Please do NOT consider Mole B (Moonstone Park) as an option for transitional housing for homeless.
The use of Moonstone Park is for recreational use, consistent with the CA Coastal Act. Development on Mole B would remove recreational opportunities for a non-profit outrigger organization with 300+ members (families, teens, kids), which has been a part of the community for over 40 years. The location is also a public access site of the harbor for the general public.
At Moonstone Park, there would also be conflict with the emergency helicopter landing zone location, and more policing in the area would be necessary. The congestion will strain the operations of the fire department and Harbor Patrol who are located beside the park. If King Harbor becomes the prime waterfront home for the homeless, it may be difficult to undo the surge of occupants once a permanent location is finalized. Additionally, there are only three local bus lines and one commuter service bus lines nearby – with the closest transportation access to a regional line well over ½ mile away.
The Kingsdale Site (Transit Maintenance), although a greater initial cost, could be offset by funding already secured by the city. This is one of the most central locations with much greater access to public and regional transportation and services that the homeless may require. Access to public transportation is vital to the homeless as they seek employment and maintain those jobs, as well as easier access to mental health and drug addiction resources. The site also has more square footage and there is ample room on the surface parking lots. The location is also consistent with land use and housing elements of the 2019-approved South Bay Galleria Mixed Use Development. One other consideration is using the old Nordstrom’s space; the construction would just be a tenant improvement versus construction of new infrastructure. The cost would be significantly lower and would be a great adaptive reuse project; it would also complement the future mixed use Specific Plan vision.
What is cheapest now, is not going to cost less for the City of Redondo Beach in the future.
This is NOT a good idea. What are some of the main attraction areas for Redondo and non-Redondo residents in the city? The Galleria mall, the Target, the Nordstrom Rack/Ulta/Sprouts/Islands/the Bank of America, etc. How is building a homeless shelter in this area a good idea? I think we need to find a better spot and reconsider because this area should stay as a family-friendly, clean and safe shopping area and a homeless shelter would only detract people from coming and SPENDING their MONEY here.
PLEASE VOTE NO on a Homeless shelter in Redondo Beach!
And At the Oceanfront? It can’t be at Seaside Lagoon or our Harbors Moonstone Park. The beach and Harbor & Riv Village is where ALL RB RESIDENTS GO to visit. It’s why we pay big taxes. And the Bike path is right there!
This will DRAW A VASTLY INCREASED # of homeless into our city. More homeless would come here and more will wander day & eve.
We already have a notable & obvious increase in public FECES and urine smells as it is. This is a SAFETY & HEALTH issue. Even more so now with SARS CoV 2 virus & body fluids, not just ignores mask wearing. Look at San Francisco! Even tourism has dropped as people don’t even want to go there now.
We know they need help! We are sympathetic but we also must be wise.
If we could be guaranteed there would be no other homeless attracted in and no public defacation, urination, loitering or harm, that’d be one thing. But that’s sadly impossible to promise.
My sister in law was attacked and killed by a mentally ill person. He was deemed safe; He wasn’t. It was a Very sudden and impulsive attack. He did not go to jail. He will be released from his mental hospital in a few years.
( details withheld - Mayor Brand can call or email me ).
Please, PLEASE consider your constituents safety, health and needs.
Thank you
As a 30-year resident, I've watched our homeless crisis expands, and I have personally gotten to know a few of them living out of their cars in different locations in NRB. It is apparent we need to address this issue as it has fallen in our laps. it's abhorrent of us not deal with this issue of housing the homeless. I commend the council for taking this upon themselves as they have this unique opportunity in the south bay to provide housing. And yes, of course, we are going to have those people in our community who will be aggressively against addressing this as they don't want these housless folks in the neighborhood. Yet, at what cost. We also cannot continue to criminalize the housless as has been suggested. Transitional housing needs to happen with out the criminilaztion of this population if they choose not transition.I think people need to see the problems of consumption in our society right at their door and deal with it head on and address it with a great deal of empathy. instead we have a slew of South Redondo resident up in arms on this issue because they don't their property value lowered, and that selfish. Use the money in the grants from Federal and county and do the good work already decided on, but do no criminalize the housless if they do not want the help, its rather simple. Keep up the good work on this matter council.
