City Council on 2024-12-03 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER Meeting Time: 12-03-24 18:00
eComments Report
Meetings Meeting
Time
Agenda
Items
Comments Support Oppose Neutral
City Council on 2024-12-03 6:00 PM -
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER
12-03-24
18:00
79 60 29 25 1
Sentiments for All Meetings
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
City Council on 2024-12-03 6:00 PM - CITY COUNCIL CHAMBER 12-03-24 18:00
Agenda Name Comments Support Oppose Neutral
H.8. 24-1900 APPROVE A DESIGN MODIFICATION TO THE BICYCLE
TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT, JOB NO
40510 TO REMOVE THE INSTALLATION OF CLASS III BIKE ROUTE
MARKINGS ON CERTAIN STREETS INCLUDING THOSE WITH A
SPEED LIMIT OF MORE THAN 30 MILES PER HOUR FROM THE
PROJECT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SENATE BILL 1216 THAT TAKES EFFECT ON JANUARY 1, 2025
5 4 0 0
J.1. 24-1896 For eComments and Emails Received from the Public 1 0 0 0 M.1. 24-1801 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE
ANNUAL REPORT FROM THE REDONDO BEACH TRAVEL &
TOURISM BOARD FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 2023 TO AUGUST
2024
ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2412-110, A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE REDONDO
BEACH TRAVEL & TOURISM BOARD FOR THE PERIOD OF
SEPTEMBER 2023 TO AUGUST 2024 IN CONNECTION WITH THE
REDONDO BEACH TOURISM MARKETING DISTRICT
1 0 0 0
N.1. 24-1903 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE
ADOPTION OF AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL PROGRAM
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REDONDO BEACH
FOCUSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE
AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO THE
FLOOR AREA RATIO AT THE BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT
CAMPUS
ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2412-111, A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE
CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2023050732) FOR THE REDONDO
BEACH FOCUSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, ZONING ORDINANCE
UPDATE AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT
PERTAINING TO THE FLOOR AREA RATIO AT THE BEACH CITIES
HEALTH DISTRICT CAMPUS
53 25 25 1
Sentiments for All Agenda Items
The following graphs display sentiments for comments that have location data. Only locations of users who have commented will be shown.
Overall Sentiment
Agenda Item: eComments for H.8. 24-1900 APPROVE A DESIGN MODIFICATION TO THE BICYCLE TRANSPORTATION PLAN IMPLEMENTATION PROJECT, JOB NO 40510 TO REMOVE THE INSTALLATION OF CLASS III BIKE ROUTE MARKINGS ON CERTAIN STREETS INCLUDING THOSE WITH A SPEED LIMIT OF MORE THAN 30 MILES PER HOUR FROM THE PROJECT, IN ACCORDANCE WITH SENATE BILL 1216 THAT TAKES EFFECT ON JANUARY 1, 2025 Overall Sentiment
Chase Gray
Location:
Submitted At: 10:40am 12-03-24
My name is Chase Gray. I'm a homeowner in Council District 3. I support this agenda item because it takes us one step closer to building protected bike lanes in accordance with the updated South Bay Bicycle Master Plan.
Sharrows provide essentially zero protection to cyclists on streets like Prospect (south of 190th). Although the posted speed limit is 35, drivers routinely travel at speeds well over 40 MPH. I'm sure RBPD could provide shocking statistics about how fast some people drive on that part of Prospect. I am an avid cyclist and would never ride on Prospect south of 190th under any circumstances.
Our community needs fully-protected Class IV bike lanes throughout Redondo. Establishing these on Prospect from 190th to PCH would create the perfect corridor to enable our students to ride to Parras and RUHS more safely and our entire community to travel around Redondo by bike without fear. This modification is an excellent first step.
Alex Fineman
Location:
Submitted At: 4:21pm 12-02-24
My name is Alex Fineman, I live in Council District 3, and I am in favor of this item to avoid putting sharrows on high-speed streets in compliance with January 2025 state law. For streets of this width and traffic speed, protected bike lanes would provide a safe route for riders of all ages and abilities to bike in South Redondo. As a parent living in North Redondo with one child at Beryl Heights and another in preschool near Alta Vista Park, I can confidently say that sharrows wouldn’t give me any sense of safety riding on a street like Prospect Ave. I bike my kids to school almost daily, and I would still avoid Prospect in the absence of a dedicated bike lane. With so many students biking to RUHS and Parras, among other schools, we need to provide safe and connected routes for children to bike to school. Prospect Ave specifically could provide a key north/south route to traverse South Redondo. I encourage the city to approve this item to avoid sharrows on high-speed streets and then take the next steps to implement protected bike lanes on these streets.
Tyler Anderson
Location:
Submitted At: 10:51am 12-01-24
My name is Tyler Anderson, I live in Torrance near the intersection of Del Amo Blvd and Prospect Ave. I am also an avid bike rider and have ridden down Prospect many times, though I have never felt particularly safe doing so.
I am in support of this measure to avoid sharrows on Prospect and other similar high-speed streets. As a bike rider, sharrows do not make me feel any safer riding next to cars, and as a driver I find it hard to understand their purpose as well. Sharrows are the bare minimum step towards a comprehensive bicycle infrastructure, and I believe they can be actively harmful towards the development of a safe and effective network of bike paths across the South Bay. Please do not take any half-measures and pretend that progress is being made. Please support this measure and then take meaningful steps towards making commuters, students, and recreational cyclists feel safer when riding around this beautiful area we call home.
