City of Redondo Beach - File #: PC25-1738

• File #: PC25-1738
• Type: Consent Item
• Status: Agenda Ready
• File created: 12/11/2025
• In control: Planning Commission
• On agenda: 12/18/2025
• Title: Public hearing for consideration of an Exemption Declaration and Coastal Development Permit to permit the construction of a Mixed-Use Residential Condominium Project with 49 Units, 5 of which are affordable to very low income and 3 of which are affordable to moderate-income households, 4 stories and 45 feet in height, with 17,000 square feet of commercial uses on the ground floor, and 2 floors of subterranean parking with up to 105 parking spaces, located on five parcels (7508012013, 7508012012, 7508012011, 7508012010, 7508012009) within a Commercial zone (C-2) 401-417 S. Pacific Coast Highway. PROPERTY OWNER: Redondo Seaside Living, LLC APPLICANT: Redondo Seaside Living, LLC LOCATION: 401 - 417 S. Pacific Coast Highway CASE NO: 2025-0074 RECOMMENDATION: 1. Open the public hearing and take testimony; 2. Close the public hearing; 3. Adopt the attached resolution by title only, waiving further reading. A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH ADOPTING ...

To:                                                               PLANNING COMMISSION

From:                                                               SEAN SCULLY, PLANNING MANAGER

TITLE

title    

Public hearing for consideration of an Exemption Declaration and Coastal Development Permit to permit the construction of a Mixed-Use Residential Condominium Project with 49 Units, 5 of which are affordable to very low income and 3 of which are affordable to moderate-income households, 4 stories and 45 feet in height, with 17,000 square feet of commercial uses on the ground floor, and 2 floors of subterranean parking with up to 105 parking spaces, located on five parcels (7508012013, 7508012012, 7508012011, 7508012010, 7508012009) within a Commercial zone (C-2) 401-417 S. Pacific Coast Highway.

                     PROPERTY OWNER: Redondo Seaside Living, LLC

                     APPLICANT: Redondo Seaside Living, LLC

                     LOCATION: 401 - 417 S. Pacific Coast Highway

                     CASE NO: 2025-0074

                     RECOMMENDATION:

1.                     Open the public hearing and take testimony;

2.                     Close the public hearing;

3.                     Adopt the attached resolution by title only, waiving further reading.

A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH ADOPTING A CEQA EXEMPTION DECLARATION, APPROVING REQUESTS UNDER STATE DENSITY BONUS LAW, AND APPROVING THE REQUEST FOR A COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE § 65912.124(e) BASED UPON A DETERMINATION THAT THE PROJECT -- CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM PROJECT WITH 49 UNITS, 5 OF WHICH ARE AFFORDABLE TO VERY LOW INCOME & 3 OF WHICH ARE AFFORDABLE TO MODERATE-INCOME HOUSEHOLDS, 4 STORIES AND 45 FEET IN HEIGHT, WITH 17,000 SQUARE FEET OF COMMERCIAL USES ON THE GROUND FLOOR, AND 2 FLOORS OF SUBTERRANEAN PARKING WITH UP TO 105 PARKING SPACES, LOCATED ON FIVE PARCELS (7508012013, 7508012012, 7508012011, 7508012010, 7508012009) WITHIN A COMMERCIAL ZONE (C-2) AT 401-417 S. PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (CASE NO. 2025-0074) IS “CONSISTENT WITH ALL OBJECTIVE STANDARDS” IN THE CERTIFIED LCP WITH THE APPLICATION OF ALLOWABLE CONCESSIONS AND WAIVERS PERMITTED BY DENSITY BONUS LAW

end

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:

On March 13, 2025, the City of Redondo Beach (“City”) received application materials on behalf of Wal2Wal Inc. (“Applicant”) to construct a four-story mixed-use multi-family residential condominium project at 401-417 South Pacific Coast Highway, consisting of 49 residential units, inclusive of 8 affordable units, and 17,000 square feet of ground-level commercial floor space (“Project”) with 2 subterranean parking levels providing 105 parking spaces.