I strongly oppose a shelter being build at mole B. During Covid Times many Redondo Beach residents have been frequenting Moon stone park and the harbor front. Closing one of our few options to go outside and enjoy the City safely is not a good look for the council. Second, Moonstone park is located directly under the Harbor Patrol, Baywatch, Fire Station building at the end of a small peninsula. This could be a severe drain on their resources. Not only would it block traffic for Fire and call cars during emergencies, but it would be a drain on the Police and Harbor Patrol who should have their attention on the Harbor and Ocean activities. This location is also an emergency helicopter LZ for the Fire and Harbor Patrol. Last, I believe the financial reasoning to be insufficient as the city has already secured grants to pay for any of the locations.
PLEASE DO NOT CONSIDER MOLE B FOR TEMPORARY HOUSING
NO to KINGSDSALE location. Right next to residential homes east, west, north and south. Close to Target/mall which attracts non-locals who will NOT be coming to a location so close to a homeless shelter. Seriously, this location is the worst idea and the most expensive, it doesn't make logical sense.. In the midst of homes and stores that will make people re-consider coming to Redondo and rather go to Manhattan or Torrance.. Think this through but the Kingsdale location is a NO. Absolute NO.
Please do not consider Mole B (Moonstone Park) as an option for transitional housing for homeless. Other sites have permanent and better facilities. There will be conflict with the emergency helicopter landing zone and there will need to be more policing in the area. The congestion will also affect the operations of the fire department and Harbor Patrol.
The Kingsdale Site (Transit Site), although a greater initial cost, could be offset by funding already secured by the city. This is one of the most central locations with much greater access to public transportation and services that the homeless may require. Access to public transportation is vital in the movement and growth of the homeless as they seek employment and maintain those jobs. Selecting a site in the harbor will cost the city greater future financial loss due to a decrease in tourism dollars and revenue that would out-way the initial costs benefits. What is cheapest right now is not going to cost less in the future.
If Redondo Beach establishes itself as a welcoming beacon for the homeless in King Harbor, we may not be able to undo the surge of occupants that will migrate to this location. This needs to be taken very seriously from a community, economic and safety perspective.
As well as affecting our children's safety who spend significant amount of time in and around the area.
Hello,
I strongly urge the Council not to choose Moonstone Park as a site for a Temporary Homeless Shelter. The park is located in a private section of the King Harbor Marina, one in which there are not only residents living on their boats, but also where boats owners pay to own a parking pass and have a designated tag to be let in the guard gate. Even guests of boat owners must supply a reason for visitng that specific area. In other words, public access is not permitted. Homeless people present a conflict of interest, as they do not own a boat and do not own a parking pass in which to put their vehicle, if they do own one.
The owners and guests can use a key to access the private restroom and shower facilities available, yet it is simple to access these facilities without a key, and this is a breach of privacy.
In all, this idea of using Moonstone Park adds an element of insecurity to the small private marina that is already home to people that reside on their boats, as well as adding concern to the many boat owners that use their boats for recreation and depend on the marina to protect this privacy. Please deny consideration of this location. Thank you.
Please reconsider Seaside lagoon and Moonstone park as potential sites for temporary pallet homeless shelters. Please consider the impact to future tourism revenue for the City as a result of installing these homeless shelters near where visitors engage in outdoor activities. An analysis on revenue loss, safety and overall Redondo Beach brand impact of visitors future desire to return to the City should be conducted first.
I am strongly opposed to the Kingsdale location.
People who don’t live in the area believe that location is far from homes, parks, and businesses. That perception is wrong!
There are single family homes close by on Kingsdale, just north of Target. The proposed site is a short walk from my home in Franklin Park. My wife, daughter, and I along with many of my neighbors frequently walk past the location to access restaurants and shopping at the Galleria, the South Bay Marketplace, and Target. Many of my neighbors are women and children who would avoid walking past the homeless shelter due to safety concerns.
I don’t believe for a minute, that after spending 283 Thousand dollars for start-up costs, that the city council would move to relocate the pallet homes from Kingsdale to another location within the city as has been suggested. If they are put there, they will stay there.
