J1 - blue folder — Redondo Beach City Council, July 21, 2026

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
JULY 21, 2026
J.1 PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ON NON-AGENDA ITEMS
• Public Comments
From: Stop BCHD
To: CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: City Council; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected]; Brad Waller; Scott Behrendt; Zein Obagi; Chadwick B. Castle; Paige Kaluderovic; [email protected]; [email protected]; info; [email protected] Subject: [PUBLIC COMMENT ALL AGENCIES] BCHD Update: The Health Damages to the Nearby Community According to Peer-Reviewed Research
Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 9:13:01 AM
Attachments: (BCHD) Transmittal_Memo_Noise_Studies.pdf
(BCHD) Health Damages Studies of Construction Noise FTA Noise Level Exceedance.pdf (BCHD) Health Damages Studies of Any Source Caused FTA Noise Level Exceedance.pdf CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

As BCHD continues its march to damage surrounding neighborhood health and value for the benefit of a 100% private development -- we are continuing to document the health damages that BCHD will cause.

The damages are documented in the attached, peer-reviewed studies of the excessive noise conditions that BCHD's Board CERTIFIED will occur. The damages are very real. Heart function, nervous system, fatigue, chronic stress, and child development damages to name only a few.

Thanks to volunteers, we have two detailed studies that are fully documented and entered into the public records to be publicly available to inform local agencies as well as for group, individual, or small claims court litigation support or any other use a public comment in the record of various agencies can be used for.

No action is required from you at this time. Our only intent is to demonstrate to you that your friends and neighbors care deeply about your health and will work to support keeping you healthy, no matter what BCHD and its private developers plan to do for their $1.25M/year, 99- year lease project on our publicly-owned and purchased land.

Be safe and healthy.

Your friends and neighbors at StopBCHD
--
StopBCHD.com ([email protected]) is a Neighborhood Quality-of-Life Community concerned about the quality-of-life, health, and economic damages that BCHDs financiallycentered private development to support a runaway Executive spending will cause based on peer-reviewed, transferable studies.

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.

Page 1 ends

Health Damage Studies of Any-Source Caused FTA Noise Level Exceedances
July 15, 2026
Federal frameworks, such as the U.S. Federal Transit Administration (FTA) manual, typically baseline environmental noise impact criteria against variables like speech interference and community annoyance. For instance, permanent transit criteria flag "Moderate to Severe" impacts when noise ranges from 55 to 65 dBA Ldn, while transient construction thresholds permit short-term limits up to 70 dBA Leq at night and 80 dBA Leq during the day.

However, broad public health, medical, and developmental epidemiological data demonstrate that when ambient noise environments regularly exceed these regulatory boundaries, the impact transitions from a subjective neighborhood nuisance into systematic, non-auditory biological damage.

For non-workers—specifically permanent residents, vulnerable elderly populations, and developing children—prolonged exposure to noise levels above these thresholds triggers significant pathways of physiological and psychological impairment. The following ten peerreviewed studies document the cross-disciplinary health damages caused by high-intensity environmental noise fields.

1. Cardiovascular Pathologies, Hospitalization Risks, and All-Cause Mortality When ambient noise levels breach the 55–60 dBA Ldn envelope and advance toward peak thresholds, the primary medical damage occurs within the human vascular tree. The autonomic nervous system processes these intense sound fields as environmental stressors, resulting in persistent vasoconstriction and arterial wear.

Study 1: The Danish Diet, Cancer, and Health Cohort (Stroke Incidence) ● Source: Sørensen et al. (2011)
● Parameters & Receptors: Prospective cohort tracking 51,485 urban residents aged 50– 64 over a mean follow-up window of 9.6 years, mapping modeled residential facade exposure ranging up to 82 dBA.
● Documented Damage: The study identified a clear linear dose-response relationship between residential noise exposure and stroke risk. For every 10 dB increment of additional noise, the overall risk of sustaining a stroke increased by 14%. For vulnerable residents aged 65 and older, the vulnerability scaled exponentially, demonstrating a 27% risk increase per 10 dB of elevated noise, with a sharp pathological acceleration observed above a threshold limit of 60 dBA. The authors estimated that up to 19% of

Page 2 ends

stroke cases in older populations could be directly attributed to high-intensity traffic noise fields.

Study 2: The Swiss National Cohort (Myocardial Infarction Mortality) ● Source: Huss et al. (2010)
● Parameters & Receptors: Longitudinal evaluation of 4.6 million adult residents older than 30 years across Switzerland, tracking geocoded residential locations relative to transport corridors.
● Documented Damage: The study isolated 15,532 distinct fatalities stemming directly from myocardial infarction (acute heart attacks). After controlling for localized particulate matter air pollution (PM10), socioeconomic index, and education, researchers discovered that heart attack mortality increased progressively with both the decibel level and the duration of high-intensity exposure. Residents exposed to noise levels equal to or exceeding 60 dBA exhibited an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.3 compared to those in baseline environments below 45 dBA. For long-term non-workers and residents who remained at the same address for 15 years or more, the hazard ratio escalated to

1.5, indicating a 50% increase in fatal heart attack risk driven by sustained environmental acoustics.

Study 3: The US Multi-Airport Retrospective Cohort (Cardiovascular Hospitalizations)
● Source: Correia et al. (2013)
● Parameters & Receptors: Massive retrospective multi-airport study tracking a population of over 6 million older adults (Medicare beneficiaries aged 65 and older) residing near 89 distinct U.S. airports.
● Documented Damage: Utilizing high-resolution noise contours and controlling for individual zip-code level demographics and socioeconomic status, the study evaluated the direct relationship between aircraft noise fields and acute hospital admissions. The analysis established that a zip code characterized by a 10 dB higher noise exposure experienced a 3.5% higher cardiovascular hospital admission rate on average. The correlation remained pronounced in environments where noise metrics advanced into the 90th percentile, confirming that high-decibel overhead noise spikes cause rapid cardiovascular decompensation in vulnerable residential demographics.

Page 3 ends

Study 4: The London M25 Urban Population Study (All-Cause Mortality and Morbidity)
● Source: Halonen et al. (2015)
● Parameters & Receptors: Small-area level public health analysis covering 8.6 million inhabitants across the entirety of London, partitioning daytime (7:00–22:59) and nighttime (23:00–06:59) noise fields.
● Documented Damage: The study cross-referenced all-cause mortality and cardiovascular hospital admissions against residential postcodes. Residents living in high-noise zones exceeding 60 dBA during the day demonstrated a 4% increase in allcause mortality compared to residents exposed to quieter baselines below 55 dBA.

Furthermore, daytime noise levels above 60 dBA drove a 5% increase in hospital admissions for stroke among adults, which expanded to a 9% increased risk among elderly residents. Nighttime noise spikes between 55–60 dBA independently forced a 5% increase in stroke risks for the elderly cohort.