The five parcels that comprise the Project site are zoned C-2, which does not allow for residential development. The Applicant, however, has proposed to invoke the “Affordable Housing and High Road Jobs Act of 2022” (Government Code § 65912.100 et seq., sometimes referred to as “AB 2011”), which allows the ministerial approval of mixed-income residential development (including some mixed-use buildings) on sites currently zoned for commercial or retail uses along a “commercial corridor.” Additionally, as the Project includes affordable housing units, the application also may take advantage of the benefits provided by State Density Bonus Law (Government Code § 65915, “SDBL”). The applicant also submitted an SB 330 preliminary application for the purpose of vesting rights to proceed with the rules and regulations in effect as of the date of their initial preliminary application.

The Project Description in the Background section of this Administrative Report provides a comprehensive description of the proposed Project. Also included within the Project Description section is a summary of the Project’s compliance with each required objective development standard (whether local or within the provisions of state law), or through the allowed incentives, concessions, and waivers pursuant to SDBL.

Because state law requires ministerial approval of a qualifying housing development project under AB 2011, this project typically would be approved administratively by staff. However, because the project site is located in the Coastal Zone, a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) is required, which is the only required entitlement being scheduled for a public hearing. The Planning Commission’s purview concerning this project is limited to the review of the requests for concessions and waivers pursuant to SDBL and the objective criteria in the City’s certified Local Coastal Program. Other entitlements that would typically be required of this project, such as Design Review and a Conditional Use Permit, are superseded by state law. Furthermore, several of the local zoning development standards are also superseded state law.

BACKGROUND:

Project Location, Uses, and Zoning

The project site is located on the west side of S. Pacific Coast Highway between Pearl Street and Ruby Street, at 401, 405, 411, 413, and 417 S. Pacific Coast Highway. Figure 1 below is an aerial of the project site and surrounding land uses. Figure 2 is the zoning map of the subject property and all surrounding properties. 

Figure 1 - Site Aerial

The project site is currently developed with three buildings on 401 and 405 S. Pacific Coast Highway (previous uses consist of varying commercial businesses). The parcels located at 411, 413, and 417 S. Pacific Coast Highway are vacant. The surrounding land uses north and south of the subject property along Pacific Coast Highway include a mix of small-scale office and various retail and service commercial uses and some legal non-conforming residential uses.

Figure 2 - Zoning Map

The project site encompasses five parcels, all zoned Commercial (C-2) with frontage along Pacific Coast Highway and Pearl Street. The project site is located within the City’s Coastal Zone. The surrounding zoning consists of High-Density Multi-family (R-3A) to the west, Commercial (C-2) to the east across S. Pacific Coast Highway, Commercial (C-2) to the south, and Mixed-Use (MU-3) across Pearl Street along S. Pacific Coast Highway to the north.

LEGAL BACKGROUND

A number of state laws affect the processing of the proposed mixed-income, mixed-use project. Each summary discussion below clarifies how these laws apply to the project.

The Housing Accountability Act (“HAA”)

The HAA (Government Code section 65589.5) prevents the city from denying or reducing the density of a housing development project, including a qualifying AB 2011 application, on the basis of subjective reasons, unless the City makes a “specific, adverse impact” finding.  If the project complies with the applicable objective standards, a city’s discretion is substantially limited. The City’s authority here is somewhat limited by the general protections of the HAA, but more importantly, the City’s authority is limited by AB 2011 itself, as described further below.

AB 2011

AB 2011 (and AB 2243, which revised AB 2011 and became effective on January 1, 2025) fundamentally changed the role of commercial zoning in housing production by mandating the ministerial approval of certain affordable housing projects and qualifying mixed-income projects located on “commercial corridors.” AB 2011 overrides local zoning and prohibits subjective design review, discretionary hearings, or CEQA review for qualifying projects. Because the project site in this instance is zoned C-2, which prohibits residential uses outright (but allows retail uses), the applicant is relying upon this state law to supersede local zoning and allow this application.

Setting aside the fact that the C-2 zone prohibits residential development, a project of this scope typically would require a public hearing before the Planning Commission to consider a Conditional Use Permit, Design Review, Subdivision, and a Coastal Development Permit. Pursuant to AB 2011, however, only a Coastal Development Permit entitlement applies to this project. Moreover, the City’s consideration of the CDP is limited to considering whether the proposed project complies with the objective standards in the City’s certified LCP.

Site Eligibility Requirements

Site eligibility requirements under AB 2011 depend on satisfying multiple requirements.

