Oct 14, 2025 City Council

[00:00:02]

MEETING TO ORDER. WELCOME TO THE ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL.

[A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

MAY I HAVE A ROLL CALL, PLEASE? YES. COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER.

PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC IS ABSENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. HERE. MAYOR LIGHT IS ABSENT TONIGHT.

MAYOR PRO TEM BEHRENDT. HERE. ALL RIGHT, WE'LL GO AHEAD AND SKIP THE SALUTE TO FLAG AND MOVE TO BLUE FOLDER ITEMS.

[D. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS - ADDITIONAL BACK UP MATERIALS]

ALL RIGHT. WILL YOU GO AHEAD AND READ THE ITEMS THAT WILL BE DISCUSSED IN CLOSED SESSION?

[F. RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION]

ITEMS F.1 AND F.2 ARE UNDER THE TITLE CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR.

FOR F.1, THE PROPERTY IS 210 FISHERMAN'S WHARF (A PORTION OF APN: 7505-002-934).

FOR F.2, THE PROPERTIES ARE 3007 VAIL AVENUE (A PORTION OF APN: 415-001-7931).

PARKING LOT AT THE CORNER OF FELTON LANE AND 182ND STREET (APN: 415-803-3900).

715 JULIA AVENUE (PORTION OF PARCELS APN: 750-702-0900 AND APN: 750-702-1900). 1935 MANHATTAN BEACH BOULEVARD (APN: 404-900-8903). 807 INGLEWOOD AVENUE (A PORTION OF APN: 408-302-4900). AND 200 NORTH PACIFIC COAST HIGHWAY (A PORTION OF APN: 750-500-9902). ITEMS F.3 THROUGH F.11 ARE UNDER THE TITLE CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL -EXISTING LITIGATION.

FOR F.3, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, ET AL.

V. CALIFORNIA STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD.

CASE NUMBER: 20STCP03193. FOR 4, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS IN REGARDS TO 9300 WILSHIRE LLC.

BANKRUPTCY C.D. CAL. CASE NUMBER: 2:23-BK-10918-ER.

FOR F.5, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS 9300 WILSHIRE LLC V.

CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; CITY OF REDONDO BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT; AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100, INCLUSIVE. CASE NUMBER: 23STCP02189.

FOR F.6, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS IN REGARDS TO 9300 WILSHIRE LLC (9300 WILSHIRE LLC, ET AL.

V. AES-REDONDO BEACH, LLC) BANKRUPTCY C.D. CAL.

CASE NUMBER: 2:23-AP-01163-ER. FOR F.7, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS YES IN MY BACKYARD, A CALIFORNIA NONPROFIT CORPORATION; SONJA TRAUSS, AN INDIVIDUAL V. CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; CITY OF REDONDO BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, AND DOES 1 THROUGH 25 INCLUSIVE.

CASE NUMBER: 23TRCP00325. FOR F.8, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS NEW COMMUNE DTLA LLC V.

CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, AND DOES 1 THROUGH 100 INCLUSIVE.

CASE NUMBER: 23STCV10146. FOR F.9, THE NAME OF THE CASE NEW COMMUNE DTLA LLC AND LEONID PUSTILNIKOV V. CITY OF REDONDO BEACH AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH.

CASE NUMBER: 22TRCP00203. FOR F.10, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS NEW COMMUNE DTLA LLC V.

CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH; CITY OF REDONDO BEACH DEPARTMENT OF COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT, ET AL. CASE NUMBER: 23STCP00426. AND FOR ITEM F.11, THE NAME OF THE CASE IS AES SOUTHLAND DEVELOPMENT, LLC AND AES REDONDO BEACH, LLC V. CALIFORNIA COASTAL COMMISSION.

CASE NUMBER: BS157789. THANK YOU. THANK YOU. MR. CITY MANAGER, WHO WILL BE JOINING US IN CLOSED SESSION? YES. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. WE WILL HAVE MYSELF FOR ALL ITEMS, CITY ATTORNEY JOY FORD, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY CHERYL PARK, AND THEN FOR ITEMS F.3 THROUGH F.11, WE WILL BE JOINED BY [INAUDIBLE] AND GINETTA GIOVINCO, OUR OUTSIDE LEGAL COUNSEL ON THOSE MATTERS. AND WE WILL ALSO HAVE MARC WEINER, OUR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR FOR THOSE ITEMS AS WELL.

OKAY. MAY I HAVE A MOTION TO RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION? SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE.

NONE OPPOSED. OKAY. WE ARE IN RECESS TO CLOSED SESSION.

[00:05:02]

[G. RECONVENE TO OPEN SESSION]

PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC IS ABSENT.

COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. HERE. MAYOR LIGHT, ABSENT TONIGHT.

MAYOR PRO TEM BEHRENDT. HERE. OKAY, MR. CITY MANAGER, ANY ANNOUNCEMENTS TO REPORT FROM CLOSED SESSION? NOT THIS EVENING, MAYOR PRO TEM. THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION TO ADJOURN TO THE REGULAR MEETING?

[J. ADJOURN TO REGULAR MEETING]

AYE. NONE OPPOSED. OKAY. I AM CALLING TO ORDER THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AT 06:11 P.M.

[A. CALL TO ORDER]

PRESENT. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. HERE. COUNCIL MEMBER.

KALUDEROVIC IS ABSENT. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. HERE.

MAYOR LIGHT, ABSENT. MAYOR PRO TEM BEHRENDT. THANK YOU.

I'M HERE. ALL RIGHT. IF WE HAVE ANY VETERANS OR ACTIVE DUTY MILITARY HERE TONIGHT, WILL YOU PLEASE STAND TO BE RECOGNIZED FOR YOUR SERVICE? ALL RIGHT. LET US ALL NOW STAND FOR THE SALUTE TO THE FLAG AND REMAIN STANDING FOR A MOMENT OF SILENT AND INVOCATION.

I'LL GO AHEAD AND LEAD THE PLEDGE ON THREE. ONE, TWO, THREE.

ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

OKAY. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. THE NEXT ITEM ON THE AGENDA IS PRESENTATIONS AND AB

[D. PRESENTATIONS/PROCLAMATIONS/ANNOUNCEMENTS/ AB 1234 TRAVEL EXPENSE REPORTS]

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM.

I ATTENDED THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND EXPO LAST WEEK, ALONG WITH COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT, COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE, MAYOR LIGHT, CITY ATTORNEY FOR CITY MANAGER MIKE WITZANSKY, AND MANY OTHER STAFF.

WHILE THERE, I ATTENDED A NUMBER OF SESSIONS.

ONE OF THEM WAS ABOUT ADVANCING MUNICIPAL CLIMATE ACTION THROUGH PARTNERSHIPS, HOW TO PASS LOCAL SALES TAX MEASURES IN TODAY'S POLITICAL ENVIRONMENT, EFFECTIVE PARKING MANAGEMENT AND THE FUTURE OF URBAN PARKING.

FROM COUNCIL CHAMBERS TO CAPITOL FLOORS, CULTIVATING LEADERSHIP FOR HIGHER OFFICE.

A D USE GROUP HOMES AND SHORT TERM RENTALS, LOCAL REGULATIONS AND ENFORCEMENT.

I LEARNED SOME GOOD THINGS THAT I'VE BROUGHT TO OUR CITY ATTORNEY AND OUR CITY MANAGER ALREADY.

AND THEN I SPENT MOST OF SATURDAY AT REDONDO UNION HIGH SCHOOL, FIRST AT THE PTSA CAR SHOW WHERE THEY HAD OVER 40 CARS, NOT INCLUDING MINE, WHICH WERE PARKED ON THE LAWN OUT FRONT BY THE MARQUEE.

AND THEN LATER IN THE EVENING FOR THE PERFORMANCE OF URINETOWN IN THEIR AUDITORIUM.

IT WAS A PRODUCTION THAT TOOK ALMOST 100 STUDENTS AND INCLUDED A LIVE ORCHESTRA, SO IT WAS A BUSY WEEK LAST WEEK AND VERY GOOD.

THANK YOU. OKAY, AND THANK YOU. DO YOU HAVE ANY AB 1234 ANNOUNCEMENTS FOR EXPENDITURES? I ATTENDED THE LEAGUE OF CALIFORNIA CITIES ANNUAL CONFERENCE AND EXPO.

OKAY. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE.

I ATTENDED THE CONFERENCE AS WELL AND ATTENDED SEVERAL SESSIONS.

IT WAS A GREAT OPPORTUNITY TO LEARN MORE ABOUT OTHER CITIES AND MEET OUR FELLOW COUNCIL MEMBERS AND CITY REPRESENTATIVES FROM ACROSS THE STATE.

ALSO, I'D LIKE TO ANNOUNCE I'VE PLANNED MY NEXT COMMUNITY MEETING FOR OCTOBER 22ND IN THE LIBRARY ON THE SECOND FLOOR.

AND THE SUBJECT WILL DEAL WITH THE TRAFFIC AROUND THE HIGH SCHOOL.

SO I HAVE SOME CITY STAFF COMING IN TO SPEAK TO US ABOUT SOME UPCOMING CHANGES TO DIAMOND STREET, AND HOPEFULLY THAT WILL MAKE SOME IMPROVEMENTS. SO PLEASE ATTEND.

AND THAT'S ALL I HAVE. I DON'T HAVE ANY EXPENSES FOR THE CONFERENCE, LAST WEEK´S, TO REPORT.

