Torrance council approves solar installation on open-space parcel despite resident concerns

The Torrance City Council voted to adopt Resolution No. 2025-53 approving a modification (MOD 203-00010) that allows a large solar installation on property described as open space at 2550 Pacific Coast Highway.

Council and staff spent more than an hour debating whether the contested parcel should remain open space, the legal effect of earlier environmental documents that referenced “natural open space,” and which agency would review construction plans for solar panels proposed inside a mobile home park.

Community Development Director Michelle Ramirez told the council the city will not issue building permits for work inside the mobile home park and that construction permits for the project would be processed by the state: “The permit goes through the state of California Housing and Community Development Department, otherwise known as HCD, because this land is located within a mobile home park,” Ramirez said. “The underlying land use, we do have control of that, but we don't have control once a decision is made for construction to be done inside the mobile home park.”

Councilmembers and the city attorney pressed staff about the scope and wording of an open-space easement recorded years earlier. Ramirez said the environmental impact report used the phrase “natural open space” for parcels that included the adjacent golf course, but the recorded easement on the mobile home park parcel does not include the same language, leaving room for disagreement over what activities the easement prohibits. “There is no easement that actually says those conditions,” Ramirez said, explaining the legal ambiguity.

City Attorney Patrick Sullivan told the council that a legal challenge to the council’s decision would most likely take the form of a writ seeking to overturn the action rather than a damages suit at this stage: “A writ challenging the city's decision would be to overturn the action. It wouldn't be to seek financial damages because … it hasn't been built yet,” he said, while also noting nothing is ever certain in litigation.

Council members raised practical concerns about the proposal, including proximity to residences, possible heat or glare from “700 plus solar panels,” access and setbacks, and whether the project proponent had agreed to indemnify the city. Ramirez said an indemnification clause was included in the proposed resolution and that staff had highlighted that condition at an earlier hearing. She told the council she had not received direct written objections from the property owner or noticed any executed indemnity agreement.

The modification had been appealed after a 5–2 Planning Commission denial; councilmembers debated whether to postpone action to allow additional clarification. Ultimately the council approved the resolution; the city clerk recorded that “that motion, passes with council members Gerson and Sheikh voting no.”

The council’s approval does not immediately change what is built on the site. Any construction inside the mobile home park will be subject to review by HCD, and the project proponent will remain the primary target for any later legal claims if residents alleged damage or nuisance. Residents and council members were told they retain the right to challenge the council’s decision in court.

Council discussion closed with officials saying the approval reflected the city’s zoning code (which allows solar in open-space zoning after a prior ordinance) while leaving technical construction and setback review to HCD.

What happens next: staff will finalize the resolution language, and the project proponent must pursue required state permits through HCD. Neighbors and other interested parties may seek judicial review of the council’s action.