I believe that the city should continue to look for a suitable location outside of the city. Perhaps we could convince the METRO Board to let us use some of the many unused parking spaces at the Harbor Gateway Transit Center for our pallet homes. The lot is located in our local “Service Planning Area” ( SPA 8).
The homeless problem is a regional issue. We need a regional solution to this important issue.
Hello, I urge the city council NOT to consider any use of Moonstone park for the homeless. I do not feel safe with homeless so close. The majority of the homeless are in that situation because of a long series of bad decisions and choices. Let's not reward them with ocean front housing. The homeless create a horrible mess and ruin the area they occupy. They have proven they can't take care of anything- even their own lives. Just because you are absolutely poor, does not mean you can't bend over and dispose of your trash properly. I have never scene a clean homeless housing attempt. I pay a lot in fees and taxes to have a boat, and a lot more to lease a slip just feet away. I am extremely negative towards the idea that it is even a consideration to change the park into a homeless area.
I oppose the creation of any “pallet” shelters in our city. The Administrative Report includes assumptions and overbroad conclusions. For example, Moonstone Park does not have 18,000 square feet available because this number includes the areas set up for emergency landing location for sheriff and Coast Guard helicopters and two paddleboard clubs. Is the City Council planning to put temporary housing in front of emergency services? The summary conveniently omits the necessary parking and office space needed to manage the “pallet” shelter. The summary cited one city (Bellflower) for innovative strategies. An endeavor of this magnitude deserves better research.
The City of Redondo Beach is taking on the ambitious goal of supplying housing for the homeless. However, simply supplying pallet shelter with water and power is not fair to those in need. It is a disingenuous gesture that will only divide our community and create a bigger issue than the City cannot effectively handle. If one takes a detailed look at the history and the current status of “Skid Row” in Los Angeles, it is understandable that the best intentions can cause further harm to those experiencing homelessness
I recommend the City Council create a committee with the partnership of the City Attorney to conduct a comprehensive study of the best practices of additional cities who have properly addressed homelessness
City Council Members: I am opposed to placing the pallet shelter housing units at Seaside Lagoon or Moonstone Park. We need to support our waterfront restaurants and businesses during this pandemic when all are struggling. Adding homeless shelters at the waterfront will discourage residents from dining out and supporting these small businesses. Most sites that include public open space around our City are all close to businesses, schools, residences, churches and schools..Is there one site that you all agree on?
There are also too many issues related to maintaining a pallet shelter "village". Security, sanitation, restrooms/showers and related services will be a burden to City staff. Who will manage the whole program if you do find a site?
I recommend that you partner with other South Bay cities or Los Angeles County and work on a regional program for sheltering the homeless that are now located in Redondo Beach. Using State or emergency funds for mental health and health care for local homeless would also would be a better way to use the funds and support a larger number of homeless.
Thank you for continuing to work on finding a solution to shelter the homeless during our current public health emergency.
I am writing this letter in response to the recently proposed housing sites for the homeless shelters in Redondo Beach. Upon reviewing the locations we believe that the Kingsdale Transit site would be the most practical for the future temporary housing. This location provides the closest access to various public transportation services and is located in a central area for accessing the nearby cities. Additionally, it is adjacent to a large commercial zone which decreases, at least in part, the effect on surrounding residential neighborhoods. Utilizing the area near Moonstone Park and/ or the Seaside lagoon is an unwise plan;
First, the area draws the largest percentage of the tourism for Redondo Beach. Moving a homeless shelter to this site would make the Redondo Beach waterfront less desirable to visit, negatively impacting the revenue that is generated by those tourist dollars. Business for local restaurants, shops and boutiques would decrease. Rates and occupancy at surrounding hotels would decline, having a substantial impact on the revenue and resulting Transient Occupancy Tax that the city collects. From a marketing perspective, this would diminish Redondo Beach’s reputation, affecting tourism for years to come. Social Media and review sites would explode with comments from visitors describing their experiences with the near-by homeless population. Speaking for Shade Hotel, 80-90% of our current business is from leisure travelers and locals looking for a safe ‘staycation’ and escape from their homes. These are the travelers that dine at the local restaurants and spend at the local shops.
