reinforces the local identity with historical scenes. Placemaking
60 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach The southern boundary of the Aviation Corridor is adjacent to a retaining wall that supports the parking deck for a shopping center at the Big Lots site and presents an opportunity to create a memorable arrival experience.
Source: Town of Granby
This mural in Granby, Colorado,reflects the local identity and builds a sense of excitement around a theme.
FUN FACT
Philadelphia’s Porch Light Program (which among other things, creates meaningful murals around the city) collaborated with the Yale School of Medicine to assess the program’s impact on health outcomes for the neighborhoods where projects were implemented. After two years, researchers found a sustained increase in and improved perceptions of both the pedestrian environment and neighborhood safety.
The southeast corner of
Artesia and Aviation
Boulevards provides an
opportunity to create a
recognizable community
gateway feature
(enhanced landscaping,
beautification, banners,
etc.).
Low-profile signage and
landscaping, such as the
neighborhood marker used in
the Los Angeles neighborhood
of Jefferson Park, would be an
appropriate scale for this
intersection.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 61
BANNERS
Banners provide a relatively affordable means of reinforcing the community story at regular intervals along the Corridors. At one point, banner supports and banners were installed along Artesia Corridor, but due to a lack of funding and programmatic vision, the banners and supports were removed.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Next Steps:
Banner Program. Use the Riviera Village Banner Program as a template to establish a program that facilitates the installation, maintenance, and permitting of banners (possibly role of Chamber or BID) in the AACAP area.
WAYFINDING
Thoughtfully designed signage can help visitors orient themselves and communicate a clear, welcoming neighborhood identity. Including walking distances to local attractions on signage may compel some visitors to walk through the AACAP area rather than drive, promoting foot traffic.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $–$$$
Next Steps:
Develop a Signage Master Plan. As part of a signage master plan, establish a wayfinding master plan to govern all wayfinding signage within the AACAP area. Incorporate elements of the brand strategy, and collaborate with local businesses to ensure cohesive, thoughtful, and useful wayfinding elements are introduced.
Banners can be used to
reinforce community
identity and to advertise
events and civic occasions.
Wayfinding systems can help
visitors navigate an area, find
parking/bicycle stations, or
locate places of interest or
specific Activity Nodes; convey
walking distances or times; and
reinforce the community story
and identity.
Placemaking
62 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
PUBLIC ART
Public art can increase community engagement and social cohesion. It can also be a powerful catalyst for improved mental and physical health within communities, and it can serve as another way to convey a clear community story. Redondo Beach has an existing public art program, administered by the Cultural Arts Division, that serves to aesthetically enhance the community through the creation, acquisition, and restoration of works of art that inspire residents and visitors and give them an opportunity to appreciate works of art.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $–$$$
Next Steps:
Cohesive Theme. Develop a cohesive theme for new art generated by fees collected in the City’s Public Art Fund for public areas and private properties in the Artesia or Aviation Corridors (as part of the City’s art requirements in the Municipal Code).
Early involvement. Engage artists early in the development of public projects and encourage private developers to involve artists from the outset of new significant projects.
Establish Partnerships. Consider implementing the Public Art Master Plan through a combination of means including, but not limited to:
Seek public partnerships. Work with nonprofit art organizations to install public murals and other installations in public areas, medians, and on private property that is visible from the sidewalk. Develop Functional Art. Based on the brand strategy, work with artists to develop functional art to be used throughout the AACAP area, including area-specific benches, garbage cans, bike racks, and creative crosswalks (for Activity Nodes).
Public Art can take many
forms. Top Row: bench;
ground mosaic. Second Row:
garbage can, nose median
sculpture, squirrel median
sculpture. Third Row: Creative
bike racks incorporate ground
art. Bottom: wall mural.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 63
BUSINESS SIGNAGE
Signs can add interest to the sidewalk environment if they are appropriate to the area’s desired scale and character. The rhythm and spacing of signs along the Corridors can help achieve a human scale and create a more inviting and active sidewalk environment.
Artesia Corridor
There is currently a wide variety of signage along the Artesia Corridor, including “wall signs” (flat signs mounted flush against or painted directly on the building), “projecting signs” (flat or three-dimensional signs attached to the building on a perpendicular bracket), “free-standing signs” (signs supported by a pole or base that is not attached to the building), “roof signs” (signs attached to the roof of a building by means of a projecting bracket), and “billboards” (large elevated signed used for advertisement). The variety of signage is shown in Figure 3.2.
The vast array of existing signage is not unified by any underlying themes, relative size, or consistent elements that could help to brand the Corridor. A more cohesive and strategic approach could turn what is now a missed opportunity into an element of the Corridor that reinforces the pedestrian environment, improves the aesthetic quality, and reinforces the sense of place and identity of the Corridor.
Aviation Corridor
The existing signage along Aviation Corridor is generally less varied than the signage along Artesia Corridor, more subtle, and sets a more consistent tone.
Though the area would benefit from a signage master plan, changes to the signage landscape along Artesia Corridor should be prioritized.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $–$$$ (depends on incentives and sign design) Next Steps:
Develop Signage Master Plan. As part of a Signage Master Plan, develop specific signage standards to unify business signage for both the Artesia and Aviation Corridors.
Use Signage to Engage the Streetscape. Revise Municipal Code to allow A-frame street signs outside of the Clear Walking Path within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area.
Billboards. Determine the role billboards will play in the Corridors moving forward. Consider prohibiting billboards in Activity Nodes and/or AACAP area.
Incentives. After the development of the Signage Master Plan, provide incentives for existing businesses to replace existing signage that does not comply with the Master Signage Plan.
Signage master plans often regulate the size of signage relative to the building size, the types of signs, the materials, and the number of signs or overall square footage of signage per building. These restrictions allow businesses the freedom to convey their brand. They also create a more unified streetscape and prevent one business from dominating the landscape with disproportionally large signage.
Placemaking
64 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Figure 3.2: Existing Signage Along the Artesia Corridor Roof sign and painted wall sign
Billboard A variety of canopy signage, wall signs, and projecting signs Fast-food pole sign Combination of wall signage with external Newer wall signage illumination and canopy signage
Pole sign for individual business Projecting sign
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 65
3.4 DESIGN GUIDELINES
This section contains both standards and guidelines. Standards, as indicated by the words “shall or must,” identify requirements. Guidelines, as indicated by the word “should,” describe additional requirements that the City asks architects and developers to satisfy. Guidelines must be addressed for all development projects—alternatives will be permitted only if a physical condition constrains implementation of the requirement and if the applicant demonstrates the intent of the design guideline is met. Conditions that are restricted are indicated by the word “prohibited.”
STREETSCAPE
Street design is an important aspect of placemaking. Pedestrian-realm improvements should reflect the community’s desire for more walkable sidewalks and bikeable streets. Streetscape amenities are an important detail that should be addressed during the site plan review process and provided by new development or when major public works projects are undertaken. Clear Walking Path. A minimum Clear Walking Path of 5 feet shall be maintained throughout the AACAP area. In Activity Nodes the minimum Clear Walking Path shall measure a minimum of 6 feet. Amenity Zone. When sidewalk widths exceed the minimum Clear Walking Path, an Amenity Zone shall be established along the sidewalk.
Streetscape Amenities. The AACAP area shall include a unique “family of streetscape amenities” (complementary furnishings, bike racks, lighting, signage, banners, etc.) that are consistent with the AACAP area identity (see Section 3.3.3) and contribute to a sense of place.
Landscaping. The AACAP area shall be planted with shade trees and drought-tolerant landscaping consistent with City standards and other applicable landscaping plans.
Street Trees. For new street trees, species shall be selected from an approved City list and based on site location and orientation, scale of the proposed buildings, existing and proposed business signage, scale of the street, and adjacent public spaces.
Tree Wells. If new street trees are planted, permeable tree wells (planted, decomposed granite, or similar) should be used wherever practical and are preferred over tree grates.
Enhanced Sidewalks. Within Activity Nodes, enhanced paving should be used if it can be maintained by the City or private property owner.
Outdoor Uses. Outdoor business uses, including outdoor dining (with appropriate permits) and outdoor retail displays (in pilot areas with appropriate permits), are encouraged within the public sidewalk, provided there is adequate space to maintain the Clear Walking Path, and on private property within the frontage area.
Such uses are strongly encouraged within Activity Nodes. Deeper setbacks intended to accommodate such uses are strongly encouraged in Activity Nodes.
Wall / fence height. A wall or fence enclosing a front or side setback area shall not to exceed 3 feet in height in Activity Nodes or 42 inches in height throughout the AACAP area and shall be low enough for safety and security purposes.
Placemaking
66 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
SITE DESIGN
Access
New projects should be designed and existing spaces retrofitted (when possible) to encourage the consolidation of small private parking lots into larger shared parking areas, to promote walking and bicycling within the AACAP area, and to establish better pedestrian connections with the surrounding neighborhoods. Projects should also provide safe and reasonably convenient access for visitors who will arrive by car.
Vehicular Access. Vehicular access to each site must be designed to minimize conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists, autos, and service vehicles. Sight lines, pedestrian walkways, and lighting are factors to consider in developing a site plan. Entrance and exit points should be well marked with streetscape and landscape features.
Curb Cuts. The number of site access points for vehicles should be minimized and consolidated. Drives should be as narrow as possible to minimize interruptions of the sidewalk. Shared drives and shared parking should be used when possible to reduce pedestrian and vehicular conflicts. Driveways should be located as far from intersections as possible.
Cross Access Between Parking. Private parking lots should include pedestrian cross access when feasible and safe.
Barriers. Low headlight walls or landscaping used to screen parking and define property boundaries should provide breaks to allow pedestrian circulation and be low enough for safety and security purposes. Pedestrian Pass-Through Routes. When feasible and safe, full-block pedestrian pass-throughs should be required.
Parking Lots. Parking lots should be screened from adjacent street views but should not be hidden from the view of passersby and police.
Surface parking or structures should not dominate the site area adjacent to the street. Vehicular parking should be hidden from view but well signed. Wherever possible, parking should be accommodated in larger shared lots rather than single-use lots.
Bicycle parking. Accessible, secure, and well-signed bicycle parking shall be provided at convenient and visible locations throughout or adjacent to new development.
Lighting. Parking lots, bicycle parking areas, and pedestrian passthrough routes should include lighting compatible with the streetscape lighting and/or building lighting to maintain a safe environment.
Building Placement and Orientation
Building placement and orientation to the sidewalk has a large impact on the pedestrian experience. Visually interesting buildings that are oriented to the street shape the area’s character as well as the visitor’s experience. Designing buildingsthat engage the sidewalk contributes to making the public street more inviting to pedestrians.
Pedestrian Scale. Developments should make public frontages interesting and comfortable for a pedestrian walking alongside them. Engage the Sidewalk. Buildings shall have a strong presence and encourage activity along the street frontage. Buildings shall face the street and provide entrances from the sidewalk.
Setbacks. Designs that incorporate front setbacks in order to accommodate programming that contributes to or activates the public realm are encouraged. Parking in setbacks should be avoided. Lighting. Exterior lighting should be designed and located in such a way that it does not project off-site or onto adjacent uses. This is especially critical with neighboring residential uses.
Placemaking
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 67
STOREFRONT DESIGN
Façade Articulation
Detailed Façade Elements. Exterior building walls fronting the Artesia or Aviation Corridors shall have variation, recesses, and offsets in the surface, especially at entries and important gateways.
Long building walls shall be attractive and visually interesting by applying changes in surface materials, colors, massing, fenestration, storefronts, public art, or other well-composed architectural elements.
Pilasters or breaks in the wall plane shall be allowed where appropriate.
Restrict Blank Walls. All large expanses of walls that face a public street should be broken up by change in plane, color, materials, murals, trellises, or vines and espaliers to add texture and create visual interest. Corners and Gateways. Buildings should have a major presence at important corners or gateway locations. These buildings should front the sidewalk with parking to the side, rear, or in an adjacent/nearby shared lot.
Multistory Buildings. The ground floor should be differentiated from the floor above with treatments such as a change in material and/or color, moldings, or built planters. More detail and higher quality materials should be used on the ground floor.
Entrances. Building entries should be oriented toward the street and clearly defined. Entrances and windows, and not vehicular access points, should be the dominant elements on the public street façades. Lighting. Illumination should be used to highlight main building entrances and add interest to the building façade. Accent lighting to offset architectural elements (such as distinctive building rooftops) is encouraged.
Encourage Buildings That Engage the Sidewalk.
Building designs that open to the sidewalk with large windows or roll-up doors are encouraged.
Sit-down and bar-style dining within the sidewalk and frontage area is encouraged with appropriate permits and adequate space to maintain the Clear Walking Path.
Walk-up windows for food service that front the sidewalk are encouraged provided there is adequate space to maintain the Clear Walking Path and accommodate the standing queue of waiting patrons.
Materials. Buildings shall use durable, high-quality materials to develop long-lasting structures that can be adaptively reused over time. Natural stone, precast concrete, and factory-finished metal panels (heavygauge only, in corrugated or flat sections, low reflectivity) are preferred.
Transparency
Transparency. Buildings should have a variety of solid and nontransparent or treated transparent glass surfaces. Ground-floor storefronts should be partially transparent (e.g., incorporate doors, windows, and display areas) to encourage pedestrian activity. Long stretches of solid glass without any articulation should be avoided. Alternatives. Where interior uses do not require windows, it is encouraged to use murals, trellises, or vines and espaliers instead of glazing to break up large expanses of walls at the rear or sides of buildings.
Lighting. Internal and external storefront lighting should be designed for ground-floor retail and restaurant spaces to augment the pedestrian space and encourage window shopping even when stores are closed. Security Gates. Within Activity Nodes, security gates should allow for visibility into the storefront even when closed. The gates should be placed behind the glass line to enhance the pedestrian experience when commercial establishments are closed.
Placemaking
68 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Canopies, Awnings, and Shading Devices
Design, Proportion, Maintenance. Awnings, canopies, and shading devices are encouraged but must be well designed, proportioned, and maintained so they do not adversely impact the sidewalk environment.
The materials, shape, rigidity, reflectance, color, lighting, and signage should relate to the architectural design of the building. Dimension and Clearance. The minimum vertical clearance between the ground or street level and the encroachment should be 8 feet.
Horizontal dimensions should relate to the bays of the building façade.
The awning or canopy may encroach over the public sidewalk or pedestrian pathway, provided at least 2 feet of clearance is maintained from the street curb line.
Ground Support. Any devices that would require ground support within the public right-of-way are prohibited.
Chapter 4. MOBILITY
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 71 Mobility CH APTER 4. MOBILITY
4.1 MOBILITY OVERVIEW
The Artesia and Aviation Corridors serve the dual purposes of acting as the primary roadway arterials carrying high volumes of traffic, and as the principal location for neighborhood-serving commercial businesses in North Redondo Beach. As detailed in Chapter 2, many factors have converged to create an area that continues to function in its role in the roadway network but is no longer serving the residents of North Redondo as the “Main Street” of the community.
Building on the work of prior revitalization efforts (see Section 2.4), parking and development feasibility were identified as two of the biggest challenges preventing revitalization efforts from moving forward, so additional studies of the AACAP area (see Section 2.3) were conducted to identify specific opportunities and constraints related to each challenge (see Section 2.5). These were combined with the recommendations of related efforts to develop the AACAP strategies.
Many of the opportunities and recommendations were related to mobility, such as parking, ride share, active modes of transportation, and closing portions of public streets to create new public spaces. To address these items, mobility objectives (see Section 4.4) and strategies (see Section 4.5) are detailed in this chapter.
Understanding Parking
One of the questions that arose from related planning efforts was how much parking was available within the corridors. Because of small lots and scattered businesses, there is a perception that some portions of the corridors would benefit from additional parking. The parking study (Appendix A) identified a total of 2,877 parking spaces, of which 688 are on-street, public spaces, and 2,189 are private, off-street spaces, most of which are currently underutilized.
The challenge identified, however, was in the inefficient utilization of parking.
Private ownership of off-street lots and the absence of public off-street lots resulted in very inefficient parking utilization—the majority of the parking within the AACAP area is reserved for patrons and employees of specific businesses.
GPAC Recommendations
In addition to the parking analysis, the GPAC identified some key measures that would work with other strategies to transform the AACAP area—investigating the possibility of adding a bike lane to Artesia Boulevard, enhancing the physical connections to the adjacent community, exploring alternative street sections, and identifying opportunities to create temporary or permanent gathering spaces along the corridor. Strategies related to these measures are described in this chapter.
New Public Spaces
Establishing additional public spaces in North Redondo is challenging because of the limited supply of vacant and/or publicly held land, but it remains a priority for the community, so creative solutions are necessary. The suggestion to create new public space by closing a segment of a public street to establish a “streetlet” was submitted by a community member through an online survey for the General Plan Update.
The streetlet idea was discussed and endorsed by the GPAC, and the feasibility was analyzed by a cross-disciplinary group of City staff members from different departments. City staff analyzed every intersection in the AACAP area for streetlet potential based on criteria that included:
Topography (was the street too steep for a streetlet?) Existing driveway access (would closing the street cut off access to private property?)
Transit (would closing the street impact an existing bus line?) Approved development projects (would closing the street restrict access to an approved project?)
Activity Nodes (would the location of the streetlets help to activate an identified Activity Node?)
Ultimately, City staff identified two locations to establish streetlets: MacKay Lane and Green Lane. See further discussion in Section 4.5.2. Mobility
72 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
4.2 EXISTING CONDITIONS
PASS-THROUGH DRIVERS
Artesia Boulevard serves as a major arterial within the AACAP area, connecting the Beach Cities and PCH to I-405 and the larger regional roadway network. As a primary connection between the Beach Cities and nearby freeways, average daily traffic counts along Artesia Boulevard range between 33,000 and 36,000 vehicles per day, and speed limits are set at 35 mph.
The portion of Aviation Boulevard within the AACAP area is also designated as a major arterial, connecting local roadways to PCH, Artesia, and other arterials that eventually connect to the larger regional roadway network. Average daily traffic counts range between 32,000 and 37,000 vehicles per day and speed limits are set at 35 mph.
To preserve the critical role that the Artesia and Aviation Corridors play in the local roadway network, the number of travel lanes and the speed limit must be maintained.
There are, however, opportunities to introduce measures to ensure that the corridors support both their respective aspirations for the neighborhoods of North Redondo and continue to function as part of the local roadway network.
BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS FROM NEIGHBORHOODS
The AACAP area is connected by a consistent street and sidewalk network.
Residential neighborhoods are served by a mix of one-way and traditional streets averaging 28 feet wide. Sidewalks in the residential areas are approximately 4 feet wide at their narrowest, but generally meet the 5-foot minimum standard.
