From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk; Andrew Winje; Paige Kaluderovic; James Light Subject: Public Comment for RB City Council, RB PWSC, RB PSC, RBPW Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 11:17:56 AM
Attachments: RBCC 6-17-25 Intersection Diagram.pdf
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
The attached was discussed with the City Council at the 6/17/25 meeting. It provides concerns regarding the proposed intersection design. The greatest concern is RBPW proposal to leave parking in the intersection. The visual cue from a southbound parked vehicle is clearly indicative of continued southbound travel. That is inappropriate and dangerous.
As I indicated, I own a home in the intersection. I am significantly disabled with multiple surgeries and implants, yet, I will park as needed for safety and proceed to my home.
If safety is not our priority, then what is? We should not have a 2000, 4000 or even 6000 pound parked vehicle pointing southbound as the single most dominant, defining feature of the intersection.
For reference, I also provide video security samples of common wrong-way drivers. One makes a considered decision to drive though construction workers on the street to proceed the wrong-way down the Frontage to Diamond driving into a low, rising sun. The other comes up fast on a pedestrian (student?) from behind as it illegally makes a U-turn.
ALL FOCUS needs to be on highlighting the direction of travel and a parked vehicle facing SOUTH does not do that.
Mark Nelson
Local Traffic Wrong Way Vehicle Videohttps://youtu.be/35Rls7YOc1k Wrong Way Coming Up on Pedestrian from Behind https://youtu.be/CkW6dJInxNs
Following review of the June 11th letter from Traffic Engineering about the North Prospect Frontage & BCHD Intersection, we have the following comments:
#1 Addition of the word ONLY in street paint to the Right Turn Arrow. #2 Addition of the CalTrans DO NOT ENTER street paint that is now in use at the end of freeway offramps in addition to, or in place of, the red reflective markers. The same people that drive past 2 NO U-TURN SIGNS, 2 DO NOT ENTER SIGNS, 1 ONE-WAY SIGN, and OVER a 10-FOOT LONG WHITE ARROW will not be deterred by
REFLECTIVE RED ROAD MARKERS
#3 Red curbing the rest of the bus stop for visibility as the key to safety, as per the findings of the University of California. The bus stop on the frontage has had mental health crises, medical emergencies, hospital dump offs in gowns, campers/sleepers, and transients. We were notified in an email from prior PW Director Semaan that the frontage road has had child predator investigations. Let’s use the UC data about bus stops and the prior events and be safe instead of having an unseen medical emergency of child molestation because a van or SUV or even a car is parked next to the bus stop blocking the view of the enclosure. #4 Red curb the area on the west side of the intersection entirely and add a NO LEFT TURN SIGN. Parking a single vehicle inside the intersection pointed southbound sends a CLEAR SIGNAL to drivers that SOUTHBOUND illegally against the one-way is acceptable. Don’t squander an opportunity for safety by allowing a giant TURN LEFT THE WRONG WAY sign in the intersection. RED CURB IT and add a NO LEFT TURN SIGN AS THE ONLY VISUAL.
Used on Freeway Off Ramps to Deter Wrong-Way
From: Darryl Boyd
To: CityClerk; Anneke Blair; Jeffrey Gaul; Alan Klainbaum; Nancy Skiba; Austin Carmichael; [email protected]; Gilbert M. Escontrias; Cindi Arrata; Candace Nafissi; John Simpson; Andrew Beeli; Jay Tsao; Steven Anderson; Bhuvan Bajaj; Traffic Engineering; Andrew Winje; James Light; Paige Kaluderovic; Zein Obagi; Scott Behrendt; Brad Waller; Chadwick B. Castle Subject: 500-600 N Prospect Ave - Plants, irrigation
Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 11:48:45 AM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Good Morning City Council Members and Mayor Light,
Please take 5 minutes today and review the video file I am providing from earlier this morning and the PDF file that I sent to all of you last week.
Video file:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1XFpZFgf6SvmSSMLUDvMPkGyZIl2iYCrl/view? usp=drive_link
PDF file:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/14oy8DpkR63vLhhIco6xW5wO52vGpUlus/view?usp=sharing What you are providing to the Residents of 500-600 N Prospect Ave. is cosmetic in nature only. There is no safety or noise reduction benefit whatsoever and there never will be from those plants.
Before this gets too far along, I am asking that you reconsider what you are doing here and make corrections. The Residents on this street deserve much better than this. Maybe we could have been consulted first. Another neighborhood meeting maybe? Someone is taking things into their own hands here and it's not being fully thought through.
I am still waiting on a response regarding the $200k+ budget that was already in place for the N. Prospect Ave median. I can't understand why you refuse to respond to that. Also if part of your budget process is to watch where dollars are going, why was money spent on overtime for the workers out here? This shouldn't be an overtime project now and never would have been if the City of Redondo Beach had not neglected this entire situation for decades.
Nothing personal towards anyone, but many of us are very unhappy with how things are being done without our input and with what we are seeing out there. Put yourselves in our situation.
This just isn't right.
Darryl Boyd
--
Darryl Boyd - Broker/Owner, MRP, SFR, CPTS
Specialized Court Services:
Expert Witness - Probate & Trust Valuation Disputes
Substitute Administration - Probate Cases
DARRYL B. BOYD, BROKER
811 N. Catalina Ave. Suite #2016
Redondo Beach, CA 90277
(310) 490-0139 Direct cellular
[email protected]
DarrylBoydBroker.com
CA DRE #01178871
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk; Andrew Winje; Paige Kaluderovic; James Light Subject: Re: Public Comment for RB City Council, RB PWSC, RB PSC, RBPW Date: Wednesday, June 18, 2025 12:14:50 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.
Addendum
The prior week 6/10/25 we discussed CVC 22500 (illegal parking across driveways) and the lack of enforcement. That state law needs to be enforced in the T-intersection, and perhaps one or two driveways each way (for example) 509-515 or 507-517. Perhaps a round of warning tickets would be appropriate?
On Wed, Jun 18, 2025 at 11:15 AM Mark Nelson (Home Gmail) wrote:
The attached was discussed with the City Council at the 6/17/25 meeting. It provides concerns regarding the proposed intersection design. The greatest concern is RBPW proposal to leave parking in the intersection. The visual cue from a southbound parked vehicle is clearly indicative of continued southbound travel. That is inappropriate and dangerous.
As I indicated, I own a home in the intersection. I am significantly disabled with multiple surgeries and implants, yet, I will park as needed for safety and proceed to my home.
If safety is not our priority, then what is? We should not have a 2000, 4000 or even 6000 pound parked vehicle pointing southbound as the single most dominant, defining feature of the intersection.
For reference, I also provide video security samples of common wrong-way drivers. One makes a considered decision to drive though construction workers on the street to proceed the wrong-way down the Frontage to Diamond driving into a low, rising sun. The other comes up fast on a pedestrian (student?) from behind as it illegally makes a U-turn.
ALL FOCUS needs to be on highlighting the direction of travel and a parked vehicle facing SOUTH does not do that.
Mark Nelson
Local Traffic Wrong Way Vehicle Videohttps://youtu.be/35Rls7YOc1k Wrong Way Coming Up on Pedestrian from Behind https://youtu.be/CkW6dJInxNs