The State of California has told Redondo Beach to plan for 2,491 new housing units by 2029. That number is not optional. It is a legal obligation under state housing law, and after a court ruled that the city's previous plan fell short, Redondo is now under increased state scrutiny to get it right. This article explains what the Housing Element is, why it matters, and what it actually means for your street.
What is a Housing Element?
Every city in California is required to maintain a Housing Element as part of its General Plan — the master document that guides land use, zoning, and development. The Housing Element specifically addresses how the city will accommodate its share of regional housing need over an eight-year cycle.
The current cycle, called the 6th Cycle, runs from 2021 to 2029. The state's Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) assigns each city a number through a process called the Regional Housing Needs Assessment, or RHNA. For Redondo Beach, that number is 2,491 units, distributed across four income levels: very low, low, moderate, and above moderate.
To be clear: the state is not requiring Redondo to build 2,491 homes. It is requiring the city to zone enough land so that 2,491 homes could be built if developers chose to build them. The distinction matters. The city controls zoning, not construction. But the zoning has to be realistic — you cannot zone a parking lot for 500 units if the economics and infrastructure make that impossible.
Why Redondo is in a difficult position
In 2023, a court found that Redondo Beach's adopted Housing Element did not comply with state law. The specifics involved sites the city identified for potential housing that HCD and the court found were not realistic — parcels that were too small, already developed, or unlikely to redevelop within the planning period.
When a city loses Housing Element compliance, it triggers a set of consequences under state law. The most significant is the “builder's remedy” — a provision that allows developers to propose projects that do not conform to local zoning, as long as they include a percentage of affordable units. Several California cities, including Santa Monica and Huntington Beach, have seen builder's remedy applications filed during periods of non-compliance.
Redondo is now working on a revised Housing Element to regain compliance. The revised plan will need to identify sites capable of accommodating the full RHNA allocation at densities of up to 80 dwelling units per acre for lower-income housing sites — a significant increase from what most Redondo Beach neighborhoods currently allow.
Where the density would go
The 80 units-per-acre requirement applies specifically to sites identified for lower-income housing. To put that in perspective, a typical Redondo Beach residential block has single-family homes on lots of roughly 5,000 to 7,500 square feet, yielding maybe 6 to 8 units per acre. Eighty units per acre looks like a five- to six-story apartment building with minimal setbacks.
The city is focusing its site inventory on corridors and commercial areas rather than established single-family neighborhoods. The primary candidate areas include Pacific Coast Highway, Artesia Boulevard, parts of Aviation Boulevard, and the Galleria/Kmart site on Hawthorne Boulevard. These are areas where higher density is more feasible and where existing zoning already allows mixed-use or commercial development.
This does not mean those areas will see construction overnight. It means the zoning on those parcels would change to allow residential development at the densities the state requires. Whether developers actually build depends on market conditions, construction costs, and financing.
What residents are worried about
The concerns are predictable and, in many cases, legitimate. Parking is at the top of the list — Redondo's residential streets are already crowded, and adding thousands of potential units raises real questions about where people will park. Traffic follows closely behind, particularly on PCH and Artesia, which are already congested during commute hours.
Infrastructure capacity is another genuine concern. Water, sewer, and electrical systems were designed for the city's current density. The city's own studies have acknowledged that some infrastructure upgrades would be necessary if significant new construction occurs. Who pays for those upgrades — developers, existing residents, or some combination — is an open question.
Then there is the character question. Redondo Beach is largely a low-rise city. Many residents moved here specifically because it is not Santa Monica or Hollywood. The prospect of five- and six-story buildings on commercial corridors changes the visual and experiential character of the city, even if the single-family neighborhoods themselves are not directly rezoned.
What the city can and cannot control
The city cannot refuse to plan for the 2,491 units — state law is clear on that point, and the court ruling reinforced it. What the city can control is where the density goes and what design standards apply. It can require setbacks, height transitions near single-family zones, parking minimums above state requirements (in some cases), and architectural standards.
The city can also influence the type of housing. Mixed-use projects with ground-floor retail. Workforce housing aimed at teachers, firefighters, and nurses. Senior housing near transit. These policy choices shape what gets built even within the density constraints the state mandates.
The revised Housing Element will go through a public comment process before adoption. Residents who want to influence where density is concentrated and what standards apply should participate in that process — attending planning commission meetings, submitting written comments during review periods, and staying engaged with council as the plan moves toward adoption.
The bottom line
Redondo Beach is going to get denser. That is not a political opinion — it is a legal reality imposed by the state. The question is not whether it happens but how thoughtfully it is managed. A well-designed Housing Element can direct growth to the right places, protect the neighborhoods residents care about, and create housing opportunities that the region desperately needs.
A poorly designed one — or worse, continued non-compliance that invites builder's remedy projects — means less local control, not more. The paradox of fighting the Housing Element too hard is that it can produce exactly the outcome opponents fear: uncontrolled development with minimal city input on design, location, or scale.
We will continue covering the Housing Element process as it moves forward. If you want to stay informed, subscribe to Better Redondo — we translate what happens at City Hall into language that does not require a planning degree to understand.