2. Child Development, Neurodevelopmental Impairments, and Education Deficits Developing children represent a uniquely high-risk non-worker population. Because their central nervous systems are still maturing and they lack the mature cognitive coping strategies needed to actively manage environmental stressors, high-amplitude ambient sound fields directly interfere with core learning windows and behavioral baselines.

High-Intensity Noise Environment (>60 dBA)
│
├─► Impaired Auditory Discrimination & Speech Perception ├─► Cortical Overload & Deficits in Sustained Attention └─► Failure of Declarative Memory & Reduced Reading Comprehension Study 5: The RANCH Trans-European Epidemiological Study (Cognitive Impairment)
● Source: Stansfeld et al. (2005)
● Parameters & Receptors: Cross-sectional field study evaluating 2,279 primary school children aged 9–10 across 89 schools surrounding major European aviation hubs (London Heathrow, Amsterdam Schiphol, and Madrid Barajas). ● Documented Damage: The study established a clear, linear, exposure-response relationship between chronic high-decibel noise fields and cognitive deficits. Even after rigorously adjusting for parental socioeconomic status, home crowding, and localized classroom acoustics, elevated noise exposure linearly impaired both reading comprehension and recognition memory. The data proved that every 5 dB increase in

Page 4 ends

chronic daytime environmental noise shifted reading development metrics backward, creating long-term educational delays at a critical stage of childhood development.

Study 6: The Munich Airport Longitudinal Switchover Study (Causal Memory Loss)
● Source: Hygge, Evans, & Bullinger (2002)
● Parameters & Receptors: A prospective, longitudinal natural experiment tracking 326 primary schoolchildren (mean age of 10 years) evaluated across three separate measurement waves before and after the sudden decommissioning of the old Munich airport and the simultaneous opening of the new international airport. ● Documented Damage: This study provided definitive evidence of a causal relationship between high noise levels and cognitive impairment. Children living near the newly opened airport site—who went from a quiet baseline to an environment characterized by frequent high-decibel overflights—suffered significant drops in long-term declarative memory recall, speech perception accuracy, and reading capabilities within two years of operation. Conversely, children residing near the closed airport showed substantial cognitive recovery once the noise fields were removed, demonstrating that chronic environmental noise acts as a continuous neurocognitive depressant.

3. Psychiatric Metrics, Affective Disorders, and Behavioral Pathology Exceeding standard acoustic limits does not merely damage physical tissue; it alters the fundamental neurochemistry of the brain. Chronic exposure to unpredictable, high-amplitude acoustic events maintains the central nervous system in a state of hyper-vigilance, leading to a higher prevalence of psychiatric conditions.

Study 7: The NORAH Rhine-Main Case-Control Project (Clinical Depression) ● Source: Seidler et al. (2016)
● Parameters & Receptors: Massive secondary healthcare data analysis evaluating approximately 1 million insured residents older than 40 years living within the acoustic impact zone of the Frankfurt Airport.
● Documented Damage: The epidemiological team mapped insurance-coded medical diagnoses of unipolar depression and anxiety disorders against modeled residential noise exposure. For individuals exposed to long-term continuous road traffic noise levels equal to or exceeding 70 dBA, the study documented a significant linear exposure-risk profile, yielding an Odds Ratio (OR) of 1.17 for clinical depression. Most notably, when residents faced combined, multi-source environmental noise vectors that crossed the

Page 5 ends

50 dB threshold, the psychological strain compounded, producing a peak depression Odds Ratio of 1.42.

Study 8: The Danish National Birth Cohort (Childhood Hyperactivity and Inattention)
● Source: Hjortebjerg et al. (2016)
● Parameters & Receptors: Epidemiological cohort tracking 46,940 children from birth up to age 7, utilizing the parent-reported Strengths and Difficulties Questionnaire (SDQ) to monitor behavioral baselines.
● Documented Damage: The study calculated time-weighted residential noise averages across each child's complete developmental address history. A 10 dB increase in continuous residential road traffic noise from birth to age 7 was associated with a 7% increase in abnormal total behavioral difficulty scores. Crucially, the subscale analysis demonstrated a 9% risk increase for clinically significant hyperactivity and inattention symptoms per 10 dB increment. Nighttime facade noise exposure similarly drove elevated rates of emotional symptoms and sleep latency delays (OR = 1.79), confirming that high noise levels disrupt childhood psychological development.

4. Endocrinology, Metabolic Deregulation, and Allostatic Burden Chronic ambient noise stimulates the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal (HPA) axis, causing a sustained, low-grade release of glucocorticoids—specifically cortisol. Elevated baseline cortisol levels inhibit insulin secretion and reduce the sensitivity of hepatic and muscular tissue to insulin, driving downstream metabolic disorders.

Study 9: The Danish Diet, Cancer, and Health Follow-Up (Type 2 Diabetes Incidence)
● Source: Sørensen et al. (2013)
● Parameters & Receptors: Population-based cohort tracking 57,053 individuals aged 50–64 at enrollment, identifying 3,869 verified cases of incident diabetes over a 9.6-year tracking window.
● Documented Damage: Using multi-year historical address mapping via SoundPLAN modeling, the research team isolated noise fields from background air pollution. A 10 dB higher average residential noise level during the 5 years preceding diagnosis was associated with a statistically significant 11% increased risk of developing incident diabetes. When the researchers applied a stricter clinical definition of diabetes (excluding self-reported cases to capture only medically managed patients), the risk

Page 6 ends

profile escalated to an Incidence Rate Ratio (IRR) of 1.14 per 10 dB increase.

Study 10: The Stockholm County NordSOUND Collaborative Project (Central Obesity)
● Source: Pyko et al. (2015)
● Parameters & Receptors: Cross-sectional metabolic evaluation of 5,075 urban and suburban residents across Stockholm County, incorporating comprehensive clinical physical exams and body composition metrics.
● Documented Damage: The study investigated the relationship between residential traffic noise and markers of obesity. Long-term road traffic noise exposure demonstrated a direct relationship with increases in physical waist circumference, tracking a 0.21 cm increase per 5 dB rise in noise. For non-workers and residents exposed to sustained environmental noise levels equal to or exceeding 45 dBA, the Odds Ratio for developing central obesity was 1.18. When residents were subjected to multi-source noise environments (overlapping road, rail, and aviation noise fields), the risk multiplied, yielding an obesity Odds Ratio of 1.95. This confirms that high noise levels alter core endocrine homeostatic mechanisms, driving systemic fat deposition and visceral adiposity.

