I.1- Blue Folder — Redondo Beach City Council, January 14, 2025

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
JANUARY 14, 2025
I.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
• PUBLIC COMMUNICATION
From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; Nils Nehrenheim; Paige Kaluderovic; Todd Loewenstein; Scott Behrendt; Zein Obagi; Michael Webb; Marc Wiener; Sean Scully; Joy Ford; Cheryl Park; James Light Cc: Kevin Cody; Garth Meyer; Douglas Boswell; Wayne Craig; Sheila W. Lamb; Gale S. Hazeltine; Robert Gaddis Subject: Re: Public Comment - Spot Upzoning of BCHD and 200 N PCH Parcels Violates GC 65852 Date: Monday, January 13, 2025 8:00:20 AM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

The email below summarizes the legal case made by RUTAN to the City that parcels of same zoning, no matter what size, much have the same limitation, i.e. FAR. The City appears ready to violate California Government Code by spot upzoning BCHD's FAR to 1.25. All P-CF will also require FAR 1.25 as well.

On Mon, Dec 9, 2024 at 5:40 PM Stop BCHD <[email protected]> wrote:

In Rutan & Tucker (RUTAN) correspondence to the Council on behalf of BCHD, RUTAN cites Government Code 65852 with the following:
[“All such regulations shall be uniform for each class or kind of building or use of land throughout each zone, but the regulation in one type of zone may differ from those in other types of zones.” (emphasis added) In Neighbors in Support of Appropriate Land Use v. Tuolumne County (2007), the courts held that “the foundations of zoning would be undermined if local governments could grant favored treatment to some owners on a purely ad hoc basis. Cities and counties unquestionably have the power to rezone and their decisions to do so are entitled to great deference; but rezoning, even of the smallest parcels, still necessarily respects the principle of uniformity.] BCHD has requested to be spot upzoned to a 1.25 FAR for its P-CF zoned parcel. Council has taken the first step to the spot upzoning by conducting an $18,000 environmental analysis that supports only the action of spot upzoning of the single BCHD parcel.

Assuming that RUTAN is not attempting to mislead the Council, and that RUTAN provided a faithful interpretation of GC 65852, then the Council CANNOT spot upzone the BCHD parcel without providing uniform treatment to all P-CF. Per GC 65852, all P-CF parcels require uniform treatment (see RUTAN above "even the smallest parcels still necessarily reflects the principle of uniformity.)
Further, the Council increased the FAR of 200 N PCH to 1.25. 200 N PCH is zoned P-SF, yet other P-SF parcels were not granted the uniformity REQUIRED by GC 65852 as provided in comments by RUTAN.

Last, the 415 Diamond parcel is zoned P-CIV, and has no peers in P-CIV. Therefore, it appears that it has, and can remain, FAR 1.25 as its own zone.

This is a very concerning issue to the residents and taxpayers impacted by the proposed spot upzoning of the BCHD parcel. The Council appears bound to the principle of uniforming in FAR assignment within zones - and - the Council appears on a path of violation of GC 65852 with both the spot upzoning of the 200 N PCH parcel and the BCHD parcel. We ask the Council to adhere strictly to the law and reevaluate its non-uniform zone restrictions in favor of full compliance with GC65852 as presented by RUTAN on behalf of its client BCHD. If the Council believes that RUTAN provided false information, the public has a right to know that as well. Thank you.

StopBCHD.com
--
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.

From: Holly Osborne
To: CityClerk
Cc: William Hall; James Light; Luke Smude; Mike Witzansky Subject: Redondo City Council, Jan 14, 2025
Date: Tuesday, January 14, 2025 2:40:51 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Dear Mayor and Councilmembers, and public works.

This is a 3 minute summary of some of the problems in Redondo on the Greenline.

A week or so ago, some Redondo and Lawndale residents received a flyer in the mail from Metro saying that Metro was going to be taking surveying measurements of the ROW. to confirm existing property boundaries; and that they would let the residents know beforehand, and they would not come onto properties.
(We believe that some preliminary form of this has already started, because multiple neighbors reported heavy drone activty before Christmas.)
News Flash: Someone from the ROW just called; some residents just got a new flyer on their doorstep today. See below.