Isaac Birch
Location:
Submitted At: 5:53pm 11-30-24
My name is Isaac Birch, I live in Council District 1, and I am in favor of this item to avoid putting sharrows on highspeed streets in compliance with January 2025 state law. For streets of this width and traffic speed, protected bike lanes would provide a safe route for riders of all ages and abilities to bike in South Redondo. Sharrows in this context would only offer a false sense of security. Given the number of schools in the area, we need to provide safe and connected routes for children to bike to school. Considering that 70% of trips in the South Bay are less than 3 miles, a convenient, connected, and safe network of bike lanes would help those without access to a car and additionally relieve congestion by taking cars off the road. Protected bike lanes can also assist with traffic calming to reduce speeding. Prospect Ave specifically could provide a key north/south route to traverse South Redondo. I encourage the city to approve this item to avoid sharrows on high-speed streets and then take the next steps to implement protected bike lanes on these streets. I'd much prefer this state bill be the call to action that we need, rather than the funeral of a teenage cyclist killed by a driver who'd do anything to go back and fix their mistake. We can do well now, or we can live to regret it.
Liam Walsh
Location:
Submitted At: 5:06pm 11-30-24
My name is Liam Walsh, I live in Council District 5, and I am in favor of this item to avoid putting sharrows on high-speed streets in compliance with January 2025 state law. For streets of this width and traffic speed, protected bike lanes would provide a safe route for riders of all ages and abilities to bike in South Redondo.
Sharrows in this context would only offer a false sense of security. Given the number of schools in the area, we need to provide safe and connected routes for children to bike to school. Considering that 70% of trips in the South Bay are less than 3 miles, a convenient, connected, and safe network of bike lanes would help those without access to a car and additionally relieve congestion by taking cars off the road. Protected bike lanes can also assist with traffic calming to reduce speeding. Prospect Ave specifically could provide a key north/south route to traverse South Redondo.
The average daily traffic volume on Prospect Ave in 2016 was reported as between 7,600 - 18,200 [1], and the posted speed limit is 35 mph. Per CalTrans DIB 90 [2], this volume and speed condition would put Prospect squarely into the Class I or IV bikeway region. Class IV (protected bike lanes) would likely be best suited for this environment, but sharrows (Class III) are not meant to be applied in this context. Doing so would be against CalTrans guidance and against state law come January. I encourage the city to approve this item to avoid sharrows on high-speed streets and then take the next steps to implement protected bike lanes on these streets. [1] https://www.bchd.org/redondo-beach-bchd-look-make-prospect-ave-safer [2] https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/design/documents/dib-94-010224-a11y.pdf Agenda Item: eComments for J.1. 24-1896 For eComments and Emails Received from the Public Overall Sentiment
Executive Director StopBCHD.com
Location:
Submitted At: 6:45pm 11-28-24
Vanessa Poster misled the Council on 10-1-24 with her false statements during testimony asserting falsely that the City Attorney had admonished the Planning Commission to stop targeting BCHD. No such event occurred.
Poster should be banned from the City Council meetings as a consequence and all BCHD sponsored testimony should be FACT CHECKED prior to admission into the record.
Agenda Item: eComments for M.1. 24-1801 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE ANNUAL REPORT FROM THE REDONDO BEACH TRAVEL & TOURISM BOARD FOR THE PERIOD SEPTEMBER 2023 TO AUGUST 2024 ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2412-110, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING THE REPORT OF THE REDONDO BEACH TRAVEL & TOURISM BOARD FOR THE PERIOD OF SEPTEMBER 2023 TO AUGUST 2024 IN CONNECTION WITH THE REDONDO BEACH TOURISM MARKETING DISTRICT Overall Sentiment
Dennis McLean
Location:
Submitted At: 3:26pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD.
Agenda Item: eComments for N.1. 24-1903 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION REGARDING THE ADOPTION OF AN
ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE REDONDO BEACH FOCUSED GENERAL
PLAN UPDATE, ZONING ORDINANCE UPDATE AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO THE FLOOR
AREA RATIO AT THE BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT CAMPUS
ADOPT BY TITLE ONLY RESOLUTION NO. CC-2412-111, A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF REDONDO
BEACH, CALIFORNIA, ADOPTING AN ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (STATE CLEARINGHOUSE NUMBER 2023050732) FOR THE REDONDO BEACH FOCUSED GENERAL PLAN UPDATE, ZONING
ORDINANCE UPDATE AND LOCAL COASTAL PROGRAM AMENDMENT PERTAINING TO THE FLOOR AREA RATIO AT THE
BEACH CITIES HEALTH DISTRICT CAMPUS
Overall Sentiment
Brianna Egan
Location:
Submitted At: 7:38pm 12-03-24
As a member of the Redondo Beach community, a public health professional, and a medical student, I support the work of Beach Cities Health District. They are a vital asset to our community in providing preventive health services across the lifespan. I have benefitted from their services such as the Center for Health & Fitness, summer fitness series, Blue Zones programs, and their funding and support of environmental projects in Redondo Beach including the community garden. I would have loved to have access to the allcove services when I was in high school and as a young adult.
The BCHD facilities are aging and in need of major upgrades. The board and staff have diligently studied ways to remodel and redevelop the site and provide even more community-oriented spaces and resources. The vision and future use of the site is artificially limited and obstructed by restrictive zoning parameters. As evidenced by the addendum to the EIR, setting the FAR to 1.25 for the BCHD site will not have any additional environmental impacts. You've commissioned the objective data, and now it's important that you listen to the evidence. Stand up for the good of the entire community, not just a few neighborhoods, and approve a uniform FAR of 1.25 for public institutional zones.
