BLUE FOLDER ITEM
Blue folder items are additional back up material to administrative reports and/or public comments received after the printing and distribution of the agenda packet for receive and file.
CITY COUNCIL MEETING
AUGUST 1, 2023
J.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS
From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; Nils Nehrenheim; Todd Loewenstein; Zein Obagi; [email protected] Subject: Fwd: OPPOSE: Proposed Revision of RB Residential Design Guidelines Date: Thursday, July 27, 2023 4:20:39 PM
Attachments: image.png
image.png
RB Council Comments on RDGs - Google Forms.pdf
Final City Signers.docx
Some people who received this message don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
PUBLIC COMMENT - Council, Planning Commission
We continue to object to the City Council's view that existing property owners should have their rights from the current RDGs taken away and given to developers. The protections below that the Council is removing MUST BE CONTINUED IN THE REVISED RDGs.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Stop BCHD <[email protected]>
Date: Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 10:37 AM
Subject: Fwd: OPPOSE: Proposed Revision of RB Residential Design Guidelines To: <[email protected]>
Please provide the status of the City of Redondo Beach's proposed cancellation of these important residential property owner protections.
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Stop BCHD <[email protected]>
Date: Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 7:58 PM
Subject: Re: OPPOSE: Proposed Revision of RB Residential Design Guidelines To: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Nils Nehrenheim <[email protected]>, Zein Obagi <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, <[email protected]> Cc: Kevin Cody <[email protected]>, Lisa Jacobs <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>, Garth Meyer <[email protected]> Final submittal lists as of 7-17-23 - updated from original email.
The over 50 local residents below oppose adoption of the revised RDGs that surrender more power to developers and strip strong protections from residential owners.
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 11:05 AM Stop BCHD <[email protected]> wrote:
We continue to receive more signatories to the letter opposing the Redondo Beach RDG update that is proposed. We will provide an update later in the day. This is a clear sign that many local residents were unaware of this revision activity. At times, the revision process was by invitation only to developers and others that profit from the development of real estate. Sadly, few people follow the planning commission agenda to gain awareness of this issue.
On Mon, Jul 17, 2023 at 10:32 AM Stop BCHD <[email protected]> wrote:
Redondo Beach and Torrance Mayors, Councils, City Attorneys, Planning Commissioners:
The following letter from 50 local residents demonstrates the lack of resident consent achieved on the Redondo Beach "objective" residential design standards. The RDGs govern the strong protections of residential character and ultimately property value. The Planning Department proposes to discard those 20-year old successful RDGs merely because they have been unable to turn all of them into numbers.
There is no reason to forsake strong protections. They can be included in the revision in their CURRENT form.
Please reject the proposed RDG changes and return this issue to the Planning Commission with direction to reinsert the discarded strong residential property owner protections. Thank you.
The local resident letter:
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
The revised Residential Design Guidelines remove many strong protections that existing property owners deserve.
Single family and other existing residential is now at risk from excessive multifamily that will not be required to be compatible with the existing neighborhood, its character, or visual style. Please reject the May 2023 revision and direct the Planning Commission to return the following strong protections to any revision:
Thank you for your consideration. The residents and residential property owners of Redondo Beach deserve better than uncontrolled development caused by removing successful, 20 year old development rules.
Signed by the attached list of 50 local residents.
--
StopBCHD.com ([email protected]) is a Neighborhood Quality-of-Life Community concerned about the quality-of-life, health, and economic damages that BCHDs 110-foot above the street, 800,000 sqft commercial development will inflict for the next 50-100 years. Our neighborhoods have been burdened since 1960 by the failed South Bay Hospital project and have not received the benefit of the voter-approved acute care public hospital since 1984.Yet we still suffer 100% of the damages and we will suffer 100% of the damages of BCHDs proposal.
Untitled Section
Dear Mayor and Councilmembers:
The revised Residential Design Guidelines remove many strong protections that existing property owners deserve.
Single
family and other existing residential is now at risk from excessive multifamily that will not be required to be compatible with the existing neighborhood, its character, or visual style. Please reject the May 2023 revision and direct the Planning Commission to return the following strong protections to any revision:
Untitled Section
Thank you for your consideration. The residents and residential property owners of Redondo Beach deserve better than uncontrolled development caused by removing successful, 20 year old development rules.