The Methodological Flaw of Regulatory Energy Averages: Standard municipal and federal guidelines like the FTA framework rely heavily on time-integrated metrics ($L_{eq}$ or $L_{dn}$), which mathematically smooth out intense, short-duration acoustic peaks over extended 8-hour or 24-hour windows. Public health data demonstrates that the human autonomic nervous system does not respond to energy averages; it responds to peak mechanical and neurological shocks. A high-kurtosis environment that meets a regulatory 80 dBA daytime average can cause significantly more vascular, cognitive, and endocrine damage than a steady, predictable baseline drone of the exact same decibel value.

Cross-Disciplinary Summary of Non-Worker Noise Damages
Peer-Reviewed
Study
Primary Field Target Receptor
Cohort
Key Quantified
Health Metric /
Outcome
Sørensen et al.
(2011)
Medicine / Vascular 51,485 Urban Adults 27% increase in stroke risk per 10
dB for residents
over 65 years old.

Page 7 ends

Huss et al. (2010) Medicine /
Cardiology

4.6 Million Swiss
Adults
Hazard Ratio of 1.5
for fatal myocardial
infarction in longterm residents.

Correia et al.
(2013)
Public Health /
Geriatrics
6 Million U.S. Elderly 3.5% elevation in
cardiovascular
hospital
admissions per 10
dB increase.

Halonen et al.
(2015)
Epidemiology 8.6 Million London
Citizens
4% increase in allcause mortality;
9% increase in
elderly stroke
hospitalizations.

Stansfeld et al.
(2005)
Education /
Pediatrics
2,279 Developing
Children
Linear exposureresponse
correlation with
reading
comprehension
and memory
deficits.

Hygge et al.
(2002)
Child Development 326 Munich
Schoolchildren
Proven causal
relationship for
long-term
memory loss and
speech perception
defects.

Seidler et al.
(2016)
Psychiatry / Mental
Health
1 Million Frankfurt
Residents
Odds Ratio of 1.42
for clinical
depression under
multi-source

Page 8 ends

exposure fields.

Hjortebjerg et al.
(2016)
Behavioral Science 46,940 Danish
Children
9% risk increase
for clinical
hyperactivity and
inattention per 10
dB increment.

Sørensen et al.
(2013)
Endocrinology /
Metabolic
57,053 Adult
Subjects
14% increase in
Type 2 Diabetes
incidence per 10
dB historical
exposure.

Pyko et al. (2015) Endocrinology /
Metabolic
5,075 Stockholm
Residents
Odds Ratio of 1.95
for central obesity
under combined
multi-source noise
loads.

Comprehensive Source Directory
● Azuma, K., & Uchiyama, I. (2017). Association between environmental noise and subjective symptoms related to cardiovascular diseases among elderly individuals in Japan. PLOS ONE, 12(11), e0188236. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188236 ● Correia, A. W., Peters, J. L., Levy, J. I., Melly, S., & Dominici, F. (2013). Residential exposure to aircraft noise and hospital admissions for cardiovascular diseases: multiairport retrospective study. British Medical Journal (BMJ), 347, f5438. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.f5438
● Halonen, J. I., Hansell, A. L., Gulliver, J., et al. (2015). Road traffic noise is associated with increased cardiovascular morbidity and mortality and all-cause mortality in London.

European Heart Journal, 36(39), 2653–2661. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehv216 ● Hjortebjerg, D., Andersen, A. M., Christensen, J. S., et al. (2016). Exposure to road traffic noise and behavioral problems in 7-year-old children: a cohort study.

Environmental Health Perspectives, 124(2), 228–234.
https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1409430
● Huss, A., Spoerri, A., Egger, M., & Röösli, M. (2010). Aircraft noise, air pollution, and mortality from myocardial infarction. Epidemiology, 21(6), 829–836.

Page 9 ends

https://doi.org/10.1097/EDE.0b013e3181f4e634
● Hygge, S., Evans, G. W., & Bullinger, M. (2002). A prospective study of some effects of aircraft noise on cognitive performance in schoolchildren. Psychological Science, 13(5), 469–474. https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.00483
● Jarup, L., Babisch, W., Houthuijs, D., et al. (2008). Hypertension and exposure to noise near airports: the HYENA study. Environmental Health Perspectives, 116(3), 329–333. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.10775
● Pyko, A., Eriksson, C., Oftedal, B., et al. (2015). Exposure to traffic noise and markers of obesity. Occupational and Environmental Medicine, 72(8), 594–601. https://doi.org/10.1136/oemed-2014-102516
● Seidler, A., Wagner, M., Schubert, M., et al. (2016). Association between aircraft, road and railway traffic noise and depression in a large case-control study based on secondary data. Deutsches Ärzteblatt International, 113(24), 407–414. https://doi.org/10.3238/arztebl.2016.0407
● Sørensen, M., Andersen, Z. J., Nordsborg, R. B., et al. (2011). Road traffic noise and stroke: a prospective cohort study. European Heart Journal, 32(6), 737–744. https://doi.org/10.1093/eurheartj/ehq466
● Sørensen, M., Andersen, Z. J., Nordsborg, R. B., et al. (2013). Long-term exposure to road traffic noise and incident diabetes: a cohort study. Environmental Health Perspectives, 121(2), 217–222. https://doi.org/10.1289/ehp.1205503 ● Stansfeld, S. A., Berglund, B., Clark, C., et al. (2005). Aircraft and road traffic noise and children's cognition and health (RANCH study): a cross-national study. The Lancet, 365(9475), 1942–1949. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0140-6736(05)66660-3

Page 1 ends

Health Damage Studies of Any-Source Caused FTA Noise Level Exceedances
July 15, 2026
To evaluate the environmental health consequences of prolonged infrastructure development, it is necessary to examine how the human body processes high-decibel acoustic profiles and groundborne vibrations that exceed the regulatory thresholds established by the Federal Transit Administration (FTA).

The FTA Transit Noise and Vibration Impact Assessment Manual establishes specific construction limits for residential zones, setting an 8-hour daytime ceiling of 80 dBA Leq (Equivalent Continuous Sound Level), an 8-hour nighttime ceiling of 70 dBA Leq, and a 30-day cumulative average of 75 dBA Ldn (Day-Night Average Sound Level).

Crucially, these federal thresholds rely heavily on the Equal Energy Hypothesis, which assumes that the total biological damage of noise is determined strictly by the time-averaged acoustic energy accumulated over a given window. However, public health and environmental engineering research indicates that time-integrated metrics significantly underestimate the health hazards unique to construction noise. Because construction sites generate highly erratic, high-kurtosis sound signatures (sudden, near-instantaneous sound pressure peaks) paired with low-frequency ground vibrations, they trigger distinct, severe non-auditory pathological pathways in surrounding residential populations.

1. Epidemiological Identification of Construction-Specific Health Outcomes Large-scale epidemiological tracking reveals that the irregular, high-amplitude clatter of an active construction site acts as a significantly more severe physiological stressor than standard, predictable transportation noise sources.