THANK YOU. PARKING? I JUST PAID FOR IT. OKAY.

COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. I JUST WANT TO SAY A QUICK THANK YOU TO CHIEF HOFFMAN, BECAUSE THERE'S BEEN SOME POLICE ACTIVITY, SHERIFF'S ACTIVITY IN REDONDO BEACH, NORTH REDONDO IN THE LAST WEEK.

AND HE'S VERY RESPONSIVE TO LET US KNOW EXACTLY WHAT'S GOING ON SO WE CAN PUSH THAT OUT TO THE COMMUNITY, AND RESIDENTS GREATLY APPRECIATE WHEN THEY SEE ALL THAT POLICE ACTIVITY IN OUR NEIGHBORHOOD KNOWING WHAT IT'S ABOUT AND THAT THEY'RE SAFE.

SO THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. ANY AB 1234 ITEMS TO REPORT? I HAVE BEEN DOING MUCH OF ANYTHING AS FAR AS SPENDING THE PEOPLE'S MONEY.

OKAY. AND I HAVE NO ANNOUNCEMENTS. I DO HAVE A AB 1234 EXPENDITURE TO REPORT, WHICH WOULD BE THE CAL LEAGUE CAL CITIES ANNUAL EVENT,

[00:10:09]

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. NEXT ON THE ITEM IS APPROVING THE ORDER OF AGENDA.

[E. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA]

NOBODY OPPOSED. NEXT, BLUE FOLDER ITEMS. ARE THERE ANY BLUE FOLDER ITEMS FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING,

[G. BLUE FOLDER ITEMS - ADDITIONAL BACK UP MATERIALS]

FOR ITEM H.7, APPROVE LEASES AND ADDENDUMS FOR THIRTEEN (13) SINGLE ROOM OCCUPANCY UNITS LOCATED AT 126 WEST D STREET, WILMINGTON, WITH SWAMI INTERNATIONAL TO SERVE AS BRIDGE HOUSING FOR PEOPLE EXPERIENCING HOMELESSNESS.

WE HAVE THE LEASE AGREEMENTS FOR UNITS 13, 15, 16, 17, 20, 22, 26, 27 AND 28.

FOR ITEM J.1, NON-AGENDA ITEMS, PUBLIC COMMUNICATION.

AND FOR ITEM L.1, THE PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER AN ORDINANCE AMENDING THE MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO PARKING REGULATIONS FOR NON RESIDENTIAL USES ON PROPERTIES LOCATED ON ARTESIA AND AVIATION. WE HAVE ALTERNATIVE ORDINANCE LANGUAGE TO THE REQUIREMENTS FOR REAR PARKING.

THAT'S IT. OKAY. THANK YOU. IS THERE A MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE THE BLUE FOLDER ITEMS? SO MOVED. SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. NONE OPPOSED.

OKAY, NEXT I BELIEVE WE'RE ON CONSENT CALENDAR.

[H. CONSENT CALENDAR]

WE HAVE NO ONE ON ZOOM. NO ONE ON ZOOM. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT THEN WE WILL APPROVE ALL CONSENT ITEMS IN ONE MOTION.

IS THERE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR? I MOVE TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR. I SECOND.

ALL RIGHT, ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. NONE OPPOSED.

MAYOR PRO TEM, I HAVE A FEW ORDINANCES TO READ.

PLEASE, THANK YOU. I HAVE EIGHT TONIGHT, SO BEAR WITH ME FOR A MINUTE.

FOR ITEM H.6, ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NUMBER 3298-25, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 1, SECTIONS 2-9.10 BEFORE YOU GO FURTHER, AND PARDON MY INTERRUPTION, WERE WE REQUIRED TO, AND SHOULD WE NOW ASK IF THERE'S PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? YES. ALL RIGHT. SO I'LL GO AHEAD AND DO THAT.

ANY PUBLIC COMMENT ON ANY OF THE CONSENT ITEMS? SEEING NONE. HEARING NONE. ANY ONLINE OR ZOOM? NO ZOOM ATTENDEES AND NO ECOMMENTS. ALL RIGHT.

PLEASE CONTINUE. OKAY. I'LL START FROM THE BEGINNING.

ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NUMBER 3298-25, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE ONE, SECTIONS 2-9.100, 2-9.101, 2-9.102, 2-9.103, 2-9.106, 2-9.107 AND SECTION 2-9.109 AND ADDING SECTIONS 2-9.110 AND 2-9.111 AND DELETING IN ITS ENTIRETY SECTION 2-9.108 PERTAINING TO THE UNIFORM REGULATIONS OF COMMISSIONS FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION.

ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE 3299-25, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 4, SECTION 2-9.401, 2-9.402 AND 2-9.403 PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION.

ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE 3300-25, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 7, SECTION 2-9.702 AND AMENDING SECTIONS 2-9.704 AND 2-9.0709 AND RENUMBERING TO 2-9.703 AND 2-9.704 RESPECTIVELY, AND DELETING SECTION 2-9.705, 2-9.706, 2-9.707, 2-9.708, 2-9.709, 2-9.712 AND 2-9.714 AND RENUMBERING SECTIONS 2-9.701 TO 2-9.705 AND 2-9.711 TO 2-9.706 PERTAINING TO THE HARBOR COMMISSION FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION.

[00:15:09]

ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE 3302-25, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 13, SECTIONS 2-9.1309 AND 2-9.1302 PERTAINING TO THE BUDGET AND FINANCE COMMISSION FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION.

ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE 330325, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 14, SECTIONS 2-9.1402 AND 2-9.1403 PERTAINING TO THE CULTURAL ARTS COMMISSION FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION.

TWO MORE. ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE 3304-25.

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 2, CHAPTER 9, ARTICLE 15, SECTIONS 2-9.1502 AND 2-9.1503 PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSION FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION. AND ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE 3305-25, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 4, ARTICLES 1, 03, 4, 5 AND 6, SECTIONS 2-4.104, 10-4.302, 10-4.304, 10-4.307, 10-4.308, 10-4.309, 10-4.310, 10-4.404, 10-4.501 AND 10-4.601 PERTAINING TO HISTORIC RESOURCES PRESERVATION FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL MOVE ON TO ITEM J.

[J. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS]

THIS SECTION IS LIMITED TO 30 MINUTES. EACH SPEAKER SHALL BE AFFORDED THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE MAYOR AND COUNCIL.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE PERMITTED TO SPEAK ONLY ONCE.

WRITTEN REQUEST WILL BE CONSIDERED FIRST UNDER THE SECTION.

SO WE ARE GOING TO BEGIN NOW AT 6:24 P.M. ALL RIGHT.

FIRST CARD. [INAUDIBLE], FOLLOWED BY RON MAROKO.

ALL RIGHT. HI. GOOD EVENING, [INAUDIBLE], DISTRICT 3.

AND SO LAST WEEK, AS YOU KNOW, I PRESENTED THE REFINERY LETTER THAT THOROUGHLY OUTLINES ALL OF THEIR STRIKING CONCERNS ABOUT HAVING THEIR INTERNAL SAFETY PROTOCOLS BREACHED AND PUBLIC SAFETY ISSUES, AND THEY DID IT WITH LEGAL FINESSE.

THAT BETTER BE TAKEN SERIOUSLY. METRO'S RESPONSE WAS LESS THAN MEANINGFUL.

AND THE COMMUNITY FINDS THAT DEFICIENT. AND THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER, FOR REACHING OUT TO THE REFINERY. AND WITH EVERYTHING WE'VE LEARNED OVER THE YEARS, AND ESPECIALLY RECENTLY, THIS WHOLE PLAN DESPERATELY NEEDS RECONSIDERING.

IF ANYONE IS AFRAID OF HAVING THE PROJECT KILLED OVER THIS REFINERY ISSUE, THE SOLUTION IS TO END THE ROUTE AT THE GALLERIA ON HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD, AS HAS BEEN SUGGESTED MANY TIMES OVER THE YEARS.

JUST KNOW THAT WE SEE THROUGH THE PROPAGANDA AND THE GASLIGHTING.

SO PLEASE BE VIGILANT ABOUT DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE.

METRO'S RESPONSE IS USUALLY THAT THEY CLAIM TO HAVE THEIR EXPERTS, BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY'RE PAID BY METRO TO GIVE THEM WHAT THEY WANT. AND SO IT'S ILLOGICAL TO THINK THAT A TRANSIT AGENCY KNOWS BETTER THAN THE ACTUAL GAS AND REFINERY PROFESSIONALS.

SO PLEASE TAKE THIS SERIOUSLY. AND ALSO I WANT TO MENTION THAT IT'S IMPORTANT

[00:20:05]

THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE SOME SORT OF. I MENTIONED BEFORE SOME RELOCATION ASSISTANCE FOR THESE PEOPLE.

AND EACH CASE IS PROBABLY GOING TO BE DIFFERENT.

SOME HAVE BEEN THERE FOREVER AND THEIR HOMES ARE PAID OFF AND OTHERS, LIKE MYSELF, HAVE MORTGAGES, AND THERE COULD BE A LOT OF OTHER THINGS. THE DODGER STADIUM GONDOLA PROJECT IS KIND OF LIKE, YOU KNOW, KIND OF LOST NOW, BECAUSE THEY HAD ALL OF THESE CONDITIONS THAT HAVEN'T BEEN MET.

