by Mark McDermott
The City Council on Tuesday night took two actions that were ostensibly about parking permits and notifying residents of construction projects. But more fundamentally they were about the city bracing itself for an upcoming wave of residential development prompted by the state-imposed Residential Overlay District.
In unanimous votes, the council approved a residential permit parking program for Tree Section neighborhoods west of Sepulveda Boulevard and overhauled its public notification system for ROD projects — expanding the notification radius, simplifying language, and adding developer contact information to notices sent to residents.
The backdrop for both issues is Manhattan Beach’s Residential Overlay District, established in March 2023 to comply with state housing mandates. The ROD encompasses 34 sites totaling 43 acres along Sepulveda and Rosecrans. At minimum densities, the ROD could result in roughly 850 new residential units. At maximum allowable densities under state density bonus law — which the city has almost no power to deny — the theoretical maximum approaches 5,100 units, though city officials consider full buildout extremely unlikely.
Still, preliminary proposals submitted over the past year total more than 1,000 units across just five projects, including a 273-unit development at the former Fry’s Electronics site and the 40-unit project at 2301 N. Sepulveda that directly prompted the Oak Avenue parking petition.
Resident Steve Alexander, one of the Oak Street residents advocating for the permit program, noted that 250 angry residents attended a city forum earlier in the year regarding the impending ROD developments.
“This is the biggest thing,” Alexander said. “This is going to permanently change the character of Manhattan Beach.”
The “Tree Section Residential Permit Parking Program” covers the neighborhood bounded by Sepulveda Boulevard, Manhattan Beach Boulevard, Pine Avenue, and 33rd Street. The decision came after months of advocacy by Oak Avenue residents who organized a petition campaign that garnered support from 30 of 33 households on their block, a 93% approval rate.
State law severely constrains what Manhattan Beach can do about ROD projects. All must be approved ministerially — without public hearings or environmental review in most cases — as long as they meet objective development standards and include at least 20% affordable housing units.
The city can only require project modifications when staff can demonstrate a “specific, adverse impact” on public health or safety based on existing objective standards. What does not qualify are most of what residents are concerned about, including maintaining neighborhood character, aesthetics, design preferences, General Plan policies, or even traffic congestion.
“The challenge is separating what we would like the law to be from what it is in fact,” Lesser said in 2023 when the city faced state threats over initially rejecting a different density bonus project. “The state has dislodged local jurisdictions like ours from the ability to entitle projects just like this. You’ve heard we do not have discretion on this project…They have weaponized the state law such that there is huge liability.”
Within those narrow confines, the city has tried to mitigate impacts where it can. In September, the council adopted an ordinance requiring large ROD projects to provide environmental site assessments, construct 12-foot sound barriers along residential property lines, and submit construction management and parking plans.
The parking program and enhanced notifications represent similar attempts to manage the ripple effects of development the city cannot stop.
Residents said that parking is already a problem in Tree Section neighborhoods.
“If you come by our area on a Monday around 30th and Oak, you will find that the trash trucks can’t get down the street,” said Ed Duffy, who has lived at 3001 Oak Avenue since 1994. “A fire engine could never get down the street. Most of the time a car can’t get down the street.”
The current culprits, according to multiple residents, are employees from medical offices and businesses along Sepulveda Boulevard who park all day on residential streets. “They all have their smocks on, so I know where they’re coming from,” Duffy said. “They’re there 24/7, from nine in the morning to six at night, five days a week.”
Marilyn Holcomb, whose home sits at the first property west of Sepulveda on 33rd Street, echoed these concerns. Her street has only five parking spots on one side, with the other side entirely red-curbed. “From 7:30 to 9 each morning, there is no parking,” she said. “These people who work at Sepulveda wait till nine o’clock to go and park there. We cannot park across the street from our own home.”
The approved program represents Manhattan Beach’s third residential permit parking initiative, following successful programs established near Mira Costa High School in 2005 and in the downtown area in 2008. City Traffic Engineer Erik Zandvliet emphasized that this new program would mirror those proven models.
The program operates on a two-step, opt-in basis. The council’s vote established the eligible zone, but individual street segments within that zone must still petition separately with a 67% majority to implement actual parking restrictions. This ensures that burdensome permit requirements only apply where genuinely needed.
“We’re not going to overly restrict the parking up front if there’s still available parking for all the residents,” Zandvliet explained. “We don’t want to push parking demand to another street unnecessarily.”
When restrictions are implemented, they will limit parking to two hours except for vehicles with resident permits. Households can obtain up to three permits for $15 for the first permit and $5 for each additional one — fees that cover a two-year period. The permits would be valid during business hours, with overnight parking remaining unrestricted.
While daily commercial parking overflow has been the persistent irritant, the immediate catalyst for action was a looming seven-story, 40-unit residential overlay district (ROD) project at 2301 Sepulveda Boulevard.
Todd Cogan, who lives at 2301 Oak Avenue directly adjacent to the proposed development, said the development would wipe out parking in the neighborhood. The project only includes 47 parking spaces.
“It is poor planning,” Cogan said. “The city is going to feel the impact.”
The ROD zoning allows multi-family housing along Sepulveda with reduced parking requirements. While the policy aims to increase housing density near commercial corridors, residents fear it will simply transfer parking problems onto their streets.
Alexander, who helped initiate the petition drive, emphasized the proactive nature of their request. “We’re not asking for it now, but we’d like to pull the trigger as soon as they start,” he said of the Sepulveda construction project. “We wanted to be proactive, have this in place so it could be implemented as soon as they mobilize.”
