Editor's note: Last week, we asked our readers about the plans for Live Oak Park in Manhattan Beach.
Proceed with caution
Is it possible that Manhattan Beach is unlike any of its neighbors (Redondo, Hermosa, Venice, Santa Monica) because it does not have excess (some would say adequate) parking along the coastline? One of the design alternatives offered by our strategic planners would include a 300-space (at $60,000 per space) underground parking structure at Live Oak Park. Noting that the diagonal parking on Valley would disappear, do you think that it would benefit the residents of Manhattan Beach to have a 300-space underground parking structure at the park.
I think we do need to build and appropriately finance many (not all, I take issue with some aspects of the proposed pool and Live Oak Park complexes) of the projects designed by MDA Favaro/Johnson. However, there is good reason to be cautious. If you seriously change the architecture, the form, of a city, you can expect some significant changes in the way it functions. A tailor I knew often said, “Measure seven times, cut once.” Good advice.
David Wachtfogel, Manhattan Beach
Not serving the community
I think the proposed project is absurd. The library is not overutilized from what I see. The 300 parking spaces will be mostly for nearby businesses. The current Community Center is also not overutilized.
Some business interests are being served here, not members of the community.
David Helgevold, Manhattan Beach
Editor's note: Two weeks ago, we asked our readers about placing limits on “mansionization” in Manhattan Beach.
Limits are in city's best interest
I believe that it is in the best interest of the community to place limits on land use, including limiting the size of houses that can be built. Extremely large houses on small lots decrease the entire community's enjoyment of the surrounding land by limiting natural air flow, destroying the character/charm of a neighborhood and by blocking the view.
Rebekah Sass, Redondo Beach
Initiative will negatively impact schools
People circulating the land-use initiative petition in Redondo Beach claim that this initiative will not affect the schools. This is misleading at best. In fact, the schools and our children will be negatively impacted by this initiative.
The Redondo Beach Unified School District has surplus properties that it would like to use to develop cash flow for improving our schools. Regrettably, their land value will decrease as a result of this initiative as developers and financiers will not want to invest in high-risk projects that have to go before voters.
RBUSD has a great opportunity to use its assets for desperately needed improvements to the schools. How about new science and computer labs, remodeled library and cafeteria, or improved fields and athletic facilities? Have you seen the newly remodeled student service center at Tulita Elementary School? It would be nice to see that in all of our schools, but who will pay for it? These surplus properties could reduce the need for more bond measures that add to our property taxes. However, no developer, lender or investor will have the stomach for the added risk of complying with this flawed initiative. Even if the supporters of this petition think they win with this initiative, they ignore the sad fact that the ones who really lose are our students in the schools.
Jane Diehl, Redondo Beach
Editor's note: Diehl is a member of the Redondo Beach Unified School District board.
Sign up to be heard
Redondo Beach, with 10,000-plus residents per square mile, is the nation's 43rd highest in population density for cities of more than 50,000. We need to speak up about housing density, which directly impacts our quality of life.
I ask Redondo voters to sign the ballot initiative petition requiring a direct public vote on major zoning change development projects. Go to any Redondo grocery store this weekend to sign or call (310) 543-9122 for details.
Yes, this initiative is imperfect. But the pros outweigh the cons because it doesn't take away anyone's existing property rights. The initiative only affects changes of public or commercial zoning to residential or upzoning to high densities.
While City Council crows about how few housing units built recently, ask how many they've approved by changing commercial-zoned parcels to high-density residential. At least 372 units since 2004; not counting 189 condos on Torrance Boulevard pending a more thorough EIR than what City Planning submitted last summer.
The key words are “zoning changes.” Want to develop within your current zoning? Not affected by the initiative. Want to put a Starbucks in an existing commercial area? Not affected. Why? No zoning change.
Perhaps the best reason why people should sign the initiative petition was made by an individual who stated, “Whether or not the proposed rezoning in Redondo Beach is a wise idea, when politicians and special interests try to quash an initiative that seeks to shed light on the subject, voters need to sign up.”
Don Vangeloff, Redondo Beach
Overcrowded schools
I thought a perspective from a person who attended Redondo Beach schools would be of significance. I value our Redondo schools and am currently an active member of the Redondo Beach Alumni Association.