AND THEN THE STATE COURT OF APPEALS HAS REJECTED THAT FEIR.

SO THE FEIR HAD BEEN APPROVED. THANK YOU SO MUCH.

YOUR TIME IS UP. YOU'RE WELCOME. ALL RIGHT. NEXT, MR. RON MAROKO.

GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, CITY MANAGER AND STAFF THAT ARE PRESENT.

I HAVE FOUR THINGS THAT I WANT TO GET THROUGH REALLY QUICKLY. ONE, I'VE RAISED THE QUESTION.

WE NEED A SWAG SALE. WE HAVE THIS NEW LOGO THAT'S BEEN OUT THERE FOR SEVERAL MONTHS, AND WE SHOULD EITHER GET IT LICENSED OR START MANUFACTURING THEM OURSELVES. WE'RE LOSING OUT ON A SOURCE OF REVENUE AND CIVIC PRIDE, AND I THINK YOU CAN GET THAT THAT WOULD BE A NICE THING TO DO.

I'M STILL WAITING TO GET MY HAT AND MY SHIRT, SO.

THE SECOND ITEM IS A TRANSPARENCY ITEM. AND THIS IS REALLY DIRECTED TOWARD THE CITY ATTORNEY AS WELL AS THE COUNCIL, IF THAT'S SOMETHING YOU WANT TO DO. I SAW IN YOUR CLOSED SESSION YOU HAD NINE ITEMS OF LITIGATION ON IT, EACH SEPARATE. I KNOW YOUR DISCUSSIONS ARE CONSIDERED PRIVILEGED, BUT IT WOULD BE NICE FOR THE COMMUNITY TO ACTUALLY HAVE IN THE LIBRARY A BOOK THAT INCLUDES THE COMPLAINTS AND ALL THE RECENT BRIEFS, SO THE PUBLIC CAN BE AWARE OF IT.

I HAVE ACCESS TO THAT MYSELF BECAUSE I'M AN ATTORNEY, BUT OTHER PEOPLE IN THE COMMUNITY MAY WANT TO READ UP ABOUT SOME OF THE PIECES OF LITIGATION AND GIVE YOU SOME FEEDBACK AS WELL.

WILDERNESS PARK. PLEASE BRING IT BACK FOR A VOTE SO WE CAN GET A LANDMARK STATUS ON WILDERNESS PARK.

IT'S KIND OF A NICE LITTLE THING NOW. AND THEN, AS A PRIORITY, AND MR. WEINER'S HERE AS WELL. WE NEED TO UPDATE OUR HISTORIC RESOURCES SURVEY.

IT'S ABOUT 25 YEARS OUT OF DATE. THERE'S MONEY THAT'S SET ASIDE, I BELIEVE, IN THE CIP ACCOUNT FOR THAT.

BUT WE'RE LOSING HOMES IN NORTH REDONDO ESPECIALLY, BECAUSE THE TIME PERIOD COVERED IS UNTIL 1975.

SOUTH REDONDO HAS ALL THE 20S HOMES, NORTH REDONDO HAS ALL THE 50S HOMES, WHICH ARE IN MUCH BETTER SHAPE.

SO WE NEED AT LEAST THAT BROUGHT AS A PRIORITY SO THAT WE CAN GET SOME OF THESE HOMES PROTECTED.

BECAUSE I GO AROUND AND I CAN SEE ALL THE DESTRUCTION THAT'S GOING ON ON THESE OLD HOMES, AND IT REALLY WOULD BE A SHAME IF WE HAD SOMETHING HISTORIC THAT WAS IN THE MIX THAT DIDN'T GET ACCOUNTED FOR. THANK YOU. THANK YOU.

OKAY. IS THERE ANYBODY ELSE HERE PRESENT IN THE PUBLIC WHO'D LIKE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS? OH, PLEASE COME FORWARD. HI THERE, DESIREE GALASSI, DISTRICT 4. FOR TRANSPARENCY. THANK YOU.

I'M ALSO A COMMISSIONER ON THE PUBLIC AMENITIES COMMISSION, AND I WOULD LIKE TO SECOND WHAT MY CHAIRPERSON SAID.

WE ARE STRUGGLING A LITTLE BIT NOW. THERE ARE A LOT OF PEOPLE WHO ACTUALLY DON'T REALLY KNOW THAT THEIR HOUSES ARE LISTED ON THE SURVEY.

AND THAT'S A PROBLEM FOR US. AND WE RECOGNIZE THAT WE HAVE TO DO SOME OUTREACH AS A COMMISSION.

WE HAVE A LOT OF CLEANING UP TO DO WITH OUR PRESERVATION PLAN, WHICH WE WILL ADDRESS AS A COMMISSION.

BUT WE'RE DEFINITELY STRUGGLING AND NEED TO HAVE THIS SURVEY UPDATED AS SOON AS POSSIBLE.

[00:25:07]

I LIVE IN THAT NEIGHBORHOOD. THE THRIFT STORE IS NICE IN ALL OF THAT.

IT'S A FOR PROFIT BUSINESS, AS OPPOSED TO WHAT'S ON THE CORNER OF FORD AND AVIATION, WHICH IS A NONPROFIT ORGANIZATION THAT SUPPORTS CHILDREN'S HOSPITAL OF LOS ANGELES.

THAT'S A GREAT THING TO HAVE THERE. I'M NOT REALLY FOR THE THRIFT STORE, AND I UNDERSTAND THAT WE CAN'T PICK AND CHOOSE, BUT THAT DOESN'T REALLY BRING THE KIND OF VIBE THAT WE WANT FOR OUR NEIGHBORHOOD.

THANKS. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE CARE TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS? OKAY. SEEING NOBODY IN CHAMBERS, IS THERE ANYONE ONLINE? WE DO HAVE ONE ZOOM ATTENDEE, NANCY SKIBA. YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND UNMUTE YOURSELF AND BEGIN.

NANCY, YOU CAN GO AHEAD AND UNMUTE YOURSELF AND BEGIN WHEN YOU'RE READY.

SHE STEPPED AWAY FROM THE COMPUTER. OKAY. ANYBODY ELSE NO OTHER ZOOM ATTENDEES. ALL RIGHT. WELL, THAT CONCLUDES PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS.

[K. EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS]

EX PARTY COMMUNICATIONS IN CONNECTION WITH OUR PUBLIC HEARING.

SO WHY DON'T WE GO AHEAD AND DO THAT NOW? I'LL GO TOWARDS EACH OF THE COUNCIL MEMBERS AND ASK IF THEY HAD ANY EX PARTE COMMUNICATIONS TO DISCLOSE WITH RESPECT TO ITEM L.1, THE PUBLIC HEARING.

COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER. CITY MANAGER AND PERHAPS SOME STAFF, I CAN'T REMEMBER BECAUSE IT COULD HAVE BEEN IN THE PAST COUPLE OF WEEKS, BUT. OKAY. JUST THAT. COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. JUST I WOULD SAY.

OUCH. THE CITY MANAGER AND STAFF TO DISCUSS THAT.

OKAY. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. MAYOR PRO TEM BEHRENDT, CITY STAFF, MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

AND I BELIEVE THAT IS IT. ALL RIGHT. AND I HAVE HAD EX-PARTE COMMUNICATIONS WITH CITY STAFF, THE MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI AND MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC.

ALL RIGHT. MOVING ON THEN, TO ITEM L.1, OUR PUBLIC HEARING.

[L. PUBLIC HEARINGS]

AYE. NONE OPPOSED. ALL RIGHT. SO, MR. CITY MANAGER, IS THERE A PRESENTATION FOR ITEM L.1 TONIGHT? THERE IS. COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR MARC WEINER WILL PROVIDE THAT.

ONE THING THAT I DO WANT TO NOTE, AND IT WAS ACCEPTED AND ENTERED INTO THE RECORD EARLIER.

THERE'S SOME BLUE FOLDER MATERIAL PERTAINING TO REVISED ORDINANCE OPTION FOR YOU THAT WILL BE COVERED IN MARC'S PRESENTATION IN A BIT MORE DETAIL.

SO WITH THAT, I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO MARC. OKAY.

THANK YOU. PLEASE PROCEED. YEAH. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM AND COUNCIL.

SO TO PROVIDE A LITTLE HISTORY ON THIS ITEM, IN AUGUST, THE CITY COUNCIL REVIEWED THE UPDATED LAND USE ELEMENT WITH A FOCUS ON THE ARTESIA AND AVIATION CORRIDOR, AACAP FOR SHORT.

AND AT THAT MEETING, WE DISCUSSED THE FLOOR AREA ALLOWANCES AS WELL AS THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS.

THE CITY COUNCIL PROVIDED DIRECTION TO STAFF TO PREPARE AN ORDINANCE THAT WOULD ELIMINATE THE PARKING REQUIREMENTS ALONG THE AACAP.

A DRAFT ORDINANCE WAS PRESENTED TO THE CITY COUNCIL ON SEPTEMBER 9TH, AND THE CITY COUNCIL PROVIDED SPECIFIC DIRECTION TO STAFF.

ONE BEING THAT WE REMOVED THE LANGUAGE THAT PROHIBITS FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS AND DRIVE THRU WITHIN THE AACAP.

THERE WAS SOMETHING IN THE EXISTING ORDINANCE THAT PROHIBITED THOSE TYPES OF USES, EVEN THOUGH THEY WERE ALLOWED IN OTHER AECTIONS OF THE ZONING CODE.

