by Mark McDermott
The Manhattan Beach City Council last April authorized purchase of the former U.S. Bank site in the heart of downtown, in part to stave off dense residential development that state laws would have encouraged for the 16,570 square feet, three-parcel tract.
In buying the property, for $13 million, the City of Manhattan Beach acquired a piece of a larger puzzle that also includes, one block away, its Lot 3 parking lot. The Lot 3 structure had to be demolished last August due to structural deterioration. It was replaced with a temporary lot while the city determined a way forward.
On Tuesday night, the Council considered ways the two big puzzle pieces might fit together in what could be a significant revision of downtown Manhattan Beach. City staff have dubbed the undertaking “Project Pulse,” but just what that project might be has remained uncertain. Ideas from community input have ranged from open space to art center to parking lots and a hotel.
City Manager Talyn Mirzakhanian told the council that staff needed the council’s direction on uses to explore for the two sites.
“The more direct the council can be about what you are interested in seeing on each site, the further along we can take this process,” Mirzakhanian said.
The urgency stems from the financing structure the city chose for the bank site, at 400 Manhattan Beach Boulevard. The city transferred $13.2 million from its General Fund to complete the April acquisition, then issued tax-exempt Certificates of Participation to reimburse that fund. That financing vehicle creates pressure to move forward with development plans on an aggressive timeline. A preliminary design package is scheduled for council approval by August.
“One of the reasons we have such an aggressive timeline is for the 400 MBB and the financing option that we chose,” Mirzakhanian said. “We have an out per se from the aggressive timeline that we developed. But there are repercussions to that.”
Associate Planner Tari Kuvhenguhwa presented results from an extensive outreach campaign that included a phone survey of 588 residents, booths at the Hometown Fair and multiple farmers markets, focus groups with residents and downtown business owners, and meetings with business organizations.
The community opinion survey, conducted by True North Research with a 4% margin of error, showed parking structures as the top priority, with 64.8% of residents ranking it high or medium priority. Open space/park came second at 60%, followed by commercial development at 57.3%. Hotels ranked near the bottom at just 19.3% support, with social clubs (13.1%) and visitor centers (12.3%) even less popular.
When participants could vote for specific uses at specific sites across all the outreach activities, patterns emerged. For Lot 3, the parking structure received 160 votes, open space/park got 131 votes, and mixed-use development received 104 votes. For the 400 MBB site, open space/park led with 172 votes, mixed-use development had 140 votes, and cultural arts/community space received 76 votes.
“For both properties, hotel, social club and visitor center were the least popular options,” Kuvhenguhwa said.
Mike Zislis, owner of the Shade Hotel directly across from Lot 3, made a pitch that ran counter to the survey results. His hotel has operated at 96% occupancy since opening and has generated more than $10 million in transient occupancy tax revenue for the city.
“I proposed a Shade Hotel expansion on that parking lot,” Zislis said, with subterranean parking connecting to the nearby Metlox garage with hotel rooms above. “If you said you want a utopian unicorn farm, they’re going to pick that over something else. But I think my concept’s the only thing that pays the bills for the city.”
Zislis also requested the council separate discussion of the two sites rather than treating them as a unified project, noting confusion among residents about which property was being discussed for various uses.
Residents who live near the 400 MBB site urged the council to develop that location as lightly as possible, emphasizing traffic and safety concerns.
“Whatever you decide to do, you are going to change the lives of people right there,” said Jim Burton, a longtime resident who lives adjacent to the site.
His neighbor Johanna emphasized safety concerns, particularly in summer when traffic is heaviest. “I can’t even imagine a parking lot, or anything other than just a pedestrian area, an open space area for the community. Because everything else, to me, is just a danger zone.”
Another neighbor, Ralph, suggested the city explore working with Vons on the large unused space behind the grocery store, which sits between the two Project Pulse sites. “There’s a large empty space behind Vons, where my wife and I walk with our dog every morning, and no one is using that space,” Ralph said. “I think if you had parking there and adjacent to Vons, so [there] is an entrance into Vons…that’s a plus for them.”
The city has been in ongoing discussions with representatives of the Von’s property about collaboration on the Project Pulse development. The grocery store is adjacent to 400 MBB. It could offer opportunities for coordinated planning. Discussion with the store also occurred two decades ago, at the time of the Metlox development, but did not bear fruit.
Mirzakhanian said city staff are in discussions with Von’s.
“We have continuously been meeting with the representative of the Von’s property to gauge their interest in redeveloping that site in conjunction with whatever project we take on at 400 MBB,” Mirzakhanian said. “We have had at a minimum of four meetings with them at this point, and we are continuing to engage with them..”
Much of the council’s discussion centered on parking numbers and configurations. City Traffic Engineer Erik Zandvliet provided detailed capacity estimates for various scenarios.
For Lot 3, a two-level above-ground structure would provide about 115 spaces, he said. Going underground changes the math significantly: two levels below ground could accommodate 133 spaces, but only if the structure extends under Morningside Drive to connect with Metlox. At three levels total (two underground, one above), capacity could reach 184 spaces. A four-level structure could provide up to 307 spaces.
