Agenda Item 9B — Torrance City Council, July 8, 2025

9B
Date: July 8, 2025
To: City Council
From: Michelle Ramirez, Community Development Director By: Kevin Joe, Planning Associate | [email protected] Subject: Planning Commission and Community Development - Conduct Public Hearing Regarding Proposed Amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code Pertaining to a Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone, Adopt ORDINANCE Amending the Torrance Municipal Code, and Determine an Exemption from California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). Expenditure:

None.

RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation of the Planning Commission and Community Development Director that City Council:

1. Conduct a public hearing regarding proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code (TMC) pertaining to a Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone; and

2. Adopt an ORDINANCE amending the Torrance Municipal Code to establish a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone with amendments; and

3. Determine an exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) and 15378(b)(5); and

4. Approve Ordinance Summary for publication.

FUNDING

None Required.

DISCUSSION

Current State law, which was enabled by AB 1851 and SB 4, allows affordable housing development by right on qualified properties that are owned by religious institutions and independent institutions for higher education on or before January 1, 2024. Under State law, the local agency is prohibited from requiring the replacement of more than 50 percent of the religious use parking spaces that are displaced by the proposed housing development and may adopt objective development standards, but it may not requi re more than one parking space per unit. Housing development shall not be adjoined to any site where more than one- third of the square footage on the site is dedicated to light industrial uses, not be located within 1,200 feet of site that is currently a heavy industrial use or where the most recent permitted use was a heavy industrial use, not be located within 1,600 feet of major industrial 1 City Council
July 8, 2025

Page 2 ends

source of air pollution and where a multiple -family housing is not an existing permitted use, the housing development site shall not be located within 3,200 feet of facility that actively extracts or refines oil or natural gas.

On June 14, 2022, the City Council adopted the 6 th Cycle Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) Housing Element Update, which was certified and deemed compliant with State housing law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development. Under State law, each city’s housing element must identify adequate sites with the appropriate zoning and development standards to accommodate their RHNA allocation for future housing for all income levels. RHNA is not obligatory to construct housing, however a city must demonstrate it has the capacity to accommodate its RHNA allocation through the Housing Element Sites Inventory and programs. For the 6 th Cycle period of 2021 -2029, Torrance’s RHNA allocation is 4,939 housing units.

Torrance’s RHNA 2021-2029
Income Group % of County Area Median
Income (AMI)
Total Housing Units
Allocated
Extremely Low 30% or less 584
Very Low 31-50% 1,037
Low 51-80% 846
Moderate 81-120% 853
Above Moderate 120%+ 1,619
Total 4,939

Housing Element Annual Progress Report
Housing Unit Activity
Year Units Entitled Units Permitted Units Completed
2024 666 143 130
2023 206 198 103
2022 339 169 114
2021
(Oct. 15 - Dec. 31)* 12 93 35
Total 1,223 603 382
*6th Cycle began on October 15, 2021

The establishment of a Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone (RHEIH-OZ) was one of several programs and strategies of the adopted Housing Element for facilitating the City’s RHNA. During the Housing Element Update public outreach efforts and stakeholder interviews with service providers and affordable housing developers, part nering with religious institutions was cited as an effective way for developing affordable housing.

The Housing Element Sites Inventory identified 25 RHEIH-OZ sites that could potentially accommodate 267 units, assuming development meeting the target density of 23.25 dwelling units per acre, which would count towards the City’s low income RHNA allocation. The 2 City Council
July 8, 2025

Page 3 ends

RHEIH-OZ will apply to all eligible properties identified in the Sites Inventory and sites owned by religious and higher education institutions on or before January 1, 2024.

Staff notes that the list of 25 properties that were originally identified in the housing sites inventory list were identified prior to State legislative updates and as such is not inclusive of all eligible properties and may also contain ineligible properties.

Draft Ordinances with staff recommendations and Planning Commission recommendations have been prepared for Council’s consideration (Attachments 1 & 2). The proposed Ordinance will add a new Article 52 of Chapter 1 of Division 9 entitled “Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone” to the Torrance Municipal Code to establish RHEIH-OZ objective development standards. Pursuing housing under the RHEIH-OZ is strictly voluntary, whereby the property owner can choose to develop housing pursuant to the RHEIH-OZ development standards. The permissible uses and development standards of the underlying zoning of the property will apply for owners who choose not to pursue housing under the RHEIH-OZ. By adopting a RHEIH-OZ Ordinance, the City is taking preemptive steps to regulate the development of housing on properties owned by religious and higher education institutions and to help ensure a level of compatibility with neighboring uses.

The RHEIH-OZ standards were created with the assistance of a consultant to facilitate the target density and potential number of units that were identified in the Housing Element Site Inventory. The RHEIH-OZ will allow single-family, two-family, multiple-family residential, and senior citizen housing development at a maximum density of 31 dwelling units per acre by - right without discretionary approval. The proposed development standards will include building stepbacks for building height over 30 feet, lower height limits and wider setbacks for buildings that are adjacent to properties in the R -1 Zone to help protect potential impacts to adjacent uses. Existing Code standards will apply to properties implementing the RHEIH-OZ unless specifically addressed in the RHEIH-OZ. The development standards are divided into two different categories, Sub-Group 1 sites that are under two acres in size and Sub -Group 2 sites that are two acres or larger in size.

Sub-Group 1 Sub-Group 2
Site size Under 2 acres 2 acres or larger
Maximum Density 31 du/ac
Building Height
35 feet
27 feet if building is within 20
feet of abutting R-1 District
50 feet
35 feet if building is within 20
feet of abutting R-1 District
Building Stepbacks
Buildings on lots adjacent to R -1 shall provide a 5 -foot setback for every additional 10 feet in height for building above 30 feet
Front Yard Setback
10 feet
15 feet if front yard faces a major arterial or higher street classification
3 City Council
July 8, 2025

Page 4 ends

Side Yard Setback
5 feet
10 feet if side yar is adjacent
to R-1 or faces major arterial
or higher street classification
10 feet
15 feet if side yard is
adjacent to R-1
Rear Yard Setback
5 feet
10 feet if rear yard is
adjacent to R-1
10 feet
20 feet if rear yard is
adjacent to R-1
Parking 0.5 space per dwelling 1 space per dwelling

The draft RHEIH-OZ Ordinance was introduced to the Planning Commission on February 5, 2025. The Planning Commission conducted public hearings on March 19, 2025 and May 7, 2025, to consider and provide recommendations on the draft Ordinance to the City Council.

At the Planning Commission meeting dates of March 19, 2025 and May 7, 2025, members of the public expressed concerns regarding view protection, the exclusion of decorative elements from the height requirement, construction traffic, parking, public notification, and the loss of religious institutions. There was misperception among st some community members that new housing developments were being proposed under this Ordinance. To date, there have not been any requests to develop housing on properties owned by religious or higher education institutions in the city.

After receiving comments from the public, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of the Ordinance with the following amendments:
• higher education be added to the name of the overlay zone; and • that flagpoles are not allowed to exceed the established building height limit under Section 91.52.070 d) Building Height.

Staff are not opposed to adding higher education to the title to be consistent with what is allowed under State law and proposes the title to be the Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

Flagpoles were originally proposed to be included in the list of structures allowed to exceed the established building height limit. The RHEIH-OZ height provisions were modeled after the development standards of the Housing Corridor Overlay Zone, which did not include any areas of the Hillside Overlay Zone. Staff do not object to deleting flagpoles from the list of items exempted from the height requirement as there are two locations in the Hillside Overlay Zone where the RHEIH-OZ could apply.

ENVIRONMENTAL FINDINGS

An initial study and Negative Declaration were adopted as part of the Housing Element Update for the 6 th Regional Housing Needs Allocation cycle. The establishment of the 4 City Council
July 8, 2025

Page 5 ends

RHEIH-OZ was a program of the adopted Housing Element. This item is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and 15378(b)(5) government activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft RHEIH-OZ Ordinance

2. Ordinance Summary

3. Planning Commission Items and Minutes

4. Notice of Public Hearing Proof of Publication
5 ORDINANCE NO.___________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TORRANCE, CALIF ORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 91.3.2

REGARDING DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED OF THE TORRANCE
MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING ARTICLE 52 OF CHAPTER 1
OF DIVISION 9 REGARDING RELIGIOUS AND HIGHER
EDUCATION INSTITUTION HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE.

LUS24-00006 CITY OF TORRANCE
WHEREAS, City Council adopted a Housing Element Update on June 14, 2022, which has been deemed compliant with state housing law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); and
WHEREAS, Program 1, Objective 7 of the Housing Element mandated an ordinance to revise the Zoning Code and Zoning Map to create a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone on properties designated in the Sites Inventory to allow for new low income and mixed-use housing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) that were prepared in conjunction with the Housing Element Update; and WHEREAS, no substantial changes are proposed under the project (an Ordinance to establish Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone) and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that wi ll require major revisions to the previously approved Negative Declaration (ND) due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is no “new information of substantial importance” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element pursuant to §65860 of the State Government Code.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1
That Section 91.3.2 entitled “District Established” shall be amended as follows:
“91.3.2 DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED.

of Torrance – Official Land Use Plan” which are hereby adopted and made a part of this Chapter by this reference:

R-1 Single family residence district
R-2 Two family residence district
R-3 Limited multiple family residence district
R-R-3 Restricted multiple family residence district
R-4 Unlimited multiple family residence district
R-5 Highrise residential district
L-P Limited professional office district
R-3-3 Three-unit multiple-family residential district
A-1 Light agricultural district
C-1 Retail commercial district
C-2 General commercial district
C-3 Solely commercial district
C-4 Shopping center district
C-5 Conditional commercial district
C-R Restricted commercial district
Civic Center district
M-1 Light manufacturing district
M-2 Heavy manufacturing district
M-L Limited manufacturing district
P-1 Open area – planting – parking
P-U Public use district
HMD Hospital-medical-dental district
RTH Residential townhouse district
Downtown Torrance district
R-H Hillside and local coastal overlay zone
P-D Planned development district
Madrona Marsh district
Small lot, low-medium overlay zone
7 HBCSP Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Zone ROO Residential office overlay district
C/RTO Commercial/residential transition overlay district Downtown residential multiple-family residential district Torrance Tract overlay zone
HCO Housing Corridor Overlay Zone
RHEIH-OZ Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone SECTION 2
That Article 52 entitled “RHEIH -OZ Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone” shall be added and to Chapter 1, Division 9 of the Torrance Municipal Code:
“ARTICLE 52 – RHEIH-OZ RELIGIOUS AND HIGHER EDUCATION INSTITUTION HOUSING

OVERLAY ZONE

91.52.010 PURPOSE
The Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone creates opportunities for future affordable housing development on existing religious institutional land within the City of Torrance. The RHEIH-OZ was established as part of the implementation of the General Plan Housing Element and meeting the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. In addition to the General Plan Housing Element update, the Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay seeks to utilize State of California Senate Bill 4, signed into law on October 11, 2023, which permits housing as a use by right on lands owned by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution.

91.52.020 APPLICABILITY
The Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone is applicable to qualified properties that are owned on or before January 1, 2024 by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution which meet the criteria of Stat e Government Code Sections 65913.6 and 65913.16.

91.52.030 RELATIONSHIP TO BASE ZONING DISTRICTS
a) The Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone is applied over base zoning districts and is elective, rather than mandatory. New housing development projects would be permitted uses by right on religious institutional land and properti es where the RHEIH-OZ is applied are required to either comply with the requirements of the base zoning district, or elect to comply with the requirements of the RHEIH -OZ. Existing standards applicable to all zoning districts (e.g. sign standards, fence/wa ll standards, parking design standards) will still apply to properties utilizing the RHEIH -OZ, unless specifically established by the RHEIH-OZ.
b) When RHEIH -OZ regulations conflict with the standards of the base district, the less restrictive standards will prevail.
8 91.52.040 PERMISSIBLE USES
In the Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone, the uses permitted in the base district are permitted. Additionally, the following uses are permitted:
a) Single-family residence
b) Multi-family residence
c) Two-family residence
d) Flat building, apartment house, bachelor apartment
e) Bungalow court
f) Multiple-family residence
g) Multiple owner-occupied residential structures
h) Senior citizen housing

91.52.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The development standards of the Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone are established with two different Sub-Groups.

Sub-Group 1 is comprised of sites under 2 acres.

Sub-Group 2 is comprised of sites 2 acres or larger.