A landmark environmental health study isolated the precise health burdens of distinct urban noise profiles on residents inside their homes. The research team tracked multi-source environmental noise exposure—including road traffic, rail lines, civil aviation, general neighborhood sounds, and active construction sites—and cross-referenced them with clinically validated subjective symptoms of cardiovascular disease (CVD).

Out of all urban environmental stressors analyzed, residential construction noise demonstrated the strongest statistical association with cardiovascular-related symptoms, surpassing the measured impacts of both aviation and rail traffic. The study found that exposure to construction noise dramatically elevated adjusted Odds Ratios (OR) within a 95% confidence interval across multiple acute vascular and neurological risk indicators:

Page 2 ends

● Disturbances in Pulse (Cardiac Arrhythmia Indicators): OR = 1.12 (1.06 to 1.19) ● Foot Pain or Numbness While Walking (Peripheral Vascular Restriction): OR = 1.19 (1.12 to 1.28)
● Acute Impaired Tongue Movement (Neurological/Stroke Indicators): OR = 1.21 (1.08 to 1.35)
● Limb Paralysis (Acute Ischemic Indicators): OR = 1.25 (1.15 to 1.36) To quantify the broader community toll of these exposures, public health researchers developed a structural health risk model based on Disability-Adjusted Life Years (DALYs)—a metric utilized by the World Health Organization to measure the years of healthy life lost to environmental illnesses.

Evaluating a residential area adjacent to heavy infrastructure development, the model demonstrated that extended construction noise exposure resulted in a documented loss of

34.51 DALYs across the neighboring receptor community. The analysis identified middle-aged adults (specifically the 45 to 54 age demographic) as the most vulnerable population cohort, with the absolute primary driver of healthy life loss stemming directly from severe construction-induced sleep architecture fragmentation.

2. Low-Frequency Hum and Groundborne Vibration Dynamics A primary reason construction noise penetrates residential envelopes so aggressively is its low-frequency component, which is frequently paired with groundborne structural vibration.

Comprehensive field studies analyzing human responses to vibration in residential environments have derived distinct exposure-response curves specifically for construction activity. The field data demonstrated that 37.9% of residents exposed to construction-induced groundborne vibration reported being "highly annoyed," a rate vastly outstripping the community reaction to permanent rail infrastructure. The tracking proved that identical construction vibration velocities elicited significantly stronger autonomic and negative emotional stress responses during the evening and night than during daytime hours.

Furthermore, a resident's immediate concern over property and structural settlement damage heavily amplifies the biological severity of their noise and vibration annoyance.

When these forces interact with multi-story residential structures, the propagation behavior creates unique internal exposure zones. Structural mapping inside a 31-story residential tower adjacent to a heavy light-rail construction project revealed that airborne construction noise concentrates heavily on lower residential levels before attenuating upward. Concurrently, groundborne vibrations travel directly up the structural columns, creating secondary acoustic resonances and floor-slab vibrations that decay sequentially by floor. Because construction machinery operates with no physical shielding and constantly shifts positions, its noise and vibration profiles are highly sudden and discontinuous. This structural randomness prevents

Page 3 ends

the human body from anticipating the stressor, making it uniquely disruptive compared to predictable underground transit systems.

3. Physical Attributes, Annoyance Levels, and Sleep Disturbance The specific machinery arrays deployed on site—including diesel generators, metal-cutting tools, welding stations, and heavy transport vehicles—create an oppressive localized soundscape.

Ambient sound tracking at the exterior facades of homes flanking urban worksites revealed a mean exposure level of 74.57 dBA, directly breaching acceptable municipal and residential baselines. Cross-sectional community surveys mapped to these decibel loads documented intense community distress, with 87.1% of vicinity residents reporting "very high" noise annoyance. The most prevalent non-auditory clinical issues identified among these adjacent neighbors were persistent indoor cognitive distraction, severe sleep onset delay, and immediate reading and concentration difficulties.

Steady Traffic Noise (Low Kurtosis) --> Brain Habituation Underway --> Lower Acute Stress Response
Construction Impact (High Kurtosis) --> Reflex Acoustic Shock --> Sympathetic Nervous System Dominance
To map the exact biological timeline of how these acoustic shocks break down human homeostatic function, researchers conducted real-time physiological tracking of subjects exposed to stepped construction machinery loads scaling up to the peak FTA allowance of 80 dBA. Tracking Electrodermal Activity (EDA) and Heart Rate Variability (HRV), the experimental data revealed that construction noise significantly alters the body's nervous system balance within the first 30 seconds of exposure. The rapid, unpredictable shifts inherent to both tonal machinery hums and impulsive impact pile driving cause sharp drops in the standard deviation of normal beat intervals (SDNN) and high-frequency (HF) cardiac power bands. This shifts the human body completely out of its parasympathetic "rest-and-digest" state and locks it into acute sympathetic nervous system dominance, driving immediate blood pressure spikes, elevated systemic cortisol, and arterial constriction.

The Pathological Mechanism: The core hazard of construction noise lies in its high kurtosis and structural randomness. Because the human brain cannot establish a predictable pattern amid the erratic clatter of heavy equipment, it continually processes the soundscape as an immediate environmental threat. This permanent engagement of the stress-response loop prevents nocturnal cardiovascular recovery, accelerating arterial stiffening and long-term endothelial damage over weeks of exposure.

Page 4 ends

Summary of Quantified Residential Health Indicators
Peer-Reviewed
Study
Measured Vector Primary
Residential
Receptors
Documented
Health Outcomes
Azuma &
Uchiyama (2017)
Heavy site
machinery noise vs.
transit noise
Elderly individuals
inside primary
homes
Strongest
correlation with
CVD symptoms; up
to a 1.25 Odds
Ratio for acute
ischemic indicators.

Xiao, Li, & Zhang
(2016)
Earthwork and
concrete phase
noise
Bordering
residential
neighborhoods
Documented
community loss of

34.51 DALYs driven
by severe sleep
architecture
fragmentation.

Waddington et al.
(2014)
Groundborne
construction
vibration
Occupants inside
their own homes
Confirmed 37.9%
high annoyance;
evening/night
vibration forces
acute autonomic
stress reactions.

Zou, Zhu, & Chen
(2020)
Combined
structural noise and
vibration
Multi-story (31
floors) residential
tower
Mapped floor-byfloor transmission;
sudden,
discontinuous
profiles cause
maximum
psychological
disruption.

Golmohammadi et Diesel generators 140 immediate Ambient levels

Page 5 ends

al. (2013) and heavy hauling neighborhood
residents
averaged 74.57
dBA; 87.1% of
residents suffered
extreme sleep and
cognitive
interference.

Lee, Hwang, & Lee
(2024)
Impulsive pile
driving and tonal
machinery
Human biological
testing at FTA limits
Documented
immediate
sympathetic
nervous system
dominance via
HRV/EDA; failure of
brain habituation.