It's distressing to see this subject continue to come back, week after week, and subject the community to endless discussions about construction and BCHD. Look to any number of college campuses that expand and add new buildings and housing. This type of project would not be meaningfully different from those. A healthy city grows and changes. Allow BCHD to do so. Enough.
Pam Absher
Location:
Submitted At: 6:28pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I OPPOSE adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff."
I have lived in Redondo Beach most of my 65 years and I am opposed to a private developer controlling the South Bay Hospital property. I would love to know how many of the supporters for the change in the FAR live in Redondo Beach, or near the proposed community. Would you want this community in your backyard? I live off Prospect, in the South end of town, but I grew up on the north side of Beryl, and in fact I had family that used South Bay Hospital's ER. The current use of the land has not created a major change to the area. The BCHD Healthy Living Campus will over power the surrounding residential homes, create traffic and noise. It does not fit with our community, and in fact it appears it is not being built for our community.
A change in the FAR is a sell out. Years ago city officials allowed 4 homes to be built on one lot in North Redondo and condos were built on the Esplanade. This has created a traffic and parking problem in our city. The developers prevailed again when the corner of PV Blvd and PCH was rezoned allowing the massive building that now occupies where Bristol Farms was located. Traffic again will be negatively impacted.
BCHD employees are being paid by the tax payers and they are working in the developers best interests, not the residents of Redondo Beach.
The Project needs to be stopped, for our children's sake.
Pam Absher
Susan Brilliant
Location:
Submitted At: 6:27pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions. BCHD Community Services supports vital care coordination for older adults and the projected exponential increase in this segment of the population will make the need even more critical in the future.
Maricela Guillermo
Location:
Submitted At: 5:37pm 12-03-24
I strongly OPPOSE the adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan and the proposed 1.25 FAR for BCHD. THIS SPOT UPZONING WOULD DIRECTLY HARM OUR CITY AND ITS RESIDENTS.
The Planning Commission and General Plan Advisory Group both recommended a 0.5 FAR, which strikes a balance and considers the long-term impact on our community. Approving the 1.25 FAR would undermine this careful approach and send the wrong message—that the interests of non-district residents and private organizations outweigh the well-being of local taxpayers, especially when most of BCHD's programs are funded by OUR TAX DOLLARS.
Approving the 1.25 FAR would not only alter the character of our neighborhood and reduce property values, but also set a dangerous precedent for UNFAIR subsidies to non-residents under the guise of "public benefit." This decision will affect us for years to come, and it’s crucial that the City Council acts in the best interest of its residents.
Please reconsider the fairness and long-term impact of your decision. The community is watching, and we are counting on you to make the right choice for our city’s future.
Laura Zahn
Location:
Submitted At: 5:36pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1. I oppose adoption of the Addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by Staff. I oppose unfair Spot Upzoning for BCHD a NON Public Safety organization.
The “South Bay Hospital District” at the time it was formed and the building of a “local community Hospital” commenced…In the early 1950’s
* On Eminent Domain Land
*. Which had belong to Mr. Huntington
*. With a Bond
*. For the three BEACH Cities of
Manhattan Beach
Hermosa Beach
Redondo Beach
Because the residents of these THREE beach cities knew they needed a “Local Hospital” and voted for a Bond Measure to be included in their property tax to cover the cost for it… FOR 30 years.
Unfortunately the Hospital was not successful and another entity took it over. However the Board of the South Bay Hospital District, not wanting to let go of the tax payer owned property changed their name TO… The Beach Cities Health District (BCHD).
They began offering programs, and services that do NOT meet a single requirement of the Eminent Domain conditions, or any of the Bond Restrictions that the voters approved.
The THREE Beach Cities are NOW still paying for the operating expenses of a “Health District” NOT a “Hospital District” that is expanding its Services and its Foot-Print beyond the residents of the THREE Beach Cities.
With its BEACH -CREEP… BCHD is now offering Services TO non-Beach City residents AT the three-beach Cities expense. There is not a Hawthorne Beach, a Lawndale Beach, a Lomita Beach, an Inglewood Beach…etc. the first two words IN Beach Cities SAYS it ALL!
There are 88 Cities within Los Angeles County. 95% of them do not have a Health District. Let BCHD change their name to The Greater South Bay Health District! Stop raiding the property taxes of the three beach cities of Manhattan Beach, Hermosa Beach, Redondo Beach
for non-resident users!
Laura Zahn
Beneficiary of the Kay T Zahn Revokable Trust 2408/2306 Grant Avenue Redondo Beach, CA 90278 310-693-3317
[email protected]
Reid Fujinaga
Location:
Submitted At: 4:37pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I OPPOSE adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I am a resident and homeowner of 15 years on Ronald Avenue in Torrance. My house is less than 1/4 mile from the BCHD campus.