[00:30:01]

SO THE COUNCIL WANTED THAT REMOVED, AND THEY WANTED THE PARKING WAIVER TO APPLY TO ALL NON RESIDENTIAL USES, INCLUDING FAST FOOD AND DRIVE THRUS. AND ALSO WE DISCUSSED THE PARKING ON THE SITE FOR SITES THAT DO OPT TO PROVIDE PARKING.

AND THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION WAS THAT THE PREFERENCE WOULD BE TO LOCATE THE PARKING AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY BEHIND THE FRONT BUILDING, BUT TO PROVIDE SOME FLEXIBILITY FOR ALLOWING IT IN THE FRONT.

AND IF IT WERE TO BE IN THE REAR, IT WOULD BE A MORE STREAMLINED PROCESS THAN PUTTING IT IN THE FRONT.

SO STAFF HAS INCORPORATED THOSE RECOMMENDATIONS INTO THE DRAFT ORDINANCE.

THIS ORDINANCE WAS REVIEWED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION ON SEPTEMBER 18TH.

THEY MADE SEVERAL RECOMMENDATIONS. ONLY THE FIRST ONE ACTUALLY PERTAINED TO THIS ORDINANCE, AND IT WAS THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S RECOMMENDATION THAT PARKING BE OUTRIGHT PROHIBITED AT THE FRONT OF THE PROPERTY, NO EXCEPTIONS. SO THAT THAT WAS WHAT THEY RECOMMENDED ON THAT.

THE OTHER WOULD OCCUR TO OTHER SECTIONS OF THE CODE OR MORE POLICY DRIVEN.

SO THEY HAD A RECOMMENDATION TO LIMIT THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAYS INTO THESE PROPERTIES, AND THAT WOULD BE TO CREATE A MORE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED ENVIRONMENTS.

ALSO DIRECTED OR RECOMMENDED THAT THE CITY START EVALUATING AND EXPLORING LOCATIONS FOR POTENTIAL PARKING LOTS, OR PARKING STRUCTURES IN THE FUTURE, TO HELP ADDRESS SOME OF THE LACK OF ONSITE PARKING FOR THESE BUSINESSES.

ALSO, THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED RETAINING THE PROHIBITION ON FAST FOOD RESTAURANTS ALONG ARTESIA AND AVIATION.

THEY RECOMMENDED THAT ADDITIONAL CROSSWALKS BE ADDED IN LOCATIONS THAT DON'T CURRENTLY HAVE THOSE.

AND ALSO THAT THE CITY DEVELOP A RIGHT OF WAY PLAN.

AND SOMETHING THAT WOULD INCLUDE ADDRESSING PARKING AS WELL AND ADDRESS STREET CURBSIDE PARKING.

SO SOME OF THESE, SUCH AS THE INTERSECTION AND THE RIGHT OF WAY, ARE ADDRESSED IN THE AACAP PLANNING DOCUMENT CURRENTLY.

BUT THE COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THAT WE CONTINUE TO MOVE THESE EFFORTS FORWARD.

SO I REALLY WANTED TO PRIMARILY FOCUS ON THE REAR PARKING.

I THINK THAT WAS THE ITEM THAT WAS STILL UP FOR SOME CONSIDERATION AND DISCUSSION AS TO WHAT THE REGULATIONS WOULD LOOK LIKE FOR THAT.

SO PER THE CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION, WE INCLUDED A PROVISION THAT THE OFF STREET PARKING IS REQUIRED AT THE REAR OF THE PROPERTY BEHIND THE FRONT BUILDING.

HOWEVER, THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THAT, WHICH ARE COVERED IN THE ORDINANCE, AND WE'VE DRAFTED TWO OPTIONS FOR THE COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION.

ONE, IT'S THE ONE THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET THAT WAS PUBLISHED.

AND THAT WOULD REQUIRE AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT OR CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT AT THE DIRECTOR'S DISCRETION.

AND ALL THREE OF THE FINDINGS HAD TO BE MET IN ORDER TO PLACE THE PARKING AT THE FRONT.

THE OTHER WOULD ONLY REQUIRE AN ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT, SO IT WOULD NOT NEED A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT THAT WOULD GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND ONLY TWO OF THE FINDINGS WOULD NEED TO BE MET.

AND THAT'S WHAT WAS CIRCULATED EARLIER TODAY AS A BLUE FOLDER ITEM.

SO OPTION ONE, AS I MENTIONED, REQUIRES AN AUP OR CUP.

THE AUP WOULD BE APPROVED BY STAFF, BY THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR.

THE CUP WOULD BE THE PLANNING COMMISSION. AND THE WAY IT'S CRAFTED IN THIS VERSION OF THE ORDINANCE, IT WOULD BE AT THE STAFF'S DISCRETION AS TO WHETHER THE APPLICATION IS REFERRED TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION FOR CONSIDERATION, AND ALL THE FOLLOWING THREE FINDINGS WOULD NEED TO BE MET IN ORDER TO GRANT THE ALLOWANCE FOR PARKING AT THE FRONT.

ONE WOULD BE THERE ARE SITE CONSTRAINTS ON THE PROPERTY.

MAYBE IT'S A CORNER LOT, OR THE LOCATION OF THE EXISTING BUILDING ON THE SITE MAKES IT INFEASIBLE TO LOCATE THE PARKING AT THE REAR.

ANOTHER WOULD BE IF THEY CAN DEMONSTRATE THAT THE BUSINESS OPERATIONS WARRANT PLACING THE PARKING AT THE FRONT, AND THERE'S CERTAIN CIRCUMSTANCES AS TO WHY THAT WOULD BE PRACTICAL FOR THE USE.

AND THEN FINALLY, THERE WOULD HAVE TO BE A FINDING THAT IF THEY ARE GOING TO PLACE IT AT THE FRONT, THAT THEY WOULD SCREEN IT AND HELP MINIMIZE THE VISUAL IMPACTS OF THE PARKING LOT THROUGH LANDSCAPING AND OTHER MEANS.

SO THIS IS THE VERSION THAT WAS INCLUDED IN THE PACKET RIGHT HERE.

THIS IS THE ONE THAT WE PROVIDED VIA THE BLUE FOLDER ITEM.

[00:35:01]

HOWEVER, THE PROCESS IS A LITTLE DIFFERENT. WITH THIS VERSION, PLACING PARKING AT THE FRONT WOULD ONLY REQUIRE AN AUP, AND THEN ONLY TWO OF THE THREE FINDINGS WOULD NEED TO BE MET.

AND THAT'S EITHER 1 OR 2 AND 3. SO IN ALL CIRCUMSTANCES, THREE WOULD NEED TO BE MET.

IF THEY'RE GOING TO PLACE AT THE FRONT, THEY WOULD NEED TO SCREEN IT. BUT THE ALLOWANCE FOR PARKING AT THE FRONT COULD BE GRANTED BASED ON SITE CONSTRAINTS OR BUSINESS OPERATIONS. IT DOESN'T HAVE TO BE BOTH. SO THAT'S.

AND IN REVIEWING THIS A LITTLE CLOSER, IT REALLY, IN MY OPINION, MAKES MORE SENSE TO HAVE IT BE THE TWO OF THE THREE FINDINGS RATHER THAN ALL THREE. SO, YEAH, THAT'S FOR THE COUNCIL'S CONSIDERATION.

PARDON ME, THAT'S OPTION TWO? THAT'S OPTION TWO.

THIS ONE MAKES MORE SENSE TO YOU? IT DOES WITH REGARDS TO THE FINDINGS THAT NEED TO BE MET.

AND THEN WHETHER IT'S AN AUP VS. CUP, I THINK IS REALLY JUST A POLICY CONSIDERATION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.

OKAY. PLEASE CONTINUE. SO THE PROCEDURES AND RECOMMENDATIONS ARE TO OPEN THE PUBLIC HEARING AND TAKE TESTIMONY, CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING. SELECT A PREFERRED OPTION FOR THE REAR PARKING PROCESS AND FINDINGS AS I JUST DISCUSSED.

AND THEN INTRODUCE BY TITLE THIS ORDINANCE. AND I THINK IT'S WORTH NOTING.

THANK YOU, MARC. THAT IN CONSULTATION WITH THE ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, EITHER OPTION CAN BE SELECTED TONIGHT AND BE INTRODUCED FOR FIRST READING.

AND WE CAN BRING THAT BACK FOR SECOND READING AND ADOPTION AT OUR NEXT MEETING.

SO NOW, IF YOU DECIDE TO MAKE SUBSTANTIVE CHANGES TO THE BALANCE OF THE ORDINANCE FOR ANY REASON BEYOND WHAT WE'VE NOTED HERE TONIGHT, THEN PERHAPS, ADVICE WOULD CHANGE. BUT AS IT PERTAINS TO THE REAR PARKING DISCUSSION AND THE OPTIONS THAT MARC JUST PRESENTED, YOU CAN DO EITHER TONIGHT AND KEEP IT MOVING.

AND THAT CONCLUDES THE PRESENTATION. I'M AVAILABLE FOR QUESTIONS.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. SEE IF THERE'S ANY HANDS RAISED HERE.

NOT SHOWING ON MY SCREEN. I MAY NOT BE SEEING THEM.

YOU DON'T HAVE MAYORAL POSITION HERE. OKAY. HE SHOULD.