1. 2.
Please sign on to send comments to the Council to
PROTECT RESIDENTIAL PROPERTY
The City of Redondo Beach is revising its Residential Design Guidelines that cover both single and multifamily residential. Unfortunately, the revision throws out MANY of the STRONG PROTECTIONS for existing property owners. The Council vote could be as early as Tuesday, July 18th.
PLEASE CONSIDER SIGNING ONTO THIS LETTER THAT WILL BE DELIVERED TO THE COUNCIL First Name Last Name
Your Email Address
3. Mark only one oval.
YES
NO
This content is neither created nor endorsed by Google.
Please send the Council comments on my behalf
Forms
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Judy Rae
Cc: CityClerk; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Jacki Bacharach; [email protected]
Subject: Letters to the Editor
Date: Sunday, July 30, 2023 12:20:27 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
A few quick corrections on BCHD provided information for the bike lane story. First, the measure function in Google Maps says it's 400-feet, not 450-feet. Second, the majority of the project is on the four lane, paved, median-divided dead end of Diamond Street. Third, BCHD is spending $1M on a contractor and $800,000 on overheads, executives, and consultants.
Eighty percent overheads (soft costs) is outrageous inefficiency from an agency with no expertise in the project. Fourth, the cost-effectiveness economics of the project in the 2011 study showed the cost of this tiny segment at $100,000 after adjustments for 70% cost inflation. BCHD is roughly 18-times more costly that the expert cost estimates. Last, BCHD had no authority to seek the $1.8M Measure M grant for the total project. Yet somehow, BCHD managed to spend the entire $1.8M on a tiny, 400-foot segment, leaving the other 800- feet in Torrance unfunded. The public sector needs to become better stewards of tax funding. $1.8M for one-block past 6 houses is simply outrageous mismanagement when there is a benchmark study by known experts with a $100,000 cost estimate.
Mark Nelson
Redondo
Public Comment to all agencies listed in the email
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: [email protected]; Jacki Bacharach; [email protected] Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Kevin Cody; Lisa Jacobs; Letters; [email protected]; Judy Rae; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk; Martha Koo; Jane Diehl; Noel Chun; Michelle Bholat; Holly J. Mitchell; Vanessa I. Poster Subject: Metro and SBCCOG Have Failed to Allocate, Administer and Oversee Measure M Funding in the Required Prudent Manner Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 5:44:01 PM
Attachments: image.png
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
FORMAL REQUEST FOR INVESTIGATION
Metro IG Office
LA County Attorney
Public Comment to Torrance, Redondo, Hermosa, and Manhattan Beach Mayors, Councils, and City Attorneys SUBJECT: Metro and SBCCOG Have Failed to Allocate, Administer and Oversee Measure M Funding Beach Cities Health District CEO Bakaly published the BCHD July Board report with forms demonstrating that BCHD will spend 100% of the $1 8M Measure M funding for Torrance and Redondo Beach bike paths on a mere 400-feet in Redondo Beach One, SBCCOG failed to conduct due diligence when it recommended that BCHD, an agency with no road construction experience, bet he vendor for Torrance and Redondo Beach bike path in the Master Plan Two, SBCCOG failed to vet BCHD's $1 8M proposal for the 1200-feet of bike path from Prospect Ave to Beryl Ave Had SBCCOG conducted its required diligence, it would have clearly seen that BCHD's proposal $1500 per foot was 6-fold larger than the value in the 2011 Master Plan after adjustment for inflation
Three, SBCCOG failed to withdraw its support from BCHD based on the egregious estimated cost because SBCCOG failed to do its required diligence Four, Metro abdicated any cost-effectiveness and cost diligence based on its claim that SBCCOG failed to ask Metro to do such work Five, Metro failed to vet the BCHD cost against the South Bay Master Plan to determine that BCHD was 6-fold more expensive than the expert consultants of the plan