Jennifer Sams
Location:
Submitted At: 4:35pm 12-03-24
I am a resident and homeowner of a lovely home Torrance home directly behind from the BCHD campus on North Prospect Avenue. My neighbors and I are tired of hearing all about the building and area you want to construct right in the middle of our neighborhood. Our property values will go down, traffic will increase, and we will no longer be living in a quaint and quiet neighborhood. Have you ever stopped to wonder how you would like this in your backyard? Please reconsider this monstrosity. Jennifer Sams Howard Darvey
Location:
Submitted At: 4:03pm 12-03-24
I am a volunteer at The Center for Health and Fitness which is part of Beach Cities Health District. In the many years that I have been volunteering and using the facilities at the Center, I have seen our community benefit from the exercise, diet, and general health counseling that the facility and services that have been provided to the public. These services can be improved and expanded to serve the community better by allowing this facility and similar service facilities to expand to a FAR of 1.25. Please consider this request for the benefit of the entire south bay beach community. Thank you for your consideration - Howard Darvey Carol Cutting
Location:
Submitted At: 3:54pm 12-03-24
I fully support BCHD's mission and its plans to replace a seismically unsafe building with a facility that will highly benefit the South Bay. The organization's goals and objectives are uniquely aligned with healthy living as an important component for residents and their welfare. I don't know of any other organization or company that supports this the way that BCHD does.
I have been a member of CHF for almost 20 years and have learned to appreciate their efforts to create a community that is focused on helping people live a better, healthier life along with the sense of helping each other.
I truly hope that the City Council will step up and support them and their mission by approving the ratio for this project, showing that they truly care about not just RB residents, but those of the entire South Bay. If RB City buildings have a ratio that is higher than this health and well-being project is looking for, then they should really think twice as they are doing what Congress is doing, enforcing different standards on the people than they practice themselves.
Please fully support this project as BCHD truly makes a positive impact and a real difference to those of us who live in the South Bay.
krista allen
Location:
Submitted At: 2:59pm 12-03-24
Please do not permit BCHD to have higher zoning or a FAR above what they have now.
I am opposed to the Private "partnership" with this public entity. BCHD is trying to expand their empire, This is not the time to let them expand. They have shown bad judgement with their choices. I do not believe that they should be encouraged. I do not live close to BCHD, but I believe that they should not be developers. The bike path shows why.
Vanessa Poster
Location:
Submitted At: 2:57pm 12-03-24
As an elected board member of the Beach Cities Health District, I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 F.A.R. for all public institutions.
Joan Edelmann-Brand
Location:
Submitted At: 2:47pm 12-03-24
"Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions. BCHD’s community programs make Redondo Beach unique and should be supported by the City of Redondo Beach.
Mark Nelson
Location:
Submitted At: 2:29pm 12-03-24
*ABOUT 200 COMMENTS OPPOSING N1 BY STOPBCHD PARTICIPANTS RE: SPOT UPZONING OF BCHD TO 1.25 FAR - The community members supporting StopBCHD have presented two group letters in Opposition to the 1.25 BCHD FAR to the City Clerk, Council and Attorney. The letters represent 76 and 78 signatories and their families respectively. Further, at current count, StopBCHD has been bcc'ed on 38 additional correspondences rejecting the 1.25 FAR for BCHD. While we cannot know what other correspondence was submitted, we are confident that we are approaching 200 statements objecting to SPOT UPZONING OF BCHD and OPPOSING AGENDA ITEM N1.
**BCHD IS ALREADY THE LARGEST P-I DEVELOPMENT AND 300% OF AVERAGE P-I FAR It should also be noted that based on analysis of the Planning Departments P-I FAR list, BCHD is currently the LARGEST SQUARE FOOT P-I development at 312,600 sqft. The LARGEST FAR is the City of Redondo Beach PD and Administration at an FAR of 0.87. The average FAR of all P-I is 0.26 and BCHD's current dense development is 300% of average.
***BCHD HAS DIMINISHED PROPERTY VALUES WITHIN 1/2-MILE BY $170M In addition, econometric models show that property within one-half mile of the current 0.77 FAR development have suffered a loss of $170M in value over what their expected values would be. ****LA COUNTY DATA SHOWS NO HEALTH IMPACT BY BCHD
Statistical analysis using the Gallup value of health outcomes methodology and the LA County Dept of Public Health survey from 2023 demonstrates that BCHD provides no improvement in health outcomes in the Beach Cities. The primary driver of health outcomes is household income with a roughly 90% statistical "fit". The Beach Cities actually slightly underperform in health outcomes based on regression analysis, LA County *****80% to 95% PLANNED NON-RESIDENT USE ON BCHD SITE
In direct opposition to the Superior Court decision INGL-C-1594, BCHD is no long providing its benefits for the "residents who reside within the District." In fact the damages of BCHD fall 100% in Redondo Beach, while the benefits for the District will be only 5% to 20%. That is clearly not in the best interest of Redondo Beach.
Angela Wilson
Location:
Submitted At: 2:27pm 12-03-24
My name is Marc Schenasi and I am proud to serve as the Executive Director of South Bay Children's Health Center (SBCHC). I am here today to voice our steadfast support regarding Agenda Item N1, a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions.
For many years, SBCHC has collaborated closely with BCHD to address the multifaceted health needs of our community. This partnership has allowed us to bridge critical gaps in mental health care, dental health, and wellness support for children, teens, and families across the South Bay. BCHD’s expansion under a 1.25 FAR would not only ensure the sustainability of their services but also empower organizations like ours to meet the growing demands of a dynamic and diverse population.
The importance of BCHD’s work extends beyond individual programs; it is a cornerstone of community health infrastructure. From preventive care and mental health resources to wellness programs and health education, BCHD provides essential services that build a healthier, more equitable community. Reducing their capacity by enforcing a restrictive 0.50 FAR would limit their ability to respond effectively to the complex challenges we face today, including rising mental health needs and access to preventive care.
