To: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
From: BRANDY FORBES, COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
TITLE
title
PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER THE DRAFT ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN (AACAP) WHICH DEFINES A NUMBER OF STRATEGIES AND IMPLEMENTABLE ACTIONS THAT WILL GUIDE THE FUTURE REVITALIZATION OF THE AREA, INCLUDING PHYSICAL PLACEMAKING ENHANCEMENTS, CONNECTIVITY TO SURROUNDING NEIGHBORHOODS, PARKING STRATEGIES, AND NEW GATHERING SPACES TO CREATE A SENSE OF “PLACE AND CHARACTER”.
ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2010-074, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING THE ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN (AACAP) AND A FINDING THAT THE AACAP IS NOT SUBJECT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA).
DISCUSSION AND DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING THE PREPERATION OF PRIORITY CODE AMENDMENTS NEEDED TO BEGIN IMPLEMENTING ELEMENTS OF THE AACAP;
OR
CONTINUE THE PUBLIC HEARING TO OCTOBER 13, 2020 TO FURTHER CONSIDER AND/OR EDIT THE DRAFT ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN (AACAP).
PROCEDURES:
a. Open the public hearing, take testimony;
b. Close the public hearing;
c. Adopt Resolution No. CC-2010-074 by title only adopting the Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan (AACAP) and a finding that the AACAP is not subject to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); or
d. As an alternative, continue the public hearing to October 13, 2020 to further consider and/or edit the Draft Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan.
end
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan (AACAP) is intended to guide and encourage change along the Corridors by providing a roadmap to activate, energize and revitalize these areas in a manner consistent with the community’s desires.
The purpose of the AACAP is to create a working document that identifies policy approaches and explicit actions that can be used by the City, property owners, and business owners/operators to activate, energize, and revitalize the Artesia and Aviation Corridors in a coordinated and consistent manner. The Area Plan is also intended to be used as a tool to help inform the City’s strategic planning efforts (what items should be prioritized when, and what resources should be allocated to a task). It will also serve as an interdepartmental tool/strategy document that helps to outline partnerships that are needed to accomplish a particular objective (improvements in the public right of way or sidewalks, for example).
This Administrative Report will focus on the most “actionable” elements of the Draft Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan (“AACAP” or “Area Plan”) within Chapter 3 - Placemaking, Chapter 4 - Mobility, and Chapter 6 - Implementation and conclude with a brief summary of the Area Plan’s overall implementation process and recommended constructive short-term “next steps”.
Before presenting the AACAP’s prescriptive solutions, focused options, and strategies in the “Placemaking”, “Mobility”, and “Implementation” chapters in the ANALYSIS section of this Administrative Report, a BACKGROUND section is included that summarizes the City Council’s actions and directions concerning the development of this Area Plan followed by a recap of the General Plan Advisory Committee’s (GPAC’s) recommended land use decisions that are critical to understanding the Area Plan’s scope. In addition to the City Council’s actions and directives, it is the GPAC’s recommended land use principles and themes that served to frame, shape, and guide the Area Plan’s content. The BACKGROUND section concludes with a brief summary of the rigorous analysis, technical studies, and robust public engagement process that also informed the Area Plan’s development over the past three (3) years. The BACKGROUND also describes the actions and recommendations from the Planning Commission’s three (3) public hearings concerning the AACAP. Below is an outline of the information presented in the BACKGROUND section of the report:
• City Council’s AACAP Actions - Directives
• GPAC’s Recommended Land Use Principals and Themes
o Maintain Existing Development Standards/Intensity
o “Organic Growth”
• Purpose of the AACAP
• How to Use the Area Plan
• Technical Studies Performed to Inform the AACAP
o Parking Study
o Market Analysis and Development Feasibility Study
• Public Input and Recommendations from the GPAC and Planning Commission
o Artesia Vitalization Strategy (2013)
o Artesia-Aviation Revitalization Committee (2018-2019)
o General Plan Update and Advisory Committee (GPAC, 2017-2020)
o North Redondo Beach Business Association (NRBBA) and Community Meeting Summary (2019-2020)
o Planning Commission’s Public Hearings
§ July16, 2020
§ August 20, 2020
§ September 17, 2020
Following the topics described above, the ANALYSIS section of the Administrative Report will present the actual strategies within the Area Plan for advancing the Corridors’ revitalization and conclude with a brief summary of the overall implementation program of the AACAP and two (2) of the most impactful short-term recommended “next steps”.
BACKGROUND
City Council’s AACAP Actions - Directives
At its meeting on June 20, 2017, the City Council approved a budget of $100,000 for expanding the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) and Placeworks, Inc.’s scope of work to include “planning and environmental services for the development of a planning document to effectively support revitalization of the Artesia Boulevard Corridor (Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan (AACAP))”.
At its meeting on December 19, 2017, the City Council advanced the AACAP revitalization efforts further with the approval of the first amendment to the agreement for consulting services between the City of Redondo Beach and Placworks, Inc. which included details for the development of the Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan with a scope of services and a total budget of $224,100 that included a parking utilization study, an economic feasibility and pro forma analysis of the Corridors, identification of revitalization strategy options, the preparation of the Area Plan that would serve as guidance for the future revitalization of the “Corridors”, three additional AACAP-focused GPAC meetings (3), an AACAP community wide meeting, and public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.
The City Council, at its meeting on April 16, 2019, as part of the second amendment to the City’s contract with Placeworks, Inc. revised the AACAP budget to downward by $20,000 with a more focused and simplified document for a new total of $204,100.
GPAC’s Recommended Land Use Principals and Themes:
Maintain Existing Development Standards/Intensity and “Organic Growth”
It is important to summarize at the outset of this Administrative Report the key determinations and recommendations by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), as it is the GPAC’s recommended land use principals and themes that serve to frame, shape, and guide the Area Plan’s content. The GPAC’s primary land use theme for the Corridors is to essentially maintain the existing land use development standards/intensity (floor area ratio and height) rather than significantly increase and intensify the allowable development standards to more aggressively incentivize the redevelopment of the properties along the Corridors. Instead of intensifying the development standards, the GPAC recommended, more flexibility with respect to the parking standards and a minor increase inf FAR from 0.5 to 0.6 as a way to stimulate improvements in the area.
Additional information that led to the GPAC’s position on this fundamental issue is presented in subsequent sections of this Administrative Report, but essentially the GPAC preferred revitalization strategies that were more long-term, measured, and “organic” rather than short-term, developer-driven changes. The following is a summary of the GPAC’s recommended land use principles and “themes” that served as the context for the development of the Area Plan and framed and guided the Draft AACAP towards small-scale revitalization strategies rather than a large-scale transformative approach:
• Maintain the existing development standards with the exception of a slight increase in floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6 from 0.5 for limited “preferred uses-professional office and restaurant” in limited areas designated as “Activity Nodes”.
o At their September 17, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council consider a FAR increase to something higher than the GPAC recommended 0.6 FAR suggested in the AACAP.
• Wait for the Galleria revitalization project to occur and mature to see how it may impact the “Corridors” before considering more intense development incentives.
• Preferred uses:
o Professional Office.
o Restaurants with outdoor dining.
• Target and incentivize the recommended “preferred uses” at a limited number of specific blocks, termed “Activity Nodes”, with limited relaxations of parking standards (such as changing parking ratios, considering shared parking strategies, and considering/allowing/encouraging connections between adjacent private parking areas).
It is important to note that the Planning Commission at their September 17, 2020 public hearing largely confirmed the GPAC’s approach with the exception of desire to allow some intensification of floor area ratio standards above what GPAC recommends.
Purpose of the AACAP
The purpose of the AACAP is to create a working document that identifies policy approaches and explicit actions that can be used by City Staff or property owners to activate, energize, and revitalize the Artesia and Aviation Corridors in a coordinated and consistent manner. The Area Plan is intended to be used as a tool to help inform the City’s strategic planning efforts (what items should be prioritized when, and what resources should be allocated to a task). It will also serve as an interdepartmental tool/strategy document that helps to outline partnerships that are needed to accomplish a particular objective (improvements in the public right of way or sidewalks, for example).
Additionally, the Area Plan will serve as a companion document to the City’s zoning requirements, outlining the special provisions or design guidelines property owners should implement as they are designing new projects or contemplating improvements to their buildings.
Finally, this document aims to provide a tool that consolidates the recommendations generated from all of the prior revitalization efforts that focused on the Artesia and Aviation Corridors over the last several years and serves as a framework for City Council to systematically implement the ideas generated in this document.
How to Use the Area Plan
The AACAP shall be used as a companion document to the General Plan and zoning ordinance. It will be referenced in both documents similarly to how the City has implemented the “Residential Design Guidelines”. The AACAP will also be used as a starting point for the City to establish general policy direction, Corridor objectives, and implementable actions along the two Corridors. Additionally, property owners and developers will be directed to the Area Plan as they pursue new projects in the Corridors to transition uses over time.
City Staff will also use the Area Plan as a guide during Strategic Planning and budgeting discussions (primarily for prioritization and resource allocation purposes).
Recommended actions may take the form of a zoning code update (which requires subsequent and separate action by the Planning Commission and/or City Council), preparation of a study or analyses, additional outreach with businesses and neighbors, or establishment or continuance of a City program. These actions are intended to implement the underlying intentions of the AACAP which in no particular order are as follows:
• Create “Activity Nodes”
• Increase floor area ratio (FAR)
o Current FAR is 0.5
o GPAC proposed FAR is 0.6
o Planning Commission recommends FAR greater than 0.6
• Relax parking standards for preferred uses
• Encourage shared parking (private) and establish shared parking (public)
• Improve pedestrian/vehicular access between businesses
• Establish a Business Improvement District (BID)
• Improve neighborhood connectivity
• Apply and develop design guidelines
• Build an identity through cohesive branding, placemaking objects, wayfinding, public art, and gateways
• Unify Corridor signage
• Create new public spaces (such as parklettes or streetlets)
• Improve walking and biking infrastructure
• Consider long-range transit improvements
City Staff will rely on the Area Plan during the review of development proposals, as submittals will be checked to ascertain if the standards, guidelines, and recommendations in the AACAP have been followed and to see if the intent of the design and placemaking approach have been reasonably observed or addressed. Developments in compliance with the standards and guidelines will receive favorable recommendations (or approval by City Staff if the project falls under Staff administrative jurisdiction/authority). Developments are not expected to meet every detail of every discretionary guideline in order to be considered in reasonable compliance with the overall intent of the AACAP. In turn, and as required, the Planning Commission will also rely on the Area Plan, as conformity with the AACAP will be a “criteria” necessary for the Planning Commission to approve some future projects along the Corridors.
Technical Studies Performed to Inform the AACAP: Parking Study and Market Analysis and Development Feasibility Study
A significant constraint impeding the Corridors’ revitalization concerns parking. Many of the properties along the Corridors have less on-site parking spaces than are required pursuant to the City’s zoning ordinance parking requirements. To better understand the current actual parking conditions and parking capacity within the overall AACAP area, a comprehensive parking utilization study was conducted. The parking utilization study (Appendix A of the AACAP), attached to this Administrative Report, identified a total of 2,877 parking spaces, of which 688 are on-street public spaces and 2,189 are off-street private spaces.
Further analysis revealed that both on-street and off-street parking spaces are generally underutilized, suggesting that the current supply can accommodate higher demand. An industry standard “efficiently” parked area maintains an 85 percent utilization rate, but current on-street and off-street parking in the Aviation Artesia Area rarely exceeds 68 percent and 50 percent utilization, respectively.
