N.2. 20-1630 DISCUSSION AND POSSIBLE ACTION TO DIRECT STAFF TO EVALUATE THE SEA LAB PROPERTY AT 1021 N. HARBOR DRIVE AS A POSSIBLE ALTERNATIVE SITE FOR PALLET SHELTER TEMPORARY TRANSITIONAL HOUSING
Redendo beach should not be used for homeless shelter because it’s a tourist place. The plan can lead to many problems including sanitation and safety to the area.
Strongly oppose SeaLab location. Seems like a total quid-pro-quo from somebody currently in litigation with the City, and that has trouble written all over it.
I am very disappointed that city council members are arguing over whose district the shelter should go in and not debating which location is best for the homeless and best for the city. Please stop fighting each other over who "should" have the shelter north or south Redondo and start talking about the actual issue of which location is best suited for the homeless and best suited to keep Redondo safe and enjoyable. The Location is not a compromise to the residents or the city council members. Since all members seem to be in agreement that this program is worth trying, please discuss location pros and cons not which city council member gets the shelter in their district. City Council members John Gran and Laura Emdee I would like to hear a validate reason for why the homeless shelter will not work at the kingsdale site, other than your city residents do not want it.
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 utilizing the area 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 raise 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 far from 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 oppose pallet housing at the Sea Lab, Mole B and Seaside Lagoon locations. As a kid growing up in the south bay, I thought the Redondo Beach waterfront area was pretty seedy, to put it nicely. The Redondo waterfront has come a long way - now it is an area that attracts tourists and locals from the larger Los Angeles area and beyond, and is a major generator of economic activity. Its quite beautiful, safe, family-oriented and one of the benefits of living here in the South Bay! I can't help but feel this could be a step backward into the 1970s rather than a look forward beyond 2020 for our area. Homelessness is a regional problem with a regional solution. Placing pallet housing here just doesn't make sense.
As a board member for waterfront education I find it very disturbing that there will be homeless shelters right next to a child’s waterfront education class. Young children and homeless population who could possibly be mixed up with drugs or alcohol is not good to intermingle with children. Waterfront education has already had a priority in this spot and it’s been established for the past four or five years and it would be heartbreaking to watch an amazing organizationThat helps to Educate our future Stuards of the ocean lose its forward momentum. I urge you to reconsider.
It's a no-brainer to evaluate this no-cost option. What possible reason would there be to not even consider this site? Kingsdale is a terrible location due to its proximity to Washington Elementary, Adams Middle School and multiple nearby parks. It's also literally steps away from neighborhoods filled with families. That's not even touching upon all the businesses adjoining the area. The Sealab site is completely enclosed and surrounded by parking lots and the AES plant with no neighborhoods or schools in sight. That seems like the ideal location for the transitional housing...
I would like to know what the criteria for being housed there is. That is a very active bike path area for children and families, I would not like to consistently encounter anyone with mental issues loitering on that corner or darting our in front of bikes. I hope I don’t sound awful, and I don’t want to be NIMBY-ish... it’s just that particular corner right in the bike path that makes me think it’s not a great idea.
I support either and/or both locations. We need more solutions and care for people who are currently without a home or shelter. We need to teach our kids and our communities to not fear those that are currently without shelter and raise them to want to help those in need. Every beach city citizen should volunteer to help our houseless neighbors. Ignorng the problem will not make it magically disappear. We need to address it head on and take action to help each other.
I strongly oppose the proposed transitional housing site at the Sea Lab site. This area is too near restaurants and hotels that have already suffered enough due to Pandemic. Why on earth would anyone want to come to the beaches of RB with a homeless center near the heart of the commercial district that caters to tourists? Makes absolutely no sense at all. Many of the homeless are chronic drug abusers who support their habits by stealing from our cars and homes. Now, they get rewarded with beachfront shelter? It is wrong in every way.
Please leave the Pilot Program for the next six months at the Kingsdale location as previously approved for the following reasons:
-Multiple youth programs operate at the harbor and many participants ride their bikes to these programs
-The intersection is already extremely congested and dangerous
-That area is difficult for first responders to get to
-Revenues for the city and local businesses will be negatively impacted
-We will lose tourism to the area that generates significant income to our city
I am oppose to using the sea lab for transitional housing. This location could serve the public and future generations if it remains a place to teach the children about the ocean. There are other areas that will be more appropriate for transitional housing.