Comprehensive Sources and References
● Azuma, K., & Uchiyama, I. (2017). Association between environmental noise and subjective symptoms related to cardiovascular diseases among elderly individuals in Japan. PLOS ONE, 12(11), e0188236. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0188236 ● Golmohammadi, R., Abbaspour, M., Nassiri, P., & Mahjub, H. (2013). Noise Annoyance Due to Construction Worksites. Journal of Research in Health Sciences, 13(2), 201–207. (Archived via ResearchGate & CABI Digital Library).
● Lee, S., Hwang, S., Lee, M., & Lee, S. (2024). The impact of different types and levels of construction noise on physiological responses: Focusing on standardization and habituation. Sustainable Cities and Society, 112, 105644. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scs.2024.105644
● Waddington, D. C., Wood, C. C., Smith, M. G., et al. (2014). Human response to vibration in residential environments. The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, 135(1), 182–193. https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4836017
● Xiao, J., Li, X., & Zhang, Z. (2016). DALY-Based Health Risk Assessment of Construction Noise in Beijing, China. International Journal of Environmental Research and Public Health, 13(11), 1045. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijerph13111045 ● Zou, C., Zhu, R., Chen, Y., et al. (2020). Evaluation of Building Construction-Induced Noise and Vibration Impact on Residents. Sustainability, 12(4), 1579. https://doi.org/10.3390/su12041579

Page 1 ends

MEMORANDUM
To: Beach Cities Health District and its Developers and Contractors; From:

Local Agencies; Surrounding Construction-Impacted Residents StopBCHD
Date: July 20, 2026
Re: Transmittal of Noise-Health Research Relevant to FTA Threshold Exceedances of Proposed Commercial Real Estate Development on Public-owned Prospect Avenue Site
Beach Cities Health District (BCHD) routinely relies on research developed in other places and populations when that research supports its public-health programs and institutional objectives. That practice necessarily rests on the accepted scientific principle that valid findings may be transferable beyond the precise location or project studied. During the Healthy Living Campus EIR process, however, BCHD repeatedly discounted unfavorable health evidence because a study was not conducted in Redondo Beach, did not concern this exact project, did not involve temporary construction noise, or did not match the precise exposure pathway or symptom asserted. BCHD cannot reasonably invoke transferability when research supports its programs and reject transferability when research identifies potential harm from its own project. Selective reliance of that kind amounts to cherry-picking. We therefore intend to present BCHD's prior EIR responses, viewed as a whole, to one or more judicial officers for independent review at a future time.

Enclosed are two research compilations addressing the health consequences of environmental noise at levels relevant to Federal Transit Administration criteria.

The first addresses health damage associated with noise exceeding or approaching FTA thresholds regardless of source. It summarizes peer-reviewed research concerning roadway, aircraft, rail, and multi-source environmental noise and identifies cardiovascular disease, stroke, myocardial infarction mortality, hospital admissions, childhood cognitive impairment, behavioral effects, depression, diabetes, and other non-auditory outcomes. The central point is straightforward:
the human body responds to acoustic intensity, duration, nighttime disturbance, unpredictability, and repeated peak events—not to the administrative label assigned to the source. The compilation also notes that FTA construction criteria permit exposure up to 80 dBA Leq during the day and 70 dBA Leq at night, while epidemiological studies report adverse associations at lower environmental noise levels.

The second compilation is limited more specifically to construction noise and associated vibration. It identifies research involving active worksites, heavy machinery, hauling, pile driving, lowfrequency noise, groundborne vibration, sleep disruption, cardiovascular symptoms, cognitive interference, and autonomic nervous-system responses. It also explains why averaged metrics such as Leq and Ldn may understate the effects of erratic, impulsive, high-kurtosis construction noise.

The studies summarized include findings of cardiovascular-related symptoms among residents exposed to construction noise, loss of healthy life years driven principally by sleep disruption, high annoyance from construction vibration, concentration and reading interference, and measurable acute stress responses during machinery exposure.

Page 2 ends

These two compilations are complementary. The first demonstrates that sufficiently intense environmental noise may produce physiological and developmental harm regardless of whether the source is road traffic, aircraft, rail, industrial activity, or construction.

The second demonstrates that construction noise presents additional source-specific concerns because of its impulsive character, unpredictability, vibration component, low-frequency content, interference with sleep, and limited potential for habituation. Together, they directly answer the recurring suggestion in BCHD's EIR responses that available health literature was either too general or insufficiently specific to construction activity. They refute BCHD’s recurring pattern of cherrypicking only supportive research and ignoring research that demonstrates BCHD’s construction damages profile to surrounding residents. They establish a clear nexus of transferability of noise damages to health.

BCHD's prior responses should not be examined one at a time as isolated drafting choices. The pattern was to narrow the required factual match until virtually no published study could qualify: not local enough, not project-specific enough, not temporary enough, not construction-specific enough, or not tied to the exact receptor and symptom. Applied consistently, that standard would make preventive epidemiology functionally useless unless the project were first built and the surrounding population studied after exposure. That is not a defensible public-health standard. It substitutes technical distinctions for a meaningful evaluation of whether known noise-related health mechanisms are relevant to the exposures BCHD itself predicts.

BCHD is a public health district. It should evaluate health evidence consistently and with the same willingness to apply transferable research that it uses in its own programs. These materials are transmitted so that BCHD, reviewing agencies, and any court examining the record have an organized presentation of both the general noise-health evidence and the constructionspecific evidence.

Enclosures

1. Health Damages Studies of Any-Source-Caused FTA Noise Level Exceedance

2. Health Damages Studies of Construction Noise and FTA Noise Level Exceedance From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: [email protected]; [email protected]; [email protected] Cc: Robert W. Lundy; [email protected]; Garth Meyer; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk Subject: BCHD Errors Ignored by Public Auditors and GFOA Date: Friday, July 17, 2026 6:05:24 PM
Attachments: image.png
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Below is a page from the Beach Cities Heath District FY 2025-26 financial summary. BCHD makes claims about providing an ROI on property tax revenues. While the claim itself is false, the math behind the claim is incorrect. Using BCHD's math, if I invested $100 and received $10 interest in a year, I would have received a 110% return on investment. Clearly that fails any Finance or Accounting class definition. It is troubling that no one in BCHD Executive Management or Board knows the formula for ROI. The CEO is an MBA. Don't MBAs learn rudimentary finance? Surely the CFO holds a finance or accounting degree.

Both BCHD's auditors and GFOA are negligent for failing to catch and correct such a high school level error in an "award winning" GFOA financial report. Further such simple errors are clearly worthy of being audit findings and worthy of much deeper records examination. This is a basic, finance failure or an outright misrepresentation of fact. Either way, the auditor failed the public.