Second, these areas are adjacent to the pier and parks where locals bring their families and children to play, relax, connect and socialize.
Third, the geographical location is the most remote with regards to accessing public transportation and surrounding areas.
While we understand the need for such housing and commend the city on its proactive approach to the issue, we strongly urge you to consider the above factors when determining the location for the homeless Shelter,
I strongly oppose the Kingsdale location. It is too close to homes, shopping, dining, parks, and schools. The Galleria area is already struggling. Less people will want to shop, dine, visit or invest in the area. This would result in less sales to businesses, lower property values, and less revenue for our declining city budget. A homeless shelter on Kingsdale would not help revitalize North Redondo Beach. Kingsdale is also too far from services feeding, homeless court and police station.
I am not against helping homeless people, but location matters and we do not want to attract more and more homeless people from other cities. The safety and quality of life of our children and families must be given priority.
At a minimum the city should seek regional locations in South Bay SPA 8 that are less impacting. A few to include in the considerations:
-Metro Harbor Gateway Transit Center (182nd St/110 fwy/Vermont). It’s a large Lot with 980 spaces of which most are empty.
-Large Corner Lot for Lease at 190th St/405 fwy/Western.
I cannot understand why the best choice for Redondo Beach would be to put a homeless encampment in the same location as our visitor and tourist-serving businesses. Why would you site this encampment at our unique feature, which is a draw for LA County residents and for visitors from further afield? These visitors utilize the businesses in and around the harbor - the rental paddleboats and SUPs, the Gondola and Duffy boat rides, the whale watching and marine naturalist cruises, the hotels and dining establishments – which all provide tax revenue to the city. It is in the city coffer’s best interests to make this area as hospitable, safe and clean as possible.
I support assisting the homeless who want help. Let’s locate the housing in an area that makes sense. To add homeless housing in a location with ready access to the drug use and sales culture that already thrives on the breakwater with zero consequences - this is a very bad idea. It would create a negative nexus that would be detrimental to the very people we are attempting to assist.
Saving money by utilizing these Harbor locations is not worth the negative effects to both the area businesses and the people who need the help.
There needs to be a plan for where these people will go after temporary shelter. I have not heard anything about a plan for that. Also I unconditionally oppose the housing being put at the lagoon.
We just heard about the measure to house the homeless at Sea Side Lagoon and Moonstone Park in Redondo Beach. As a resident and tax payer of Redondo Beach and a boat owner with a slip at Port Royal Marina, this is completely unacceptable. I guarantee you if you further ruin our home with these insane policies, we will follow the mass exodus of residents leaving the state. We will also pull our boat out of the marina and out of the state. If you continue this stupidity, you will continue to lose high dollar tax payers.
I encourage that you re think this measure.
Sincerely,
JoAnn Perritano
Curtis B. Myer
Residents, Redondo Beach, CA
thesharkbait@mac.com
310-420-8948
Please do not consider Mole B (Moonstone Park) as an option for transitional housing for homeless. Other sites have permanent and better facilities. There will be conflict with the emergency helicopter landing zone and there will need to be more policing in the area. The congestion will also affect the operations of the fire department and Harbor Patrol.
The Kingsdale Site (Transit Site), although a greater initial cost, could be offset by funding already secured by the city. This is one of the most central locations with much greater access to public transportation and services that the homeless may require. Access to public transportation is vital in the movement and growth of the homeless as they seek employment and maintain those jobs. Selecting a site in the harbor will cost the city greater future financial loss due to a decrease in tourism dollars and revenue that would out-way the initial costs benefits. What is cheapest right now is not going to cost less in the future.
If Redondo Beach establishes itself as a welcoming beacon for the homeless in King Harbor, we may not be able to undo the surge of occupants that will migrate to this location. This needs to be taken very seriously from a community, economic and safety perspective.
Please do NOT consider Mole B (Moonstone Park) as an option for transitional housing for homeless.
