Dec 15, 2025 Public Works and Sustainability Commission

[00:00:03]

SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION 7 P.M. MEETING.

[A. CALL MEETING TO ORDER]

I AM HERE. COMMISSIONER BAJAJ. PRESENT. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.

HERE. COMMISSIONER NAFISSI. HERE. COMMISSIONER BEELI.

PRESENT. COMMISSIONER TSAO. PRESENT. CHAIRPERSON ARRATA.

PRESENT. ALL RIGHT. COMMISSIONER BEELI WOULD YOU HELP US IN THE SALUTE TO THE FLAG? I PLEDGE ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA.

AND TO THE REPUBLIC FOR WHICH IT STANDS. ONE NATION UNDER GOD, INDIVISIBLE, WITH LIBERTY AND JUSTICE FOR ALL.

OKAY. DO YOU APPROVE THE ORDER OF

[D. APPROVE ORDER OF AGENDA]

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

JESSE WE DON'T HAVE ANY BLUE FOLDER ITEMS. THERE'S NO BLUE FOLDER ITEMS FOR TONIGHT'S MEETING. OKAY,

[F. CONSENT CALENDAR]

THOSE ITEMS REMAINING ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR WILL BE APPROVED IN ONE MOTION.

FOLLOWING ORAL COMMUNICATIONS F.1 APPROVE AFFIDAVIT OF POSTING FOR THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION MEETING F.2 APPROVE THE PUBLIC WORKS AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION MEETING MINUTES FOR THE OCTOBER 27, 2025 REGULAR MEETING AND F.3 RECEIVE AND FILE THE UNIFORM REGULATIONS REGARDING ALL COMMISSIONS AND BOARDS AND THE ORDINANCE PERTAINING TO THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION.

F.4 RECEIVE AND FILE UPDATE REGARDING THE SUBCOMMITTEE BETWEEN THE CITY OF REDONDO BEACH AND THE REDONDO BEACH UNIFIED SCHOOL DISTRICT.

WOULD ANYBODY LIKE TO CHANGE THE ORDER OR THE CONSENT CALENDAR? SO IT WOULD BE EITHER A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR, OR IF YOU'D LIKE TO PULL ITEM, YOU COULD. IF ANYONE WOULD LIKE TO PULL AN ITEM. JUST NOTE THAT NOW WE ARE THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION, CORRECT BASED UPON THIS MOTION. THAT IS CORRECT.

NOT OF YET. NOT BECAUSE OF THIS MOTION, BUT YES, AS OF THIS MEETING.

THIS IS THE FIRST MEETING THAT YOU ARE NOW THE PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION.

YEAH. I'LL MAKE A MOTION TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR.

SECOND. SECOND. WAS THAT SECOND BY, I HEARD BEELI.

SIMULTANEOUS. WHO'S GOING TO TAKE THE HONOR?.

OKAY. WE CAN DO A ROLL CALL VOTE. COMMISSIONER SIMPSON.

AYE. COMMISSIONER BAJAJ. YES, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON.

AYE. COMMISSIONER NAFISSI. AYE. COMMISSIONER BEELI.

AYE. COMMISSIONER TSAO. AYE. CHAIR ARRATA. AYE.

EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR. OR DO WE NEED ANY PUBLIC COMMENTS? WE SHOULD HAVE TAKEN PUBLIC COMMENT. YEAH. FOR CONSENT CALENDAR, SO I THINK WE CAN.

UNAPPROVE IT. ASK FOR AND. WELL UNAPPROVE IT AND ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT, PLEASE.

I THINK WE CAN RETROACTIVELY ASK FOR PUBLIC COMMENT IF THERE'S ANY, ON THE CONSENT CALENDAR. AND FOR THE RECORD, THERE IS NO ECOMMENTS OR ANY HANDS RAISED ON ZOOM.

OKAY, SO WE HAVE A MOTION AND A SECOND WITH THE FIRST MOTION ACCEPTED.

MOVING ON TO EXCLUDED CONSENT CALENDAR ITEMS. THERE'S NONE. H PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS.

[H. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS]

THIS SECTION IS LIMITED TO 30 MINUTES. EACH SPEAKER WILL BE AFFORDED THREE MINUTES TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSION.

EACH SPEAKER WILL BE PERMITTED TO SPEAK ONLY ONCE.

WRITTEN REQUESTS, IF ANY, WILL BE CONSIDERED FIRST UNDER THIS SECTION.

[00:05:03]

JIM MUELLER. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSION. THE CITY IS TRYING TO DEVELOP ARTESIA BOULEVARD INTO A MORE LIVELY AND REVENUE RICH COMMERCIAL DISTRICT.

TO DO THAT REQUIRES MORE PEDESTRIANS HAVING A SAFE AND PLEASANT EXPERIENCE ON THE SIDEWALKS AND PUBLIC SPACES.

PARDON ME? WHEN THE THOUSANDS OF CONSUMERS WHO LIVE AROUND ARTESIA GET IN THEIR CARS, THEY DON'T TEND TO BUY LOCAL.

THEY HEAD OUT OF TOWN TO ANOTHER CITY'S SHOPPING CENTER WHERE THEY AND THEIR FAMILIES FEEL COMFORTABLE AND SAFE.

ARTESIA BOULEVARD BUSINESSES NEED THOSE CUSTOMERS TO BUY CLOSER TO HOME, TO FEEL SAFE AND COMFORTABLE ON FOOT, ON THE SIDEWALK. RIGHT NOW. PEOPLE DON'T LIKE TO WALK ON ARTESIA BECAUSE THEY'RE TOO NEAR A LARGE VOLUME OF FAST MOVING CARS, THREE TIMES MORE THAN THE RIVIERA, AND THE NOISE GENERATED BY THAT TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTES TO AN UNPLEASANT EXPERIENCE.

A CRUCIAL STEP TO ENCOURAGE MORE PEOPLE ON FOOT ON ARTESIA MUST BE TO CALM THE TRAFFIC.

FIRST, I SUGGEST REDUCING THE SPEED LIMIT FROM 35 TO 30 OR EVEN 25.

MAKE THE BOULEVARD A BUSINESS ZONE WITH SIGNAGE ENCOURAGING SLOWER SPEEDS AND LOOK OUT FOR PEDESTRIANS.

SECOND, EMPLOY SOME OF THE TECHNIQUES FOR TRAFFIC CALMING THE CITY USES FOR RESIDENTIAL STREETS.

HELP FOR THIS CAN COME FROM THE PROPOSED ART PLAN FOR ARTESIA, WHICH INCLUDES INSTALLATION OF CROSSWALKS FOUR ALTOGETHER.

INSTALL ALL OF THEM IN THE FIRST PHASE OF THE CONTRACT IN 2026.

THEY'RE PAID FOR. THIRD, FINALLY, THE AACAP ARE FINALLY THE AACAP ARTESIA IMPROVEMENTS.

THE BULB OUTS AND OTHER PEDESTRIAN AIDS SPECIFIED TO PROVIDE PEDESTRIAN BUFFER ZONES AND COMMUNITY SPACE.

FOURTH, WORK WITH PLANNING COMMISSION TO ENSURE NEW BUILDINGS OR RENOVATIONS USE SETBACKS IN A WAY THAT EXPANDS THE PEDESTRIAN SPACE.

BEGINNING THIS CALMING EFFORT NOW BEFORE THE NEW FARMERS MARKET STARTS UP, WILL HELP ENSURE SAFETY OF PEDESTRIAN TRAFFIC HEADED TO THAT VENUE BECAUSE IT'S LIKELY OURS ARE ALSO BUSY TRAFFIC TIMES ON ARTESIA.

PUBLIC WORKS EFFORTS WILL HELP MAXIMIZE THE POTENTIAL OF ARTESIA BOULEVARD, A VITAL COMMERCIAL AREA FOR THE FUTURE OF REDONDO BEACH.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING. GEORGETTE GANTNER DISTRICT TWO. I WOULD LIKE TO FURTHER THE COMMENTS THAT JIM JUST MADE REGARDING ARTESIA.

IN LIGHT OF THE FACT THAT $450,000 RIGHT NOW SEED MONEY HAS BEEN PROVIDED AND WILL BE PROVIDED, INCLUDING THE HIRING OF A CONSULTANT. THAT IS I THINK THEY'RE TOMORROW NIGHT GIVING A PRESENTATION TO CITY COUNCIL.

I WOULD ALSO LIKE TO ADD THE FOLLOWING TO HELP TO MAKE THE AREA MORE BEAUTIFUL AND TO ENCOURAGE BUSINESS.

AND IF THERE'S ANY WAY THAT THE CITY AND OR YOUR COMMISSION OR PLANNING COMMISSION COULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE WHO HAVE PROPERTY THAT'S NOT BEING USED OR IS VACATED, THERE'S LIKE, FOR INSTANCE, A PRESCHOOL THAT HASN'T BEEN USED MAYBE IN A DECADE.

IT SITS AND SITS IF THOSE PROPERTIES CAN BE GIVEN UP, IF THE CITY CAN INCENTIVIZE THOSE OWNERS TO SELL OR MOVE OR RENT OR IMPROVE, THAT WOULD IMPROVE THE AREA GREATLY.

AND THE THING THAT I HAVE THIS IS MAYBE NOT PRACTICAL, BUT I'M GOING TO SHARE IT ANYWAY.

WHO KNOWS? IS SOME OF THOSE PROPERTIES, IF VACATED, POSSIBLY COULD BE MADE INTO LITTLE PARKETTES AND MAYBE EACH ONE COULD HAVE A VARIETY OF USES. MAYBE ONE COULD BE FOR PICKLEBALL OR THERE'S A BASKETBALL COURT.

SOMETHING THAT WOULD, YOU KNOW, OUR KIDS PLAYGROUND, SOMETHING THAT WOULD ENCOURAGE PEOPLE FOR HEALTHY ACTIVITY.

AND IT WOULD ALSO IMPROVE THE SETBACK BECAUSE IT WOULD BE A PARK SO PEOPLE WOULD BE FURTHER AWAY FROM THE STREET AND THEREFORE SAFER.

SO THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME. THANK YOU. ANYBODY ELSE FOR PUBLIC PARTICIPATION? ANY ECOMMENTS? NO HANDS RAISED ON ZOOM.

OKAY. MOVING ON TO I. ITEMS CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS AGENDAS.

THERE IS NONE. ITEMS J ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION.

[J. ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION]

GOOD EVENING. COMMISSION. RYAN LIU, CITY TRAFFIC ENGINEER.

I'D LIKE TO. THIS IS A JOINT ITEM WITH PLANNING DIVISION AND THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT.

I'D LIKE TO INTRODUCE SEAN SCULLY, OUR PLANNING MANAGER, WHO WILL KICK US OFF ON THIS DISCUSSION. ALL RIGHT.

THANK YOU, RYAN. AND TO CONTINUE THE THEME, THIS IS ALL ABOUT ARTESIA AND AVIATION CORRIDORS.

SO I'M GOING TO PROVIDE SOME OF THE BACKGROUND HOW WE GOT HERE.

[00:10:03]

AND SO THEY KNOW EXACTLY WHAT I'M TALKING ABOUT.

AND WE JUST HEARD IT FROM THE SPEAKERS AS WELL.

REVITALIZATION OF ARTESIA BOULEVARD AND AVIATION BOULEVARD HAS BEEN ON THE CITY'S RADAR FOR DECADES.

SO THE AACAP CAME TOGETHER WAS DIRECTED FROM COUNCIL GPAC KIND OF DUG IN.

WE HAD CONSULTANTS ON BOARD. WE DID A NUMBER OF STUDIES OF PARKING UTILIZATION STUDY, MARKET FEASIBILITY STUDY, DEVELOPMENT FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND AACAP EVENTUALLY GOT APPROVED AS THE REVITALIZATION STRATEGY DOCUMENT FOR ARTESIAN AVIATION.