Despite the excess of parking spaces that generally exist across the Corridors, the functional supply is largely restricted by the private ownership of off-street lots and the absence of public lots and structures. The manual inventory of on- and off-street parking was conducted in mid-December 2018 so it does reflect conditions that would be described as “peak”; however, it was conducted prior to the City’s recent development of the public lot on the SCE Right of Way at Artesia Blvd.
The “underutilization” of existing parking is mapped and site specific and could provide opportunities to relax parking standards in certain areas as redevelopment efforts progress. As recommended in the Area Plan, the City could capitalize on the abundance of existing off-street parking by seeking partnerships with the property/business owners and/or simply recognizing the overall availability/underutilization over segments within the Corridor that could allow for some more immediate short-term options for revitalization through the modification of existing parking standards. Essentially, with more parking spaces available for general use, other targeted efforts-such as reduced parking requirements for new development-become more feasible.
In addition to the parking study, the AACAP was informed by a citywide market study (2017) and an AACAP development feasibility study (Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard - 2019). The citywide market study found that there was a demand for more and improved office space throughout the city and noted that the nationwide changes in the retail environment would likely impact the amount and type of retail that would be supported going forward. Meaning that much of the existing retail space along the corridors will need to be replaced with alternative uses. The 2019 development feasibility study (Appendix B of the AACAP), attached to this Administrative Report, evaluated the potential for redevelopment of the types of uses that are likely within the AACAP area. Analysis of four conceptual development scenarios on a hypothetical site along Artesia Boulevard was conducted.
The 2019 development feasibility study concluded that shallow lot depths and high land values along the Corridors significantly limited near-term redevelopment unless development standards allowed for additional height (e.g., 4+ stories), reduced setbacks, relaxed parking requirements, and increases in the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) well above what is currently permitted. The GPAC recommended not to pursue the relaxation of development standards that are considered to be compatible with existing surrounding neighborhoods. Rather, the GPAC preferred more modest and conservative changes, including:
• Allow for flexible parking standards and a minor increase in FAR for preferred uses to encourage development of desired uses.
• Introduce impact fee reductions for preferred uses to help marginally feasible projects to become more feasible.
• Establish a flexible zoning designation to allow for a range of uses that accommodates a variety of businesses according to market demand.
Public Input and Recommendations from the GPAC and Planning Commission
In addition to the technical land use, parking, and development feasibility analyses conducted to inform the AACAP, the opportunities and recommendations in this Area Plan also build on the work of prior and concurrent planning efforts. Over the years, focused efforts and appointed committees have tackled the discussion about how to prompt activity and promote revitalization along Artesia and Aviation Boulevards. Those efforts are included in the attachment entitled “AACAP Public Input and Recommendations from GPAC and Planning Commission”.
A review of the findings and recommendations from all these efforts found that several previously-recommended items are still relevant (for example, establishing a Business Improvement District). The AACAP includes many of the common themes seen in these previous efforts. Additionally, the Area Plan identifies any observed obstacles that have prevented previous recommendations from moving forward and includes suggestions to eliminate barriers and to promote prompt implementation.
As a part of the general plan update work program, the City Council authorized the GPAC to provide support and input for the preparation of the Artesia and Aviation Corridors Area Plan to provide more focused policy and placemaking guidance to two of the City’s most prominent and traveled corridors.
The GPAC carefully considered the findings of the 2017 citywide market study, which identified a need for new and improved office facilities, as well as the 2019 development feasibility study, which concluded that residential development with three or fewer stories was not financially feasible in the near term. Based on these findings, GPAC recommends allowing the area to evolve “organically” over time instead of creating significant changes to (or increases in) the area’s development capacity to prompt immediate change. Additionally, GPAC determined that the land use focus of the Corridors should be primarily restaurant and office, with some general retail and service commercial, thus catering to and creating connectivity with the adjacent residential neighborhoods.
The GPAC provided additional policy and/or implementation measures focused on:
• A pedestrian-focused environment.
o Not emphasizing or supporting the “commuter” service, i.e. drive throughs.
• A bike lane and multimodal access and facilities along Artesia.
• Enhanced physical connections to the adjacent community, commercial businesses, and nearby residential neighborhoods.
• Alternative streetscape and street section design options.
• Opportunities to create temporary or permanent gathering spaces along the Corridors (streetlet/parklet in part of a cross-street to the Artesia Corridor). Spaces could be tried out temporarily, then permanently installed if they are actively used by the community and funding could be secured to install and maintain.
The Draft AACAP document is a result of GPAC’s efforts, including multiple GPAC meetings specifically designated for developing the AACAP, as well as public meetings and public surveys to present the Area Plan and collect public feedback on the Draft AACAP.
The City’s Planning Commission recently conducted three (3) public hearings in consideration of the AACAP. The minutes from each of their public meetings/hearings is attached to this Administrative Report. The detailed discussion is described in the attachment entitled “AACAP Public Input and Recommendations from GPAC and Planning Commission”.
At the final public hearing on September 17, 2020, each Planning Commissioner presented their individual comments and Chairman Elder led discussions and deliberations in consideration of the Draft Area Plan and specifically each Planning Commissioner’s Comments as presented. A roll call vote was conducted on each considered comment/edit/proposed change and the following were the proposed comments/edits/changes that the Planning Commission reached consensus on and these proposed comments/edits/changes have been incorporated into the attached Resolution for the City Council’s consideration.
• Consider restoring the name of Artesia Blvd to Redondo Beach Blvd to help in rebranding the area.
• Consider the FAR increase from 0.5 to something higher than the recommended 0.6 FAR suggested in the AACAP.
• Focus on Matthews and Vanderbilt or other parallel streets for bike traffic (both in short and potentially the long term) to make as safe for bicyclists as possible. Significant infrastructure changes are needed for Artesia to be safe and usable for more bicycle traffic.
• Consider eliminating Artesia on-street parking in the blocks at the nodes at first.
• After establishing shared parking among lots and/or building parking structure(s), then reduce the parking requirements to encourage development, focusing on preferred uses.
• Add rooftop restaurant dining to the sidewalk dining idea along Artesia.
• Avoid the identified streetlets locations at signalized lights. Find other streetlet locations near the nodes.
• Consider an “empty storefront” and or blight fee for owners who choose to leave sites empty after some time period to encourage development (after 12 months, 18 months, etc.).
• Add a prioritization for timeline of the implementation items. There is an implementation list at the end of the Plan, but it would be helpful to have a standard linear timeline with milestones to get a feel of the possible roll out.
• Include a pie chart or other visual aid showing projected possible amounts from different funding sources. This would allow some approximation of what is possible.
• Potential AACAP changes may result from the Pandemic. Make sure this plan has flexibility to adapt to a post-Pandemic environment.
• Consider regulations that encourage local businesses in favor of larger national chains.
ANALYSIS
The ANALYSIS section of this Administrative Report presents the actual prescriptive strategies within the Area Plan contained within Chapter 3 - Placemaking, Chapter 4 - Mobility, and Chapter 6 - Implementation which are critical to advancing the Corridors’ revitalization. The section provides short-term and mid-term action items for each of the subtopics within the three chapters and an estimate of relative cost and concludes with a summary of specific immediate “next steps” recommended by staff.
Chapter 3. Placemaking
In order to transform the underperforming areas of the Corridors into places where people want to walk, bike, scooter, or take a rideshare service, elements must be introduced that draw people in and make people feel welcome and comfortable.
Focused placemaking decisions implemented with appropriate mobility improvements and economic development strategies can create Corridors that better serve community needs, ensure the continued stability of nearby residential neighborhoods, and provide a social anchor for North Redondo Beach.
Chapter 3. PLACEMAKING provides the aesthetic and design-related actionable strategies for achieving the intended purpose of the Area Plan. The following lists the subtopics discussed in the “Placemaking” chapter and the associated recommendations/ actions the City could choose to pursue to enhance the Corridors. Each of the “Recommendations” within the AACAP assigns a general cost implication [low ($): $0-$50,000; medium ($$): $50,001-$499,999; high ($$$): >$500,000] and a suggested general time frame [short term (1-5 years), midterm (5-10 years), and long term (10 years +)] in order to support future decision makers with implementation.
Placemaking Implementation Initiatives
Creating A Destination
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). Establish a BID to help facilitate focused economic development efforts to attract preferred uses to Activity Nodes.
• Incentives. Identify and provide incentives that mitigate development obstacles and encourage preferred uses to locate within the Activity Nodes, such as:
o Offer expedited permitting and streamlined applications for preferred uses within Activity Nodes (e.g., give priority to projects that include restaurant on the ground floor and office above).
• Facilitate a program to offer low-cost loans to finance tenant improvements for qualifying preferred uses within Activity Nodes.
• Reduce parking requirements for preferred uses within Activity Nodes (see Section 4.5.1).
• Design Guidelines. Implement design guidelines in Section 3.4, which include measures to enhance the pedestrian experience and make the Activity Nodes more desirable destinations.
• Pilot Projects and Improvements. Gather insight from local businesses, property owners, and residents regarding which Activity Nodes should be prioritized for improvements or pilot projects outlined in later sections of this document (if they need to be phased over time due to funding or resource constraints).
• Long-Range Parking Strategy. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, in addition to reducing parking requirements for preferred uses within Activity Nodes, develop a long-term parking strategy to understand the cost and benefit of various parking options, including private shared parking, public structured parking, and other strategies to consolidate and improve the efficiency of parking that could be implemented in phases as the AACAP area and Activity Nodes develop.
• Evaluate Activity Nodes. Evaluate the success of targeted improvements in each Activity Node annually. Consider adding 1-2 additional Nodes in the future, and identify a general timeframe to do so (mid- to long-term).
Encourage Reinvestment-Revise Land Use Intensity and Development Standards
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Increase Allowable FAR (Artesia only). Increase FAR from 0.50 to 0.60 along the Artesia Corridor. (This was a recommendation for consideration that came out of discussions with the GPAC.)
• Reduce Minimum Parking Requirements. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, reduce the minimum parking requirements for preferred uses in Activity Nodes.
• Long-Range Parking Strategy. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, develop a long-term parking strategy to understand the cost and benefit of various parking options-including private shared parking, public structured parking, and other strategies to consolidate and improve the efficiency of parking-that could be implemented in phases as the AACAP area and Activity Nodes develop.
Connectivity (Getting to the Corridors)
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $$
Action Items:
• Revise Municipal Code
o As detailed in Section 4.5.1, revise current parking requirements to allow and encourage shared parking between adjacent and nearby parcels within the AACAP area.
o Revise the City’s Municipal Code to allow pedestrian pass-through routes in the walls separating qualifying residential properties (with 4 or more units) and adjacent commercial development, where safe and feasible.
• Coordination. In the Artesia Corridor, when changes to a commercial property that is adjacent to a qualifying multifamily property (4 or more units) would require the issuance of a building permit, the City shall require the developer to make a reasonable effort to determine if a pedestrian access route is feasible, safe, and desired by the residential property via coordination with the owner, HOA, or other representative party of the residential property.
• Implement Site Design Guidelines. The site design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to full-block pass-throughs, pedestrian access, and parking.
The Corridor Experience-Sidewalks
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Implement Sidewalk Dining Permit Program. Expand the existing program to include businesses within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area.