What is of concern to me, is, since the Greenline project was first announced in 2018, why are they just confirming boundaries NOW? I have pointed out numerous mistakes and missing diagrams in the DEIR, and a Redondo District 4 resident felt compelled to hire their own surveyor, to prove that their possessions were on their own land, when Metro wanted them to get rid of them. Also, in the narrow part of the ROW in Lawndale, Metro initially claimed that the ROW was 81 ft wide when it was only 75 ft wide. They later corrected some of their mistakes, but not all.

I am going to point out some additional concerns on the Redondo ROW between Artesia and Grant (where the above resident lives)'
(I also want to add that the Hybrid/ROW alternative which Metro selected as a LPA was NOT presented in detail in the DEIR, the way that the Hawthorne option and the Plain Vanilla ROW were.) 1) On the east side of the ROW, all the residents are at the bottom of a steep embankment. The embankment is on ROW property (for the most part, but not at the very bottom) and Metro's plans call for filling in the embankment in order to effectively widen the ROW, and put the LRT on top of it. (Without this fill-in, the flat part of the ROW would be about only 85ft wide or less.) 2) The plans call for a very high retaining wall, in these residents back yards; and further more, the wall will extend higher than the ROW. In effect, the people's back yards are going to be an isolated chamber. (Whose property is the wall going to be on, and how thick does it need to be? It should NOT be on the residents property)
3) The centerline of the closest LRT to the houses will be only about 13 ft away.

Below is a diagram done by Bill Hall of District 3, showing how houses are as close as 13 ft from centerline (The pink lines are the LRT track. Totally coincidental that he used "pink" for the pink line!) Mayor Butts said he was not in favor of houses that close, or even 30 ft away.

Figure 1. Shows distance from LRT centerline to houses on the east side of ROW.

Not shown on this diagram is where the pipelines are going. THey are probably ALL being relocated along the walls of the condos on the west side. See cartoon map below.

That is where the sink hole was; that damaged the foundation of the patio, and took 2 1/2 years ro repair.

We need a soils engineer (not controllec by Metro) to determine the likelihood of more sink holes.

Thank you

Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
January 14, 2025
To: City of Redondo Beach City Council
Subject: Outdated Anti-Tree Ordinance
My name is Andre Leroux and I am a lifetime resident of Redondo Beach.

Did you know that privacy hedges are illegal in Redondo Beach? According to a fence ordinance the side and rear yards should be a maximum of 6 feet and the front yard is even shorter at 42 inches. The city is currently prosecuting me with a misdemeanor for hedges I planted over 12 years ago. They are healthy and well maintained. Both neighbors on the other side of the hedge want them to stay.

This law is on the books but it is dormant and never enforced until there is a disgruntled neighbor who reports you. After doing some research, I have discovered that over 30% of properties in Redondo Beach are estimated to be affected by this ordinance. Massive enforcement of this ordinance will cause the City of Redondo Beach to lose over 30% of their mature trees.

NOT great for a Tree City USA recipient.

I have been trying to reach the city and there has been zero response from anyone. The only response I received from the city is a heavy prosecution from your legal department against my trees I planted over 12 years ago.

Prior to planting the trees, I contacted your planning department and they stated there were no issues with my plan. These are very well established, mature, low water, and well-maintained trees which all directly affected neighbors want to keep.

There have been zero private properties with this violation in the last 5 years. I am the only private resident being prosecuted for this unenforced Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
law. This was discovered through a public records search and proves it is not being enforced. Selective enforcement of the law allows for biases in policing, leading to potential abuse of power and corruption. It contributes to a breakdown of trust between law enforcement and communities, undermining public safety. This practice threatens the equitable treatment of all individuals under the law.

As you should know many Redondo Beach residents have similar trees and could also be charged with a misdemeanor after years of enjoying the benefits of having trees give privacy, shade, beauty, and so much more.

You probably have trees such as this in your neighborhood including possibly your neighbor, if you live in Redondo Beach.

I currently have 244 signatures on a petition to change and update this ordinance. You can find this petition on change.org or the website I created for this called GreenRedondo.com.

I have taken over 2000 photos of other homes in Redondo Beach violating this same ordinance. You can find a small sampling of photos on GreenRedondo.com.