The use of Moonstone Park is for recreational use, consistent with the CA Coastal Act. Development on Mole B would remove recreational opportunities for a non-profit outrigger organization with 300+ members (families, teens, kids), which has been a part of the community for over 40 years. The location is also a public access site of the harbor for the general public.
At Moonstone Park, there would also be conflict with the emergency helicopter landing zone location, and more policing in the area would be necessary. The congestion will strain the operations of the fire department and Harbor Patrol who are located beside the park. If King Harbor becomes the prime waterfront home for the homeless, it may be difficult to undo the surge of occupants once a permanent location is finalized. Additionally, there are only three local bus lines and one commuter service bus lines nearby – with the closest transportation access to a regional line well over ½ mile away.
The Kingsdale Site (Transit Maintenance), although a greater initial cost, could be offset by funding already secured by the city. This is one of the most central locations with much greater access to public and regional transportation and services that the homeless may require. Access to public transportation is vital to the homeless as they seek employment and maintain those jobs, as well as easier access to mental health and drug addiction resources. The site also has more square footage and there is ample room on the surface parking lots. The location is also consistent with land use and housing elements of the 2019-approved South Bay Galleria Mixed Use Development. One other consideration is using the old Nordstrom’s space; the construction would just be a tenant improvement versus construction of new infrastructure. The cost would be significantly lower and would be a great adaptive reuse project; it would also complement the future mixed use Specific Plan vision.
What is cheapest now, is not going to cost less for the City of Redondo Beach in the future.
Thank you for your consideration.
This is NOT a good idea. What are some of the main attraction areas for Redondo and non-Redondo residents in the city? The Galleria mall, the Target, the Nordstrom Rack/Ulta/Sprouts/Islands/the Bank of America, etc. How is building a homeless shelter in this area a good idea? I think we need to find a better spot and reconsider because this area should stay as a family-friendly, clean and safe shopping area and a homeless shelter would only detract people from coming and SPENDING their MONEY here.
PLEASE VOTE NO on a Homeless shelter in Redondo Beach!
And At the Oceanfront? It can’t be at Seaside Lagoon or our Harbors Moonstone Park. The beach and Harbor & Riv Village is where ALL RB RESIDENTS GO to visit. It’s why we pay big taxes. And the Bike path is right there!
This will DRAW A VASTLY INCREASED # of homeless into our city. More homeless would come here and more will wander day & eve.
We already have a notable & obvious increase in public FECES and urine smells as it is. This is a SAFETY & HEALTH issue. Even more so now with SARS CoV 2 virus & body fluids, not just ignores mask wearing. Look at San Francisco! Even tourism has dropped as people don’t even want to go there now.
We know they need help! We are sympathetic but we also must be wise.
If we could be guaranteed there would be no other homeless attracted in and no public defacation, urination, loitering or harm, that’d be one thing. But that’s sadly impossible to promise.
My sister in law was attacked and killed by a mentally ill person. He was deemed safe; He wasn’t. It was a Very sudden and impulsive attack. He did not go to jail. He will be released from his mental hospital in a few years.
( details withheld - Mayor Brand can call or email me ).
Please, PLEASE consider your constituents safety, health and needs.
Thank you
I strongly oppose the use of Moonstone Park as a temporary transitional housing site.
As a 30-year resident, I've watched our homeless crisis expands, and I have personally gotten to know a few of them living out of their cars in different locations in NRB. It is apparent we need to address this issue as it has fallen in our laps. it's abhorrent of us not deal with this issue of housing the homeless. I commend the council for taking this upon themselves as they have this unique opportunity in the south bay to provide housing. And yes, of course, we are going to have those people in our community who will be aggressively against addressing this as they don't want these housless folks in the neighborhood. Yet, at what cost. We also cannot continue to criminalize the housless as has been suggested. Transitional housing needs to happen with out the criminilaztion of this population if they choose not transition.I think people need to see the problems of consumption in our society right at their door and deal with it head on and address it with a great deal of empathy. instead we have a slew of South Redondo resident up in arms on this issue because they don't their property value lowered, and that selfish. Use the money in the grants from Federal and county and do the good work already decided on, but do no criminalize the housless if they do not want the help, its rather simple. Keep up the good work on this matter council.