Existing structures shall not be deemed nonconforming for not meeting the standards of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.060 DENSITY
a) The goal of the Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone is to add very low-income and low-income housing in the City of Torrance on religious institutional grounds. The individual sites are listed by Appendix C: Sites Inventory, Table C-1. b) The maximum density shall be 31 dwelling units per acre.

91.52.070 BUILDING HEIGHT
a) Sub-Group 1: The maximum building height shall be 35 feet; buildings within 20 feet of an abutting R-1 District are limited to 27 feet.
b) Sub-Group 2: The maximum building height shall be 50 feet; buildings within 50 feet of an abutting R-1 District are limited to 35 feet.
c) Buildings on lots adjacent to the R-1 District shall provide additional stepbacks for building height above 30 feet. Above 30 feet, the building shall provide a 5 -foot stepback in the depth of the façade for every additional 10 feet of height, or fractional portion thereof. d) The following structures are allowed to exceed the established building height limit:
skylights, chimneys, elevator and stair towers, fire escapes and catwalks required by law, solar panels, building-mounted antennas, ordinary plumbing or heater vents, and utilities. e) The maximum building height shall be measured from the lowest portion of the building which is above the ground, but not including any berm or raised planter, to the topmost portion of the roof, exclusive of those structures listed above in Section 91.52.070 d). 9 91.52.080 SETBACKS
Encroachments such as decks, porches, and eave overhangs shall comply with the provisions of Division 9, Article 5 (Yards).
a) Front Yard.
1) Sub-Group 1: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. 2) Sub-Group 2: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. b) Side Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The side yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District, unless the side yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the side yard shall be 10 feet.
2) Sub-Group 2: The side yard shall be 10 feet; or 15 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
c) Rear Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The rear yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
2) Sub-Group 2: The rear yard shall be 10 feet; or 20 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
d) Yard Adjacent to Internal Drive Aisle. The yard adjacent to internal drive aisles shall be 5 feet.

91.52.090 USEABLE OPEN SPACE
Useable open space is not required on parcels within the Religious Institutional Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.100 PARKING
a) Existing Parking. Up to 50% of existing off -street parking required for the religious institution may be removed in order to construct new housing in place of the existing parking.
b) Minimum Parking Spaces Required. These minimum requirements replace the numerical provisions of Division 9, Chapter 3, Article 2 (Use and Parking Spaces Required). The remaining parking design standards of Division 9, Chapter 3 (Off -Street Parking) shall apply to all projects.
1) Sub-Group 1: A minimum of 0.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be provided. 2) Sub-Group 2: A minimum of 1 parking space per dwelling unit shall be provided. c) Tandem parking will be allowed.

91.52.110 RESIDENTIAL UNIT SIZES:

The Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone establishes the following minimum unit sizes for residential units. These minimum unit sizes supersede the standards established by Division 9, Article 20 (Living Areas).
10 a) Studio Unit. The minimum unit size shall be 450 square feet. b) One-Bedroom Unit. The minimum unit size shall be 600 square feet. c) Two-Bedroom Unit. The minimum unit size shall be 800 square feet. d) Three-Bedroom Unit or Greater. The minimum unit size shall be 1,000 square feet.

91.52.120 COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS
a) Upper floor windows that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate obscured glass and/or a minimum five -foot sill height when allowed by the Building Code.
b) Balconies and upper floor decks that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate a minimum five -foot tall privacy walls that are constructed of a solid or opaque material.
c) Where parcels share a property line with single -family residential uses, a fence or wall constructed of solid and opaque material shall be erected not to exceed 8 feet in height.

91.52.130 NOTIFICATION
Upon issuance of building permits for a housing project developed under the RHEIH -OZ, the applicant shall post an information board along the front property line that displays:
a) Project address;
b) Description of the project that includes the number of housing units and maximum building height;
c) Building Permit case numbers issued for the project; d) Property owner’s name and phone number;
e) Contractor’s name and phone number;
f) Code Enforcement phone number where violation can be reported; The information board shall be a minimum 11 inches by 17 inches in size, weather-proof, visible from the public right-of-way, posted on the site throughout the duration of construction, and shall not be removed until after all project Building Permits have been finaled by the City of Torrance.” SECTION 3
Any provisions of the Torrance Municipal Code or its appendices, or any other ordinances of the City inconsistent with this ordinance to the extent of the inconsistencies and no further, are repealed.

SECTION 4
If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by the decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, the decision will not affect the validity of the remaining portions of the ordinance. The City Council declares that it would have passed this ordinance and each section, subsection, sentence, clause and phrase irrespective of the fact that anyone or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases are declared invalid or unconstitutional.

SECTION 5
This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days following adoption, this ordinance or a summary of this ordinance if authorized by the City 11 Council, will be published at least once in the Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Torrance.

INTRODUCED and APPROVED this ____________ day _________ 2025.

ADOPTED and PASSED this ____________ day ____________ 2025. __________________________
Mayor George Chen
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

PATRICK Q. SULLIVAN, City Attorney ATTEST:

By: _______________________
Rebecca Poirer, City Clerk
_______________________________
Tatia Y . Strader, Assistant City Attorney
12 ORDINANCE SUMMARY

On July 8, 2025, the City Council of the City of Torrance adopted Ordinance No. which adopts amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code (Division 9, Planning and Land Use Code) pertaining to Religious and Higher Education Institution Housing Overlay Zone (RHEIH-OZ). The RHEIH -OZ creates the opportunity for future affordable housing development on properties that are owned on or before January 1, 2024 by a religious or higher education institution that meet the criteria of State Government Code Sections 65913.6 and 65913.16. The Ordinance will establish permissible uses, development and compatibility standards, and notification requirements for proposed housing development within the RHEIH-OZ.

*****City Clerk to add a paragraph stating that copies of the Ordinance are available at the City Clerk’s Office and stating the names of the City Council members that voted in favor and those that voted against.*****

13 ATTACHMENT 2
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8C
DATE: May 7, 2025
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Kevin Joe, Planning Associate
Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Land Use Study LUS24-00006
Consideration of proposed amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code pertaining to Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone. This item is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) and 15378(b)(5).

RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation of the Community Development Director that Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and direct staff to:

A. Forward the draft Ordinance amending the Torrance Municipal Code, as presented, to the City Council for consideration; or
B. Modify and/or add to the draft Ordinance amending the Torrance Municipal Code, as directed, and forward to the City Council for consideration.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommends an amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code to establish a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone (RIH-OZ). The RIH-OZ was identified as Program 7 of the recently adopted Housing Element Update (2022). The RIH-OZ creates the opportunity for affordable housing development on existing religious institutional land within the City. The RIH-OZ does not propose redevelopment of any religious facilities to residential.

DISCUSSION
Environmental Determination
The City Council adopted an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) that were prepared in conjunction with the Housing Element Update for the 6th Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Cycle. The RIH-OZ is one of the programs of the adopted Housing Element. No substantial changes are proposed under the project (an Ordinance to establish a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone) and there are no substantial changes in circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previously approved Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Therefore, the previous adopted ND adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project. This item is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the 1 14
ATTACHMENT 3
environment and 15378(b)(5) government activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

Background and Analysis
On February 5th and March 19th, the Planning Commission conducted a workshop and public hearing to introduce proposed amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code to establish a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone, receive public comments and provide input on the draft ordinance.

During the March 19th meeting, 19 members of the public provided comments on the proposed RIH-OZ. Concerns were raised regarding view protection, restricting height to exclude decorative elements, construction traffic, parking, notification, and loss of religious institutions. This item was continued to May 7th to allow staff time to prepare a revised draft Ordinance.

In response to the comments raised by the Planning Commission and public, a revised draft Ordinance was prepared for the Planning Commission’s consideration (Attachment 1). The revised Ordinance attempts to address the concerns that were raised to the extent possible without impacting the ability to implement RIH-OZ program, accommodate the number of units identified in the Housing Element Sites Inventory that are counted towards the City’s RHNA obligation, and comply with State law.

Revisions to Draft Ordinance
The revisions include amending applicability of the RIH-OZ to qualified properties owned on or before January 1, 2024 by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution that meet the criteria set forth by State law, which limits development on sites that are in close proximity to industrial uses and oil and natural gas extraction or refining activities, where existing residential units are demolished, and vacant sites that contain tribal cultural resource. Decorative features, such as spires, bell towers, cupolas, obelisks and monuments, and rooftop open space features, such as trellises and sun shades, will not be exempt from the maximum height requirement. Language has been added to clarify how the maximum height is measured from the lowest portion of the building which is above the ground, but not including any berm or raised planter, to the topmost portion of the roof, exclusive of the structures that are listed in Section 91.52.070. The redundant 10 feet side yard setback for a street identified as a major arterial or higher classification was also deleted. A requirement to post a notification board at the proposed RIH-OZ construction site that provides project and contract information upon issuance of building permit has also been added.

Staff presented the draft RIH-OZ Ordinance to the Community Planning and Design Committee on April 14th. After the presentation and the Committee’s questions were addressed, the Committee accepted and filed the update on RIH-OZ Ordinance.

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a hearing to receive public comments, provide input on the revised draft Ordinance, and forward the revised draft Ordinance, as presented or amended, to the City Council for their consideration.

PUBLIC NOTICE
For the March 19th Planning Commission meeting, notices of the public hearing were made no less than 20 calendar days before the meeting pursuant to AB 2904. Notices were published in the local newspaper (The Daily Breeze), posted on the 25 RIH-OZ sites, and posted on the City of Torrance webpage on February 28, 2025, 20 calendars days before the 2 15
Planning Commission meeting. On March 19, 2025, the Planning Commission set the date of May 7, 2025 to reconsider the draft ordinance.

DRAFT CODE AMENDMENTS
The revised draft Ordinance that contains amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code is attached. The proposed Ordinance would amend TMC Section 91.3.2 regarding districts established and add TMC Section 91.52 regarding Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Revised Draft RIH-OZ Ordinance

2. February 5th and March 19th Planning Commission items

STAFF CONTACT
Kevin Joe, Planning Associate
[email protected]
Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager
[email protected]
3 16
4 ITEM 8C
ATTACHMENT 1

REVISED DRAFT RIH-OZ ORDINANCE
ITEM 8C
ATTACHMENT 1
17 ORDINANCE NO.___________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TORRANCE, CALIFRORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 91.3.2

REGARDING DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED OF THE TORRANCE
MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 52 OF
DIVISION 9 SECTION 91.52 REGARDING RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTION HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE.

LUS24-00006 CITY OF TORRANCE
WHEREAS, City Council adopted a Housing Element Update on June 14, 2022, which has been deemed compliant with state housing law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); and
WHEREAS, Program 1, Objective 7 of the Housing Element mandated an ordinance to revise the Zoning Code and Zoning Map to create a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone on properties designated in the Sites Inventory to allow for new low income and mixed-use housing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) that were prepared in conjunction with the Housing Element Update; and WHEREAS, no substantial changes are proposed under the project (an Ordinance to establish Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone) and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previously approved Negative Declaration (ND) due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is no “new information of substantial importance” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element pursuant to §65860 of the State Government Code.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1
That Section 91.3.2 entitled “District Established” shall be amended as follows:
“91.3.2 DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED.

In order to classify, regulate, construct and segregate the use of land and buildings, to regulate and restrict the height and bulk of buildings, and to regulate the area of yards and other open spaces about buildings, the following classes of districts are hereby established, which said several classes of districts are shown and delineated on that certain series of maps entitled “City of Torrance – Official Land Use Plan” which are hereby adopted and made a part of this Chapter by this reference:
5 18
R-1 Single family residence district
R-2 Two family residence district
R-3 Limited multiple family residence district
R-R-3 Restricted multiple family residence district
R-4 Unlimited multiple family residence district
R-5 Highrise residential district
L-P Limited professional office district
R-3-3 Three-unit multiple-family residential district
A-1 Light agricultural district
C-1 Retail commercial district
C-2 General commercial district
C-3 Solely commercial district
C-4 Shopping center district
C-5 Conditional commercial district
C-R Restricted commercial district
Civic Center district
M-1 Light manufacturing district
M-2 Heavy manufacturing district
M-L Limited manufacturing district
P-1 Open area – planting – parking
P-U Public use district
HMD Hospital-medical-dental district
RTH Residential townhouse district
Downtown Torrance district
R-H Hillside and local coastal overlay zone
P-D Planned development district
Madrona Marsh district
Small lot, low-medium overlay zone
HBCSP Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Zone
ROO Residential office overlay district
6 19
C/RTO Commercial/residential transition overlay district Downtown residential multiple-family residential district Torrance Tract overlay zone
HCO Housing Corridor Overlay Zone
RIH-OZ Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone
SECTION 2
That Article 52 entitled “RIH-OZ Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone” shall be added and to Chapter 1, Division 9 of the Torrance Municipal Code:
“ARTICLE 52 – RIH-OZ RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE

91.52.010 PURPOSE
The Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone creates opportunities for future affordable housing development on existing religious institutional land within the City of Torrance. The RIH-OZ was established as part of the implementation of the General Plan Housing Element and meeting the City’s Regional Housing Needs Assessment (RHNA) allocation. In addition to the General Plan Housing Element update, the Religious Institution Housing Overlay seeks to utilize State of California Senate Bill 4, signed into law on October 11, 2023, which permits housing as a use by right on lands owned by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution.