The site must abut a commercial corridor, defined as a non-freeway street with a right-of-way between 70 and 150 feet. Pacific Coast Highway meets this definition, as the right-of-way is approximately 80 feet. The intent behind this requirement is to ensure housing is placed along well-traveled arterial routes where transit and commercial services are concentrated.

The law prohibits sites that have industrial uses or are adjacent to industrial uses or contained tenant-occupied housing within the last 10 years or that require demolition of rent-controlled, income-restricted, or other protected housing. The project site is eligible because it does not contain, nor is it adjacent to, industrial uses, nor does the site contain any housing that was tenant-occupied within the last 10 years.

After carefully reviewing all site requirements, City staff have determined that the Project site is an eligible site for AB 2011 purposes.

Affordability Requirement

To qualify for the ministerial approval process, state law requires mixed-income housing projects to reserve a specific percentage of units for lower-income households. For mixed-income “owner-occupied housing development” projects, the statute sets a clear minimum requirement:

•                     At least 15% of the “base units” must be offered at an affordable cost to Lower Income households.

•                     A “base unit” is defined as the number of units the site could support without applying any density bonuses, including those allowed under state law. (Gov. Code §65912.101(a); §65912.122(a)).

•                     The percentage is calculated only on the base units, not on the total units proposed after bonuses.

The base unit calculation for the 401 - 417 S. PCH site is being calculated based on the following data:

•                     The lot area is 33,294 square feet (0.764 acres).

•                     The applied density is 35 DU/AC (MU-3 Zone).

•                     The resulting base density for the site is 26.74 units, rounded up to 27 units.

AB 2011 does not permit rounding the acreage to inflate the base-unit value, nor may the developer calculate affordability percentages using the total proposed units.

Utilizing the applied base density of 27 units, the AB 2011 affordability requirement is:

15% of 27 = 4.05 units, which is rounded up to 5 Lower Income (LI) units required.

As described further below, however, the applicant has proposed to provide deeper affordability and a greater percentage of deed-restricted affordable units (5 Very Low Income (VLI) units and 3 Moderate Income (MI) units).  This allows the applicant to both meet the affordability requirements to use the AB 2011 process and maximize benefits under SDBL.

Development Standards

In addition to “site criteria” requirements and the affordability requirement described above, the AB 2011 process prescribes a number of specific “development standards” that should apply in this instance.

These include allowable density, building height, setbacks, the amount of commercial square footage in a mixed-use project, and parking.  State law also provides that “other” local objective zoning standards shall apply. These “other” development standards are determined by identifying the closest zoning district that allows multifamily residential at the density proposed by the project. In this case staff determined that the “other” local zoning designation that applies is the City’s MU-3 zone, which is located immediately north of the subject site across Pearl Avenue.

In the “Project Description” section of this Administrative Report, we have analyzed the Project against all the applied state law standards and the City’s MU-3 zoning development standards. After careful review of the Project, City staff determined that the Project is in compliance with most of the applied state and local development standards and where the Project is not compliant with a specific development standard, the applicant has proposed either a concession or a waiver pursuant to SDBL.

Coastal Zone Requirements

Although AB 2011 creates a ministerial pathway for qualifying projects, AB 2011 originally was ambiguous concerning its application to projects located within the Coastal Zone. In 2024, AB 2243 clarified how AB 2011 applies to projects located within the coastal zone.

AB 2243 revises how AB 2011 applies to projects within the Coastal Zone by defining “exclusion zones” (where AB 2011 cannot be used) as:

•                     Coastal zones within the Coastal Commission’s appeal jurisdiction,

•                     Coastal areas lacking a certified LCP or LUP, and

•                     Areas at risk of five feet of sea level rise.

This project is not located within the Coastal Commission’s appeal jurisdiction, nor in an area at risk of five feet of sea level rise, and the Project is located within the City’s certified LCP, meaning the project remains an eligible AB 2011 project.

Additionally, state law now specifically grants the use of SDBL incentives/concessions or waivers/reductions of development standards to deviate from specified AB 2011 setback and height requirements and from any applicable local coastal program development standards. Furthermore, any SDBL incentives/concessions or waivers/reductions of local coastal program objective development standards granted to an AB 2011 project “shall not constitute a basis to find the project inconsistent with the local coastal program.”