I strongly oppose a shelter being build at mole B. During Covid Times many Redondo Beach residents have been frequenting Moon stone park and the harbor front. Closing one of our few options to go outside and enjoy the City safely is not a good look for the council. Second, Moonstone park is located directly under the Harbor Patrol, Baywatch, Fire Station building at the end of a small peninsula. This could be a severe drain on their resources. Not only would it block traffic for Fire and call cars during emergencies, but it would be a drain on the Police and Harbor Patrol who should have their attention on the Harbor and Ocean activities. This location is also an emergency helicopter LZ for the Fire and Harbor Patrol. Last, I believe the financial reasoning to be insufficient as the city has already secured grants to pay for any of the locations.
PLEASE DO NOT CONSIDER MOLE B FOR TEMPORARY HOUSING
NO to KINGSDSALE location. Right next to residential homes east, west, north and south. Close to Target/mall which attracts non-locals who will NOT be coming to a location so close to a homeless shelter. Seriously, this location is the worst idea and the most expensive, it doesn't make logical sense.. In the midst of homes and stores that will make people re-consider coming to Redondo and rather go to Manhattan or Torrance.. Think this through but the Kingsdale location is a NO. Absolute NO.
Please do not consider Mole B (Moonstone Park) as an option for transitional housing for homeless. Other sites have permanent and better facilities. There will be conflict with the emergency helicopter landing zone and there will need to be more policing in the area. The congestion will also affect the operations of the fire department and Harbor Patrol.
The Kingsdale Site (Transit Site), although a greater initial cost, could be offset by funding already secured by the city. This is one of the most central locations with much greater access to public transportation and services that the homeless may require. Access to public transportation is vital in the movement and growth of the homeless as they seek employment and maintain those jobs. Selecting a site in the harbor will cost the city greater future financial loss due to a decrease in tourism dollars and revenue that would out-way the initial costs benefits. What is cheapest right now is not going to cost less in the future.
If Redondo Beach establishes itself as a welcoming beacon for the homeless in King Harbor, we may not be able to undo the surge of occupants that will migrate to this location. This needs to be taken very seriously from a community, economic and safety perspective.
As well as affecting our children's safety who spend significant amount of time in and around the area.
Hello,
I strongly urge the Council not to choose Moonstone Park as a site for a Temporary Homeless Shelter. The park is located in a private section of the King Harbor Marina, one in which there are not only residents living on their boats, but also where boats owners pay to own a parking pass and have a designated tag to be let in the guard gate. Even guests of boat owners must supply a reason for visitng that specific area. In other words, public access is not permitted. Homeless people present a conflict of interest, as they do not own a boat and do not own a parking pass in which to put their vehicle, if they do own one.
The owners and guests can use a key to access the private restroom and shower facilities available, yet it is simple to access these facilities without a key, and this is a breach of privacy.
In all, this idea of using Moonstone Park adds an element of insecurity to the small private marina that is already home to people that reside on their boats, as well as adding concern to the many boat owners that use their boats for recreation and depend on the marina to protect this privacy. Please deny consideration of this location. Thank you.
Please reconsider Seaside lagoon and Moonstone park as potential sites for temporary pallet homeless shelters. Please consider the impact to future tourism revenue for the City as a result of installing these homeless shelters near where visitors engage in outdoor activities. An analysis on revenue loss, safety and overall Redondo Beach brand impact of visitors future desire to return to the City should be conducted first.
I am strongly opposed to the Kingsdale location.
People who don’t live in the area believe that location is far from homes, parks, and businesses. That perception is wrong!
There are single family homes close by on Kingsdale, just north of Target. The proposed site is a short walk from my home in Franklin Park. My wife, daughter, and I along with many of my neighbors frequently walk past the location to access restaurants and shopping at the Galleria, the South Bay Marketplace, and Target. Many of my neighbors are women and children who would avoid walking past the homeless shelter due to safety concerns.
I don’t believe for a minute, that after spending 283 Thousand dollars for start-up costs, that the city council would move to relocate the pallet homes from Kingsdale to another location within the city as has been suggested. If they are put there, they will stay there.