I have children attending Parras Middle School and I couldn't be happier. However, when my children were 3, we were playing at the park when the bell rang at Alta Vista Elementary School. I watched in disbelief as children were squeezed onto the overcrowded playground. Overcrowded because there now exists trailers on the playground and many of our neighborhood public schools are being leased out for private use.
So when some well-meaning parents oppose the Redondo initiative and feel it would be awful for the schools, I am rather amused. Have they not noticed their children take recess and lunch in shifts because their child's school, which was built for 300, now has more than 500 children attending - all being taught in trailers sitting on the playground? Our population in Redondo is increasing. The School District responds to an increasing population with more trailers, not by reopening our leased-out schools.
Members of our School Board have decided to come out publicly against the Redondo Beach initiative. They want to take our schools, the true wealth of a district, and rezone them for condos. Our children deserve real classrooms and real playgrounds.
Demand a voice on the rezoning of our school property. Sign the initiative.
Gale Hazeltine, Redondo Beach
A burned-out shell
Why is Sharkeez still allowed to be a burned-out building shell that it is, representing a public safety issue as well as an eyesore? El Sombrero/Old Venice are cleaned up. Why not Sharkeez? I would think there is an ordinance that would apply.
Dave Rodriguez, Hermosa Beach
Paid signature-gatherers distort facts
Thirteen years ago, there were empty storefronts at what is now pier plaza. People avoided downtown because of the skinheads and trashy gang types. It took the bars and restaurants to invest a lot of money and take a chance to help rejuvenate this area. The cost of police enforcement in the whole city is about $700,000. The income is more than $4 million. The city needs its second biggest source of income.
Citizens of this city have a right to stop a code change but it should be done by citizens of the city and not by paid ($10 per signature) signature-gatherers who are not Hermosa Beach residents. These “hired guns” distort and misrepresent issues to do their “job.” Because of these tactics, our family, friends and employees chose to stand alongside these solicitors to make certain each potential signer heard both sides of the referendum issue. In some instances, the solicitors were overheard stating that they actually worked for Sharkeez and a signature would support Sharkeez's plans. Many misrepresentations by paid solicitors are documented on videos, “caught on tape.” The referendum was about allowing plaza businesses (not just Sharkeez) to pay “in lieu” parking fees to the city rather than construct on-site (subterranean) parking. Underground parking access for Sharkeez would delete three existing parking spaces from the public lot. Sharkeez's contribution of $28,500 per “in lieu” space goes toward building the city's future parking structure near City Hall. Otherwise the city gets nothing for the lost parking.
Leigh Lupinacci , Hermosa Beach
Owner's clarification
Just to set the record straight, I've read the letters regarding our plight and would like to clarify information that seems to be misunderstood by so many readers. Remember, the average age in Hermosa is 37 and these people enjoy going out to eat, having a drink, socializing and dancing. Sharkeez is known for great food and we do a good family business during the day and early evening before the arrival of the late-night crowd.
Remember: We had a fire. Our building burned down. We lost all income, our employees lost their jobs, and most of them live and vote in Hermosa also.
I wonder how other citizens would feel if their place of employment burned down; if their income dried up and they were unable to make their car, rent, mortgage or tuition payments?
We went through a fair process lasting almost one year. The Planning Commission and the City Council approved our project because it was the right thing to do. The new projected building will be brought up to ADA codes: i.e. elevator, wider stairways, special seating, Health Department upgrades and storage. All this required additional square footage. Without the upstairs we would not utilize our prior capacity. We are gaining 60 seats upstairs but we agreed to close at midnight like any restaurant. The downstairs will still be open but will accommodate 25 persons less than our capacity during the final two hours of operation. We, therefore, end up with less people at closing.
Ron Newman, Hermosa Beach
Strand issues
The replacement Manhattan Beach Strand project progress is certainly significant. If one walks the full length of this project, there are many reasons to be encouraged, pleased and appreciative. This upgrade seems to have recaptured, refurbished and reinvigorated the original intent, which is a good thing. Completion of this project should address the following issues.
Will the southwest bank of the walkway be filled with sand where it is obviously missing and needed? Will plants be reintroduced in those areas now devoid of most vegetation? Please remediate the failing trash and recycle platforms, breaking away from the southwest walkway curb, such as apparent at 18th and 19th streets. Will the growing cracks, spider cluster cracks, one-quarter to 1-inch potholes developing and the relief cracks at sewer covers, cable access covers, water valve covers and light access covers be properly addressed for remediation and maintenance? The heavy maintenance and street sweeper trucks will accelerate the deterioration already begun.
