I write to ask some questions: is this the best location? What about the Galleria?
Will the housing/shelter come with services? Ie case management to help people get documentation needed to head to permanent housing? Mental health care access? Self Help group access ( SHARE! In Culver City offers ZOOM meetings)?
Security and maintenance for the property?
Sanitation control? Port a potties?
What about also offering/exploring other housing options like SHARE! Collaborative Housing?
The area you propose could be used for lower income housing for long term solutions.
Respectfully,
Rita Crabtree-Kampe
Eurocrab@hotmail.com
City council, please ask yourself why NIMBYism exists. It exists because making your city a place for the homeless only degrades your city. Building housing for the homeless may look good on your resume and give you government funding but it provides no long term lasting benefits to your city’s residences. The City Council’s objective should always be to improve your city, not degrade it only because the government gives you an incentive. Why do you think those incentives exits? Because no one wants them – because they don’t make sense – because they are only band-aids and don’t look at the source of the problems. The reason NIMBYism exists is because there are no examples showing that a city like Redondo Beach is better off when it becomes more like Compton. Using Compton or Watts as an example of how you want your city to become just doesn’t make sense. Stop trying to justify this project only because you have unused CARES Act money. If you can’t find a use for the money that genuinely improves your city then don’t use the money.
As I read that Redondo Beach is interested in placing a homeless shelter at Aviation Park.
I think the alternate place could be the South Bay Galleria. As it is public knowledge the Large malls are struggling. and this mall has been struggling before Covid. In a central area that they can go to a supermarket to buy food etc.
Whereas Aviation Park is right next to where People use the track to exercise and they have events. Next to The Redondo Performing Arts center has outdoor events as well. and there is Northrup Grumman Preschool . In addition you are 2-3 blocks away from a Middle School.
Where as the South Bay Galleria, has large empty space not impeding on any activities. I also see Aviation Park is consideration for a Voters center. How can you have Homeless center there as well.
I strongly oppose creating a shelter in this area.
For many reasons... but the obvious reason being the safety of our children. Already we see an increase In homelessness In our area. Just the other day, a woman took off all her clothes on the corner of Sepulveda and Rosecrans.
This woman must have been on drugs or alcohol, and obviously not well. We do not have the infrastructure to take care of the homeless in this area.
There are other areas where there are no preschools nearby, or people exercising.
This location is used by our children frequently, practicing sports, running the track.
Please re-think the location. I am completely opposed, as we don’t have the proper resources put into place and iit is going to de-value our community.
I hear the phrase NIMBY being thrown out.... and that is absolutely correct.
There are other back yards that may benefit from this idea. But not ours!!!!
Listen to the community!!!
Thank you
Lisa Welch
Why can't we work with other cities who have better access to this type of transitional housing (such as Manhattan Beach has done) instead of having housing suggested at a sight near our local theater, park and sports track for children and adults? Not in favor of this option.
Not a RB resident, but I live in Liberty Village. I think it is a wonderful idea. Time for all of us to step up and stop this NIMBY crap. I'm a former member of the MB Homelessness task force. I applaud you for setting this example. YES
This is not the right location for this shelter. Next to the one of the area's largest employers, adjacent to Northrops Preschool, near the community park where many (outside of Covid) access the park to keep healthy which is advocated by Beach Cities Health district, too close to other schools and parks where vulnerable children are daily, adjacent to where an annual carnival visits, too close to residential and next to one of the only live performance venues we have in the south bay. This is a terrible idea. A better location in Redondo Beach would be the vacant South Bay Galleria. While I am sure there are development plans, it is a good immediate location. Having worked with this population I am not an advocate of them being housed in an active loved area of the community. Most of these individuals suffer from Mental Health Issues and Addiction issues leaving them vulnerable - but also unpredictable. I STRONGLY oppose this location. I have also written Janice Hahn regarding my thought on this. The location conflicts with too many other positive aspects of the location for the community.
I am against a housing shelter for the homeless in this area. It would have a huge negative impact on the residents and businesses in Redondo Beach and surrounding cities of Hawthorne, Manhattan Beach, Torrance, El Segundo and Lawndale. There are many families with young children that live very close and within walking proximity to the proposed shelter site.
1. Can Redondo lease (or purchase) a lot outside the city for this project and still enforce an anti-camping ordinance in compliance with Martin v. City of Boise?
2. Will there be preexisting Redondo residency requirements for those who are using this facility?
3. San Clemente (and other South OC cities) have recently addressed similar issues in a fairly comprehensive manner -- has Redondo consulted with San Clemente about their experience and potential solutions?
4. Has the city council studied the impact of this project on community quality of life and property values, and also whether it may attract more homeless to Redondo?
