If this plan were needed, it should be on Residential High density, not a Public zone. The BCHD boardmembers believe or are pretending to believe this proposal is allowed outright on this site, when it's not. Their plan is not for public use—it's for rich people. RCFEs (Residential Care Facility for the Elderly) are not allowed without the Planning Commission and City Council okaying a conditional use permit. This plan would threaten the health of the residents and the neighborhoods themselves. The board knows this, because they've heard hundreds of bright residents loaded with more specific data than the board itself has provided. With schools and homes in every direction, the fallout from this massive development would be traffic, destruction of property values, and loss of neighborhood character.
BCHD is supposed to use our property tax dollars to develop and operate community programs, not gamble with our money. If this project proceeds, it most likely will require a public vote based on the property use switching from public to private, under the requirements of Measure DD. And a quick read of the relevant section in the General Plan Land Use Element already shows violations. The most glaring: Is this compatible with type, character and density of adjacent uses? No, it's not. The BCHD board members appear not to know the zoning, including their real estate expert. Yes, unbelievably they have an executive director of real estate. One board member at their June meeting admitted she didn't know there might be a zoning question--this is three years into the project! Yes, Silverado is there now, but it does not mean future private facilities can be there. Go online to qcode/us, Redondo Beach, zoning, to learn about P-CF (Public-Community Facility). What used to be called Public or Institutional, is now Public-Community Facility—changed to emphasize the need for community-focused land. This is critical as it relates to this proposal. The sensible alternative to this plan is: reduce current programs and staff to operate within the means at their disposal. Health districts should reduce stress, not cause it.
BCHD Healthy Living Plan
If this plan were needed, it should be on Residential High density, not a Public zone. The BCHD boardmembers believe or are pretending to believe this proposal is allowed outright on this site, when it's not. Their plan is not for public use—it's for rich people. RCFEs (Residential Care Facility for the Elderly) are not allowed without the Planning Commission and City Council okaying a conditional use permit. This plan would threaten the health of the residents and the neighborhoods themselves. The board knows this, because they've heard hundreds of bright residents loaded with more specific data than the board itself has provided. With schools and homes in every direction, the fallout from this massive development would be traffic, destruction of property values, and loss of neighborhood character.
BCHD is supposed to use our property tax dollars to develop and operate community programs, not gamble with our money. If this project proceeds, it most likely will require a public vote based on the property use switching from public to private, under the requirements of Measure DD. And a quick read of the relevant section in the General Plan Land Use Element already shows violations. The most glaring: Is this compatible with type, character and density of adjacent uses? No, it's not. The BCHD board members appear not to know the zoning, including their real estate expert. Yes, unbelievably they have an executive director of real estate. One board member at their June meeting admitted she didn't know there might be a zoning question--this is three years into the project! Yes, Silverado is there now, but it does not mean future private facilities can be there. Go online to qcode/us, Redondo Beach, zoning, to learn about P-CF (Public-Community Facility). What used to be called Public or Institutional, is now Public-Community Facility—changed to emphasize the need for community-focused land. This is critical as it relates to this proposal. The sensible alternative to this plan is: reduce current programs and staff to operate within the means at their disposal. Health districts should reduce stress, not cause it.