Council approves broad parking waivers to encourage redevelopment along Artesia and Aviation

The Redondo Beach City Council voted unanimously to direct staff to prepare an ordinance that removes minimum off‑street parking requirements for nonresidential uses in the Artesia–Aviation Corridor (ACAP) and establishes design controls for any parking provided in front of stores or at ground level.

Community Development Director Mark Weiner told the council the change responds to the corridor’s low floor‑area‑ratio limits and existing code parking burdens. He said a 2019 parking study by Fair & Peers showed typical public parking occupancies around 68 percent and private parking around 50 percent, leaving an estimated surplus of roughly 1,300 spaces on an average day. Weiner said, and staff modeling showed, that achieving a higher FAR (for example 1.5 FAR) under current code often would require multi‑level subterranean parking on small lots, a heavy cost barrier for redevelopment.

The council majority framed the action as a tool to spur revitalization. The draft direction removes the city’s written minimum parking requirement for nonresidential uses inside the ACAP boundary, requires design review where shared parking agreements, tandem valet, or mechanical lifts are proposed, and directs staff to harmonize other code sections (including provisions that mention “fast food” and “drive‑through” uses) so the code is internally consistent.

Council members emphasized implementation controls. Several members said they prefer parking to be provided behind buildings or under them rather than fronting the pedestrian frontage; the council asked staff to build that preference into the ordinance while allowing limited exceptions by administrative design review (ADR) where justified. Council members also asked staff to return a clarified rule about drive‑through uses so there is no internal conflict between land‑use tables and the parking section.

The council asked that the ordinance include a mechanism for review after implementation (for example a periodic check tied to the city’s strategic plan) so the council can revisit the policy if parking spillover or other negative impacts appear. Staff said the plan will go to the Planning Commission for review next week, and then return to council for introduction and formal ordinance action. The council made the motion and approved the direction unanimously.

Public comments during the same meeting reflected a range of viewpoints. Jim Mueller (District 5 resident) proposed a recurring public market on the Artesia corridor and said reduced parking requirements would help small vendors. Residents including Grace Peng and Holly Osborne urged the council to consider pedestrian, bike and safety improvements along Artesia as part of any redevelopment; they also raised concerns about employee and customer parking pressure, lighting and safety if parking is moved to the rear. Kyle Johnson, a resident and frequent transit user who spoke during the public‑comment period, said he supports waiving parking and adding infrastructure to make the corridor walkable and better served by transit.

The council’s direction does not change the land‑use element or rooftop/setback standards that are still the subject of separate code updates; staff told the council those items remain on the work program and that drafting for the parking ordinance will explicitly cross‑reference the design standards in the ACAP. The Planning Commission will review the draft ordinance and provide a recommendation before the council sees a final ordinance for introduction.