Crowne Plaza Redondo Beach opposes the Sea Lab location as a possible alternative site for Pallet Shelter Temporary Transitional Housing. Similiar to the Seaside Lagoon site, Sea Lab is still near hotels, restaurants and other businesses that will negatively impact guest experience and result in loss of revenue for businesses including the Transient Occupancy Tax for the city. We prefer the site at Kingsdale as it is more away from visitor attractions and will not have a negative impact for businesses or the city as the Sea Lab location would. Thank you.
This would significantly impact current residents and users of the bike path and other beach related areas. There has to be a more suitable solution, like the Kingsdale location
Please leave the Pilot Program for the next six months at the Kingsdale location as previously approved. That location is not adjacent the Galleria or homes, and is not visible from either.
The SeaLab site is adjacent to two large apartment complexes and is the current home to Waterfront Education, a Foundation that provides STEM and STEAM learning opportunities for youth.
As previously mentioned, a few negative TripAdvisor or Yelp reviews will kill the occupancy for the hotels and restaurants in our harbor area. As city revenues plummet from the ongoing Level 1 closure of LA County, support for businesses that generate TOT income from visitors and staycationers is crucially important.
Please start working now to grade the area behind the post office for use after the Kingsdale six months are up as the best location in South Redondo.
With the recent offer to utilize SeaLab at no-cost, it would be irresponsible for the council not to proceed with strongly considering this new site as the first to kick-off the pilot temporary shelter program. It would be completely nonsensical to claim that the Kingsdale site is more appropriate with Washington Elementary and Adams Middle Schools, along with many residential homes so close by. Therefore, I strongly urge the council to take this item back for discussion and select the SeaLab site as the first “pilot” location for the very much needed temporary shelters instead of the Kingsdale location.
With the recent offer to utilize SeaLab at no-cost, I believe this new site opportunity would be the most appropriate site for the temporary shelter program. With majority of the complaints regarding homeless activity generated from South Redondo, it would be most effective to provide temporary shelter as close to the activities of concern. Therefore, I strongly urge the council to take this item back for discussion and select the SeaLab site as the first “pilot” location for the very much needed temporary shelters instead of the Kingsdale location.
Redendo beach should not be used for homeless shelter because it’s a tourist place. The plan can lead to many problems including sanitation and safety to the area.
NO TO KINGSDALE. No one wants it at any location near them, the ideal situation is to square this. Agree with Loewenstein.
Strongly oppose SeaLab location. Seems like a total quid-pro-quo from somebody currently in litigation with the City, and that has trouble written all over it.
I am very disappointed that city council members are arguing over whose district the shelter should go in and not debating which location is best for the homeless and best for the city. Please stop fighting each other over who "should" have the shelter north or south Redondo and start talking about the actual issue of which location is best suited for the homeless and best suited to keep Redondo safe and enjoyable. The Location is not a compromise to the residents or the city council members. Since all members seem to be in agreement that this program is worth trying, please discuss location pros and cons not which city council member gets the shelter in their district. City Council members John Gran and Laura Emdee I would like to hear a validate reason for why the homeless shelter will not work at the kingsdale site, other than your city residents do not want it.
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 utilizing the area 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 raise 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 far from 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,
Melissa Alvarez, Hotel Manager - Shade Hotel, Redondo Beach
I oppose pallet housing at the Sea Lab, Mole B and Seaside Lagoon locations. As a kid growing up in the south bay, I thought the Redondo Beach waterfront area was pretty seedy, to put it nicely. The Redondo waterfront has come a long way - now it is an area that attracts tourists and locals from the larger Los Angeles area and beyond, and is a major generator of economic activity. Its quite beautiful, safe, family-oriented and one of the benefits of living here in the South Bay! I can't help but feel this could be a step backward into the 1970s rather than a look forward beyond 2020 for our area. Homelessness is a regional problem with a regional solution. Placing pallet housing here just doesn't make sense.
As a board member for waterfront education I find it very disturbing that there will be homeless shelters right next to a child’s waterfront education class. Young children and homeless population who could possibly be mixed up with drugs or alcohol is not good to intermingle with children. Waterfront education has already had a priority in this spot and it’s been established for the past four or five years and it would be heartbreaking to watch an amazing organizationThat helps to Educate our future Stuards of the ocean lose its forward momentum. I urge you to reconsider.