• Establish a Pilot Outdoor Retail Display Permit Program. Based on the Sidewalk Dining Permit Program, establish a similar program (or expand the existing Sidewalk Dining Permit Program) to allow outdoor retail displays. Pilot the program in Activity Nodes to assess long-term viability.
• Incentivize Outdoor Dining. Provide incentives to attract uses that include outdoor dining to Activity Nodes:
o For preferred uses within Activity Nodes, reduce the amount of parking required for outdoor dining by requiring no additional parking for the first 16 seats outdoors or 30 percent of the interior seats, whichever is greater.1
o Prioritize storefront improvement grants for preferred uses within Activity Nodes, with emphasis on projects that include outdoor dining components.
• Implement Streetscape Design Guidelines. The design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to sidewalk and streetscape improvements.
The Corridor Experience-Public Open Spaces
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Establish Public Open Space Requirements. Require new commercial projects that meet specified criteria (lot size, project size, etc.) to provide public open spaces on-site.
• Purchase Land. As opportunities arise, consider purchasing land from property owners to establish public open spaces and pedestrian pass-throughs.
• Incentivize Public Open Spaces Adjacent to Pedestrian Pass-Throughs. Provide incentives to encourage property owners to provide public open spaces adjacent to pedestrian pass-throughs. ? Consider reducing the amount of on-site parking required for properties that formally preserve land for both a pedestrian pass-through and adjacent open space area.
• Count the pedestrian pass through toward a public open space requirement only if it is adjacent to additional open space that enables public gathering, activity, recreation, and/or leisure.
• Prioritize storefront improvement grants for properties that formally preserve land for both a pedestrian pass-through and an adjacent public open space area.
The Corridor Experience-Storefronts
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Near Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Continue Existing Storefront Improvement Program. Continue funding and implementation of the program in the AACAP area, with priority given to preferred uses and projects in Activity Nodes.
• Expand Storefront Improvement Program. Expand the program to include improvements that screen parking and other frontage areas consistent with design guidelines. Consider issuing larger grants for projects in Activity Nodes.
• Amend Storefront Improvement Program. Amend the program to require that improvements be consistent with design guidelines to the extent possible.
• Implement Storefront Design Guidelines. The design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to storefront design, including:
o Façade Articulation
o Transparency
o Canopies, Awnings, and Shading Devices
o Building Placement
o Parking and Screening
Identity (Making an Impression)-Branding
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$ (depending on the strategy)
Action Items:
• Engage the Community. Gather insight from local businesses, property owners, and residents about what attracted them to North Redondo in the first place as well as the specific values, challenges, and ideas for the future of business in the AACAP area.
• Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). As noted in Section 3.2.1, a BID would help to create and implement a marketing strategy.
• Establish a brand. Work with residents, businesses, and property owners (possibly through a BID) to:
o Build a cohesive brand based on the results of the community engagement.
o Develop a brand/marketing strategy to effectively communicate the brand to attract visitors, businesses, and investors to the AACAP area. Collaborate with the Chamber of Commerce and businesses within the AACAP area to develop the brand.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Gateways
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$
Action Items:
• Create a Signage Master Plan. As part of a signage master plan, develop design concepts for gateways and monumentation. Work with designers, artists, and community groups to design gateway features.
• Coordinate with Property Owners. Coordinate with owners of the properties identified as gateway locations.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Banners
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Banner Program. Use the Riviera Village Banner Program as a template to establish a program that facilitates the installation, maintenance, and permitting of banners (possibly role of Chamber or BID) in the AACAP area.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Wayfinding
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Develop a Signage Master Plan. As part of a signage master plan, establish a wayfinding master plan to govern all wayfinding signage within the AACAP area. Incorporate elements of the brand strategy, and collaborate with local businesses to ensure cohesive, thoughtful, and useful wayfinding elements are introduced.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Public Art
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Cohesive Theme. Develop a cohesive theme for new art generated by fees collected in the City’s Public Art Fund for public areas and private properties in the Artesia or Aviation Corridors (as part of the City’s art requirements in the Municipal Code).
• Early involvement. Engage artists early in the development of public projects and encourage private developers to involve artists from the outset of new significant projects.
• Establish Partnerships. Consider implementing the Public Art Master Plan through a combination of means including, but not limited to:
o Seek public partnerships. Work with nonprofit art organizations to install public murals and other installations in public areas, medians, and on private property that is visible from the sidewalk.
o Develop Functional Art. Based on the brand strategy, work with artists to develop functional art to be used throughout the AACAP area, including area-specific benches, garbage cans, bike racks, and creative crosswalks (for Activity Nodes).
Identity (Making an Impression)-Business Signage
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$ (depends on incentives and sign design)
Action Items:
• Develop Signage Master Plan. As part of a Signage Master Plan, develop specific signage standards to unify business signage for both the Artesia and Aviation Corridors.
• Use Signage to Engage the Streetscape. Revise Municipal Code to allow A-frame street signs outside of the Clear Walking Path within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area.
• Billboards. Determine the role billboards will play in the Corridors moving forward. Consider prohibiting billboards in Activity Nodes and/or AACAP area.
• Incentives. After the development of the Signage Master Plan, provide incentives for existing businesses to replace existing signage that does not comply with the Master Signage Plan.
Design Guidelines
This section of the AACAP contains both recommended standards and guidelines. Standards, as indicated by the words “shall or must,” identify requirements. Guidelines, as indicated by the word “should,” describe additional requirements that the City asks architects and developers to satisfy. To be implemented, the zoning ordinance would need to be amended to require projects to be reviewed with the Guidelines. Once a zoning code amendment is adopted, Guidelines would then need to be addressed for all development projects-alternatives will be permitted only if a physical condition constrains implementation of the requirement and if the applicant demonstrates the intent of the design guideline is met. Conditions that are restricted are indicated by the word “prohibited.”
Because there are numerous Design Guidelines, only a listing of the “categories” of design guidelines and a short description are provided below. For the comprehensive list and a review of each specific Design Guideline, refer to Chapter 3 Pages 66-69 of the AACAP document.
Design Guidelines-Streetscapes
Street design is an important aspect of placemaking. Pedestrian-realm improvements should reflect the community’s desire for more walkable sidewalks and bikeable streets. Streetscape amenities are an important detail that should be addressed during the site plan review process and provided by new development or when major public works projects are undertaken. Below are just a few of the design guidelines intended to enhance the Corridors’ streetscapes.
• Clear Walking Path. A minimum Clear Walking Path of 5 feet shall be maintained throughout the AACAP area. In Activity Nodes the minimum Clear Walking Path shall measure a minimum of 6 feet.
• Amenity Zone. When sidewalk widths exceed the minimum Clear Walking Path, an Amenity Zone shall be established along the sidewalk.
• Streetscape Amenities. The AACAP area shall include a unique “family of streetscape amenities” (complementary furnishings, bike racks, lighting, signage, banners, etc.) that are consistent with the AACAP area identity (see Section 3.3.3) and contribute to a sense of place.
• Outdoor Uses. Outdoor business uses, including outdoor dining (with appropriate permits) and outdoor retail displays (in pilot areas with appropriate permits), are encouraged within the public sidewalk, provided there is adequate space to maintain the Clear Walking Path, and on private property within the frontage area. Such uses are strongly encouraged within Activity Nodes. Deeper setbacks intended to accommodate such uses are strongly encouraged in Activity Nodes.
Design Guidelines-Site Design-Access
New projects should be designed and existing spaces retrofitted (when possible) to encourage the consolidation of small private parking lots into larger shared parking areas, to promote walking and bicycling within the AACAP area, and to establish better pedestrian connections with the surrounding neighborhoods. Projects should also provide safe and reasonably convenient access for visitors who will arrive by car. Below are four (4) examples of the eight (8) design guidelines that address site access within the AACAP.
• Vehicular Access. Vehicular access to each site must be designed to minimize conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists, autos, and service vehicles. Sight lines, pedestrian walkways, and lighting are factors to consider in developing a site plan. Entrance and exit points should be well marked with streetscape and landscape features.
• Curb Cuts. The number of site access points for vehicles should be minimized and consolidated. Drives should be as narrow as possible to minimize interruptions of the sidewalk. Shared drives and shared parking should be used when possible to reduce pedestrian and vehicular conflicts. Driveways should be located as far from intersections as possible.
• Bicycle Parking. Accessible, secure, and well-signed bicycle parking shall be provided at convenient and visible locations throughout or adjacent to new development.
• Cross Access Between Parking. Private parking lots should include pedestrian cross access when feasible and safe.
Design Guidelines-Site Design-Building Placement and Orientation
Building placement and orientation to the sidewalk has a large impact on the pedestrian experience. Visually interesting buildings that are oriented to the street shape the area’s character as well as the visitor’s experience. Designing buildings that engage the sidewalk contributes to making the public street more inviting to pedestrians. There are four (4) design guidelines concerning this category and all are listed below.
• Pedestrian Scale. Developments should make public frontages interesting and comfortable for a pedestrian walking alongside them.
• Engage the Sidewalk. Buildings shall have a strong presence and encourage activity along the street frontage. Buildings shall face the street and provide entrances from the sidewalk.
• Setbacks. Designs that incorporate front setbacks in order to accommodate programming that contributes to or activates the public realm are encouraged. Parking in setbacks should be avoided.
• Lighting. Exterior lighting should be designed and located in such a way that it does not project off-site or onto adjacent uses. This is especially critical with neighboring residential uses.
Design Guidelines-Storefront Design -Façade Articulation-Transparency-Canopies, Awnings, and Shading Devices
This category of design guidelines is focuses upon the treatment of store fronts. Below is an example of a design guideline targeting each of the subheadings in this category.
• Detailed Façade Elements. Exterior building walls fronting the Artesia or Aviation Corridors shall have variation, recesses, and offsets in the surface, especially at entries and important gateways.
o Long building walls shall be attractive and visually interesting by applying changes in surface materials, colors, massing, fenestration, storefronts, public art, or other well-composed architectural elements.
o Pilasters or breaks in the wall plane shall be allowed where appropriate.
• Transparency. Buildings should have a variety of solid and nontransparent or treated transparent glass surfaces. Ground-floor storefronts should be partially transparent (e.g., incorporate doors, windows, and display areas) to encourage pedestrian activity. Long stretches of solid glass without any articulation should be avoided.
• Design, Proportion, Maintenance. Awnings, canopies, and shading devices are encouraged but must be well designed, proportioned, and maintained so they do not adversely impact the sidewalk environment. The materials, shape, rigidity, reflectance, color, lighting, and signage should relate to the architectural design of the building.
Chapter 4. Mobility
Included in this section of the Administrative Report are two (2) elements lifted directly from this chapter of the AACAP, the “Mobility Overview” section and the “AAACAP Mobility Objectives” section. These two (2) sections in particular present the breadth of the topics included in this chapter and explain the intentions it seeks to achieve. Generally speaking it is within the “Mobility” chapter where the public right of way and other public spaces are envisioned.
Additionally, a summary list of the specific mobility topics that include targeted “strategies” with recommendations is provided herein. There are significant details concerning time frames, relative costs, and action items that are also included in this summary. Please refer to the actual AACAP document for additional details concerning each of the prescriptive “strategies” summarized below.