SO THERE'S A NUMBER OF MEASURES IN THAT DOCUMENT.

STRATEGIES, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS THAT ARE LAID OUT IN THAT DOCUMENT.

AND A LOT OF THEM HAVE TO DO WITH THAT. WHAT WE HEARD EARLIER ABOUT THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION, TRYING TO CREATE THE ENERGY, THE ECONOMIC DRIVER THAT NORTH REDONDO BEACH IS LOOKING FOR, THE THE QUARTERS THEMSELVES, AS YOU ALL PROBABLY ARE AWARE, THEIR COMMUTER ORIENTED.

ESSENTIALLY, WHAT THE AACAP DOES IS TRIES TO CONVERT THAT INTO FROM COMMUTER ORIENTED TO NEIGHBORHOOD ADJACENT NEIGHBORHOOD ORIENTATION, SO THAT PEDESTRIAN EFFORT AND PEDESTRIAN ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT IS REALLY WHAT WE THINK IS GOING TO HELP TURN IT OVER. THE OTHER ISSUE, AND IT KIND OF SPEAKS TO SOME OF THE COMMENTS WE HEARD, IS THE DEVELOPMENT, THE, YOU KNOW, WHAT'S GOING TO INCENTIVIZE THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY, AND IT'S THE INTENSIFICATION OF ALLOWED DEVELOPMENT.

SO LIKE AND SOME OF THOSE ITEMS ARE GOING BEFORE THE COUNCIL THIS VERY NEXT MONTH, INCREASING THE FLOOR AREA RATIO, INCREASING THE ALLOWABLE HEIGHT NUMBERS OF STORIES.

AND AS A MATTER OF FACT, REDUCING AND ACTUALLY IN THIS CASE, ELIMINATING THE PARKING REQUIREMENT.

SO WE STILL THINK THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY IS GOING TO WANT PARKING, BUT IT'S PER THE NEW ORDINANCE, IT'S SUPPOSED TO BE PROVIDED TO THE REAR OF THE DEVELOPMENT.

AND IF IT DOES, IF THEY DO WANT IT IN FRONT OF, IT'S GOT TO GO TO OUR CITY ENGINEER AND RYAN FOR REVIEW TO SEE IF THERE'S SOME POTENTIAL TO ALLOW, ALONG WITH THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR, TO ADMINISTRATIVELY DETERMINE IF WE'RE GOING TO ALLOW THAT PARKING.

THE OTHER, THE PIECE OF THE PUZZLE THAT WE'RE BRINGING BEFORE THIS BODY TONIGHT IS THE THE DRIVEWAY WIDTHS.

NOW, WE DON'T WANT TO HAVE DRIVEWAYS RUNNING THROUGH YOUR PEDESTRIAN CORRIDORS, BUT WE KNOW THE WAY THAT DEVELOPMENT IS SET UP THERE.

THERE'S GOING TO BE DRIVEWAYS RIGHT NOW THE STANDARD IS FOR ONE WAY, IT'S A 14 FOOT DRIVEWAY WIDTH MINIMUM.

AND FOR TWO WAY IT'S 30FT. SO THAT'S JUST WHAT PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED 15FT FOR TWO WAY.

AND COUNCIL HAS ASKED THAT WE BRING THIS TO YOU TO TO GET YOUR RECOMMENDATION ON WHAT WOULD BE THE APPROPRIATE DRIVEWAY WIDTH, MUCH NARROWER THAN WHAT WE HAVE NOW. SO THAT'S KIND OF THE STORY OF HOW WE GOT HERE TONIGHT.

RYAN'S DONE A LOT OF RESEARCH WITH OTHER ABOUT OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND CAN GO OVER KIND OF THE NUTS AND BOLTS THAT STAFF IS GOING TO RECOMMEND.

THANK YOU, SEAN. SO, AS SEAN MENTIONED, OUR CURRENT DRIVEWAY MINIMUMS FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT ARE CODIFIED IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE 10-2.1706.

THEY MANDATE THAT ONE WAY DRIVEWAY. SO A SINGLE DRIVEWAY HAS TO BE AT LEAST 14FT MINIMUM.

AND A TWO WAY DRIVEWAY NEEDS TO BE AT LEAST 30FT WIDE.

SO THESE HAVE BEEN PRETTY PRESCRIPTIVE AND RIGID THROUGHOUT THE HISTORY OF THE CITY.

WE'VE HAD A LITTLE BIT OF A WORKING GROUP BETWEEN COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT AND PUBLIC WORKS TO LOOK AT OTHER CITIES AND BEST PRACTICES, AND IN LIGHT OF THE MODERNIZATION AND ENHANCING PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENTS ON ARTESIA AND AVIATION.

SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE IS A BASELINE STANDARD OF A 12 FOOT MINIMUM WIDTH FOR ONE WAY DRIVEWAY, A 20 FOOT MINIMUM FOR TWO WAY DRIVEWAY, AND A 24 FOOT MAXIMUM FOR A TWO WAY DRIVEWAY.

[00:15:05]

HORIZONTAL AND VERTICAL SLOPES AS IT INTERFACES WITH THE STREET AND THE EXACT USE THAT'S BEING PROPOSED ON THE SITE.

FOR EXAMPLE, IF THERE WAS EVER A SUPERMARKET THAT NEEDED TO BE DEVELOPED THAT HAD A LARGE LOADING DOCK, THEY MAY REQUIRE A WIDER DRIVEWAY, WHEREAS A USE THAT'S PROPOSING MAYBE JUST A HANDFUL OF PARKING SPACES COULD GET AWAY WITH A MUCH NARROWER DRIVEWAY.

THIS SLIDE SHOWS A FEW CITIES IN OUR REGION THAT HAVE SIMILARLY CONSTRAINED URBAN ENVIRONMENTS, OR TRYING TO ENHANCE THEIR PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENTS AS WELL.

CULVER CITY, TORRANCE AND SANTA MONICA. THEY ALL HAVE VARYING STANDARDS FOR DRIVEWAY WIDTHS AND COMMERCIAL AREAS, BUT WE WANT TO NOTE THAT EACH OF THESE CITIES HAS A MAXIMUM WIDTH FOR DRIVEWAYS, FOR COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAYS, AND A CLAUSE FOR THE CITY. THEIR EQUIVALENT OF A CITY ENGINEER TO PROVIDE ADMINISTRATIVE FLEXIBILITY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

SO OUR RECOMMENDATION THAT FOR DISCUSSION AT THIS COMMISSION IS FOR THE CITY COUNCIL, IN CONSULTATION WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE, TO UPDATE COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY STANDARDS IN THE MUNICIPAL CODE TO THE MEASUREMENTS AS JUST STATED, WITH ADMINISTRATIVE FLEXIBILITY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. DO WE HAVE ANY PUBLIC COMMENT? I DO HAVE ONE CARD. THERESA MITCHELL.

THANK YOU EVERYBODY. AND ESPECIALLY THANK YOU, SEAN AND RYAN, BECAUSE WE BROUGHT THIS UP WITH THE PARKING REFORM.

AND IT'S REALLY GREAT TO SEE IT COME IN SO FAST.

BECAUSE I KNOW THESE THINGS TAKE A LONG TIME AND A LOT OF WORK.

I REALLY APPRECIATE THE LOOK AT THIS BECAUSE I THINK THE, YOU KNOW, THE DRIVEWAYS ARE THE HIGHEST IMPACT WITH PEDESTRIANS.

WHEN YOU'RE IN A CROSSWALK, YOU EXPECT A CAR WHEN YOU'RE WALKING ON A SIDEWALK, YOU DON'T.

BUT IT ALSO THE DRIVEWAYS CONSTRAIN, ESPECIALLY IF WE WANT TO PUT THE PARKING IN THE BACK FOR THE AACAP OR IN ANY OTHER COMMERCIAL AREA, THE WIDTH OF THE DRIVEWAY THAT'S THE MOST VALUABLE LAND ON A PARCEL.

SO IT'S WHERE THE RETAIL SHOPS ARE. SO YOU GET THE HIGHEST RENT AND YOU ALSO GET THE HIGHEST TAX REVENUE.

SO I THINK IT'S THE SMALLER THAT WE CAN REDUCE THOSE DRIVEWAYS OR ALLOW A SMALLER MINIMUM FROM THE 14FT.

EXCUSE ME. I'M LOSING MY VOICE TODAY. THEN I THINK THE MORE INCENTIVIZING WE ARE TO NEW DEVELOPMENT COMING IN AND REHABBING ANY OF OUR COMMERCIAL AREAS THAT SPECIFICALLY ARTESIA AND AVIATION CORRIDOR.

I, I THINK THE MAXIMUM IS FANTASTIC. I WOULD SUGGEST MAYBE REDUCING THE MINIMUM FARTHER TO TEN FOOT.

WE HAVE DRIVING LANES THAT ARE TEN FOOT. WE ALSO HAVE PARKING STALLS THAT ARE NINE AND 8 TO 9FT THAT PEOPLE DRIVE IN FROM THE STREET AND THEY PULL STRAIGHT INTO THAT PARKING STALL. I KNOW HERMOSA HAS A NINE FOOT MINIMUM DRIVEWAY, AND LADOT HAS A 10 FOOT MINIMUM AND A 12 FOOT MAXIMUM FOR SINGLE LANE DRIVEWAYS. SO THAT AND THEN THE THIRD THING, THERE'S A COUPLE OTHER THINGS THAT I WOULD RECOMMEND MAYBE POTENTIALLY INCLUDING IS LIMITING THE NUMBER OF DRIVEWAYS. SO THE CARL'S JUNIOR THAT'S ON AVA OR ON ARTESIA HAS THREE DRIVEWAYS COMING IN, ONE FROM THE SIDE AND TWO IN THE FRONT. WHICH SEEMS A BIT EXCESSIVE WHEN YOU START TAKING UP A WHOLE BLOCK WITH MULTIPLE DRIVEWAYS MAYBE PREFERENCE TO DRIVEWAYS THAT ARE ON A CORNER FROM THE SIDE STREET INSTEAD OF ONTO THE MAIN STREET, AND THEN ALSO A MINIMUM SPACE BETWEEN THE DRIVEWAYS OF 20 FOOT SO THAT YOU HAVE MORE YOU HAVE MORE ON STREET PARKING.

SO IF YOU HAVE A DRIVEWAY AND THEN YOU HAVE AN EIGHT FOOT SPACE AND THEN ANOTHER DRIVEWAY, YOU'RE, BASICALLY ELIMINATING 30FT OF ON STREET PARKING.

SO, BUT THOSE ARE MY RECOMMENDATIONS IF YOU HAVE IT.

THANK YOU. THANK YOU. HELLO. WELCOME. COME ON UP.

SURE. HELLO, EVERYONE. MY NAME IS BENJAMIN DE FRANCE.

THE ONLY ISSUE I HAVE. I DON'T KNOW MUCH ABOUT THIS.

I'M STILL LEARNING. BUT IN TERMS OF FOR YOUR DRIVEWAYS, YOUR PROPOSAL OF REDUCING DRIVEWAY SPACE.

[00:20:01]

THOSE DRIVEWAYS ARE PRETTY NARROW WHEN YOU'RE DRIVING WITHIN.

AND ONE ISSUE THAT I CONSTANTLY RUN INTO ALL THE TIME IS WHEN YOU HAVE A BIGGER VEHICLE, LIKE AN SUV AND YOU'RE TRYING TO MAKE A RIGHT TURN OR A LEFT TURN, ESPECIALLY MAKING A RIGHT TURN, AND YOU HAVE ONCOMING TRAFFIC, YOU'RE ALWAYS CROSSING OVER THE LINES BECAUSE IT'S NOT ENOUGH TURN SPACE.