To be clear, after speaking with my neighbors, these neighbors do NOT want the trees cut. They are happy with them. These are the trees separating our properties and the two directly affected neighbors do NOT want my trees cut.

My neighbors do not want these trees cut, I do not want these trees cut, and yet your city is prosecuting me hard and wants to possibly JAIL ME FOR 6 MONTHS.

These laws need to be changed. You have new properties being built with landscaping being planted. After speaking with the realtors, they stated the Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
purpose of these trees to grow into each other and provide privacy. I would be extremely upset spending $2.4M on a home and then finding out the planted trees, approved by your city upon final inspection, would need to be cut. This is a messed-up and outdated ordinance.

The city has created an extremely high-density neighborhoods and they are just becoming denser. The way we use our properties is completely different than we did even 20 years ago. We all want privacy from the ever-encroaching houses. Plus, the added benefit is environmental, providing shade, and the aesthetic beauty of landscaping increasing our property values.

If you have hedges or trees on your property, this CAN happen to you! Again, there are over 30% of properties in Redondo Beach which are directly affected. This is WHY it is imperative we act now to save our trees! We need to act now as a city and as residents to save these trees by updating these outdated anti-tree ordinances.

Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
Illegal hedges in Redondo Beach are:

1. Front Yard: over 42 inches tall (36 inches if you are on the corner lots)

2. Rear and Side yards: over 6 feet
Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
These illegal hedges are throughout Redondo Beach in all districts. These are a few examples.

We need to save our trees.

Sign our petition HERE
Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
This is at the corner of North Broadway and Carnelian Street. Yes, this is a corner lot on public property. This is our Redondo Beach City Hall. Google maps view. It appears the wall construction was intended to follow the ordinance but they grew a tall hedge. It is 140 feet long on the Carnelian side alone. It is taller than 6 feet even…as referenced by the man walking on the sidewalk. This is an illegal hedge per the ordinance.

Current ordinance states the side setback hedge cannot be over 6 feet. This hedge is significantly higher than that and an illegal hedge. Our anti-tree laws need to change.

Sign Petition
Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
This beautiful hedge is providing privacy for these residents. They are certainly over 6 feet tall and illegal. These anti-tree ordinances must be updated.

This beautiful hedge is providing privacy for these residents. They are certainly over 6 feet tall and illegal.

These anti-tree ordinances must be updated to save these trees. Sign our petition.

This beautiful front hedge is providing privacy for these residents. They are certainly over 42 inches tall and illegal. These anti-tree ordinances must be updated to save these trees. Sign our petition.

Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
Corner lot with 2 violations. The corner plants are higher than 36 inches and the driveway hedge is taller than 42 inches. Currently illegal under this ordinance.

This was taken at the Department of Beaches and Harbors warehouse. All those properties do not want to see this parking lot and want their privacy. These are all illegal per the current anti-tree ordinances. We need to change this…sign the petition and support our cause.

This hedge is located on a newer construction property. Per the current ordinance, this is located in the front set back and higher than 42 inches. This is an illegal hedge.

Sign Petition
Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
This property is located adjacent to Dive & Surf. This hedge is located on their side setback which, per the ordinance, would need to be no taller than 6 feet. This is an illegal hedge.

This is a huge hedge 200 feet long within the front setback. Current ordinance states it should be maximum 42 inches tall. This is significantly taller and currently illegal. We need the change these laws. Sign the petition.

Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
Prospect Avenue certainly is full of residents who have illegal hedges.

Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
Side setback hedges taller than 6 feet currently illegal. Corner hedge being grown currently over 36 inches. These trees look beautiful and currently illegal under the current ordinance. Sign the petition to save these trees.

Sign Petition
Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
Front hedges over 42 inches tall. These are illegal. Let’s change this ordinance.

Front hedges over 42 inches tall and side setback taller than 6 feet. These are illegal.

Let’s change this ordinance.

Front hedges over 42 inches tall and side setback taller than 6 feet. These are illegal.

Let’s change this ordinance.

Andre Leroux
Redondo Beach, CA 90278
https://GreenRedondo.com
Front hedges over 42 inches tall. These are illegal. Let’s change this ordinance.