91.52.020 APPLICABILITY
The Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone is applicable toqualified properties that are owned on or before January 1, 2024 by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution which meet the criteria of State Government Code Sections 65913.6 and 65913.16 geographic areas shown on the Torrance Zoning Map.

91.52.030 RELATIONSHIP TO BASE ZONING DISTRICTS
a) The Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone is applied over base zoning districts and is elective, rather than mandatory. New housing development projects would be permitted uses by right on religious institutional land and properties where the RIH-OZ is applied are required to either comply with the requirements of the base zoning district, or elect to comply with the requirements of the RIH-OZ. Existing standards applicable to all zoning districts (e.g. sign standards, fence/wall standards, parking design standards) will still apply to properties utilizing the RIH-OZ, unless specifically established by the RIH-OZ. b) When RIH-OZ regulations conflict with the standards of the base district, the less restrictive standards will prevail.

91.52.040 PERMISSIBLE USES
In the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone, the uses permitted in the base district are permitted. Additionally, the following uses are permitted:
a) Single-family residence
7 20
b) Multi-family residence
c) Two-family residence
d) Flat building, apartment house, bachelor apartment
e) Bungalow court
f) Multiple-family residence
g) Multiple owner-occupied residential structures
h) Senior citizen housing

91.52.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The development standards of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone are established with two different Sub-Groups.

Sub-Group 1 is comprised of sites under 2 acres.

Sub-Group 2 is comprised of sites 2 acres or larger.

Existing structures shall not be deemed nonconforming for not meeting the standards of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.060 DENSITY
a) The goal of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone is to add very low-income and low-income housing in the City of Torrance on religious institutional grounds. The individual sites are listed by Appendix C: Sites Inventory, Table C-1. b) The maximum density shall be 31 dwelling units per acre.

91.52.080 SETBACKS
Encroachments such as decks, porches, and eave overhangs shall comply with the provisions of Division 9, Article 5 (Yards).
a) Front Yard.
8 21
1) Sub-Group 1: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. 2) Sub-Group 2: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. b) Side Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The side yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District, unless the side yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the side yard shall be 10 feet.
2) Sub-Group 2: The side yard shall be 10 feet; or 15 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District, or faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the side yard shall be 10 feet.
c) Rear Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The rear yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
2) Sub-Group 2: The rear yard shall be 10 feet; or 20 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
d) Yard Adjacent to Internal Drive Aisle. The yard adjacent to internal drive aisles shall be 5 feet.

91.52.090 USEABLE OPEN SPACE
Useable open space is not required on parcels within the Religious Institutional Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.100 PARKING
a) Existing Parking. Up to 50% of existing off-street parking required for the religious institution may be removed in order to construct new housing in place of the existing parking.
b) Minimum Parking Spaces Required. These minimum requirements replace the numerical provisions of Division 9, Chapter 3, Article 2 (Use and Parking Spaces Required). The remaining parking design standards of Division 9, Chapter 3 (Off-Street Parking) shall apply to all projects.
1) Sub-Group 1: A minimum of 0.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be provided. 2) Sub-Group 2: A minimum of 1 parking space per dwelling unit shall be provided. c) Tandem parking will be allowed.

91.52.110 RESIDENTIAL UNIT SIZES:

The Housing Corridor Overlay establishes the following minimum unit sizes for residential units.

91.52.120 COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS
a) Upper floor windows that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate obscured glass and/or a minimum five-foot sill height when allowed by the Building Code.
b) Balconies and upper floor decks that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate a minimum five-foot tall privacy walls that are constructed of a solid or opaque material.
c) Where parcels share a property line with single-family residential uses, a fence or wall constructed of solid and opaque material shall be erected not to exceed 8 feet in height.

91.52.130 NOTIFICATION
Upon issuance of building permits for a housing project developed under the RIH-OZ, the applicant shall post an information board along the front property line that displays:
a) Project address;
b) Description of the project that includes the number of housing units and maximum building height;
c) Building Permit case numbers issued for the project; d) Property owner’s name and phone number;
e) Contractor’s name and phone number;
f) Code Enforcement phone number where violation can be reported; c) The information board shall be a minimum 11 inches by 17 inches in size, weather-proof, visible from the public right-of-way, posted on the site throughout the duration of construction, and shall not be removed until after all project Building Permits have been finaled by the City of Torrance.”
SECTION 3
Any provisions of the Torrance Municipal Code or its appendices, or any other ordinances of the City inconsistent with this ordinance to the extent of the inconsistencies and no further, are repealed.

SECTION 5
This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days following adoption, this ordinance or a summary of this ordinance if authorized by the City Council, will be published at least once in the Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Torrance.
10 23
INTRODUCED and APPROVED this ____________ day _________ 2025.

ADOPTED and PASSED this ____________ day ____________ 2025. __________________________
Mayor George Chen
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

PATRICK Q. SULLIVAN, City Attorney ATTEST:

By: _______________________
Rebecca Poirer, City Clerk
_______________________________
Tatia Y . Strader, Assistant City Attorney
11 24
12 ITEM 8C
ATTACHMENT 2
FEBRUARY 5TH & MARCH 19TH

COMMISSION ITEMS
ITEM 8C
ATTACHMENT 2
25 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8A
DATE: March 19, 2025
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Kevin Joe, Planning Associate
Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Land Use Study LUS24-00006

Consideration of proposed amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code pertaining to Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone. This item is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3) and 15378(b)(5).

RECOMMENDATION
Recommendation of the Community Development Director that Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and provide input on the draft Ordinance.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Staff recommends an amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code to establish a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone (RIH-OZ). The RIH-OZ was identified as Program 7 of the recently adopted Housing Element Update (2022). The RIH-OZ creates the opportunity for affordable housing development on existing religious institutional land within the City. The RIH- OZ does not propose redevelopment of any religious facilities to residential.

DISCUSSION
Environmental Determination
The City Council adopted an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) that were prepared in conjunction with the Housing Element Update for the 6 th Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) Cycle. The RIH-OZ is one of programs of the adopted Housing Element. No substantial changes are proposed under the project (an Ordinance to establish a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone) and there are no substantial changes in circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previously approved Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. Therefore, the previous adopted ND adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project. This item is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15061 (b) (3) common sense exemption that CEQA applies only to projects, which have the potential for causing a significant effect on the environment and 15378 (b) (5) government activities that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment.

Background and Analysis
In 2020, the State Legislature passed AB 1851, which facilities the construction of housing on religious institution properties. Under AB 1851, a local agency is prohibited from requiring the replacement of more than 50 percent of the religious use parking spaces that displaced by the proposed housing development. In 2023, the State Legislature passed SB 4, which requires housing development project be a use by right on land owned by an independent institution for 13 26
higher education or religious institution on or before January 1, 2024, provided that the development is not adjoined to any site where more than one-third of square footage on the site is dedicated to industrial use. SB 4 requires that 100% of the units, exclusive of the manager’s, in the housing project be affordable to lower income households, except that 20% of the units may be for moderate income households, and 5% of the units may be staff of the independent institution for higher education or religious institution that owns the land. This bill would allow a local government to review the project for compliance with objective planning standards and evaluate potential environmentally impacts under CEQA, however the project cannot be subject to discretionary review.

On June 14, 2022, the City Council adopted the Housing Element Update for the 6th RHNA Cycle for the 2021 to 2029 planning period, which was deemed compliant with State housing law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). During the Housing Element Update stakeholder interview with service providers and affordable housing developers, partnering with religious institutions for developing affordable housing was cited as effective way of providing affordable housing. As a result, a Housing Element program was incorporated that called for revising the Zoning Code and Zone Map to establish a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone. RIH-OZ would apply to properties owned by and operated by religious institutions, but would not apply to properties leased for a religious institution. In order to qualify for the RIH- OZ, the units must be affordable to low income (80% area median income) households.

This Ordinance (Attachment 1) will amend the Zoning Map to create RIH-OZ for the properties designated in the Housing Element Sites Inventory and add a new Section 91.52 entitled “Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone” to the Torrance Municipal code to establish RIH-OZ objective development standards. The RIH-OZ is voluntary in that the owner can elect to develop housing pursuant to the development standards. The underlying permissible uses and development standards of the base zone will apply for owners that chooses not to pursue housing under the RIH-OZ.

RIH-OZ will allow single-family, two-family, multiple-family residential, and senior citizen housing uses by right without discretionary review. Development projects would still be subject to CEQA review to evaluate potential environmental impacts, such as traffic, noise, hydrology, and air quality.

The maximum density will be limited to 31 dwelling units per acre excluding units allowed under State Density Bonus law. The proposed development standards will include building stepbacks for building height over 30 feet, lower height limits and wider setbacks for buildings that are adjacent to properties in the R-1 Zone and compatibility standards to help protect impacts to neighboring uses. Existing standards applicable to all zoning districts will still apply to properties utilizing the RIH-OZ unless specifically addressed in the RIH-OZ. The table below summarizes the proposed development standards:

Sub-Group 1 Sub-Group 2
Maximum Density 31 du/ac 31 du/ac
Building Height 35 feet
27 feet if building is within 20
feet of abutting R-1 District
50 feet
35 feet if building is within 20
feet of abutting R-1 District
Building Stepbacks Building on lots adjacent to R-1 shall provide 5-foot setback for every additional 10 feet in height for building above 30 feet 14 27
Front Yard Setback 10 feet
15 feet if front yard faces a
major arterial or higher street
classification
10 feet
15 feet if front yard faces a
major arterial or higher street
classification
Side Yard Setback 5 feet
10 feet if side yar is adjacent
to R-1 or faces major arterial
or higher street classification
10 feet
15 feet if side yard is adjacent
to R-1
Rear Yard Setback 5 feet
10 feet if rear yard is adjacent
to R-1
10 feet
20 feet if rear yard is adjacent
to R-1
Parking 0.5 space per dwelling 1 space per dwelling

These development standards were created with the assistance of a consultant to implement a Housing Element program and crafted to be able to accommodate a portion of the City’s RHNA obligation.

The Housing Element Sites Inventory identified 25 RIH-OZ sites (Attachment 2) that could potentially accommodate 267 units, assuming development meeting the target density of 23.25 dwelling per acre, towards the City’s low income RHNA of 2,844 units. The RIH-OZ ordinance as currently drafted will apply to the 25 church sites identified in the Housing Element Sites Inventory.

Staff will be revising ordinance so the RIH-OZ will apply to all parcels City wide that are owned on or before January 1, 2024 by an independent institution of higher education or religious institution and meet the eligibility requirements of SB 4 to ensure that the proposed housing developments on these sites will be uniformly regulated.

Staff recommends that the Planning Commission conduct a public hearing to receive public comments, provide input on the draft Ordinance and continue this item to a date uncertain to allow staff to further refine the draft Ordinance.

Correspondence was received regarding this item and is attached herewith for your consideration (Attachment 3). The correspondence raises concerns relating to traffic, parking, light and views and opposition to the proposed ordinance. The proposed ordinance will provide for objective development standards and compatibility standards to mitigate potential light and privacy impacts to surrounding uses. RIH-OZ projects will be subject to the City’s Noise Ordinance and CEQA review. Under AB 1851, the City is prohibited from requiring the replacement of more than 50 percent of the religious use parking spaces displaced by the housing development. Under SB 4, the City may require up to one parking space per unit. As the RIH-OZ is a program of the adopted Housing Element and helps satisfy the City’s RHNA obligation, the City must implement the RIH- OZ or face considerable fines from the State if it is found that the city in not in substantial compliance with their Housing Element.