SO IF YOU'RE BUILDING A NEW DEVELOPMENT AND YOU'RE REDUCING THE SPACE A LOT OF PEOPLE HAVE A HARD TIME DRIVING IN GENERAL.

SO NOW YOU'RE REDUCING THE DRIVEWAY SPACE. ESPECIALLY IF THEY'RE COMING ON, COMING FROM THE STREET AT A SPEED THEY MAY NOT HAVE BEEN ANTICIPATING, THE FACT OF SOMEONE IS COMING THROUGH. AND SO THEY MAKE WIDE TURNS.

THEN WHAT YOU FIND, EVEN WITH BUSSES SOMETIMES IS THE VEHICLE STARTS SLOWING DOWN, AND NOW PEOPLE ARE TRYING TO GO IN REVERSE TO GET INSIDE AND IT CREATES MORE TRAFFIC.

WHAT THE LADY MENTIONED ABOUT WHAT SHE MENTIONED ABOUT CARL'S JUNIOR ON ARTESIA, I KNOW EXACTLY WHAT SHE'S TALKING ABOUT.

I KNOW HYPOTHETICALLY, FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES, YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE AT LEAST TWO POINTS OF EGRESS.

SO YOU HAVE ONE SIDE THAT'S ON THE RESIDENTIAL WHERE YOU COULD COME INTO THE PARKING LOT.

THEN YOU HAVE ONE SIDE ON ARTESIA. THEN IF YOU GO OVER TO THE UPS STORE RIGHT THERE, YOU HAVE EXITS WHERE VEHICLES COULD COME IN AND COME OUT.

AND IDEALLY YOU'RE SUPPOSED TO HAVE THOSE DIFFERENT POINTS JUST FOR EMERGENCY PURPOSES IN CASE SOMETHING HAPPENS.

I DON'T I GUESS TO KIND OF SUM IT UP, I AGREE WITH WHAT YOU GUYS WANT IN TERMS OF REDUCING THE SPACE, BUT BECAUSE VEHICLES ARE GETTING BIGGER, YOU NOW HAVE VEHICLES LIKE CYBERTRUCKS THAT'S LEGALLY ALLOWED ON THE ROADS.

I DON'T THINK REDUCING THE DRIVEWAY SIZE IS PROBABLY THE BEST THING TO DO IS GOING TO CREATE A LOT OF ISSUES IN THE IN THE FUTURE IF IT IS REDUCED.

SORRY. THANK YOU. YOU STILL HAVE 47 SECONDS. THANK YOU.

ANY OTHER PUBLIC COMMENT ON THE DISCUSSION OF THE COMMERCIAL DRIVEWAY WIDTH? WELCOME UP. HELLO AGAIN. YEAH, I'D LIKE TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS BECAUSE I THINK I HEARD SEAN SAY THAT THEY'RE ENCOURAGING THE PARKING COMING FROM THE BACK OF THE PROPERTY.

AND SO THEREFORE IF YOU WANT TO ALLOW TRUCK ACCESS OR A LOT OF WIDE VEHICLE ACCESS, PUT IT IN THE BACK, BUT IN THE FRONT HAVE THE NARROW DRIVEWAY ACCESS.

THAT WAY YOU'D HAVE THE TWO POINTS OF EGRESS AND INGRESS.

MY SUGGESTION. THANK YOU. DO WE HAVE ANY OTHER ECOMMENT? THERE IS NO HANDS RAISED ON ZOOM AND THERE ARE NO ECOMMENTS.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER BAJAJ.

THANK YOU FOR THE PRESENTATION. YOU KNOW, IT'S AN INTERESTING TOPIC. I MEAN, I SEE THE BENEFITS FROM A PEDESTRIAN POINT OF VIEW.

YOU KNOW, AS YOU'RE WALKING TO HAVE THE REDUCED WIDTH OF A DRIVEWAY TO REDUCE THE EXPOSURE OF CARS COMING IN AND OUT.

BUT LIKE THIS GENTLEMAN SAID, THAT WAS ONE OF THE THOUGHTS THAT CROSSED MY MIND AS WELL IS NARROWING IT TOO MUCH, YOU KNOW, ESPECIALLY ON A STREET LIKE AVIATION WHERE, YOU KNOW, WE HAVE A LITTLE BIT OF A HIGHER SPEED LIMIT.

WHAT'S THE SPEED LIMIT THERE IF YOU CAN RECALL? 35. 35. AND WITH THE CARS TRAVELING THAT, YOU KNOW, THE NARROWER THE DRIVEWAY THEORETICALLY THAN THE SLOWER CAR CAN SLOW DOWN AND MAKE THAT RIGHT TURN IN THERE. AND YOU KNOW, WITH THE OTHER CITIES WERE YOU JUST PULLING THIS INFORMATION OFF OF THEIR WEBSITE, OR DID YOU ACTUALLY HAVE A DISCUSSION ABOUT HOW THEY ARRIVED AT SOME OF THESE NUMBERS? NO, THIS WAS JUST BASED ON THEIR MUNICIPAL CODE.

YEAH. I DON'T REALLY HAVE A QUESTION. IT WAS JUST A COMMENT, I GUESS.

COMMISSIONER TSAO. WE KNOW THAT THERE'S A PREMIUM ON PARKING SPOTS.

LIKE, WE'VE ALWAYS TALKED ABOUT PARKING SPOTS AND PEOPLE, YOU KNOW, EVERYONE FROM RESIDENCES COMMERCIAL TENANTS, I MEAN, TALKING ABOUT. IS THIS ONE OF THE MOTIVATIONS IS TO EVENTUALLY TRY TO INCREASE PARKING SPOTS ON STREET PARKING IN AVIATION.

THAT COULD BE A SIDE EFFECT OF NARROWING THE PROPOSED THE DRIVEWAY STANDARDS IS THAT IN SOME CASES, IT COULD BUY BACK A PARKING SPOT OR TWO IF WE GET A FEW FEET BACK.

YEAH, THAT THAT IS THAT IS A POSSIBILITY. BUT, YOU KNOW, NOT JUST NOT JUST FOR THE STREET PARKING, BUT ALSO FOR, FOR A TREE OR PARKWAY SPACE, BECAUSE THAT SPACE CANNOT BE USED FOR SUCH FEATURES RIGHT NOW.

OKAY. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. I'M NOT SUPER CLEAR IN

[00:25:09]

COUNTY, CITY OF L.A.. AND THEN WORK THAT DISCRETION ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS WITHIN THAT WIDTH, ON THE MINIMUM AND THE MAXIMUM SIDE FOR ONE WAY AND TWO WAY? YEAH. I THINK WHAT WE PROPOSED HERE WAS JUST SORT OF A BASELINE, YOU KNOW, IT'S LIKE IT'S A SUGGESTED MINIMUM.

SO, YOU KNOW, THE REASON WHY WE PROPOSED 12 FOOT FOR A MINIMUM ON A ONE WAY IS SO THAT AS A CAR IS TURNING.

YES. IT'S TRUE. PARKING SPACES AND LANES CAN BE DOWN TO 8, 9 OR 10FT.

BUT WHEN THE CAR IS ACTUALLY MAKING THAT TURN, THEY'RE NOT IN A STRAIGHT LINE, THEY'RE IN AN ANGLE.

SO THAT'S WHY WE PROPOSE A 12 FOOT MINIMUM. THERE COULD BE CASES WHERE I THINK WHEN AN APPLICANT COMES BEFORE US, THEY CAN SHOW A TURNING RADIUS BASED ON THE INTENSITY OF THE USE THAT THEY'RE PROPOSING.

SAY THEY'RE PROPOSING A TYPE OF RETAIL STORE THAT'S ONLY GOING TO ATTRACT PASSENGER VEHICLES.

MAYBE THEY CAN GET AWAY WITH A TEN FOOT WIDE, ONE WAY DRIVEWAY.

IF THERE ARE ONLY PROPOSING A HANDFUL OF PARKING SPOTS ON THE SITE, THAT'S GOING TO BE A LOW VOLUME DRIVEWAY.

MAYBE WE CAN GET AWAY WITH A NARROWER DRIVEWAY IN THAT CASE.

SO THE 12 FOOT REPRESENTS SORT OF A SUGGESTED MINIMUM STANDARD, AND IT CAN GO UP OR DOWN, YOU KNOW, BASED ON WHAT THE ACTUAL SITUATION IS.

WE DO HAVE SOME PRETTY NARROW LOTS. YOU KNOW, THERE ARE SOME CORNER LOTS THAT HAVE OPPORTUNITIES FOR DRIVEWAYS TO GO ON SIDE STREETS OR ON THE MAIN STREET. BUT WE ALSO HAVE LOTS THAT ARE JUST SO NARROW THAT THEY CAN ONLY AFFORD TO PLACE ONE SINGLE NARROW DRIVEWAY AT THE FRONT OF THEIR LOT. AND SO WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE IS JUST, YOU KNOW, THESE ARE GENERAL STANDARDS WITH, YOU KNOW, GOOD LATITUDE TO MODIFY. SO IT SAYS HERE TO REQUIRE 12 FOOT MINIMUM ONE WAY DRIVEWAY.

SO SHOULD IT BE UPDATED TO A SUGGESTED 12 FOOT MINIMUM ONE WAY DRIVEWAY.

YEAH. THAT CAN BE THE LANGUAGE THAT'S THAT'S IN THERE. AND I THINK WE CAN MODEL THAT OFF THE OTHER CITIES THAT DO SPECIFY THAT THERE'S ADMINISTRATIVE FLEXIBILITY IN ALL THESE CASES. DO YOU REQUIRE TURN TRUCK TEMPLATES OR TURN TEMPLATES IN A LOT OF THESE CASES? I THINK THAT'LL BE PART OF THE REQUIREMENTS WHEN THEY TRY TO JUSTIFY A DIFFERENT WIDTH THAT'S DIFFERENT FROM 12 OR DIFFERENT FROM 20 TO 24.

WE WOULD WANT TO SEE THOSE DESIGN VEHICLE TURNING TEMPLATES.

YEAH. THE ONE REASON I WAS THINKING IS LIKE, WHAT IF THEY'VE GOT LOADING TRUCKS, RIGHT, FOR EXAMPLE. EXACTLY. ON THE BACK OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT. YEAH, EXACTLY. SO IF THEY'RE PROPOSING A STORE THAT'S EXPECTED TO RECEIVE, YOU KNOW, LIKE A WB 67 TRACTOR TRAILER TRUCK OF SOME KIND, YOU KNOW, WHEN THEY'RE MAKING THAT TURN AND THEY'RE ANGLED ACROSS THE SIDEWALK, THEN THAT'S WHEN THEY MAY BE JUSTIFIED TO HAVE AN EXTRA WIDE DRIVEWAY.

YEAH. YEAH I'M ALL FOR SHORTENING IT OUT, PROVIDING MORE PARKWAY ELEMENTS AND OPPORTUNITIES.

I THINK THAT'S GREAT. THERE IS A GOOD POINT BROUGHT UP. OF COURSE THAT MIGHT BRING SOME ISSUES WITH CIRCULATION FROM TIME TO TIME TOO. SO ALWAYS SOMETHING TO TAKE INTO CONSIDERATION. YEAH. AND WE'LL ALSO BE THINKING ABOUT THE NUMBER OF ACTUAL SPACES PROPOSED ON THE SITE.

YOU KNOW THAT THAT'S USUALLY AN INDICATOR OF THE LEVEL OF ACTIVITY THAT'S EXPECTED.

SO IF THE VOLUMES ARE LOW, THE CHANCES ARE PRETTY LOW THAT SOMEONE IS TURNING IN AND OUT AT THE SAME TIME.