Mobility Overview
The Artesia and Aviation Corridors serve the dual purposes of acting as the primary roadway arterials carrying high volumes of traffic, and as the principal location for neighborhood-serving commercial businesses in North Redondo Beach. As detailed in Chapter 2, many factors have converged to create an area that continues to function in its role in the roadway network but is no longer serving the residents of North Redondo Beach as the “Main Street” of the community.
Building on the work of prior revitalization efforts (see Section 2.4 of the AACAP), parking and development feasibility were identified as two of the biggest challenges preventing revitalization efforts from moving forward, so additional studies of the AACAP area (see Section 2.3) were conducted to identify specific opportunities and constraints related to each challenge (see Section 2.5). These were combined with the recommendations of related efforts to develop the AACAP strategies. Many of the opportunities and recommendations were related to mobility, such as parking, ride share, active modes of transportation, and closing portions of public streets to create new public spaces. To address these items, mobility objectives (see Section 4.4) and strategies (see Section 4.5) are detailed in this chapter.
Mobility Overview - Understanding Parking
One of the questions that arose from related planning efforts was how much parking was available within the Corridors. Because of small lots and scattered businesses, there is a perception that some portions of the Corridors would benefit from additional parking. The parking study (Appendix A) identified a total of 2,877 parking spaces, of which 688 are on-street, public spaces, and 2,189 are private, off-street spaces, most of which are currently underutilized (pre-COVID analysis).
The challenge identified, however, was in the inefficient utilization of parking. Private ownership of off-street lots and the absence of public off-street lots resulted in very inefficient parking utilization-the majority of the parking within the AACAP area is reserved for patrons and employees of specific businesses.
Mobility Overview - GPAC Recommendations
In addition to the parking analysis, the GPAC identified some key measures that would work with other strategies to transform the AACAP area-investigating the possibility of adding a bike lane to Artesia Boulevard, enhancing the physical connections to the adjacent community, exploring alternative street sections, and identifying opportunities to create temporary or permanent gathering spaces along the Corridor. Strategies related to all these measures are described in the Mobility Chapter.
Mobility Overview - New Public Spaces
Establishing additional public spaces in North Redondo Beach is challenging because of the limited supply of vacant and/or publicly held land, but it remains a priority for the community, so creative solutions are necessary. The suggestion to create new public space by closing a segment of a public street to establish a “streetlet” was submitted by a community member through an online survey for the General Plan Update.
The “streetlet” idea was discussed and endorsed by the GPAC, and the feasibility was analyzed by a cross-disciplinary group of City Staff members from different departments. City Staff analyzed every intersection in the AACAP area for “streetlet” potential locations based on criteria that included:
• Topography (was the street too steep for a “streetlet”?)
• Existing driveway access (would closing the street cut off access to private property?)
• Transit (would closing the street impact an existing bus line?)
• Approved development projects (would closing the street restrict access to an approved project?)
• Activity Nodes (would the location of the “streetlets” help to activate an identified Activity Node?)
Ultimately, City Staff identified two locations to establish “streetlets”: MacKay Lane and Green Lane. See further discussions concerning “streetlets” in Section 4.5.2 of the AACAP.
AACAP Mobility Objectives
The Corridors are envisioned as places with enhanced neighborhood connectivity, safe opportunities for active transportation (walking, biking and scooter riding), and attractive streetscapes. The long-term vision of a transformed, revitalized AACAP area is only achievable through consistent incremental improvements. Part of this revitalization will be realized by changing the way residents and visitors access the Corridor. Converting travel behavior takes time and intentional effort. This document describes implementable actions within short-term, midterm, and long-term time frames.
SHORT TERM: IMPROVING SPACE EFFICIENCY
As the parking study of existing conditions found in Appendix A concludes, there are many underutilized off-street and on-street parking areas within the AACAP area, even during peak demand periods. A good first step for the Corridors is to leverage the opportunities that already exist. This may be in the form of reducing parking requirements, facilitating shared parking solutions, or replacing vehicle parking with bicycle parking. These tactics help create more room for livable and walkable spaces within the Corridor.
MIDTERM: ENHANCING WALKING AND BIKING ACCESS
More residents and visitors will choose walking, biking, and scooter riding to access and travel through the Corridor when safer, more convenient facilities exist. The AACAP recommends the City designate bike boulevards for low-speed, low-stress bicycle and scooter access to the Corridor. The removal of some driveway access points and installation of traffic-calming measures near crosswalks will also enhance the walking environment. With enhanced facilities installed, the City can encourage residents and visitors to change the way they access and enjoy the Corridors.
LONG TERM: TRANSFORMED AND REVITALIZED CORRIDORS
The fully transformed and revitalized Corridors will require many safe, reliable options for access and mobility. The City can install metered parking on high demand blocks to ensure available parking and provide funding for other improvements. Public shared parking lots - the park-once approach - can reduce overall parking needs and promote the use of active transportation, particularly walking, bicycling, and scooter riding. Enhanced transit service can better link the Corridors with the revitalizing South Bay Galleria shopping center and adjacent future regional light rail station.
Corridor Mobility Strategies
The following is a summary list of specific topics within Section 4.5 Corridor Descriptions and Strategies. For each identified strategy is a proposed general time frame, relative cost, and recommended action items.
Shared Off-Street Parking/Reducing Minimum Parking Requirements
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Conduct a comprehensive parking study to identify opportunities for shared parking and adjust parking requirements including provisions for establishing shared parking and reduced on-site parking standards.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
“Park Once” Public Parking Garages/Removing On-Street Parking
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $$/$$$
Action Items:
• Conduct a comprehensive parking study to identify opportunities to establish public parking lots and garages, remove on-street parking, and adjust parking requirements.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
• Develop a long-term parking strategy including parking demand management strategies, autonomous vehicle “holding” areas, and considerations of other future technonology.
Pick-Up/Drop-Off Zones (For Transportation Network Companies and Autonomous Vehicles)
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Long Term
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Curb-space management study to identify opportunities for pickup and drop-off zones.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
The Walking Experience-Driveway Access Points
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Local Access Study. Consider local access traffic studies to assess the impact of driveway closures.
• Drive-thrus. Evaluate an approach to drive-thrus in Corridors (considerations: potentially minimize, strategically locate, or prohibit them in areas such as activity nodes).
• Update Development Standards. Update the Municipal Code to incorporate regulations for curb cuts within the AACAP area, including:
o Maximum Width. Establish maximum width dimensions for curb cuts.
o Minimum Distance. Establish minimum distances between curb cuts for new development.
• Design Guidelines. Implement the design guidelines (see Section 3.4) that relate to curb cut frequency, width, and distance from intersections.
• Incentives. Identify and provide incentives to encourage property owners to consolidate driveways (e.g., include in the Storefront Improvement Program, establish a new program).
The Walking Experience-Midblock Crosswalks/Enhancing Existing Crosswalks
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$ (depending on level of safety infrastructure)
Action Items:
• Crosswalk warrant study.
• Outreach to residents, businesses, and parcel owners.
• Installation of overhead street lighting at crosswalks (existing or proposed) to improve pedestrian safety and visibility.
The Walking Experience-Streetlets
(Applies to Artesia)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $$-$$$
Action Items:
• Local access traffic study.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Experience-Parking for Bikes and Secondary Mobility Devices
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $ (without curb extensions) - $$ (with curb extensions)
Action Items:
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
• Conduct a study to determine the optimal locations and frequency of bike and scooter amenities along both Corridors.
• Consider updating the municipal code to:
o Require that new projects provide a certain amount of bicycle or scooter parking for each vehicle space provided.
o Allow businesses to reduce the amount of required parking if they provide publicly accessible bicycle racks or scooter parking on-site or contribute to a fund to establish and maintain a public bicycle/scooter station within a certain distance of the business.
• If shared equipment is eventually allowed within the City, establish guidelines to manage the shared equipment in various street and sidewalk situations within the micro-mobility framework.
Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Experience-Bike Boulevards
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $$
Action Items:
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Experience-Class II Bike Lanes
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $ (without curb extensions) - $$ (with curb extensions)
Action Items:
• Outreach to residents, business owners, and parcel owners.
• Develop a complete streets strategy for the AACAP area including phasing.
The Transit Experience-Potential for Curb Extension Conversion to Transit Stops and Trolley Service
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Long Term
Relative Cost: $ (without curb extensions) - $$ (with curb extensions)
Action Items:
• Potential transit service study and/or pilot project.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
• Seek first/last mile funding opportunities related to the Green Line light rail extension.
Chapter 6. Implementation
This section of the Administrative Report includes the introduction portion of this chapter of the AACAP followed by a few of rows from the actual table that identify the substantive actions that will serve to implement the concepts, strategies, guidelines, etc. that are contained in the Area Plan. The implementation table identifies the action, potential funding sources, timeframe, responsible department & other partnerships, relative cost, and related strategies.
Implementation-Introduction
Implementation of the Area Plan will require a combination of public and private effort to achieve the changes envisioned to the public realm and infrastructure serving the area. This section is a consolidation of actions outlined in the AACAP. Where one action implements multiple strategies, it is noted in Table 6.1 in the AACAP.
The phasing of new development and revitalization of existing buildings on private properties will occur incrementally, as landowners and developers respond to new market opportunities.
Actual implementation will be dependent on development activity, funding availability, and staff resources. The Implementation Table will be used by the City during annual budgeting and strategic planning to prioritize and monitor progress (and barriers to progress) so the vision for the Corridors can be implemented over time.
The Implementation Table (Table 6.1) lists the specific actions, outlined in previous chapters, that should be taken by the City of Redondo Beach, in coordination with local businesses, future developers, and other agencies where appropriate. Programs and policies for some of these items are already in place and are recommended to be continued.
For each action, a potential funding source(s) has been identified, a recommended timeframe for completion is noted, the responsible party is listed, and the relative cost is provided. The timeframes are identified as follows:
• Short (1-5 years)
• Mid (5 to 10 years)
• Long (10 years or more)
The relative costs are identified as follows:
• Low ($): $0-$50,000
• Medium ($$): $50,001-$499,999
• High ($$$): >$500,000
It is also assumed that staff resources (either from the City or from a to be established Business Improvement District (BID)) would be required to implement all actions listed in the table.
City Council’s AACAP Actions - Directives
At its meeting on June 20, 2017, the City Council approved a budget of $100,000 for expanding the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC) and Placeworks, Inc.’s scope of work to include “planning and environmental services for the development of a planning document to effectively support revitalization of the Artesia Boulevard Corridor (Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan (AACAP))”.
At its meeting on December 19, 2017, the City Council advanced the AACAP revitalization efforts further with the approval of the first amendment to the agreement for consulting services between the City of Redondo Beach and Placworks, Inc. which included details for the development of the Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan with a scope of services and a total budget of $224,100 that included a parking utilization study, an economic feasibility and pro forma analysis of the Corridors, identification of revitalization strategy options, the preparation of the Area Plan that would serve as guidance for the future revitalization of the “Corridors”, additional AACAP-focused GPAC meetings (3), an AACAP community wide meeting, and public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.
The City Council, at its meeting on April 16, 2019, as part of the second amendment to the City’s contract with Placeworks, Inc. revised the AACAP budget to downward by $20,000 with a more focused and simplified document for a new total of $204,100.