Encourage those wonderful people who have taken it upon themselves to plant public gardens on the southwest side of The Strand at their address, most at their own expense, by simply applauding and appreciation of their involvement, sense of community and generosity to continue.
Proceed with an oversight committee review of this wonderful project with a financial audit, observations, criticism, comments and recommendations from independent concerned members for the future.
History and the oversight reports show the Proposition “A” and “M” projects were poorly executed. Let us not let history repeat itself.
Donald A. Sellek, Manhattan Beach
Thanks from Rotary Club
Thank you to The Beach Reporter for spotlighting Manhattan Beach Rotary Club's biggest annual fund-raiser, Magic in Giving, April 12. It really began to sum up what this thoughtful group of local Rotarians devote themselves to day after day, year after year, in our city, the region, our country and the world. Our motto of “Service Above Self” permeates everything we Rotarians do. Every year, a dedicated committee and its chairperson raises Rotary's annual budget for the incoming president's year, which begins several months later. The article mentioned a few areas we devote these proceeds to. This year I was asked to chair Magic in Giving and assembled a committee I call “Team Magic.” Manhattan Beach Rotary Club and its entire membership have proudly displayed our heartfelt thanks to all who participated in this year's event in this week's issue. Special thanks to Richard Frank and Shelley Crawford. If you would indulge me though, I would like to publicly acknowledge my committee of 17. Team Magic is Jim Hunter, Harris Bass, Roger Civalleri, Mimi Haines, Larry Wolf, Larry Johnson, incoming president-elect Ian Jackson, Barbara Matles, Lindy Murrell, Dennis Morehead, Mike Doell, Steve DeBeats, John Ostin, Megan Hall, Geoff Bremer, Matt Peck and Jim Bowser. President Steve Murillo and Jackson join me in expressing our gratitude to a multitude of sponsors, advertisers, our community (including you) and Rotary Club members for making this year's event a sold-out gala at the Comedy and Magic Club in Hermosa Beach.
Jan Rhees, chair, Magic in Giving, Manhattan Beach Rotary Club for the week beginning April 19
Editor's note: Last week, we asked our readers about the plans for Live Oak Park in Manhattan Beach.
Proceed with caution
Is it possible that Manhattan Beach is unlike any of its neighbors (Redondo, Hermosa, Venice, Santa Monica) because it does not have excess (some would say adequate) parking along the coastline? One of the design alternatives offered by our strategic planners would include a 300-space (at $60,000 per space) underground parking structure at Live Oak Park. Noting that the diagonal parking on Valley would disappear, do you think that it would benefit the residents of Manhattan Beach to have a 300-space underground parking structure at the park.
I think we do need to build and appropriately finance many (not all, I take issue with some aspects of the proposed pool and Live Oak Park complexes) of the projects designed by MDA Favaro/Johnson. However, there is good reason to be cautious. If you seriously change the architecture, the form, of a city, you can expect some significant changes in the way it functions. A tailor I knew often said, “Measure seven times, cut once.” Good advice.
David Wachtfogel, Manhattan Beach
Not serving the community
I think the proposed project is absurd. The library is not overutilized from what I see. The 300 parking spaces will be mostly for nearby businesses. The current Community Center is also not overutilized.
Some business interests are being served here, not members of the community.
David Helgevold, Manhattan Beach
Editor's note: Two weeks ago, we asked our readers about placing limits on “mansionization” in Manhattan Beach.
Limits are in city's best interest I believe that it is in the best interest of the community to place limits on land use, including limiting the size of houses that can be built. Extremely large houses on small lots decrease the entire community's enjoyment of the surrounding land by limiting natural air flow, destroying the character/charm of a neighborhood and by blocking the view.
Rebekah Sass, Redondo Beach
Initiative will negatively impact schools
People circulating the land-use initiative petition in Redondo Beach claim that this initiative will not affect the schools. This is misleading at best. In fact, the schools and our children will be negatively impacted by this initiative.
The Redondo Beach Unified School District has surplus properties that it would like to use to develop cash flow for improving our schools. Regrettably, their land value will decrease as a result of this initiative as developers and financiers will not want to invest in high-risk projects that have to go before voters.