The former Lot 3 structure had 145 spaces before demolition. The city currently has 69 spaces in the temporary surface lot at Lot 3, plus 26 spaces at the 400 MBB site (created after the bank closed). Zandvliet noted the city now has more total downtown parking than before Lot 3’s demolition, when spaces were added throughout downtown. The Metlox garage provides an additional 100 public spaces available after 5 p.m. and on weekends.
For the 400 MBB site, a surface lot would provide 41 spaces. A two-level structure, despite the site’s narrow configuration, could yield about 85 spaces.
Mayor Pro Tem Joe Franklin proposed an unconventional solution for 400 MBB: maximize the 41-space surface lot, then build a rooftop park above it.
“You can get stairs up there. You can get an elevator up there. You can get people up there with strollers, with kids. People can get up there with wheelchairs, and enjoy probably a really nice view, because you’re going to be looking out over Manhattan Beach Boulevard and down to the ocean,” Franklin said. “If you’re going to get a sandwich from Health Nut or a to-go order from somebody, you can go over there and you can eat it. You’re going to be away from the hubbub.”
Franklin also proposed a broader vision for how the two parking sites could function as a gateway to downtown. With Morningside Drive as the first street west of Valley, visitors entering downtown via Manhattan Beach Boulevard would encounter parking options immediately.
“The first street west of Valley/Ardmore is Morningside. So we’re going to give you an option of 711 spaces to park by either going right on Morningside or going left,” Franklin said, combining capacities from Lot 3, 400 MBB, and the Metlox garage.
He suggested sophisticated parking space counters, similar to those at Manhattan Beach Village, could direct drivers to available spaces and reduce the congestion of cars circling downtown streets hoping for a spot. His vision would split traffic at the entrance to downtown, reducing the number of cars proceeding west on Manhattan Beach Boulevard searching for elusive street spaces.
But his colleagues expressed concerns about both the rooftop park concept and Franklin’s emphasis on maximizing parking capacity.
“That kind of thing could be an attractive nuisance for the residents who live there,” Council Member Amy Howorth said of the rooftop park. “It’s not at street level, so it might be harder for us to keep the public safe.”
Councilmember Steve Charelian initiated the motion that ultimately passed, directing staff to pursue two primary options: parking and a combination of mixed-use/retail/open space.
“The surveys, to me, speak very loud,” Charelian said. He proposed exploring two levels of underground parking at Lot 3 with mixed-use development facing Morningside Drive and potentially open space behind it. For 400 MBB, he suggested mixed-use development that takes “into consideration what the residents and the neighbors in that area are saying.”
“It won’t be a dormant location, but we can look at open spaces,” Charelian said, emphasizing the need to minimize impact on the residential neighborhood. “Although it’s zoned commercial, that lot has stayed dormant.”
Charelian also referenced the study commissioned by the City a year and a half earlier that examined peak parking demand patterns. He noted that while June through August show high parking occupancy, demand normalizes over the rest of the year, suggesting the city shouldn’t build for peak summer capacity alone.
Council Member Nina Tarnay supported narrowing the options to align with community input.
“I think we have enough information to at least whittle it down to maybe the top three items,” she said. “I want us to be more visionary in looking at the spaces and being able to incorporate what we need, and then also planning for the future. Hopefully, we won’t all be using cars as much, so maybe not such a huge emphasis on parking everywhere.”
Howorth emphasized the value of the city’s extensive outreach efforts.
“Our city’s turned a corner in the last year or two in how much outreach we do,” she said. “You can never do enough.”
Howorth supported the concept of underground parking at Lot 3 with mixed-use development above.
“Yes, building underground spaces are usually three times the cost, but guess what? They’re also revenue generating,” she said.
For the 400 MBB site, Howorth said she was open to combinations of mixed-use development, cultural arts space, and contained open space, while eliminating social club, visitor center, multi-family residential, and hotel options from consideration.
Mayor David Lesser sought to clarify the engineering timeline, concerned that detailed parking studies could derail the project schedule. Traffic Engineer Zandvliet said engineering studies would take “probably six months,” plus contract execution time.
Lesser emphasized the importance of staying on schedule while getting better information.
“We need to give direction to get an engineer on board to better understand how we can utilize these two properties for parking with different scenarios that incorporate perhaps mixed-use, an open space, and then also some rough order of magnitude of cost,” he said.
Lesser also recalled why the city acquired 400 MBB in the first place.
“We as a community would not have the choice over what goes in this location if it had not been acquired,” he said. “I was originally opposed to acquiring it, but it was that argument that was important to me to persuade me to proceed purchasing this lot so we could control its destiny and try and live up to what all of us talk about as council members and as candidates — to retain our small town feel for our downtown.”
Mirzakhanian cautioned that extensive engineering work comes at significant cost.
“An engineer preparing engineering drawings and costing for various projects or proposals is very expensive,” she said. “The more we can narrow down the concepts and then go after the more in-depth cost proposals, the more we’re going to save money at the end of the day.”
The council ultimately directed staff to proceed with preliminary engagement with parking engineering consultants while simultaneously moving forward with the next phase of community design charrettes, focused on the narrowed options of parking and mixed-use/retail/open space combinations. Staff will have flexibility to explore both underground and above-ground parking to meet the parking requirements for whatever development is ultimately proposed.
Charelian’s motion, seconded by Lesser, passed unanimously.
The timeline calls for design workshops in spring, with conceptual designs and cost estimates returning to council later this year before the August deadline for a preliminary design package. ER