GPAC’s Recommended Land Use Principals and Themes:
Maintain Existing Development Standards/Intensity and “Organic Growth”
It is important to summarize at the outset of this Administrative Report the key determinations and recommendations by the General Plan Advisory Committee (GPAC), as it is the GPAC’s recommended land use principals and themes that serve to frame, shape, and guide the Area Plan’s content. The GPAC’s primary land use theme for the Corridors is to essentially maintain the existing land use development standards/intensity (floor area ratio and height) rather than significantly increase and intensify the allowable development standards to more aggressively incentivize the redevelopment of the properties along the Corridors. Instead of intensifying the development standards, the GPAC recommended, more flexibility with respect to the parking standards and a minor increase inf FAR from 0.5 to 0.6 as a way to stimulate improvements in the area.
Additional information that led to the GPAC’s position on this fundamental issue is presented in subsequent sections of this Administrative Report, but essentially the GPAC preferred revitalization strategies that were more long-term, measured, and “organic” rather than short-term, developer-driven changes. The following is a summary of the GPAC’s recommended land use principles and “themes” that served as the context for the development of the Area Plan and framed and guided the Draft AACAP towards small-scale revitalization strategies rather than a large-scale transformative approach:
• Maintain the existing development standards with the exception of a slight increase in floor area ratio (FAR) of 0.6 from 0.5 for limited “preferred uses-professional office and restaurant” in limited areas designated as “Activity Nodes”.
o At their September 17, 2020 meeting, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council consider a FAR increase to something higher than the GPAC recommended 0.6 FAR suggested in the AACAP.
• Wait for the Galleria revitalization project to occur and mature to see how it may impact the “Corridors” before considering more intense development incentives.
• Preferred uses:
o Professional Office.
o Restaurants with outdoor dining.
• Target and incentivize the recommended “preferred uses” at a limited number of specific blocks, termed “Activity Nodes”, with limited relaxations of parking standards (such as changing parking ratios, considering shared parking strategies, and considering/allowing/encouraging connections between adjacent private parking areas).
•
It is important to note that the Planning Commission at their September 17, 2020 public hearing largely confirmed the GPAC’s approach with the exception of desire to allow some intensification of floor area ratio standards above what GPAC recommends.
Purpose of the AACAP
The purpose of the AACAP is to create a working document that identifies policy approaches and explicit actions that can be used by City Staff or property owners to activate, energize, and revitalize the Artesia and Aviation Corridors in a coordinated and consistent manner. The Area Plan is intended to be used as a tool to help inform the City’s strategic planning efforts (what items should be prioritized when, and what resources should be allocated to a task). It will also serve as an interdepartmental tool/strategy document that helps to outline partnerships that are needed to accomplish a particular objective (improvements in the public right of way or sidewalks, for example).
Additionally, the Area Plan will serve as a companion document to the City’s zoning requirements, outlining the special provisions or design guidelines property owners should implement as they are designing new projects or contemplating improvements to their buildings.
Finally, this document aims to provide a tool that consolidates the recommendations generated from all of the prior revitalization efforts that focused on the Artesia and Aviation Corridors over the last several years and serves as a framework for decision-makers, i.e. City Staff, the Planning Commission, and the City Council, to systematically implement the ideas generated in this document.
How to Use the Area Plan
The AACAP shall be used as a companion document to the General Plan and zoning ordinance. It will be referenced in both documents similarly to how the City has implemented the “Residential Design Guidelines”. The AACAP will also be used as a starting point for the City to establish general policy direction, Corridor objectives, and implementable actions along the two Corridors. Additionally, property owners and developers will be directed to the Area Plan as they pursue new projects in the Corridors to transition uses over time.
City Staff will also use the Area Plan as a guide during Strategic Planning and budgeting discussions (primarily for prioritization and resource allocation purposes).
Recommended actions may take the form of a zoning code update (which requires subsequent and separate action by the Planning Commission and/or City Council), preparation of a study or analyses, additional outreach with businesses and neighbors, or establishment or continuance of a City program. These actions are intended to implement the underlying intentions of the AACAP which in no particular order are as follows:
• Create “Activity Nodes”
• Increase floor area ratio (FAR)
o Current FAR is 0.5
o GPAC proposed FAR is 0.6
o Planning Commission recommends FAR greater than 0.6
• Relax parking standards for preferred uses
• Encourage shared parking (private) and establish shared parking (public)
• Improve pedestrian/vehicular access between businesses
• Establish a Business Improvement District (BID)
• Improve neighborhood connectivity
• Apply and develop design guidelines
• Build an identity through cohesive branding, placemaking objects, wayfinding, public art, and gateways
• Unify Corridor signage
• Create new public spaces (such as parklettes or streetlets)
• Improve walking and biking infrastructure
• Consider long-range transit improvements
City Staff will rely on the Area Plan during the review of development proposals, as submittals will be checked to ascertain if the standards, guidelines, and recommendations in the AACAP have been followed and to see if the intent of the design and placemaking approach have been reasonably observed or addressed. Developments in compliance with the standards and guidelines will receive favorable recommendations (or approval by City Staff if the project falls under Staff administrative jurisdiction/authority). Developments are not expected to meet every detail of every discretionary guideline in order to be considered in reasonable compliance with the overall intent of the AACAP. In turn, and as required, the Planning Commission will also rely on the Area Plan, as conformity with the AACAP will be a “criteria” necessary for the Planning Commission to approve some future projects along the Corridors.
Technical Studies Performed to Inform the AACAP: Parking Study and Market Analysis and Development Feasibility Study
A significant constraint impeding the Corridors’ revitalization concerns parking. Many of the properties along the Corridors have less on-site parking spaces than are required pursuant to the City’s zoning ordinance parking requirements. To better understand the current actual parking conditions and parking capacity within the overall AACAP area, a comprehensive parking utilization study was conducted. The parking utilization study (Appendix A of the AACAP), attached to this Administrative Report, identified a total of 2,877 parking spaces, of which 688 are on-street public spaces and 2,189 are off-street private spaces.
Further analysis revealed that both on-street and off-street parking spaces are generally underutilized, suggesting that the current supply can accommodate higher demand. An industry standard “efficiently” parked area maintains an 85 percent utilization rate, but current on-street and off-street parking in the Aviation Artesia Area rarely exceeds 68 percent and 50 percent utilization, respectively.
Despite the excess of parking spaces that generally exist across the Corridors, the functional supply is largely restricted by the private ownership of off-street lots and the absence of public lots and structures. The manual inventory of on- and off-street parking was conducted in mid-December 2018 so it does reflect conditions that would be described as “peak”; however, it was conducted prior to the City’s recent development of the public lot on the SCE Right of Way at Artesia Blvd.
The “underutilization” of existing parking is mapped and site specific and could provide opportunities to relax parking standards in certain areas as redevelopment efforts progress. As recommended in the Area Plan, the City could capitalize on the abundance of existing off-street parking by seeking partnerships with the property/business owners and/or simply recognizing the overall availability/underutilization over segments within the Corridor that could allow for some more immediate short-term options for revitalization through the modification of existing parking standards. Essentially, with more parking spaces available for general use, other targeted efforts-such as reduced parking requirements for new development-become more feasible.
In addition to the parking study, the AACAP was informed by a citywide market study (2017) and an AACAP development feasibility study (Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis for Artesia Boulevard - 2019). The citywide market study found that there was a demand for more and improved office space throughout the city and noted that the nationwide changes in the retail environment would likely impact the amount and type of retail that would be supported going forward. Meaning that much of the existing retail space along the corridors will need to be replaced with alternative uses. The 2019 development feasibility study (Appendix B of the AACAP), attached to this Administrative Report, evaluated the potential for redevelopment of the types of uses that are likely within the AACAP area. Analysis of four conceptual development scenarios on a hypothetical site along Artesia Boulevard was conducted.
The 2019 development feasibility study concluded that shallow lot depths and high land values along the Corridors significantly limited near-term redevelopment unless development standards allowed for additional height (e.g., 4+ stories), reduced setbacks, relaxed parking requirements, and increases in the allowable floor area ratio (FAR) well above what is currently permitted. The GPAC recommended not to pursue the relaxation of development standards that are considered to be compatible with existing surrounding neighborhoods. Rather, the GPAC preferred more modest and conservative changes, including:
• Allow for flexible parking standards and a minor increase in FAR for preferred uses to encourage development of desired uses.
• Introduce impact fee reductions for preferred uses to help marginally feasible projects to become more feasible.
• Establish a flexible zoning designation to allow for a range of uses that accommodates a variety of businesses according to market demand.
Public Input and Recommendations from the GPAC and Planning Commission
In addition to the technical land use, parking, and development feasibility analyses conducted to inform the AACAP, the opportunities and recommendations in this Area Plan also build on the work of prior and concurrent planning efforts. Over the years, focused efforts and appointed committees have tackled the discussion about how to prompt activity and promote revitalization along Artesia and Aviation Boulevards. Those efforts are included in the attachment entitled “AACAP Public Input and Recommendations from GPAC and Planning Commission”.
A review of the findings and recommendations from all these efforts found that several previously-recommended items are still relevant (for example, establishing a Business Improvement District). The AACAP includes many of the common themes seen in these previous efforts. Additionally, the Area Plan identifies any observed obstacles that have prevented previous recommendations from moving forward and includes suggestions to eliminate barriers and to promote prompt implementation.
As a part of the general plan update work program, the City Council authorized the GPAC to provide support and input for the preparation of the Artesia and Aviation Corridors Area Plan to provide more focused policy and placemaking guidance to two of the City’s most prominent and traveled corridors.
The GPAC carefully considered the findings of the 2017 citywide market study, which identified a need for new and improved office facilities, as well as the 2019 development feasibility study, which concluded that residential development with three or fewer stories was not financially feasible in the near term. Based on these findings, GPAC recommends allowing the area to evolve “organically” over time instead of creating significant changes to (or increases in) the area’s development capacity to prompt immediate change. Additionally, GPAC determined that the land use focus of the Corridors should be primarily restaurant and office, with some general retail and service commercial, thus catering to and creating connectivity with the adjacent residential neighborhoods.
The GPAC provided additional policy and/or implementation measures focused on:
• A pedestrian-focused environment.
o Not emphasizing or supporting the “commuter” service, i.e. drive throughs.
• A bike lane and multimodal access and facilities along Artesia.
• Enhanced physical connections to the adjacent community, commercial businesses, and nearby residential neighborhoods.
• Alternative streetscape and street section design options.
• Opportunities to create temporary or permanent gathering spaces along the Corridors (streetlet/parklet in part of a cross-street to the Artesia Corridor). Spaces could be tried out temporarily, then permanently installed if they are actively used by the community and funding could be secured to install and maintain.
The Draft AACAP document is a result of GPAC’s efforts, including multiple GPAC meetings specifically designated for developing the AACAP, as well as public meetings and public surveys to present the Area Plan and collect public feedback on the Draft AACAP.
The City’s Planning Commission recently conducted three (3) public hearings in consideration of the AACAP. The minutes from each of their public meetings/hearings is attached to this Administrative Report. The detailed discussion is described in the attachment entitled “AACAP Public Input and Recommendations from GPAC and Planning Commission”.
At the final public hearing on September 17, 2020, each Planning Commissioner presented their individual comments and Chairman Elder led discussions and deliberations in consideration of the Draft Area Plan and specifically each Planning Commissioner’s Comments as presented. A roll call vote was conducted on each considered comment/edit/proposed change and the following were the proposed comments/edits/changes that the Planning Commission reached consensus on and these proposed comments/edits/changes have been incorporated into the attached Resolution for the City Council’s consideration.
• Consider restoring the name of Artesia Blvd to Redondo Beach Blvd to help in rebranding the area.