AND IT SEEMS LIKE, I THINK BASED ON THE CITY COUNCIL'S DIRECTION WITHIN THE AACAP, THAT THERE IS A GENERAL DESIRE TO SLOW SPEEDS DOWN ON MAJOR STREETS AND, YOU KNOW, HAVING MORE APPROPRIATELY SIZED DRIVEWAYS WHERE PEOPLE ARE NOT RUSHING IN AND OUT AT SPEED IS PROBABLY THE DESIRED GOAL AS WELL.

YEAH. THANK YOU. MAY I ASK A QUESTION, RYAN? WHAT WOULD BE THE EFFECT IF WE JUST KEPT IT AT 14 AND 30? AND THEN THE LANGUAGE WOULD BE WITH ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION FOR EXCEPTIONS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

PROBABLY NOT A BIG DIFFERENCE. BUT THAT MIGHT BE THE STARTING PLACE IN WHICH A DEVELOPER COMES TO US WITH.

AND SO IT MIGHT BE ANOTHER COUPLE DESIGN ITERATIONS WHEN WE TELL THEM, WELL, WELL, ACTUALLY WE THOUGHT, YOU KNOW, 12 OR 10 COULD BE BETTER. SO WE, WANTED TO BRING THOSE NUMBERS DOWN AT LEAST CLOSER TO WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE SUGGESTING, BUT AND ALSO PROVIDING THAT FLEXIBILITY. I THINK WHERE THE NUMBERS STAND RIGHT NOW WITH THE 14 AND THE 30 ARE PRETTY FAR OUTSIDE OF WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE MANDATING. FOR EXAMPLE, OUR MINIMUM 30FT IS CLOSE TO THE MAXIMUM FOR OTHER CITIES.

ARE WE SEEING ELEVATED PUSHBACK FROM DEVELOPERS ON THIS PARTICULAR ISSUE? IN SOME WAYS, YES. I THINK THERE ARE A COUPLE PROJECTS THAT I'VE PROCESSED WHERE THE LOT IS ONLY, YOU KNOW, 30 TO 40FT WIDE, AND THEY'RE MANDATED TO PROVIDE A 30 FOOT WIDE DRIVEWAY, WHICH IS ESSENTIALLY THEIR ENTIRE FRONTAGE.

[00:30:07]

IT RESULTS IN THEM HAVING TO ADD PARKING LIFTS TO THEIR SITE BECAUSE THE LOT WAS JUST SO NARROW.

COMMISSIONER BAJAJ. SO THIS IS THIS SHOULD BE A BUSINESS.

THIS IS REALLY A BUSINESS FRIENDLY CHANGE, SOMETHING THAT COULD BE MORE ATTRACTIVE TO DEVELOPERS.

AND THEN PROVIDING THIS, IT ALSO PROVIDES THE CITY WITH LEEWAY FOR THESE UNIQUE CASES TO STILL HAVE THE INCREASE.

BUT IT REALLY DOES SEEM LIKE IT'S GOT PEDESTRIAN SAFETY BENEFITS AND A LITTLE BIT MORE BUSINESS FRIENDLY.

SO I THINK THAT'S A STEP IN THE RIGHT DIRECTION THAT THE CITY IS GOING WITH THIS.

DO YOU SEE THIS AS AN IMPLEMENTATION, RYAN? COMMISSIONER TSAO. FOR NEW DEVELOPERS MOVING FORWARD, OR IS THIS SOMETHING THAT THE CITY WANTS TO BE ABLE TO INITIATE ANY INFRASTRUCTURE CHANGES? IT WOULD BE THIS WOULD GO INTO OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS THAT THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY WOULD FOLLOW.

OKAY. SO THIS IS FOR PRIVATE DRIVEWAYS MOVING FORWARD.

OKAY. YES. COMMISSIONER NAFISSI. QUICK QUESTION FOR RYAN.

YOU SAID THAT YOU DID SOME DIGGING INTO OTHER CITIES REGARDING THE WIDTHS OF OTHER CITIES.

SO CAN YOU SHARE WHAT OTHER CITIES ARE COMPARABLE TO OURS? WHAT THE MAYBE THE MINIMUM AND MAXIMUM ARE JUST FOR CONTEXT? YEAH. SO RIGHT HERE I'M SHOWING ON THE SLIDE HERE IS THAT SANTA MONICA HAS A 12 FOOT MINIMUM FOR ONE WAY AND A 20 FOOT FOR A TWO WAY.

AND THEN THEY HAVE A CAP OF 35FT. THAT'S THEIR MAXIMUM.

AND THEN THEY STILL HAVE EXCEPTIONS BASED ON ACTUAL USES.

TORRANCE HAS A 30 FOOT MAXIMUM ACROSS THE BOARD, NO MINIMUMS. AND CULVER CITY'S DRIVEWAY WIDTHS ARE ACTUALLY BASED ON A NUMBER OF SPACES THAT ARE PROPOSED ON SITE.

SO IT CAN, YOU KNOW, EVEN A LOT THAT HAS 20 SPACES OR LESS CAN BE TEN FEET WIDE FOR TWO WAY TRAFFIC.

WE COULD SEE OURSELVES ALLOWING A CASE LIKE THAT ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

WE'RE NOT COMFORTABLE PROVIDING THAT AS OUR STANDARD, BUT WE CAN SEE SITUATIONS WHERE THAT MIGHT BE A FEASIBLE OPTION.

SAY A SITE IS ONLY PROPOSING ADA PARKING ON SITE OR SOMETHING LIKE THAT.

AND DO WE CURRENTLY HAVE A MINIMUM OR WE'RE JUST TRYING TO START A MINIMUM? OUR CURRENT MINIMUM IS 14. 14 FOR ONE WAY AND 30 FOR TWO WAY.

OKAY. DID THIS REQUEST COME TO THE CITY FROM A DEVELOPER OR DID IT COME FROM CITY COUNCIL? OR HOW DID THIS END UP ON OUR AGENDA TONIGHT? YEAH, FROM CITY COUNCIL. AND IT'S PART OF THE OVERALL EFFORT TO LOOK AT OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS, TRY TO INCENTIVIZE DEVELOPMENT MAKE OUR STANDARDS MORE FLEXIBLE BUT NOT GOING TOO FAR.

YOU KNOW, OF COURSE, FOR SAFETY ISSUES AND THEN NOT ALSO RADICALLY ALTERING THE NEIGHBORHOOD SURROUNDING IT.

SO TRYING TO FIND THAT THAT RIGHT SIZE OF ALL OF OUR DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS.

THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER SIMPSON.

COMMISSIONER BAJAJ. YEAH. I MEAN, WITHOUT ANY STRONG OBJECTION TO WHAT STAFF HAS PROPOSED, I WOULD BE INCLINED TO MAKE A MOTION TO MOVE THIS ITEM FORWARD BASED ON STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS.

ARE WE BEING ASKED TO APPROVE THIS OR JUST. RECOMMENDATION FOR THE CITY COUNCIL TO ADOPT THIS IN OUR MUNICIPAL CODE? COMMISSIONER ANDERSON, YOU HAD A COMMENT? YEAH. I THINK IT'S GREAT TO GIVE MORE FLEXIBILITY.

I WOULD MAKE ONE MODIFICATION TO THAT MOTION.

IN LIEU OF REQUIRE TO MAKE SUGGESTED AS THE WORD IN THE RECOMMENDATION, BUT OTHERWISE I'VE I THINK IT'S GREAT.

COMMISSIONER BEELI. RYAN, WITH THIS, ARE WE LOOKING TO ADD MORE STREET PARKING IN ORDER TO KEEP THE PEDESTRIANS ON ARTESIA AT, FOR INSTANCE, IN ORDER TO HELP WITH TRAFFIC CALMING.

I THINK THERE'S A POSSIBILITY THAT SOME STREET PARKING COULD BE PRESERVED OR GAINED WHEN NARROWING DRIVEWAYS.

IT'S REALLY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS. THERE'S A LOT OF FACTORS, SUCH AS EXISTING STREET LIGHTS, FIRE HYDRANTS, PROXIMITY TO INTERSECTIONS. THAT'S IT'S GOING TO BE ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS.

BUT LITTLE STEPS LIKE THIS WILL SORT OF BE ANOTHER SMALL TOOL IN THE TOOLBOX TO, YOU KNOW, I THINK THE CITY'S GOAL HAS BEEN TO PRESERVE, YOU KNOW, THE STREET PARKING AND FIND THE MOST EFFICIENT USE POSSIBLE.

AND MAY I ASK ONE MORE TIME? I'M JUST SO IF WE WENT WITH LIKE, LET'S SAY 14 AND 30 AND THEN EVERYTHING WAS AT ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION FOR EXCEPTIONS ON

[00:35:05]

SO ARE YOU SUGGESTING NO CHANGE TO. THAT TO INCLUDE IN THE RECOMMENDATION? JUST THAT IT DO WE HAVE THAT IN THE LANGUAGE RIGHT NOW AS IT'S WRITTEN? THE DRIVEWAYS WITH ADMINISTRATIVE DISCRETION FOR EXCEPTIONS ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS, IS THAT ALREADY IN THE LANGUAGE? NO. OUR CURRENT MUNICIPAL CODE DOESN'T HAVE ANY EXCEPTIONS FOR FLEXIBILITY AND.

BECAUSE MY. JUST EXCEPTION. AND YEAH, MY THOUGHTS ARE THAT IT'S LIKE SUPER BUSY THAT STREET AND LIKE MAKING THEM SMALLER AND THINKING ABOUT WHAT THE PUBLIC SAID.

I MEAN, I DID A TURN AND GOT REAR ENDED GOING INTO ONE OF THE BUSINESSES.

IT WASN'T THERE. BUT DID YOU DO LIKE ANY LIKE ENGINEERING STUDIES ON REDUCING THESE DRIVEWAYS AND THE EFFECT IT WOULD HAVE ON THE TRAFFIC? THAT'S PROBABLY SOMETHING THAT'S PRETTY DIFFICULT TO STUDY, I THINK, TO LOOK AT THE SPECIFIC, YOU KNOW, SPEEDS AND TURNING. THAT'S WHY WE WANTED TO MODEL OURSELVES AFTER OTHER CITIES THAT, YOU KNOW, HAVE HAVE A TRACK RECORD OF AND CONSISTENCY OF THESE TYPES OF DRIVEWAY REGULATIONS.

I THINK WHAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE IS REASONABLE AND NOT, YOU KNOW, EXTREME.

IT'S IN LINE WITH THE OTHER JURISDICTIONS AND BUT ALSO STILL WANTING THAT FLEXIBILITY.

THE 30 FOOT MINIMUM THAT WE'RE REQUIRING RIGHT NOW IS ACTUALLY CLOSE TO THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED FOR OTHER CITIES.

SO WE'RE BRINGING OUR WE'RE BRINGING OUR MAXIMUM DOWN A LITTLE BIT CLOSER TO OTHER CITIES AND OUR MINIMUMS DOWN TO SAY SANTA MONICA.

FOR CLARIFICATION, SO THERE WAS A MOTION BY COMMISSIONER BAJAJ, COMMISSIONER ANDERSON DIDN'T SECOND IT, BUT OFFERED A FRIENDLY AMENDMENT. WAS THAT KIND OF.

THAT IS CORRECT. AN AMENDMENT TO BAJAJ'S MOTION.

DID COMMISSIONER BAJAJ ACCEPT THE FRIENDLY AMENDMENT? I WOULD I THINK CHANGING THE WORDING FROM REQUIRED TO SUGGEST.

I WOULD THINK THAT MAYBE STAFF OR I DON'T KNOW IF YOU WOULD WANT TO CONSULT WITH YOUR CITY ATTORNEY TO SEE WHAT, IF ANY, YOU KNOW, CHANGES OR IMPLICATIONS THAT MIGHT HAVE ON, YOU KNOW, HOW THE DEVELOPERS INTERACT WITH THE CITY.

SO I DON'T KNOW IF I WOULD SUPPORT DICTATING THAT CHANGE, BUT I WOULD ASK STAFF TO LOOK AT THE POSSIBILITY TO CHANGE IT.