RBUSD has a great opportunity to use its assets for desperately needed improvements to the schools. How about new science and computer labs, remodeled library and cafeteria, or improved fields and athletic facilities? Have you seen the newly remodeled student service center at Tulita Elementary School? It would be nice to see that in all of our schools, but who will pay for it? These surplus properties could reduce the need for more bond measures that add to our property taxes. However, no developer, lender or investor will have the stomach for the added risk of complying with this flawed initiative. Even if the supporters of this petition think they win with this initiative, they ignore the sad fact that the ones who really lose are our students in the schools.
Jane Diehl, Redondo Beach
Editor's note: Diehl is a member of the Redondo Beach Unified School District board.
Sign up to be heard
Redondo Beach, with 10,000-plus residents per square mile, is the nation's 43rd highest in population density for cities of more than 50,000. We need to speak up about housing density, which directly impacts our quality of life.
I ask Redondo voters to sign the ballot initiative petition requiring a direct public vote on major zoning change development projects. Go to any Redondo grocery store this weekend to sign or call (310) 543-9122 for details.
Yes, this initiative is imperfect. But the pros outweigh the cons because it doesn't take away anyone's existing property rights. The initiative only affects changes of public or commercial zoning to residential or upzoning to high densities.
While City Council crows about how few housing units built recently, ask how many they've approved by changing commercial-zoned parcels to high-density residential. At least 372 units since 2004; not counting 189 condos on Torrance Boulevard pending a more thorough EIR than what City Planning submitted last summer.
The key words are “zoning changes.” Want to develop within your current zoning? Not affected by the initiative. Want to put a Starbucks in an existing commercial area? Not affected. Why? No zoning change.
Perhaps the best reason why people should sign the initiative petition was made by an individual who stated, “Whether or not the proposed rezoning in Redondo Beach is a wise idea, when politicians and special interests try to quash an initiative that seeks to shed light on the subject, voters need to sign up.”
Don Vangeloff, Redondo Beach
Overcrowded schools
I thought a perspective from a person who attended Redondo Beach schools would be of significance. I value our Redondo schools and am currently an active member of the Redondo Beach Alumni Association.
I have children attending Parras Middle School and I couldn't be happier. However, when my children were 3, we were playing at the park when the bell rang at Alta Vista Elementary School. I watched in disbelief as children were squeezed onto the overcrowded playground. Overcrowded because there now exists trailers on the playground and many of our neighborhood public schools are being leased out for private use.
So when some well-meaning parents oppose the Redondo initiative and feel it would be awful for the schools, I am rather amused. Have they not noticed their children take recess and lunch in shifts because their child's school, which was built for 300, now has more than 500 children attending - all being taught in trailers sitting on the playground? Our population in Redondo is increasing. The School District responds to an increasing population with more trailers, not by reopening our leased-out schools.
Members of our School Board have decided to come out publicly against the Redondo Beach initiative. They want to take our schools, the true wealth of a district, and rezone them for condos. Our children deserve real classrooms and real playgrounds.
Demand a voice on the rezoning of our school property. Sign the initiative.
Gale Hazeltine, Redondo Beach
A burned-out shell
Why is Sharkeez still allowed to be a burned-out building shell that it is, representing a public safety issue as well as an eyesore? El Sombrero/Old Venice are cleaned up. Why not Sharkeez? I would think there is an ordinance that would apply.
Dave Rodriguez, Hermosa Beach
Paid signature-gatherers distort facts
Thirteen years ago, there were empty storefronts at what is now pier plaza. People avoided downtown because of the skinheads and trashy gang types. It took the bars and restaurants to invest a lot of money and take a chance to help rejuvenate this area. The cost of police enforcement in the whole city is about $700,000. The income is more than $4 million. The city needs its second biggest source of income.
Citizens of this city have a right to stop a code change but it should be done by citizens of the city and not by paid ($10 per signature) signature-gatherers who are not Hermosa Beach residents. These “hired guns” distort and misrepresent issues to do their “job.” Because of these tactics, our family, friends and employees chose to stand alongside these solicitors to make certain each potential signer heard both sides of the referendum issue. In some instances, the solicitors were overheard stating that they actually worked for Sharkeez and a signature would support Sharkeez's plans. Many misrepresentations by paid solicitors are documented on videos, “caught on tape.” The referendum was about allowing plaza businesses (not just Sharkeez) to pay “in lieu” parking fees to the city rather than construct on-site (subterranean) parking. Underground parking access for Sharkeez would delete three existing parking spaces from the public lot. Sharkeez's contribution of $28,500 per “in lieu” space goes toward building the city's future parking structure near City Hall. Otherwise the city gets nothing for the lost parking.