• Consider the FAR increase from 0.5 to something higher than the recommended 0.6 FAR suggested in the AACAP.
• Focus on Matthews and Vanderbilt or other parallel streets for bike traffic (both in short and potentially the long term) to make as safe for bicyclists as possible. Significant infrastructure changes are needed for Artesia to be safe and usable for more bicycle traffic.
• Consider eliminating Artesia on-street parking in the blocks at the nodes at first.
• After establishing shared parking among lots and/or building parking structure(s), then reduce the parking requirements to encourage development, focusing on preferred uses.
• Add rooftop restaurant dining to the sidewalk dining idea along Artesia.
• Avoid the identified streetlets locations at signalized lights. Find other streetlet locations near the nodes.
• Consider an “empty storefront” and or blight fee for owners who choose to leave sites empty after some time period to encourage development (after 12 months, 18 months, etc.).
• Add a prioritization for timeline of the implementation items. There is an implementation list at the end of the Plan, but it would be helpful to have a standard linear timeline with milestones to get a feel of the possible roll out.
• Include a pie chart or other visual aid showing projected possible amounts from different funding sources. This would allow some approximation of what is possible.
• Potential AACAP changes may result from the Pandemic. Make sure this plan has flexibility to adapt to a post-Pandemic environment.
• Consider regulations that encourage local businesses in favor of larger national chains.
ANALYSIS
The ANALYSIS section of this Administrative Report presents the actual prescriptive strategies within the Area Plan contained within Chapter 3 - Placemaking, Chapter 4 - Mobility, and Chapter 6 - Implementation which are critical to advancing the Corridors’ revitalization. The section provides short-term and mid-term action items for each of the subtopics within the three chapters and an estimate of relative cost and concludes with a summary of specific immediate “next steps” recommended by staff.
Chapter 3. Placemaking
In order to transform the underperforming areas of the Corridors into places where people want to walk, bike, scooter, or take a rideshare service, elements must be introduced that draw people in and make people feel welcome and comfortable.
Focused placemaking decisions implemented with appropriate mobility improvements and economic development strategies can create Corridors that better serve community needs, ensure the continued stability of nearby residential neighborhoods, and provide a social anchor for North Redondo Beach.
Chapter 3. PLACEMAKING provides the aesthetic and design-related actionable strategies for achieving the intended purpose of the Area Plan. The following lists the subtopics discussed in the “Placemaking” chapter and the associated recommendations/ actions the City could choose to pursue to enhance the Corridors. Each of the “Recommendations” within the AACAP assigns a general cost implication [low ($): $0-$50,000; medium ($$): $50,001-$499,999; high ($$$): >$500,000] and a suggested general time frame [short term (1-5 years), midterm (5-10 years), and long term (10 years +)] in order to support future decision makers with implementation.
Placemaking Implementation Initiatives
Creating A Destination
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). Establish a BID to help facilitate focused economic development efforts to attract preferred uses to Activity Nodes.
• Incentives. Identify and provide incentives that mitigate development obstacles and encourage preferred uses to locate within the Activity Nodes, such as:
o Offer expedited permitting and streamlined applications for preferred uses within Activity Nodes (e.g., give priority to projects that include restaurant on the ground floor and office above).
• Facilitate a program to offer low-cost loans to finance tenant improvements for qualifying preferred uses within Activity Nodes.
• Reduce parking requirements for preferred uses within Activity Nodes (see Section 4.5.1).
• Design Guidelines. Implement design guidelines in Section 3.4, which include measures to enhance the pedestrian experience and make the Activity Nodes more desirable destinations.
• Pilot Projects and Improvements. Gather insight from local businesses, property owners, and residents regarding which Activity Nodes should be prioritized for improvements or pilot projects outlined in later sections of this document (if they need to be phased over time due to funding or resource constraints).
• Long-Range Parking Strategy. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, in addition to reducing parking requirements for preferred uses within Activity Nodes, develop a long-term parking strategy to understand the cost and benefit of various parking options, including private shared parking, public structured parking, and other strategies to consolidate and improve the efficiency of parking that could be implemented in phases as the AACAP area and Activity Nodes develop.
• Evaluate Activity Nodes. Evaluate the success of targeted improvements in each Activity Node annually. Consider adding 1-2 additional Nodes in the future, and identify a general timeframe to do so (mid- to long-term).
Encourage Reinvestment-Revise Land Use Intensity and Development Standards
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Increase Allowable FAR (Artesia only). Increase FAR from 0.50 to 0.60 along the Artesia Corridor. (This was a recommendation for consideration that came out of discussions with the GPAC.)
• Reduce Minimum Parking Requirements. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, reduce the minimum parking requirements for preferred uses in Activity Nodes.
• Long-Range Parking Strategy. As detailed in Section 4.5.1, develop a long-term parking strategy to understand the cost and benefit of various parking options-including private shared parking, public structured parking, and other strategies to consolidate and improve the efficiency of parking-that could be implemented in phases as the AACAP area and Activity Nodes develop.
Connectivity (Getting to the Corridors)
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $$
Action Items:
• Revise Municipal Code
o As detailed in Section 4.5.1, revise current parking requirements to allow and encourage shared parking between adjacent and nearby parcels within the AACAP area.
o Revise the City’s Municipal Code to allow pedestrian pass-through routes in the walls separating qualifying residential properties (with 4 or more units) and adjacent commercial development, where safe and feasible.
• Coordination. In the Artesia Corridor, when changes to a commercial property that is adjacent to a qualifying multifamily property (4 or more units) would require the issuance of a building permit, the City shall require the developer to make a reasonable effort to determine if a pedestrian access route is feasible, safe, and desired by the residential property via coordination with the owner, HOA, or other representative party of the residential property.
• Implement Site Design Guidelines. The site design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to full-block pass-throughs, pedestrian access, and parking.
The Corridor Experience-Sidewalks
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Implement Sidewalk Dining Permit Program. Expand the existing program to include businesses within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area.
• Establish a Pilot Outdoor Retail Display Permit Program. Based on the Sidewalk Dining Permit Program, establish a similar program (or expand the existing Sidewalk Dining Permit Program) to allow outdoor retail displays. Pilot the program in Activity Nodes to assess long-term viability.
• Incentivize Outdoor Dining. Provide incentives to attract uses that include outdoor dining to Activity Nodes:
o For preferred uses within Activity Nodes, reduce the amount of parking required for outdoor dining by requiring no additional parking for the first 16 seats outdoors or 30 percent of the interior seats, whichever is greater.1
o Prioritize storefront improvement grants for preferred uses within Activity Nodes, with emphasis on projects that include outdoor dining components.
• Implement Streetscape Design Guidelines. The design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to sidewalk and streetscape improvements.
The Corridor Experience-Public Open Spaces
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Establish Public Open Space Requirements. Require new commercial projects that meet specified criteria (lot size, project size, etc.) to provide public open spaces on-site.
• Purchase Land. As opportunities arise, consider purchasing land from property owners to establish public open spaces and pedestrian pass-throughs.
• Incentivize Public Open Spaces Adjacent to Pedestrian Pass-Throughs. Provide incentives to encourage property owners to provide public open spaces adjacent to pedestrian pass-throughs. ? Consider reducing the amount of on-site parking required for properties that formally preserve land for both a pedestrian pass-through and adjacent open space area.
• Count the pedestrian pass through toward a public open space requirement only if it is adjacent to additional open space that enables public gathering, activity, recreation, and/or leisure.
• Prioritize storefront improvement grants for properties that formally preserve land for both a pedestrian pass-through and an adjacent public open space area.
The Corridor Experience-Storefronts
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Near Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Continue Existing Storefront Improvement Program. Continue funding and implementation of the program in the AACAP area, with priority given to preferred uses and projects in Activity Nodes.
• Expand Storefront Improvement Program. Expand the program to include improvements that screen parking and other frontage areas consistent with design guidelines. Consider issuing larger grants for projects in Activity Nodes.
• Amend Storefront Improvement Program. Amend the program to require that improvements be consistent with design guidelines to the extent possible.
• Implement Storefront Design Guidelines. The design guidelines in Section 3.4 include provisions related to storefront design, including:
o Façade Articulation
o Transparency
o Canopies, Awnings, and Shading Devices
o Building Placement
o Parking and Screening
Identity (Making an Impression)-Branding
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$ (depending on the strategy)
Action Items:
• Engage the Community. Gather insight from local businesses, property owners, and residents about what attracted them to North Redondo in the first place as well as the specific values, challenges, and ideas for the future of business in the AACAP area.
• Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). As noted in Section 3.2.1, a BID would help to create and implement a marketing strategy.
• Establish a brand. Work with residents, businesses, and property owners (possibly through a BID) to:
o Build a cohesive brand based on the results of the community engagement.
o Develop a brand/marketing strategy to effectively communicate the brand to attract visitors, businesses, and investors to the AACAP area. Collaborate with the Chamber of Commerce and businesses within the AACAP area to develop the brand.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Gateways
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term / Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$
Action Items:
• Create a Signage Master Plan. As part of a signage master plan, develop design concepts for gateways and monumentation. Work with designers, artists, and community groups to design gateway features.
• Coordinate with Property Owners. Coordinate with owners of the properties identified as gateway locations.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Banners
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Banner Program. Use the Riviera Village Banner Program as a template to establish a program that facilitates the installation, maintenance, and permitting of banners (possibly role of Chamber or BID) in the AACAP area.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Wayfinding
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Develop a Signage Master Plan. As part of a signage master plan, establish a wayfinding master plan to govern all wayfinding signage within the AACAP area. Incorporate elements of the brand strategy, and collaborate with local businesses to ensure cohesive, thoughtful, and useful wayfinding elements are introduced.
Identity (Making an Impression)-Public Art
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $-$$$
Action Items:
• Cohesive Theme. Develop a cohesive theme for new art generated by fees collected in the City’s Public Art Fund for public areas and private properties in the Artesia or Aviation Corridors (as part of the City’s art requirements in the Municipal Code).
• Early involvement. Engage artists early in the development of public projects and encourage private developers to involve artists from the outset of new significant projects.
• Establish Partnerships. Consider implementing the Public Art Master Plan through a combination of means including, but not limited to:
o Seek public partnerships. Work with nonprofit art organizations to install public murals and other installations in public areas, medians, and on private property that is visible from the sidewalk.
o Develop Functional Art. Based on the brand strategy, work with artists to develop functional art to be used throughout the AACAP area, including area-specific benches, garbage cans, bike racks, and creative crosswalks (for Activity Nodes).
Identity (Making an Impression)-Business Signage
RECOMMENDATIONS (Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$$ (depends on incentives and sign design)
Action Items:
• Develop Signage Master Plan. As part of a Signage Master Plan, develop specific signage standards to unify business signage for both the Artesia and Aviation Corridors.
• Use Signage to Engage the Streetscape. Revise Municipal Code to allow A-frame street signs outside of the Clear Walking Path within Activity Nodes in the AACAP area.
• Billboards. Determine the role billboards will play in the Corridors moving forward. Consider prohibiting billboards in Activity Nodes and/or AACAP area.
• Incentives. After the development of the Signage Master Plan, provide incentives for existing businesses to replace existing signage that does not comply with the Master Signage Plan.
