Planning commission backs removing nonresidential parking requirements in Artesia/Aviation corridor, adds conditions

The Redondo Beach Planning Commission on Sept. 18 voted to recommend that the City Council eliminate parking minimums for new nonresidential development within the Artesia and Aviation Corridor Area Plan (ACAP), while attaching several implementation conditions and reporting requirements.

Planning manager Sean Scully described the recommendation as part of a broader effort to encourage redevelopment and revitalization in the corridor. "The council's direction was they wanted to eliminate parking requirements going forward in the ACAP," Scully said in his presentation, citing data from the ACAP parking utilization study (December 2018) and staff massing/parking modeling.

Staff noted the corridor's private parking lots and on‑street spaces showed occupancy rates well below standard optimization levels during the prior study: about 68% occupancy for on‑street spaces and roughly 50% occupancy in many private lots; by comparison, planners often target roughly 85% utilization for efficient use of available parking.

Commission discussion ranged across implementation details. Commissioners and the public raised concerns about spillover parking into adjacent residential neighborhoods, loading and service access for businesses, walkability and sidewalk widths, and whether removing parking minimums might cause long‑term access problems if redevelopment accelerates.

Public commenter Teresa Mitchell, a resident with urban planning experience, told the commission she supported eliminating parking minimums for nonresidential uses and preferred parking be located behind buildings. "I really strongly support the eliminating of the parking for the nonresidential uses and to have it into the rear," Mitchell said.

To address foreseeable consequences, the commission added direction and conditions before forwarding the ordinance to council. The commission asked that the council direct staff to identify potential city‑owned parking locations and contingency measures, require any new parking provided to be placed behind or under buildings rather than between the sidewalk and storefront, and to prepare periodic monitoring and reporting on parking and spillover impacts. Commissioners also supported requiring setbacks and pedestrian improvements to improve walkability.

On several points the commission asked staff to remove existing language that would have allowed administrative or conditional permits for front‑of‑building parking, effectively signaling a preference to prohibit new front‑yard parking in favor of rear or below‑grade parking. Commissioners also directed staff to include recommendations on crosswalks, reduced curb cut widths and other right‑of‑way design ideas to make the corridors more pedestrian friendly.

The commission voted unanimously to recommend adoption of the ordinance as modified by the commission’s conditions. Staff will transmit the recommendation and the record to City Council; staff also recommended the council consider an appropriate CEQA determination. The commission’s recommendation includes: (a) removing parking minimums for nonresidential uses in ACAP; (b) requiring parking, if provided, to be behind or underground; (c) removing administrative/conditional‑use options for front‑yard parking; (d) directing staff and council to identify possible sites for future city‑owned parking facilities and to establish monitoring and periodic reporting on parking and neighborhood impacts; and (e) adding pedestrian and curb cut controls (maximum curb cut widths) and additional crosswalks.

Staff emphasized these are tools intended to incentivize redevelopment in a corridor where massing and parking modeling suggest meeting current parking standards would largely prevent economically feasible redevelopment (substantial off‑site or below‑grade parking would otherwise be required to reach higher FARs). The commission’s transmittal will include the ACAP study exhibits and staff’s parking/massing analyses.

Ending

The Planning Commission endorsed a strategy that removes a regulatory barrier — parking minimums — while adding implementation safeguards and a monitoring program so the city can react if parking or neighborhood impacts emerge as redevelopment occurs. The City Council will consider the commission’s recommendation and decide whether to adopt the ordinance and related implementation steps.