Six, after notification, the Metro IG office failed to conduct analysis and instead allowed the project to continue Seven, after notification, Metro failed to conduct diligence on BCHD's plan to spend 100% of the $1 8M in funding on 400-feet of bike path Eight, after notification, Metro failed to conduct diligence when it was demonstrated that BCHD did not secure any approvals from Torrance for the grant request
Nine, after notification, Metro failed to conduct diligence when Torrance announced it would not proceed with any of the Metro $1 8M grant project Ten, SBCCOG failed to conduct cost diligence on BCHD's final estimated cost of $4,583 per foot of bike lane Note: each INCH of BCHD bike path is enough to fund the salary of a public school teacher for one day Eleven, Metro failed to conduct cost diligence on BCHD's final estimated cost of $4,583 per foot of bike lane Note: each INCH of BCHD bike path is enough to fund the salary of a public school teacher for one day In conclusion, in the face of Metro's mismanagement of Measure M funding, the Metro IG office's failure to conduct analysis, Metro's failure to enforce any reasonable taxpayer cost protections, and SBCCOG's wholesale failure of analysis and monitoring, this project must be terminated and all funds clawed back from BCHD Past Measure M funding needs prompt review and future funding must have at least minimal controls in place, unlike the BCHD funding case
Mark Nelson
Redondo Beach
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Communications; cc: info; [email protected]; [email protected]; Kevin Cody; Lisa Jacobs; Jacki Bacharach; Vanessa I. Poster; Jane Diehl; Noel Chun; Martha Koo; Michelle Bholat; Robert W. Lundy; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk; Michael Webb; [email protected]; Letters; [email protected]; [email protected]; rbpta
Subject: Public Comment - BCHD Confirms Cost of 400-foot RB Bike Path is $1.83M ($4600/foot or $400/inch) Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 11:41:45 AM
Attachments: 8bb9a494-1492-44e1-9bf8-38e3e72a8fec.png
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
In an apparent malfeasance of Measure M funding usage, BCHD has reduced the activity from the Metro Measure M grant from 1200-feet of bike lane to 400-feet while consuming 100% of the funding for the 1200-foot project.
The Metro Board and Inspector General are derelict of duty for allowing this BCHD action and the County Board of Supervisors needs to use its Metro Board power to correct this misuse of funds.
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Communications; cc: info; [email protected]; [email protected]; Kevin Cody; Lisa Jacobs; Jacki Bacharach; Vanessa I. Poster; Jane Diehl; Noel Chun; Martha Koo; Michelle Bholat; Robert W. Lundy; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk; Michael Webb Subject: Public Comment - BCHD"s Due Diligence Lease Period has Expired therefore TERMINATING the BCHD Design Build authority Date: Saturday, July 22, 2023 11:32:50 AM
Attachments: image.png
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
BCHD states that it has a 120-day lease due diligence period with PMB LLC. That was required to be executed prior to 12/31/22. That period is now expired and BCHD has provided no public process that could have extended that period. As such, the Design Build authority from the state has expired due to failure to execute during the legally valid period.
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk; Michael Webb
Cc: [email protected]; Garth Meyer; Todd Loewenstein; Nils Nehrenheim; Zein Obagi; Scott Behrendt; Bill Brand; Paige Kaluderovic
Subject: Public Comment - How has Redondo Beach Planning Department received NO DELIVERABLES for review from Rincon on the BCHD Project?
Date: Tuesday, July 25, 2023 11:46:38 AM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Mayor, Council, Planning Commission, City Attorney:
For months now, the City has been signing off on payments to Rincon for review of the BCHD EIR. Each month we place a CPRA request and are told that NO DELIVERABLES have been provided by Rincon for review by the City prior to payment.
I cannot imagine any reasonable accounting standard, even in the public sector, that allows tens-of-thousands of dollars of monthly payments for no reviewable work product. As a retired executive who has managed small and very large contracts, I am very concerned at this practice and have built a record for CPRA responses from the City for the City's review in this matter.