YEAH, THAT'S SOMETHING WE YOU KNOW, IF THIS GETS RECOMMENDED TONIGHT WHEN WE CONSULT WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY AND GET THE EXACT LANGUAGE FOR THIS.

YEAH, WE CAN DETERMINE THAT. BUT MAYBE ANDY HAS SOME BETTER IDEA.

YOU KNOW, IF THE INTENTION IS TO HAVE SOMETHING MORE STANDARDIZED AND JUST ENGAGE IN THE LEAST AMOUNT OF DISCUSSION REQUIRES GOOD.

BECAUSE THE SECOND PART OF THE STATEMENT ALREADY ALLOWS THE FLEXIBILITY BUILT IN THERE, BUT AT LEAST REQUIRED, I THINK. GO AHEAD ANDY. THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, COMMISSIONERS ANDY WINJE, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT, FOR THE RECORD. JUST BIG PICTURE CONTEXT HERE.

WHEN DEVELOPERS COME IN WITH THEIR PLANS AND INTENTIONS, THEY DON'T ALWAYS DEVELOP IN A WAY THAT THE CITY THINKS IS VALUABLE TO THE ENTIRE CORRIDOR. AND SO WE'RE TRYING TO FIND STANDARDS HERE TO FORCE THEM INTO THIS BOX THAT WE'RE TRYING TO GET THEM INTO.

WITH NOTABLE EXCEPTIONS, YOU KNOW, HAVING THE FLEXIBILITY TO NOT MAKE IT A, YOU KNOW, A NO WIN GAME FOR THEM.

SO I THINK WE'RE WE'RE TRYING TO CREATE. AND THAT'S THE DIRECTION FROM THE PLANNING COMMISSION.

THE AACAP AND THE COUNCIL IS COULD WE CONSIDER THESE SMALLER DRIVEWAY MAXIMUMS TO INCREASE THE USABILITY OF THE SIDEWALK, THE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLINESS OF THE SIDEWALK? SO I THINK THAT'S WHAT'S BEFORE YOU TONIGHT IS THE QUESTION IS, DOES THIS BODY AGREE THAT THAT'S A GOOD IDEA? AND IF SO, YOU KNOW WHAT ARE THE RIGHT NUMBERS? I THINK THE, FOR INSTANCE, CHANGING THE WORD SUGGESTING A 12 FOOT MINIMUM THAT DOESN'T FOR A DEVELOPER THAT'S A GET OUT OF JAIL FREE CARD RIGHT THERE, [LAUGHTER] 100%. SO I THINK WE WANT TO KEEP STRONG LANGUAGE IN THERE BUT GIVE DISCRETION NOT IN THE LANGUAGE, BUT DISCRETION IN THE CITY ENGINEER TO SAY THAT'S NOT AN APPROPRIATE WIDTH FOR THIS PARTICULAR DRIVEWAY BECAUSE THEY'RE BRINGING IN BIG TRUCKS OR SOMETHING ELSE.

SO I THINK IF YOU KEEP THAT IN MIND, AS YOU KIND OF DELIBERATE ON THIS, THAT'S PROBABLY THE DIRECTION THE COUNCIL IS ASKING.

THE INPUT THE COUNCIL IS ASKING FROM YOU GUYS IS WHAT IS THIS? WE'RE TRYING TO WE'RE TRYING TO MOVE IN THIS DIRECTION. WHAT IS THIS? HOW DOES THIS FEEL TO YOU AS A PUBLIC WORKS RELATED ENTITY? DOES THIS MAKE SENSE TO YOU? RATHER THAN SHALL WE JUST KEEP IT OPEN? YEAH. AS AN ENGINEER, WE ALL WE LIKE TO KEEP OUR OPTIONS OPEN TO DO WHATEVER SEEMS FAIR.

I THINK THAT'S WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO DO HERE WITH THE LANGUAGE IS LET'S TRY AND PUSH THE DEVELOPERS INTO THIS SMALLER DRIVEWAY MODEL SO WE CAN INCREASE THE USAGE OF THE

[00:40:01]

SO YEAH. THANK YOU. WHAT IS THE LANGUAGE IN THE CURRENT CODE RIGHT NOW? EXACTLY 14 FOOT MINIMUM FOR ONE WAY, 30 FOOT MINIMUM FOR TWO WAY.

AND IT DOESN'T HAVE THAT EXCEPTION IN IT RIGHT NOW IS IT? NO. SO IF SOMEBODY WANTED LET'S SAY WE KEPT IT AT 14 AND 30 AND SOMEBODY WANTED TO DO 12, WOULD THAT BE THE EXCEPTION? THAT WOULD BE THEY WOULD BE ASKING FOR EXCEPTION AND WE WOULD NOT BE ABLE TO GRANT IT.

YEAH. OKAY. GO AHEAD. COMMISSIONER. COMMISSIONER BEELI.

AS SOMEONE WHO OWNS A LARGER VEHICLE. I HAVE A F-350 CREW CAB LONG BED.

AND AS FOR IT'S NOT SO MUCH AS THE NARROW DRIVEWAYS FOR ME, IT'S WHEN WE HAVE SOMEBODY PARKED RIGHT UP AGAINST IT ON THE STREET ON THE APRON THAT IT MAKES IT DIFFICULT TO MAKE THAT TURN BECAUSE, YOU KNOW, YOU DON'T WANT TO DO A THREE POINT TURN TRYING TO GET OUT OF THE DRIVEWAY. I'M JUST I'M NOT KNOCKING A NARROW DRIVEWAY.

I'M JUST SAYING WITH PARKING NEARBY. SO THERE'S THAT APRON.

SO SOME OF THE LARGER VEHICLES CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THAT RIGHT OR LEFT HAND TURN, AS IT WERE.

JUST SOMETHING FOR THE CITY TO TAKE UNDER CONSIDERATION.

AGAIN, I'M NOT AGAINST THE NARROW DRIVEWAYS. I UNDERSTAND THEM AS FAR AS THE BUILDING GOES AND HOW MANY PARKING STALLS ARE AVAILABLE, AND, YOU KNOW, I TOTALLY AGREE. YOU DON'T NEED A 15 FOOT WIDE PARKING OR A DRIVEWAY.

YOU KNOW, YOU ONLY HAVE FOUR SPOTS IN THE BACK WHERE A TEN FOOT OR 11 MIGHT BE MORE THAN ENOUGH.

IT'S FOR MAKING THOSE RIGHT HAND TURNS AND STUFF, AND IT CAN BE QUITE DIFFICULT IF THERE'S A VEHICLE THERE WHO JUST SNUCK IN AND DECIDED TO PARK THERE FOR HOWEVER LONG. ANYHOW, THAT'S MY $0.02.

IT'S NOT SO MUCH AS THE NARROW DRIVEWAY AS IT IS THE TURNING RADIUS WHEN YOU'RE TRYING TO ESCAPE OR GET IN.

COMMISSIONER NAFISSI QUICK QUESTION REGARDING YOUR CASE BY CASE BASIS, BECAUSE IT'S NOT VERY DEFINED, RIGHT? SO A DEVELOPER CAN COME IN AND SAY, HEY, I WANT TO MAKE THIS CASE FOR A MORE NARROW DRIVEWAY.

I ASSUME THAT WILL HAPPEN BECAUSE YOU HAVEN'T CLEARLY DEFINED WHAT A CASE BY CASE BASIS IS, RIGHT? SO ANYONE CAN ACTUALLY MAKE THAT CASE.

FURTHERMORE, I ALSO AGREE WITH COMMISSIONER BAJAJ WHEN YOU REMOVE THAT WORD.

I JUST FORGOT THE WORD TO REQUIRED VERSUS SUGGESTED.

IT IMPLIES SOMETHING ELSE, RIGHT? REQUIRED MEANS YOU NEED TO HAVE IT. IT NEEDS TO BE THIS RIGHT. YOU'RE CLEARLY DEFINING TO THE PROJECT DEVELOPER THAT IT NEEDS TO BE THIS.

YOU KNOW, THIS WAY. SUGGESTED MEANS JUST SUGGESTED.

YOU KNOW, I'M GOING TO SUGGEST THIS IF YOU WANT TO PRESENT SOMETHING ELSE THAT LEGALLY, WE'D PROBABLY HAVE TO ENTERTAIN IT BECAUSE WE JUST SUGGESTED IT.

AND THAT'S PROBLEMATIC FOR ME. AND IF THE WHOLE POINT OF US DISCUSSING GUIDELINES IS TO PROVIDE THEM GUIDELINES, WE SHOULD GIVE THEM GUIDELINES. I'M NOT SUPPORTIVE OF THE 12FT.

I MEAN, IT'S BEEN 14FT ALL THESE YEARS, I AGREE.

CARS ARE GETTING LARGER. MOST PEOPLE, I MEAN, FEELS LIKE MOST PEOPLE DRIVE SUVS.

IT'S TOO NARROW. AND SO I HAVE A LOT OF ISSUES WITH THE FACT THAT WE'RE REDUCING THAT AT THE BEHEST OF PROJECT DEVELOPERS AND MAYBE NOT RESIDENTS.

BUT I DO WANT TO EMPOWER THE COMMISSION. I DO WANT TO EMPOWER CITY STAFF TO ALSO THINK ABOUT THE PEOPLE THAT LIVE HERE AND, YOU KNOW, UTILIZE THESE BUSINESSES AS WE'RE THE ONES ENTERING AND EXITING.

PROJECT DEVELOPERS. PROJECT DEVELOPERS ARE FANTASTIC, AND I'M HAPPY THEY'RE COMING TO ARTESIA TO REDEVELOP HERE, AND I THINK I WANT THEM TO BE HERE. BUT AT THE SAME TIME, WE'RE THE ONES LIVING HERE AND WE'RE THE ONES THAT ARE GOING TO BE ENCOMPASSING THESE VERY NARROW DRIVEWAYS. SO FOR THAT REASON, I'M VOTING A NO.

YEAH. I HAVE SIMILAR CONCERNS TOO. I DON'T UNDERSTAND HOW THE DRIVEWAY WIDTHS CAN ENHANCE PEDESTRIAN USE OF SIDEWALK. I MEAN, I THINK I DON'T NECESSARILY SEE HOW THAT ENHANCES AN EXPERIENCE FOR PEDESTRIAN.

AND FOR WHAT I KNOW OF THIS WAS ORIGINALLY BROUGHT ABOUT BY STAFF'S RECOMMENDATION FOR ELIMINATING PARKING REQUIREMENTS, RIGHT, ON RESIDENTIAL AREAS AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSIONS.

THE CITY COUNCIL'S. THAT WAS A COUNCIL DETERMINATION ON THE ELIMINATION OF PARKING.

ELIMINATION OF PARKING. OKAY. AND THEN THE PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDED THE WIDTHS THE REDUCTION IN DRIVEWAY WIDTHS.

[00:45:02]

AND THEY THOUGHT. TO ASK US. AND THEN THEY SAID.

AND THEN THEY KICKED IT TO US. WE'LL BRING IT TO THIS COMMISSION. AND LET'S HEAR WHAT THE PUBLIC SAFETY OR PUBLIC WORKS AND SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION HAS TO SAY ABOUT THIS. SO THEY WERE BOTH INCLINED TOWARDS MOVING THE DIRECTION OF IN FAVOR OF THE WIDTH REDUCTION.

YES. OKAY. INTERPRETED MAYBE. MAYBE. I HAVE A QUESTION.

SO I'M GOING TO ASK A QUESTION AGAIN. I'M SO SORRY.

ARE YOU ABLE TO KEEP IT LIKE 14 AND 30 AND THEN MAKE IT IF IT'S CASE BY CASE BASIS PER THE CITY ENGINEER.