Although the residential streets meet the 24-foot minimum, little room is left for cyclists between the parked cars and two lanes of traffic. Combined with driving speeds that can easily exceed the posted limit of 25 mph on the residential streets surrounding the AACAP area, the narrow roads can deter cyclists from riding or may encourage them to ride on the sidewalk without additional roadway protections such as a dedicated bike lane. This in turn poses a hazard to pedestrians because the sidewalks are too narrow to allow a bike to pass safely.
These factors contribute to an unpleasant roadway environment and can discourage walking and cycling activity. Access from neighborhoods to commercial uses along Aviation and Artesia is generally abundant due to the gridpattern block structure of adjacent neighborhoods. The longest distance between crosswalks along both Artesia and Aviation is a quarter mile. Each residential cross-street intersects the corridors within 800 feet from a crosswalk. Figure 4.1, Block Length, illustrates the average block size and typical distance between crosswalks.
Figure 4.1 Block Length
Example of average block lengths (600 feet) and maximum distance between crosswalks (1/4 mile).
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 73 Mobility
BIKE AND PEDESTRIAN ACCESS ON THE CORRIDORS
Cyclists and pedestrians often compete for sidewalk space along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors. Without designated bike lanes on either arterial roadway, many cyclists ride on the sidewalks instead, which creates conflicts and safety issues when the sidewalks are highly trafficked.
Variations in topography around the Aviation Corridor and adjacent residential neighborhoods add to the challenges of walking and biking in the area. The Aviation Corridor slopes up from Pacific Coast Highway to Prospect Avenue and then down to Artesia Boulevard, challenging cyclists to navigate hilly terrain along a busy roadway.
PARKING
As detailed in Appendix A and outlined in Section 2.3.2, parking along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors primarily serves the commercial uses that occupy almost 80 percent of the AACAP area. Currently, the 688 on-street parking spots and 2,189 private off-street parking spots are capable of meeting demand at peak hours with a considerable amount of cushion. Although some blocks and off-street lots are more impacted than others, the average excess capacity suggests that future growth can be accommodated without the need for more parking. Furthermore, transitioning to shared off-street lots (public or private) can help distribute demand more efficiently.
TRANSIT
The AACAP area is currently served by three bus lines operated by Beach Cities Transit, Torrance Transit, and LA Metro. The lines generally run at 25- to 30-minute headways during weekday peak hours and at 40- to 60-minute intervals on weekends. Stops are generally placed at two block intervals within the Artesia Corridor, but many more are located just beyond the AACAP area boundary.
OTHER ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION
The City has limited infrastructure to serve other active modes of transport (scooters, skateboards, etc.) in the corridors and citywide. Cities allowing personal electric scooters generally allow them on any street with a speed limit of 25 miles per hour or less and allow scooters to operate within bike lanes on streets with higher speed limits. The rules for nonmotorized scooters, skateboards, and rollerblades are less consistent, but these modes of transportation are generally allowed anywhere bicycles are permitted. This would allow personal nonmotorized scooters on all the residential streets around the AACAP area, but a new bike lane would need to be constructed along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors before electric scooter traffic could be accommodated. Improvements to the bicycle infrastructure in the AACAP area will generally improve access for other modes of active transportation.
Personal scooters along sidewalk.
Mobility
74 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
4.3 RELATIONSHIP TO OTHER PLANS
4.3.1GENERAL PLAN CIRCULATION ELEMENT
The Redondo Beach General Plan includes a Circulation Element that was last updated in 2009. The Circulation Element is the City’s primary guiding document for planning and implementing mobility and access improvements throughout the City. The specific guidance found in the Circulation Element for the Artesia and Aviation Corridors is incorporated into this document.
The Redondo Beach pier is a popular biking destination for residents and visitors. A goal of the AACAP is to create a similar destination in North Redondo.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 75 Mobility
Figure 4.2 General Plan Circulation Element (2009)
Mobility
76 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
4.3.2SOUTH BAY BICYCLE MASTER PLAN
The South Bay Bicycle Master Plan (Figure 4.3) documents the Los Angeles County Bicycle Coalition’s and the South Bay Bicycle Coalition’s vision for improving the bicycle experience throughout the South Bay region. This plan was created in 2011, and various South Bay cities have adopted all or portions of the Bicycle Master Plan within their respective city-level planning documents since its creation.
The Redondo Beach General Plan Circulation Element was last updated prior to the creation of the Bicycle Master Plan. Although this document references some of the Bicycle Master Plan’s recommendations for the Artesia-Aviation Corridor, the incorporation of any part of the Bicycle Master Plan into the Circulation Element will require public outreach and detailed analysis of the feasibility of any specific recommendation. To initiate those discussions, the AACAP explored possibilities to implement the proposed bike lanes along the Artesia Corridor.
Artist renderings / street sections of the potential solutions considered during the AACAP are included in Figures 4.5 and 4.6. These sections represent potential configurations, but additional analysis and design, as well as updates to City policy, planning documents, and City standards, would be necessary before implementation.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 77 Mobility
Figure 4.3 South Bay Bicycle Master Plan
Mobility
78 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
4.4 AACAP MOBILITY OBJECTIVES
The Corridors are envisioned as places with enhanced neighborhood connectivity, safe opportunities for active transportation (walking, biking and scooter riding), and attractive streetscapes. The long-term vision of a transformed, revitalized AACAP area is only achievable through consistent incremental improvements.
Part of this revitalization will be realized by changing the way residents and visitors access the corridor. Converting travel behavior takes time and intentional effort. This document describes implementable actions within short-term, midterm, and long-term time frames.
SHORT TERM: IMPROVING SPACE EFFICIENCY
As the parking study of existing conditions found in Appendix A concludes, there are many underutilized off-street and on-street parking areas within the AACAP area, even during peak demand periods. A good first step for the Corridors is to leverage the opportunities that already exist. This may be in the form of reducing parking requirements, facilitating shared parking solutions, or replacing vehicle parking with bicycle parking. These tactics help create more room for livable and walkable spaces within the corridor.
MIDTERM: ENHANCING WALKING AND BIKING ACCESS
More residents and visitors will choose walking, biking, and scooter riding to access and travel through the corridor when safer, more convenient facilities exist. The AACAP recommends the City designate bike boulevards for low-speed, low-stress bicycle and scooter access to the corridor. The removal of some driveway access points and installation of traffic-calming measures near crosswalks will also enhance the walking environment. With enhanced facilities installed, the City can encourage residents and visitors to change the way they access and enjoy the Corridors.
LONG TERM: TRANSFORMED AND REVITALIZED CORRIDORS
The fully transformed and revitalized Corridors will require many safe, reliable options for access and mobility. The City can install metered parking on high demand blocks to ensure available parking and provide funding for other improvements. Public shared parking lots - the park-once approach – can reduce overall parking needs and promote the use of active transportation, particularly walking, bicycling, and scooter riding. Enhanced transit service can better link the Corridors with the revitalizing South Bay Galleria shopping center and adjacent future regional light rail station.
A goal of the Artesia and Aviation Corridors is to convert people’s traditionally autooriented habits to those that prioritize active modes of travel, such as walking and biking.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 79 Mobility
4.5 CORRIDOR DESCRIPTIONS AND
STRATEGIES
The Artesia Corridor
The Artesia Corridor is an east-west major arterial, designated as both a truck route and bus route. Artesia serves as a commercial corridor for the North Redondo Beach area. The Corridor was recently enhanced with pedestrianfocused and general improvements, including a landscaped median and curb extensions with landscaping and sidewalk-facing benches. Opportunities exist to further improve mobility and access to the Corridor for all road users, including drivers, bicyclists, scooter riders, and pedestrians.
The Aviation Corridor
The Aviation Corridor is a north-south major arterial, designated as a truck route.
The Corridor is primarily designed for efficient vehicle throughput. Opportunities exist to improve mobility and access to the Corridor for all road users, at a smaller scale than on Artesia.
Mobility
80 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
4.5.1THE DRIVING AND PARKING EXPERIENCE
SHARED OFF-STREET PARKING / REDUCING MINIMUM PARKING
REQUIREMENTS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Time Frame: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Next Steps:
Conduct a comprehensive parking study to identify opportunities for shared parking and adjust parking requirements including provisions for establishing shared parking and reduced on-site parking standards. Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
The Redondo Beach Municipal Code requires each parcel to provide a minimum amount of off-street parking to accommodate peak on-site demand given the parcel’s land uses. Opportunities exist along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors to leverage the efficiencies of shared parking among adjoining parcels. For example, a coffee shop and a sit-down restaurant can share a significant amount of parking since peak parking demand for a coffee shop is typically in the morning, and peak parking demand for a sit-down restaurant is typically in the evening. Similarly, office and residential uses typically have peak parking demand at different times of day.
Also, the minimum parking requirements in the code may not reflect current and potential future trends in parking demand, which have generally decreased in recent years. The City can use the findings of the existing conditions parking study (see Appendix A) to validate a reduction in minimum parking requirements throughout the AACAP area. For each land use, the City can determine a new parking requirement per unit of an independent variable (most commonly, increments of 1,000 square feet, or KSF). Depending on the reduction goals the City wishes to achieve, the new parking requirement can be set based on the highest observed parking demand rate for each land use (less reduction) or the average rate of all parcels containing each land use (more reduction). For parcels with multiple land uses, the percentage of demand for each land use can be determined by referencing industry standards such as the Institute of Transportation Engineers’ Parking Generation or the Urban Land Institute’s Shared Parking.
Facilitating shared parking and reducing parking requirements along the corridor allows for a greater variety of attractive land use designs and can improve the walking environment by reducing inactive street frontage, hardscape, and driveway access points.
“PARK ONCE” PUBLIC PARKING GARAGES / REMOVING ONSTREET PARKING Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Time Frame: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $$/$$$
Next Steps:
Conduct a comprehensive parking study to identify opportunities to establish public parking lots and garages, remove on-street parking, and adjust parking requirements.
Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
Develop a long-term parking strategy including parking demand management strategies, autonomous vehicle “holding” areas, and considerations of other future technology.
Through the acquisition of privately owned parcels or the redevelopment of publicly owned parcels along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors, the City can construct public, off-street parking garages. Accommodating parking demand for multiple nearby parcels using a public parking garage is known as the “park once” approach. Instead of drivers parking and re-parking multiple times for each land use they visit, the public garage allows them to park once and access several nearby land uses by foot, bike, or scooter. Public garages can serve activities within a reasonable walking distance, typically one-quarter mile. This approach is City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 81 Mobility
similar in operation to an outdoor shopping mall and should focus on the Corridors’ Activity Nodes.
The minimum dimensions for a parking structure—with two-way driveway aisles and considering ramp slope requirements—is typically approximately 135 feet long by 120 feet deep (about 50 vehicles per level). Longer structures are preferred to optimize space and cost efficiency. The typical lot depth along the Artesia Corridor can accommodate the 120-foot minimum structure depth but not the 135-foot minimum structure length. Lot depths along the Aviation Corridor, on the other hand, are generally narrower than the 120 minimum depth.
Therefore, parking structures along the Artesia Corridor will most likely need to be oriented east-west lengthwise and potentially occupy several adjacent parcels fronting Artesia. Because very few lots within the Aviation Corridor have sufficient depth to accommodate a parking structure, and because the identified Activity Nodes both fall within the Artesia Corridor, the development of such a structure should be prioritized within the Artesia Corridor.
The introduction of public parking garages will become more relevant as parcels redevelop and provide less on-site parking. See Section 5.1.1 for additional information on how to fund the construction and operation of these facilities.
Public parking garages can also accommodate parking demand from the potential removal of on-street parking spaces along the Corridors. If the on-street parking lanes along Artesia were removed, the corridor could accommodate wider sidewalks and protected bikeways (see Section 4.5.3 and Figure 4.6 for more details). These improvements would greatly enhance the walking and bicycling experience in the AACAP area, which further facilitates the attractiveness and functionality of the park-once approach.
Introducing low-profile parking structures is a long-term solution to meeting parking demand while reducing on-site parking requirements and improving the pedestrian experience within the AACAP area.
Mobility
82 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
PICK-UP/DROP-OFF ZONES (FOR TRANSPORTATION NETWORK
COMPANIES AND AUTONOMOUS VEHICLES)
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Time Frame: Long Term
Relative Cost: $
Next Steps:
Curb-space management study to identify opportunities for pickup and drop-off zones.
Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
As the AACAP area revitalizes, demand for curb space near high-activity centers, like Activity Nodes, will increase. The City can study the use of flexible-use zones along the curb which can serve both transportation network company pickups/drop-offs and freight deliveries. Since the addition of flexible-use zones will likely require the removal of some on-street parking spaces, the City can study and implement a prioritization plan for the Corridors to assess the most efficient uses for limited curb space, with a particular focus on serving the Corridors’ Activity Nodes. One general prioritization strategy involves trading proximity for time. Curb space closest to high-activity centers can be reserved for the shortestterm parking—pick-ups and drop-offs—while spaces slightly farther away can be reserved for longer-term parking needs.
Companies such as Uber and Lyft provide a popular alternative to owning, insuring, maintaining, and driving a personal vehicle.
TRANSPORTATION NETWORK COMPANIES:
App-based ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 83 Mobility
4.5.2THE WALKING EXPERIENCE
DRIVEWAY ACCESS POINTS
In many segments along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors, frequent driveway access points interrupt the walking environment. The City may seek strategic opportunities to close select driveway access points to create a more safe and seamless pedestrian experience. Opportunities may exist to leverage shared parking and access for adjoining parcels or, where applicable, to rout all driveway access to side streets only. Driveway closures should be considered carefully to avoid overloading side streets with additional traffic. If curb cuts for cars are not limited in any way, they will continue to disrupt the continuity of the pedestrian path.
Limiting the maximum width allowed for a curb cut can minimize disruption to pedestrian circulation. Widening the minimum space required between two curb cuts can help maintain streetscape and tree planting continuity, increase front yard planting, preserve on-street parking, and foster more active building frontages.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Time Frame: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $
Next Steps:
Local Access Study. Consider local access traffic studies to assess the impact of driveway closures.
Drive-thrus. Evaluate an approach to drive-thrus in the Corridors (considerations: potentially minimize, strategically locate, or prohibit them in areas such as activity nodes).
Update Development Standards Update Municipal Code to incorporate regulations for curb cuts within the AACAP area, including:
Maximum Width. Establish maximum width dimensions for curb cuts.
Minimum Distance. Establish minimum distances between curb cuts for new development.
Design Guidelines. Implement the design guidelines (see Section 3.4) that relate to curb cut frequency, width, and distance from intersections.
The three-block stretch (1,890 linear feet) of Artesia Boulevard between MacKay and Perkins Lanes has 16 curb cuts (see yellow arrows), an average of a curb cut every 120 feet. This is similar to curb-cut conditions throughout the Artesia Corridor. Mobility
84 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Incentives. Identify and provide incentives to encourage property owners to consolidate driveways (e.g., include in the Storefront Improvement Program, establish a new program).
MIDBLOCK CROSSWALKS/ENHANCING EXISTING CROSSWALKS
If people don’t feel safe walking along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors, they are less likely to walk. Street lighting and adequate protection from vehicles when crossing the street are two elements that affect the safety of the walking environment in the AACAP area.
Safe pedestrian crossings should be visible and frequent. Crosswalk spacing of more than a couple blocks or a quarter mile apart is inconvenient for pedestrians.
People waiting to cross the street should be easily visible to drivers, and the crossing should be as short as possible, since shorter crossing distances minimize the time that a pedestrian is in potential conflict with cars.
Enhanced Crosswalk Striping
Major crossings striped as wide or wider than the connecting walkway induce vehiclesto yield, and high-visibility artistic, ladder, zebra, or continental crosswalk markings (see images of continental and artistic crosswalks on the next page) would help ensure the safety of pedestrians in the Artesia and Aviation Corridor.
In the Activity Nodes, the City can consider incorporating a crosswalk design that reflects the Corridor’s theming and complements other placemaking and identity elements.
Artesia Corridor
All signalized intersections along the Artesia Corridor have crosswalks, but on some segments along the Corridor crosswalks are spaced a quarter mile or more apart—e.g., between Green Lane and Rindge Lane. A crosswalk warrant study can identify potential sites for midblock crosswalks to close these gaps in the pedestrian network. Crosswalks at unsignalized, midblock locations may require safety infrastructure to alert drivers to crossing pedestrians, such as push-buttonactivated flashing yellow beacons, overhead lighting, pedestrian-crossing warning signs, and painted “shark teeth” on the roadway (see image of “shark teeth” on the next page). Assessing the Corridor for midblock crosswalks is also a good opportunity to identify potential enhancements to existing crosswalks. Highvisibility crosswalks with continental striping (see image below) and overhead lighting are important safety improvements for all crosswalks on the Corridor.
Bulb-outs at crosswalks with highvisibility continental striping improve pedestrian safety by limiting exposure to
vehicles.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 85 Mobility
Curb extensions, or bulb-outs, exist throughout Artesia Boulevard, but are primarily located midblock and never in conjunction with a crosswalk. Curb extensions with crosswalks would reduce pedestrians’ overall crossing distance and improve the perceived and actual safety. Priority for implementation should be in any high-risk intersections and Activity Nodes.
Aviation Corridor
Like the Artesia Corridor, all signalized intersections along the Aviation Corridor have crosswalks, but in some segments along the Corridor, crosswalks are spaced more than a quarter mile apart—e.g., between Artesia and Grant Avenue, between Grant and Ford Avenue, and between Ford and Prospect Avenue.
Enhanced crossing opportunities along the Aviation Corridor would improve its connection to nearby residents. Although curb extensions are more appropriate to the scale and role of the Artesia Corridor, the Aviation Corridor may have limited opportunities for bulb-outs, especially in conjunction with a midblock crossing.
Improved striping and the introduction of midblock crossings would improve the perceived and actual safety of the pedestrian network along the Aviation Corridor.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $–$$ (depending on level of safety infrastructure) Next Steps:
Crosswalk warrant study
Outreach to residents, businesses, and parcel owners
Installation of overhead street lighting at crosswalks (existing or proposed) to improve pedestrian safety and visibility
Top: example of continental crosswalk markings with “shark teeth”; Bottom: example of artistic crosswalk
Mobility
86 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
STREETLETS
Applies to: Artesia
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $$–$$$
Next Steps:
Local access traffic study
Outreach to residents and parcel owners
After City review of the Aviation and Artesia Corridors to determine which areas would be able to accommodate a streetlet, two opportunities appear to be most viable in the Artesia Corridor—one closing the southern leg of the Artesia/Green intersection and one closing the northern leg of the Artesia/Mackay intersection.
Though streetlets may significantly enhance the walking and biking environment along the Corridor, there are some key vehicle access issues to consider when designing them.
Some parcels along Green Lane between Artesia and Vanderbilt only have driveway access facing Green, and some along Mackay Lane between Artesia and Mathews only have driveway access facing Mackay. Therefore, it is not likely feasible to use these entire blocks as streetlets. Also, auxiliary access to these blocks may be necessary for adequate emergency response times. Corner parcels adjacent to the potential streetlet locations with driveway access onto both cross-streets might serve as emergency access routes. Like closing driveway access points, the implementation of streetlets should carefully consider the potential for spillover traffic and diversion of vehicles onto other side streets. The images on the next page show the recommended maximum street depths for these two potential streetlets.