While a Coastal Development Permit (CDP) for eligible projects located within the Coastal Zone still may be required, unlike typical CDPs, the City must issue the permit based solely on compliance with applicable objective LCP standards and as applied, AB 2011 and SDBL standards. This means the City cannot apply discretionary or subjective design review criteria from its LCP.

The City cannot rely on design compatibility, neighborhood context, aesthetic viewshed concerns, or similar subjective criteria to modify or deny the CDP for the project.

Although the LCP does not allow residential uses within the C-2 zone, AB 2011 mandates that the Project be treated as consistent related to land use for CDP purposes. The City is prohibited from treating the proposed land use as a CDP inconsistency.

Under AB 2011:

•                     The Commission cannot deny the project based on subjective standards.

•                     It cannot modify the use, density, height, design, or site layout unless an objective standard is violated and does not qualify for a SDBL concession or waiver.

•                     It cannot apply the LCP’s zoning prohibitions because AB 2011 overrides such local rules.

Therefore, the Commission’s scope is limited to verifying compliance with the applicable objective standards per Government Code § 65912.124(e), which states in part, “… A public agency with coastal development permitting authority shall approve a coastal development permit if it determines that the development is consistent with all objective standards of the local government’s certified local coastal program…”. Presented in a subsequent section of this Administrative Report and within the attached resolution is the proposed finding for the project.

State Density Bonus Law

As the Project applicant has agreed to include five (5) units that will be affordable to very low-income (VLI) households and three (3) units that will be made affordable to moderate income (MI) households, it qualifies for density bonuses and incentives/concessions, waivers, and parking ratio reductions, pursuant to Government Code § 65915 (SDBL).

Density Bonus Units

The following density bonus calculations are derived pursuant to SDBL and based upon the MU-3 zone density of 35 DU/AC and a total lot area of 33,294 square feet (0.764 acres), which results in a base unit count for the site of 26.74 units, rounded upward to 27 base units.

The Project proposes 5 VLI units (over 18% of the base density), which results in a density bonus of 50% under what is commonly referred to as the “Tier 1” density bonus, and 3 MI units (over 11% of the base density), which results in an additional density bonus of 35% under what is commonly referred to as the “Tier 2” density bonus.

•                     27 units x 50% = 13.5, rounded upward to 14 units

•                     27 units x 35% = 9.45, rounded upward to 10 units

•                     Total density bonus units = 24 units

•                     Total project units: 27 base units + 24 density bonus units = 51 units allowed

The Project proposes 49 units and therefore complies with the number of units allowed per SDBL.

Parking

Within SDBL are parking provisions (Government Code § 65915 (p)(1)) that limit the local permitting authority to the following specific residential parking standards:

•                     Zero to one bedroom: one onsite parking space.

•                     Two to three bedrooms: one and one-half onsite parking spaces.

•                     Four and more bedrooms: two and one-half parking spaces.

Pursuant to the SDBL parking provisions and based on the proposed bedroom size of the units, the Project is required to provide a total of 61 residential parking spaces. Below is the SDBL residential parking breakdown for the Project.

Residential:

•                     Zero to one bedroom: 26 units = 26 spaces

•                     Two to three bedrooms: 23 units = 35 spaces

•                     Total residential spaces: 61 spaces

The Project is proposing 61 residential spaces and 44 commercial spaces for a total of 105 parking spaces. As the Project complies with the prescribed SDBL residential parking standards, an SDBL concession for the residential parking is not required.

Concerning the commercial spaces, the project is proposing 44 commercial parking spaces. If the Project site were located within ½ mile of a “major transit stop”, pursuant to AB 2097, no commercial spaces would be required. See, Gov. Code § 65863.2. In relevant part, however, state law defines the term “major transit stop” to include the “intersection of two or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of 20 minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods.” Per staff’s analysis, there are no qualifying “major transit stops” within ½ mile of the Project site. Therefore, the Project is not subject to the limitations on imposing parking requirements per AB 2097.

Since SDBL does not prescribe a commercial parking standard, the applicable objective commercial parking standard for this Project is prescribed per RBMC § 10-5.1706(a)(1) “commercial uses not listed”. Per RBMC § 10-5.1706(a)(1), the “commercial uses not listed” parking standard requires one space per each 250 square feet of gross floor area. The resulting RBMC commercial parking requirement is 68 parking spaces in support of the 17,000 square feet of planned commercial use. However, the applicant is requesting a concession under SDBL to allow the Project to provide only 44 commercial parking spaces. Per local commercial parking standards, the proposed Project, if approved, would be deficient by 24 commercial parking spaces.

