9A
Date: August 11, 2026
To: Honorable Mayor and Members of the City Council
From: Michelle Ramirez, Community Development Director
By: Austin Lujan, Planning Assistant | [email protected] Subject: Community Development – Supplemental Material #3 for Agenda Item 9A
DISCUSSION
Attached herewith for your consideration is a correspondence received after the item was prepared and distributed.
ATTACHMENT
1. Email Correspondence
1 From:
Date: August 6, 2026 at 4:50:28 AM PDT
To: "Lieu, Betty" <[email protected]>
Subject: Re: District 5 Resident Request — Deny Appeal of MHE25-00051
Thank you for the support and response. I appreciate it
On Wed, Aug 5, 2026 at 9:24 PM Lieu, Betty <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi ,
I’d like to revise my prior email below. I will listen to all the evidence presented at the council meeting, and review all the evidence provided to me, before I render a final decision.
Regards,
BETTY LIEU
Councilmember District #5
310-618-2801
[email protected]
3031 Torrance Blvd. | Torrance, CA 90503
TorranceCA.Gov Facebook
X (Formerly Twitter) Instagram
This email, and any attachments to it, may contain confidential information and is intended for the sole use of the intended recipient(s). If you are not the intended recipient, or believe that you may have received this email in error, please notify the sender and delete this email and any attachments. Any review, reliance, disclosure, copying, storing, distribution, forwarding without express permission, or use of the contents of the information received in error is strictly prohibited.
On Aug 4, 2026, at 5:20 PM, Lieu, Betty <[email protected]> wrote:
Hi ,
I am in receipt of your email. Thank you very much for letting me know of your position. I will be visiting the houses affected that you mentioned, tomorrow (Wednesday) either during the afternoon or early evening. I have made my position known on the Hillside Overlay Ordinance. I absolutely insist that we enforce it. I plan to be confirming the Planning Commission’s decision to deny the appeal.
2 3
when neighbor correspondence reports that reductions were resisted because the applicant would lose the ocean view the project is intended to create. A design intended to obtain a new private view by impairing existing views cannot reasonably be characterized as minimizing neighborhood impacts.
I am also deeply concerned about the precedent. Allowing applicants to use a garage addition and an attached ADU to accomplish vertical construction that conflicts with the practical protections of the Hillside Overlay would provide a roadmap for similar projects throughout District 5. Over time, that would render those protections largely meaningless.
The Planning Commission reviewed this project and denied the exemption. I respectfully ask you to support that decision, deny the appeal, and require any future proposal to be materially reduced in height, massing, and visual intrusion.
Thank you for representing District 5 and for considering the long-term consequences this decision may have for the entire hillside community.
Sincerely,
4