I PUT IT. AS A BUTTON REQUEST TO SPEAK. WE CAN DO IT PHYSICALLY, OLD SCHOOL. YEAH, WE COULD JUST. I JUST RESET IT, SO.

OKAY. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU FOR PUTTING THIS TOGETHER.

IT WAS UNANIMOUS COUNCIL THAT STEPPED FORWARD TOGETHER WITH THE MAYOR TO SAY YES, GO BOLD ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD AND AVIATION AND REMOVE THESE PARKING REQUIREMENTS TO ENCOURAGE AND ENERGIZE THAT CORRIDOR.

AND FORTUNATELY, WE HAVE THE CAPACITY TO DO IT.

AND IF AT ANY POINT IN TIME, IF WE'RE SO FORTUNATE TO HAVE A PARKING PROBLEM, COUNCIL MAINTAINS THE ABILITY TO TOGGLE TO STAY AGILE AND MAKE CHANGES AS NEEDED. SO VERY WELL DONE ON THAT.

I'LL JUST SAY ON THE ALTERNATIVE DRAFT. THANK YOU FOR EXPLORING THAT.

I THINK WE'RE ALSO ALL IN AGREEMENT THAT, AT LEAST ENCOURAGING PARKING IN THE BACK, THE REAR PARKING, IF A DEVELOPER IS GOING TO DECIDE TO DO THAT, IS PREFERABLE.

IT IS CLOSER TO RESIDENCES WHEN YOU PUT THAT IN THE REAR.

BUT I THINK WE'VE KIND OF DONE A BALANCING AND DECIDED THAT HAVING AT LEAST A PREFERENCE STATED FOR PARKING IN THE REAR IS CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I THINK MOST FOLKS WOULD BE COMFORTABLE WITH.

AND BEST CASE SCENARIO, SEE IN THE AACAP. ALSO I THINK OPTION TWO, WHICH IS IN THE BLUE FOLDER, AND IT SOUNDS LIKE IT'S BEEN RECOMMENDED BY OUR PLANNING DEPARTMENT DIRECTOR, IS KIND OF CONSISTENT WITH WHAT I'VE HEARD THROUGH OUR ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBCOMMITTEE, WHICH IS THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, INVESTORS, ENTREPRENEURS, THEY MAY HAVE DESIGNS THAT ARE UNIQUE THAT WE AS LAYPEOPLE HAVEN'T THOUGHT OF, THAT THEY THINK WOULD BE A GREAT FIT, WILL BE NEW IN OUR CORRIDOR.

AND YET, BY ALLOWING AT LEAST, AND I THINK PRETTY RIGOROUSLY HERE, FOR THE STAFF TO NONETHELESS APPROVE THAT UNDER THESE CIRCUMSTANCES.

MEANING MEETING TWO OF THESE THREE FINDINGS AT LEAST GIVES THEM THE FLEXIBILITY TO BE HEARD.

[00:40:06]

AND DON'T WANT THAT. WE AT LEAST WANT TO HEAR FROM THEM.

WE WANT TO WORK WITH THEM. AND IF IT'S ACCEPTABLE, WE COULD DO IT.

AND I THINK THESE THREE ITEMS HERE ARE REASONABLE AND STRIKE THE RIGHT BALANCE.

SO THOSE WERE JUST SORT OF MY INITIAL OBSERVATIONS FOR ME.

IT LOOKS LIKE WE GOT A LOT OF HANDS UP HERE, SO.

NOT SURE WHO WAS FIRST. I'LL, GO TO MY RIGHT TO COUNT WHAT.

I DON´T KNOW. IT DOESN'T MATTER TO ME. I HAVE NO IDEA WHO WAS FIRST EITHER, BECAUSE I CAN'T TELL. ALL RIGHT. COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU, MAYOR PRO TEM. I AGREE WITH EVERYTHING THE MAYOR PRO TEM JUST SAID.

THANK YOU DIRECTOR WEINER, BECAUSE I KNOW THAT YOU'VE GOT A LOT ON YOUR PLATE AND YOU'VE HIGHTAILED THIS.

AT FIRST, YOU IDENTIFIED IT AS AN ISSUE THAT WE NEED TO TAKE UP.

SO THANK YOU FOR THAT. IT'S A HUGE STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION AND AN IMPORTANT ONE.

SO I THANK YOU FOR THE INITIATIVE AND THE MOMENTUM WITH WHICH YOU MOVE FORWARD ON THIS.

SO I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU SAID, COUNCIL MEMBER BEHRENDT, ABOUT KEEPING THE BARRIERS LOW HERE.

AND WHAT I WANT FOLKS WHO MAY BE PAYING ATTENTION TO THIS TO APPRECIATE, IS THAT WHERE WE HAVE GOTTEN VACANCIES HAVE OCCURRED AND NEW BUSINESSES HAVE COME IN QUICKLY. THE BIG LOT SITE EVEN [INAUDIBLE] NOW, THANKS TO MAYOR PRO TEM BEHRENDT SENT ME A PICTURE OF SOMEBODY APPLYING TO OPEN UP AN [INAUDIBLE] SPACE. THOSE HAVE BEEN THE PROPERTIES WITH AMPLE PARKING, AND IT HAS NOT BEEN A PROBLEM TO REFILL THOSE PROPERTIES.

THE ONES WITHOUT AMPLE PARKING, LIKE ALL THE REST OF THE PROPERTY ON ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

THOSE ARE THE ONES THAT WERE MORE CHALLENGED TO GET GOOD BUSINESSES INTO.

AND I THINK WE NEED TO KEEP THE BARRIERS AS LOW AS POSSIBLE.

AND I THINK THAT THIS ADMINISTRATIVE USE PERMIT WITH THESE SPECIFIC CONDITIONS AND CONJUNCTIVE TEST, IT STRIKES THE RIGHT BALANCE OF KEEPING THE BARRIER LOW, BUT ALSO KEEPING OBJECTIVE REQUIREMENTS TO MEET THE BARRIER.

ONE THING I DID WANT TO CLARIFY UNDER LOOKING AT THE BLUE FOLDER.

ITEM A.1, OFF STREET PARKING SHALL BE LOCATED TO THE REAR OF THE PRIMARY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ON THE LOT.

I DON'T THINK THAT LEAVES OPEN THE POSSIBILITY THAT SOMEBODY COULD DO AN UNDERGROUND PARKING LOT. SO I THINK OF A YAWN.

AND I. OR NOT YAWN, A GRUB HOUSE. AND THEIR PLAN WAS TO JUST HAVE A DRIVEWAY AND GO DOWN UNDERNEATH.

THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, SOMEBODY COULD CONSTRUE THAT, SAY, WELL, IT'S NOT TO THE REAR, IT'S BENEATH.

SO I'D LIKE TO JUST ADD IN TO THE REAR OF OR BENEATH THE PRIMARY BUILDING OR STRUCTURE ON THE LOT .FOR THE VERY FEW PARKING, FOR THE VERY FEW SITES ON ARTESIA AND AVIATION THAT HAVE ENOUGH SIZE TO SUPPORT AN UNDERNEATH LOT.

BUT AGAIN, IF WE HAVE CONSOLIDATION, THEN PEOPLE COULD.

AND OUR REACTION TO THAT WOULD BE TO MAKE THAT EXPRESSLY CLEAR.

WE WOULD SUPPORT THAT. IT'S AN EASY CHANGE, AND WE WOULD INTERPRET IT AS SUCH THAT WE WOULD ENGAGE A PROSPECTIVE DEVELOPER IN THAT CONVERSATION AND ALLOW FOR IT IF THEY FELT IT WAS FISCALLY FEASIBLE AND COULD BUILD IT. BUT IT DOESN'T HURT TO MAKE THAT VERY CLEAR, SO.

COOL. AND THEN ONE THING, IF WE COULD LIGHT UP 2.B, PLEASE.

I DO WANT TO ECHO THE POINT ABOUT THE DRIVEWAY APRONS.

IF YOU LOOK AT LAVENDER AND HONEY, A GREAT PLACE THAT WE'VE LIKED HERE IN NORTH REDONDO.

IF YOU LOOK AT THE DRIVEWAY APRON HERE, THIS IS HUGE.

GIGANTIC. A PERSON WALKING DOWN HERE, AND WE'VE PUT UP A SPEED SIGN TO TRY TO CURB PEOPLE'S SPEED IN THIS PARTICULAR INTERSECTION OF AVIATION.

AND SO A PERSON WALKING HERE WOULD NOT FEEL VERY PROTECTED AT ALL FROM THE TRAFFIC.

SO WHAT ARE YOUR THOUGHTS ON PUTTING A MAXIMUM ON THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY APRONS? BE IT, YOU KNOW, 15FT FOR A TWO WAY DRIVEWAY AND SOME OTHER NUMBER, SMALLER NUMBER FOR A ONE WAY DRIVEWAY? WELL, THAT'S SOMETHING THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED.

I THINK IT'S WORTH STUDYING. WE'D WANT TO WORK WITH PUBLIC WORKS ON IT AND GET THEIR INPUT ON THIS, SINCE IT CROSSES OVER THROUGH THE RIGHT OF WAY.

BUT IF THAT'S THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION, WE CAN BRING AN ORDINANCE FORWARD THAT WOULD MODIFY THE DRIVEWAY WIDTH.

I DON'T KNOW EXACTLY WHAT THAT WIDTH SHOULD BE.