The Project does include a “shared parking management” concept that will allow for residents to utilize the commercial parking spaces during non-business hours and the commercial uses will have access to some residential spaces during business hours as parking management services will be provided for the Project. The proposed “shared parking management” service is subject to the City’s overlap parking requirements pursuant to RBMC § 10-5.1706 (d). That said, the Project does not comply with a requirement of the City’s overlap parking provisions in that the Project has not provided “A minimum two week (14 day) parking utilization survey…” Since the applicant has not conducted a comprehensive commercial use and parking utilization survey as required by the City’s Municipal Code, the applicant is requesting a “concession” pursuant to SDBL concerning shared parking.

With the application of the SDBL residential parking standard and the granting of the requested concessions related to the commercial parking (described further below), the Project would be compliant with parking regulations pursuant to SDBL.

Incentives, Concessions, and Waivers

As the Project proposes to include over 18% of the base units as affordable to VLI households, it qualifies for four (4) concessions, and separately, waivers from state and local development standards. As presented in the “Project Description,” the following lists the specific concessions and waivers requested by the applicant.

Concessions:

1.                     Increase FAR for mixed-use projects (commercial and residential) from 1.5 to 2.58 (RBMC § 10-5.915(a)(2)).

2.                     Decrease in required commercial parking from 68 to 44 (RBMC § 10-5.1706(a)(1)).

a.                     Note: A concession is not required for the residential parking as the residential parking complies with the required SDBL residential parking standard.

3.                     Deviate from “overlap (shared) parking requirements” (RBMC § 10-5.1706(D)(2)).

Waivers:

1.                     Increase in number of stories from 3 to 4 (RBMC § 10-5.915(e)(2)).

2.                     Reduce street side yard setback (pearl street) for a corner/reverse corner

lot from 10'-0" to 6'-0". (RBMC § 10-5.915(f)(2)(a))

3.                     Reduce setback along property lines abutting residential uses (starting at 2nd

floor and above) from 7'-0" x floor number to same setbacks as ground floor for all floors (Gov't Code § 65912.123(d)(3)(A)(ii)).

4.                     Reduce setback along property lines abutting non-residential uses from 15'-0" to 10'-0" (Gov't Code § 65912.123(d)(3)(B)).

5.                     Allow stairwell and elevator penthouse projections up to 15' - 7" above the permitted 45' height limit (RBMC § 10-5.1522(b)).  

Under SDBL, a qualifying project may receive a certain number of concessions/incentives (Gov’t Code § 65915(d)), and any waivers of development standards that are required to avoid physically precluding a qualifying project at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by state law (Gov’t Code § 65915(e)).  As stated previously, the project as proposed qualifies for four concessions based on the percentage of VLI affordable units the applicant is proposing to include in the Project. 

For concessions/incentives, state law provides that the City shall grant the requested concession unless the City makes one of the specific written findings, based on substantial evidence. The City bears the burden of proof for the denial of a concession/incentive.  Gov’t Code § 65915(d)(4).  The first possible finding of denial is that the requested incentive “does not result in identifiable and actual cost reductions, consistent with subdivision (k), to provide for affordable housing costs, as defined in Section 50052.5 of the Health and Safety Code.”  See, Gov’t Code § 65915(d)(1).  Alternatively, the City may deny a requested concession if it finds that either the requested concession is “contrary to state or federal law” or the request would have a “specific, adverse impact” upon public health and safety or on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources, and there is “no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact without rendering the development unaffordable to low-income and moderate-income households.”  The property here is not listed on the California Register of Historical Resources.  Moreover, staff is not aware of any specific state or federal law that would prohibit the requested concessions.  Finally, given the limited definition of “specific, adverse impact” in state law, staff is not aware of any public health and safety standard that could be used for this finding.