Staff recommends that Planning Commission conduct hearing to receive public comments, provide input on the draft Ordinance, and continue this item to May 7, 2025 Planning Commission meeting to allow staff time to prepare revisions and for the revised Ordinance to be reviewed by the City Attorney’s Office.

15 28

PUBLIC NOTICE
Pursuant to AB 2904, notices of the public hearing were made no less than 20 calendar days before the Planning Commission meeting. Notices were published in the local newspaper (The Daily Breeze), posted on the 25 RIH-OZ sites, and posted on the City of Torrance webpage on February 28, 2025, 20 calendars days before the Planning Commission meeting.

DRAFT CODE AMENDMENTS
The draft Ordinance that contains amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code is attached. The proposed Ordinance would amend TMC Section 91.3.2 regarding districts established and add TMC Section 91.52 regarding Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft RIH-OZ Ordinance

2. RIH-OZ Sites

3. Correspondence

STAFF CONTACT
Kevin Joe, Planning Associate
[email protected]
Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager
[email protected]

16 29
17 ATTACHMENT 1

DRAFT RIH-OZ ORDINANCE
ITEM 8A
30 ORDINANCE NO.___________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TORRANCE, CALIFRORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 91.3.2

REGARDING DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED OF THE TORRANCE
MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 52 OF
DIVISION 9 SECTION 91.52 REGARDING RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTION HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE.

LUS24-00006 CITY OF TORRANCE
WHEREAS, City Council adopted a Housing Element Update on June 14, 2022, which has been deemed compliant with state housing law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); and
WHEREAS, Program 1, Objective 7 of the Housing Element mandated an ordinance to revise the Zoning Code and Zoning Map to create a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone on properties designated in the Sites Inventory to allow for new low income and mixed-use housing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) that were prepared in conjunction with the Housing Element Update; and WHEREAS, no substantial changes are proposed under the project (an Ordinance to establish Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone) and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previously approved Negative Declaration (ND) due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is no “new information of substantial importance” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element pursuant to §65860 of the State Government Code.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1
That Section 91.3.2 entitled “District Established” shall be amended as follows:
“91.3.2 DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED.

In order to classify, regulate, construct and segregate the use of land and buildings, to regulate and restrict the height and bulk of buildings, and to regulate the area of yards and other open spaces about buildings, the following classes of districts are hereby established, which said several classes of districts are shown and delineated on that certain series of maps entitled “City of Torrance – Official Land Use Plan” which are hereby adopted and made a part of this Chapter by this reference:
18 31
R-1 Single family residence district
R-2 Two family residence district
R-3 Limited multiple family residence district
R-R-3 Restricted multiple family residence district
R-4 Unlimited multiple family residence district
R-5 Highrise residential district
L-P Limited professional office district
R-3-3 Three-unit multiple-family residential district
A-1 Light agricultural district
C-1 Retail commercial district
C-2 General commercial district
C-3 Solely commercial district
C-4 Shopping center district
C-5 Conditional commercial district
C-R Restricted commercial district
Civic Center district
M-1 Light manufacturing district
M-2 Heavy manufacturing district
M-L Limited manufacturing district
P-1 Open area – planting – parking
P-U Public use district
HMD Hospital-medical-dental district
RTH Residential townhouse district
Downtown Torrance district
R-H Hillside and local coastal overlay zone
P-D Planned development district
Madrona Marsh district
Small lot, low-medium overlay zone
HBCSP Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Zone
ROO Residential office overlay district
19 32
C/RTO Commercial/residential transition overlay district Downtown residential multiple-family residential district Torrance Tract overlay zone
HCO Housing Corridor Overlay Zone
RIH-OZ Religious institution housing overlay zone
SECTION 2
That Article 52 entitled “RIH-OZ Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone” shall be added and to Chapter 1, Division 9 of the Torrance Municipal Code:
“ARTICLE 52 – RIH-OZ RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE

91.52.020 APPLICABILITY
The Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone is applicable to geographic areas shown on the Torrance Zoning Map.

91.52.040 PERMISSIBLE USES
In the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone, the uses permitted in the base district are permitted. Additionally, the following uses are permitted:
a) Single-family residence
b) Multi-family residence
c) Two-family residence
20 33
d) Flat building, apartment house, bachelor apartment
e) Bungalow court
f) Multiple-family residence
g) Multiple owner-occupied residential structures
h) Senior citizen housing

91.52.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The development standards of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone are established with two different Sub-Groups.

Sub-Group 1 is comprised of sites under 2 acres.

Sub-Group 2 is comprised of sites 2 acres or larger.

Existing structures shall not be deemed nonconforming for not meeting the standards of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.080 SETBACKS
Encroachments such as decks, porches, and eave overhangs shall comply with the provisions of Division 9, Article 5 (Yards).
a) Front Yard.
1) Sub-Group 1: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. 21 34
2) Sub-Group 2: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. b) Side Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The side yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District, unless the side yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the side yard shall be 10 feet.
2) Sub-Group 2: The side yard shall be 10 feet; or 15 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District, or faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the side yard shall be 10 feet.
c) Rear Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The rear yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
2) Sub-Group 2: The rear yard shall be 10 feet; or 20 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
d) Yard Adjacent to Internal Drive Aisle. The yard adjacent to internal drive aisles shall be 5 feet.

91.52.090 USEABLE OPEN SPACE
Useable open space is not required on parcels within the Religious Institutional Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.100 PARKING
a) Existing Parking. Up to 50% of existing off-street parking required for the religious institution may be removed in order to construct new housing in place of the existing parking.
b) Minimum Parking Spaces Required. These minimum requirements replace the numerical provisions of Division 9, Chapter 3, Article 2 (Use and Parking Spaces Required). The remaining parking design standards of Division 9, Chapter 3 (Off-Street Parking) shall apply to all projects.
1) Sub-Group 1: A minimum of 0.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be provided. 2) Sub-Group 2: A minimum of 1 parking space per dwelling unit shall be provided. c) Tandem parking will be allowed.

91.52.110 RESIDENTIAL UNIT SIZES:

The Housing Corridor Overlay establishes the following minimum unit sizes for residential units.

91.52.120 COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS
a) Upper floor windows that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate obscured glass and/or a minimum five-foot sill height when allowed by the Building Code.
b) Balconies and upper floor decks that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate a minimum five-foot tall privacy walls that are constructed of a solid or opaque material.
c) Where parcels share a property line with single-family residential uses, a fence or wall constructed of solid and opaque material shall be erected not to exceed 8 feet in height.” SECTION 3
Any provisions of the Torrance Municipal Code or its appendices, or any other ordinances of the City inconsistent with this ordinance to the extent of the inconsistencies and no further, are repealed.

SECTION 5
This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days following adoption, this ordinance or a summary of this ordinance if authorized by the City Council, will be published at least once in the Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Torrance.

INTRODUCED and APPROVED this ____________ day _________ 2025.

ADOPTED and PASSED this ____________ day ____________ 2025. __________________________
Mayor George Chen
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

PATRICK Q. SULLIVAN, City Attorney ATTEST:

By: _______________________
Rebecca Poirer, City Clerk
_______________________________
Tatia Y . Strader, Assistant City Attorney
23 36
24 ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 8A

RIH-OZ SITES
37 Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone
Housing Element Sites Inventory
Site
Number APN Address Base Zoning
Zoning
Overlay
Net Realistic
Capacity
33 7519-025-049
21100 Victor St
R-3
14 63
7370-002-002
2300 Sepulveda Blvd
C-3/P1
2 88
7357-010-012
1900 Crenshaw Blvd
M-2
16 94
7514-023-030
330 Palos Verdes Blvd
R-3
Hillside
10 106
7371-020-016
2051 236th St
R-1
2 131
4087-016-033
16831 Ainsworth Ave
R-3/C-2
25 146
7370-010-009
2150 Sepulva Blvd
C-3
5 177
7524-015-104
3611 Torrance Blvd
H-DA2
9 193
7547-003-015
3646 Newton St
R-3
5 216
7528-005-009
22605 Kent Ave
R-3
18 231
7371-020-032
2059 236th St
R-1
0 241
7534-006-012
4000 Pacific Coast Hwy
C-2
15 254
7511-021-004
375 Palos Verdes Blvd
R-3
Hillside
9 311
4088-006-027
17910 Prairie Ave
R-3
21 314
4085-032-008
18015 Prairie Ave
A-1
4 332
7359-023-038
2900 Carson St
R-2
19 353
7524-006-001
4527 Spencer St
R-3
2 361
4096-009-067
2115 182nd St
C-3/P1
7 366
7519-026-040
4915 Emerald St/20730 Victor St
R-1
9 369
7524-007-035
4345 Emerald St
ML (M-1PP)
25 391
7514-005-005
6122 Pacific Coast Hwy
R-3
4 400
7362-014-011
2930 El Dorado St
R-1
9 420
7371-020-041
2077 236th St
R-1
4 493
7527-021-006
4565 Sharynne Ln
A-1
8 495
7377-013-001
2701 237th St
M-1PP
25 267
25 38
26 ATTACHMENT 3

CORRESPONDENCE
ITEM 8A
39 1
Joe, Kevin
From:

Anthony Valentino
Sent:

Wednesday, March 5, 2025 2:30 PM
To:

Joe, Kevin
Cc:

Tim Donahue
Subject:

Re: LUS24-00006 - Hillside Overlay Suggestions
Good Afternoon Kevin,
Are you available to connect tomorrow or early next week? Tim has gathered a few bullet points, summarizing many bits we’ve heard from the neighborhood that I’d love to take a look at with you for incorporation. Below is a snippet of those points, echoing the voices of many. Please let me know a good time and day to connect.
 Please add mechanism for oversight, accountability and enforcement to the RIZ-OH amendment draft.
 Parking and traffic study should be mandated prior to construction. Please also consider a light and view study.
 Please limit ancillary uses; as an example - if the location is a church, prohibit new construction from being used as extension of school. And if it is a school, require the buildings to be used as housing only (eg cannot be used for office, rec center or to offset other buildings which would be turned into housing in exchange for the new construction.)  Deed restrictions required by SB4 must be amended.
 Structures should be no higher than needed, ideally limiting height using code examples below.  Mitigate view and sunlight impacts as much as possible using setbacks, building measurement, view and sunlight standards.

Thank you again for your efforts on this. Please let us know if there is anything else we can help with.

Kind regards,
-Anthony
On Thu, Feb 27, 2025 at 2:12 PM Anthony Valentino < > wrote:

Good Morning Kevin & Oscar -
First Kevin & Oscar - thank you so much for your efforts on this. Kevin - I greatly appreciate your time yesterday and especially the kindness expressed by you and your team in sharing the draft amendment in advance of the planning commission meeting on 03-19.

I can empathize with the need to adhere to state regulatory requirements while maximizing local regulations that make our city the beautiful place you’ve worked for years to create. And, many neighbors are concerned about the impact to their properties and preservation of the Hillside Overlay. It goes without saying - everyone in the hillside overlay prefers upholding the hillside overlay standards for property within the hillside overlay, and if it's possible to differing requirements for hillside overlay. 27 40
28 41
3 1. For properties with multiple buildings on a slope or hill , the maximum allowable height for any new
SB 4 housing developmentshall be measured from the finished grade of the lowest existing building on the religious institution’s lot, rather than from the specific building pad of the new development.

2. The highest point of any new structure shall not exceed the elevation of the lowest existing building on the lot plus one additional story, as permitted under SB 4,not to exceed 24 feet.

3. If a property contains multiple structures atvarying elevations, thelowest finished grade on the site shall be used to determine themaximum allowable height for all new buildings constructed under SB 4.

4. Any request for an exemption from this height limit shall require objective justification, such as compliance with existing zoning overlays or necessary safety accommodations.

RE: 91.52.080 SETBACKS
SB4 does not stipulate setback requirements, and by moving the setback requirement out for any new building over ##-feet in height, you can assure the hillside is “generally’ preserved. Here are some suggestions:

A. Standard Setback Requirements

1. Minimum Rear Setback:
o Any new housing developmentup to 24 feet in height must maintain aminimum 25-foot rear setback if adjacent to a residential property.
o Any structureover 24 feet in height must maintain aminimum 35-foot rear setback if adjacent to a residential property.

2. Minimum Side Setback:
o Any new housing developmentwithin 50 feet of a residential property must maintain a minimum side setback of 15 feet.
o If the new building isover 24 feet in height, the side setback must increase to25 feet.