The following pagesshowstreetlet conversions in Los Angeles and Vancouver, British Columbia. The benefit of streetlets is that they can be phased in, beginning with a temporary installation ofmovable features that could be permanently affixed if there is interest and use by the community. The City already has an example of the streetlet conversion at Lilenthal Park, so this is a concept that has proven to be implementable in Redondo Beach.
Lilenthal Park is an example of a conversion from street to open space in Redondo Beach.
STREETLET:
Conversion of street segments to temporary or permanent open space, often using large planters or other physical barriers to protect the space from vehicles. These spaces may include seating and active play areas to enhance the pedestrian environment along a corridor.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 87 Mobility
Left: The maximum recommended depth
for a streetlet on Green Lane is 90 feet.
Right: The maximum recommended
depth for a streetlet on MacKay Lane is
70 feet.
Mobility
88 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
EXAMPLES OF STREETLET/PARKLETTE CONVERSIONS
Bradley Avenue Plaza, Los Angeles
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 89 Mobility
Bradley Avenue Plaza, Los Angeles
Mobility
90 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Butte and Robson Streets, Vancouver BC
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 91 Mobility
4.5.3 BICYCLE AND MICRO-MOBILITY EXPERIENCE
PARKING FOR BIKES AND SECONDARY MOBILTY DEVICES
An important aspect of improving the Artesia and Aviation Corridors’ connection to the nearby residents is encouraging people to ride bikes and other slow speed travel/secondary mobility devices (skateboards, scooters, etc.) to the Corridors.
People are generally willing to travel longer distances along less convenient routes on a bicycle or scooter than they would on foot. Therefore, improving bicycle and scooter-type infrastructure increases the number of North Redondo residents who could easily access the Corridors without driving.
To encourage more residents to walk, cycle, or ride a scooter or other secondary mobility device to the Corridors, the network that people use to get to the Corridor must be safe and convenient, as described in Section 4.4.2, The Walking Experience, but there must also be a safe and convenient place for people to “park” bikes and scooters within the Corridors. Along both the Artesia and Aviation Corridors, few individual businesses provide bike racks, and there are even fewer public bike racks.
Because e-scooters and bike shares are not currently permitted in Redondo Beach, there are no existing corrals to manage shared equipment. If the City adopts an ordinance allowing bikeshare / scooter-share companies (known collectively as “micro-mobility”), it should include standards to manage parking of equipment. Corrals or parking boxes for privately owned bikes and scooters may also be appropriate within the AACAP area. Both amenities should be added at regular intervals along the Corridors to encourage more people to bike and ride a scooter to and from the AACAP area.
Artesia Corridor
The South Bay Bicycle Master Plan proposes two public bike-parking racks along the Artesia Corridor. Adequate bike-rack designs should provide at least two points of contact, so both the front wheel/frame and rear wheel can be locked concurrently. For private-development bike parking, the South Bay Bicycle Master Plan recommends amending the Redondo Beach Municipal Code to require bike parking at all new and retrofitted multifamily residential, commercial, office, and mixed-use developments.
The space around each bike rack can also be designated micro-mobility parking through painted markings (ideally using high-visibility thermoplastic) or signage.
Proper siting of micro-mobility parking must ensure the path for pedestrians is not obstructed. If there is not adequate space in the street furniture zone of the sidewalk, micro-mobility parking may be better located on the street in the vehicle parking lane. Adequate micro-mobility parking will likely only require the removal of one on-street vehicle parking space on any block where micro-mobility access is desired. Existing or new curb extensions may be used as micro-mobility MICRO-MOBILITY:
Shared transportation services typically using smaller two-wheeled vehicles, such as electric bicycles (e-bikes) and scooters. This includes services provided by companies like Bird and Lime.
STREET FURNITURE ZONE:
The area between the curb and sidewalk path, designated for streetlights, utilities, signposts, landscaping, bus benches, etc.
Mobility
92 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach and/or bike parking areas to enhance the safety and quality of these parking facilities.
Aviation Corridor
The South Bay Bicycle Master Plan proposes one public bike parking rack along the Aviation Corridor. See the Artesia Corridor section for details on bike parking recommendations. Since the Aviation Corridor does not currently utilize curb extensions and the Corridor is primarily auto-oriented, the addition of curb extensions for use as bike/scooter parking is not recommended at this time.
RECOMMENDATIONS
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $ (without curb extensions)–$$ (with curb extensions) Next Steps:
Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
Conduct a study to determine the optimal locations and frequency of bike and scooter amenities along both Corridors.
Consider updating the municipal code to:
Require that new projects provide a certain amount of bicycle or scooter parking for each vehicle space provided.
Allow businesses to reduce the amount of required parking if they provide publicly accessible bicycle racks or scooter parking on-site or contribute to a fund to establish and maintain a public bicycle / scooter station within a certain distance of the business. If shared equipment is eventually allowed within the City, establish guidelines to manage the shared equipment in various street and sidewalk situations within the micro-mobility framework.
Source: City of Austin Department of Transportation.
Example of a parking box for bicycles and scooters in Austin, TX.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 93 Mobility
BIKE BOULEVARDS
Applies to: Streets Parallel to the Artesia Corridor (outside of AACAP area)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $$
Next Steps:
Outreach to residents and parcel owners
The South Bay Bicycle Master Plan Mathews Avenue and Vanderbilt Lane, both running parallel to Artesia Boulevard, as proposed future bike boulevards(no bike boulevards were identified near the Aviation Corridor). Mathews and Vanderbilt are each one block away from Artesia and provide a lower-speed, lower-stress bicycle and micro-mobility environment. Each street is currently one-way restricted (Vanderbilt runs westbound and Mathews runs eastbound) and the speed limit is 25 mph. These streets can be further enhanced for safety through the following improvements:
Install “super-sharrow” lane markings to heighten bicycle and secondary mobility device visibility, and designate the streets as bike boulevards. Convert select intersections along the bike boulevards to all-way stop controlled in cases where crossing uncontrolled vehicle travel lanes creates safety issues for bicyclists and scooter riders. Install speed cushions to encourage vehicles to further reduce speed along the bike boulevards but maintain access for emergency vehicles. Add signage with direction and distances to/from key activity centers, especially the North Redondo Beach Bikeway, the South Bay Galleria and adjoining future light rail station, and the Corridor’s Activity Nodes.
Example of a sharrow, which allows cars and bikes to share a vehicle lane.
SUPER-SHARROW:
A larger, more visible version of a sharrow street marking. A sharrow is a painted marking on the street which indicates a travel lane intended for shared use between vehicles and bicycles. These markings are typically only recommended for lower-speed local streets.
Mobility
94 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
CLASS II BIKE LANES
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $$
Next Steps:
Outreach to residents, business owners, and parcel owners Develop a complete streets strategy for the AACAP area including phasing The South Bay Bicycle Master Plan classifies both Artesia and Aviation Boulevards as streets with proposed Class II bike lanes. Because the Artesia Corridor is envisioned as the “main street” of North Redondo, while the Aviation Corridor is intended to serve as a secondary corridor, the AACAP, developed possibilities to introduce a bike lane within the Artesia Corridor. Figures 4.4 and 4.5 illustrate the existing roadway configuration and a conceptual design if a bike lane is added on the Artesia Corridor. Figure 4.6 illustrates a conceptual design if the parking lane is removed to accommodate a buffer for the bike lane and wider sidewalks.
Additional exploration would be needed to provide similar conceptual designsfor the Aviation Corridor.
Providing bike lanes on arterials will become increasingly relevant if the City adopts a micro-mobility ordinance for devices such as e-bikes and scooters. Any ordinance passed would likely limit these micro-mobility devices to travel within bike lanes along arterial streets. Within the Artesia Corridor, if travel lane widths are reduced from 12 feet to 10-foot inside lanes and 11-foot outside lanes, the Corridor can accommodate bike lanes up to 6 feet wide. If on-street parking was removed, the Artesia Corridor could accommodate an additional 3-foot-wide buffer zone between the travel lanes and bike lanes and 5 feet of additional sidewalk space on either side of the roadway. Within the Aviation Corridor, if travel lane widths are reduced from 12 feet to 10 feet, the Corridor may be able to accommodate bike lanes up to 5 feet wide.
If the existing number of parking spaces and travel lanes for vehicles are maintained in both Corridors, neither Corridor has enough space to accommodate buffer zones to help protect bicyclists from vehicles in the parking (i.e., the “door zone”) and travel lanes. Without any buffer zone or physical barriers between vehicles and bicyclists, these facilities may only feel safe for strong and confident riders. As an additional safety measure, a thicker lane stripe can be painted separating the bike lane and the travel lanes.
The addition of bike lanes may require the removal of some on-street parking spaces and/or driveway access points where feasible in order to reduce sightdistance issues. For example, the white vehicle in the image below conceals a driveway access point just beyond it. Its presence in this location reduces sightdistance and reaction time for both bicyclists along a potential bike lane and vehicles pulling out of the driveway, increasing the risk of collision. On-street parking spaces and driveway access points should be assessed for safety issues on a case-by-case basis.
Artesia Boulevard currently is configured as two lanes with on-street parking. If a bike lane were to be introduced, adjustments to the median or the sidewalk widths might be necessary to create a safe buffer for cyclists.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 95 Mobility
Figure 4.4: Artesia Boulevard Existing Configuration
Mobility
96 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Figure 4.5: Artesia Boulevard Concept with Bike Lane
PLACEHOLDER GRAPHIC – CAN BE REFINED IF
CITY CONFIRMS OK
NOTE: The following issues should be taken into consideration when exploring the potential for a bike lane on Artesia Boulevard:
This will require reducing the median to 10 feet in order to provide 6-foot bike lanes. This will require the removal of raised medians at each left-turn pocket (currently there is at least 3 feet of raised median approaching each intersection). The City could instead explore plastic bollards or some other form of narrow median separation at intersections. The City should verify whether the narrower median impacts the critical root zone or otherwise obstructs the trees within the median. The City will need to modify its Circulation Element to only require 11-foot outside lanes for truck and bus routes.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 97 Mobility
Figure 4.6: Artesia Boulevard Concept without Parking Lane PLACEHOLDER GRAPHIC – CAN BE REFINED IF
CITY CONFIRMS OK
NOTE: The following issues should be taken into consideration when exploring the potential for a bike lane on Artesia Boulevard:
This will require reducing the median to 10 feet.
This will require removal of the on-street parking lanes. This will require the removal of raised medians at each left-turn pocket (currently there is at least 3 feet of raised median approaching each intersection). The City could instead explore plastic bollards or some other form of narrow median separation at intersections. The City should verify whether the narrower median impacts the critical root zone or otherwise obstructs the trees within the median. The City will need to modify its Circulation Element to only require 11-foot outside lanes for truck and bus routes. Mobility
98 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
4.5.4THE TRANSIT EXPERIENCE
POTENTIAL FOR CURB EXTENSION CONVERSION TO TRANSIT
STOPS AND TROLLEY SERVICE
Applies to: Artesia and Aviation
Timeframe: Long Term
Relative Cost: $$$
Next Steps:
Potential transit service study and/or pilot project
Outreach to residents and parcel owners
Seek first/last mile funding opportunities related to the Green Line light rail extension
The existing curb extensions along Artesia Boulevard can be converted into highquality transit stops. (There are no curb extensions along the Aviation Corridor, and the width of the right-of-way limits the potential to install them, so recommendations related to curb extensions apply to the Artesia Corridor.) This may become an increasingly relevant improvement as transit service increases along the Corridor in relation to the future planned light rail station adjacent to the Galleria. A rubber-tired trolley service between the South Bay Galleria and the AACAP area might serve as a convenient first/last mile solution for residents and visitors to access the future light rail station, in addition to existing transit service along the Corridor.
The current bus stop configurations along Artesia Boulevard require buses to merge into and out of the parking lane to pick up and drop off passengers. These merging maneuvers increase travel time and decrease speed for buses, especially while yielding to passing vehicles for an opportunity to merge back into the travel lane. These maneuvers also increase the risk of conflicts and collisions with passing vehicles. Converting the curb extensions to transit stops allows buses to consistently occupy the travel lane, creating more efficient and safer service.
Example of a high-quality transit stop with a curb extension along a similar corridor in the City of Los Angeles.
CURB EXTENSIONS:
Any measure to calm traffic and improve the pedestrian environment by extending the curb line, sidewalk, and/or landscaping.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 99 Mobility
Although using the curb extensions for transit stops improves transit operations, it creates the potential for unique bus/bike/scooter conflicts. Since buses would need to occupy bike lanes while picking up and dropping off passengers, the bike lane should be striped intermittently at and approaching the transit stop to alert bicyclists/scooter riders of the merging conflict. The image to the right demonstrates the two recommended actions bicyclists/scooter riders can take when approaching buses at transit stops.
Education and awareness are key to reduce the risk of conflicts and collisions. If the trolley system is implemented in the Corridors, signage and displays on the back of the buses should reinforce appropriate bicycle/scooter behavior. Mobility
100 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
These examples show potential improvements along a portion of Aviation Boulevard outside of the AACAP area.
Section 5. FUNDING MECHANISMS
Funding Mechanisms
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 103 CH APTER 5. FUN DING MEC HANISMS
5.1 FUNDING MECHANISMS
The following chapter identifies potential funding mechanisms and financing strategies to be considered for implementation of the Aviation and Artesia Corridor Area Plan (AACAP). These strategies build upon the extensive economic analysis and pro forma modeling conducted as part of the feasibility study (see Appendix B).
Because of low vacancies along the Corridors and high underlying land values, financial feasibility for new development has remained a challenge. Therefore, all funding strategies identified below are evaluated within the context of their overall suitability given the unique characteristics and constraints of the Aviation and Artesia Corridors.
Funding options are weighed for their potential for generating revenue given the comparative lack of new development, time frame for implementation, overall competitiveness (e.g., for monetary grants), and staff or consultant resources required.
KEY FINDINGS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
Public investments that enhance the pedestrian experience should be prioritized, both to encourage alternative transportation options such as bikes, personal scooters, and skateboards, and to help leverage private investment in designated Activity Nodes.
With no significant change in allowable FAR or land use designation, revitalization funding strategies that rely on value capture (e.g., tax increment financing districts) are not likely to be successful in the immediate term.
More-effective funding alternatives would include the formulation of a local Special Assessment District, such as a Business Improvement District (BID) or a Landscape and Lighting District.
The City should continue to leverage and promote existing strategies in place, such as the Storefront Improvement Program and John Parsons Public Art Fund.
While the Corridors may not qualify for some grant-related funding streams dedicated to disadvantaged communities, they could score well in other criteria, such as neighborhoods that rank high on “park need.” Existing “service-oriented” uses along the Corridors (e.g., auto repair, salons) do not generate sales tax revenue in the State of California.
Stimulating preferred uses such as sit-down restaurants and specialty retail could channel additional revenue toward revitalization efforts. Revitalization efforts should support integration with and connection to the planned Galleria revitalization. Corridor enhancements should therefore leverage potential revenue streams from development agreements associated with the Galleria where possible.
Beyond the funding mechanisms outlined in this chapter, a number of revitalization strategies could be initiated at the citywide level that could have a direct impact on the commercial health and vitality of the Corridors. These include:
Expedited permitting and streamlined applications for preferred uses along the Corridors, such as sit-down restaurants, grocers, professional office, and other uses that may be identified in the future. Flexibility with respect to reduced permitting fees for preferred uses. Flexible commercial use districts that better harness fluctuations in real estate market conditions.
Relaxed parking standards to incentivize preferred uses in Activity Nodes such as restaurants and professional office space.
The implementation of in-lieu fee / parking structure funding. Funding Mechanisms
104 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
5.1.1 SPECIAL ASSESSMENT DISTRICTS
An assessment district (also called a special assessment district, a local improvement district, or a benefit assessment district) is an additional assessment charged on the property within the district. The additional assessment can be constant or can vary over time. Assessment-district financing is similar to tax increment financing (see 5.1.4), except that it is less speculative and therefore less risky. This is because some revenue is always guaranteed, unlike tax increment financing, which is solely dependent on increasing property values.
In order for assessment district bonds to be issued, a majority of owners within the district must agree to a self-assessment. Property owners may be willing to do this since the resulting upgrades (for example, improved infrastructure) can increase property values and spur additional development. Assessment districts can only finance certain types of “special benefits,” which are laid out in the enabling legislation. These improvements can include streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, water, sewer, gas or electric, lighting, and drainage or flood control facilities.
BUSINESS IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT
A Business Improvement District (BID) is a common type of Special Assessment District that assesses business and/or property owners to fund maintenance, marketing, and other public services or improvements. If such a district were to be formed in Redondo Beach along Aviation and/or Artesia, funding could be used to improve the streetscape and pedestrian experience.
By law, assessments in these districts are not taxes for the general benefit of the city, but for improvements, services, and programs that will directly benefit the assessed facilities within the district. A district can be established and an advisory board appointed as long as it is not protested by a majority of property owners.
FUNDING OPPORTUNITIES FOR CORRIDOR REVITALIZATION
Special Assessment: Business Improvement District
A BusinessImprovementDistrict(BID) is a common type of Special Assessment District that assesses business and/or property ownersto fundmaintenance,marketing, and other public services or improvements.
Other Special Assessment Districts
A Landscape and Lighting District could help improve the streetscape by funding new streetlights and traffic signals, landscaping, parkways, medians, drainage facilities, and graffiti removal. A Parking Benefit District could help dedicate local meter revenue to funding Corridor-specific improvements.
Grant Programs
There are a number of local, regional, state, and federal grant funding sources that can support Corridor improvements. These can include, for example, transportation grants related to pedestrian safety or sustainability grants for urban greening.
Impact Fees
Development impact fees are another potential funding source for parks, and other amenities. These fees, paid by new residential and commercial development projects, must only be used to pay for improvements that can be demonstrated to serve new residents and businesses.
Tax Increment Financing
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) relies on an anticipated increase in property values within a TIF district, typically through an upzone or targeted investment. TIF can provide a source of funding for catalytic investments that will spur additional development and increase property values.
Funding Mechanisms
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 105
LANDSCAPE AND LIGHTING DISTRICT
A Landscape and Lighting District along the Corridors could also help to improve the streetscape by funding new street lights and traffic signals, landscaping, parkways, medians, drainage facilities, and graffiti removal. To form such a district in Redondo Beach, the sponsoring agency (e.g., City of Redondo Beach) would conduct a study, prepare an engineer’s report, and propose the formation of a district and the levy of assessments.
Affected property owners would then be notified of a public hearing to address concerns. For commercial properties similar to those along the Aviation and/or Artesia Corridors, funding is typically assessed by “front footage,” or on a lot front foot basis.