At South Bay Children’s Health Center, we see firsthand how BCHD’s programs serve as a lifeline for families in crisis and as a foundation for long-term wellness. Let us not underestimate the collective impact of public health organizations that work tirelessly to improve quality of life for all.
I urge you to support a uniform 1.25 FAR and enable BCHD to continue their vital mission. Together, we can ensure that our community remains strong, resilient, and capable of meeting the evolving needs of its residents.
Thank you.
Marc Schenasi
Executive Director
South Bay Children's Health Center
Amy Mensink-Boyd
Location:
Submitted At: 1:15pm 12-03-24
OPPOSE UNFAIR SPOT UPZONING FOR BCHD. OPPOSE N1 AGENDA ITEM Delia Vechi
Location:
Submitted At: 1:14pm 12-03-24
Please do not allow for BCHD land a FAR of 1.25. Follow the advise of the Planning Commission and GPA!!! Dennis McLean
Location:
Submitted At: 1:03pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD.
Jane Bell
Location:
Submitted At: 12:51pm 12-03-24
Regarding the Agenda Item N-1, I SUPPORT the adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions. As a retiree, the Beach Cities Gym has been central to my wellness, by providing both structured exercise and the opportunity to socialize with others in group classes.
Amy Huh
Location:
Submitted At: 12:35pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions.
BCHD provides valuable services to our community particularly for our young people at allcove. It is important to keep these services intact and even expand them.
Darryl Boyd
Location:
Submitted At: 12:17pm 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I OPPOSE adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I OPPOSE UNFAIR SPOT UPZONING for BCHD.
I am a resident and homeowner of 31 years directly across the street from the BCHD campus on North Prospect Avenue. The residents and homeowners on this street are very tired and we have had enough. This residential service street and the median that divides this street from the main Prospect Ave. has been neglected for decades. It is now a complete eyesore, unsafe, and not reflective of the image of what Redondo Beach is supposed to be.
Since June of this year we feel like we are living in a ghetto with the 405 Freeway on top of us. Any little bit of our privacy that was left with the unkept dead shrubs is now gone completely, and there is no safety barrier or noise deflection at all. We deal with noise of all kinds all day and night. From cars and motorcycles racing through Prospect Ave. at double and triple the 35 MPH speed limit, to people with obnoxiously loud booming audio and cell phone calls blasting from their cars. We can hear every car and motorcycle that goes in and out of the BCHD parking lot. Every screaming siren that blows down Prospect Ave. and into BCHD sometimes multiple times per day. We have to hear everything, all day, all night, every day of the week. We are suddenly living in an echo chamber of complete noise 24x7. Add the E-bike problem on top of it all. There is no traffic control and no enforcement at all. Violators run rampant on Prospect Ave., RBPD is nowhere to be seen.
The people have voted NO on Measure BC. So please respect the will of the people and stop trying to sneak and ram this unwanted BCHD overdevelopment plan down our throats. We don't want it or the additional noise and traffic down here. Please focus on what we, the tax paying homeowners and residents in this neighborhood and on this neglected, un-monitored street want and need. Get this street cleaned up, sound and safety proofed, and under control. You work for us, not BCHD and this should be your priority.
You who approve of this heinous overdevelopment idea probably don't live near it. OPPOSE Patricia Bellas
Location:
Submitted At: 12:15pm 12-03-24
As health professionals and community health advocates living in the Beach Cities, we SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff and presented on agenda item N1. We SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD.
A 1.25 FAR is a critical factor to ensure that the BCHD is able to continue its many health and wellness programs.
The BCHD has been on the forefront of addressing community health care needs and supporting our youth, families, and seniors.
A recent article published in the Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA) highlights findings from the National Academies of Sciences, Engineering and Medicine regarding deficiencies in our current health care system in addressing the critical health and mental health needs of our youth and families.
Per the report, “The US currently ranks at the bottom among wealthy nations on the mental well-being, physical health, and academic and social skills of children. Transformation of health care for children, youth, and families requires active involvement of children, families, and communities in all aspects of care and program design,… Well-documented examples of community-based team care involving parents and youth have helped transform health care to better promote the health and well-being of younger populations,… and It should include collaboration in coproduction and extend to peer and near-peer models of services.” The current allcove model of care is an important means of addressing many of the issues listed in the report.
Beach Cities Health District has served as a leader in improving access to care by bringing allcove Beach Cities to our community. The allcove model was inspired by Stanford University and international models of youth services. Following the concept of “coproduction”, allcove Beach Cities was co-designed by young people through a youth advisory group. It focuses on prevention, screening and early intervention services, builds youth and family resilience, increases early help-seeking, reduces stigma and increases mental health literacy.
Patricia Bellas MD, MPH
Eugenie Lewis, LCSW MSW, MHSA
Keith Kretzer
Location:
Submitted At: 11:05am 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions. I feel it is important to provide these services to all seniors in the South Bay Community.
Marcio Nava
Location:
Submitted At: 10:55am 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I OPPOSE adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff.
Warren Croft
Location:
Submitted At: 10:53am 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I OPPOSE adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff.