From: Christopher Truman
To: CityClerk
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Please publish your ALPR/Flock transparency policy and data-sharing report -- Redondo Beach City Council Date: Wednesday, July 15, 2026 1:30:10 PM
[You don't often get email from [email protected]. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Dear Mayor and Members of the Redondo Beach City Council:

My name is Christopher Truman. I am a South Bay resident writing to ask you to place your city's automated license plate reader (ALPR) program -- including any Flock Safety cameras and any legacy Vigilant/Motorola system -- on a noticed City Council agenda for a public airing and vote. I am sending the same request to several neighboring councils, because these camera networks share data across city lines, and the public has never had a real chance to see or approve those arrangements.

Here is why this is timely. On July 11, 2026, the Los Angeles Police Department -- the largest force in the state -- let its Flock Safety contract expire rather than renew it, citing civil-liberties concerns.

The day before, LAPD's Inspector General told the City that every license-plate-reader contract must be approved by the governing body -- even the free ones -- and must carry enforceable terms on data security, privacy, retention, and auditing. The Inspector General's review found LAPD's cameras logged more than 210 million plate reads in two months, which produced 74 arrests. That is the real trade-off this technology offers.

And the data does not stay local. The California Attorney General sued the City of El Cajon in October 2025 over sharing Flock data with more than one hundred out-of-state agencies. Ventura County disabled national sharing in 2023, yet an audit still found out-of-state agencies searched its data more than 364,000 times in a single month, hundreds of those searches citing immigration. Flock itself has publicly acknowledged that some California networks were "inadvertently accessible" to out-of-state agencies and that, in some cases, it cannot determine the cause. Santa Cruz, South Pasadena, Mountain View, and Santa Clara County have all terminated their programs.

On July 7, 2026, Redondo Beach's own police records custodian confirmed to me in writing that the department's Flock data is shared by default with every reciprocating agency on the Flock network, and that filtering to a single city is the exception rather than the rule.

I could not locate a published transparency portal or a standalone SB 34 policy for the city. If sharing is the default, residents deserve a public page showing exactly to whom their movements are flowing, and a Council vote on whether that default is acceptable.

I am not asking you to prejudge the outcome. I am asking for transparency and a lawful process. Specifically, I respectfully request that the Council:

1. Agendize the city's ALPR/Flock program at a noticed public meeting and take a recorded vote on whether to continue, amend, or end it -- regardless of whether the contract involves any exchange of funds.

2. Publish the program's data-sharing list (every agency your city shares detections with and receives them from), the data-retention setting, and the audit/query logs, and post a conspicuous SB 34 Usage and Privacy policy as required by Civil Code section 1798.90.51(b).

3. Adopt enforceable, LAPD-grade terms: a ban on sharing ALPR data with out-of-state and federal agencies (Civ. Code section 1798.90.55(b)) and on any use for immigration enforcement (section 1798.90.55(d), AB 1814), with penalties and a designated custodian who signs off on access, plus regular public reporting and an independent audit.

4. Answer one specific question in writing: Does your police department share ALPR/Flock data with, or query ALPR/Flock data from, the Torrance Police Department or any Torrance city department -- by direct agreement, by reciprocal Flock-network default, or through a regional pool -- and if so, under what written policy?
That last question matters because these South Bay systems are interconnected. Residents of one city routinely have their movements captured and searchable by neighboring agencies with no notice and no vote. A public agenda item and a published policy are the minimum this deserves.

Thank you for your time and public service. I would appreciate written confirmation that this correspondence has been distributed to the Council and included in the public record.

Respectfully,
Christopher Truman
3225 Antonio St, Torrance, CA 90503
(310) 347-9814
[email protected]
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: CityClerk
Subject: Public Comment - Pat Healy"s Summary of Agenda for 7-21-26 and CITY"S DUMB DECISION TO WASTE $250K on a BALLOT MEASURE VOTE
Date: Monday, July 20, 2026 10:55:28 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Pat -- Thank you so much for this. It is CRAZY for Redondo to piss away $250K in November 2026 to vote on Article 27 when there's a MANDATORY March 2027 citywide election next. COMBINE THEM! Wow.... So little concern for WASTING TAXPAYER FUNDS!
Pat Healy
Alta Vista·
7 hr ago
·
PREVIEW – July 21, 2026 Council Meeting (RBCC) THE STAKES UP FRONT The Redondo Beach City Council meets Tuesday, July 21, 2026, with Closed Session at 4:00 PM and Open Session at 6:00 PM in the City Council Chamber, 415 Diamond Street. The agenda includes 18 Consent Calendar items and three major discussions: hedge enforcement, crossing guards, and a November landuse ballot measure. MEETING HIGHLIGHTS • Hedge rules: complaint standing, enforcement, privacy exceptions, and penalties. • Crossing guards: annual review of the 18 remaining staffed locations. • November ballot: a proposed $250,000 Special Municipal Election involving residential, commercial, and industrial land-use changes. • Consent Calendar: commission vacancies, parking-meter increases, housing funding, public-safety purchases, and possible bowling-and-arcade entertainment at the former Fun Factory. 4:00 PM – CLOSED SESSION • F.1 – Cornelia Blakely v. City of Redondo Beach, Case No. 24TRCV02937. • F.2 – Claudia Siracusa v. City of Redondo Beach, Case No. 26TRCV00905. • F.3 – 100 and 130 International Boardwalk: negotiations with Quality Seafood. • F.4 – Basin 3 slips: pricing negotiations with various tenants. 6:00 PM – OPEN SESSION CONSENT CALENDAR Items not pulled for discussion may be approved together. H.3 – June 16 City Council Minutes The FY 2026–27 budget passed 3–2, with Brad Waller, Zein Obagi, and Scott Behrendt voting yes and Chadwick Castle and Paige Kaluderovic voting no. The King Harbor water-polo agreement and crossing-guard annual-review referral each passed 4–1, with Behrendt opposed. Named public participants were: • Scott Crowell – traffic and pedestrian safety near Avenue F, Palos Verdes Boulevard, and the Catalina Avenue Post Office. • Ron Maroko – the LGBTQ history project and possible historic designation for Wilderness Park. • Georgette Gantner – truck enforcement on Prospect and protection of public art. • Drew Berry – opposition to the current Seaside Lagoon design and timing. • Allen Sanford – greater waterfront-business involvement. • Mark Hansen – waterfrontbusiness input, Chamber events, and Harbor infrastructure. • Joan Irvine – Wilderness Park, online child protections, cannabis revenue, and Esplanade conditions. • Darryl Boyd – North Prospect median landscaping and privacy. • Wayne Craig – City-supported events, fee increases, and gun-range spending. • Mara Santos – a larger fee waiver for the Super Bowl 10K. • Mickey Johnson – restoration of the Storefront Improvement Program. • Eugene Solomon – the vapor-wake police dog, lift-assist charges, parking permits, and outdoor-dining fees. • Sean Stringer – the King Harbor water-polo program. H.4 – Payroll and Vendor Payments The Council will consider approving $13,871,868.05 in payroll and payments. Major items include about $3.08 million for PRISM insurance programs, the $2.6 million Mehta Mechanical settlement, $422,744.87 to Dash Construction, $280,745.21 to PCI, and $220,500 to Sancon Technologies. A $1,317 Pileum Corporation invoice is labeled “FY26–27 Sentinel AI,” but the product is not identified. H.5 – Fire Software and Police AI The Council will consider a three-year PSTrax Fire Department agreement, not to exceed $21,749.11, and a Police Department Barricade AI report-writing trial and possible subscription, estimated at $6,000. H.6 – Nine Commission Vacancies The Council may declare vacant the seats of Rodney Ramcharan, Trent Turner, Chelsea Lawrence, Edward Caldwell, Jeffery Rowe, Massood K. Yousufzai, Jay Tsao, Baran T., and Kaia W. The agenda title names four commissions, while the report also includes two Youth Commission positions. H.7–H.10 – Infrastructure, Meters, and Fire • Accept $1,090,106.08 in completed Artesia Boulevard safety work. • Raise metered parking from $2.00 to $2.25 per hour effective August 20 across Riviera Village, the Esplanade, Catalina Avenue, Harbor Drive, Herondo Street, and several City lots. Staff projects $401,081 in added annual General Fund revenue. • Receive the annual Fire Department inspection report. • Purchase 20 Veterans Park walkway poles and fixtures for $93,068. H.11 – Beach Cities Transit Line 109 Manhattan Beach would contribute $29,125 toward Line 109, connecting Riviera Village with the LAX/Metro Transit Center. Annual operating cost is about $2.45 million. H.12 – Pallet Shelter Funding The Council will consider $198,126 in state housing funds for the existing Pallet Shelter. All 20 units are occupied, a waiting list exists, three residents are employed, and 78 former residents have moved into permanent housing. The action does not approve expansion. H.13–H.15 – Police Ammunition and Housing Initiative Court • $42,762 for Winchester duty and practice ammunition. • A one-year CLEAR counseling agreement, not to exceed $125,000. • A five-year Sheriff’s Department agreement for court security, funded through grants and opioidsettlement resources. H.16 – South Bay Regional Housing Trust The Council will receive and file a June 10 letter already signed by Mayor Jim Light supporting SB 799. The bill would allow preservation of existing affordable housing, private funding for moderate-income or workforce housing, and non-elected alternate board members. H.17 – Entertainment at the Former Fun Factory The Council will consider an Exclusive Negotiating Agreement with Multiverse Platforms for the former Fun Factory at 123 International Boardwalk. The proposed Level Up Bowl and Bistro may include bowling, arcade games, a bistro-style restaurant, a sports bar, and other entertainment uses. This does not approve a lease or construction; any lease must return to the Council. H.18 – Strategic Plan Update The Council will receive the second monthly update to the 2026–2029 Strategic Plan. One entry refers to a “Waterfront Market Hall” at the former Fun Factory site, while H.17 describes bowling, arcade, dining, and entertainment uses.