I believe that the city should continue to look for a suitable location outside of the city. Perhaps we could convince the METRO Board to let us use some of the many unused parking spaces at the Harbor Gateway Transit Center for our pallet homes. The lot is located in our local “Service Planning Area” ( SPA 8).
The homeless problem is a regional issue. We need a regional solution to this important issue.
Hello, I urge the city council NOT to consider any use of Moonstone park for the homeless. I do not feel safe with homeless so close. The majority of the homeless are in that situation because of a long series of bad decisions and choices. Let's not reward them with ocean front housing. The homeless create a horrible mess and ruin the area they occupy. They have proven they can't take care of anything- even their own lives. Just because you are absolutely poor, does not mean you can't bend over and dispose of your trash properly. I have never scene a clean homeless housing attempt. I pay a lot in fees and taxes to have a boat, and a lot more to lease a slip just feet away. I am extremely negative towards the idea that it is even a consideration to change the park into a homeless area.
I oppose the creation of any “pallet” shelters in our city. The Administrative Report includes assumptions and overbroad conclusions. For example, Moonstone Park does not have 18,000 square feet available because this number includes the areas set up for emergency landing location for sheriff and Coast Guard helicopters and two paddleboard clubs. Is the City Council planning to put temporary housing in front of emergency services? The summary conveniently omits the necessary parking and office space needed to manage the “pallet” shelter. The summary cited one city (Bellflower) for innovative strategies. An endeavor of this magnitude deserves better research.
The City of Redondo Beach is taking on the ambitious goal of supplying housing for the homeless. However, simply supplying pallet shelter with water and power is not fair to those in need. It is a disingenuous gesture that will only divide our community and create a bigger issue than the City cannot effectively handle. If one takes a detailed look at the history and the current status of “Skid Row” in Los Angeles, it is understandable that the best intentions can cause further harm to those experiencing homelessness
I recommend the City Council create a committee with the partnership of the City Attorney to conduct a comprehensive study of the best practices of additional cities who have properly addressed homelessness
City Council Members: I am opposed to placing the pallet shelter housing units at Seaside Lagoon or Moonstone Park. We need to support our waterfront restaurants and businesses during this pandemic when all are struggling. Adding homeless shelters at the waterfront will discourage residents from dining out and supporting these small businesses. Most sites that include public open space around our City are all close to businesses, schools, residences, churches and schools..Is there one site that you all agree on?
There are also too many issues related to maintaining a pallet shelter "village". Security, sanitation, restrooms/showers and related services will be a burden to City staff. Who will manage the whole program if you do find a site?
I recommend that you partner with other South Bay cities or Los Angeles County and work on a regional program for sheltering the homeless that are now located in Redondo Beach. Using State or emergency funds for mental health and health care for local homeless would also would be a better way to use the funds and support a larger number of homeless.
Thank you for continuing to work on finding a solution to shelter the homeless during our current public health emergency.
Dear City Council,
I am writing this letter in response to the recently proposed housing sites for the homeless shelters in Redondo Beach. Upon reviewing the locations we believe that the Kingsdale Transit site would be the most practical for the future temporary housing. This location provides the closest access to various public transportation services and is located in a central area for accessing the nearby cities. Additionally, it is adjacent to a large commercial zone which decreases, at least in part, the effect on surrounding residential neighborhoods. Utilizing the area near Moonstone Park and/ or the Seaside lagoon is an unwise plan;
First, the area draws the largest percentage of the tourism for Redondo Beach. Moving a homeless shelter to this site would make the Redondo Beach waterfront less desirable to visit, negatively impacting the revenue that is generated by those tourist dollars. Business for local restaurants, shops and boutiques would decrease. Rates and occupancy at surrounding hotels would decline, having a substantial impact on the revenue and resulting Transient Occupancy Tax that the city collects. From a marketing perspective, this would diminish Redondo Beach’s reputation, affecting tourism for years to come. Social Media and review sites would explode with comments from visitors describing their experiences with the near-by homeless population. Speaking for Shade Hotel, 80-90% of our current business is from leisure travelers and locals looking for a safe ‘staycation’ and escape from their homes. These are the travelers that dine at the local restaurants and spend at the local shops.