AND THEN THEY WANT TO GO SMALLER HAVE IT WHERE THEY CAN WORK WITH THAT? YOU KNOW, KEEP IT EXISTING 14, 30. AND IF SOMEBODY'S CASE BY CASE BASIS WANTS TO GO SMALLER TO 14 OR 24, THEN YOU CAN APPROVE THAT. I DON'T KNOW WHAT ANYBODY THINKS ABOUT THAT.

IT CERTAINLY COULD BE THAT AS A RECOMMENDATION OF THIS BODY.

I CAN TELL YOU THOUGH. HOWEVER, THAT'S INCONSISTENT WITH THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION WE'RE TRYING TO GET TO AND TO ADDRESS THE COMMISSIONER TSAO, AM I PRONOUNCING THAT RIGHT? HIS, YOU KNOW, HOW DOES THAT MAKE IT MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY? WELL, AGAIN, YOU'RE WHAT YOU'RE DOING IS YOU'RE TAKING YOUR FRONTAGE AND YOUR SIDEWALK, WHICH IS OUR PEDESTRIAN ENVIRONMENT.

AND WE'RE JUST INCREASING THE AREA BY MINIMIZING.

RIGHT NOW YOU'VE GOT A 30 FOOT MINIMUM DRIVEWAY.

IF WE CAN GET THAT DOWN TO 20FT, THAT'S 10 ADDITIONAL FEET OF SPACE THAT COULD BE ACCOMMODATED FOR, YOU KNOW, OUTDOOR SEATING, ETCETERA. AND I THINK FROM A TRAFFIC SAFETY POINT OF VIEW, THE WIDER THE DRIVEWAY, THE FASTER THE TURNS ARE, THE MORE EXPOSURE THAT A PEDESTRIAN HAS WITHIN THAT DRIVEWAY.

SO THIS PICTURE HERE ACTUALLY ON THE SCREEN SHOWS PROBABLY ONE OF THE MORE EXTREME EXAMPLES WHERE THIS MOST OF THIS FRONTAGE IS DRIVEWAY.

AND IT'S GENERALLY NOT CONSIDERED PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY BECAUSE CARS COULD BE COMING IN AND OUT IN ANY DIRECTION.

AND SO WHERE WE CAN LIMIT THAT WIDTH, THAT'S WHEN WE CAN FOCUS THAT DRIVER AND PEDESTRIAN CONFLICT TO A SMALLER SPACE FORCE, A SLOWER TURN. I THINK ONE OF THE COMMENTERS TALKED ABOUT HAWTHORNE BOULEVARD.

I DON'T THINK ANYONE CONSIDERS THAT TO BE A PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT. THEY ACTUALLY HAVE CUTOUTS OF DECELERATION CUTOUTS SO THAT DRIVERS CAN ENTER DRIVEWAYS AT A MUCH FASTER SPEED. SO IT'S A LITTLE DESIGN STANDARDS LIKE THAT THAT CONSTITUTE WHAT'S CONSIDERED A PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY ENVIRONMENT OR NOT.

SO THE TASK THAT WE WERE, YOU KNOW, WE WERE TASKED WITH WAS TO SEE HOW WE CAN MAKE THE ENVIRONMENT MORE PEDESTRIAN FRIENDLY.

AND THE DRIVEWAY WIDTHS ARE PART OF THAT DISCUSSION.

SO RYAN, WITH YOUR CURSOR, YOU HAD YOUR CURSOR ON THERE, RIGHT? WOULD YOU BE ABLE TO LIKE SHOW WHAT THAT DRIVEWAY THE WAY IT IS? LIKE WHAT YOU THOUGHT YOU WOULD DO WITH THAT DRIVEWAY AND HOW IT WOULD INCREASE THE PEDESTRIAN? NOT MUCH YOU CAN DO. THAT'S A DANGEROUS DRIVEWAY.

THAT'S A DANGEROUS LOT. YOU KNOW, JUST THE ONE THAT YOU SHOWED HERE, IF THAT WAS TO BE MODIFIED.

WELL, I THINK IF WE HAD AN APPLICATION THAT CAME IN, YOU KNOW, TO REDEVELOP THIS STRIP MALL AND THEY PROPOSED ONE DRIVEWAY, YOU KNOW, WITH MAYBE SAY, YOU KNOW, ONLY EIGHT SPACES IN THE BACK, SOMETHING LIKE THAT, BECAUSE THEY'RE NOT REQUIRED TO PROVIDE ON SITE PARKING.

WE WOULD SEE WHAT THE TYPES OF USES THEY'RE PROPOSING. YOU KNOW, MAYBE IT'S AN OFFICE SPACE, AND THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PARKING IN THE BACK AREN'T GOING TO BE COMING IN AND OUT ALL DAY.

SO PERHAPS WE COULD ENTERTAIN A TWO WAY DRIVEWAY THAT'S ACTUALLY NARROWER THAN 20FT OR CLOSER TO 20FT.

SINCE WE KNOW THAT THAT TYPE OF DRIVEWAY IS NOT GOING TO SEE A LOT OF INTENSIVE USE.

IF THE PROPOSED USE IS SOMETHING LIKE A LIQUOR STORE THAT MIGHT GET TRUCK TRAFFIC AND HIGH IN AND OUT DRIVEWAYS, YOU KNOW, DRIVEWAY VOLUMES, THEN THAT'S WHEN WE MIGHT WANT TO MANDATE AND STICK TO OUR 20 TO 24 FOOT MINIMUM, 20 FOOT MINIMUM, 24 MAXIMUM, OR EVEN LARGER THAN THAT BASED ON THE TYPE OF TRUCK THAT THEY MIGHT RECEIVE, SO THAT WE CAN APPROPRIATELY SIZE THE DRIVEWAY TO THE ACTUAL NEEDS OF THE SITE.

BUT I DON'T THINK WE'RE IN THE INTEREST OF APPROVING, YOU KNOW, A DRIVE A SITE WITH THAT'S MOSTLY DRIVEWAY AT THIS POINT.

SO, FOR EXAMPLE, IF THESE TWO DRIVEWAYS GOT CONSOLIDATED TO A SINGLE DRIVEWAY, WE WOULD MOST CERTAINLY BUY BACK SOME SPACE FOR ON STREET PARKING.

YOU KNOW, A TREE PERHAPS, OR SOME PLANTING AS WELL, BECAUSE I'M THINKING ABOUT THE WHEN YOU SAID LIQUOR STORE, I WAS THINKING ABOUT THE CORNER. LIKE THERE'S THE BEACH CITIES ON TORRANCE BOULEVARD, AND IT'S GOT THE BURGER PLACE AND THE NAIL SALON AND THEN THE LIQUOR STORE.

AND I FEEL LIKE WHEN YOU PULL IN THERE, SOMETIMES IT'S REALLY TIGHT RIGHT THERE.

AND IF THAT'S 14 AND 30 ALREADY, I CAN'T IMAGINE IT BEING GOING DOWN ANY SMALLER TO 12 AND 24.

[00:50:01]

YOU KNOW, THE EXAMPLE THAT YOU'RE REFERRING TO, BUT THE WIDTH THAT WE'RE PROPOSING HERE ARE IN LINE WITH OTHER CITIES.

COMMISSIONER NAFISSI. DO YOU GUYS WHEN SOMEONE'S BUILDING A HOME AND SOMEONE WANTS TO REDUCE THEIR DRIVEWAY, DO YOU GUYS HAVE A CASE BY CASE BASIS IN WHICH YOU ALLOW THEM TO REDUCE THEIR DRIVEWAY? NO WE DON'T. WE'VE GOT A SET, STANDARD SINGLE FAMILY RESIDENTIAL 11FT.

EXCUSE ME, NINE FEET AND THEN MULTIFAMILY 11FT.

THOSE ARE STANDARD DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SO HELP ME UNDERSTAND WHY THE LEEWAY IS HAPPENING HERE.

WELL, I THINK THE YOU KNOW AGAIN THESE THE STANDARD THIS IS PART OF MANY NEW STANDARDS PARTICULARLY FOR ARTESIA AND AVIATION CORRIDOR. AND THERE'S WE'RE TRYING TO BUILD IN FLEXIBILITY BUT MINIMUMS. WE'RE TRYING TO AS ANDY HAD ALLUDED TO, WE'RE TRYING TO DRIVE THE DEVELOPMENT IN A CERTAIN DIRECTION IN ORDER TO ACHIEVE THAT REVITALIZATION THAT THE CITY IS LOOKING FOR. SO WE'RE IT'S KIND OF A PUSH AND PULL OF STANDARDS.

I THINK ONE ONE BIG DIFFERENCE, YOU KNOW, SAY RESIDENTIAL IS THAT, YOU KNOW, THE TYPES OF TRAFFIC AND THE PATTERNS OF TRAFFIC FROM RESIDENTIAL IS MORE CONSISTENT BETWEEN EACH OTHER. YOU KNOW, RESIDENTS ARE RESIDENTS, WHEREAS FOR COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT, IT COULD BE A NAIL SALON, A LIQUOR STORE, A PRESCHOOL, A FAST FOOD RESTAURANT, AND THEY MIGHT RECEIVE, YOU KNOW, DIFFERENT TYPES OF EMPLOYEES AND FREIGHT TRIPS.

AND SO THE, NEEDS FOR COMMERCIAL BUSINESSES ARE MORE DIVERSE, CERTAINLY THAN TYPICAL RESIDENTIAL DRIVEWAY, YOU KNOW, COMMUTE TRIPS, COMMUTE SCHOOL TRIPS AND THE LIKE.

YEAH, ABSOLUTELY. I MEAN WHEN YOU'RE DESCRIBING.

IT'S A LOT MORE DYNAMIC. IT'S ACTUALLY EVERY REASON WHY I THINK IT NEEDS TO BE WIDER. BUT I DON'T KNOW, MAYBE I'M MISSING SOMETHING. YEAH. I MEAN, THERE CERTAINLY ARE CASES WHERE IT COULD BE NARROWER, SUCH AS, YOU KNOW, AS I MENTIONED, AN OFFICE BUILDING THAT THEY'RE ONLY PROPOSING, YOU KNOW, LESS THAN, SAY, LESS THAN TEN SPACES FOR THEIR EMPLOYEES.

AND THE EMPLOYEES ARE COMING IN ONCE AND LEAVING ONCE.

AND IT'S NOT EXPECTED THAT VISITORS OR FREIGHT WILL BE SERVICING THAT DRIVEWAY.

THEN, BECAUSE IT'S PREDICTED TO BE A LOW VOLUME DRIVEWAY, WE CAN PROBABLY GET AWAY WITH A NARROWER DRIVEWAY BECAUSE WE'RE NOT EXPECTED TO SEE TWO WAY TRAFFIC IN THAT SPACE IF IT'S LIKE AN OFFICE BUILDING.

AND THEN CAN YOU TALK ME THROUGH LIKE HOW SOMEONE COULD APPEAL THIS.

YOU KNOW IT'S A CASE BY CASE BASIS. HOW WOULD IT LIKE WHAT ARE SOME OF THE REASONS THAT YOU GUYS WOULD CONSIDER LOOKING, YOU KNOW, NOT FOLLOWING THESE GUIDELINES. YEAH.

SO IF THERE'S A SITE THAT'S LARGE ENOUGH TO SUPPORT A GROCERY STORE THAT'S GETTING A VERY LARGE NATIONAL BRAND, NATIONALLY BRANDED TRUCK, THEN THAT WOULD BE AN EXCEPTION TO ALLOW FOR A WIDE TURNING SPACE SO THAT THAT LOADING HAPPENS ON SITE AND NOT IN THE STREET.

AND SO IF I'M A DEVELOPER AND I DON'T SEE THAT I'M JUST GOING TO TAKE, I'M JUST GOING TO APPEAL IT.

RIGHT. AND I FEEL LIKE THERE'S SOME OBLIGATION ON THE CITY TO HONOR THAT BECAUSE YOU SAID YOU, YOU WOULD ENTERTAIN IT A CASE BY CASE BASIS. RIGHT.