Geoffrey Gilbert
Location:
Submitted At: 10:48am 12-03-24
I strongly oppose granting BCHD a 1.25FAR on Public Institutional land without proper study of the scope of the privately owned and operated commercial development by PMB LLC. The proposed project does not fit with the surrounding residential neighborhood and at the very least, a redesign is necessary. BCHD's design has not been endorsed by District voters, something that the Kensington Care Facility faced before construction. It should be noted that the Kensington facility is has an FAR much smaller than the 1.25FAR demanded by BCHD.
Sincerely,
Geoff Gilbert
Redondo Beach
Richard Raynor
Location:
Submitted At: 8:44am 12-03-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I OPPOSE adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff.
Please respect the diligent work done by the planning commission, and reject the addendum to the EIR.
Supersizing the Floor Area Ratio is not justified. Most of the residents immediately surrounding the BCHD property oppose such high density development. And the proposed use of the high density project is a private for profit residential care facility that would serve mostly persons currently outside of the BCHD service area. The supersized Floor Area Ratio for BCHD is simply not necessary for BCHD to serve its core functions to the residents of the district.
John Stauffer
Location:
Submitted At: 7:29am 12-03-24
I OPPOSE the City Council taking action solely for the special treatment of BCHD. A major increase in FAR is not warranted or needed for their non-essential, non-emergency services. Enabling an oversized 1.25 FAR for BCHD, against the recommendations of the Planning Commission and GPAC, would be damaging to the character of the City and quality of life of residents.
Kelley Daily
Location:
Submitted At: 3:24am 12-03-24
Since moving to Redondo Beach from Torrance two years ago my health has improved dramatically due to BCHD.
It was the closest gym to my place. They taught me how to eat right, exercise, and yoga in a wonderful clean facility where I felt comfortable and that I could afford. I have never had a resource quite like this one, (it is not just a gym,) anywhere I have lived. My bloodwork is now perfect and my doctor took me off cholesterol and blood pressure meds. Not bad for the age of 58!
I see the teens using allcove while at the building. I see the seniors that have built a real strong community and are thriving there too. Both of those groups will have no other options, no place to go if we do not support BCHD.
It is one of the things making me most proud of living here.
Please know that group that fights it with misinformation is influencing people unrighy. Please look at and vote on what many of us, less loud yet better informed and familiar with the situation believe.
I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions Thank you for listening.
Kelley Daily
Resident of Redondo Beach since 2022
Mariam Butler
Location:
Submitted At: 11:41pm 12-02-24
I strongly support a 1.25 FAR for BCHD. The arguments against are ridiculous. BCHD supports seniors, our schools and the entire community. The Allcove mental health services are highly utilized and clearly needed. The opposition is complaining about traffic? Ridiculous. We all have to take on our fair share to improve our city.
District 4 has taken on the pallet shelters so we can get to functional zero homelessness (you’re welcome), and even though is the most dense district in terms of population, will need to take on at least 650 new housing units at the mall so it can be revitalized and bring much needed revenue to the city (you’re welcome again). Prospect and Beryl will be fine with the BCHD expansion. It’s only a handful of complainers in the grand scheme of things with regards to overall population on RB, and most of the anti BCHD crew are Torrance residents who provide zero dollars to RB anyway. Let’s not expose ourselves to another costly lawsuit. Support BCHD as they support our community! FAR for one, FAR for all!
Sabrina Barakat
Location:
Submitted At: 10:40pm 12-02-24
Please do not allow a special super-sizing of any BCHD building projects. It is not warranted and will only mar our beautiful neighborhood. Of course we all want healthy-living programming, but why can't BCHD collaborate with the Parks & Rec commissions? If more facility space is needed, please repurpose the empty 99 Cents Store on 190th Street, just down the road.
Thank you!
George Broatch
Location:
Submitted At: 9:50pm 12-02-24
I moved to RB about 6 years ago and was very happy to discover the BCHD. I have been a member of the gym since I arrived, and take 3 classes, and work on the weight machines 2 days each week. It has added a lot to my well being, both physically and mentally. The social interactions are equally important. I have also been involved with some of the other community programs also offered. I have been surprised, and disappointed, to learn that there are funding problems with the BCHD programs. It is such an important asset for the community. Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions.
Joan Davidson
Location:
Submitted At: 9:26pm 12-02-24
"Regarding Agenda Item N1, I OPPOSE adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff."
This should never have gotten as far as it has. Please vote NO! Eugenie Lewis
Location:
Submitted At: 7:43pm 12-02-24
Having lived in Redondo Beach for 28 + years, and knowing the benefits the Beach Cities Health District provides to promote the health of our community, my question is: what are our priorities? Do we want to continue preserve a valuable community treasure or squander it? We have been lucky for so long to have a resource which promotes the health of our community. Most communities don’t have access to these kind of services, and I fear we are taking BCHD for granted. School programs, youth and senior services, physical fitness, substance use prevention, blue zones, nutrition programs, volunteer programs, and community meeting rooms where people are able to meet for support and education. Let’s rally behind BCHD to help it move forward to establish a campus that continues to support valuable health programs. I strongly support a FAR of 1.25.
Darryl Leong
Location:
Submitted At: 7:24pm 12-02-24
I have carefully read thru the resolution and addenda and agree with the addendum findings and therefore support the 1.25 FAR for the BCHD campus at 514 N Prospect.
Darryl Leong, MD MPH
Marie Puterbaugh
Location:
Submitted At: 6:31pm 12-02-24
Todd went out of his way to chastise (in my opinion) Tom for asking people to support Beach Cities health district.