Design Guidelines
This section of the AACAP contains both recommended standards and guidelines. Standards, as indicated by the words “shall or must,” identify requirements. Guidelines, as indicated by the word “should,” describe additional requirements that the City asks architects and developers to satisfy. To be implemented, the zoning ordinance would need to be amended to require projects to be reviewed with the Guidelines. Once a zoning code amendment is adopted, Guidelines would then need to be addressed for all development projects-alternatives will be permitted only if a physical condition constrains implementation of the requirement and if the applicant demonstrates the intent of the design guideline is met. Conditions that are restricted are indicated by the word “prohibited.”
Because there are numerous Design Guidelines, only a listing of the “categories” of design guidelines and a short description are provided below. For the comprehensive list and a review of each specific Design Guideline, refer to Chapter 3 Pages 66-69 of the AACAP document.
Design Guidelines-Streetscapes
Street design is an important aspect of placemaking. Pedestrian-realm improvements should reflect the community’s desire for more walkable sidewalks and bikeable streets. Streetscape amenities are an important detail that should be addressed during the site plan review process and provided by new development or when major public works projects are undertaken. Below are just a few of the design guidelines intended to enhance the Corridors’ streetscapes.
• Clear Walking Path. A minimum Clear Walking Path of 5 feet shall be maintained throughout the AACAP area. In Activity Nodes the minimum Clear Walking Path shall measure a minimum of 6 feet.
• Amenity Zone. When sidewalk widths exceed the minimum Clear Walking Path, an Amenity Zone shall be established along the sidewalk.
• Streetscape Amenities. The AACAP area shall include a unique “family of streetscape amenities” (complementary furnishings, bike racks, lighting, signage, banners, etc.) that are consistent with the AACAP area identity (see Section 3.3.3) and contribute to a sense of place.
• Outdoor Uses. Outdoor business uses, including outdoor dining (with appropriate permits) and outdoor retail displays (in pilot areas with appropriate permits), are encouraged within the public sidewalk, provided there is adequate space to maintain the Clear Walking Path, and on private property within the frontage area. Such uses are strongly encouraged within Activity Nodes. Deeper setbacks intended to accommodate such uses are strongly encouraged in Activity Nodes.
Design Guidelines-Site Design-Access
New projects should be designed and existing spaces retrofitted (when possible) to encourage the consolidation of small private parking lots into larger shared parking areas, to promote walking and bicycling within the AACAP area, and to establish better pedestrian connections with the surrounding neighborhoods. Projects should also provide safe and reasonably convenient access for visitors who will arrive by car. Below are four (4) examples of the eight (8) design guidelines that address site access within the AACAP.
• Vehicular Access. Vehicular access to each site must be designed to minimize conflicts between pedestrians, cyclists, autos, and service vehicles. Sight lines, pedestrian walkways, and lighting are factors to consider in developing a site plan. Entrance and exit points should be well marked with streetscape and landscape features.
• Curb Cuts. The number of site access points for vehicles should be minimized and consolidated. Drives should be as narrow as possible to minimize interruptions of the sidewalk. Shared drives and shared parking should be used when possible to reduce pedestrian and vehicular conflicts. Driveways should be located as far from intersections as possible.
• Bicycle Parking. Accessible, secure, and well-signed bicycle parking shall be provided at convenient and visible locations throughout or adjacent to new development.
• Cross Access Between Parking. Private parking lots should include pedestrian cross access when feasible and safe.
Design Guidelines-Site Design-Building Placement and Orientation
Building placement and orientation to the sidewalk has a large impact on the pedestrian experience. Visually interesting buildings that are oriented to the street shape the area’s character as well as the visitor’s experience. Designing buildings that engage the sidewalk contributes to making the public street more inviting to pedestrians. There are four (4) design guidelines concerning this category and all are listed below.
• Pedestrian Scale. Developments should make public frontages interesting and comfortable for a pedestrian walking alongside them.
• Engage the Sidewalk. Buildings shall have a strong presence and encourage activity along the street frontage. Buildings shall face the street and provide entrances from the sidewalk.
• Setbacks. Designs that incorporate front setbacks in order to accommodate programming that contributes to or activates the public realm are encouraged. Parking in setbacks should be avoided.
• Lighting. Exterior lighting should be designed and located in such a way that it does not project off-site or onto adjacent uses. This is especially critical with neighboring residential uses.
Design Guidelines-Storefront Design -Façade Articulation-Transparency-Canopies, Awnings, and Shading Devices
This category of design guidelines is focuses upon the treatment of store fronts. Below is an example of a design guideline targeting each of the subheadings in this category.
• Detailed Façade Elements. Exterior building walls fronting the Artesia or Aviation Corridors shall have variation, recesses, and offsets in the surface, especially at entries and important gateways.
o Long building walls shall be attractive and visually interesting by applying changes in surface materials, colors, massing, fenestration, storefronts, public art, or other well-composed architectural elements.
o Pilasters or breaks in the wall plane shall be allowed where appropriate.
• Transparency. Buildings should have a variety of solid and nontransparent or treated transparent glass surfaces. Ground-floor storefronts should be partially transparent (e.g., incorporate doors, windows, and display areas) to encourage pedestrian activity. Long stretches of solid glass without any articulation should be avoided.
• Design, Proportion, Maintenance. Awnings, canopies, and shading devices are encouraged but must be well designed, proportioned, and maintained so they do not adversely impact the sidewalk environment. The materials, shape, rigidity, reflectance, color, lighting, and signage should relate to the architectural design of the building.
Chapter 4. Mobility
Included in this section of the Administrative Report are two (2) elements lifted directly from this chapter of the AACAP, the “Mobility Overview” section and the “AAACAP Mobility Objectives” section. These two (2) sections in particular present the breadth of the topics included in this chapter and explain the intentions it seeks to achieve. Generally speaking it is within the “Mobility” chapter where the public right of way and other public spaces are envisioned.
Additionally, a summary list of the specific mobility topics that include targeted “strategies” with recommendations is provided herein. There are significant details concerning time frames, relative costs, and action items that are also included in this summary. Please refer to the actual AACAP document for additional details concerning each of the prescriptive “strategies” summarized below.
Mobility Overview
The Artesia and Aviation Corridors serve the dual purposes of acting as the primary roadway arterials carrying high volumes of traffic, and as the principal location for neighborhood-serving commercial businesses in North Redondo Beach. As detailed in Chapter 2, many factors have converged to create an area that continues to function in its role in the roadway network but is no longer serving the residents of North Redondo Beach as the “Main Street” of the community.
Building on the work of prior revitalization efforts (see Section 2.4 of the AACAP), parking and development feasibility were identified as two of the biggest challenges preventing revitalization efforts from moving forward, so additional studies of the AACAP area (see Section 2.3) were conducted to identify specific opportunities and constraints related to each challenge (see Section 2.5). These were combined with the recommendations of related efforts to develop the AACAP strategies. Many of the opportunities and recommendations were related to mobility, such as parking, ride share, active modes of transportation, and closing portions of public streets to create new public spaces. To address these items, mobility objectives (see Section 4.4) and strategies (see Section 4.5) are detailed in this chapter.
Mobility Overview - Understanding Parking
One of the questions that arose from related planning efforts was how much parking was available within the Corridors. Because of small lots and scattered businesses, there is a perception that some portions of the Corridors would benefit from additional parking. The parking study (Appendix A) identified a total of 2,877 parking spaces, of which 688 are on-street, public spaces, and 2,189 are private, off-street spaces, most of which are currently underutilized (pre-COVID analysis).
The challenge identified, however, was in the inefficient utilization of parking. Private ownership of off-street lots and the absence of public off-street lots resulted in very inefficient parking utilization-the majority of the parking within the AACAP area is reserved for patrons and employees of specific businesses.
Mobility Overview - GPAC Recommendations
In addition to the parking analysis, the GPAC identified some key measures that would work with other strategies to transform the AACAP area-investigating the possibility of adding a bike lane to Artesia Boulevard, enhancing the physical connections to the adjacent community, exploring alternative street sections, and identifying opportunities to create temporary or permanent gathering spaces along the Corridor. Strategies related to all these measures are described in the Mobility Chapter.
Mobility Overview - New Public Spaces
Establishing additional public spaces in North Redondo Beach is challenging because of the limited supply of vacant and/or publicly held land, but it remains a priority for the community, so creative solutions are necessary. The suggestion to create new public space by closing a segment of a public street to establish a “streetlet” was submitted by a community member through an online survey for the General Plan Update.
The “streetlet” idea was discussed and endorsed by the GPAC, and the feasibility was analyzed by a cross-disciplinary group of City Staff members from different departments. City Staff analyzed every intersection in the AACAP area for “streetlet” potential locations based on criteria that included:
• Topography (was the street too steep for a “streetlet”?)
• Existing driveway access (would closing the street cut off access to private property?)
• Transit (would closing the street impact an existing bus line?)
• Approved development projects (would closing the street restrict access to an approved project?)
• Activity Nodes (would the location of the “streetlets” help to activate an identified Activity Node?)
Ultimately, City Staff identified two locations to establish “streetlets”: MacKay Lane and Green Lane. See further discussions concerning “streetlets” in Section 4.5.2 of the AACAP.
AACAP Mobility Objectives
The Corridors are envisioned as places with enhanced neighborhood connectivity, safe opportunities for active transportation (walking, biking and scooter riding), and attractive streetscapes. The long-term vision of a transformed, revitalized AACAP area is only achievable through consistent incremental improvements. Part of this revitalization will be realized by changing the way residents and visitors access the Corridor. Converting travel behavior takes time and intentional effort. This document describes implementable actions within short-term, midterm, and long-term time frames.
SHORT TERM: IMPROVING SPACE EFFICIENCY
As the parking study of existing conditions found in Appendix A concludes, there are many underutilized off-street and on-street parking areas within the AACAP area, even during peak demand periods. A good first step for the Corridors is to leverage the opportunities that already exist. This may be in the form of reducing parking requirements, facilitating shared parking solutions, or replacing vehicle parking with bicycle parking. These tactics help create more room for livable and walkable spaces within the Corridor.
MIDTERM: ENHANCING WALKING AND BIKING ACCESS
More residents and visitors will choose walking, biking, and scooter riding to access and travel through the Corridor when safer, more convenient facilities exist. The AACAP recommends the City designate bike boulevards for low-speed, low-stress bicycle and scooter access to the Corridor. The removal of some driveway access points and installation of traffic-calming measures near crosswalks will also enhance the walking environment. With enhanced facilities installed, the City can encourage residents and visitors to change the way they access and enjoy the Corridors.
LONG TERM: TRANSFORMED AND REVITALIZED CORRIDORS
The fully transformed and revitalized Corridors will require many safe, reliable options for access and mobility. The City can install metered parking on high demand blocks to ensure available parking and provide funding for other improvements. Public shared parking lots - the park-once approach - can reduce overall parking needs and promote the use of active transportation, particularly walking, bicycling, and scooter riding. Enhanced transit service can better link the Corridors with the revitalizing South Bay Galleria shopping center and adjacent future regional light rail station.
Corridor Mobility Strategies
The following is a summary list of specific topics within Section 4.5 Corridor Descriptions and Strategies. For each identified strategy is a proposed general time frame, relative cost, and recommended action items.
Shared Off-Street Parking/Reducing Minimum Parking Requirements
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Conduct a comprehensive parking study to identify opportunities for shared parking and adjust parking requirements including provisions for establishing shared parking and reduced on-site parking standards.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
“Park Once” Public Parking Garages/Removing On-Street Parking
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $$/$$$
Action Items:
• Conduct a comprehensive parking study to identify opportunities to establish public parking lots and garages, remove on-street parking, and adjust parking requirements.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
• Develop a long-term parking strategy including parking demand management strategies, autonomous vehicle “holding” areas, and considerations of other future technonology.