SO IS THERE ANY WAY THAT YOU GUYS COULD CLEARLY DEFINE A LITTLE BIT MORE WHAT THE CASE BY CASES MIGHT BE? LIKE WE WILL ENTERTAIN MAYBE I'M GOING TO PARAPHRASE I'M OBVIOUSLY NOT OF YOUR NATURE.

YOU KNOW WE WILL ENTERTAIN AN EXCEPTION UNDER THESE RULES.

YEAH. AND I THINK THAT WILL BE LANGUAGE THAT WE CAN MASSAGE WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY IF THAT'S THE DIRECTION THAT WE GO IN. FOR EXAMPLE, HERE IN SANTA MONICA, YOU KNOW, IT CANNOT EXCEED THIS WISH UNLESS, IN THEIR OPINION, A WIDER DRIVEWAY IS REQUIRED BY THE NATURE OF THE BUSINESS OPERATING OPERATED ON THE BUDDING PROPERTY. SO THAT'S THAT'S ONE WAY ANOTHER CITY'S CODE IS WRITTEN FOR THAT TYPE OF EXCEPTION.

AND THEN IN CULVER CITY PROVIDED HOWEVER, THAT THE CITY ENGINEER AT THEIR DISCRETION MAY APPROVE EXCEPTIONS.

SO THEY DIDN'T DEFINE THOSE IN THEIR CITY. BUT I THINK WE WOULD WORK WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO COME UP WITH THOSE TYPES OF EXCEPTIONS AS WE LISTED HERE.

THESE TYPES OF FACTORS, I THINK WE WILL TRY TO INCORPORATE SOME OF THOSE IN.

OKAY. THANK YOU. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. I THINK IN LINE WITH COMMISSIONER NAFISSI'S COMMENTS, THAT'S WHY I WAS LOOKING AT THE SUGGESTED FOR A LITTLE BIT THERE BECAUSE OF THOSE LINES.

I GUESS I'M GOING TO GO BACK TO THE PUBLIC WORKS DIRECTOR, AND IN THE SPIRIT OF THIS, IT'S MUCH MORE IN LINE WITH THE GENERAL SPIRIT OF WHAT THESE RECOMMENDATIONS ARE AND THEN GETTING TO THE ACTUAL LEGAL LANGUAGE.

THAT'S NOT AN EXERCISE FOR TODAY NECESSARILY, RIGHT? AND ALSO WHAT SPECIFICALLY THOSE EXCEPTIONS WOULD BE AND HOW THAT WOULD BREAK DOWN.

I THINK THAT'S AN EXERCISE FOR ANOTHER DAY. CORRECT.

I THINK IT WILL BE THE ACTIVITY OF THE PLANNING STAFF WORKING WITH THE CITY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE TO COME UP WITH LANGUAGE,

[00:55:03]

SO, YEAH, I DON'T THINK. THERE'S A LOT OF VALUABLE TIME TO BE SPENT GETTING INTO THE MINUTIA OF LANGUAGE TONIGHT.

BUT CERTAINLY THE GENERAL SUPPORT OR, OR DISAGREEMENT WITH THE CONCEPTS PRESENTED IS PROBABLY WHERE YOUR TIME IS MOST VALUABLE TONIGHT.

KEEP IT SIMPLE. YEAH. COMMISSIONER TSAO. I THINK THAT YOU WERE THINKING ABOUT WHEN THEY CAME AND THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE RESTAURANTS AND REVITALIZING ARTESIA WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT REDOING THE PARKING. IS THAT THE CONVERSATION YOU WERE THINKING ABOUT THAT CAME FROM THE CITY COUNCIL AND THEN CAME TO US WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT REDOING IT, ABOUT MAYBE, I THINK ABOUT A YEAR AGO. IS THAT WHAT YOU WERE REFERRING TO, LIKE WHERE IT STARTED? NO, NO, BECAUSE IN THE ADMINISTRATIVE REPORT, IT TALKED ABOUT PLANNING, WORKING WITH CITY COUNCIL TO COME UP WITH THIS AND KICK THIS OVER TO US. WHAT WAS YOUR QUESTION PRIOR TO THAT? YOU WERE SAYING, LIKE, WHERE DID IT ORIGINATE? WHERE DID IT ORIGINATE? YEAH. OR WAS THAT COMMISSIONER NAFISSI? WHERE DID IT ORIGINATE, LIKE THE CONCEPT? YEAH, I ASKED AND THEY SAID CITY COUNCIL. SOMEONE ON CITY COUNCIL HAD BROUGHT THIS UP.

IT SEEMS REALLY RANDOM. THEY JUST BROUGHT IT UP.

I'M SURE THAT THERE WAS A REQUEST OF SOMEONE, TO BE QUITE FRANK WITH YOU.

DO YOU ALL REMEMBER WHEN THEY WERE TALKING ABOUT THE REVITALIZATION AT THE MEETING? WHEN THEY CAME, WERE TALKING ABOUT THE RESTAURANTS AND THE PARKING? DOES ANYBODY REMEMBER THAT WHEN THEY CAME? NO. OKAY, SO I SEE THE INTENTION RIGHT.

THE INTENTION IS MAYBE TO HAVE NUMBERS THAT MIGHT BE MORE ATTRACTIVE TO DEVELOPERS COMING INTO THE CITY.

RIGHT. IT COULD JUST BE OPTICS. RIGHT. YOU KNOW, LIKE JUST BEING A MORE INVITING CITY TO BRING SOME REVITALIZATION HERE.

HEARING EVERYONE'S CONCERNS, YOU KNOW, ABOUT REDUCING THE MINIMUMS. YOU KNOW, I THINK EVERYONE'S GOT SOME VERY VALID POINTS. BUT IT DOES, CAN WE ALL AGREE THAT MAYBE THERE SHOULD BE SOME FLEXIBILITY BUILT IN TO MAYBE THE EXISTING THE. ABSOLUTELY. THE EXISTING GUIDELINE THAT THEY HAVE.

ABSOLUTELY. RIGHT. I THINK I THINK MAYBE, THAT MIGHT BE THE HAPPY MEDIUM IS RETAINING OUR EXISTING NUMBERS, PUTTING IN, YOU KNOW, BUILDING IN SOME KIND OF FLEXIBILITY THERE AND MAYBE, YOU KNOW, EVEN THE ABILITY TO REVISIT IT IN ANOTHER YEAR OR TWO.

I DON'T KNOW IF THAT'S GOING TO SATISFY, THOUGH, WHAT THE COUNCIL'S GOING AFTER IF THEY JUST, YOU KNOW, WANT OPTICS, YOU KNOW. WELL, I THINK WHAT. THE CITY'S LISTENING AND WE'RE DOING SOMETHING PROACTIVELY TO ENCOURAGE.

BUT I THINK WHAT THE CITY IS TRYING TO REVITALIZE THE ARTESIA CORRIDOR IS, I THINK WHAT THE CITY HAS PROPOSED HERE IS ACTUALLY SOMETHING THAT MIGHT WORK A LITTLE BIT MORE COHESIVELY WITH CONTRACTORS OR DEVELOPERS AND MAKE THIS A MORE OF A PLEASANT WAY OR A LITTLE BIT MORE, YOU KNOW. LESS FRICTION. YEAH, A LITTLE FRIENDLIER FOR, YOU KNOW, THE DEVELOPERS TO COME IN HERE AND ACTUALLY GET A PROJECT IN THAT THEY WANT THAT WILL WORK FOR THEM AS WELL. BECAUSE IF YOU KEEP THE EXISTING MINIMUMS, LET'S SAY THE 14 OR 30FT, AND THERE NEEDS TO BE AN EXCEPTION MADE TO 12FT, FOR EXAMPLE, YOU GUYS ARE SAYING IT'S HARD TO MAKE THAT EXCEPTION.

RIGHT NOW WE CAN'T MAKE THAT EXCEPTION. CAN'T MAKE THAT EXCEPTION. WELL JUST NOT INCLUDED. IT'S NOT THAT IT'S HARD. IT'S JUST THE CASE BY CASE FLEXIBILITY IS NOT INCLUDED, RIGHT? NOT CONCLUSIVELY. OKAY. SO THAT'S CLARIFICATION. YEAH SO IF WE. SO IF YOU INCLUDED THAT.

INCLUDED THE VERBIAGE. RIGHT. CORRECT. HERE WE GO.

SO WHAT YOU'RE SAYING IS RIGHT I'M SAYING. SO SUGGESTING MAKING A MOTION.

OF THE EXISTING MINIMUMS 14FT FOR ONE WAY. 30FT FOR TWO WAY WIDTH ADMINISTRATIVE FLEXIBILITY ON A CASE BY CASE BASIS PER THE CITY ENGINEER BASED ON THE OBJECTIVE FACTORS. SUCH AS WHAT YOU'VE DISPLAYED, PROPOSED NUMBER OF SPACES, SAFETY SITE DISTANCE. INTERFACE WITH PUBLIC ROW.

PROXIMITY TO OTHER USES. VERTICAL HORIZONTAL SLOPES.

PROPOSED LAND USES. CAN WE SEE WHAT THE STAFF RECOMMENDATION IS AGAIN? WE UNDERSTAND WE WANT TO MAKE THIS LIKE DEVELOPER FRIENDLY, RIGHT? ABSOLUTELY. SO IF THE DEVELOPERS SEE THE EXISTING REQUIREMENTS AS IS THEY MAY NOT UNDERSTAND IF WE PUT IN THE VERBIAGE THAT THERE IS STAFF FLEXIBILITY TO BE ABLE TO ACCOMMODATE EXCEPTIONS, ETC., THEY MAY NOT KNOW THAT. WILL THAT DETER THEM IN ANY WAY? WILL THAT BE AN INFLUENCE IN THEIR DECISION MAKING WHEN IT COMES TO THEIR PROJECTS?

[01:00:04]

SO IT'S THIS ONE IS MUCH STAFF AND CITY COUNCIL AND PLANNING COMMISSION DRIVEN TO MAXIMIZE THE PEDESTRIAN ORIENTATION AND REDUCE THE AUTO ORIENTED DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS. SO IT'S AND I THINK THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY THEY LIKE CERTAINTY YOU KNOW SO THEY DEFINITELY WANT TO SEE A REQUIREMENT. AND THEN THEY DO LIKE FLEXIBILITY TOO IF THEY HAVE NEEDS THEY BRING THEY MAKE US WELL AWARE OF THOSE.

AND THEN WE WORK WITH THEM. WE BRING IN THE CITY ENGINEER AND THE PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT TO SEE HOW THAT WOULD THEN BE ACCOMMODATED IF WE COULD.

SO IT'S I DON'T KNOW IF I'M ANSWERING YOUR QUESTION DIRECTLY, BUT IT'S REALLY ABOUT CREATING THE. STREETSCAPE DESIGN. THE STREETSCAPE DESIGN AND TAKING THOSE WIDE DRIVEWAYS OFF OF THE VISUAL AND NARROWING THOSE AND CREATING MORE STOREFRONT, MORE BUSINESS DEVELOPMENT.

AND YOU CAN DO THAT WITH A NARROW, DRIVEWAY. SO WE'RE GOING TO THIS MINIMUM MORE FOR THE LAND USE IMPLICATIONS. AND THEN ALSO BEING SPECIFIC WITH THE DEVELOPMENT COMMUNITY BECAUSE AGAIN, THEY WANT TO KNOW WHAT THOSE REQUIREMENTS ARE. AND IF THEY DON'T WORK, YOU KNOW, THEY'LL SEE THAT CAVEAT.

AND THEY CAN COME IN AND WE CAN START START THAT DIALOG.

COMMISSIONER SIMPSON, DID YOU HAVE A COMMENT? NO, I JUST I THINK THIS IS AN EXCELLENT PROPOSAL.