Second, these areas are adjacent to the pier and parks where locals bring their families and children to play, relax, connect and socialize.
Third, the geographical location is the most remote with regards to accessing public transportation and surrounding areas.
While we understand the need for such housing and commend the city on its proactive approach to the issue, we strongly urge you to consider the above factors when determining the location for the homeless Shelter,
Thank you,
Shaunna Hatcher SVP of Operations Shade Hotel, Redondo Beach
I strongly oppose the Kingsdale location. It is too close to homes, shopping, dining, parks, and schools. The Galleria area is already struggling. Less people will want to shop, dine, visit or invest in the area. This would result in less sales to businesses, lower property values, and less revenue for our declining city budget. A homeless shelter on Kingsdale would not help revitalize North Redondo Beach. Kingsdale is also too far from services feeding, homeless court and police station.
I am not against helping homeless people, but location matters and we do not want to attract more and more homeless people from other cities. The safety and quality of life of our children and families must be given priority.
At a minimum the city should seek regional locations in South Bay SPA 8 that are less impacting. A few to include in the considerations:
-Metro Harbor Gateway Transit Center (182nd St/110 fwy/Vermont). It’s a large Lot with 980 spaces of which most are empty.
-Large Corner Lot for Lease at 190th St/405 fwy/Western.
-Abandoned Hawthorne Mall/Parking lot.
Thank you,
Lisa Garlan
I cannot understand why the best choice for Redondo Beach would be to put a homeless encampment in the same location as our visitor and tourist-serving businesses. Why would you site this encampment at our unique feature, which is a draw for LA County residents and for visitors from further afield? These visitors utilize the businesses in and around the harbor - the rental paddleboats and SUPs, the Gondola and Duffy boat rides, the whale watching and marine naturalist cruises, the hotels and dining establishments – which all provide tax revenue to the city. It is in the city coffer’s best interests to make this area as hospitable, safe and clean as possible.
I support assisting the homeless who want help. Let’s locate the housing in an area that makes sense. To add homeless housing in a location with ready access to the drug use and sales culture that already thrives on the breakwater with zero consequences - this is a very bad idea. It would create a negative nexus that would be detrimental to the very people we are attempting to assist.
Saving money by utilizing these Harbor locations is not worth the negative effects to both the area businesses and the people who need the help.
There needs to be a plan for where these people will go after temporary shelter. I have not heard anything about a plan for that. Also I unconditionally oppose the housing being put at the lagoon.
October 20, 2020
TO: The City of Redondo Beach, CA
We just heard about the measure to house the homeless at Sea Side Lagoon and Moonstone Park in Redondo Beach. As a resident and tax payer of Redondo Beach and a boat owner with a slip at Port Royal Marina, this is completely unacceptable. I guarantee you if you further ruin our home with these insane policies, we will follow the mass exodus of residents leaving the state. We will also pull our boat out of the marina and out of the state. If you continue this stupidity, you will continue to lose high dollar tax payers.
I encourage that you re think this measure.
Sincerely,
JoAnn Perritano
Curtis B. Myer
Residents, Redondo Beach, CA
thesharkbait@mac.com
310-420-8948
Please do not consider Mole B (Moonstone Park) as an option for transitional housing for homeless. Other sites have permanent and better facilities. There will be conflict with the emergency helicopter landing zone and there will need to be more policing in the area. The congestion will also affect the operations of the fire department and Harbor Patrol.
The Kingsdale Site (Transit Site), although a greater initial cost, could be offset by funding already secured by the city. This is one of the most central locations with much greater access to public transportation and services that the homeless may require. Access to public transportation is vital in the movement and growth of the homeless as they seek employment and maintain those jobs. Selecting a site in the harbor will cost the city greater future financial loss due to a decrease in tourism dollars and revenue that would out-way the initial costs benefits. What is cheapest right now is not going to cost less in the future.
If Redondo Beach establishes itself as a welcoming beacon for the homeless in King Harbor, we may not be able to undo the surge of occupants that will migrate to this location. This needs to be taken very seriously from a community, economic and safety perspective.