5. The "case studies" appear to be from a party with a potential financial interest in this transaction -- are there any independent 3rd party studies about the potential impact of this proposed project?
6. Are Hermosa, Manhattan, El Segundo, and/or Torrance also going to be involved in this effort to address South Bay homelessness, and if so, are they willing to host this project in their own city in a location that may be better suited for it?
I strongly oppose this plan as a local business owner and property owner in both Redondo and Manhattan Beach This will adversely impact nearby businesses, schools, and properties surrounding this area.
I am opposed becasue there is no number stated, there is no time limit for the homes. Historically shelters have not kept promises to the residents. Laws are not enforced and residents are not required to be clean and sober, they can come and go at all hours. Look to Venice as an example of promises not kept by the government.There are schools and residents who are more important than the homeless. Find somewhere away from residents and a sports complex and schools
I am very opposed to this idea. The proposed area belongs in South Redondo Beach, where the homeless currently are located, NOT North Redondo. This site negatively impacts residents of Manhattan Beach and Hawthorne. The proposed site is WAY too close to several schools (pre-school, elementary school and middle school) and will result in huge security concerns. I do not want to have to worry about my wife and kids being in danger from the homeless population, who will surely spread further West, closer to our schools, parks, homes and beaches. The location brings up numerous safety concerns, and the risk of trash build up and drug use nearby. Residents of this neighborhood all chose to move our families here to be safe and secure ... DO NOT take that away from us. DO NOT select this location. It is a very bad decision and will NOT go over well once more and more nearby residents catch word of this.
The proposed area has a huge impact on Manhattan Beach as well as the city of Hawthorne. As a MB homeowner this could be devastating to the beautiful neighborhood that we live in. Aviation park is home to sports teams and camps and many wonderful programs geared towards children. Having a homeless shelter right next to a park children spend their time is detrimental to the programs and creates major safety areas for children and their parents. In addition it is across the street from a preschool and nearby Polliwog park. This proposed site has a greater impact on adjacent cities than it does on the city of Redondo Beach. The shelter should be created where the homeless problem is, not bring them to a new area that will negatively impact nearby cities. We are hardworking tax paying citizens that DO NOT want to see our beautiful parks and recreation areas being destroyed by homeless shelters.
As a local resident in community and very close to the Aviation Park, I understand the need to fix the homeless problem, however adding homeless shelters to the Aviation Park brings in a community of homeless to the immediate North Redondo local area which is not there already and could endanger the children and locals who rely on the park for exercise, outdoor games and activities. Please reconsider this location. This is a beautiful park for the local community which offers an outdoor space for many activities in North Redondo including the Performing Arts Center when it opens back up. The pallet housing community would bring in a group of individuals who may have substance abuse problems or other problems that could negatively impact the children and other individuals that rely on the public park for the local area. I urge you to reconsider the location of this shelter. As those individuals are free to come and go, it brings a group of homeless not in the immediate local north redondo area to this area. Also, local businesses will not be happy which bring considerable tax revenue to the city. We are losing businesses left and right, do we really want to NG?? Please reconsider.
I note that your proposed site would impact residential neighborhoods in Manhattan Beach more directly than your own. As a MB resident whose property values and quality of life would be adversely impacted by placement of a homeless shelter in close proximity my home, I am vehemently opposed to your proposal. If you wish to construct such a facility, I suggest you be a good neighbor and place it in an area where your own community members can be the ones to absorb its effects.
Aviation Park hosts youth sports: camps, practices, and games. Don’t mix shelters with kids. Bad idea. Also, the McDonalds across the street is favorite after school stop for MBMS kids. BAD idea. And Northrop Grumman is one of the cities largest tax payers; they won’t want a shelter adjacent to One Space Park. Think about it.
Aviation Park is not only a business park but a recreation area as well. This park is heavily used by children and adults. The jungle gym area is in constant use by pre-schoolers and I see adults teaching their kids to ride bicycles in the parking lot. There is theater which requires parking there. Will the Redondo Beach Arts theater close down? What about voting? We use a room there to vote.
I foresee confrontations between the homeless and sports teams, exercisers, and parents. This is a heavily used complex. In 1982 Redondo Beach closed Aviation High to make money off of businesses which moved in. Don’t screw us again! I don’t think the businesses that you lured to the park will be too happy. The homeless tend to beg, steal and make a mess. You will have to hire security. Why not build a temporary shelter by the freeway? Aren’t there any empty buildings you can use? Please reconsider this proposal!
I write to ask some questions: is this the best location? What about the Galleria?