B. Additional Step-Back for Increased Height

1. If a buildingexceeds 30 feet in height, the portion of the structure above24 feet must bestepped back an additional 15 feet from anyadjacent residential property line.

2. For everyadditional 5 feet in height beyond 35 feet, anextra 5-foot setback shall be required.

C. Increased Setback for Large Developments

1. Any SB 4 project withmore than 50 units must maintain aminimum 40-foot rear setback from adjacent single-family homes.

Section 5: View and Sunlight Protection
A. Shadow Impact Limitations

1. A developmentmay not cast a shadow coveringmore than 50% of an adjacent residential yard or primary living area for more thanthree consecutive hours between 9 AM and 3 PM on thewinter solstice (December 21).

2. If a projectexceeds the shadow limit, the developer shall providearchitectural modifications, including but not limited to:
o Height reduction
o Additional step-backs
o Increased setbacks
29 42
4 Section 6: Rooftop Features and Exceptions
A. Permitted Rooftop Features
The following featuresmay exceed the maximum height limit by up to 5 feet, provided they are architecturally integrated into the building design and do not obstruct significant views from neighboring properties:

1. Chimneys, vents, and exhaust stacks

2. HVAC and mechanical equipment, provided they are screened from public view

3. Solar panels, if mounted at an angle no greater than 15 degrees from the roof plane

4. Elevator or stair enclosures, provided they do not exceed 20% of the rooftop area B. Prohibited Rooftop Features

1. Enclosed rooftop structures
intended for habitable space, such as penthouses or recreational rooms, are not permitted to exceed the height limit.

2. Rooftop decks within 30 feet of a residential property must includeopaque privacy screening at least 6 feet in height to minimize visibility into adjacent properties.

3. Stairwells, Trellises and sunshades, Flag Poles, Spires, Elevators, Decorative Features such as bell towers, obelisks, catwalks, monuments, building mounted antennas, and telecommunication facilities etc. are not permitted above roofline(or add the details about the max allotted height for the building structure here)
Section 7: Ministerial Approval and Compliance with SB 4

1. This ordinance shall be enforced through the ministerial approval process in accordance with SB 4 (§65913.16).

2. A city may not deny an SB 4 project that meets the criteria outlined in this ordinance.

3. The City shall issue awritten determination of non-compliance within the timeframe specified under SB 4 (§65913.16(l)) if a project does not conform to these standards.

Section 8: Severability
If any provision of this ordinance is found to beinvalid or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall remain in full force and effect.
30 43
1 Joe, Kevin
From:

Marco A < >
Sent:

Tuesday, March 4, 2025 12:26 PM
To:

Planning Commission
Subject:

Subject: Strong Opposition to Proposed RIH-OZ Amendments Follow Up Flag:

Follow up
Flag Status:

Completed
Dear Kevin Joe and team,
I am writing as a concerned Torrance resident to express my firm opposition to the proposed amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code regarding the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone (RIH-OZ).

This rezoning plan raises serious concerns, particularly with the potential development of low-income housing on church parking lots adjacent to our schools. Such a proposal not only disrupts the intended use of these spaces but also feels like an infringement on the role and integrity of our religious institutions.

Furthermore, this plan does not serve the best interests of our residents. Instead, it risks increasing traffic congestion and crime within our communities while primarily benefiting developers rather than the people who live here.

I urge you to reconsider this proposal and prioritize policies that truly enhance the well-being and safety of Torrance residents. Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Marco Altieri ,
Torrance resident
You don't often get email from . Learn why this is important 31 44
AGENDA ITEM NO. 8A (SUPPLEMENTAL #1)
DATE: March 19, 2025
TO: Planning Commission
FROM: Kevin Joe, Planning Associate
Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager
SUBJECT: Land Use Study LUS24-00006

SUPPLEMENTAL
Correspondence was received after the distribution of the agenda packets and is attached herewith for your consideration.

ATTACHMENTS

1. Correspondence

STAFF CONTACT
Kevin Joe, Planning Associate
[email protected]
Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager
[email protected]

1 32
45 2
33 46
2 
 Without oversight and accountability, the door is open for developers to use the new  construction for any purpose they choose, nullifying the intent of SB4 entirely. There must be responsible oversight and accountability, including designation of the City offices responsible for this oversight.



 Assign a specific City department to oversee RIZ-OH compliance, ensuring that affordability  requirements, deed restrictions, and SB4 mandates are upheld beyond the initial development phase. 


 Implement annual reporting requirements for religious institutions and developers, including  occupancy and affordability verification.



 Establish clear penalties for non-compliance to deter violations and maintain program  integrity.




2. Strengthen Deed Restrictions and Affordability Protections 

 Codify long-term affordability requirements (minimum of 55 years) within the ordinance  to prevent conversion of units to market-rate housing. 


 Implement strict deed enforcement procedures to prevent the unauthorized sale or repurposing  of properties developed under RIZ-OH, should the property change hands. 



3. Address View, Traffic and Parking Impacts


 Require a comprehensive pre-construction traffic and parking impact study before any  RIZ-OH project is approved, with costs borne by the developer or institution. 


 Mandate mitigation strategies such as additional parking requirements, staggered use  schedules, and improved circulation planning to minimize disruptions to surrounding neighborhoods. 
3 34
47 3


 Require a view and environmental impact study to assure and limit impact. 




4. Prevent the Misuse of RIZ-OH for School or Non-Residential Expansion 

 Explicitly prohibit the conversion of residential units built under RIZ-OH into school  facilities, classrooms, offices, or other non-housing uses. 


 Ensure all RIZ-OH developments adhere strictly to SB4’s low-income housing intent. 


5. Prevent Unilateral Authority Over Homeowners’ Protected Views - The RIZ-OH Amendment, as currently drafted, creates an unprecedented and highly concerning shift in authority by effectively granting religious institution leaders the unilateral power to alter or obstruct the historically protected views of Santa Monica Bay which are a fundamental aspect of the character, value and livability of Riviera area hillside homes. This authority, which has traditionally been safeguarded under the Hillside Overlay for nearly five decades, would now rest with individuals who are not publicly elected, serve in transient roles, and may have no long-term stake in the affected communities. - This sets a dangerous precedent—allowing non-taxpaying religious institutions to make decisions that directly impact the property values and quality of life of taxpaying homeowners broadly and indefinitely, without any required input from those affected. The potential for legal challenges against the City is substantial, given the significant financial and personal investment residents have in preserving these views.
- It is imperative that the RIZ-OH Amendment be revised to ensure that no development under its framework can override or erode the rights of hillside homeowners who have relied on the long-standing protections of the Hillside Overlay. The City must not disregard nearly half a century of thoughtful urban planning in favor of an unbalanced policy that unfairly places homeowners at a permanent disadvantage. - Please see additional information in Addendum below.

6. Preserve Neighborhood Character and Protect Homeowners' Rights:

Ornamental Structure Restrictions and Reasonable Setbacks 

 Restrict non-essential ornamental structures (e.g., spires, cupolas, towers, ornaments,  rooflines) from exceeding the base district height limit to prevent unnecessary visual obstructions. SB4 does make specific mention or requirement to allow spires or other structures without height restrictions, it’s unclear why this is written as it is within  the amendment document.


4 35
48 4

 Strengthen setback and stepback requirements to mitigate view obstructions, preserve  sunlight access, and enhance privacy protections for adjacent properties. 

7. Implement Safety and Access Protections when Parcels are Shared By Grade Schools
When a K-8 school operates within the same parcel as a RIZ- OH housing development, additional safety
precautions should be clearly defined and enforced to protect school children in accordance with Megan’s Law, and maintain a secure learning environment. The current RIZ-OH draft does not outline any measures to address the coexistence of residential tenants and school operations, creating potential risks that could be prevented with clear guidelines. We recommend strongly considering the following in regards to school safety and access protections:
- Controlled Access and Secure Boundaries: Require secure fencing, controlled entry points, and physical separation between residential areas and school facilities to prevent unauthorized access to school grounds.
- Background Checks and Residency Restrictions: Implement tenant screening requirements similar to those used for housing near schools, ensuring that sex offender residency laws and other child safety protections are enforced.
- School-Specific Traffic and Parking Impact Mitigation: Require dedicated drop-off/pick-up zones, traffic flow plans, and separate parking areas to prevent conflicts between residential and school-related traffic.
- Design Requirements for Child Safety: Encourage site design elements such as clear pedestrian pathways, secure play areas, and sightline considerations to minimize risks to children from increased vehicle and foot traffic. These measures are not about opposing housing but rather ensuring safe, well- planned integration of housing and school functions.

RIZ-OH Amendment Proposed Solution:

Call for a Temporary Pause on RIZ-OH to Engage In Economic, Environmental, Public study and discourse.

The current draft amendment lacks essential protections, enforcement mechanisms, and mitigation strategies necessary to balance affordable housing development with responsible urban planning. Given these shortcomings, we strongly urge the City to pause the advancement of the RIZ-OH amendment and engage in a thorough review process that includes meaningful discourse and collaboration with affected residents.

We request a formal meeting with City officials, planning staff, and community stakeholders to discuss necessary revisions before this amendment proceeds to a vote. It is essential that any policy changes affecting our neighborhoods be implemented with transparency, due diligence, and a firm commitment to protecting the rights of all residents.

We appreciate your time and consideration of these urgent matters and look forward to your response. 5 36
49 6
37 50
6 Note that only 8% ( 2 sites of the 25 total ) of the designated RIZ-OH sites are affected by Hillside Overlay considerations, likely not enough to trigger non-compliance concerns - especially if building is permitted but with sensible height restrictions.

Option 3: Require Public Hearings for Projects Impacting Protected Views A straightforward compromise would be to mandate public hearings before any RIZ-OH project that could materially impact scenic views is approved. This would:

Ensure transparency and provide an opportunity for community input. Allow affected homeowners to propose reasonable mitigations. Encourage religious institutions and developers to collaborate with residents rather than act unilaterally. The City could also implement a tiered approval process, where minor projects (with little to no view impact) proceed without hearings, while larger or higher-density developments triggering view concerns automatically require formal public discussion and review.

Option 4: Incentivize Lower Heights & View-Friendly Design Rather than imposing strict prohibitions, the City could encourage view-sensitive development by offering incentives for projects that:

Limit building height to below a certain thresholds. Utilize tiered, stepback designs to preserve sightlines.

Implement privacy-enhancing features, such as strategic landscaping or setbacks. Proactively engage with neighbors before submitting plans. These incentives could include faster permitting, fee reductions, or density bonuses in less view-sensitive areas, encouraging developers to build responsibly while still making projects financially viable.

Option 5: Grandfather in Hillside Overlay Rights for Existing Homeowners A more aggressive but fair proposal would be to grandfather in Hillside Overlay protections for current homeowners, ensuring that:

Any RIZ-OH project affecting pre-existing homes with protected views must undergo a special review process.

Homeowners who purchased their properties with the expectation of protected views under the Hillside Overlay retain some level of legal recourse if those protections are eroded. New buyers purchasing in affected zones post-RIZ-OH implementation are made aware that SB4 may override previous protections. This would ensure equity and fairness by recognizing that homeowners relied on long-standing city policies when making major financial investments.

Again, note that only 8% ( 2 sites of the 25 total ) of the designated RIZ-OH sites are affected by Hillside Overlay considerations, likely not enough to trigger non-compliance concerns - especially if building is permitted – but with sensible height restrictions.

Option 6: Add Hillside Region to a Local Coastal Plan within the California Coastal Commission.

Coastal Commission assures and mitigates impact to the coastal environment from an array of sources including construction, industrialization, traffic, and more. Through these efforts, not only are scenic views often maintained, the coastline’s marine habitat is also preserved for generations to come. The California Coastal Commission has authority over SB4 and SB9, thereby requiring any new project within the coastal region to require approval and hearing from the CCC.
7 38
51 1
Joe, Kevin
From:

DANIEL HOVENSTINE < >
Sent:

Monday, March 17, 2025 7:20 PM
To:

[email protected]
Cc:

Mattucci, Aurelio; Council Meeting Public Comment; Planning Commission; CDD Info Subject:

Concern Regarding Land Use #LUS24-00006. Planning Commission Meeting 3/19/2025 [You don't o en get email from . Learn why this is important at h ps://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIden ﬁca on ]
Dear Members of the Planning Commission and City Council, I have been a resident of Torrance on Via La Selva for over 30 years. As such I have been subject to the Hillside Overlay rules and restric ons for my own home and so have my neighbors. I also am aware of the housing shortage within the State of CA and state mandates for ci es to iden fy property for poten al development and that certain city regula ons are waived on development projects.