PARKING BENEFIT DISTRICT
A Parking Benefit District (PBD) is another type of assessment district that could help revitalize the Corridor.
As noted in the parking study (Appendix A), there is adequate on-street parking along the Artesia-Aviation Corridor to accommodate current peak parking demand. However, demand for parking along the Corridor is not evenly distributed, creating some blocks with very limited supply during high-demand periods. Limited on-street parking encourages drivers to spend more time cruising for available spaces, potentially increasing traffic, greenhouse gas emissions, and collisions due to distracted and reckless driving.
One solution to this problem is to implement an on-street parking meter system, with the price of parking set at a level which always leaves a few spaces along each block available. While the addition of a parking fee may seem like a disincentive to patronage along the Corridor, an efficient parking meter system offers two primary benefits: (1) it reduces the stress and hassle of driving by reliably providing available on-street spaces on every block and (2) the meter revenue generated can be funneled into the creation of a PBD.
The key to a successful PBD is to ensure local control of the revenue (i.e., revenue generated from the parking meters should be used to fund improvements on the same blocks as the meters). The creation of an advisory board consisting of property owners along the parking-metered blocks helps establish this local control. Revenue generated from the parking meters can be used to fund sidewalk and streetscape improvements, including maintenance and cleaning, and programs/events which further promote and revitalize the Corridor, such as farmers markets and street festivals. Before establishing a PBD, a combined parking and economic study should be conducted to estimate the revenue that could be generated and the cost associated with installation and maintenance of parking meters and other infrastructure.
Image source: rivieravillage.net.
Riviera Village in South Redondo Beach established a Business Improvement District to fund maintenance, marketing, and other services and improvements in the area. Funding Mechanisms
106 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
5.1.2 GRANT PROGRAMS
There are a number of local, regional, state, and federal grant funding sources that could also be used to support Corridor improvements. Grants that could potentially be applicable to the Artesia and Aviation Corridors are described in this section.
PROPOSITION 68, STATE OF CALIFORNIA PARKS AND WATER
BOND ACT
This bond act provides grants which are available to local governments on a per capita basis for park rehabilitation, creation, and improvement. Unless the project has been identified as serving a severely disadvantaged community (where median household income is less than 60 percent of statewide average), an entity that receives an award pursuant to this section is required to provide 20 percent as a local share. Applications and approvals are conducted on a rolling basis over the next five years, with the next round of awardees to be announced in 2020.
INTEGRATED REGIONAL WATER MANAGEMENT GRANT
Proposition 1, a water bond passed by California voters in 2014, will help fund over $510 million in Integrated Regional Water Management (IRWM) related planning and implementation projects throughout the state. In April 2019, the Department of Water Resources released the Final IRWM Implementation Grant Proposal Solicitation Package and Final 2019 Guidelines. Approximately $222 million in grant funding is being made available for implementation. Eligible projects in Redondo Beach could include stormwater capture, water reuse, providing new open space, and other green streets measures.
CALTRANS ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION PROGRAM
Caltrans’ Active Transportation Program consolidates various transportation programs at the state and federal level, including the federal Transportation Alternatives ProgramandBicycle Transportation Account, and the State Safe Routes to School. Approximately $440 million is expected to be awarded through Fiscal Year 2025.
The goal of the Active Transportation Program is to encourage increased use of active modes of transportation, including walking and biking, and to ensure the safety and mobility of nonmotorized users. Eligible projects along the Corridors could include developing new bike paths and walkways or adding new landscaping, traffic control devices, and enhanced street lighting.
SAFE ROUTES TO SCHOOL
Safe Routes to School (SRTS) is a state funding source managed through Caltrans’ Active Transportation Program. SRTS grants may be used to fund safety enhancements to the walking environment, including crosswalks.
Successfully competing for SRTS grants typically requires cities to conduct upfront planning work to demonstrate the need for improvements. The City can conduct a school walking route evaluation, incorporating collision and traffic data and community outreach, to identify improvement needs along school walking routes. The findings of this study should then be incorporated into the City’s planning documents to demonstrate readiness for receiving funding and implementing improvements.
Safe Routes to School promotes
walking and bicycling to school
through infrastructure improvements,
enforcement, safety education, and
incentives to encourage walking and
bicycling to school.
Funding Mechanisms
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 107
5.1.3 IMPACT FEES
Development impact fees are another potential funding source that could pay for improvements to the Corridors. These fees, paid by new residential and commercial development projects, must only be used to pay for improvements that can be demonstrated to serve new residents and businesses. A nexus study—which calculates the new increment of development, estimates the portion of an improvement project attributable to that increment of growth, and allocates the fee among the new development projects by land use—is required by state law for implementation.
Given the lack of new development along the Corridors over the past decade, instituting new impact fees might serve to hinder growth in the area. However, development agreements with large-scale projects in the vicinity (such as the South Bay Galleria) have the potential to channel new funds to the Corridors.
Two such conditions of approval for the Galleria project, for example, are expected to generate approximately $2 million earmarked for improvements along Artesia Boulevard. The fees are evenly allocated between a flexible fund that could be used for AACAP area roadway improvements and the John Parsons Public Art Fund, which can be used to fund public art initiatives along the Artesia Corridor (e.g., Banner Program).
IN-LIEU DEVELOPMENT FEES / IDENTIFYING SHARED PUBLIC
PARKING
In addition to existing impact fees, the City may develop a new program to assess in-lieu development impact fees on developers desiring to provide less parking than the code requirement. This may be especially relevant in areas with an oversupply of off-street parking, as identified in the parking study (Appendix A). The cost of the in-lieu fee can be tied to the cost to implement a specific improvement, such as a shared public parking facility or operating the proposed trolley system along the Corridor. In-lieu fees provide an opportunity to transfer funds dedicated for vehicle-only access to instead fund and encourage the use of active transportation modes.
Identifying opportunities for shared public parking facilities along the Corridor will require further analysis and input from residents and relevant parcel owners. Preferable sites include existing larger surface lots, which can be converted into multistory garages on parcels already owned by the City, like the Redondo Beach North Library. Before establishing such impact fees, a combined parking and economic study should be conducted to estimate the revenue that could be generated as well as the cost associated with installation and maintenance of parking meters and other infrastructure.
Artist’s rendering of the approved South Bay Galleria redevelopment. The Galleria project, within walking distance of the AACAP area, is expected to generate $2 million in impact fees specifically earmarked for improvements to Artesia Boulevard. Funding Mechanisms
108 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach
5.1.4TAX INCREMENT FINCNANCING
Tax Increment Financing (TIF) was legal and widely used in California for decades. Because TIF districts diverted new property tax revenue away from traditional taxing entities, however, it was discontinued in 2011 during a severe budget crisis.
TIF has since re-emerged in California, albeit in limited form. As currently authorized, taxing entities (e.g., the City of Redondo Beach and/or Los Angeles County) must “opt in” and agree to contribute a portion of their share of the increment to a newly formed district. In addition, school districts as taxing entities cannot participate. This represents a significant reduction in financial capacity compared to pre-2011 TIF guidelines, because approximately 50 percent of property taxes in the State of California are allocated to schools.
TIF strategies rely on an anticipated, substantial increase in property values within a TIF district. A well-designed TIF mechanism should provide a source of funding for catalytic investments that will spur additional development and increase property values within the TIF district. The increased public revenues resulting from higher property values become a source of funds for paying debt service on the borrowing that funded the initial catalytic investments.
Given the limitations on development intensity along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors, it is unlikely that a TIF district there could generate a sufficient increase in property values to be viable as a funding mechanism. Under Proposition 13, property value increases above the standard 2 percent can only be triggered by a sale or new construction activity. In the absence of new construction activity, a potential TIF district would have to rely on incremental increases from property sales. The implementation of the Corridorrevitalization strategies described above may contribute to higher sale prices (and, thus, property valuations) than would otherwise be observed, but the value increases will likely be too modest and too incremental to support major investments in the near term.
ENHANCED INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING DISTRICTS
The Enhanced Infrastructure Financing District (EIFD) was the state’s first attempt at re-establishing a modified tax increment regime following the dissolution of redevelopment. Signed into law in 2015, its main purpose is to finance a wide array of infrastructure projects with “communitywide significance.” These can include transportation and other improvements associated with the AACAP.
An EIFD can be established by a city or county to finance infrastructure projects that provide community-wide benefits to a defined area. An EIFD does not need voter approval.
Participating jurisdictions appoint a public financing authority to govern the EIFD, which requires participation of the taxing entities—including cities, counties, and special districts—along with two public members. The PFA must prepare and adopt an infrastructure financing plan.
A vote is required only when an EIFD issues tax increment bonds supported by an allocation of the property tax increment, with a vote threshold of 55 percent.
However, allocating property tax increment to a project on an annual basis—a “pay as you go” method—would not trigger a vote. It would only require the approval of the participating agency.
TIF: LIMITING CONDITIONS
Due to the unique limitations of California’s Proposition 13, property tax revenue only increases appreciably when parcels are either sold or reassessed due to new improvements (e.g., market-rate development). This is indeed an important consideration given the relative lack of recent development along the Corridors, as tax increment financing to fund Corridor enhancements cases would accrue new increment at a much slower pace.
As such, the City should prioritize financing strategies that do not rely on new tax increment, unless the City is willing to allow for increased development opportunities (e.g., increasing FAR, increasing number of allowable stories, and expanding the menu of allowable uses).
Chapter 6. IMPLEMENTATION
110 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Introduction
Page intentionally left blank.
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 111 Implementation CH APTER 6. IMPLEMENTATION
6.1 IMPLEMENTATION
Implementation of the Area Plan will require a combination of public and private effort to achieve the changes envisioned to the public realm and infrastructure serving the area. This section is a consolidation of actions outlined in the AACAP. Where one action implements multiple strategies, it is noted in the following table (Table 6.1).
The phasing of new development and revitalization of existing buildings on private properties will occur incrementally, as landowners and developers respond to new market opportunities.
Actual implementation will be dependent on development activity, funding availability, and staff resources. The Implementation Table will be used by the City during annual budgeting and strategic planning to prioritize and monitor progress (and barriers to progress) so the vision for the Corridors can be implemented over time.
The following Implementation Table (Table 6.1) lists the specific actions, outlined in previous chapters, that should be taken by the City of Redondo Beach, in coordination with local businesses, future developers, and other agencies where appropriate. Programs and policies for some of these items are already in place and are recommended to be continued.
For each action, a potential funding source(s) has been identified, a recommended timeframe for completion is noted, the responsible party is listed, and the relative cost is provided. The timeframes are identified as follows:
Short (1-5 years)
Mid (5 to 10 years)
Long (10 years or more)
It is also assumed that staff resources (either from the City or from the established Business Improvement District (BID) would be required to implement all actions listed in the table.
Implementation
112 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
Placemaking Actions
PM.1 Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). General fund Short Term Waterfront and
Economic
Development /
NRBBA1
$
Establish Activity Nodes;
Revise Land Use Intensity
and Development Standards
PM.2 Offer Expedited Permitting and streamlined applications for preferred uses within Activity Nodes. General fund
Short Term
(establish
process)/
Ongoing
Planning $ Establish Activity Nodes
PM.3
Facilitate a program to offer low-cost loans to finance tenant improvements for qualifying preferred uses
within Activity Nodes (Managed by BID2).
Partner with: The Los Angeles
Local Initiatives Support
Corporation (LA LISC), Kiva,
National Development Council
Grow America Fund, or other
programs to establish loan
programs and/or City -funded
microenterprise loans to
support startups and small
businesses.
Midterm
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$ $$$
(depending on
program, size of
loans offered,
and funding
partners)
Establish Activity Nodes
PM.4 Adopt and implement design guidelines (contained in Section 3.4).
General fund; Permit
application fees
Short Term /
Ongoing Planning $
Establish Activity Nodes;
Pedestrian Access Through
Parking Areas; Sidewalks;
Storefronts; Driveway
Access Points
PM.5
Based on community input, identify and install priority pilot projects (such as streetlets, outdoor retail displays, A-frame signs, or closure of a parking lane) for
temporary or permanent installation within Activity
Nodes.
General fund; CIP3 fund; BID Short Term /
Midterm
Community
Services; Planning;
Public Works;
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$$ Establish Activity Nodes
PM.6
Increase allowable FAR within the Artesia Corridor as
part of the General Plan Update. Revise zoning
standards to be consistent with General Plan Update.
General Plan Update funding;
General fund Short Term Planning $ Revise Land Use Intensity and Development Standards
1 North Redondo Beach Business Association (NRBBA) 2 Business Improvement District (BID) 3 City Capital Improvement Project (CIP) City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 113 Implementation
Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
PM.7
Revise Municipal Code to allow pedestrian pass-through
routes in walls separating qualifying residential
properties (4 or more units) and adjacent commercial
development.
General fund Short Term /
Midterm Planning $ Pedestrian Access Through
Parking Areas
PM.8
Establish and implement an entitlement process
requiring commercial development projects in the
Artesia Corridor that are adjacent to a qualifying
multifamily property (4 or more units) submit evidence
of a reasonable effort to determine if a pedestrian
access route is feasible, safe, and desired by the
residential property via coordination with the owner,
HOA, or other representative party.
General fund Short Term /
Midterm Planning $ Pedestrian Access Through
Parking Areas
PM.9
Extend and implement existing Sidewalk Dining Permit
Program within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area.
General fund; Permit /
application fees
Short Term /
Ongoing Planning $ Sidewalks
PM.10 Establish and Pilot an Outdoor Retail Display Permit Program within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area. General fund Midterm Planning $ Sidewalks PM.11
Revise Municipal Code to exempt additional outdoor
dining in Activity Nodes (require no additional parking for the first 16 seats outdoors or 30% of the interior
seats, whichever is greater).
General fund Short Term Planning $ Sidewalks
PM.12
Continue Storefront Improvement Program with the
following considerations:
Prioritize and offer larger grants for preferred
uses within Activity Nodes, with emphasis on
project that include outdoor dining components.
Fund grants to screen parking and other frontage
areas consistent with design guidelines.
Require grant-funded improvements comply with
applicable design guidelines to the extent
feasible.
General fund; BID1 Ongoing
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$$-$$$ Sidewalks; Storefronts
PM.13
Develop a brand and marketing strategy based on
community input, including a cohesive theme for
signage, banners, streetscape elements and other
public art within the AACAP area.
John Parsons Public Art Fund2;
General fund; BID Short Term /
Midterm
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$-$$ Branding
1 Business Improvement District (BID) 2 Including $1 million in impact fees from the Galleria Development Project that is earmarked for public art improvements along Artesia Boulevard Implementation
114 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
PM.14
Develop a Signage Master Plan consistent with the
brand strategy including:
Locations and design concepts for gateways and
monumentation.
Locations and design concepts for all wayfinding
signage within the AACAP area.
Specific signage standards to unify business
signage for both the Artesia and Aviation
Corridors.
Locations where Billboards could be allowed in
the AACAP area and design standards.
John Parsons Public Art Fund1;
General fund; BID2
Short Term /
Midterm
Planning;
Community
Services / BID
$-$$ Gateways; Wayfinding;
Business Signage
PM.15 Revise Municipal Code to allow A-frame street signs within AACAP Activity Nodes with appropriate permit.
General fund; Permit
application fees
Short Term /
Ongoing Planning $ Business Signage
PM.16
Identify and provide incentives for existing businesses to comply with Signage Master Plan (such as extending
the Storefront Improvement Program, requiring
compliance to qualify for low-cost loans, or establishing a new program) with priority given to businesses in
Activity Nodes.
General fund; BID Midterm
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$$-$$$ Business Signage
PM.17
Coordinate with public and private property owners and
businesses to design and install gateways and
monumentation consistent with the Signage Master
Plan.
John Parsons Public Art Fund1;
Partnerships with City
departments; public agencies;
and nonprofits; Developer inlieu payment or installation of art on-site; CIP3 fund; BID
Midterm
Planning;
Community
Services / BID
$$-$$$ Gateways
PM.18
Coordinate with public and private property owners and
businesses to design and install wayfinding and signage consistent with the Signage Master Plan.
Midterm /
Long Term
Planning;
Community
Services / BID
$$-$$$ Wayfinding
PM.19 Establish and implement a Banner Program similar to the existing program in Riviera Village.
Midterm/
Ongoing
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$ Banners
1 Including $1 million in impact fees from the Galleria Development Project that is earmarked for public art improvements along Artesia Boulevard 2 Business Improvement District (BID) 3 City Capital Improvement Project (CIP) City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 115 Implementation
Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
PM.20
Continue Public Art Initiative consistent with brand
strategy, Public Art Master Plan, and Signage Master
Plan with the following considerations:
Coordinate with other departments to engage
artists from the outset of public improvement
projects.
Encourage private developers engage artists from
the outset of new private development projects.
John Parsons Public Art Fund1;
Partnerships with City
departments; Public agencies;
and nonprofits; Developer inlieu payment or installation of art on-site; CIP2 fund; BID3
Ongoing
Community
Services (public
projects); Planning
(private projects) /
BID
$-$$$ Wayfinding; Public Art
PM.21
Engage designers and/or artists to develop and install a unique “family of streetscape amenities”
(complimentary furnishings, bike racks, lighting,
wayfinding/signage, banners etc.) that are consistent
with the AACAP area brand strategy (see PM.13) and
contribute to a sense of place.
Short Term /
Midterm /
Ongoing
Community
Services / BID $$ Banners; Wayfinding; Public
Art
PM.22 Encourage developers to engage artists/designers from the outset of new private development projects. General fund Short Term / Ongoing
Planning; Public
Works; Waterfront
and Economic
Development / BID
$ Public Art
PM.23
Establish on-site public open space requirements for
commercial properties that meet specific criteria within the Corridors
General fund; BID Mideterm Planning $$ Open Space
PM.24
Identify the tools and process(es) that can be used to
dedicate / preserve private land for on-going public use (e.g. New York City’s adopt a plaza program).
Staff time Midterm Planning Staff time Open Space; Pedestrian Pass-throughs
PM.25
Update Municipal Code and General Plan to encourage
integration of new public open spaces within
commercial areas
General fund Short Term Planning $ Open Space; Pedestrian Pass-throughs
Mobility Actions
1 Including $1 million in impact fees from the Galleria Development Project that is earmarked for public art improvements along Artesia Boulevard 2 City Capital Improvement Project (CIP) 3 Business Improvement District (BID) Implementation
116 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
MO.1
Revise Municipal Code to reduce parking requirements
in Activity Nodes (and eventually throughout the Artesia Corridor). Including the following considerations
Use the findings of the parking study (Appendix
A) to determine and validate the appropriate
reduction as outlined in Section 4.5.1.
Consider allowing businesses to reduce the
amount of parking required if publicly accessible
bicycle parking is provided within a specified
distance of the project.
Consider requiring charging stations in parking
areas that exceed a specified number of spaces.