City staff initially recommended deferring actual parking restrictions on Oak Avenue between 19th Street and Marine Avenue. Traffic studies conducted in July found parking occupancy never exceeded 50%, failing to meet the threshold for “recurrent and heavy non-resident parking demand.”
This technical finding created tension between the data-driven approach of traffic engineers and the lived experience of residents. Steve Packwood, another Oak Avenue resident, expressed skepticism about the city’s surveys, noting he had brought this issue to “different city councils” over the years.
Mayor David Lesser sought to bridge this gap by exploring whether the council could direct immediate implementation given the petition’s strong support. However, Zandvliet clarified that the approved program guidelines already give him administrative authority to post restrictions once he verifies sustained parking problems. No additional council approval will be needed.
“We’re ready to pull the trigger when that construction starts,” Zandvliet assured residents, promising to conduct additional parking surveys if residents identify specific problematic times.
The council’s unanimous support reflected recognition that this represents more than just a parking issue — it’s about protecting residential neighborhoods, as best as the city is able, from the impact of development policies they cannot control.
“We have a duty to be proactive,” Lesser said, “very much in favor of adopting the restrictions in advance of construction to protect their lives and their access to their homes.”
Councilmember Amy Howorth praised the Oak Avenue residents’ organizing efforts, calling it “small town Manhattan Beach at its best.”
Public notice overhaul
Later in Tuesday’s meeting, the City Council tackled another dimension of the same challenge: how to inform residents about development projects the city cannot stop.
The discussion centered on “courtesy notices” — although the council later removed the word courtesy, since little about the impending developments has felt courteous to residents. These are the informational mailings the city voluntarily sends about Residential Overlay District (ROD) projects, even though state law doesn’t require any public notification for these ministerial developments. Unlike traditional public hearing notices that invite input before decisions are made, these courtesy notices essentially tell residents: this is happening, and there’s nothing the city can do about it.
The irony wasn’t lost on anyone. The city sends notices to be transparent, but the notices themselves can’t offer residents any real influence over projects that must be approved “by right” under state density bonus law.
“We send out notices and tell someone, ‘Hey, sorry,” said Planning Manager Adam Finestone, noting the communication challenge. “It’s not communicated in necessarily the best way.”
Councilperson Amy Howorth said the new notification system should find a way to inform residents that there is virtually nothing that they can do under state law to prevent the developments.
“I do hope that we are clear in our language, so that people don’t get the false expectation that we can do something,” she said.
The existing notices had gone to property owners and residents within 500 feet of project sites at the time building plans were submitted. Two such notices had been sent: one for the 40-unit project at 2301 N. Sepulveda Boulevard (the same project driving the parking petition), and another for a massive 273-unit development at the former Fry’s Electronics site on Sepulveda.
But residents wanted more — more notice, sent earlier, to more people, in plainer language.
Council members unanimously agreed the technical language needed simplification. The existing notices referenced “residential overlay districts” and “objective development standards” without explaining what those terms meant or why they mattered.
“I don’t know if everybody knows what that is or why that’s important,” said Howorth. She suggested explaining up front that ROD projects are “allowable” or “by right” because of state mandates, rather than burying that information in bureaucratic language.
The more contentious question involved whether the city should expand the 500-foot notification radius.
Using the 2301 Sepulveda project as an example, Finestone said that 500 feet captured 119 properties. Doubling the radius to 1,000 feet would quadruple the number of properties to 472.
The cost implications were not prohibitive. Staff estimated roughly $1,000 per mailing in postage and labor for the 500-foot radius. Doubling the radius would significantly increase costs, and the city couldn’t charge developers for the notices since they’re not legally required.
But council members weren’t concerned about the expense. “This is not really a time to pinch pennies,” said Councilmember Steve Charelian.
Council Member Nina Tarnay suggested an even more tailored approach: “If it’s a larger project, larger footprint, more radius.” She floated 1,000 feet as a “bare bones” minimum but suggested scaling up for bigger developments.
The council also directed staff to enhance the information provided to include contacts for the developers and for state lawmakers. Franklin noted that in Hermosa Beach, community pressure had led developers to modify plans.
“They’re not your friend,” he said bluntly, “but you can talk to that developer.”
Perhaps the most pointed addition was listing the Assembly member and State Senator’s contact information on each notice.
“The state is where these laws are made, and the state is where these laws can be affected,” Finestone said.
City Attorney Quinn Barrow cautioned about potential legal issues with what could be perceived as political activity. Council members weighed the concern but ultimately felt it appropriate to direct frustrated residents toward the actual decision-makers.
“If they’re not listening to you, vote, vote, vote,” Franklin urged from the dais. “Ask the candidates. Vote for the ones that are going to help you.”
The council also directed earlier notification. Currently, courtesy notices go out when building plans are submitted — chosen because it indicates serious developer commitment (plans can cost six or seven figures to prepare) and reduces the chance of notifying people about projects that never materialize.
But council members wanted residents informed during the preliminary planning review phase, even though projects might still fall through at such early stages. The idea was that it would be better to sometimes notify about a project that doesn’t end up proceeding than to provide notice too late for any meaningful response.
“Let them know that you’re there, you’re vocal, you’re strong,” Franklin said.
Throughout the discussion, speakers kept returning to the larger concern of what all the upcoming development means for the small town feel of Manhattan Beach.
“What’s it going to be like in three or four years?” asked resident Steve Packwood. “What’s our strategy? What is behind this? We think about the traffic, the impact on our schools…There’s many different factors.”
“The small town atmosphere,” Alexander said, “is about to change.” ER
Good article Mark. Thanks for keeping everyone informed