However, these developments should not be allowed to proceed without any oversight and should contain protec ons against misuse by developers or individuals looking for opportuni es that will beneﬁt themselves in the name of a “housing crisis”. The proper es at 330 and 375 Palos Verde Ave are directly within my home views. In the interest of fairness to myself and the hundreds of my neighbors, ci zens of Torrance, I implore you to place full and appropriate safeguards and accountability language to the Amendments for Land Use # LUS24- 00006 (and all other similar provisions
throughout the city) to prevent abuse harmful to longstanding residents. Those within the Hillside Overlay who have been held to decades of regula ons deserve that respec ul considera on.

I am unable to a end the Planning Commission mee ng this week on Wed 3/19, but will be following the results and future ac ons regarding this ma er.

Sincerely, Dr. Daniel Hovens ne , , Hollywood Riviera
Sent from my iPad
8 39
52 1
Joe, Kevin
From:

Tim Donahue < >
Sent:

Tuesday, March 18, 2025 8:50 AM
To:

Joe, Kevin
Cc:

Anthony Valentino; Martinez, Oscar; Council Meeting Public Comment; Planning Commission; Chen, George; Mattucci, Aurelio
Subject:

Request for Meeting re: Land Use Study LUS24-00006 - Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone
Hello Mr. Joe,
I am writing to follow up on an email sent by my neighbor, Anthony Valentino, on March 5th, 12 days ago regarding the draft amendment for the RIH-OZ.

We completely understand that the City needs to abide by SB4 and that you're in the midst of drafting and passing the Land Use Study LUS24-00006 - Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone RIH-OZ amendment to create this zoning that SB4 calls for.

I think you're aware from earlier emails of most of the concerns. Anthony and I and a number of other neighbors have canvassed our neighborhood recently and there are most certainly a lot of others with these same concerns.

We live close to the church properties that will soon be able to build under this zoning and we feel that there are some important stipulations and omissions that could be added to the draft amendment - and we were truly hoping to be able to meet with you for a few moments at least to share our input with you.

We would very much appreciate it if you can find time for a short meeting - could you please let us know if there's a date/time that would work?
It seems time is of the essence since my understanding is that this amendment will come to a vote within a month perhaps if not sooner. We hope to hear from you.

Best regards and thanks for your consideration,
Tim Donahue
Redondo Beach
Some people who received this message don't often get email from .

Learn why this is important
9 40
53 1
Joe, Kevin
From:

Jonathon Markovich < >
Sent:

Tuesday, March 18, 2025 8:47 AM
To:

Joe, Kevin; Mattucci, Aurelio; [email protected]; Planning Commission; ;
Subject:

Public Comment - Reference #: LUS24-00006 - 375 Palos Verdes Blvd & 330 Palos Verdes Blvd
Hello- I want to add my comments to the public record regarding the potential building of low income housing to be built at the two sites along Palos Verdes Blvd.

My family lives in the home at , Redondo Beach, CA 90277. We love our quiet community, the Riviera shops, and the neighborhood we have lived in for over 15 years.

While I understand the state's need for housing these sites have never been deemed housing sites prior and are not zones for housing to be built. The issues that would be created from traffic to parking to lowering property values would not be fair or justified to the residents who live in this community.

The current amendment of SB4 lacks any enforcement or accountability of the religious institutions from repurposing or rezoning their properties as they wish. The city needs to hold all residents and businesses accountable for what they build and how they build it in order to maintain our neighborhood and community.

Also the height of the structures that are proposed would greatly have negative impacts on all the surrounding homes and the views that we purchased our homes with the understanding that they would be protected by the Hillside Overlay laws. The fact that they can build up to 35' plus any nonessential structure on top of that is baffling. There needs to be set guidelines for height, setbacks, and parking, and traffic in order to maintain the views, light, air, and privacy we all deem necessary in our lives.

The final issue I find with this process is that my family has received no notice or communication from either of the religious institutions or companies planning to build on these sites. The decision to not attempt to include the community shows the negligence for this entire process.

There are plenty of sites that the city and state owns in Torrance and surrounding neighborhoods that could provide housing for people. Building on these properties would be like trying to put a bandaid on a major issue.

I hope the city and commission reconsider this proposal and do not allow this to go any further.

I appreciate your time and consideration on this matter.

Thank you.
--
Jon Markovich
Some people who received this message don't often get email from .

Learn why this is important
10 41
54 2
11 42
55 1
Joe, Kevin
From:

Maureen March < >
Sent:

Tuesday, March 18, 2025 9:11 AM
To:

Joe, Kevin; Martinez, Oscar; Mattucci, Aurelio; Chen, George; Council Meeting Public Comment; Planning Commission
Subject:

RIH-OZ Amendment
Subject: Regarding RIH-OZ Amendment – Public Comments, Need Revisions Dear Mayor Chen and Members of the Torrance City Council, I understand that the City is working to comply with SB4 and support efforts to create more affordable housing. However, the current RIZ-OH amendment raises serious concerns about long-term enforcement, accountability, and fairness for the surrounding community. There are critical gaps in oversight that could lead to unintended consequences if left unaddressed.

As homeowners and citizens that we urge you to address these items within the City amendment:
 Height Restrictions Should Be Clear & Enforced – Non- essential structures like spires, cupolas,
and other decorative add-ons shouldn’t be allowed to exceed height limits. These don’t contribute to housing but do impact surrounding properties by further obstructing views.  Neighbors Deserve Advance Notice – Residents should be informed before religious institutions finalize plans for new developments. It’s only fair that nearby homeowners have a chance to understand what’s happening in their own neighborhood.
 Stronger Oversight & Accountability – A City department should be assigned to monitor compliance and enforce penalties when religious institutions fail to meet SB4’s requirements.

Without this, there’s no way to guarantee these projects will actually provide long- term affordable
housing.
 Deed Restrictions to Prevent Misuse – There’s currently nothing stopping a religious institution from developing housing and then selling it off without maintaining its affordability. A clear policy needs to be in place to prevent this loophole.

There is a responsible way to do all this. Please ensure that the RIZ-OH amendment includes these necessary safeguards so that both new residents and existing homeowners are treated fairly.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Maureen & Ken March
You don't often get email from .

Learn why this is important
12 43
56 2
Redondo Beach
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
13 44
57 1
Joe, Kevin
From:

J Cook < >
Sent:

Tuesday, March 18, 2025 11:26 AM
To:

Joe, Kevin
Cc:

Mattucci, Aurelio; Planning Commission; Council Meeting Public Comment Subject:

Land Use Number: LUS24-00006
To Torrance City Officials,
The Torrance Hillside Overlay Zone is what keeps this area in Torrance so beautiful. PLEASE hear the resident's voices! Keep Torrance charming and beautiful. Protect views, light, and the open air spaces.

Do not overbuild, creating crowded streets and neighborhoods. Keep Torrance a city where people want to live and visit. Torrance is a city we are proud to be a part of. You are a public official who can make a difference and keep the quality of Torrance alive.

Please support more safeguards and enforceability. We need accountability added to the amendments to prevent abuse for financial gain.

1. Enforcement of zoning

2. More studies

3. Affordable housing use only

4. Deed restrictions

5. Structure height restrictions

6. Require additional setbacks

7. Use other alternatives for low income housing
Please keep these issues in mind when planning for future city structures.

Sincerely, a concerned Torrance/Hollywood Riviera resident, Jill Cook
Redondo Beach, Calif
90277
Some people who received this message don't often get email from .

Learn why this is important
14 45
58 1
Joe, Kevin
From:

Sent:

Tuesday, March 18, 2025 12:27 PM
To:

Joe, Kevin; Mattucci, Aurelio; Council Meeting Public Comment; Planning Commission Subject:

Land Use Case #LUS24-00006
To whom it may concern,
I am concerned about repercussions to the city and existing residents due to the impacts of SB4. Both in dollars, time, and effort.

If at all possible, when creating your plans, please include qualifications on any plans that exceed current rules, such as the hillside overlay, any environmental requirements, and infrastructure capability (including, but not limited to water throughput, electricity access, internet bandwidth, traffic congestion/accidents due to). Meaning there needs to be true needed justification for the violation of existing city ordnance. Also that though they are not required to do environmental impacts and other necessary studies, that they must be done (even if the. The city that has to do so) to determine the impacts so that the project will have to contribute (maybe a regular fee by the church or something until the improvements are paid for) toward the needed updates as part of the project acceptance.

Also, please make sure there are severe penalties for not actually providing low cost housing and also that the low cost housing is not limited to certain religious beliefs to ensure no later misuse of the housing
Just because SB4 was passed without a lot of state residents being fully cognizant of the law, does not mean that the city cannot make criteria to enable the city and existing residents to avoid downstream problems
Thank you for your time.

Tracey Nakadate
Sent from Yahoo Mail for iPhone
You don't often get email from .

Learn why this is important
15 46
59 16
47 60
17 48
61 18
49 62
1 Joe, Kevin
From:

Rebecca Love < >
Sent:

Tuesday, March 18, 2025 3:23 PM
To:

Mattucci, Aurelio; Planning Commission; ; Council
Meeting Public Comment; Joe, Kevin; CDD Info
Subject:

Fwd: Public Comment - Reference #: LUS24-00006 - 375 Palos Verdes Blvd & 330 Palos Verdes Blvd
Hello-
I would like to add my comments to record regarding the potential building of low income housing along two sites on Palos Verdes Blvd.

My family lives in the lower Riviera and have been here for over a decade. We have built a life in this wonderful community and can't imagine living anywhere else.

I understand the state's need for housing, specifically low income but the impact it would have to this small community would be devastating. Our local infrastructure is not built to handle the added residents - parking, grocery stores, etc. etc.

The current amendment to SB4 overlooks the need for enforcement and accountability regarding how religious institutions repurpose or rezone their properties. The city must ensure that all residents and businesses are held responsible for their developments, as this is essential for preserving the character and cohesion of our neighborhood.

The proposed building heights are another serious concern. These structures would have a detrimental effect on the surrounding homes. There must be clear regulations in place to limit height, establish setbacks, and address parking and traffic concerns. This will ensure that the light, air, privacy, and scenic views we cherish remain intact.

Furthermore, my family has received no communication or notice from either the religious institutions or the developers planning these projects. The lack of outreach demonstrates a failure to involve the community in such an important decision, further undermining the process.

There are many other underutilized properties owned by the city and state in Torrance and nearby areas that could be used to address housing needs. Developing on these sites would be a more effective and thoughtful solution, rather than attempting to address a complex issue in a piecemeal fashion.

I urge the city and commission to reconsider this proposal and take the necessary steps to protect the interests of the community.

Thank you for your time.

Regards,
Some people who received this message don't often get email from . Learn why this is important 19 50
63 2
Rebecca M. Love
20 51
64 AGENDA ITEM NO. 8
E

DATE:

February
5 , 2025

TO:

Planning Commission

FROM:

Kevin Joe, Planning Associate

Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager

SUBJECT:

Land Use Study LUS24
-
00006

–

Religious
Institution
Housing
Overlay Zone

Workshop to introduce

proposed amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code
pertaining to Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone. This item is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15162
–

Subsequent EIRs and Negative Declarations
(a)(3).

RECOMMENDATION

Recommendation of the Community Development Director that Planning Commission conduct a
workshop to introduce proposed amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code pertaining to Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

DISCUSSION

The Housing Element is
one the
seven required
General Plan elements or chapters
that

is
certified by the Cal
ifornia Department of Housing and Community Development to ensure
compliance with State housing law.

The Housing Element
serves as the comprehensive plan
for promoting the production of safe, decent and affordable housing within the community.

In
accordance with State law,
cities shall
periodically
update their
Housing
Element
for
each
Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA)

cycle

to accommodate for
future housing growth

for persons

and households
of all income levels
.

The establishment of Religious Institution
Housing Overlay Zone (RIH
-
OZ) is one of the programs of the
6 th

RHNA Cycle (2021
-
2029)
Housing Element
U
pdate that was adopted in June 2022
that
helps
provide for adequate sites
to fulfill the City’s RHNA of 4,939
housing
units.

A city can face penalties and fines
if

it
is
found
that the city is
not
in substantial compliance with t
heir

Housing Element
.