General fund Short Term Planning $
Revise Land Use Intensity
and Development
Standards; Reducing
Minimum Parking
Requirements
MO.2
Conduct a detailed parking study to identify
opportunities for and develop a strategy to develop
public and private shared off-street parking.
General fund Short Term/
Midterm Planning $ Shared Off-Street Parking
MO.3
Establish and implement an entitlement process
requiring private development projects study and utilize shared parking and/or shared drives when feasible.
General fund Short Term Planning $ Shared Off-Street Parking; Driveway Access Points
MO.4
Develop a long-range parking strategy, including a
detailed parking study and outreach to parcel owners,
to:
Identify opportunities to pursue a “Park Once”
strategy that identifies the appropriate public and
private infrastructure (public parking
garages/lots, private parking garage/lots serving
multiple projects).
Explore removing on-street parking spaces to
create a larger sidewalk and safer bicycle lane.
Establish implementation plan including phasing.
Develop a technology framework including:
Parking demand management strategies,
sensor/monitoring technologies, and
considerations for future technology (like
autonomous vehicles)
General fund; Grant funding;
PBD1; in-lieu development fees
Midterm/
Long Term
Planning; Public
Works $$-$$$
Establish Activity Nodes;
Revise Land Use Intensity
and Development
Standards; “Park Once”
Public Parking Garages /
Removing Off-Street Parking
1 Parking Benefit District (PBD)
City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 117 Implementation
Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
MO.5
Conduct a curb space-management study to identify
opportunities to establish TNC1 and autonomous
vehicle pick-up/drop-off zones. Establish TNC and
autonomous vehicle pick-up/drop off zones (prioritize
those in Activity Nodes).
General fund; CIP2 fund; Grant
funding; PBD3 Long Term Planning; Public
Works $ TNC Pick Up/Drop Off Zones
MO.6 Conduct a local access study to assess the impact of driveway closures. General fund; PBD; SRTS4 Midterm Planning; Public Works $ Driveway Access Points
MO.7
Based on the results of the local access study:
Update Municipal Code to establish minimum
distances between curb cuts.
Identify and provide incentives to encourage
identified property owners to consolidate
driveways (such as including drive consolidation
in the Storefront Improvement Program, or
establishing a new program).
General fund; BID5 Midterm/
Long Term
Planning;
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$ Driveway Access Points
MO.8 Update Municipal Code to establish a maximum width for curb cuts. General fund Midterm Planning $ Driveway Access Points MO.9
Conduct a crosswalk warrant study to identify areas
where mid-block crossings would improve pedestrian
access and safety.
General fund; Grant funding;
PBD6; SRTS7 Midterm Planning; Public
Works / BID8 $ Mid-block crosswalks
MO.10
Based on results of crosswalk warrant study, install midblock crossings (with priority given to those at high-risk locations and within Activity Nodes).
General fund; CIP9 fund; Grant
funding; PBD; SRTS Midterm Public Works
$-$$ (depending
on level of safety
infrastructure)
Mid-block crosswalks
1 A Transportation Network Company (TNC) is an App-based ride-hailing services like Uber and Lyft 2 City Capital Improvement Project (CIP) 3 Parking Benefit District (PBD) 4 Safe Routes to School Grant (SRTS) 5 Business Improvement District (BID) 6 Parking Benefit District (PBD) 7 Safe Routes to School Grant (SRTS) 8 Business Improvement District (BID) 9 City Capital Improvement Project (CIP) Implementation
118 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
MO.11
Identify locations (within Activity Nodes if possible) and Install overhead street lighting and/or enhanced
crosswalks at existing / new locationsto improve safety and nighttime visibility of pedestrians. Consider
installing artistic crosswalks consistent with the
branding strategy and public art theming in Activity
Nodes.
General fund; CIP fund; Grant
funding; PBD; SRTS Midterm
Waterfront and
Economic
Development;
Public Works / BID
$-$$ (depending
on level of safety
infrastructure)
Mid-block crosswalks;
Enhancing Existing
Crosswalks
MO.13
Based on community engagement, install a temporary
pilot streetlet at one of the two locations identified in the AACAP. If the results of the pilot are positive, pilot additional streetlets and install permanent fixtures.
General fund; CIP fund; Grant
funding; PBD; SRTS
Midterm/
Long Term
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$$ (without
curb/sidewalk
alterations)
$$$ (with
curb/sidewalk
alterations)
Streetlets
MO.14 Determine optimal locations for bike parking and install bike parking along the Corridors.
General fund; CIP fund; Grant
funding; PBD
Short Term/
Midterm Planning / BID1
$ (without curb
extensions)
$$ (with curb
extensions)
Bike Parking and Secondary
Mobility Devices
MO.15
Update the Municipal Code to require new
development and redevelopment projects provide a
certain amount of bicycle parking for each vehicle space required.
General fund Short Term Planning $ Bike Parking and Secondary Mobility Devices
MO.16
Designate, design and establish bike boulevards along
Mathews Avenue and Vanderbilt Lane including supersharrow lane markings, all-way stops at intersections, speed cushions, and bicycle wayfinding/signage.
General fund; CIP2 fund; Grant
funding; SRTS3 Short Term/
Midterm
Planning; Public
Works $$ Bike Boulevards
MO.17
Determine feasibility of and strategy to establish bike lanes along the Artesia and Aviation Corridors given
limitations outlined in Section 4.5.3.
General fund; Impact Fees
from Galleria Project; Grant
funding; PBD4
Midterm Planning; Public
Works $$ Class II Bike Lanes
1 Business Improvement District (BID) 2 City Capital Improvement Project (CIP) 3 Safe Routes to School Grant (SRTS) 4 Parking Benefit District (PBD) City of Redondo Beach | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | 119 Implementation
Table 6.1 Implementation Table
Implementation Action
Potential Funding
Sources Timeframe
Responsible
Department &
Other
Partnerships Relative Cost Related Strategies
MO.18
Design and pilot a curb extension conversion to
accommodate transit stops. Based on results of pilot,
install curb extensions in appropriate locations.
General fund; CIP fund; Impact
Fees from Galleria Project;
Grant funding; PBD; in-lieu
development fees; LA Metro
first/last mile grant funding
Long Term Public Works $$$ Curb Extension Conversion
to Transit Stops
MO.19 Develop and pilot a trolley service between AACAP Activity Nodes and the Galleria.
General fund; CIP fund; Grant
funding; PBD; in-lieu
development fees; LA Metro
first/last mile grant funding
Long Term
Waterfront and
Economic
Development;
Community
Services; Public
Works / BID1
$$$ Trolley Service
MO.20 Develop a strategy to address the quantity, placement, concentration and design of drive-thrusin the Corridors. Staff time Midterms Planning; Public Works $ Driveway Access Points
Funding Actions
FU.01
Establish a public-facing outreach effort as part of the establishment of each new grant, incentive, or other
City-let initiative revitalization to ensure that
businesses, property owners, and residents are aware
of new opportunitiesfor funding become available to
visually enhance existing projects and businesses.
Same source as City-led
initiative Midterm
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$$
Business Signage, Driveway
Access Points, Sidewalks;
Storefronts, Open Space
FU.02
Release an annual report documenting progress toward
and impediments to achieving the prioritized AACAP
action items. Include an evaluation of all City-funded
grant and incentive programs launched as part of the
AACAP implementation including an analysis of the
impact each City-funded initiative has had on the
community.
General fund, Staff time On-going
Planning;
Waterfront and
Economic
Development / BID
$-$$
Business Signage, Driveway
Access Points, Sidewalks;
Storefronts, Open Space
FU-03
Assessthe fiscal efficiency and sustainability of
implementing each proposed action. Staff time
Short Term/
Midterm/
Long Term
Same as action $ All Strategies
FU.04
Make a concerted effort to reach out to the community
to gain their input regarding the implementation of
various aspects of future efforts, strategies or planning actions along the Corridors.
General fund Short Term Planning $ All Actions
1 Business Improvement District (BID)
Implementation
120 | ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN | City of Redondo Beach This page intentionally left blank
APPENDICES
In this section:
Appendix A
Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study
Appendix B
Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard Appendix C
Recommendations from the City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018-2019) Appendix D
Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013)
Appendix E
Adoption Resolution
Page intentionally left blank.
Appendix A
Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study
Page intentionally left blank.
Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study 600 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1050, Los Angeles, CA 90017 (213) 261-3050 www.fehrandpeers.com
MEMORANDUM
Date: February 28, 2019
To: Sean Scully, Planning Manager, City of Redondo Beach Jin Kim, Traffic Engineer, City of Redondo Beach
From: Drew Heckathorn and Michael Kennedy, Principal, Fehr & Peers Subject: Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study – Existing Conditions Ref: 2905
This memorandum documents the existing parking supply and peak demand during both a weekday and weekend day within the Artesia-Aviation Area Plan boundary. The existing parking demand will be used to calibrate an existing conditions shared parking model, consistent with the Urban Land Institute (ULI) shared parking methodology. The shared parking model will then be adjusted with future land use changes in order to estimate future parking demand for land uses within the Area Plan boundary.
DATA COLLECTION PARAMETERS
The Artesia-Aviation Area Plan corridor stretches approximately 1.9 miles along Artesia and Aviation Boulevards and includes portions of adjacent side-streets (see Figures 1-4 for maps of the corridor). The study area encompasses all available on-street parking and 88 private off-street parking lots within the Area Plan boundary. The non-residential land uses within the Area Plan boundary include retail, service, office, automotive, restaurant, hotel and institutional uses.
Residential uses are assumed to generally be self-parked and thus are not further considered in this analysis.
A manual inventory of on- and off-street parking was conducted in mid-December 2018. The inventory included length of unmarked curb space, where on-street parking is permitted; number of marked on-street spaces; off-street spaces in private lots; and all time limits, special curb designations, and other restrictions on parking. This manual inventory captures the overall supply of parking within the study area.
Once parking supply was calculated, on- and off-street parking surveys were conducted to capture existing parking occupancy. These parking surveys were also completed in December (typically the peak season for retail). Parking occupancy data was collected once during each period (weekday and weekend) through manual parking counts for all on-street parking spaces and off-street lots. These counts were conducted from 12:30pm to 2:30pm for each period. This timeframe includes the collection period Fehr & Peers recommended (1pm to 2pm) in our Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study memorandum dated November 21, 2018. The collection Sean Scully, Planning Manager
Jin Kim, Traffic Engineer
City of Redondo Beach
February 28, 2019
time period was extended to two hours on each day in order to give workers in the field adequate time to do a full sweep of the study area.
ON-STREET PARKING SUPPLY & RESTRICTIONS
There are approximately 688 on-street parking spaces within the study area, as summarized in Table 1. This inventory of spaces may be conservative: most on-street spaces are also unmarked.
To conform with the City of Redondo Beach’s Municipal Code, the length of unmarked curb was measured and divided by 22 feet per space1 to estimate a count of available parking spaces.
On-street parking throughout the study area is characterized by a mixture of restrictions and time limits. A variety of restrictions are present, including the following:
• 15-minute, 20-minute, 30-minute, 90-minute, 2-hour, or 4-hour parking • Mail box drop-off zone only
The most common restriction found in the study area is 2-Hour parking (from 9am to 6pm). The 2-Hour parking spaces are located along the dense commercial segments of Artesia Boulevard and Aviation Boulevard. The 2-Hour restriction serves two primary functions: prioritize commercial access towards customers patronizing retail/services adjacent to the spaces and force parking turnover to create more parking availability in high demand areas.
Table 1. Parking Supply within Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Boundary On-Street Parking 688
Off-Street Parking 2,189
Total 2,877
OFF-STREET PARKING SUPPLY & RESTRICTIONS
Approximately 2,189 parking spaces are provided in 88 off-street parking lots in the study area.
These lots are privately-owned within primarily commercial developments and are intended for use by customers and employees of each site. Since each lot serves a few uses at the most, the vast majority of these lots are relatively small – 25 spaces is the average lot size within the Plan Area boundary. Typically, each commercial development only provides enough parking to fulfill its own parking requirements as defined in the City’s Municipal Code. The study area does not include larger public or shared parking lots intended for use by customers of multiple developments throughout the commercial corridors (the closest shared/public lots within Redondo Beach are located near King Harbor and Redondo Beach Pier about 2-3 miles away). 1 City of Redondo Beach Municipal Code, Chapter 10-5.1706, City of Redondo Beach, 2019 Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study Sean Scully, Planning Manager
Jin Kim, Traffic Engineer
City of Redondo Beach
February 28, 2019
EXISTING PARKING DEMAND
Existing parking demand is assessed by measuring parking occupancy during a specified time of day/season and using a shared parking model to capture peak demand across an entire year.
Parking occupancy relates to the level of parking utilization at a specific time as compared to supply. This analysis uses parking utilization counts within the study area conducted on one weekday and one weekend day in December 2018.
On-Street Parking Occupancy
Maps depicting on-street parking occupancy are shown for weekday and weekend data collection in Figures 1 and 2, respectively. On-street parking utilization is higher during the weekend peak lunch period – 68% or about 470 spaces utilized – than during the weekday peak lunch period – 54% or about 375 spaces utilized. Overall, on-street parking utilization is highest along the dense commercial corridor of Artesia Boulevard and along side streets immediately adjacent to the corridor. Some parking segments, such as the southside of Artesia Boulevard between Mackay Lane and Phelan Lane were fully occupied in both the weekday and weekend periods.
Off-Street Parking Occupancy
Maps depicting off-street parking occupancy are shown for weekday and weekend data collection in Figures 3 and 4, respectively. As shown in the maps, occupancy ranges from less than 40% up to 100% for both weekday and weekend time periods. The overall occupancy for the off-street lots is 50% for the weekday period and 47% for the weekend period. Unlike the on-street occupancy, the off-street occupancy is comparable across the two time periods.
Occupancy during both time periods for all off-street lots included in the study can be found in Appendix A.
CONCLUSIONS AND POTENTIAL NEXT STEPS
The overall parking supply within the Plan Area boundary is more than adequate to accommodate existing demand. Ideally, an efficiently parked area would be around 85% utilized, keeping a 15% vacant space buffer to prevent excessive waiting or vehicles circling around blocks looking for available spaces. The on-street occupancy is at most 68% and the off-street occupancy is at most 50% within the study area. By harnessing the efficiencies of shared parking lots (either public or privately-owned) the study area can accommodate existing demand and some future growth in land uses using the existing supply of parking.
Parking occupancy data captured in this analysis will be used to calibrate an existing conditions shared parking model. As part of this calibration effort, we compared the parking demand observed along the Artesia-Aviation corridor for each land use category with the demand ratios recommended by ULI. Generally, the peak parking demand for retail and services along the corridor were less than half of what would be expected based on ULI ratios while the restaurant uses were generally consistent with the ULI ratios. A variety of factors contribute to the difference Sean Scully, Planning Manager
Jin Kim, Traffic Engineer
City of Redondo Beach
February 28, 2019
between the observed demand on the corridor and the ULI ratios, including the possibility of vacant units in shared commercial buildings. Another aspect to consider, while our midday counts reliably capture the peak demand for most retail and service uses, other less common uses on the corridor – such as hotels – have peak demand at other times of day. We will assess land use considerations in detail as part of our shared parking model development. The model can then be adapted to assess a variety of future growth scenarios and whether existing parking supply can accommodate different amounts of growth.
Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study Flagler Ln
Green Ln
B ol ssom Ln
R ni dge Ln
Goodman Ave
Perk ni s Ln
Herrin St
Carnegie Ln
Felton Ave
Inglewood Ave
Palm Ln
Huntington Ln
Pruitt
Dr
Speyer Ln Meyer
Ln
S al uson Ln
Harper Ave
High Ln
Lil ei nthal Ln
Dixon St
Ripley Ave
Ormond Ln
Ormond Ln
Carnegie Ln
Reynolds Ln
Clark Ln
Belmont Ln
Steinhart Ave
Ford Ave
Stanford Ave
Firmona Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
Carnegie Ln
Artesia Blvd
Rockefeller Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
Mathews Ave
Carmelita Ave
Harkness Ln
Aviation Blvd
Ruxton Ave
Vail Ave
Aviation Wy
Felton Ln
Mackay Ln
Phe al n Ln
Harkness Ln
Aviation Wy
Speyer Ln
Goodman
Ave
11Th Pl
Stanford Ave
Hadley Ln
Clark Ln
Carver St
Wollacott St
183Rd St
182Nd Pl
182Nd St
185Th St
184Th St
11Th St
Reed St
Steinhart Ave
Harper Ave
Marshallfield Ln
Pullman Ln
Goodman Ave
Harriman Ln
Ives Ln
10Th St
Hill Ln
9Th St
Axenty Wy
Grant Ave
On Street Parking Occupancy - Thursday
Figure 1
Occupancy Percent
0% - 40%
41% - 60%
61% - 80%
81% - 90%
91% - 100% Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Boundary
Off-Street Parking Lots
Fehr & Peers, 2019
Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study Flagler Ln
Green Ln
B ol ssom Ln
R ni dge Ln
Goodman Ave
Perk ni s Ln
Herrin St
Carnegie Ln
Felton Ave
Inglewood Ave
Palm Ln
Huntington Ln
Pruitt
Dr
Speyer Ln Meyer
Ln
S al uson Ln
Harper Ave
High Ln
Lil ei nthal Ln
Dixon St
Ripley Ave
Ormond Ln
Ormond Ln
Carnegie Ln
Reynolds Ln
Clark Ln
Belmont Ln
Steinhart Ave
Ford Ave
Stanford Ave
Firmona Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
Carnegie Ln
Artesia Blvd
Rockefeller Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
Mathews Ave
Carmelita Ave
Harkness Ln
Aviation Blvd
Ruxton Ave
Vail Ave
Aviation Wy
Felton Ln
Mackay Ln
Phe al n Ln
Harkness Ln
Aviation Wy
Speyer Ln
Goodman
Ave
11Th Pl
Stanford Ave
Hadley Ln
Clark Ln
Carver St
Wollacott St
183Rd St
182Nd Pl
182Nd St
185Th St
184Th St
11Th St
Reed St
Steinhart Ave
Harper Ave
Marshallfield Ln
Pullman Ln
Goodman Ave
Harriman Ln
Ives Ln
10Th St
Hill Ln
9Th St
Axenty Wy
Grant Ave
On Street Parking Occupancy - Saturday
Figure 2
Occupancy Percent
0% - 40%
41% - 60%
61% - 80%
81% - 90%
91% - 100% Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Boundary
Off-Street Parking Lots
Fehr & Peers, 2019
Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study Flagler Ln
Green Ln
B ol ssom Ln
R ni dge Ln
Goodman Ave
Perk ni s Ln
Herrin St
Carnegie Ln
Felton Ave
Palm Ln
Inglewood Ave
Huntington Ln
Pruitt
Dr
Speyer Ln Meyer
Ln
S al uson Ln
Harper Ave
H gi h Ln
Lil ei nthal Ln
Dixon St
Ripley Ave
Ormond Ln
Ormond Ln
Carnegie Ln
Reynolds Ln
Clark Ln
Belmont Ln
Steinhart Ave
Ford Ave
Stanford Ave
Firmona Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
Carnegie Ln
Artesia Blvd
Rockefeller Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
Mathews Ave
Carmelita Ave
Harkness Ln
Aviation Blvd
Ruxton Ave
Vail Ave
Aviation Wy
Felton Ln
Mackay Ln
Phe al n Ln
Harkness Ln
Aviation Wy
Speyer Ln
Goodman
Ave
11Th Pl
Stanford Ave
Hadley Ln
Clark Ln
Carver St
Wollacott St
183Rd St
182Nd Pl
182Nd St
185Th St
184Th St
11Th St
Harper Ave
Reed St
Steinhart Ave
Marshallfield Ln
Pullman Ln
Goodman Ave
Harriman Ln
Ives Ln
10Th St
Hill Ln
9Th St
Axenty Wy
Grant Ave
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16 17
18 19
20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34 35
36 37
38 39
40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51
52 53 54
55 56 57
58 59 60 61
62 63 64 65
66 67
68 69 70 71 72 73
74 75 76
77 78 79 80 81
82 83 84 85 86 87
88 Off Street Parking Occupancy - Thursday
Figure 3
Occupancy Percent
0% - 40%
41% - 60%
61% - 80%
81% - 90%
91% - 100% Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Boundary
Fehr & Peers, 2019
Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study Flagler Ln
Green Ln
B ol ssom Ln
R ni dge Ln
Goodman Ave
Perk ni s Ln
Herrin St
Carnegie Ln
Felton Ave
Palm Ln
Inglewood Ave
Huntington Ln
Pruitt
Dr
Speyer Ln Meyer
Ln
S al uson Ln
Harper Ave
H gi h Ln
Lil ei nthal Ln
Dixon St
Ripley Ave
Ormond Ln
Ormond Ln
Carnegie Ln
Reynolds Ln
Clark Ln
Belmont Ln
Steinhart Ave
Ford Ave
Stanford Ave
Firmona Ave
Ruhland Ave
Nelson Ave
Carnegie Ln
Artesia Blvd
Rockefeller Ln
Vanderbilt Ln
Mathews Ave
Carmelita Ave
Harkness Ln
Aviation Blvd
Ruxton Ave
Vail Ave
Aviation Wy
Felton Ln
Mackay Ln
Phe al n Ln
Harkness Ln
Aviation Wy
Speyer Ln
Goodman
Ave
11Th Pl
Stanford Ave
Hadley Ln
Clark Ln
Carver St
Wollacott St
183Rd St
182Nd Pl
182Nd St
185Th St
184Th St
11Th St
Harper Ave
Reed St
Steinhart Ave
Marshallfield Ln
Pullman Ln
Goodman Ave
Harriman Ln
Ives Ln
10Th St
Hill Ln
9Th St
Axenty Wy
Grant Ave
1 2
3 4
5 6
7 8
9 10
11 12
13 14
15 16 17
18 19
20 21 22 23
24 25 26 27 28
29 30
31 32
33 34 35
36 37
38 39
40 41 42 43 44
45 46 47 48 49 50 51
52 53 54
55 56 57
58 59 60 61
62 63 64 65
66 67
68 69 70 71 72 73
74 75 76
77 78 79 80 81
82 83 84 85 86 87
88 Off Street Parking Occupancy - Saturday
Figure 4
Occupancy Percent
0% - 40%
41% - 60%
61% - 80%
81% - 90%
91% - 100% Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Boundary
Fehr & Peers, 2019
Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study Sean Scully, Planning Manager
Jin Kim, Traffic Engineer
City of Redondo Beach
February 28, 2019
Appendix A: Off-Street Lot Occupancy (Weekday and Weekend Peak Periods) Lot # Land Use Supply Weekday
Vehicles
Weekend
Vehicles
Weekday
Occupancy
Weekend
Occupancy
Restriction Notes
1 Retail, Restaurant,
Services 174 108 135 62% 78% 7 ADA, 6 10-Minute
2 Services 10 4 0 40% 0% 8 Reserved, 1 Guest, 1 ADA
3 Services 18 15 11 83% 61% 1 ADA
4 Retail 8 2 4 25% 50% 1 ADA
5 Automotive 0 0 0 0% 0% *Auto storage lot not included 6 Services 35 19 8 54% 23% 1 ADA
7 Services 0 0 0 0% 0% *No current building tenant
8 Services 16 3 2 19% 13% 1 Reserved, 1 ADA
9 Automotive 0 0 0 0% 0% *Auto storage lot not included 10 Restaurant, Retail 15 7 13 47% 87% 1 ADA
11 Restaurant, Services 16 8 10 50% 63% 15 1-Hour, 1 ADA 12 Retail 9 6 5 67% 56% 1 ADA
13 Retail 13 4 4 31% 31% 1 ADA
14 Retail 9 5 2 56% 22% 1 ADA
15 Services 55 13 15 24% 27% 2 ADA
16 Services 17 2 0 12% 0% 10 2-Hour, 1 ADA, 6 Tandem
17 Services 8 3 3 38% 38% 1 ADA
18 Services 20 13 6 65% 30% 2 ADA
19 Restaurant, Retail 76 51 52 67% 68% 68 2-Hour, 4 ADA, 4 15-Minute 20 Services, Restaurant,
Retail 129 59 82 46% 64% 121 2-Hour, 4 ADA, 2 Reserved, 2 15-Minute 21 Services 28 16 22 57% 79% 1 ADA
22 Retail 85 56 54 66% 64% 3 ADA, 23 Rental Car
23 Services 13 4 3 31% 23% 3 ADA
24 Restaurant 47 30 10 64% 21% 3 ADA
25 Hotel 15 1 5 7% 33% 1 ADA
26 Services 35 13 8 37% 23% 2 ADA
27 Restaurant 11 9 10 82% 91% 1 ADA
28 Services 11 8 3 73% 27% 1 ADA
29 Services, Restaurant 27 17 17 63% 63% 6 10-Minute, 2 ADA, 3 Parallel 30 Institution 34 20 9 59% 26% 2 ADA, 2 Police
31 Institution 37 22 14 59% 38% 2 ADA, 4 Staff
32 Services 16 4 11 25% 69% 1 ADA
33 Services 77 15 27 19% 35% 3 ADA
34 Services 8 5 0 63% 0% 1 ADA
35 Services, Restaurant 33 10 12 30% 36% 3 ADA
36 Retail 0 0 0 0% 0% *Former Haggen Grocery Store
37 Restaurant 11 2 3 18% 27% 1 ADA
38 Services, Restaurant 56 49 41 88% 73% 3 ADA, 4 10-Minute 39 Services 25 17 5 68% 20% 1 ADA
40 Services 13 6 3 46% 23% 2 ADA
41 Retail 17 1 2 6% 12% 2 ADA
42 Restaurant 27 23 22 85% 81% 2 ADA
43 Retail 35 33 24 94% 69% 3 ADA
Appendix A | Artesia-Aviation Area Plan Parking Study Sean Scully, Planning Manager
Jin Kim, Traffic Engineer
City of Redondo Beach
February 28, 2019
Lot # Land Use Supply Weekday
Vehicles
Weekend
Vehicles
Weekday
Occupancy
Weekend
Occupancy
Restriction Notes
44 Services, Retail 17 2 7 12% 41% 1 ADA
45 Restaurant 15 12 5 80% 33% 1 ADA
46 Services 23 15 10 65% 43% 2 ADA
47 Retail 19 1 2 5% 11% 1 ADA
48 Services, Restaurant,
Retail 71 53 35 75% 49% 69 2-Hour, 2 ADA
49 Restaurant 8 1 2 13% 25% 1 ADA
50 Services 33 8 4 24% 12% 2 ADA
51 Services, Restaurant,
Retail 64 13 33 20% 52% 4 ADA, 1 15-Minute, 2 10-Minute 52 Services 35 4 3 11% 9% 2 ADA
53 Services 18 7 4 39% 22% 4 Compact, 1 ADA
54 Services 15 8 0 53% 0%
55 Services 8 5 0 63% 0% 1 ADA
56 Services 19 10 8 53% 42% 4 Guest, 15 Reserved
57 Retail 19 12 14 63% 74% 2 Compact, 1 ADA
58 Restaurant 15 14 5 93% 33% 1 ADA
59 Retail 12 5 5 42% 42%
60 Retail 32 17 18 53% 56% 2 ADA
61 Restaurant 6 1 4 17% 67% 1 ADA
62 Services, Restaurant,
Retail 25 11 16 44% 64% 1 ADA
63 Retail 13 3 2 23% 15% 1 ADA
64 Restaurant 7 0 1 0% 14% 1 ADA, *Closed until 4 PM
65 Services, Retail 15 10 9 67% 60% 2 Staff
66 Services, Restaurant 41 41 37 100% 90% 2 ADA
67 Restaurant 14 4 12 29% 86% 1 ADA
68 Services 29 0 7 0% 24% 2 ADA
69 Services 15 7 2 47% 13% 2 Compact, 1 ADA
70 Services 9 2 2 22% 22%
71 Restaurant 29 22 9 76% 31% 1 ADA
72 Services 20 6 0 30% 0% 2 ADA
73 Services 10 2 0 20% 0%
74 Services 13 8 7 62% 54% 1 ADA
75 Restaurant 5 1 1 20% 20% 1 ADA
76 Services 2 1 1 50% 50% 1 ADA
77 Services 14 3 3 21% 21%
78 Services, Retail 19 19 10 100% 53% 1 ADA
79 Services, Retail 16 1 0 6% 0% 1 ADA
80 Restaurant 18 17 10 94% 56% 1 ADA
81 Retail 7 3 2 43% 29% 1 ADA
82 Services 11 7 8 64% 73% 1 ADA
83 Retail 5 3 2 60% 40% 1 ADA
84 Services, Retail 13 7 7 54% 54% 1 ADA
85 Services 19 16 15 84% 79% 1 ADA
86 Hotel 40 8 8 20% 20% 2 ADA
87 Services, Retail 39 19 37 49% 95% 3 ADA, 1 Compact
88 Services, Retail 23 10 7 43% 30% 1 ADA
Total 2,189 1,102 1,031 50% 47%
Bold indicates occupancy greater than or equal to 80%.
Appendix B
Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard Page intentionally left blank.
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard bae urban economics San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC New York City 2600 10th St., Suite 300 803 2nd St., Suite A 448 South Hill St., Suite 701 700 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, 2nd Floor 215 Park Ave. S, 6th Floor Berkeley, CA 94710 Davis, CA 95616 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Washington, DC 20003 New York, NY 10003 510.547.9380 530.750.2195 213.471.2666 202.588.8945 212.683.4486 www.bae1.com
Memorandum – DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION
To: Wendy Nowak, Principal, PlaceWorks
Suzanne Schwab, Senior Associate, PlaceWorks
From: BAE Urban Economics
Date: March 5, 2019
Re: Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard Development Concepts
Executive Summary
This memorandum summarizes the financial feasibility of four development “concepts” on a hypothetical 1.79-acre block along Artesia Boulevard in the City of Redondo Beach. In addition to testing the financial feasibility of the four development concepts, this Memo also explores potential reasons for why the stretch of Artesia Boulevard between Inglewood Avenue and Aviation Boulevard (the Corridor) has not seen the type of new development and revitalization desired by the local community. Potential explanations to this end are described as follows:
Low vacancy rates point to already successful businesses The retail vacancy rate along the Corridor is currently 3.8 percent (CoStar, 2019). This would seem to indicate that businesses along the Corridor are functioning, even if the retail mix itself is not desired by the local community.
High underlying land value
If businesses along the Corridor are already generating sufficient cash flow, there may be little incentive for current landowners to risk an otherwise stable revenue stream. This overall lack of turnover is reflected in land sales data, with very few transactions for which a reliable comparable can be derived. The resulting land value, meanwhile ($6.9 million/acre), is sufficiently high to prohibit lower-scale types of construction as limited by current zoning development standards.
Lack of Recent Development and Low Comparables
The average retail building along the Corridor was constructed in 1963 (CoStar, 2019). Older, Class B and C buildings generally command lower rents, and retail rents along the Corridor are bae urban economics
San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC New York City 2600 10th St., Suite 300 803 2nd St., Suite A 448 South Hill St., Suite 701 700 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, 2nd Floor 215 Park Ave. S, 6th Floor Berkeley, CA 94710 Davis, CA 95616 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Washington, DC 20003 New York, NY 10003 510.547.9380 530.750.2195 213.471.2666 202.588.8945 212.683.4486 www.bae1.com
Memorandum – DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION
To: Wendy Nowak, Principal, PlaceWorks
Suzanne Schwab, Senior Associate, PlaceWorks
From: BAE Urban Economics
Date: March 5, 2019
Re: Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard Development Concepts
Executive Summary
This memorandum summarizes the financial feasibility of four development “concepts” on a hypothetical 1.79-acre block along Artesia Boulevard in the City of Redondo Beach. In addition to testing the financial feasibility of the four development concepts, this Memo also explores potential reasons for why the stretch of Artesia Boulevard between Inglewood Avenue and Aviation Boulevard (the Corridor) has not seen the type of new development and revitalization desired by the local community. Potential explanations to this end are described as follows:
Low vacancy rates point to already successful businesses The retail vacancy rate along the Corridor is currently 3.8 percent (CoStar, 2019). This would seem to indicate that businesses along the Corridor are functioning, even if the retail mix itself is not desired by the local community.
High underlying land value
If businesses along the Corridor are already generating sufficient cash flow, there may be little incentive for current landowners to risk an otherwise stable revenue stream. This overall lack of turnover is reflected in land sales data, with very few transactions for which a reliable comparable can be derived. The resulting land value, meanwhile ($6.9 million/acre), is sufficiently high to prohibit lower-scale types of construction as limited by current zoning development standards.
Lack of Recent Development and Low Comparables
The average retail building along the Corridor was constructed in 1963 (CoStar, 2019). Older, Class B and C buildings generally command lower rents, and retail rents along the Corridor are bae urban economics
San Francisco Sacramento Los Angeles Washington DC New York City 2600 10th St., Suite 300 803 2nd St., Suite A 448 South Hill St., Suite 701 700 Pennsylvania Ave. SE, 2nd Floor 215 Park Ave. S, 6th Floor Berkeley, CA 94710 Davis, CA 95616 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Washington, DC 20003 New York, NY 10003 510.547.9380 530.750.2195 213.471.2666 202.588.8945 212.683.4486 www.bae1.com
Memorandum – DRAFT FOR DISCUSSION
To: Wendy Nowak, Principal, PlaceWorks
Suzanne Schwab, Senior Associate, PlaceWorks
From: BAE Urban Economics
Date: March 5, 2019
Re: Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard Development Concepts
Executive Summary
This memorandum summarizes the financial feasibility of four development “concepts” on a hypothetical 1.79-acre block along Artesia Boulevard in the City of Redondo Beach. In addition to testing the financial feasibility of the four development concepts, this Memo also explores potential reasons for why the stretch of Artesia Boulevard between Inglewood Avenue and Aviation Boulevard (the Corridor) has not seen the type of new development and revitalization desired by the local community. Potential explanations to this end are described as follows:
Low vacancy rates point to already successful businesses The retail vacancy rate along the Corridor is currently 3.8 percent (CoStar, 2019). This would seem to indicate that businesses along the Corridor are functioning, even if the retail mix itself is not desired by the local community.
High underlying land value
If businesses along the Corridor are already generating sufficient cash flow, there may be little incentive for current landowners to risk an otherwise stable revenue stream. This overall lack of turnover is reflected in land sales data, with very few transactions for which a reliable comparable can be derived. The resulting land value, meanwhile ($6.9 million/acre), is sufficiently high to prohibit lower-scale types of construction as limited by current zoning development standards.
Lack of Recent Development and Low Comparables
The average retail building along the Corridor was constructed in 1963 (CoStar, 2019). Older, Class B and C buildings generally command lower rents, and retail rents along the Corridor are 2 significantly lower than they are in other areas of Redondo Beach ($2.65/sf versus $3.16/sf, NNN)1. This is also the case for the Corridor’s office supply, which commands lower rents than the City of Redondo Beach’s overall average rent ($2.22/sf versus $2.79/sf, Gross Direct).
Developers in general are reluctant to invest in areas without a “proof of concept”, and the Corridor has not seen any significant market-rate development in this real estate cycle (e.g., post Great Recession).
Considerations for Improving Feasibility
If the City’s goal is to encourage redevelopment of the corridor and/or transition to different uses, it is useful to understand what changes could be made to help incentivize property owners to make a new investment in their properties. Following is a list of approaches for the City to consider to encourage new development on the corridor.
Allow for Flexible Parking Standards for Desired Uses
Flexibility with local parking standards can have a tremendous impact on a project’s financial feasibility. As the community desires the area to be more walkable, there may be an opportunity to reduce the number of parking spaces required for a project (which also may encourage people to walk vs. drive to a business along the corridor). As demonstrated later in this report, land use mixes and concepts that allow for lowered parking ratios and the ability to park vehicles offsite (such as on-street), substantially improve financial feasibility, pushing some otherwise infeasible projects to “marginally” feasible.
Allow a Range of Uses to Harness Market Demand
A broad range of allowable uses on the Corridor would allow the local market more flexibility to adapt and adjust to local need. For reference, the current commercial mix along Artesia is currently skewed towards retail, with approximately 363,137 square feet tracked by CoStar in 2019. Office inventory is estimated to be 87,163 square feet, making up just under 20 percent of commercial space along the corridor. In addition, the allowance of residential uses will help support existing and new retail uses, and adds to pedestrian activity along the corridor.
Allow for an increase in Floor Area Ratio (FAR) for desired uses Brokers with active listings along the Corridor have indicated that for some prioritized uses (e.g., a new restaurant, creative office), it may be necessary to allow for FARs over the current maximum of 0.5. Based on feedback from the GPAC and City staff, further feasibility testing can be performed to test the extent to which a variance in FAR, height, parking, or other incentives might tip the scales to achieve financial feasibility. This could also be paired in
1 NNN stands for “net, net, net” or “triple net.” It indicates that tenants pay for common area maintenance, taxes, and other operating expenses in addition to their lease rates. Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 3 exchange for public benefits such as enhanced streetscape improvements or other desired amenities as expressed by the GPAC and the community.
Introduction
BAE used pro formas models to test the feasibility of a variety of land uses along the corridor.
Project concepts considered were developed based on the land use alternatives considered by GPAC and presented at Community Workshop #1 and the results of the community-wide “Focus Areas” Land Use Alternatives Survey. This tool is not a predictive model for the future, rather it should be viewed as a planning-level tool intended to allow decision-makers and the community to study and compare development scenarios based on today’s conditions and understand the implications of land use decisions under consideration. As part of this process, BAE studied four development concepts created by PlaceWorks and the City that were designed for a prototypical block along Artesia Boulevard.