ITEMS FOR DISCUSSION PRIOR TO ACTION N.1 – Hedge Rules, Privacy, and Enforcement Complaints since December 2025 have prompted review of the City’s hedge rules. Current limits generally allow 42 inches in front setbacks, six feet in most side and rear setbacks, and 36 inches within intersection visibility triangles. Community Development, Police, Code Enforcement, and Fire support retaining the 42-inch front-yard limit for visibility, safety, emergency access, and fire protection. Traffic Engineering has suggested considering a 24-inch standard near driveways and intersections. Proposed revisions would define hedge-related terms and establish a bona fide complainant rule. Formal complaints would generally come from an adjoining owner or occupant, someone directly across a street or alley within 150 feet, or a person the City determines is materially affected. Anonymous and nonqualifying complaints could be recorded but would not independently trigger enforcement. Other options include a 60-day compliance period, immediate action for safety hazards, administrative review for taller hedges, and treating violations as infractions or misdemeanors. July 21 is for policy direction; a final ordinance would return later. N.2 – Crossing Guard Review Policy The Council reduced the Crossing Guard Program from 27 locations to 18 on May 5. Ten school-based locations would retain one guard each, while eight at-large locations would be reviewed annually. The proposed policy favors permanent traffic-engineering improvements when possible. The Transportation Engineer and Police Department would collect data and present recommendations to the Public Works, Safety and Sustainability Commission. If the Commission agrees with staff, changes could be implemented the following school year without another Council vote. Disagreements would return to the Council. The issue is how engineering data, school input, parent experience, near misses, and public testimony should be weighed. N.3 – $250,000 Special Land-Use Election The City is preparing a land-use measure for the November 3, 2026 County General Election. Because Redondo Beach normally holds municipal elections in odd-numbered years, this would be a Special Municipal Election. The adopted budget includes $250,000 for consolidation with the County ballot. Phase I includes “Other Residential Changes” adopted in 2024, including density reductions, removal of housing from certain properties, commercial redesignations, and changes affecting Artesia Boulevard, the Galleria, PCH, Torrance Boulevard, and coastal mixed-use areas. The statemandated Housing Element itself is described as exempt, but related residential changes are included. Phase II includes higher industrial floor-area ratios north of Manhattan Beach Boulevard; commercial FAR increases along Artesia and Aviation Boulevards; building heights up to 45 feet and three stories; rooftop dining standards; commercial-intensity changes along PCH; and school-property zoning updates. The ballot question must summarize a 46-page measure in no more than 75 words. On July 21, the Council will provide direction on the question, full measure text, ballot letters, and related materials. Councilmember Obagi’s preferred letters are ART, AR, and AAC. Formal resolutions are expected August 4, before the August 7 filing deadline. WHAT THE RECORD SHOWS The July 21 meeting combines neighborhood concerns with major financial, land-use, housing, public-safety, and waterfront decisions. The discussion items will shape hedge enforcement, crossing-guard oversight, and the language presented to voters in November. The Consent Calendar also contains several long-term policy and spending decisions that could be approved in one motion.
1 1
Mark N.

Now · Beryl Heights
Thank you so much for this. It is CRAZY for Redondo to piss away $250K in November to vote on Article 27 when there's a MANDATORY March 2027 citywide election next. COMBINE THEM! Wow.... So little concern for TAXPAYER FUNDS!
From: Mark Nelson (Home Gmail)
To: Communications; CityClerk; [email protected]; [email protected]; CityClerk; [email protected]; info
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT: Re: Gear Up to Give Back: Beach Cities Volunteer Day + Reusable Bags for Envirotokens Date: Thursday, July 16, 2026 6:46:55 PM
CAUTION: Email is from an external source; Stop, Look, and Think before opening attachments or links.