It's a no-brainer to evaluate this no-cost option. What possible reason would there be to not even consider this site? Kingsdale is a terrible location due to its proximity to Washington Elementary, Adams Middle School and multiple nearby parks. It's also literally steps away from neighborhoods filled with families. That's not even touching upon all the businesses adjoining the area. The Sealab site is completely enclosed and surrounded by parking lots and the AES plant with no neighborhoods or schools in sight. That seems like the ideal location for the transitional housing...
I would like to know what the criteria for being housed there is. That is a very active bike path area for children and families, I would not like to consistently encounter anyone with mental issues loitering on that corner or darting our in front of bikes. I hope I don’t sound awful, and I don’t want to be NIMBY-ish... it’s just that particular corner right in the bike path that makes me think it’s not a great idea.
I support either and/or both locations. We need more solutions and care for people who are currently without a home or shelter. We need to teach our kids and our communities to not fear those that are currently without shelter and raise them to want to help those in need. Every beach city citizen should volunteer to help our houseless neighbors. Ignorng the problem will not make it magically disappear. We need to address it head on and take action to help each other.
I strongly oppose the proposed transitional housing site at the Sea Lab site. This area is too near restaurants and hotels that have already suffered enough due to Pandemic. Why on earth would anyone want to come to the beaches of RB with a homeless center near the heart of the commercial district that caters to tourists? Makes absolutely no sense at all. Many of the homeless are chronic drug abusers who support their habits by stealing from our cars and homes. Now, they get rewarded with beachfront shelter? It is wrong in every way.
Please leave the Pilot Program for the next six months at the Kingsdale location as previously approved for the following reasons:
-Multiple youth programs operate at the harbor and many participants ride their bikes to these programs
-The intersection is already extremely congested and dangerous
-That area is difficult for first responders to get to
-Revenues for the city and local businesses will be negatively impacted
-We will lose tourism to the area that generates significant income to our city
I am oppose to using the sea lab for transitional housing. This location could serve the public and future generations if it remains a place to teach the children about the ocean. There are other areas that will be more appropriate for transitional housing.
Crowne Plaza Redondo Beach opposes the Sea Lab location as a possible alternative site for Pallet Shelter Temporary Transitional Housing. Similiar to the Seaside Lagoon site, Sea Lab is still near hotels, restaurants and other businesses that will negatively impact guest experience and result in loss of revenue for businesses including the Transient Occupancy Tax for the city. We prefer the site at Kingsdale as it is more away from visitor attractions and will not have a negative impact for businesses or the city as the Sea Lab location would. Thank you.
This would significantly impact current residents and users of the bike path and other beach related areas. There has to be a more suitable solution, like the Kingsdale location
Please leave the Pilot Program for the next six months at the Kingsdale location as previously approved. That location is not adjacent the Galleria or homes, and is not visible from either.
The SeaLab site is adjacent to two large apartment complexes and is the current home to Waterfront Education, a Foundation that provides STEM and STEAM learning opportunities for youth.
As previously mentioned, a few negative TripAdvisor or Yelp reviews will kill the occupancy for the hotels and restaurants in our harbor area. As city revenues plummet from the ongoing Level 1 closure of LA County, support for businesses that generate TOT income from visitors and staycationers is crucially important.
Please start working now to grade the area behind the post office for use after the Kingsdale six months are up as the best location in South Redondo.
With the recent offer to utilize SeaLab at no-cost, it would be irresponsible for the council not to proceed with strongly considering this new site as the first to kick-off the pilot temporary shelter program. It would be completely nonsensical to claim that the Kingsdale site is more appropriate with Washington Elementary and Adams Middle Schools, along with many residential homes so close by. Therefore, I strongly urge the council to take this item back for discussion and select the SeaLab site as the first “pilot” location for the very much needed temporary shelters instead of the Kingsdale location.
This will impact our neighborhood in a negative way. We are already dealing with a huge theft and homeless issue in South Hermosa
I think this is a great solution to the pallet housing location. I just wish it was permanent and not temporary.
With the recent offer to utilize SeaLab at no-cost, I believe this new site opportunity would be the most appropriate site for the temporary shelter program. With majority of the complaints regarding homeless activity generated from South Redondo, it would be most effective to provide temporary shelter as close to the activities of concern. Therefore, I strongly urge the council to take this item back for discussion and select the SeaLab site as the first “pilot” location for the very much needed temporary shelters instead of the Kingsdale location.