Since the current mix of uses present in the corridor (predominantly retail) are viable uses with low vacancy rates, the four concepts selected to be analyzed were representative of uses or mixes of uses not prevalent along the corridor. This analysis was prepared to assess the development feasibility of a variety uses should the General Plan Advisory Committee recommend a change to the existing uses allowed in the General Plan. A detailed site plan for each of the four concepts, including total square footage for each use type, required parking ratios, number of stories, and other relevant factors were developed. The four concepts are as follows:
Concept 1: Two-story townhomes with 24 residences
Concept 2: Three-story townhomes with 45 residences
Concept 3A: “Mixed-Use” with ground-floor retail and 22 multifamily units above Concept 3B: “Commercial-Flex” with ground-floor retail and two stories of office Concept 1 is a conditionally permitted development program using standards similar to MU-1 zoning, with resident parking for each unit located in a private garage and guest parking located onsite. The intensity of residential development for Concept 1 is consistent with nearby residential neighborhoods north and south of Artesia Boulevard.
Concept 2, meanwhile, would require amended parking standards, with private tandem garages for residents and on-street parking for guests. The development intensity represented by Concept 2 is consistent with the City’s highest residential densities allowed per the RH-3 zone. Concept 2 would also be conditionally permitted using standards similar to MU-1 zoning.
Concept 3A consists of 17,000 gross square feet of ground-floor retail space, with 22 multifamily units on two upper floors. This concept would require amended FAR and parking standards. FAR per the MU-1 requires minimum of 0.3 for commercial, and this concept 4 presents an FAR of 0.22 for commercial. The parking for this concept is a mix of surface and on-street parking. If current MU-1 standards were applied using Concept 3A the site could accommodate up to 62 residences.
Concept 3B maintains the same amount of ground-floor retail space as Concept 3A, but with 14,000 square feet of office space on the upper floors. Current commercial zoning regulations applicable to the corridor limit height for all commercial developments to thirty feet and two stories. Both the commercial and the mixed-use concepts require the use of on-street parking to meet current zoning requirements.
The financial feasibility analysis uses a static development pro forma model that shows the extent to which each of the development scenarios may or may not be feasible. These models are constructed in a manner that calculates the residual land value for the site after accounting for direct costs (hard and soft), financing, and developer return.
Key Findings
A summary of the findings of the pro forma development feasibility analysis is presented in Table 1.
Table 1: Summary of Feasibility Findings
Development Concept 1 Concept 2 Concept 3A Concept 3B
2-story townhome 3-story townhome Retail+Residential Retail+Office Residential - (# units) 24 45 22 0
Residential - (sf, gross) 47,184 87,642 21,750 0
Ground fl retail (sf, gross) 0 0 17,000 17,000
Office (sf. gross) 0 0 0 14,000
Parking Spaces
Private Garage (# spaces) 48 90 0 0
Surface (# spaces) 20 0 59 85
On-Street (# spaces) 0 26 26 29
Net Operating Income N/A N/A $1,199,136 $882,453
Project Value $20,889,563 $40,477,512 $23,982,714 $15,347,016 Development Cost -$17,699,381 -$31,302,670 -$16,631,471 -$12,311,492 Residual Land Value (RLV) $3,190,182 $9,174,842 $7,351,243 $3,035,524 RLV per Acre $1,782,224 $5,125,610 $4,106,840 $1,695,824 Feasible? No Marginal Marginal No
Source: BAE, 2019.
Sources: CoStar; 2019; BAE, 2019.
Townhomes Commercial
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 5 Of the four development concepts analyzed, Concept 2 (three-story townhomes) yields the highest residual land value, with $5.1 million/acre.
Concept 3A (Mixed-Use, Retail + Residential), meanwhile, yields the second highest residual land value, with $4.1 million/acre.
Key findings from the financial analysis are as follows:
Concept 1 – Two-Story Townhomes:
Concept 1 is not feasible under current market conditions, with a residual land value of $1.8 million/acre. This lack of financial feasibility is due to a number of factors, including the relative lack of scale given the size of the parcel (13.4 du/acre), smaller-than-average threebedroom units, and lower sales estimates on a price-per-square foot basis.
Concept 2 – Three-Story Townhomes:
Concept 2, meanwhile, yields a significantly higher residual land value than Concept 1 ($5.1 million/acre versus $1.8 million/acre). It benefits from a greater scale, higher sales estimates on a price-per square foot basis, and flexibility with alternative parking standards. The resulting residual land value, however, may not be sufficient to convince a developer to move forward, at least in the near term.
Concept 3A – Mixed-Use, Retail + Residential:
Concept 3A (Retail + Residential) yields a higher residual land value than the Concept 3B (Retail + Office). This can be attributed in part to more leasable square footage overall (34,875 versus 27,900), high demonstrated demand for new multifamily residential, lower capitalization rates, and some flexibility with parking standards. A residual land value of $4.1 million/acre, however, would not likely be sufficient to convince a developer to move forward in the near term.
Concept 3B– Commercial Mix, Retail + Office:
Concept 3B (Retail + Office) is not feasible under current market conditions, with a residual land value of $1.7 million/acre. This is due to a number of factors, including higher capitalization rates for office versus residential, less overall square footage, and potentially significant costs associated with commercial tenant improvements.
Methodology
To assess the financial feasibility of the proposed development concepts, BAE undertook a market-based financial analysis which included the following analytic steps:
6 1. Development Program: BAE reviewed a detailed site plan for each of the four concepts, including total square footage for each use type, required parking ratios, number of stories, and other factors.
2. Cost Assumptions: For each development, BAE estimated hard and soft construction costs, including on- and off-site costs, financing costs, and required developer profit.
3. Revenue and Project Value Assumptions: For each concept, BAE estimated sales and rental revenues based on current market conditions. For income-generating properties, BAE calculated the value of the completed project components based on capitalizing net operating income (revenues less operating expenses), using market capitalization rates applicable to the land use product category.
More detailed assumptions about the development parameters, project costs, and revenues are appended to this memorandum as Appendix A-1 through Appendix A-3.
Next, BAE used a series of static pro formas to conduct this feasibility analysis. A static pro forma uses the assumptions described above to calculate the residual value of the site without accounting for the time value of money (i.e. inflation and discount rates). Instead, a static pro forma relies on capitalization rates determined in the market to account for the total value of the development if purchased outright at the time of analysis. This is the same method developers use to screen potential projects for feasibility.
Development Programs
The pro forma analysis tested the feasibility of four development concepts as summarized below.
Concept 1 – Two-Story Townhomes:
Concept 1 is configured as a low-rise, two-story townhome-style development with 24 three and three-bedroom-plus-loft units. Gross building area for the project totals 47,184 square feet, which includes a private garage for each residence. Average unit sizes total 1,566 square feet. Residential density is 13.4 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum building height of 30 feet.
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 7 Figure 1: Concept 1 Site Plan
Concept 2 – Three-Story Townhomes:
Concept 2 is a three-story, townhome-style development with 45 two and two-bedroom-plusloft units. Gross building area for this project totals 87,642 square feet, including the private garage for each residence. Average unit sizes are 1,548 square feet, which is fairly large for two-bedroom townhomes in this submarket. Residential density is 25 dwelling units per acre, with a maximum building height of 35 feet.
Figure 2: Concept 2 Site Plan
8 Concept 3A – Mixed-Use, Retail + Residential:
Concept 3A includes 22 multifamily dwelling units set atop approximately 17,000 square feet of ground-floor retail. The residential portion of the project would comprise 18 one-bedroom units and four two-bedroom units, with an average unit size of approximately 890 square feet, net circulation. For the retail portion of the project, parking would be provided at a ratio of one space per 250 square feet. The residential portion of the project, meanwhile, would feature one parking space per one-bedroom unit, and 1.5 parking spaces per two-bedroom unit.
Total FAR is approximately 0.50, with a maximum building height of 40 feet.
Figure 3: Concept 3A Site Plan
Concept 3B – Commercial Mix, Retail + Office:
Concept 3B includes 14,000 square feet of office space set atop 17,000 square feet of ground-floor retail. Parking would be provided at a ratio of one space per 250 square feet of retail and one space per 300 square feet of office space, equating to 85 surface spaces and 29 on-street spaces.
Total FAR for this concept is approximately 0.40, with a maximum building height of 30 feet.
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 9 Figure 4: Concept 3B Site Plan
Financial Feasibility Findings
The following section discusses the findings of the financial feasibility pro forma analysis for each development concept. The full pro formas can be found in Appendix B.
BAE utilized CoStar and ListSource, two comprehensive commercial real estate and property data platforms, to identify recently sold vacant land within the 90278 zip code that encompasses North Redondo Beach, including the Aviation and Artesia Boulevard corridors.
These sources identified three confirmed vacant land sales comparables within the zip code since 2012 with a median value of approximately $6.9 million per acre—the starting point at which feasibility is measured.
Concept 1 – Two-Story Townhomes:
The baseline pro forma analysis reveals that Concept 1 is not likely feasible under current market conditions. After subtracting total development costs of $17.7 million from the estimated townhome sales, the resulting residual land value is approximately $1.8 million per acre (Table 2).
10 Table 2: Summary of Feasibility Findings – Concept 1 Concept 1’s lack of feasibility is influenced by several factors, including a less intensive development program overall. In addition, Concept 1’s three-bedroom units (averaging 1,566 square feet) would be considered small in the context of similar projects in Redondo Beach, which otherwise range from 1,750 to over 2,000 square feet. This reduces the estimated sales price per square foot slightly when compared to Concept 2.
Concept 2 – Three-Story Townhomes:
Concept 2, meanwhile, yields a significantly higher residual land value than Concept 1 ($5.1 million/acre versus $1.8 million/acre). Concept 2 benefits from greater scale, higher sales estimates on a price-per square foot basis, and flexibility with alternative parking standards.
Table 3: Summary of Feasibility Findings – Concept 2
Concept 2’s floorplans comprise two and two-bedroom-plus-loft units ranging from 1,265 to 1,969 square feet. Higher estimated sales price per square foot are due in part to the demonstrated success of two-bedroom sales in developments such as the new One South project, where two-bedrooms have sold for at least $700 per square foot.
The total value of the project is $40.5 million. After subtracting the total development costs of $31.3 million, the resulting residual land value is approximately $5.1 million per acre. While this does not quite reach the $6.9 million threshold determined in the land value analysis, it comes the closest of all four scenarios analyzed.
Projected Revennue
Sales ppsf $573.00
Gross Sales $21,535,632
Less Marketing Costs ($646,069)
Total Project Value $20,889,563
Less Total Dev Costs ($17,699,381)
Residual Land Value $3,190,182
RLV/acre $1,782,224
Projected Revenue
Sales ppsf (Plans 1&2) $626.35
Sales ppsf (Plan 3) $573.00
Gross Sales $41,729,394
Less Marketing Costs ($1,251,882)
Total Project Value $40,477,512
Less Total Dev Costs ($31,302,670)
Residual Land Value $9,174,842
RLV/acre $5,125,610
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 11 Concept 3A – Mixed-Use, Retail + Residential:
High demonstrated demand for new multifamily residential, lower capitalization rates, and some flexibility with parking standards allow Concept 3A to yield a higher residual land value than the alternative concept with office.
After subtracting the total development costs of $16.6 million from the estimated project value, the resulting residual value for Concept 3A is approximately $4.1 million per acre (Table 4).
Table 4: Summary of Feasibility Findings – Concept 3A
Concept 3B – Commercial Mix, Retail + Office:
The baseline pro forma analysis reveals that Concept 3B is not likely feasible under current market conditions. After subtracting total development costs of $12.3 million from the project value at stabilization, the resulting residual land value is approximately $1.7 million per acre (Table 5).
Projected Revenue
Gross Rents - Residential $795,193
Less Vacancy ($39,760)
Less Operating Expenses ($154,000)
Net Operating Income $601,434
(NOI)
Commercial
Gross Rents-Retail $667,202
Less Vacancy ($66,720)
Less Operating Expenses (NOI) ($2,780)
NOI $597,702
Total NOI $1,199,136
Blended Cap Rate 5.00%
Total Project Value $23,982,714
Less Total Dev Costs ($16,631,471)
Residual Land Value $7,351,243
RLV/acre $4,106,840
12 Table 5: Summary of Feasibility Findings – Concept 3B
Despite low office vacancy rates and little new supply in the last decade, gross direct rents for office space in Redondo Beach submarket have flatlined since 2017. Vacancy rates, meanwhile, have also crept up, enabling residential rents in many cases to surpass office rents on a per-square-foot basis.
Further Considerations for Improving Feasibility
The Artesia Boulevard corridor has not seen any significant market-rate development in this real estate cycle (e.g., post Great Recession). The following recommendations are meant to augment those discussed in the Executive Summary, could potentially increase residual land values to the point of bringing “marginally feasible” development concepts to fully feasible.
Impact Fee Reduction Targeted to Corridor Revitalization Impact Fees can provide an important source of revenue to ensure that adequate infrastructure accommodates new development. Concepts that feature new residential units, however, currently face impact fees in excess of $37,000 per unit. While these fees alone do not render any individual project infeasible, areas targeted for revitalization such as the Artesia corridor could potentially benefit from an impact fee reduction.
Developer Outreach for Implementation Phase
Developers in general are reluctant to invest in areas without a “proof of concept”. The Artesia corridor’s lack of recent development activity, for example, precluded BAE from effectively identifying "teardown" sales to derive land values, while the lack of recent market comparables introduces yet another layer of uncertainty.
Projected Revenue
Gross Rents - Retail $667,202
Less Vacancy ($66,720)
Less Operating Expenses ($33,360)
Net Operating Income $567,122
(NOI)
Gross Rents - Office $485,125
Less Vacancy ($48,513)
Less Operating Expenses ($121,281)
NOI $315,331
Total NOI $882,453
Blended Cap Rate 5.75%
Total Project Value $15,347,016
Less Total Dev Costs ($12,311,492)
Residual Land Value $3,035,524
RLV/acre $1,695,824
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 13 To the extent that clear, objective development standards for Artesia Boulevard can be effectively marshalled through the planning process, developers may be more open to opportunities for revitalizing the corridor.
14 Appendix A-1: Assumptions that Apply to All Uses
The following key assumptions were used for all development types and do not change significantly by use.
1. Parking Costs: The analysis assumes that none of the concepts would require structured or podium parking, which in normal circumstances would cost upwards of $35,000 per stall. Surface parking, meanwhile is estimated to be $5,000 per space, while costs for private garages for the townhome concepts are included in the hard cost estimates.
2. Site Prep Costs: The analysis assumes that site preparation costs are $10 per site square foot. This includes demolition of existing structures, on/offsite costs (grading, curb cuts), and streetscape amenities. For concepts that require a portion of the parking to be located “on-street”, site preparation costs of $15 per site square foot are assumed instead.
3. Land Costs: Land costs are not included in the pro formas themselves. The pro formas return a residual land value that represents the amount that a developer would be willing to pay for land and still undertake the project.
4. Developer Profit: The developer profit is the amount that the developer earns after covering overhead and other internal costs. This analysis assumes that the developer profit must meet a minimum threshold of ten percent of total construction costs.
5. Loan-to-Cost Ratio: The construction loan-to-cost ratio is assumed to be 70 percent.
This is consistent with standard lending practices for projects of this scale backed by a qualified developer.
6. Financing Costs: The analysis assumes that developers will be charged 1.5 percent in loan fees and a 6.5 percent annual interest rate. Changes in the interest rate could change development feasibility.
7. Capitalization Rates: Capitalization rates for the commercial concepts vary by use and are listed separately. For concepts with more than one use (for example, multifamily residential atop ground-floor retail), the capitalization rate for the primary use is weighted more heavily.
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 15 Appendix A-2: Assumptions for Commercial Uses
The following assumptions specifically apply to ground-floor retail as well as office uses.
1. Parking Ratios: The analysis assumes a parking ratio of one space per 250 gross square feet of retail space, and one space per 300 gross square feet of office space.
2. Development Costs: This analysis assumes that construction hard costs for the retail plus office mix are approximately $191 per gross square foot. This is based on data from RS Means 2018 for a 2-4 story office building with a Los Angeles location factor.
3. Tenant Improvement Allowance: This analysis assumes a tenant improvement allowance of $25 per leasable square foot of office space and $50 per leasable square foot of retail.
4. Rents: Based on Q4 2018 data from CoStar, monthly office rents are assumed to be $3.21 per square foot, gross. Due to the lack of recent office comparables within the City of Redondo Beach, a fifteen percent premium has been assumed for new construction. Retail rents, meanwhile, are projected to be $3.63 per square foot, triplenet.
5. Operating Costs: Because office rents are expressed as full service, the developer would be expected to pay for common area maintenance, property taxes, and other costs from the gross rent. Thus, operating costs are calculated as 25 percent of total rental revenue. Retail spaces would be leased on a triple net basis, with tenants paying for operating expenses separately.
6. Vacancy Rate: A vacancy rate of ten percent is assumed for both office and retail space. Although vacancy rates are currently lower for both, the long-term equilibrium vacancy rate for commercial space is 10 percent. In order to provide a conservative estimate of revenues at stabilization, this analysis uses a 10 percent vacancy rate.
7. Capitalization Rate: This analysis uses a capitalization rate of 5.75 percent for the “commercial mix” office project. Cap rates were estimated based on investor reports, data provided by developers, and a review of CoStar data.
16 Appendix A-3: Assumptions for Residential (Townhome) The following assumptions specifically apply to townhome residential uses.
1. Parking Ratio: The analysis assumes a parking ratio of two vehicle spaces per townhome unit, with guest parking provided at a rate of 0.33 spaces per unit.
2. Development Costs: This analysis assumes that multifamily residential construction hard costs for both townhome scenarios are approximately $211/sf. This is sourced from RS Means 2018, and models a luxury three-story townhouse w/ brick veneer and Los Angeles location factor.
3. Sales Prices: Sales prices are based on 12-month price history for both two and threebedroom townhomes from Redfin. Adjustments have been made to account for a new construction premium.
Assumptions for Residential (Multifamily)
The following assumptions specifically apply to the multifamily residential uses.
1. Parking Ratio: The analysis assumes a parking ratio of one vehicle space per onebedroom unit, and 1.5 vehicles spaces per two-bedroom unit. Guest parking would be provided at a rate of 0.2 spaces per unit.
2. Development Costs: This analysis assumes that construction hard costs are approximately $228 per gross square foot. This is based on data from RS Means 2018, for a residential project of up to four stories, along with a Los Angeles location factor.
3. Market-Rate Rental Unit Prices: Rents are based on Q4 2018 data from CoStar, and shown on a price-per-square-foot basis for each unit type (one and two bedroom). Due to the lack of recent multifamily comparables within the City of Redondo Beach, a twenty percent premium has been assumed.