I THINK WE SHOULD RECOMMEND THAT GO FORWARD AS CITY COUNCIL, AS THEY SUGGEST.

DIDN'T YOU MAKE A MOTION TO THAT EFFECT? I MEAN, IT'S STAGNANT.

I MEAN, WE'VE HAD A LOT OF DISCUSSIONS SINCE THEN.

THERE'S A LOT OF, YOU KNOW. WELL, I'LL SECOND THE MOTION THAT YOU MADE.

WELL, I MEAN, CAN I PULL THE MOTION? I MEAN, I WANT TO YEAH, OF COURSE, IT WAS NEVER SECONDED SO.

AND I WAS GOING TO MAKE A COMMENT TO COMMISSIONER TSAO.

AND SOMETIMES I DO ACTIVE TRANSPORTATION FOR A LIVING.

SO IN SOME OF THESE CASES, WHEN WE HAVE LONG DRIVEWAYS, IT REALLY PRECLUDES OPPORTUNITIES TO DO CERTAIN TYPES OF DEVELOPMENTS.

IN SOME CASES, THEY'VE WANTED TO, FOR EXAMPLE, MOVE BUS STOPS FROM THE NEAR SIDE TO THE FAR SIDE OF AN INTERSECTION, FOR EXAMPLE. WE DON'T HAVE THAT SPACE BECAUSE OF DRIVEWAYS OR CERTAIN ELEMENTS THAT ACTUALLY HELPS CIRCULATION IN THOSE CASES.

AND IT'S LITTLE THINGS LIKE THAT JUST PROVIDES MORE OPPORTUNITY FOR DOING BETTER OPPORTUNITIES, POTENTIALLY FOR A BULB OUT IN SOME OTHER CASE YOU KNOW, YOU COULD PUT IN TWO TREES INSTEAD OF ONE IN SOME CASES OR THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO THERE'S NO UNFORTUNATELY, WE'RE NOT GOING TO A SPECIFIC SITE.

YEAH. SO THERE'S NOT ONE SPACE OR ANYTHING LIKE THAT WE CAN TALK ABOUT.

BUT THOSE ARE KIND OF THE GENERAL ELEMENTS. YOU KNOW, THE PROBLEM WITH THE DRIVEWAY IS YOU HAVE TO KEEP THE WHOLE SPACE CLEAR.

AND SO YOU CAN'T PUT PERFORM ANY STREET ELEMENTS.

AND IN PARTICULAR WHERE THEY'RE TALKING ABOUT ON THESE CORRIDORS, THESE COMMERCIAL CORRIDORS, THAT'S WHERE GOING TO BE SOME OF THE MOST ATTRACTIVE OPPORTUNITIES TO PUT IN BENCHES, TO PUT IN LANDSCAPING, SCENERY, TRANSIT ORIENTED STOPS, THINGS LIKE THAT.

SO I AS SOMEBODY WHO HAS TO DEAL WITH THESE STANDARDS ALL DAY, I'M ALWAYS A FAN OF MORE FLEXIBILITY AS A GENERAL RULE. MAKES SENSE YEAH. YEAH. GREAT COMMENTS.

COMMISSIONER ANDERSON WITH THE FLEXIBILITY WOULD WE GO WITH THE 12 INCH MINIMUM INSTEAD OF A 14.

I'M SORRY, 14, 12 FOOT MINIMUM INSTEAD OF A 14 FOOT MINIMUM.

YEAH. I MEAN, AND THEN ON THE MAX, JUST HAVE IT A LITTLE MORE FLEXIBLE WITH THE CITY AS FAR AS WHAT THEY WOULD APPROVE OR NOT.

YEAH, I WOULD SAY THE BEST OPPORTUNITY IS TO GIVE THEM THE BIG, THE BIGGEST BERTH TO A CERTAIN DEGREE TO THE CREDIT OF THE STAFF.

THEY'RE TRYING TO SAY WE'RE WITHIN THE STANDARDS OF THE OTHER CITIES TOO, RIGHT? WE'RE NOT REWRITING ANYTHING ELSE. WE'RE NOT. SO I THINK THAT THERE SHOULD BE SOME COMFORT IN THE FACT THAT THEY'RE NOT TRYING TO MAKE IT EXTRA CHALLENGING FOR LARGE TRUCKS IS WOULD IF THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE ALREADY DOING IN THE CITY OF

[01:05:10]

I THINK THAT IT'S JUST A GOOD IDEA TO ALLOW OR TO PROVIDE THE RECOMMENDATIONS FOR THE STAFF TO, WHEN THEY LOOK AT THESE SITUATIONS TO SAY, HEY, LOOK, WE CAN DO THIS.

THE 30 MINIMUM ON THE TWO WAY IS KIND OF SHOCKING, BECAUSE I CAN SEE HOW THAT CAN BE REALLY RESTRICTIVE IN A LOT OF CASES.

SO SO WITH THAT, I WOULD RECOMMEND TO TAKE THE LANGUAGE THAT THEY CURRENTLY HAVE, BECAUSE I THINK IT PROVIDES THEM A LOT MORE FLEXIBILITY.

AND MAYBE THERE'S A PATH DOWN THE FUTURE WHERE WE REALLY SIT THERE AND WE TALK ABOUT IT, BECAUSE I DO REALLY BELIEVE IN COMMISSIONER NAFISSI'S COMMENTS ABOUT WHAT IS AN EXCEPTION.

HOW DOES THAT REALLY DEFINE ITSELF? BECAUSE THAT IS IMPORTANT.

WHAT ARE TORRANCE'S MINIMUMS? YEAH. IT'S NOT STATED HERE BECAUSE WE'RE COMPARING.

I MEAN, IT'S GOOD TO BENCHMARK CITIES. YES. BUT WE'RE BENCHMARKING TWO REALLY DENSE LA CITIES.

YES, YES. SANTA MONICA OVER CITY. WE DO NOT WANT REDONDO BEACH. MAYBE HERMOSA, OR MANHATTAN. TO BE LIKE THAT. ANYTHING MORE SIMILAR TO US? YEAH. I THINK THAT'S A FAIR.

THAT'S A FAIR POINT. IN THE MIDDLE OF THE SCREEN IT SAYS 30.

AND WE DON'T WANT REDONDO BEACH LIKE THAT. IT'S 30. YEAH, THEY'VE GOT 30 IS THE MAX. THEY DON'T HAVE A MINIMUM RIGHT. HAVE A MINIMUM. WE DID NOT FIND A MINIMUM. YEAH. SO THEY HAVE A MAX OF 30.

NO MINIMUM. SO IF I UNDERSTOOD YOUR COMMENTS CORRECTLY COMMISSIONER ANDERSON YOU WOULD SUGGEST GOING WITH THE PROPOSED VALUES TO ALLOW MAXIMUM FLEXIBILITY FROM THE DEVELOPER SIDE AND HAVE MOST OPTIONS FOR OTHER TANGENTIAL IMPROVEMENTS.

CORRECT. YEAH. OKAY. AND WHEN I SAY ALSO TOO FOR THE REVIEW STAFF IN TERMS OF HOW THEY COULD ADMINISTER THOSE DRIVEWAYS AS WELL.

OKAY. BECAUSE OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION TO THE COMMENT YOU MADE TOO, IT'S AS IMPORTANT ON THE PRIVATE SIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY AS IT IS TO THE PUBLIC SIDE OF THE RIGHT OF WAY WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO TAKE CARE OF HERE. CORRECT.

WAS THAT JUST A COMMENT OR WAS THAT A MOTION? THIS IS NOT A MOTION. OKAY.

IS IT? I MEAN, YOU KNOW, WE'VE HAD TWO COMMISSIONERS SEEKING, YOU KNOW, INQUIRING WHAT OUR NEIGHBORING BEACH CITIES HAVE.

IS IT POSSIBLE TO CONTINUE THIS TO YOU KNOW, NEXT MONTH WITH THAT INFORMATION? YEAH, WE COULD DO THAT. BUT WAS IT SUPPOSED TO COME BACK TO COUNCIL? DEFINITELY. I WOULDN'T BENCHMARK HERMOSA. MOSTLY BECAUSE EVERYTHING'S IN HERMOSA.

OKAY. BUT I DON'T SEE A REASON WHY WE SHOULD REALLY HOLD THIS UP.

BUT IF ALL THEY NEED TO DO IS JUST CHANGE THE VERBIAGE A LITTLE BIT, I WOULD, I THINK, BE MORE THAN HAPPY TO PUT A MOTION FORWARD TO ADOPT THE CITY'S STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS IN ORDER TO CONTINUE WITH THIS, LOOKING INTO WHAT WOULD BE VIABLE FOR THE ARTESIA CORRIDOR.

SO WE ACTUALLY WE HAVE THE MANHATTAN BEACH ONE PULLED UP RIGHT NOW FOR A COMMERCIAL USE.

IF YOU'RE PROPOSING 14 OR FEWER SPACES, IT'S 12FT.

12. AND IT'S I THINK IF IT'S 15 OR MORE SPACES, IT'S 12 FOOT FOR A ONE WAY, 20 FOOT FOR A TWO WAY.

SO THIS IS ACTUALLY PRETTY. 12, 20. SIMILAR TO. IN LINE WITH YOUR RECOMMENDATIONS.

SHOULD WE I MEAN, I WILL GO AHEAD THEN. AND HAPPY TO MAKE ANOTHER TO REVISIT THE MOTION I MADE TO ADVANCE STAFF'S RECOMMENDATIONS. I'LL SECOND THAT. ROLL CALL.

ROLL CALL PLEASE. COMMISSIONER SIMPSON. AYE. COMMISSIONER BAJAJ.

AYE. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. AYE. COMMISSIONER NAFISSI.

NO. COMMISSIONER BEELI. AYE. COMMISSIONER TSAO.

AYE. CHAIR ARRATA. I DON'T KNOW.

YOU CAN ALSO ABSTAIN. WHAT WAS THAT? YOU CAN ABSTAIN IF YOU NEED TO. I'LL ABSTAIN FROM THIS ONE.

MOTION PASSES 5, 1, 1. OKAY. ALL RIGHT. ALL RIGHT.

OKAY, LET'S MOVE ON. WE DIDN'T HAVE ANYTHING.

[K. COMMISSION MEMBER ITEMS AND FUTURE COMMISSION AGENDA TOPICS]

[01:10:02]

COMMISSIONER SIMPSON. NO. COMMISSIONER BAJAJ.

NO. COMMISSIONER ANDERSON. NO. COMMISSIONER NAFISSI.

I HAVE NOTHING, BUT I DO WANT TO THANK CITY STAFF FOR PRESENTING OR SHARING THE SUBCOMMITTEE INFORMATION AS REQUESTED AT THE LAST MEETING.

I DO APPRECIATE THAT. THANK YOU SO MUCH. COMMISSIONER BEELI.

NOT AT THIS TIME, BUT I DO APPRECIATE RYAN'S PRESENTATION.

REALLY NICE WORK. THANK YOU. REALLY NICE WORK.

COMMISSIONER TSAO. NO. NOTHING ON THIS SIDE. ALL RIGHT.

MOVE FOR ADJOURNMENT. AWESOME. WE ARE ADJOURNING TO WHICH DAY? THE NEXT MEETING OF THE REDONDO BEACH PUBLIC WORKS SAFETY AND SUSTAINABILITY COMMISSION WILL BE A REGULAR MEETING TO BE HELD AT 7 P.M.

ON JANUARY 26TH, 2026, IN REDONDO BEACH COUNCIL CHAMBERS 415 DIAMOND STREET, REDONDO BEACH, CALIFORNIA. MOTION TO ADJOURN. SECOND. SECOND.

ALL IN FAVOR? AYE. THANK YOU. ALL RIGHT.

* This transcript was compiled from uncorrected Closed Captioning.