However, I see several emails from the “Stop” side asking for support to solicit comments to target (again in my opinion) the BCHD FAR. It should be noted. Beach Cities never offered to speak for anybody. I am flummoxed.
On one hand, you ask us to not post comments because you’ve heard us. But if we respect that, then it looks lopsided and you can always default to saying people didn’t speak up for the other side.It’s so interesting to me the outrage against BCHD who simply want to invest in their infrastructure to generate revenue to fund services. I wish I could see this sort of passionate outrage every time a smoke shop opens up on Artesia walking distance to Madison and Adams. So the city won’t support BCHD but allows numerous smoke shops and potential prostitution “massage” parlors on Artesia without a peep? This makes no sense.
I noticed free parking in Manhattan Beach the day after Thanksgiving. It must be so nice to live in a city that knows how to generate revenue. Beach Cities is trying to do that in a very sensible reasonable way. You should allow them to do that rather than let the building continue to depreciate.
Linda Buck
Location:
Submitted At: 6:00pm 12-02-24
I STRONGLY SUPPORT the adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions. I live near in the BCHD neighborhood, and feel honored to have their services so close to home. BCHD programs support the citizens of the Beach Cities and enhance a community feel of compassion, care, and integrity. They have both listened to and acted upon our community needs. BCHD has made many revisions to their Healthy Living Campus as concerns have been expressed. The Campus that is being proposed with benefit the health and wellness of everyone who resides in the Beach Cities and surrounding area. This in turn will provide us with easy and accessible healthy choices making our community emotionally, physically, mentally, and spiritually more balanced. Providing comprehensive mental health services to our youth supports a healthier future for The Beach Cities. With everyone who moves into the Beach Cities comes the responsibility to support growth.BCHD is NOT about commercial growth at the cost of our residents. They are about increasing services to those in need and preserving our community to best serve everyone who chooses to live here. I James Vita
Location:
Submitted At: 5:45pm 12-02-24
I support a FAR of 1.25 for BCHD like the city does for its own projects. They are not trying to build a huge development. They are trying to provide more open space than other projects. They probably won’t be able to provide the Center For Health And Fitness for many of us seniors. We will be very disappointed if we lose our gym.
Steve Randall
Location:
Submitted At: 5:42pm 12-02-24
This again? The cities that make up the health district just voted against a $30 million bond for BCHD to keep on going with an unapproved, unfunded project that's too big for its britches. But here they are full steam ahead to shove what they want down our throats anyway. The majority in the district don't trust the leadership of BCHD to right their own ship and don't trust the board of directors to keep their overpaid executives in line. BCHD isn't going away if their land size zoning isn't increased. And nobody is asking for them to go away. All those doom and gloom pitchfork people are fear mongering. BCHD won't cease to exist if they can't get an increase in their floor ratio. They need to stay in their own lane, unless and until the voters say otherwise and right now, they voters say no. Council can always readdress this at any point in time, once BCHD has proven they can and are making sound decisions for the people who foot their bill, not a give-away program to another outside developer to overbuild for services those in the district can't afford, and to provide services outside their charter and outside of the district. Such disingenuous nonsense.
Nancy McEvilly
Location:
Submitted At: 5:36pm 12-02-24
As a long-term resident of Redondo Beach, I am opposed to unnecessary and problematic expansion of BCHD's Health and Fitness Center. This would have an awful impact on local residents by increasing drivers on the road, adding to the air pollution in our city, and impacting home values. Why on earth do we feel like we have to fill every spot with over-sized buildings?
MICHAEL MILES
Location:
Submitted At: 5:05pm 12-02-24
I have been a BCHD's Center for Health and Fitness member for 15 years. I go to the gym 4-5 times a week.
Over this time, I have witnessed hundreds of folks, mostly retired and elderly, who have created a healthy habit of exercising and — equally important. — establishing deep and meaningful friendships. I also have paid close attention to the wonderful impact the teen center has had on our community. I live at 190th and Prospect and have zero concerns with the effects of traffic or environmental concerns. Redondo let the massive commercial and residential projected at PV Drive and PCH happen, so why would Redondo hamper BCHD's desire to help our community? After COVID, thousands got out of their routines of exercising and being in their community.
This is our chance as RB citizens to do something for the South Bay.
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT the adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan, as recommended by staff. I also SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions.
Mary Drummer
Location:
Submitted At: 4:05pm 12-02-24
I support a uniform designation for BCHD of 1.25 consistent with the rest of the City's assignment for similar structures. Anything less is biased and open for legal intervention- and Redondo Beach cannot and should not pay one dime on account of the tiny faction of malcontents dead set on eliminating services to their neighborsand themselves. To deny countless thousands of Citizens from childhood to old age the services of mental health care- teenagers and the elderly- errand volunteers, obesity prevention, parent support, and on and on- because of a laundry list of grudges based on lies is not what we elected our officials to do.
Anneke Blair
Location:
Submitted At: 11:53am 12-02-24
Please listen to residents and PROTECT Redondo Beach. Vote NO on the 1.25 FAR.
To the Honorable Mayor and City Council Members,
I urge you to REJECT the proposed 1.25 FAR for the Beach Cities Health District. This excessive density poses a serious threat to our community's quality of life, property values, and even our health.
Here's why:
* Crushing Infrastructure: Increased traffic, noise, and air pollution are inevitable. Studies show a direct link between higher density and these negative impacts (Schwanen et al., 2011). Our roads, sewers, and water systems may not cope.