Will the housing/shelter come with services? Ie case management to help people get documentation needed to head to permanent housing? Mental health care access? Self Help group access ( SHARE! In Culver City offers ZOOM meetings)?
Security and maintenance for the property?
Sanitation control? Port a potties?
What about also offering/exploring other housing options like SHARE! Collaborative Housing?
The area you propose could be used for lower income housing for long term solutions.
Respectfully,
Rita Crabtree-Kampe
Eurocrab@hotmail.com
City council, please ask yourself why NIMBYism exists. It exists because making your city a place for the homeless only degrades your city. Building housing for the homeless may look good on your resume and give you government funding but it provides no long term lasting benefits to your city’s residences. The City Council’s objective should always be to improve your city, not degrade it only because the government gives you an incentive. Why do you think those incentives exits? Because no one wants them – because they don’t make sense – because they are only band-aids and don’t look at the source of the problems. The reason NIMBYism exists is because there are no examples showing that a city like Redondo Beach is better off when it becomes more like Compton. Using Compton or Watts as an example of how you want your city to become just doesn’t make sense. Stop trying to justify this project only because you have unused CARES Act money. If you can’t find a use for the money that genuinely improves your city then don’t use the money.
As I read that Redondo Beach is interested in placing a homeless shelter at Aviation Park.
I think the alternate place could be the South Bay Galleria. As it is public knowledge the Large malls are struggling. and this mall has been struggling before Covid. In a central area that they can go to a supermarket to buy food etc.
Whereas Aviation Park is right next to where People use the track to exercise and they have events. Next to The Redondo Performing Arts center has outdoor events as well. and there is Northrup Grumman Preschool . In addition you are 2-3 blocks away from a Middle School.
Where as the South Bay Galleria, has large empty space not impeding on any activities. I also see Aviation Park is consideration for a Voters center. How can you have Homeless center there as well.
Thank you , Karen Schweter
I strongly oppose creating a shelter in this area.
For many reasons... but the obvious reason being the safety of our children. Already we see an increase In homelessness In our area. Just the other day, a woman took off all her clothes on the corner of Sepulveda and Rosecrans.
This woman must have been on drugs or alcohol, and obviously not well. We do not have the infrastructure to take care of the homeless in this area.
There are other areas where there are no preschools nearby, or people exercising.
This location is used by our children frequently, practicing sports, running the track.
Please re-think the location. I am completely opposed, as we don’t have the proper resources put into place and iit is going to de-value our community.
I hear the phrase NIMBY being thrown out.... and that is absolutely correct.
There are other back yards that may benefit from this idea. But not ours!!!!
Listen to the community!!!
Thank you
Lisa Welch
Why can't we work with other cities who have better access to this type of transitional housing (such as Manhattan Beach has done) instead of having housing suggested at a sight near our local theater, park and sports track for children and adults? Not in favor of this option.
Not a RB resident, but I live in Liberty Village. I think it is a wonderful idea. Time for all of us to step up and stop this NIMBY crap. I'm a former member of the MB Homelessness task force. I applaud you for setting this example. YES
This is not the right location for this shelter. Next to the one of the area's largest employers, adjacent to Northrops Preschool, near the community park where many (outside of Covid) access the park to keep healthy which is advocated by Beach Cities Health district, too close to other schools and parks where vulnerable children are daily, adjacent to where an annual carnival visits, too close to residential and next to one of the only live performance venues we have in the south bay. This is a terrible idea. A better location in Redondo Beach would be the vacant South Bay Galleria. While I am sure there are development plans, it is a good immediate location. Having worked with this population I am not an advocate of them being housed in an active loved area of the community. Most of these individuals suffer from Mental Health Issues and Addiction issues leaving them vulnerable - but also unpredictable. I STRONGLY oppose this location. I have also written Janice Hahn regarding my thought on this. The location conflicts with too many other positive aspects of the location for the community.
I am against a housing shelter for the homeless in this area. It would have a huge negative impact on the residents and businesses in Redondo Beach and surrounding cities of Hawthorne, Manhattan Beach, Torrance, El Segundo and Lawndale. There are many families with young children that live very close and within walking proximity to the proposed shelter site.
1. Can Redondo lease (or purchase) a lot outside the city for this project and still enforce an anti-camping ordinance in compliance with Martin v. City of Boise?
2. Will there be preexisting Redondo residency requirements for those who are using this facility?
3. San Clemente (and other South OC cities) have recently addressed similar issues in a fairly comprehensive manner -- has Redondo consulted with San Clemente about their experience and potential solutions?
4. Has the city council studied the impact of this project on community quality of life and property values, and also whether it may attract more homeless to Redondo?