With respect to waivers, state law provides that a city shall not “apply any development standard that will have the effect of physically precluding the construction of a development meeting the criteria of subdivision (b) at the densities or with the concessions or incentives permitted by this section.”  See, Gov’t Code § 65915(e).  A city may only deny a requested waiver if it finds that the application of the development standard would not have the effect described above, or if it makes one of the limited findings in state law.  In short, a city may apply a development standard (i.e., deny a requested waiver) if the request would have a “specific, adverse impact” upon health or safety, where there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact.  Again, the term “specific, adverse impact” is defined in a limited way and must rely on objective, written public health and safety standards.  The only other basis for denial of a waiver would be if the request “would have an adverse impact on any real property that is listed in the California Register of Historical Resources” or “be contrary to state or federal law.”  The property here is not listed on the California Register of Historical Resources.  Moreover, staff is not aware of any specific state or federal law that would prohibit the requested waivers.  Again, given the limited definition of “specific, adverse impact” in state law, staff is not aware of any public health and safety standard that could be used here to deny the requested waivers.

In summary, the Project only will be consistent with all required objective standards if the concessions/incentives and waivers are granted.  Unless the Planning Commission can make one of the limited findings noted above, however, the Project will be eligible for the concessions/incentives and waivers.  Staff has prepared the draft resolution to approve the requested concessions/incentives and waivers and find the project to be consistent with all applicable objective standards (with the approval of the requests under SDBL).

PROJECT DESCRIPTION

The Applicant proposes to redevelop the project site by demolishing all existing structures on site to construct a four-story, mixed-use condominium building consisting of 49 residences (including 5 affordable units reserved for very low-income households and 3 units affordable for moderate income households), with 17,000 square feet of commercial uses on the ground floor.  The building will be 45 feet in height, with some projections up to 15’ - 7” above that height to allow for a stairwell and elevator penthouse. The project includes two floors of subterranean parking with up to 105 parking spaces.

The building exhibits a contemporary coastal mixed-use style with clean, simple massing and a strong horizontal emphasis. The façade is articulated with varied rooflines, recessed courtyards, projecting balconies, and alternating materials such as fiber-cement siding, plaster, and generous glazing at the ground floor. Planter boxes and balcony railings soften the upper levels, while large storefront openings at street level create an active, transparent edge along Pacific Coast Highway.

Primary vehicular access to the site will be provided from Pearl Street, with driveways oriented away from Pacific Coast Highway to reduce conflicts along the corridor. Residential and commercial pedestrian access will be either along PCH or from the interior parking garage. Landscaping will surround the perimeter of the site and will be conditioned to consist of drought-tolerant, California native plantings, reinforcing a coastal character while minimizing water use and long-term maintenance.

The project will contain two ground-floor commercial spaces and a shared amenities space intended to serve both residents of the project and members of the surrounding community. The development will provide a mix of indoor recreational areas and outdoor amenities, including approximately 3,988 square feet of roof deck space and a ground-floor pool courtyard. These outdoor uses will be designed and located so they are buffered from adjacent residential properties to the north and west through building placement, setbacks, and enhanced landscaping to limit noise and privacy impacts.

The 17,000 square feet of commercial is largely oriented towards Pacific Coast Highway with multiple storefronts and a large central courtyard all facing the highway. Some additional commercial space is also proposed behind the commercial fronting Pacific Coast Highway that is planned as gathering spaces, “we-work” and other multi-purpose uses to be available for the residents and the surrounding neighborhood.

Figure 3 - Project Rendering and Exterior Materials Pallete

Figure 4 - Site Plan

Figure 5 - West Elevation

Pursuant to state law, staff has concluded that the applied zoning for purposes of determining the allowable “use” and other applicable “objective standards” is the City’s MU-3 zone. As proposed, the project complies with the following MU-3 objective standards:

•                     Commercial FAR (0.3 - 0.7 required and 0.51 proposed),

•                     Minimum lot size (15,000 square feet required and 33,294 square feet proposed),

•                     Building height (45 feet required and 45 feet proposed)

•                     South side Interior setback (no setback required and 5 feet is provided), and

•                     Private storage space (19,600 cubic feet required and 19,600 cubic feet provided)

The Project relies on AB 2011 development standards for the following standards:

•                     Ground floor front setback (no setback is required - and 80 percent of the frontage along the commercial corridor must be within 10 feet of the street - and 3 feet is provided),

•                     Ground floor side (Pearl St) setback (10 foot setback is required and a 10 foot setback is provided on the ground floor)

•                     South Side interior setback (no setback is required and 5 feet is provided)

The Project relies upon concessions and waivers pursuant to SDBL concerning all remaining applicable objective standards. Refer to the section entitled “Incentives, Concessions, and Waivers” for the list of itemized concessions and waivers the project is requesting.  As proposed, with the approval of the concessions and waivers permitted by SDBL, the Project would comply with all required State and local zoning standards.