The purpose of this workshop is to introduce the draft ordinance to create RIH -
OZ
(Attachment 1)
to allow the Planning Commission time to review the ordinance prior to discussing the matter and making a recommendation to City Council. The Planning Commission will not be taking action on this item at this time. This item will be brought before the Pl
anning Commission for your consideration
at the next
meeting
on February 19
th
.

RIH
-
OZ will apply to
25 parcels

(Attachment 2)
that have
been
identified in the Housing
Element Sites Inventory

which
are owned and
operated by

a religious institution
. RIH
-
OZ
will
allow
the development of
single
-
family,

two
-
family

multi
-
family, and senior citizen housing
uses
by right
without discretionary review

with a maximum allowable density of
31 dwelling
units per acre and target density of

23.25 dwelling units per acre
.

The development of
housing
pursued under the RIH
-
OZ
standards
is volun
tary and
uses permitted

and
development standards of

the underlying zo
ne

will apply
for
uses and
development

not
1 52
65 pursued under the RIH
-
OZ
.

Housing units developed under the RIH
-
OZ

must be affordable
to
low
er

income households (below 80% Area Me
dian Income)
.

The development
standards for
RIH
-
OZ

are established
with
two
different
categories
: Sub
-
Group 1

comp
rised of site
s

under
two acres and Sub
-
Group 2 comprised of sites
two acres
or larger.

A summary o
f

the
p
roposed development standards

is included below:

Sub
-
Group 1

Sub
-
Group 2

Maximum Density

31 du/ac

Building Height

35 feet

27 feet
if
building
is
within 20
feet of
abutting R
-
1 District

50 feet

35 feet
if
building
is
within 20
feet of abutting R
-
1 District

Building Stepback
s

Building
s on lots adjacent to R
-
1 shall provide
5 -
foot
setback for every additional 10 feet in height

for
building
height above 30 feet

Front
Setback

10 feet

15 feet
if front yard faces
a
major
arterial
or higher
street
classi
fi
cation

10 feet

15 feet if front yard faces a
major arterial or higher street
classification

Side Yard Setback

5 feet

10 feet
if
side yard
is

ad
jac
en
t to R
-
1 or fac
es
major arterial or higher
street classification

10 feet

15 feet if

side yard is
adjacent to R
-
1 Rear Yard Setback

5 feet

10 feet if rear

yard is
adjacent to R
-
1 10 feet

20 feet if rear yard is
adjacent to R
-
1 Parking

0.5 space per
unit

1 space per
unit

Development and c
ompatibility standards
, such as
requiring
additional
building stepbacks

for
when the height
exceeds 30 feet
,
property line
fe
ncing,
privacy walls

for balconies
,
and
privacy

glass

for
upper
floor windows
,
have
been incorporated

in the
draft Ordinance
to
provide
protect
ions to adjacent land uses
.

CONCLUSION

The purpose of this item is to
provide the Planning Commission with
sufficient time to review
and analyze the draft Ordinance
for
the RIH
-
OZ. As mentioned previously,
t
his item will be
brought before the Planning Commission for

a public hearing and

your consideration
at the
next meeting
on February 19
th
.

2 53
66 ATTACHMENTS

1. Draft RIH
-
OZ Ordinance

2. RIH
-
OZ Sites

STAFF CONTACT

Kevin Joe, Planning Associate

[email protected]

Oscar Martinez, Planning Manager

[email protected]

3 54
67 4
ATTACHMENT 1

DRAFT RIH-OZ ORDINANCE
ITEM 8E
55 68
ORDINANCE NO.___________

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
TORRANCE, CALIFRORNIA, AMENDING SECTION 91.3.2

REGARDING DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED OF THE TORRANCE
MUNICIPAL CODE AND ADDING CHAPTER 1, ARTICLE 52 OF
DIVISION 9 SECTION 91.52 REGARDING RELIGIOUS
INSTITUTION HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE.

LUS24-00006 CITY OF TORRANCE
WHEREAS, City Council adopted a Housing Element Update on June 14, 2022, which has been deemed compliant with state housing law by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD); and
WHEREAS, Program 1, Objective 7 of the Housing Element mandated an ordinance to revise the Zoning Code and Zoning Map to create a Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone on properties designated in the Sites Inventory to allow for new low income and mixed-use housing; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element; and WHEREAS, the City Council adopted an Initial Study and Negative Declaration (ND) that were prepared in conjunction with the Housing Element Update; and WHEREAS, no substantial changes are proposed under the project (an Ordinance to establish Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone) and there are no substantial changes in the circumstances under which the project will be undertaken that will require major revisions to the previously approved Negative Declaration (ND) due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects, or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects. There is no “new information of substantial importance” as that term is used in CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 (a)(3). Therefore, the previously adopted ND adequately discusses the potential impacts of the project; and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Torrance hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Torrance Municipal Code is consistent with the City’s General Plan Housing Element pursuant to §65860 of the State Government Code.

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF TORRANCE DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION 1
That Section 91.3.2 entitled “District Established” shall be amended as follows:
“91.3.2 DISTRICTS ESTABLISHED.

In order to classify, regulate, construct and segregate the use of land and buildings, to regulate and restrict the height and bulk of buildings, and to regulate the area of yards and other open spaces about buildings, the following classes of districts are hereby established, which said several classes of districts are shown and delineated on that certain series of maps entitled “City of Torrance – Official Land Use Plan” which are hereby adopted and made a part of this Chapter by this reference:
5 56
69 R-1 Single family residence district
R-2 Two family residence district
R-3 Limited multiple family residence district
R-R-3 Restricted multiple family residence district
R-4 Unlimited multiple family residence district
R-5 Highrise residential district
L-P Limited professional office district
R-3-3 Three-unit multiple-family residential district
A-1 Light agricultural district
C-1 Retail commercial district
C-2 General commercial district
C-3 Solely commercial district
C-4 Shopping center district
C-5 Conditional commercial district
C-R Restricted commercial district
Civic Center district
M-1 Light manufacturing district
M-2 Heavy manufacturing district
M-L Limited manufacturing district
P-1 Open area – planting – parking
P-U Public use district
HMD Hospital-medical-dental district
RTH Residential townhouse district
Downtown Torrance district
R-H Hillside and local coastal overlay zone
P-D Planned development district
Madrona Marsh district
Small lot, low-medium overlay zone
HBCSP Hawthorne Boulevard Corridor Specific Plan Zone
ROO Residential office overlay district
6 57
70 C/RTO Commercial/residential transition overlay district Downtown residential multiple-family residential district Torrance Tract overlay zone
HCO Housing Corridor Overlay Zone
RIH-OZ Religious institution housing overlay zone
SECTION 2
That Article 52 entitled “RIH-OZ Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone” shall be added and to Chapter 1, Division 9 of the Torrance Municipal Code:
“ARTICLE 52 – RIH-OZ RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE

91.52.020 APPLICABILITY
The Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone is applicable to geographic areas shown on the Torrance Zoning Map.

91.52.040 PERMISSIBLE USES
In the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone, the uses permitted in the base district are permitted. Additionally, the following uses are permitted:
a) Single-family residence
b) Multi-family residence
c) Two-family residence
7 58
71 d) Flat building, apartment house, bachelor apartment e) Bungalow court
f) Multiple-family residence
g) Multiple owner-occupied residential structures
h) Senior citizen housing

91.52.050 DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
The development standards of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone are established with two different Sub-Groups.

Sub-Group 1 is comprised of sites under 2 acres.

Sub-Group 2 is comprised of sites 2 acres or larger.

Existing structures shall not be deemed nonconforming for not meeting the standards of the Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.080 SETBACKS
Encroachments such as decks, porches, and eave overhangs shall comply with the provisions of Division 9, Article 5 (Yards).
a) Front Yard.
1) Sub-Group 1: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. 8 59
72 2) Sub-Group 2: The front yard shall be 10 feet, unless the front yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the front yard shall be 15 feet. b) Side Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The side yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District, unless the side yard faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the side yard shall be 10 feet.
2) Sub-Group 2: The side yard shall be 10 feet; or 15 feet where the side yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District, or faces a street identified as a major arterial or higher street classification in the Circulation Element, in which case the side yard shall be 10 feet.
c) Rear Yard
1) Sub-Group 1: The rear yard shall be 5 feet; or 10 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
2) Sub-Group 2: The rear yard shall be 10 feet; or 20 feet where the rear yard property line is adjacent to a property in the R-1 District.
d) Yard Adjacent to Internal Drive Aisle. The yard adjacent to internal drive aisles shall be 5 feet.

91.52.090 USEABLE OPEN SPACE
Useable open space is not required on parcels within the Religious Institutional Housing Overlay Zone.

91.52.100 PARKING
a) Existing Parking. Up to 50% of existing off-street parking required for the religious institution may be removed in order to construct new housing in place of the existing parking.
b) Minimum Parking Spaces Required. These minimum requirements replace the numerical provisions of Division 9, Chapter 3, Article 2 (Use and Parking Spaces Required). The remaining parking design standards of Division 9, Chapter 3 (Off-Street Parking) shall apply to all projects.
1) Sub-Group 1: A minimum of 0.5 parking spaces per dwelling unit shall be provided. 2) Sub-Group 2: A minimum of 1 parking space per dwelling unit shall be provided. c) Tandem parking will be allowed.

91.52.110 RESIDENTIAL UNIT SIZES:

The Housing Corridor Overlay establishes the following minimum unit sizes for residential units.

These minimum unit sizes supersede the standards established by Division 9, Article 20 (Living Areas).
a) Studio Unit. The minimum unit size shall be 450 square feet. b) One-Bedroom Unit. The minimum unit size shall be 600 square feet. c) Two-Bedroom Unit. The minimum unit size shall be 800 square feet. d) Three-Bedroom Unit or Greater. The minimum unit size shall be 1,000 square feet. 9 60
73 91.52.120 COMPATIBILITY STANDARDS
a) Upper floor windows that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate obscured glass and/or a minimum five-foot sill height when allowed by the Building Code.
b) Balconies and upper floor decks that are oriented towards existing residential land uses shall incorporate a minimum five-foot tall privacy walls that are constructed of a solid or opaque material.
c) Where parcels share a property line with single-family residential uses, a fence or wall constructed of solid and opaque material shall be erected not to exceed 8 feet in height.” SECTION 3
Any provisions of the Torrance Municipal Code or its appendices, or any other ordinances of the City inconsistent with this ordinance to the extent of the inconsistencies and no further, are repealed.

SECTION 5
This ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after the date of its adoption. Within fifteen (15) days following adoption, this ordinance or a summary of this ordinance if authorized by the City Council, will be published at least once in the Daily Breeze, a newspaper of general circulation, published and circulated in the City of Torrance.

INTRODUCED and APPROVED this ____________ day _________ 2025.

ADOPTED and PASSED this ____________ day ____________ 2025. __________________________
Mayor George Chen
APPROVED AS TO FORM:

PATRICK Q. SULLIVAN, City Attorney ATTEST:

By: _______________________
Rebecca Poirer, City Clerk
_______________________________
Tatia Y . Strader, Assistant City Attorney
10 61
74 11
ATTACHMENT 2
ITEM 8E

RIH-OZ SITES
62 75
Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone
Housing Element Sites Inventory
Site
Number APN Address Base Zoning
Zoning
Overlay
Net Realistic
Capacity
33 7519-025-049
21100 Victor St
R-3
14 63
7370-002-002
2300 Sepulveda Blvd
C-3/P1
2 88
7357-010-012
1900 Crenshaw Blvd
M-2
16 94
7514-023-030
330 Palos Verdes Blvd
R-3
Hillside
10 106
7371-020-016
2051 236th St
R-1
2 131
4087-016-033
16831 Ainsworth Ave
R-3/C-2
25 146
7370-010-009
2150 Sepulva Blvd
C-3
5 177
7524-015-104
3611 Torrance Blvd
H-DA2
9 193
7547-003-015
3646 Newton St
R-3
5 216
7528-005-009
22605 Kent Ave
R-3
18 231
7371-020-032
2059 236th St
R-1
0 241
7534-006-012
4000 Pacific Coast Hwy
C-2
15 254
7511-021-004
375 Palos Verdes Blvd
R-3
Hillside
9 311
4088-006-027
17910 Prairie Ave
R-3
21 314
4085-032-008
18015 Prairie Ave
A-1
4 332
7359-023-038
2900 Carson St
R-2
19 353
7524-006-001
4527 Spencer St
R-3
2 361
4096-009-067
2115 182nd St
C-3/P1
7 366
7519-026-040
4915 Emerald St/20730 Victor St
R-1
9 369
7524-007-035
4345 Emerald St
ML (M-1PP)
25 391
7514-005-005
6122 Pacific Coast Hwy
R-3
4 400
7362-014-011
2930 El Dorado St
R-1
9 420
7371-020-041
2077 236th St
R-1
4 493
7527-021-006
4565 Sharynne Ln
A-1
8 495
7377-013-001
2701 237th St
M-1PP
25 267
12 63
76 Sonia Delgado Planning Commission
Recording Secretary 2 March 19, 2025

5. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
A member of the public spoke.