Pick-Up/Drop-Off Zones (For Transportation Network Companies and Autonomous Vehicles)
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Long Term
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Curb-space management study to identify opportunities for pickup and drop-off zones.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
The Walking Experience-Driveway Access Points
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $
Action Items:
• Local Access Study. Consider local access traffic studies to assess the impact of driveway closures.
• Drive-thrus. Evaluate an approach to drive-thrus in Corridors (considerations: potentially minimize, strategically locate, or prohibit them in areas such as activity nodes).
• Update Development Standards. Update the Municipal Code to incorporate regulations for curb cuts within the AACAP area, including:
o Maximum Width. Establish maximum width dimensions for curb cuts.
o Minimum Distance. Establish minimum distances between curb cuts for new development.
• Design Guidelines. Implement the design guidelines (see Section 3.4) that relate to curb cut frequency, width, and distance from intersections.
• Incentives. Identify and provide incentives to encourage property owners to consolidate driveways (e.g., include in the Storefront Improvement Program, establish a new program).
The Walking Experience-Midblock Crosswalks/Enhancing Existing Crosswalks
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $-$$ (depending on level of safety infrastructure)
Action Items:
• Crosswalk warrant study.
• Outreach to residents, businesses, and parcel owners.
• Installation of overhead street lighting at crosswalks (existing or proposed) to improve pedestrian safety and visibility.
The Walking Experience-Streetlets
(Applies to Artesia)
Timeframe: Midterm/Long Term
Relative Cost: $$-$$$
Action Items:
• Local access traffic study.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Experience-Parking for Bikes and Secondary Mobility Devices
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $ (without curb extensions) - $$ (with curb extensions)
Action Items:
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
• Conduct a study to determine the optimal locations and frequency of bike and scooter amenities along both Corridors.
• Consider updating the municipal code to:
o Require that new projects provide a certain amount of bicycle or scooter parking for each vehicle space provided.
o Allow businesses to reduce the amount of required parking if they provide publicly accessible bicycle racks or scooter parking on-site or contribute to a fund to establish and maintain a public bicycle/scooter station within a certain distance of the business.
• If shared equipment is eventually allowed within the City, establish guidelines to manage the shared equipment in various street and sidewalk situations within the micro-mobility framework.
Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Experience-Bike Boulevards
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Short Term/Midterm
Relative Cost: $$
Action Items:
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
Bicycle and Micro-Mobility Experience-Class II Bike Lanes
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Midterm
Relative Cost: $ (without curb extensions) - $$ (with curb extensions)
Action Items:
• Outreach to residents, business owners, and parcel owners.
• Develop a complete streets strategy for the AACAP area including phasing.
The Transit Experience-Potential for Curb Extension Conversion to Transit Stops and Trolley Service
(Applies to Artesia and Aviation)
Timeframe: Long Term
Relative Cost: $ (without curb extensions) - $$ (with curb extensions)
Action Items:
• Potential transit service study and/or pilot project.
• Outreach to residents and parcel owners.
• Seek first/last mile funding opportunities related to the Green Line light rail extension.
Chapter 6. Implementation
This section of the Administrative Report includes the introduction portion of this chapter of the AACAP followed by a few of rows from the actual table that identify the substantive actions that will serve to implement the concepts, strategies, guidelines, etc. that are contained in the Area Plan. The implementation table identifies the action, potential funding sources, timeframe, responsible department & other partnerships, relative cost, and related strategies.
Implementation-Introduction
Implementation of the Area Plan will require a combination of public and private effort to achieve the changes envisioned to the public realm and infrastructure serving the area. This section is a consolidation of actions outlined in the AACAP. Where one action implements multiple strategies, it is noted in Table 6.1 in the AACAP.
The phasing of new development and revitalization of existing buildings on private properties will occur incrementally, as landowners and developers respond to new market opportunities.
Actual implementation will be dependent on development activity, funding availability, and staff resources. The Implementation Table will be used by the City during annual budgeting and strategic planning to prioritize and monitor progress (and barriers to progress) so the vision for the Corridors can be implemented over time.
The Implementation Table (Table 6.1) lists the specific actions, outlined in previous chapters, that should be taken by the City of Redondo Beach, in coordination with local businesses, future developers, and other agencies where appropriate. Programs and policies for some of these items are already in place and are recommended to be continued.
For each action, a potential funding source(s) has been identified, a recommended timeframe for completion is noted, the responsible party is listed, and the relative cost is provided. The timeframes are identified as follows:
• Short (1-5 years)
• Mid (5 to 10 years)
• Long (10 years or more)
The relative costs are identified as follows:
• Low ($): $0-$50,000
• Medium ($$): $50,001-$499,999
• High ($$$): >$500,000
It is also assumed that staff resources (either from the City or from a to be established Business Improvement District (BID)) would be required to implement all actions listed in the table.
Implementation Table
|
Placemaking Actions |
Implementation Action |
Potential Funding Source |
Timeframe |
Responsible Department & Other Partnerships |
Relative Cost |
Related Strategies |
|
PM.1 |
Establish a Business Improvement District (BID). |
General fund |
Short Term |
Waterfront and Economic Development / NRBBA1 |
$ |
Establish Activity Nodes; Revise Land Use Intensity and Development Standards |
|
PM.2 |
Offer Expedited Permitting and streamlined applications for preferred uses within Activity Nodes. |
General fund |
Short Term (establish process)/ Ongoing |
Planning |
$ |
Establish Activity Nodes |
|
Mobility Actions |
Implementation Action |
Potential Funding Source |
Timeframe |
Responsible Department & Other Partnerships |
Relative Cost |
Related Strategies |
|
MO.1 |
Revise Municipal Code to reduce parking requirements in Activity Nodes (and eventually throughout the Artesia Corridor). Including the following considerations • Use the findings of the parking study (Appendix A) to determine and validate the appropriate reduction as outlined in Section 4.5.1. • Consider allowing businesses to reduce the amount of parking required if publicly accessible bicycle parking is provided within a specified distance of the project. • Consider requiring charging stations in parking areas that exceed a specified number of spaces. |
General fund |
Short Term |
Planning |
$ |
Revise Land Use Intensity and Development Standards; Reducing Minimum Parking Requirements |
|
MO.2 |
Conduct a detailed parking study to identify opportunities for and develop a strategy to develop public and private shared off-street parking. |
General fund |
Short Term/ Midterm |
Planning |
$ |
Shared Off-Street Parking |
|
Funding Actions |
Implementation Action |
Potential Funding Source |
Timeframe |
Responsible Department & Other Partnerships |
Relative Cost |
Related Strategies |
|
FU.01 |
Establish a public-facing outreach effort as part of the establishment of each new grant, incentive, or other City-let initiative revitalization to ensure that businesses, property owners, and residents are aware of new opportunities for funding become available to visually enhance existing projects and businesses. |
Same source as City-led initiative |
Midterm |
Waterfront and Economic Development / BID |
$$ |
Business Signage, Driveway Access Points, Sidewalks; Storefronts, Open Space |
The above summaries from Chapter 3 - Placemaking, Chapter 4 - Mobility, and Chapter 6 - Implementation provide a summary list of the most actionable elements of the AACAP. Many of the recommendations are midterm and long term and require additional future studies. Most of the recommended midterm and long-term recommendations would be prioritized and budgeted at the discretion of the City Council during future strategic planning and budget efforts.
Next Steps
The most immediate “Next Steps” in order to “go live” with many of the prescribed short term recommendations would first require that the City Council adopt by resolution the AACAP and direct City Staff to prepare a follow up amendment to the Redondo Beach Municipal Code, Title 10 Planning and Zoning, Chapter 2 Zoning and Land Use, for enabling the application of AACAP against future development projects that require the issuance of a discretionary entitlement, inclusive of an Administrative Design Review, Planning Commission Design Review, Conditional Use Permit, Administrative Use Permit, Modifications, and/or Variance.
Following the recommended initial “Next Steps” noted above, City Staff recommends that the City Council direct Staff to bring back a proposal for a “Parking Implementation Study” (preliminary budget estimate of $35,000) that would inform the best options and strategies for necessary amendments to Article 5 - Parking Regulations within the City’s Zoning Ordinance to begin to remove one of the most consistent impediments to the revitalization of the existing business development that is parking. An initial scope of a “Parking Implementation Study” would include:
• Update to the latest ULI Shared Parking Model (new model released this summer) & recalibrate to the existing parking counts conducted previously
• Evaluate future parking demand for land use changes (considering Transportation Network Companies (Uber-Lyft)/Autonomous Vehicles)
• Propose parking ratios appropriate for the context of the AACAP
• Evaluate parking supply changes for mobility strategies (e.g. streetlets or bike lanes if desired)
• Identify parking shortfalls and potential locations for additional parking
• Identify relevant parking management strategies to manage demand and supply efficiently (ideally to help reduce or eliminate the need for a high investment parking structure)
• Report
• Hearings/Workshops (e.g. PC, CC)
Additionally, with the adoption of the Area Plan by the City Council, all the recommendations within the AACAP would move forward as a matter of its short term, midterm, and long-term implementation measures, and with the adoption of the amendment of the Redondo Beach Municipal Code provisions noted above some short-term revitalization could be realized quickly as future development and new businesses seek to occupy the Artesia & Aviation Corridors.
In summary, City Council direction is needed for bringing back an amendment to the Zoning Ordinance that will require future development projects requiring discretionary entitlements to be consistent with the “intent” of the Area Plan, and for bringing back a proposal for a “Parking Implementation Study”, and for the prioritization of any of the “Action Items” contained with the proposed Area Plan.
COORDINATION
The development of the Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan involved the coordination and support of multiple City Departments including the Community Development Department, the City Manager’s Office, the City Attorney’s Office, Community Services Department, Public Works Department, and the Waterfront and Economic Development Department. Additionally, appointed committees and commissions, working groups, and business associations were also instrumental in bringing the AACAP forward.
FISCAL IMPACT
The City Council approved the development of the Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan with a scope of services and a total budget of $224,100 that included a parking utilization study, an economic feasibility and pro forma analysis of the Corridors, identification of revitalization strategy options, the preparation of the Area Plan that would serve as guidance for the future revitalization of the “Corridors”, additional AACAP-focused GPAC meetings (3), an AACAP community wide meeting, and public hearings before the Planning Commission and City Council.
The City Council authorized $100,000 from the General Fund for the AACAP with the remaining $124,100 funded from the General Plan Maintenance Fund.
The City Council, at its meeting on April 16, 2019, as part of the second amendment to the City’s contract with Placeworks, Inc. revised the AACAP budget to downward by $20,000 with a more focused and simplified document for a new total of $204,100.
APPROVED BY:
Joe Hoefgen, City Manager
ATTACHMENTS
Resolution Adopting the Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan
Draft Artesia & Aviation Corridors Area Plan - January 2020
AACAP Public Input and Recommendations from GPAC and Planning Commission
AACAP Parking Utilization Study - February 28, 2020
AACAP Development Feasibility and Pro Forma Analysis - March 5, 2019
AACAP Public Survey Summary - May 5, 2020
Planning Commission Resolution No. 2020-09-PCR-17 (pending signatures)
Public Hearing Notice