BUT I AGREE, IN THIS SCENARIO IT'S NOT VERY PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED, AND IT'S NOT CONSISTENT WITH THE ESTHETIC THAT WE'RE TRYING TO ACHIEVE ALONG THE CORRIDOR.

OKAY. THANK YOU. AND. I THINK FOR THE TIME BEING, THAT THOSE ARE ALL MY COMMENTS.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI. AND ON THAT APRON, THAT'S SOMETHING YOU COULD EXPLORE THROUGH?

[00:45:02]

I THINK THE PUBLIC WORKS SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION WOULD BE A NATURAL LOCATION FOR OUR TRAFFIC ENGINEER WOULD BE INVOLVED AS IT PERTAINS TO PEDESTRIAN SAFETY, YOU KNOW, TRADITIONAL CONCEPTS. WHAT THE YOU KNOW, APWA, AMERICAN PUBLIC WORKS ASSOCIATION RECOMMENDS FOR THINGS LIKE THAT.

OR, YOU KNOW, CIVIL ENGINEERS ASSOCIATION. BUT I WANT TO MAKE CLEAR IT'S NOT SOMETHING WE COULD DO TONIGHT.

OKAY. SOUNDS GOOD. ALL RIGHT. TO MY IMMEDIATE LEFT IS COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE.

NOTHING. I WAS JUST GOING TO ADD IN THAT LAST PICTURE THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI POSTED.

IT LOOKED LIKE TWO ADJACENT PROPERTIES. SO, YOU KNOW, ALTHOUGH IT LOOKED LIKE A VERY LARGE DRIVEWAY WAS ACTUALLY TWO DRIVEWAYS.

SO I'M NOT SURE WHAT THE CORRECT FIX WOULD BE, BECAUSE IF YOU DID PUT SOME SORT OF CURB IN THE MIDDLE OF THAT, THEN THERE'S A CURB IN WHAT APPEARS TO DRIVERS AS ONE SOLID DRIVEWAY.

SO IT WOULD HAVE TO. YEAH, YOU'D BE LOOKING AT TWO WAY TRAFFIC TO EACH OF THE TWO SITES, AND THAT'S WHERE YOU COULD SEE WHERE THE PERHAPS THE DEFAULT DECISION THERE WAS TO JUST MAKE IT ONE GIANT APRON.

BUT I THINK COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI´S POINTS WELL NOTED THAT THAT DOESN'T FEEL COMFORTABLE AS A PEDESTRIAN.

BUT THERE MAY BE OTHER TREATMENTS THAT WE COULD DEPLOY THERE, SOME MODERN STRATEGIES THAT WOULD HELP WITH THAT.

OKAY. THAT'S ALL. THAT'S ALL. GOOD QUESTION. THANK YOU.

OTHER TREATMENT STRATEGIES, SOMETHING. YEAH, EXPLORE IT? AND THEY MAY BE THINGS THAT BECOME. OUR PUBLIC RIGHT OF WAY CONVERSATION EXCLUSIVE OF THE DEVELOPER OR THE SITE OWNER.

THESE MIGHT BE THINGS THAT WE LOOK AT FROM AN ENGINEERING AND ENCROACHMENT STANDPOINT, NOT NECESSARILY IMPEDIMENTS OR BARRIERS TO FUTURE DEVELOPMENT, SOMETHING THAT WE WOULD WORK IN TANDEM TO EXECUTE. SO JUST SOMETHING TO NOTE THERE AS WELL.

IT MAY NOT BE SOMETHING THAT'S EXCLUSIVELY THE DEVELOPER'S RESPONSIBILITY IN THE LONG RUN. OKAY.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. YEAH. THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER CASTLE. COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER.

THANK YOU. I LOVE THE PROGRESS THAT WE'RE MAKING ON THIS AS WELL.

I THINK IT'S GOOD THAT WE'RE DOING THIS. IT'S GOING TO ENCOURAGE US.

I'VE HAD A LOT OF ENCOURAGEMENT FROM THE BUSINESS COMMUNITY.

I WAS AT THE RBB MEETING RIGHT AFTER WE DID THIS, AND THEY WERE VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT.

I WAS AT A CHAMBER EVENT AND PEOPLE WERE VERY EXCITED ABOUT IT.

SO THE COMMUNITY DOES SEEM TO LIKE WHAT WE'RE DOING HERE WITH THE PARKING.

YOU KNOW, I DEFINITELY WOULD SAY THAT I LIKE THE OPTION TOO.

I DON'T WANT TO BE TOO PRESCRIPTIVE WITH HOW THIS WORKS, BECAUSE THEN AGAIN, THAT THEN LIMITS PEOPLE THAT MIGHT WANT TO COME IN, AND WE WANT TO MAKE AS FLEXIBLE AS POSSIBLE, BUT WE STILL DO HAVE TO PAY ATTENTION.

AND I HAD A QUESTION ABOUT THE DRIVEWAYS WRITTEN DOWN MYSELF AS WELL.

AND YEAH, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO AT LEAST HAVE THE PUBLIC WORKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMITTEE LOOK AT THAT, AND FIGURE OUT WHAT MAKES SENSE. I DON'T WANT TO SAY 15FT AND THEN HAVE SOMEBODY SAY, WELL, REALLY, 16 IS THE BETTER NUMBER. IT'S, YOU KNOW, WHATEVER A GOOD NUMBER IS.

AND IT MIGHT BE ON A PER PROPERTY BASIS THAT IT HAS TO BE LOOKED AT.

I DON'T KNOW HOW THAT'S GOING TO WORK. THERE'S SOME THAT HAVE PRETTY NARROW ALLEYWAYS GOING INTO THE BACK WHERE YOU COULD HAVE A NARROW DRIVEWAY AND OTHERS WHERE IT DOESN'T MAKE SENSE. YOU HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT TWO WAY TRAFFIC, SO IT CAN'T BE TOO SMALL.

SO I WOULD LIKE SOMETIME IN THE FUTURE, I THINK IT'S A GOOD IDEA TO DO THAT.

OTHER THINGS I'VE HAD ISSUES WITH [INAUDIBLE] AROUND ARTESIA.

I DEFINITELY NOTICED THE LACK OF MARKED CROSSWALKS IN BETWEEN THE LIGHTS.

AND SO I DEFINITELY ENCOURAGE, AGAIN, THAT'S NOT PART OF THIS, BUT IT WAS PART OF THEIR COMMENTARY.

I DEFINITELY AGREE WITH THAT, AND ENCOURAGE WHATEVER PROGRESS WE MAKE ON THAT.

BUT OTHERWISE, WOULD IT BE APPROPRIATE TO MAKE A MOTION NOW, OR? DO YOU WANT TO HEAR FEEDBACK FROM. WELL, LET'S HEAR FROM THE PUBLIC. I THINK THOSE WHO ARE TUNING IN HAVE SOME IDEAS TO WHAT WE'RE THINKING AND ARE INCLINED TO DO.

SO, YEAH. AND WHILE YOU'RE COLLECTING THAT INFORMATION, MAYOR PRO TEM, ONE THING TO NOTE AS IT PERTAINS TO THE DRIVEWAYS, SOME OF THE CALCULATION ISN'T JUST THE PEDESTRIAN DRIVEWAY CONFLICT, BUT IT'S WHAT IS THE SAFE MOVEMENT FROM THE STREET BASED ON YOUR TRAFFIC SPEEDS ON ARTESIA AND AVIATION, SO YOU CAN MAKE A QUICK AND EXPEDITIOUS MOVE INTO THE LOT WITHOUT SLOWING TRAFFIC BEHIND YOU AND CREATING POTENTIAL CONFLICT THERE.

SO IT'S A STREET SIDE AND PEDESTRIAN DRIVEWAY SIDE CALCULATION.

IT'S NOT DONE IN A VACUUM. THAT'S JUST SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE CONSIDERED.

[00:50:03]

IF YOU COULD SHARE 2.B AGAIN. SO I THINK TO THE CITY MANAGER'S POINT, ACTUALLY THIS IS A DRIVEWAY AT THE CDC AT JEFFERSON THAT KIND OF EXEMPLIFIES THE PROTECTION OF THE PEDESTRIAN BECAUSE IT'S A VERY NARROW DRIVEWAY APRON.

BUT I HIT THIS, AND THEN OTHER CARS HIT THIS EVERY SINGLE TIME THEY TURN INTO THIS DRIVEWAY BECAUSE IT'S A LITTLE TOO NARROW.

BUT IT DOES, YOU KNOW, MAKE IT MORE COMFORTABLE FOR THE MANY PEDESTRIANS WHO CROSS OVER HERE, SO. AND AS YOU KNOW, ON THAT STREET, YOU'RE DEALING WITH VERY LIMITED SPEED.

IT'S A VERY NARROW. RIGHT. RESIDENTIAL ORIENTED.

AND ONE OTHER POINT ON THE CROSSWALKS, JUST SO YOU KNOW, COUNCIL MEMBER WALLER, IN THE PAST, I'VE ASKED, WHY AREN'T THERE MORE CROSSWALKS ON GRANT AVENUE? AND THE RESPONSE FROM PUBLIC WORKS UNDER THE PRIOR DIRECTOR WAS, THE PROBLEM IS, IF YOU PUT IN A CROSSWALK, YOU GIVE THE FALSE ILLUSION THAT IT'S SAFE TO CROSS WHEN CARS MAY NOT BE ANTICIPATING DUE TO A LACK OF LIGHT OR LACK OF STOP SIGN, THAT THE CROSSING IS THERE. AND SO WE DON'T WANT TO DO IT TOO FREQUENTLY, ESPECIALLY ON A STREET LIKE ARTESIA BOULEVARD.