The following table entitled “The Projects Local and State Applied Objective Development Standards Matrix” itemizes all State and local zoning standards applied to the Project and identifies the Project’s compliance. Where the Project is not compliant, the table identifies the requested concessions and waivers per SDBL.

COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT

Pursuant to state law and Redondo Beach Municipal Code Section 10-5.2218, the proposed mixed-income, mixed-use, multi-family residential project requires the issuance of a Coastal Development Permit with Planning Commission approval. Government Code § 65912.124(e) contains the specific provision required of the public agency with coastal development permitting authority. AB 2011 specifically limits the City’s consideration of the CDP to the following: “A public agency with coastal development permitting authority shall approve a coastal development permit if it determines that the development is consistent with all objective standards of the local government’s certified local coastal program or, for areas that are not subject to a fully certified local coastal program, the certified land use plan of that area.” 

Below are each of the applied State and LCP development standards demonstrating “consistency” with the City’s LCP as prescribed by the governing State housing laws.

Pursuant to AB 2011, the applied zoning for purposes of determining the allowable “use” and other applicable “objective standards” is the City’s MU-3 zone. As proposed, the Project complies with the following MU-3 objective standards not otherwise superseded by state law:

•                     Allowed use (multi-family residential and commercial required, multi-family residential and commercial proposed)

•                     Commercial FAR (0.3 - 0.7 required, 0.51 proposed),

•                     Minimum lot size (15,000 square feet required, 33,294 square feet proposed), and

•                     Private storage space (19,600 cubic feet required, 19,600 cubic feet provided).

The Project utilizes AB 2011 development standards concerning the following standards:

•                     Ground floor front (PCH) setback (no setback is required and 3 feet is provided)

•                     Ground floor side (Pearl St) setback (10 foot setback is required and a 10 foot setback is provided on the ground floor)

•                     South Side interior setback (no setback is required and 5 feet is provided

The Project has requested the approval of concessions and waivers pursuant to SDBL concerning all remaining applicable objective standards. Below are the itemized concessions and waivers the project is requesting.

Concessions:

1.                     Increase FAR for mixed-use projects (commercial and residential) from 1.5 to 2.58 (RBMC § 10-5.915(a)(2)).

2.                     Decrease in required commercial parking from 68 to 44 (RBMC § 10-5.1706(a)(1)).

3.                     Deviate from “overlap (shared) parking requirements” (RBMC § 10-5.1706(D)(2)).

Waivers:

1.                     Increase in number of stories from 3 to 4 (RBMC § 10-5.915(e)(2)).

2.                     Reduce street side yard setback (pearl street) for a corner/reverse corner

lot from 10'-0" to 6'-0". (RBMC § 10-5.915(f)(2)(a))

3.                     Reduce setback along property lines abutting residential uses (starting at 2nd

floor and above) from 7'-0" x floor number to same setbacks as ground floor for all floors (Gov't Code § 65912.123(d)(3)(A)(ii)).

4.                     Reduce setback along property lines abutting non-residential uses from 15'-0" to 10'-0" (Gov't Code § 65912.123(d)(3)(B)).

5.                     Allow stairwell and elevator penthouse projections up to 15' - 7" above the permitted 45' height limit (RBMC § 10-5.1522(b)).

As proposed and with the approval of the concessions and waivers permitted by SDBL, staff recommends that the Commission find that the project is “consistent with all objective standards” in the certified LCP and is therefore approved.

ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS

The proposed development is exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because approval of the project is a ministerial action, and therefore CEQA does not apply pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080(b)(1) and CEQA Guidelines §15268. Additionally, Government Code §§65912.100 - 65912.124, establishing the AB 2011 ministerial approval process, expressly removes discretionary authority from local agencies for eligible mixed-income projects. As a result, CEQA does not apply, and the City is not required to evaluate alternatives or mitigation measures.

ATTACHMENTS

Attachment 1 - PC Resolution

Attachment 2 - Project Plans

Attachment 3 - Exemption Declaration