* Ruined Neighborhoods: A massive development will destroy Redondo's unique character and charm. Loss of views and sunlight negatively impacts well-being and property values (Kaplan & Kaplan, 1989). * Parking Nightmare: More density = more cars. Where will they go? Expect overflow onto residential streets and constant parking battles (Shoup, 2005).
* Health Hazard: Ironically, BCHD's proposal could harm our health. Increased traffic worsens air pollution (WHO, 2021). Overcrowding and loss of green space contribute to stress and reduced physical activity (Evans & Kantrowitz, 2002; Frank et al., 2004).
BCHD does NOT need this much space. Their motives are questionable, especially after the bond measure failure.
Oppose 1.25 FAR for BCHD - Protect Redondo Beach!
Moira Nelson
Location: 90254, Hermosa Beach
Submitted At: 10:18am 12-02-24
I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions.
The BCHD provides health services, mental and social enrichment, and healthy living programs for all three of the beach cities. I have benefitted from their myriad on-site programs and resources for many years. For my own health and wellbeing and that of my community, I want to see them fluorish rather than diminish in the years ahead.
ELLEN GILMAN
Location:
Submitted At: 2:51pm 12-01-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions.
Ellen Gilman, Redondo Beach Resident
Jill Klausen
Location:
Submitted At: 12:56pm 12-01-24
I am deeply OPPOSED to this attempted override of the carefully considered FAR recommendation determined by the GPAC and the Planning Commission. It's an outrageous ask to be singled out for special treatment when there are no benefits to the local community, only detriments. I OPPOSE being asked to endure increased costs and possible wait times for First Responders whose time and resources will be increasingly burdened by housing hundreds more elderly patients, the majority of whom do not even come from our community, which means they've paid NO TAXES to support our first responders. I am also OPPOSED to the additional burden on our roads, power grid, and water supply. BCHD is not special and does not deserve special treatment in our city. I implore you to stick with the recommended FAR and deny this addendum.
Jill Klausen
30-year Redondo Beach resident and homeowner
David Waldner
Location:
Submitted At: 9:14am 12-01-24
I strongly OPPOSE the City Council giving special treatment to the BCHD and OPPOSE the increase in FAR above the level in the unamended EIR. This proposed project along with its very high-end rental units for wealthy seniors does not serve as a benefit to the Redondo Beach community as a whole.
Additionally, with the added floor space under an increased FAR and the associated estimate of 700 plus extra staff, imagine the impact on traffic in the area. The addendum discusses bus transportation options in the area which unfortunately would not help because bus transportation in Los Angeles County in non functional.
Mona Rusch
Location:
Submitted At: 9:54pm 11-30-24
I live in this neighborhood and I OPPOSE the spot upzoning of BCHD. Enabling an oversized 1.25 FAR for BCHD, against the recommendations of the Planning Commission and GPAC, would be damaging to the character of the City and quality of life of residents like me. Other than this facility and the small shopping center with the Vons, this is a residential neighborhood. The streets - Prospect, Beryl, and Flagler - are not equipped or large enough to handle the traffic a development of this size will produce.
Alan Archer
Location:
Submitted At: 3:58pm 11-30-24
I OPPOSE the City Council taking action solely for the special treatment of BCHD. A major increase in FAR is not warranted or needed for their non-essential, non-emergency services. Enabling an oversized 1.25 FAR for BCHD, against the recommendations of the Planning Commission and GPAC, would be damaging to the character of the City and quality of life of residents.
Leo Barker
Location:
Submitted At: 3:18pm 11-30-24
We VEHEMENTLY OPPOSE the City Council taking action SOLELY for the special treatment of BCHD. A MAJOR increase in FAR is NOT warranted or NECESSARY for their NON-ESSENTIAL, NON-EMERGENCY "services". Approving an oversized 1.25 FAR for BCHD, BLATANTLY DISREGARDING the recommendations of the city's Planning Commission and GPAC, would be DETRIMENTAL to the character of the City of Redondo Beach (and it's neighbors) and quality of life of ALL Southbay residents not to mention DANGEROUS PRECEDENT-SETTING.”
Judy Petraitis
Location:
Submitted At: 1:31pm 11-30-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions.
Ira Ellman
Location:
Submitted At: 11:38am 11-30-24
Regarding Agenda Item N1, I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for BCHD and all public institutions. BCHD provides crucial services such as Allcove, a youth wellness center, senior services, fitness center, illness prevention, etc. in addition to partnering with third party medical providers. The community is extremely fortunate to have this facility and its programs in the South Bay.
Dency Nelson
Location: 90254, Hermosa Beach
Submitted At: 4:20pm 11-29-24
I SUPPORT adoption of the addendum to the Final Program EIR for the General Plan as recommended by staff. I SUPPORT a uniform 1.25 FAR for all of the public properties that serve the well being of the community, Fire Stations, Police Stations, City Hall, Hospitals, Schools and BCHD! Executive Director StopBCHD.com
Location:
Submitted At: 6:43pm 11-28-24
Oppose BCHD spot upzoning to 1.25 FAR. BCHD is not a public safety agency. BCHD is not an essential agency.
BCHD's public plan is to service 80% to 95% non-residents. BCHD has damaged surrounding property values by over $170M and further damaging development will only accelerate damages. It's time to set 0.5 FAR for ALL P-I except RBPD and RBFD, which are mandatory services for Redondo Beach residents.