GOOD POINT. OKAY. ANY OTHER COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL BEFORE WE TURN IT OVER TO THE PUBLIC? PUBLIC. ALL RIGHT. WE'LL GO AHEAD AND CALL UP OUR FIRST SPEAKER.

WE HAVE A CARD FROM TERESA MITCHELL.

SENT AN EMAIL. MOTION TO RECEIVE AND FILE. SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. NONE OPPOSED.

THANK YOU FOR READING IT. ARE WE READY? MY NAME IS [INAUDIBLE].

I'M IN DISTRICT 4. I'VE BEEN SPEAKING TO COUNCILMAN AND STAFF QUITE A BIT.

I ACTUALLY STUDIED. I HAVE TWO DEGREES IN PLANNING.

I'VE STUDIED THIS, AND I'M ALSO 30 YEARS IN LAND DEVELOPMENT AND INFRASTRUCTURE.

SO I'M VERY FAMILIAR WITH IT. I DEFINITELY SUPPORT THE ELIMINATION OF PARKING.

I WILL SAY THAT THE, AACAP, THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THEN WE ALSO SENT A DRAFT OF THIS ORDINANCE TO UCLA CENTER FOR PARKING POLICY.

THEY ALL VERY SPECIFICALLY SAY NOT TO ALLOW PARKING IN THE FRONT SETBACK.

SO I WOULD LIKE, RATHER THAN MAKE IT EASIER, I WOULD SUGGEST WE PUT IT IN THE BACK.

AND WE CAN MAKE ACCOMMODATIONS TO A CAR THAT IS GOING TO BE THERE FOR 2 OR 3 HOURS.

AND WE HAVE, YOU KNOW, YEARS BEFORE DEVELOPMENT IS IN PLACE.

BUT ONCE A BUILDING IS THERE, IT'S FOR GENERATIONS.

AND SO IF WE WANT THIS TO BE A PARKING AREA, OR I MEAN, A PEDESTRIAN AREA SIMILAR TO MANHATTAN BEACH PIER, DOWNTOWN PIER AVENUE, RIVIERA VILLAGE, WHICH I THINK THAT'S WHAT THE ESSENCE OF THE KCAP IS.

WE NEED TO BUILD THE BUILDINGS SO THAT THEY MEET THAT REQUIREMENT.

THE SECOND THING IS IN REGARD TO THE DRIVEWAYS.

I WALK UP AND DOWN AVIATION MANY TIMES A DAY BECAUSE I HAVE A DOG, AND THAT'S HOW I GET AROUND TO DIFFERENT PLACES.

IT'S UNCOMFORTABLE BECAUSE WITH THE DRIVEWAY APRON, YOU DON'T HAVE A CAR, YOU KNOW, BUFFERING YOU FROM THE STREET AND YOU HAVE THE SLOPE, SO. BUT THE ACTUAL PARKING ORDINANCE THAT'S REFERENCED IN THIS THAT DEFAULTS IF YOU ARE GOING TO PUT PARKING, IT REFERENCES THE PARKING ORDINANCE. IT HAS A MINIMUM PARKING OR DRIVEWAY APRON OF 14 TO 30FT.

SO IF ANYBODY IS ACTUALLY PUTTING IT RIGHT NOW, IT'S NOT DEFAULTING PUBLIC WORKS.

IT'S DEFAULTING TO THAT ORDINANCE, SO THAT WE'RE ALREADY MODIFYING IN THIS CASE.

BUT I DO AGAIN, LIKE DRIVEWAY APRONS. THEY'RE NOT PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY.

THEY DON'T LEAVE ENOUGH ROOM FOR STREET TREES, FOR BUFFERS, FOR BIKE RACKS, ANY OF THE OTHER ACCOMMODATIONS.

SO AGAIN, I THINK IT'S FANTASTIC THAT WE'RE GOING TO ELIMINATE THE PARKING. I THINK THAT, YOU KNOW, AS A DEVELOPER, IF PARKING IS NOT REQUIRED, I'M NOT GOING TO BUILD IT. SO LET'S NOT MAKE IT EASY TO BUILD PARKING.

LET'S MAKE IT EASY TO BUILD A BUILDING, ESPECIALLY WHEN YOU INCREASE CFAR, YOU CAN PUT A NICE TWO STORY BUILDING THAT'S STREET FRONTED THAT FEELS GOOD TO WALK UP TO AND NOT HAVE TO WORRY ABOUT INTERACTIONS WITH CARS CONSTANTLY THROUGHOUT THE WALK ON THE SIDEWALK.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME, AND THANK YOU FOR MOVING THIS FORWARD SO INCREDIBLY QUICKLY.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. ANYONE ELSE HERE IN PUBLIC WISH TO ADDRESS THE COUNCIL ON THIS ITEM? ALL RIGHT. SEEING NONE. HEARING NONE. ANYBODY ONLINE? I HAVE NO HANDS RAISED ON ZOOM, BUT THERE ARE TWO ECOMMENTS IN SUPPORT.

ALL RIGHT, WELL ANY FURTHER COMMENT FROM COUNCIL? [INAUDIBLE]. THANK YOU, [INAUDIBLE]. MISS [INAUDIBLE], FOR ALL YOUR INPUT AND ALSO FOR REACHING OUT TO THE UCLA CENTER FOR PARKING POLICY,

[00:55:08]

AND I MIGHT ADD, MARC, AND ADD TO THE DETAILS.

BUT I THINK BECAUSE OF THAT INQUIRY, UCLA IS STATING THEY MAY ACTUALLY DO A CASE STUDY ON THE BEFORE AND AFTER OF OUR PARTICULAR CHANGE, AND THAT THIS MAY BE SOMETHING THAT GETS PICKED UP AS A BIT OF A RESEARCH ACTIVITY AS WELL.

SO JUST NOTE THAT. I DON'T THINK IT'S VERY COMMON FOR CITIES LIKE OURS TO TAKE SUCH A BOLD ACTION.

SO THIS IS OF INTEREST TO THEM. YEAH. IN THE WORDS OF COUNCIL MEMBER KALUDEROVIC, IT'S A BOLD ACTION.

SO THANK YOU, COUNCIL MEMBER WEINER, FOR YOUR DILIGENCE ON THAT.

THANK YOU, CITY MANAGER. ALL RIGHT. I'LL GO AHEAD AND MAKE A MOTION.

ALL RIGHT. MOTION TO. IS IT TO APPROVE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER.

APPROVE FOR FIRST READING AND ADOPTION. YEAH, I THINK MAYBE PULL THE RECOMMENDATION UP.

SECOND. COUNCIL MEMBER.

SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND TO CLOSE THE PUBLIC HEARING.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. AYE. NONE OPPOSED. SO MAYOR PRO TEM, IT WOULD BE NUMBER FOUR WITH SPECIFICALLY NOTING THAT YOU ARE INCORPORATING WHAT I SUSPECT IS GOING TO BE THE OPTION 2 LANGUAGE THAT WAS DESCRIBED AND CIRCULATED VIA THE BLUE FOLDER.

AND THEN ALSO THE INSERT THAT COUNCIL MEMBER OBAGI MENTIONED. YEAH. MAKE IT, PLEASE. ALL RIGHT. SO MOTION TO INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NUMBER 3306-25, AND INCORPORATING THE BLUE FOLDER ITEM FOR L.1, THE CHANGES THERE, AS WELL AS THE CHANGE I'LL PUT ON THE SCREEN NOW AT TO BE THE TERM OR BENEATH BEING INSERTED AFTER REAR OF.

ALL RIGHT. THAT'S IT. OKAY. AND THAT WOULD BE FOR FIRST READING AND.

YES. AND THEN WE WOULD BE BRINGING THAT BACK FOR SECOND READING, ADOPTION, PRESUMABLY AT NEXT WEEK'S CITY COUNCIL MEETING.

YES, PLEASE. THANK YOU. FOR FIRST READING AND SORRY.

[INAUDIBLE]. AND PERTAINING TO PARKING REGULATIONS FOR NON RESIDENTIAL USES LOCATED ON PROPERTIES WITHIN THE ARTESIA & AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN FOR INTRODUCTION AND FOR FIRST READING AND ALSO DIRECTION TO STAFF TO TAKE THE DRIVEWAY APRON REGULATIONS, WHEN YOU'RE ABLE, TO THE PUBLIC WORKS SUSTAINABILITY AND SAFETY COMMISSION.

FOR DISCUSSION. CONSIDERATION AND RECOMMENDATION.

SECOND. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. NONE OPPOSED. OKAY. THANKS, MARC.

THANKS, CHERYL. THANK YOU. I BELIEVE NEXT ON THE LIST.

THANK YOU. INTRODUCE BY TITLE ONLY ORDINANCE NUMBER 3306-25, AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA, AMENDING TITLE 10, CHAPTER 2, ARTICLE 5, SECTION 10-2.1707 OF THE REDONDO BEACH MUNICIPAL CODE PERTAINING TO PARKING REGULATIONS FOR NONRESIDENTIAL USES, LOCATED ON PROPERTIES WITHIN THE ARTESIA AND AVIATION CORRIDORS AREA PLAN FOR INTRODUCTION AND FIRST READING.