Mark Nelson
Retired SCE Executive
Redondo Beach
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Jacki Bacharach
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Kevin Cody; Lisa Jacobs; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk; [email protected]; City Council; Todd Loewenstein; Nils Nehrenheim; Zein Obagi; Scott Behrendt; Michael Webb; [email protected]; [email protected]; Letters; Garth Meyer; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Paige Kaluderovic Subject: Public Comment SBCCOG - Carelessness with BCHD Bike Path Funding Date: Thursday, July 27, 2023 3:18:39 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
I find it simply amazing that the spokesperson for the South Bay Cities Council of Governments apparently doesn't understand the South Bay Bike Master Plan's methodology.
The Master Plan used valid engineering cost metrics of dollars-per-mile to cost out the Master Plan. That allows costs to be compared to their benefits in the long-time benefit-to-cost ratio method. This is the same methodology as Caltrans and other major governmental entities, as well as the private sector.
The actual quote from SBCCOG is "it is not as simple as a dollar-per-foot calculation." Well, the entire 2011 Master Plan's costs are based on the use of dollars-per-foot calculations. In fact, for the section that BCHD is currently working on, the estimated cost in the Master Plan is $257 per foot So if SBCCOG believes that BCHD extraordinary expenditure of $4,575 per foot is irrelevant - THEN WE SURELY KNOW WHY THE GOVERNMENT SECTOR IS SO INEFFICIENT. Government agencies see taxes as "other peoples' money" and they don't believe that cost is important. BCHD is 1780% over the inflation-adjusted costs from the South Bay Master Plan.
Metro failed us. SBCCOG failed us. BCHD failed us. Taxpayers lost.
According to the Master Plan, this 400-feet of bike path should have cost slightly over $100,000 after inflation adjustments on the 2011 study. Yet BCHD budgeted all $1.83M of the Metro grant for this tiny 400-foot, one-block long section of bike path. That's more than 18- times the estimated Master Plan cost for the work and SBCCOG didn't notice or worse yet, SBCCOG approved of the excessive expense by BCHD.
And how did Metro fail to intervene when BCHD's grant project went from $1.8M for 1200- feet to $1.8M for 400-feet? The length of the bike path job went down by a factor of three and the price stayed the same? Metro failed us yet again.
Don't ever wonder why your taxes are so high again. Just look at BCHD. They have 13 executives that are paid $2.3M a year on a total revenue of under $15. Each executive manages slightly over $1M a year in budget on average. Of course that doesn't count the 20% of their own budget that goes to their own salaries. For this project, BCHD is spending 18- times more than the engineering estimates from the study. That $1.8M is BCHD spending $1M on a contractor and the other $800,000 on BCHD overheads and consultants. Only in government work can you even dream of 80% administrative overheads on a project.
Can we get some review and accountability around here?
Mark Nelson
Redondo Beach
From: chris ng
To: CityClerk
Subject: Redondo Beach Community Gardens
Date: Tuesday, August 1, 2023 11:53:12 AM
You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Hello,
I am a member of the RBCG committee. Our goal is to build community gardens in Redondo Beach. On June 21st, we opened the first garden with a ribbon cutting ceremony at Alta Vista Park. There were more than 160 applicants for the 26 plots in Alta Vista. As you can see, the demand is high. So, we opened up 50 non-plot applications for more people to participate in Alta Vista Park. However, it is not a walking distance for many of us who live in North Redondo, so our hope is that we can build more gardens in other RB
A community garden has many benefits:
·It supports nutrition, food access, and green space for everyone. ·It strengthens the community when there is a beautiful green space for neighbors to socialize and share plant knowledge. This also fosters intergenerational and cultural exchange.
·It is healthy for the environment. Organic gardening and composting builds better soil. Fruit trees and native plants produce cleaner air.
Where can we do this? The city owns many underutilized barren lands.
For example,
·There’s a large dirt area north of the Aviation gym and east of the Launching Pad. We were told there was an old swimming pool underneath the dirt, but a community garden on top should be fine. ·A corner of Anderson Park near Farrell Ave.
·The enclosed yard or grassy area in front of the Anderson Park Senior Center.
·The triangle spaces on Grant Ave near Inglewood Ave.
·The dirt area where Beland Blvd and Johnston Ave intersect. ·
Along the bike path?
·
Alongside and under the train tracks?
·Would you help us find more locations to grow plants too? Thank you for your consideration in this wonderful endeavor.
Chris Ng