6. CONSENT CALENDAR
6A. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: January 15, 2025
Chair Kartsonis stated that the minutes were revised in relation to a comment he made that was not correctly reflected in the minutes.

Commissioner Obejas requested to make a correction to the first line under Commission Oral Communications on page 9. City Clerk verified comment. It should state “ Commissioner Obejas urged the City to investigate educational opportunities for hardening properties against fires”.

MOTION: Commissioner Yeh moved to approve January 15, 2025, revised minutes, as amended . Commissioner Obejas seconded the motion; a roll call vote reflected 6-0 approval Commissioner Turner absent).

7. ADMINISTRATIVE MATTERS - None.

8. HEARINGS
8A. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT – CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF LUS24- 00006: CITY OF TORRANCE ( RELIGIOUS INSTITUTION

HOUSING OVERLAY ZONE)
Recommendation of the Community Development Director that Planning Commission conduct a public hearing for consideration of proposed amendments to the Torrance Municipal Code pertaining to Religious Institution Housing Overlay Zone ( RIH- OZ). This project is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) pursuant to Guidelines Section 15061( b)(3) and Section 15378( b)(5).

Planning Associate Joe presented Item 8A.

Tim Donahue is requesting timely notice of any potential development and to enforce building height limits.

Tom Coleman is concerned that the neighborhood will be affected negatively and requested that instead, the city pay the fines associated with not complying.

Anthony Valentino requested traffic studies.

Thomas Dorsey asked if commercial properties can be used for the housing development instead.

Anthony Todd urged that other properties be considered, maybe ones that are currently unused and may be a good option for housing.

Sara Ramsey- Duke stated that her view will be taken away and requested other options be found.

Mark Shrader stated that he paid an additional amount for his home for the view and requested other options be looked at.

Linda Perez is concerned about the limit on parking availability.

David Serrano requested empathy for the residents.
77 Sonia Delgado Planning Commission
Recording Secretary 3 March 19, 2025
Lisa Valentino is aware of the challenges the Commission is facing and because of her experience working in the housing department, believes that there are alternatives and may be able to help.

Elizabeth Spatz requested that other options be looked at.

Mike Griffiths recommended that the residents redirect their anger toward the state legislators who are forcing the cities to make housing changes.

Judy Brunetti stated that the Hillside Overlay is at risk and requested that Commissioners protect it.

Morrison Hyung doesn’t want churches destroyed to build homes and requested other options be searched.

Matt Merick stated housing developments should not be allowed in the parking areas.

Doug Mopan stated that the laws can be creatively administered by the city and there could be other solutions.

Tracy requested that the residents’ needs be considered as well and wants to make sure that the low- income housing will indeed stay low income.

Andy recommended that the city not approve building permits of the churches.

Michael Trujillo is concerned about increased traffic and safety of the neighborhood.

Chair Kartsonis disclosed that his home is more than 500ft but less than 1000ft from one of the subject sites but has no financial interest. He is not required to recuse himself but does need to disclose.

Chair Kartsonis questioned if the city would be in violation of AB 1851. Planning Associate Joe clarified that the city would not be in violation for being out of compliance, the city would be subject to penalties varying up to $ 100, 000 per month. Community Director Ramirez added that the city is trying to develop objective development standards so that the city can have some local control. The state can also enact the builders remedy which means that any housing development would bypass zoning and go straight to Building and Safety for construction. If the state deems necessary, they can do a receivership and take over the Planning Department. She advised that the comments from tonight’s meetings will be considered such as notifying the public. She stated that tonight’s meeting is just a workshop and that it will be brought back in a final form later.

Senior Planner Oorts confirmed that May 7, 2025, is the date that the public hearing will be brought back to the Commission.

In response to Commissioner Obejas, Planning Associate Joe confirmed that the churches would not be replaced that they may add to the property. Planning Associate Joe responded to Chair Kartsonis that the housing component would have to comply with the religious housing overlay, but any alteration related to the church, not the housing unit, would then be subject to the Hillside Overlay.

In response to Commissioner Obejas’, Planning Associate Joe confirmed that the top ornamental nonfunctional structures ( i.e. spires) would be included in the overall height limit standard. Senior Planner Oorts then added that currently the draft excludes spires but could be added.

In response to Commissioner Obejas, regarding the requirement of 95% affordable housing Senior Planner Oorts stated that the project may be eligible to receive density bonus units that could be offered at market rate for rent or for sale. It was also mentioned that the city needs to find 2,844 low- income units with the total figure being over 4,900 units. 78 Sonia Delgado Planning Commission
Recording Secretary 4 March 19, 2025
Commissioner Borgialli inquired if a church needs to be on the property. Planning Associate stated that the state law does not indicate that a church use does not have to be on the property, it simply must be owned by the religious/ educational institution. There are properties in the city that are owned by religious/ educational institutions that do not have a church on it.

Assistant City Attorney Strader affirmed that the purpose of the Planning Commission meetings is for the public to have the opportunity to participate.

In response to Commissioner Anunson Planning Associate Joe responded that the development under the overlay would be strictly voluntary. The institution would have to initiate development. If the institution chooses to expand instead then they can do so providing they follow the proper channels.

Community Development Director Ramirez confirmed that the goal is that the final draft will be ready for the Commission’ s approval and denial the next time it comes forward. It would then proceed to City Council for final review and approval or denial.

Community Development Director Ramirez added that Assembly Bill 2097 states no parking is required when any new development is within half a mile from a major transit stop. This bill is state law mandated. Due to AB2097, the parking requirements set by the RIH- OZ for sub- group 1 and sub- group 2 would no longer be required.

Planning Associate Joe clarified for Chair Kartsonis that the land needs to be owned by a religious/ higher education institution to be subject to the RIH- OZ. He added that the ownership of the parcel needs to have taken effect before January 1, 2024.

In response to Chair Kartsonis question, Planning Associate Joe responded that realistic capacity is based on the target density identified in the housing elements that are in inventory and may be subject to 31 dwellings per acre if factored in the size of the parcel and if the site is underdeveloped or underutilized. The maximum density bonus that can be applied is 50% and then thereafter an additional 50% on top.

RECESS: 8: 18 p.m.

RECONVENED: 8: 28 p.m.

ROLL CALL: A roll call reflected Commissioners Anunson, Borgialli, Obejas, Riggs, Yeh, and Chair Kartsonis present with Commissioner Turner absent.

Planning Associate Joe stated that the Housing Element Sites Inventory is static since the state legislature imposed the owned by date of January 1st. The site list will be extended beyond the 25 sites that are currently listed. He clarified that RHNA is not an obligation to build, it is to show that there are adequate zone sites to rent. He confirmed that the state bill defines religious institutions.

Senior Planner Oorts stated the ordinance will be drafted with development standards to account for local conditions where state law does not. Staff will work on what types of objective development standards can pass state law but also account for local conditions to address some concerns that relate to these properties.

Planning Associate Joe responded to Chair Kartsonis’ inquiries on the setbacks and design standards. Planning Associate Joe stated that there are objective design standards that are incorporated as part of the Housing Corridor Overlay. The obstructed view is not considered an objective standard. Senior Planner Oorts further explained that that the Torrance municipal code has a methodology for determining what is a view impact. Assistant City Attorney Strader 79 Sonia Delgado Planning Commission
Recording Secretary 5 March 19, 2025
added that the development standards must all be objective. It is not going to be the exact same way as it is now. Senior Planner Oorts added that if there was an opportunity to include some type of quantitative methodology in the ordinance for determining there being a view impact, then the state may decide that this standard has the intent of curing or procuring any type of development which would work against the effort of promoting housing.

Planning Associate Joe stated that the developments would be approved by right development. If there are notifications sent out to neighbors, it would strictly only for information.

Senior Planner followed up on Chair Kartsonis inquiry on rebuilding or make changes to the structure, then it would be brought as a public hearing towards the Planning Commission for discretionary review. However, under this ordinance, if it is a residential project on the surplus parking lot area then it would be approved.

Chair Kartsonis questioned the ability of the institution to sell the property after they have built to the max capacity allowed. Community Development Director Ramirez explained that the institution can build and sell if it is a separate parcel or single- family homes. There are no restrictions that can be imposed by the city.

Planning Associate Perez informed that there is a restriction that the property would have to stay affordable for 45- 50 years, but ownership can change.

MOTION: Commissioner Obejas moved to close the public hearing. Commissioner Borgialli seconded the motion; a roll call vote reflected 6-0 approval ( Commissioner Turner absent).
8B. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT – CONDUCT A PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVAL OF CUP25- 00005: JOHN LA ROCK ( CITY OF TORRANCE) Recommendation of the Community Development Director that Planning Commission conduct a public hearing and consider approval of a Conditional Use Permit to allow the conversion of existing open space and the construction of eight ( 8) pickleball courts, seating, and fencing bordering the proposed courts within an existing park ( Charles H. Wilson Park), on property located within the P-U Zone at 2200 Crenshaw Boulevard ( APN 7359- 011- 911). This project is Categorically Exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ( CEQA) per Guidelines Section 15301 – Existing Facility and Section 15323 – Normal Operations of Facilities for Public Gatherings. ( Res. No. 25-020)
Chair Kartsonis requested to be recused due to a possible perceived financial conflict because of the business relationship with the City of Torrance. Chair Kartsonis recused himself and Vice Chair Yeh stepped in as Acting Chair at 8:56pm.

Planning Associate Perez presented Item 8B.

Community Services Senior Business Manager Covarrubias, on behalf of the Community Services Director La Rock, provided additional information regarding this item.

Denise D. requested confirmation on parking standards and liability insurance being met.

Assistant City Attorney Strader confirmed.

Mike Griffiths stated he is in support of the installation of new pickleball courts since the current courts are unsafe.

Debbie Martin stated he was in support of new pickleball courts since more pickleball courts are needed for tournaments.

Andy suggested that the project move ahead and added that 8 courts are not enough courts.
80 0 7-08-25 LUS24-00006 Religious Overlay (AOKI) - Page 1 of 2 Daily Breeze
2615 Pacific Coast Highway #329
Hermosa Beach, California 90254
(310) 543-6635
0011742723
City of Torrance
3031 Torrance Blvd
Torrance, California 90503

PROOF OF PUBLICATION
(2015.5 C.C.P.)

STATE OF CALIFORNIA
County of Los Angeles
I am a citizen of the United States and
a resident of the County aforesaid; I
am over the age of eighteen years, and
not party to or interested in the above-
entitled matter. I am the principal clerk
of the printer of Daily Breeze, a
newspaper of general circulation,
printed and published in the City of
Torrance*, County of Los Angeles, and
which newspaper has been adjudged a
newspaper of general circulation by the
Superior Court of County of Los
Angeles, State of California, under the
date of June 15, 1945, Decree No.

Pomo C-606. The notice, of which the
annexed is a printed copy (set in type
not smaller than nonpareil), has been
published in each regular and entire
issue of said newspaper and not in any
supplement thereof on the following
dates, to wit:
06/27/2025
I certify (or declare) under the penalty
of perjury that the foregoing is true and
correct.

Dated at Hermosa Beach, California
On this 27th day of June, 2025.
______________________________
Signature
*Daily Breeze circulation includes the following
cities: Carson, Compton, Culver City, El
Segundo, Gardena, Harbor City, Hawthorne,
Hermosa Beach, Inglewood, Lawndale,
Lomita, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Manhattan
Beach, Palos Verdes Peninsula, Palos Verdes,
Rancho Palos Verdes, Rancho Palos Verdes
Estates, Redondo Beach, San Pedro, Santa
Monica, Torrance and Wilmington
81 ATTACHMENT 4
0 7-08-25 LUS24-00006 Religious Overlay (AOKI) - Page 2 of 2 82

Torrance City CouncilJuly 8, 2025

Torrance City Council
July 8, 2025