THANK YOU. OKAY. I BELIEVE WE ARE ON TO CITY MANAGER ITEMS.

[O. CITY MANAGER ITEMS]

WE WILL ALSO HAVE FOR CONSIDERATION THE BIANNUAL CALIFORNIA BUILDING CODE UPDATE.

THAT'S AN ORDINANCE ACTIVITY THAT WE TAKE UP EVERY COUPLE OF YEARS.

USUALLY MEANS MORE REQUIREMENTS FOR OUR BUILDING COMMUNITY. WE TEND TO HIGHLIGHT THOSE AS PART OF THAT PRESENTATION, YOU'LL HEAR THAT NEXT WEEK. THAT IS A SCHEDULED AND NOTICED PUBLIC HEARING, I BELIEVE.

THAT WILL BE A PUBLIC HEARING ITEM. AND THEN FOR NOVEMBER 4TH, WE WILL HAVE A DISCUSSION ON OUR PREFERRED BOAT LAUNCH LOCATION.

THAT WAS A CONVERSATION THAT WAS TAKEN UP BY THE HARBOR COMMISSION LAST NIGHT.

I'M PLEASED TO ANNOUNCE THAT THERE WAS A UNANIMOUS RECOMMENDATION FROM THEM THAT SHOULD HELP OUR CONVERSATION ON THE FOURTH.

AND THEN, AS WAS NOTED LAST WEEK, WE'VE HAD SOME CONTINUED DISCUSSIONS.

I'VE HAD A CONVERSATION WITH MY COUNTERPART IN TORRANCE ASSOCIATED WITH THE AVENUE H AND MASSENA COURT, OR I THINK IT'S QUARTER CIRCLE. I FORGET THESE DAYS.

DISCUSSION AND ASSOCIATED WITH THE ACTIVITIES AROUND THE SLEEPY HOLLOW ANNUAL LIGHTS FESTIVAL.

[01:00:07]

SO FOR THE COMMUNITY'S SAKE, WE WILL LIKELY BE BRINGING FORWARD A RECOMMENDATION ON NOVEMBER 4TH, AND IT VERY WELL AT THIS POINT MAY BE OUR TRADITIONAL RECOMMENDATION, WHICH IS OUR CLOSURE OF THE AVENUE THERE AND THE SAME MITIGATING MEASURES WE IMPLEMENTED LAST YEAR TO HELP. SO IT COULD BE BUSINESS AS USUAL.

THAT'S, I THINK, WHAT IT'S SOUNDING LIKE BASED ON OUR PRELIMINARY CONVERSATIONS WITH TORRANCE.

BUT IT WILL BE AN ITEM ON THE FOURTH, MAYBE A CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM IF IT'S BUSINESS AS USUAL.

IF NOT, IT WOULD BE A DISCUSSION ITEM AS PART OF THAT AGENDA.

OKAY. THANK YOU, MR. CITY MANAGER. OKAY. NOW I BELIEVE WE ARE ON TO MAYOR AND COUNCIL REFERRALS TO STAFF.

[Q. MAYOR AND COUNCIL REFERRALS TO STAFF]

AND SO JUST, YOU KNOW, IN GENERAL, IF YOU HAVE A REFERRAL FOR STAFF, YOU KNOW, CONSIDER TALKING TO THE CITY MANAGER ABOUT IT.

THAT CAN BE VERY HELPFUL TO GET THAT INPUT. THE MAYOR IS ALWAYS AVAILABLE.

YOU KNOW, THE MAYOR IS NOT A MEMBER OF THE CITY COUNCIL, BUT HE'S AN IMPORTANT PART OF THIS PROCESS.

AND CAN BE CERTAINLY A RESOURCE TO TALK TO, OR GET IN FOCUS OR REFERRAL AND YOU KNOW, CONSIDER, I WOULD SAY DEFINITELY TALKING TO ANOTHER CITY COUNCIL MEMBER.

THE BROWN ACT ALLOWS FOR IT, AND THAT COULD HELP.

IT COULD IMPROVE. IT CAN, YOU KNOW, MAKE A REFERRAL EVEN THAT MUCH BETTER.

SO THAT'S PRETTY MUCH IT. SO WITH THAT IN MIND, I'LL TURN IT OVER FIRST TO COUNCIL MEMBER BRAD WALLER.

NO REFERRALS TO STAFF TODAY. OKAY. NO REFERRALS TO STAFF TONIGHT.

ALL RIGHT. DID WE FIND THE HISTORIC REGISTRY UPDATE, MR. CITY MANAGER, IN PAST BUDGETS? I FEEL LIKE IT WAS AN ITEM, RIGHT? YEAH. NO, WE HAVE AN APPROPRIATION, THAT WAS PART OF THE 24-25 FISCAL YEAR BUDGET THAT WILL HAVE TO BE CARRIED FORWARD INTO 25-26 TO BE SPENT THIS FISCAL YEAR. AS I'VE NOTED, IT'S BEEN A RECOMMENDATION OF MINE THAT WE DO NEED TO UPDATE OUR HISTORIC RESOURCE SURVEY. IT IS OVERDUE. BUT AS MAYOR PRO TEM BEHRENDT NOTED, THAT FALLS SQUARELY INTO THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT'S SHOP.

AND WE HAVE VERY, VERY PRESSING MATTERS THERE.

YOU KNOW, IT IS A CONSULTANT THAT WE WOULD BRING ON. BUT AS YOU KNOW, EVEN WITH CONSULTANTS, YOU'RE GOING TO BE MANAGING THAT WORK PUBLIC NOTICING.

EVERYTHING. YEAH, I THINK OUT OF FAIRNESS, THAT'S AN APT DESCRIPTION.

AND THEN SOMETHING CAME UP WITH THE COG. I DON'T KNOW THE BEST WAY TO DO THIS, IF IT'S GET AUTHORITY VIA A CONSENT ITEM, BUT I WANT TO PROVIDE AUTHORITY TO THE COG TO CONVENE A COMMITTEE TO EXPLORE SUB REGIONAL TRANSIT SYSTEMS FOR THE BEACH CITIES TO LOOK AT FOR THE UPCOMING WORLD EVENTS IN THE SOUTH BAY, BE IT THE SUPER BOWLS, FIFA AND OLYMPICS.

BASICALLY SOME SORT OF SHUTTLE TROLLEY. YOU KNOW, THE COG WOULD LIKE TO HEAD THAT UP AND COORDINATE BETWEEN MANHATTAN BEACH, HERMOSA BEACH, EL SEGUNDO AND REDONDO BEACH. AND WE JUST NEED TO GIVE THEM AUTHORITY.

SO CAN WE GET THAT BACK, MAYBE, I GUESS A MOTION TO PUT THAT ON CONSENT? I WOULD SECOND THAT. WELL, WE CAN'T MOVE SOMETHING TO CONSENT AS A REFERRAL.

WE'D HAVE TO BRING IT BACK FIRST AS A DISCUSSION ITEM TO DETERMINE WHAT IT IS THAT WE'RE PROPOSING POTENTIALLY FOR THEM TO DO.

WE COULD TEE THAT UP FOR YOU AT ONE OF YOUR UPCOMING MEETINGS.

I GUESS MY FIRST QUESTION WOULD BE, IS THIS SOMETHING THAT CAN BE ADVANCED, AT LEAST AT THE STAFF LEVEL, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT HAS TO BE A COUNCIL POLICY DECISION AT THIS JUNCTURE? BECAUSE I'M NOT SURE WHERE OUR TRANSIT TEAM´S AT OR OUR ENGINEERING.

THE COG´S POSITION, OR [INAUDIBLE]´S POSITION WAS, YOU KNOW, THERE'S BEACH CITIES TRANSIT, THAT'S THE TASK FORCE, IF YOU WILL, OR THE JOINT AUTHORITY, THAT WE'VE INVESTED IN.

FOR THE COG TO COORDINATE TRANSPORTATION, IT WOULD NEED AUTHORITY TO DO THAT.

SO IT NEEDS AUTHORITY, ESSENTIALLY. OKAY. SO IT'S EFFECTIVELY BEACH CITIES TRANSIT AS AN ENTITY AUTHORIZING THE COG TO POTENTIALLY CONSIDER, OR EXPLORE THESE OPTIONS. NO, THAT OR THE CITIES INDIVIDUALLY ARE SAYING, HEY, YEAH, EXPLORE FOR US AND LET'S COORDINATE.

[01:05:05]

IS THERE A TIME SENSITIVITY TO THIS CONVERSATION? IF YOU'RE COMFORTABLE WITH ME, TAKE A FEW WEEKS WITH STAFF TO KIND OF SORT OUT EXACTLY WHAT THE IMPACTS ARE OF THIS.

WE CAN GET YOUR PRIMER ON, AND THEN WE CAN DECIDE WHERE WE GO FROM THERE.

OKAY. THANK YOU. THAT'S IT. YEP. OKAY. GOOD? GOOD.

GOOD. OKAY. I HAVE NO REFERRALS TO STAFF. SO I BELIEVE THAT BRINGS US TO ITEM L.

ADJOURNMENT. ALL RIGHT. I MOVE THAT WE ADJOURN.

HUH? I MOVE THAT WE ADJOURN. ALL RIGHT. WE HAVE A MOTION TO ADJOURN.

SECOND. ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. AYE. ANY OPPOSED? NO.

ALL RIGHT. WE ARE ADJOURNED AT 7:12 P.M.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.