5. The "case studies" appear to be from a party with a potential financial interest in this transaction -- are there any independent 3rd party studies about the potential impact of this proposed project?
6. Are Hermosa, Manhattan, El Segundo, and/or Torrance also going to be involved in this effort to address South Bay homelessness, and if so, are they willing to host this project in their own city in a location that may be better suited for it?
I strongly oppose this plan as a local business owner and property owner in both Redondo and Manhattan Beach This will adversely impact nearby businesses, schools, and properties surrounding this area.
Bad Idea, i agree with many of the points raised in the opposition comments
I am opposed becasue there is no number stated, there is no time limit for the homes. Historically shelters have not kept promises to the residents. Laws are not enforced and residents are not required to be clean and sober, they can come and go at all hours. Look to Venice as an example of promises not kept by the government.There are schools and residents who are more important than the homeless. Find somewhere away from residents and a sports complex and schools
I am very opposed to this idea. The proposed area belongs in South Redondo Beach, where the homeless currently are located, NOT North Redondo. This site negatively impacts residents of Manhattan Beach and Hawthorne. The proposed site is WAY too close to several schools (pre-school, elementary school and middle school) and will result in huge security concerns. I do not want to have to worry about my wife and kids being in danger from the homeless population, who will surely spread further West, closer to our schools, parks, homes and beaches. The location brings up numerous safety concerns, and the risk of trash build up and drug use nearby. Residents of this neighborhood all chose to move our families here to be safe and secure ... DO NOT take that away from us. DO NOT select this location. It is a very bad decision and will NOT go over well once more and more nearby residents catch word of this.
No way, this is not safe for the community or children
The proposed area has a huge impact on Manhattan Beach as well as the city of Hawthorne. As a MB homeowner this could be devastating to the beautiful neighborhood that we live in. Aviation park is home to sports teams and camps and many wonderful programs geared towards children. Having a homeless shelter right next to a park children spend their time is detrimental to the programs and creates major safety areas for children and their parents. In addition it is across the street from a preschool and nearby Polliwog park. This proposed site has a greater impact on adjacent cities than it does on the city of Redondo Beach. The shelter should be created where the homeless problem is, not bring them to a new area that will negatively impact nearby cities. We are hardworking tax paying citizens that DO NOT want to see our beautiful parks and recreation areas being destroyed by homeless shelters.
As a local resident in community and very close to the Aviation Park, I understand the need to fix the homeless problem, however adding homeless shelters to the Aviation Park brings in a community of homeless to the immediate North Redondo local area which is not there already and could endanger the children and locals who rely on the park for exercise, outdoor games and activities. Please reconsider this location. This is a beautiful park for the local community which offers an outdoor space for many activities in North Redondo including the Performing Arts Center when it opens back up. The pallet housing community would bring in a group of individuals who may have substance abuse problems or other problems that could negatively impact the children and other individuals that rely on the public park for the local area. I urge you to reconsider the location of this shelter. As those individuals are free to come and go, it brings a group of homeless not in the immediate local north redondo area to this area. Also, local businesses will not be happy which bring considerable tax revenue to the city. We are losing businesses left and right, do we really want to NG?? Please reconsider.
I note that your proposed site would impact residential neighborhoods in Manhattan Beach more directly than your own. As a MB resident whose property values and quality of life would be adversely impacted by placement of a homeless shelter in close proximity my home, I am vehemently opposed to your proposal. If you wish to construct such a facility, I suggest you be a good neighbor and place it in an area where your own community members can be the ones to absorb its effects.
Aviation Park hosts youth sports: camps, practices, and games. Don’t mix shelters with kids. Bad idea. Also, the McDonalds across the street is favorite after school stop for MBMS kids. BAD idea. And Northrop Grumman is one of the cities largest tax payers; they won’t want a shelter adjacent to One Space Park. Think about it.
Aviation Park is not only a business park but a recreation area as well. This park is heavily used by children and adults. The jungle gym area is in constant use by pre-schoolers and I see adults teaching their kids to ride bicycles in the parking lot. There is theater which requires parking there. Will the Redondo Beach Arts theater close down? What about voting? We use a room there to vote.
I foresee confrontations between the homeless and sports teams, exercisers, and parents. This is a heavily used complex. In 1982 Redondo Beach closed Aviation High to make money off of businesses which moved in. Don’t screw us again! I don’t think the businesses that you lured to the park will be too happy. The homeless tend to beg, steal and make a mess. You will have to hire security. Why not build a temporary shelter by the freeway? Aren’t there any empty buildings you can use? Please reconsider this proposal!
The shelter, because this is what it is a shelter should go where the homeless are, which is the pier and the galleria