4. Operating Costs: Multifamily building operating costs are assumed to be $7,000 per unit per year.
5. Vacancy Rate: The overall vacancy rate for market-rate units is assumed to be five percent, which reflects the long-term vacancy rate of multifamily developments.
6. Capitalization Rate: Cap rates were based on investor reports, data provided by developers, and a review of CoStar data. While a cap rate as low as 4.75 percent might be assumed for a project with primarily residential uses, the introduction of a sizable mix of retail space in this scenario (17,000 gross square feet) requires a “blended” cap rate of five percent.
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard Appendix B: Full Pro Forma Analysis
Table 6: Pro Forma for Concept 1
Development Program Assumptions - Concept 1 Cost and Income Assumptions Development Cost Assumptions Feasibility Analysis Site Size - acres / square feet (sf) 1.79 77,972 Construction Construction Costs Condominiums Commercial Area (sf) 0 Site Prep Cost (per site sf) (a) $20.00 Site Prep Cost $1,559,448 Gross Sales $21,535,632 Construction Costs Hard Costs $9,970,642 Less Marketing Costs ($646,069) Hard Costs (per sf) (b) $211.31 Parking Costs $340,000
Dwelling Units (du) Parking Costs Soft Costs $2,374,018 Total Project Value $20,889,563 Total Residences (number du) 24 per surface space $5,000 Impact Fees $896,509 Total Liveable Space (gross, sf) 37,584 per podium space $35,000 Subtotal Construction Costs $15,140,617 Garage Space - sf per unit / total sf 400 9,600 Impact Fees (per du) (c) $37,355 Gross Building Area (sf) 47,184 Soft Costs, % Hard Costs 20% Feasibility Total Project Value $20,889,563
Unit Summary - Total # / sf Revenue Financing Costs Less Total Dev Costs ($17,699,381) Plan 1 (3 br) 6 1,448 Sales ppsf / sales price (d) Interest on Construction Loan $885,726 Residual Land Value $3,190,182 Plan 2 (3 br) 6 1,562 Plan 1 $573 $829,704 Points on Construction Loan $158,976 Plan 3 (3 br plus loft) 12 1,627 Plan 2 $573 $895,026 Subtotal Financing Costs $1,044,703 Total 24 1,566 Plan 3 $573 $932,271
Marketing Costs, as % sales price 3.0%
Required Parking Developer Profit
Residential - per du / total # 2.33 56 Financing Developer Profit, % total const cost 10% Construction Loan to Cost Ratio 70% Developer Profit $1,514,062 Provided Parking Construction Loan Fee (points) 1.5% RLV $3,190,182 Garage - total # 48 Interest Rate 6.5% Total Development Cost $17,699,381 RLV/acre $1,782,224 Open - total # 20 Period of Initial Loan (months) 18
Total Spaces Provided 68 Drawdown Factor 60%
Total Hard and Soft Costs $15,140,617
Total Loan Amount $10,598,432
Notes:
(a) Includes Demolition, On/Offsite Costs (grading, curb cuts), and streetscape amenities (b) Per RS Means 2018, luxury two-story townhouse with Los Angeles Location factor (c) Includes Impact Fees such as Quimby, school district, wastewater, and public arts. (d) Per Redfin, 12-month sales data for 3BR townhomes within Redondo Beach, adjusted for recently built comps Sources: City of Redondo Beach, 2019; CoStar, 2019; RS Means, 2018; BAE, 2019. Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 18 Table 7: Pro-Forma for Concept 2
Development Program Assumptions - Concept 2 Cost and Income Assumptions Development Cost Assumptions Feasibility Analysis Site Size - acres / square feet (sf) 1.79 77,972 Construction Construction Costs Condominiums Commercial Area (sf) 0 Site Prep Cost (per site sf) (a) $25.00 Site Prep Cost $1,949,310 Gross Sales $41,729,394 Construction Costs Hard Costs $18,519,986 Less Marketing Costs ($1,251,882) Hard Costs (per sf) (b) $211.31 Parking Costs (e) $450,000 Dwelling Units (du) Parking Costs Soft Costs $4,183,859 Total Project Value $40,477,512 Total Residences (number du) 45 per surface space $5,000 Impact Fees $1,674,150 Total Liveable Space (gross, sf) 69,642 per podium space $35,000 Subtotal Construction Costs $26,777,305 Garage Space - sf per unit / total sf 400 18,000 Impact Fees (per du) (c) $37,203 Gross Building Area (sf) 87,642 Soft Costs, % Hard Costs 20% Feasibility Total Project Value $40,477,512
Revenue Financing Costs Less Total Dev Costs ($31,302,670) Unit Summary - Total # / sf Sales ppsf / sales price (d) Interest on Construction Loan $1,566,472 Residual Land Value $9,174,842 Plan 1 (2 br) 9 1,270 Plan 1 $626 $795,463 Points on Construction Loan $281,162 Plan 2 (2 br) 18 1,265 Plan 2 $626 $792,331 Subtotal Financing Costs $1,847,634 Plan 3 (2 br plus loft) 18 1,969 Plan 3 $573 $1,128,237 Total 45 Marketing Costs, as % sales price 3.0%
Required Parking Financing Developer Profit
Residential - per du / total # 2.33 105 Construction Loan to Cost Ratio 70% % total const cost 10% Construction Loan Fee (points) 1.5% Developer Profit $2,677,731 Provided Parking Interest Rate 6.5% RLV $9,174,842
Tandem Garage - total # 90 Period of Initial Loan (months) 18 Total Development Cost $31,302,670 RLV/acre $5,125,610 On Street - total # 26 Drawdown Factor 60%
Total Spaces Provided 116 Total Hard and Soft Costs $26,777,305 Total Loan Amount $18,744,114
Notes:
(a) Includes Demolition, On/Offsite Costs (grading, curb cuts), and streetscaping amenities, and off-street parking. (b) Per RS Means 2018, luxury three-story townhouse w/ brick veneer with LA location factor. (c) Includes Impact Fees such as Quimby, school district, wastewater, and public arts. (d) per Redfin, 12-month sales data for 2BR townhomes within Redondo Beach, adjusted for recently-built comps. (e) Excludes costs associated with on-street parking
Sources: City of Redondo Beach, 2019; CoStar, 2019; RS Means, 2018; BAE, 2019.
Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 19 Table 8: Pro Forma for Concept 3A – Mixed-Use, Retail + Residential
Development Assumptions - Concept 3 Retail+Residential Cost and Income Assumptions Development Cost Assumptions Feasibility Analysis Site Size - acres / square feet (sf) 1.79 77,972 Construction Construction Costs Residential Site Prep Cost (per site sf) (a) $15.00 Site Prep Cost $1,169,586 Gross Rents$795,193 Ground Floor Retail Area (gross, sf) 17,000 Construction Costs Hard Costs $8,857,088 Less Vacancy ($39,760) Commercial Space Net Leasable (sf) 90% 15,300 Hard Costs (per sf) (b) $228.57 Comm'l Tenant Improvements $765,000 Less Operating Expenses ($154,000) Tenant Improvements (per sf, Retail) $50.00 Parking Costs (f) $405,000 Net Operating Income $601,434 Dwelling Units (du) Parking Costs Soft Costs $2,239,335 (NOI) Total Residences (number du) 22 per surface space $5,000 Impact Fees $791,084 Total Residential Space (gross, sf) 21,750 per podium space $35,000 Subtotal Const Costs $14,227,092 Commercial Residential Space Net Leasable (sf) 90% 19,575 Impact Fees (per du) (c) $30,462 Gross Rents $667,202 Impact Fees (per sf, comm'l) (c) $7.11 Less Vacancy ($66,720) Soft Costs, % Hard Costs 20% Financing Costs Less Operating Expenses ($2,780) Unit Summary - Total # / sf Interest on Construction Loan $832,285 NOI $597,702 Plan 1 (1 br) 9 850 Operations Points on Construction Loan $149,384 Plan 2 (1 br) 9 900 Residential Rent, (average ppsf/mo) (d) Subtotal Financing Costs $981,669 Plan 3 (2 br) 4 1,500 Plan 1 $3.56 $2,726 Total NOI $1,199,136 Total 22 Plan 2 $3.56 $2,887
Plan 3 $2.92 $3,937 Developer Profit Blended Cap Rate (g) 5.00% Average Unit Size (net circulation) 890 Vacancy Rate, annual average 5.0% % total construction cost 10% Annual Operating Cost (per du) $7,000 Developer Profit $1,422,709 Feasibility Required Parking Total Project Value $23,982,714
Retail, per 1,000 sf / total # 4.0 68 Retail Total Development Costs $16,631,471 Less Total Dev Costs ($16,631,471) Residential, per du / total # 1.3 28 Rental Rate, ppsf/mo, NNN (e) $3.63 Residual Land Value $7,351,243 Total Required Parking 96 Vacancy Rate, annual average 10.0% Annual Operating Cost (% comm'l rev) 5.0%
Parking Configuration (# spaces)
Open Parking (Surface) 59 Financing
Covered Parking (Surface) 22 Construction Loan to Cost Ratio 70% On-Street Parking 26 Construction Loan Fee (points) 1.5% RLV $7,351,243 Total Parking 107 Interest Rate 6.5% RLV/acre $4,106,840 Period of Initial Loan (months) 18
Drawdown Factor 60%
Total Hard and Soft Costs $14,227,092
Total Loan Amount $9,958,964
Notes:
(a) Includes demolition, on/offsite costs (grading, curb cuts), on-street parking, and streetscape amenities. (b) Per RS Means 2018, 4-story residential with LA location factor (c) Includes Impact Fees such as Quimby, Redondo School District, Storm Drain, Wastewater, and Public Art. (d) per CoStar, Q4 2018, Redondo Beach multifamily, ppsf, with new construction premium. (e) per CoStar, Q4 2018, Redondo Beach retail, ppsf, with new construction premium. (f) Excludes costs associated with On-Street parking
(g) Cap rates were estimated based on investor reports, data provided by developers, and a review of CoStar data.
Sources: City of Redondo Beach, 2019; CoStar, 2019; RS Means, 2018; BAE, 2019. Appendix B | Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard 20 Table 9: Pro Forma for Concept 3B – Commercial Mix, Retail + Office
Development Assumptions - Concept 3 Retail+Office Cost and Income Assumptions Development Cost Assumptions Feasibility Analysis Site Size - acres / square feet (sf) 1.79 77,972 Construction Construction Costs Retail Site Prep Cost (per site sf) (a) $15.00 Site Prep Cost $1,169,586 Gross Rents $667,202 Ground Floor Retail Area (sf) 17,000 Construction Costs Hard Costs $5,918,024 Less Vacancy ($66,720) Commercial Space Net Leasable (sf) 90% 15,300 Hard Costs (per sf) (b) $190.90 Comm'l Tenant Improvements $1,080,000 Less Operating Expenses ($33,360) Tenant Improvements (per sf, Office) $25.00 Parking Costs (e) $425,000 Net Operating Income $567,122 Commercial Office Tenant Improvements (per sf, Retail) $50.00 Soft Costs $1,718,522 (NOI) Total Office Space (gross, sf) 14,000 Parking Costs Impact Fees $220,512 Office Space Net Leasable 90% 12,600 per surface space $5,000 Subtotal Const Costs $10,531,644 Office per podium space $35,000 Gross Rents $485,125
Office Floorplate - sf Impact Fees (per sf, comm'l) (c) $7.11 Less Vacancy ($48,513) Floor 1 7,000 Soft Costs, % Hard Costs 20% Financing Costs Less Operating Expenses ($121,281) Floor 2 7,000 Interest on Construction Loan $616,101.17 NOI $315,331 Operations Points on Construction Loan $110,582
Retail Subtotal Financing Costs $726,683
Required Parking Rental Rate, sf/mo, NNN (d) $3.63 Total NOI $882,453 Retail, per 1,000 sf / total # 4.0 68 Vacancy Rate, annual average 10.0% Office, per 1,000 sf / total # 3.3 46 Annual Operating Cost (% comm'l rev) 5.0% Blended Cap Rate (f) 5.75% Required Parking 114 Developer Profit
Office % total construction cost 10% Feasibility
Rental Rate, sf/mo, Gross (e) $3.21 Developer Profit $1,053,164 Total Project Value $15,347,016 Parking Configuration (# spaces) Vacancy Rate, annual average 10.0% Less Total Dev Costs ($12,311,492) Open Parking (Surface) 85 Annual Operating Cost (% comm'l rev) 25.0% Total Development Costs $12,311,492 Residual Land Value $3,035,524 On-Street Parking 29
Total Parking 114 Financing
Construction Loan to Cost Ratio 70%
Construction Loan Fee (points) 1.5%
Interest Rate 6.5%
Period of Initial Loan (months) 18 RLV $3,035,524
Drawdown Factor 60% RLV/acre $1,695,824
Total Hard and Soft Costs $10,531,644
Total Loan Amount $7,372,151
Notes:
(a) Includes demolition, on/offsite costs (grading, curb cuts), on-street parking, and streetscape amenities. (b) Per RS Means 2018, 2-4 story office with LA location factor (c) Includes Impact Fees such as stormwater and public art. (d) per CoStar, Q4 2018, Redondo Beach office, ppsf, assumes 15 percent premium on new construction (d) per CoStar, Q4 2018, Redondo Beach retail, ppsf, w new construction premium (e) Excludes costs associated with On-Street parking
(f) Cap rates were estimated based on investor reports, data provided by developers, and a review of CoStar data.
Sources: City of Redondo Beach, 2019; CoStar, 2019; RS Means, 2018; BAE, 2019.
Appendix C
Recommendations from the City Manager’s
Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018-2019)
Page intentionally left blank.
Appendix C | Recommendations from the City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018-2019)
! "#" $"
$"
%&'
%
%%
(%%
) "
"$
$ ""
%
#"
$"*% "%
+ ,
",
-
""
""
!
""
"#
"."
,"%
$
%
&
' "
"
' ""
%
%%
(
#
)*+,
%
%%
(
#
"
%
(
-
%
-
%
."
""
#
%
"
%
#
%
"
"
%
#
) /$
$
%
&
' "
"
' ""
%
%%
(
#$
!
/-)*+0-
%"
%
""
(
#
++
%
(
-
"
"
11
%
%
"
#!
%
-
""
%
#
)*+,
%
(
%
"
"
% -
-
2
"
"
"
"
"
""
#3
"
%
-
-
4
#
3DJHRI
-
5
"
#
%
-
"5
-
"
%
#
""
"
%
""
%
#
(
%%%
$%%
-6%
3
!
"
-
!
"
-
6
5-
!"
#
7
"
"
-
2
#
%
(
%%
%
""
%
(
"8+,
+9(
#
%
)
"
)
((,"
)
#"
%
3DJHRI
Appendix C | Recommendations from the City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018-2019) 1 January 22, 2019
The Honorable Mayor Brand and City Council Members
City of Redondo Beach
415 Diamond Street
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
SUBJECT: City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee Recommendations to the City Council
Mayor Brand & City Council Members:
As you are aware, over the course of the last several months, the City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee has held meetings and worked to identify measures to help with the continued revitalization of the Artesia/Aviation Corridor. The committee met with staff from a variety of City Departments, and after further review and discussion, is pleased to offer the below recommendations for consideration. The recommendations have been divided into ongoing projects, shorter term, and longer term projects as follows:
Ongoing Projects
¾ That the City continue with infrastructure beautification work along Artesia Boulevard, including median upgrades.
¾ That the City continue its support for North Redondo Beach Business Association (NRBBA) activities in the form of fee waivers for NRBBA and NRBBA-hosted events along the Artesia/Aviation corridor.
¾ That the City continue the recently initiated Storefront Improvement Program, with expansion or modification of the Program to attract targeted niche businesses into the area.
¾ That the City continue and, if possible, expand its law enforcement presence for traffic control and overall safety with community-oriented policing and traffic enforcement.
Shorter-Term Projects
¾ That the City positively consider new Special Events along the Artesia/Aviation corridor, including a Santa Run in 2019.
¾ That the City consider installation of additional decorative lighting along the Artesia/Aviation corridor, including but not limited to, tree lighting and sidewalk-illuminating lighting.
3DJHRI
2 Longer-Term Projects
¾ That the businesses consider formation of a Business Improvement District along the corridor or consider formation of the Main Street Program. ¾ That the City consider installation of wayfinding signage to create a sense of place, including a banner program that would identify entry into Redondo Beach. A welcoming arch over the street should be considered.
¾ That the City consider installation of electric charging stations and rideshare locations at key locations along the Artesia/Aviation corridor.
¾ That the City - through the General Plan update – consider updating zoning to permit for additional housing and office uses, as well as modifying planning requirements to promote dining establishments and associated parking.
¾ That the City explore ways to provide parking for evening businesses, including utilizing municipal assets (e.g. library parking lot during off-hours) and creating a “park and walk” program using shared parking agreements.
¾ That the City engage in efforts to evolve the Artesia Corridor into a multimodal corridor, where walking, biking and fewer vehicle trips are encouraged. The SCE greenbelt can play a role in this – it is a feature unique to Redondo Beach – connecting to the Metro Green Line stations.
Significant discussion was devoted to the prospect of changing the name of Artesia Boulevard to Redondo Beach Boulevard. Although the Committee did not reach a consensus on the matter, it was deemed substantial enough to bring to the City Council’s attention for possible consideration.
In closing, we recognize that resources are limited and that some of these items will require funding beyond what is currently available to the City. However, we appreciate the opportunity to submit these recommendations and hope they will be considered for further discussion and implementation by the City Council at the appropriate time.
Sincerely,
The Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee
Attachments:
Roster of Members
3DJHRI
Appendix C | Recommendations from the City Manager’s Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018-2019) City Manager's Artesia/Aviation Revitalization Committee Member Roster
Name Business/Residence Info
Leland Hyde Kurt Hardware
2404 Artesia Blvd
Heidi Butzine NRBBA President
Robe Reichester* District 5 Resident
John Simpson District 4 Resident
Randolph Stern
Dance 1 Redondo
2228 Artesia Blvd
District 4 Resident
Wally Marks
Great Room & Medical Offices
Property Owner
2810 Artesia Blvd
Mike Garcia
Enviroscape LA Founder
Property Owner
2701 Artesia Blvd
District 5 Resident
Mo Sharifi
Caskey and Caskey
Commercial Real Estate
District 4 Resident
John Wolf South Bay Aquatic Center
2012 Artesia Blvd
Dave Redmond Redmond's Lock & Key
2213 Artesia Blvd
*Not in agreement with content of the letter
3DJHRI
Page intentionally left blank.
Appendix D
Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013)
Page intentionally left blank.
Appendix D | Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013) Appendix D | Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013) Appendix D | Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013) Appendix D | Artesia Boulevard Vitalization Strategy (2013) Appendix E
Adoption Resolution
Page intentionally left blank.
Appendix E | Adoption Resolution
Appendix E | Adoption Resolution
Appendix E | Adoption Resolution
Appendix E | Adoption Resolution