Q. How much of BCHD's $3M annual cost of Executive compensation will be paid by the $1.25M sunrise rent?
Q. Where are the benchmark studies that show 20% of revenue is a reasonable payment for executives?
Q. How many of the Silverado residents will survive the transfer trauma of eviction? Q. Why does BCHD refuse to allow 2 years of transition time to Silverado patients? Q. Why does BCHD not heed "best practice" and 25 years continued use of the taxpayer owned hospital?
On Thu, Jul 16, 2026 at 6:01 PM Beach Cities Health District <[email protected]> wrote:

July 16, 2026
Wednesday, August 12, 2026
8:30 a.m. — Check-in and instructions
9:30 – 11:30 a.m. — Volunteer in the school gardens
Beach Cities Health District (BCHD) invites you to be part of our annual Beach Cities Volunteer Day, a community-wide effort to promote health and wellness through service. Local businesses, organizations and residents will come together with one shared goal…to help build a healthier beach community.

How Can You Get Involved?
Volunteer: Support the LiveWell Kids Garden and Nutrition Programs by helping prepare elementary school gardens in Hermosa Beach, Manhattan Beach and Redondo Beach for the upcoming school year. Your efforts will directly benefit students' health, learning and access to hands-on garden and nutrition education.

Register Now to Volunteer for Beach Cities Volunteer Day 2026! Become a Sponsor: Help us grow the LiveWell Kids program. Your support funds programming in Beach Cities elementary schools and gives your organization the opportunity to learn healthy habits. For sponsorship details, please reach out to Amanda VerWys, Partnerships & Funding Innovation Specialist at [email protected].

Whether you’re passionate about giving back, meeting new people or spending time outdoors, we’d love to have you join us.

Let’s grow a healthier community together.

Questions? Contact Alejandra Sierra, Volunteer Engagement Supervisor, at (310) 374-3426 x8160.

Elevating Civility and Honoring All Voices in Our Community Recent online conversations and attacks on youth who recently testified before the Redondo Beach City Council remind us how important it is to maintain civility and focus on the issues. Attacking youth voices is not healthy and will not be tolerated. BCHD welcomes civil participation from the entire community, including youth. As a public agency, all voices need to be heard.

The young people in our allcove Beach Cities Youth Advisory Group (YAG) are active stakeholders who have shaped this project from the beginning. They have helped make programming decisions, selected providers, contributed to service development, and even influenced design elements. Their involvement ensures our programs reflect the needs of the young people who use them.

Everyone has the right to express their opinion, and our civic process is strongest when discussions remain respectful and fact‑based. BCHD is committed to open dialogue and to supporting all voices, including the youth who choose to engage in this work.

A Note from our CEO
Dear Beach Cities Resident,
When summer comes to mind, many people
associate the season with vacation, and I
hope you and yours get a chance to downshift
before the kids go back to school. Meanwhile,
at Beach Cities Health District, we are hard at
work creating a healthy beach community on
many fronts this summer.

For instance, three times a month, BCHD Care Managers Joy Schmidt, LCSW and Rudy Diaz, ASW, in partnership with the Alzheimer’s Association, host a Dementia Caregiver Support Group. Caring for a loved one with a dementia diagnosis can be overwhelming and stressful, and our support groups offer a safe space to address the challenges that come with caring for someone, find support amongst peers who share similar experiences and openly express your feelings around being a caregiver.These groups meet in Manhattan Beach on the second and fourth Tuesdays of the month, and in Redondo Beach on the third Monday. Registration is not required, and more info, including times and locations, is available on our website at bchd.org.

Read More
Shop Summer Essentials,
Give Back with Every Bag
AdventureCamp is filling up
quickly!
Lazy Acres shoppers—remember your
reusable bags this summer! From July
1, 2026 to June 30, 2027, you can
donate your 10¢ Envirotokens to
Beach Cities Health District and
support a Healthy Beach Community,
One Reusable Bag at a Time.

Shop for your summer essentials at
Lazy Acres in Hermosa Beach
(Artesia & PCH), reuse your bag, and
help fund local health and wellness
programs across the Beach Cities.

Every bag makes a difference!
Shop Lazy Acres
Five of the first eight days of July sold
out at AdventureCamp. July 20 and 21
are almost at capacity. With active
play, creative activities, new
friendships and exciting daily
adventures, every camp day offers
something new. Our affordable daily
registration also gives families the
flexibility to choose the dates that work
best for their summer schedules. Don’t
wait until your preferred date reaches
a waitlist!
Reserve Camp Days Today
Make a Difference: Become an Errand
Volunteer!
Studies show that giving back to your
community can reduce stress, increase
happiness and improve your overall health.

Whether you’re a student, retiree, working
professional, parent, or part of a community
group or organization, there are a variety of
volunteer opportunities to match your interests
and availability.

We are looking for Errand Volunteers to help
older and disabled adults in the Beach Cities community maintain their independence. Our Older Adult Programs provide services to improve the quality of life and maintain the independence of older adult residents and residents with disabilities within the Beach Cities. Picking up medications and doing grocery runs are a part of the duties.

For accommodations needed to complete the volunteer application or any immediate questions, contact our team at (310) 374-3426, ext. 8246 or [email protected].

Become an Errand Volunteer
Dear BCHD Community,
As our campus redevelopment moves forward,
there are questions we want to make sure we
answer clearly and directly. Below, you'll find
updates on the Sunrise Senior Living ground
lease, the Center for Health & Fitness
relocation, allcove Beach Cities, and our PACE
program.

Q: Why is BCHD redeveloping its Campus?
Safety is BCHD’s primary concern. The former
South Bay Hospital building does not meet current seismic standards, and experts have confirmed that the 514 Building’s 1960 non-ductile concrete construction is vulnerable in major earthquakes.

Rather than invest in costly retrofits that aren’t financially feasible, BCHD is taking a proactive approach by addressing its aging infrastructure, rising maintenance needs and costs, and seismic issues.

The 514 building will be vacated in 2027 as part of the Healthy Living Campus revitalization project.

Q: With BCHD’s plans to redevelop the old hospital building, relocating Silverado residents is inevitable, yes?
A: Correct. In either development scenario, residents of Silverado Memory Care would have been moved to a new facility.

Under the Sunrise plan, Silverado’s clients will be relocated by May 2027.

Residents wanting to return to the Prospect Ave. Campus can do so once Sunrise opens its facility, which is expected to occur in 2030.

The other proposal would have left Silverado residents in their current location for an additional 18-24 months, while construction of a new residential care facility was ongoing. After their relocation, they would have then been subject to the demolition of the old hospital building and an additional two years (or more) of construction on the Campus.

Redondo Beach City CouncilJuly 21, 2026

Redondo Beach City Council
July 21, 2026