Leigh Lupinacci , Hermosa Beach
Owner's clarification
Just to set the record straight, I've read the letters regarding our plight and would like to clarify information that seems to be misunderstood by so many readers. Remember, the average age in Hermosa is 37 and these people enjoy going out to eat, having a drink, socializing and dancing. Sharkeez is known for great food and we do a good family business during the day and early evening before the arrival of the late-night crowd.
Remember: We had a fire. Our building burned down. We lost all income, our employees lost their jobs, and most of them live and vote in Hermosa also.
I wonder how other citizens would feel if their place of employment burned down; if their income dried up and they were unable to make their car, rent, mortgage or tuition payments?
We went through a fair process lasting almost one year. The Planning Commission and the City Council approved our project because it was the right thing to do. The new projected building will be brought up to ADA codes: i.e. elevator, wider stairways, special seating, Health Department upgrades and storage. All this required additional square footage. Without the upstairs we would not utilize our prior capacity. We are gaining 60 seats upstairs but we agreed to close at midnight like any restaurant. The downstairs will still be open but will accommodate 25 persons less than our capacity during the final two hours of operation. We, therefore, end up with less people at closing.
Ron Newman, Hermosa Beach
Strand issues
The replacement Manhattan Beach Strand project progress is certainly significant. If one walks the full length of this project, there are many reasons to be encouraged, pleased and appreciative. This upgrade seems to have recaptured, refurbished and reinvigorated the original intent, which is a good thing. Completion of this project should address the following issues.
Will the southwest bank of the walkway be filled with sand where it is obviously missing and needed? Will plants be reintroduced in those areas now devoid of most vegetation? Please remediate the failing trash and recycle platforms, breaking away from the southwest walkway curb, such as apparent at 18th and 19th streets. Will the growing cracks, spider cluster cracks, one-quarter to 1-inch potholes developing and the relief cracks at sewer covers, cable access covers, water valve covers and light access covers be properly addressed for remediation and maintenance? The heavy maintenance and street sweeper trucks will accelerate the deterioration already begun.
Encourage those wonderful people who have taken it upon themselves to plant public gardens on the southwest side of The Strand at their address, most at their own expense, by simply applauding and appreciation of their involvement, sense of community and generosity to continue.
Proceed with an oversight committee review of this wonderful project with a financial audit, observations, criticism, comments and recommendations from independent concerned members for the future.
History and the oversight reports show the Proposition “A” and “M” projects were poorly executed. Let us not let history repeat itself.
Donald A. Sellek, Manhattan Beach
Thanks from Rotary Club
Thank you to The Beach Reporter for spotlighting Manhattan Beach Rotary Club's biggest annual fund-raiser, Magic in Giving, April 12. It really began to sum up what this thoughtful group of local Rotarians devote themselves to day after day, year after year, in our city, the region, our country and the world. Our motto of “Service Above Self” permeates everything we Rotarians do. Every year, a dedicated committee and its chairperson raises Rotary's annual budget for the incoming president's year, which begins several months later. The article mentioned a few areas we devote these proceeds to. This year I was asked to chair Magic in Giving and assembled a committee I call “Team Magic.” Manhattan Beach Rotary Club and its entire membership have proudly displayed our heartfelt thanks to all who participated in this year's event in this week's issue. Special thanks to Richard Frank and Shelley Crawford. If you would indulge me though, I would like to publicly acknowledge my committee of 17. Team Magic is Jim Hunter, Harris Bass, Roger Civalleri, Mimi Haines, Larry Wolf, Larry Johnson, incoming president-elect Ian Jackson, Barbara Matles, Lindy Murrell, Dennis Morehead, Mike Doell, Steve DeBeats, John Ostin, Megan Hall, Geoff Bremer, Matt Peck and Jim Bowser. President Steve Murillo and Jackson join me in expressing our gratitude to a multitude of sponsors, advertisers, our community (including you) and Rotary Club members for making this year's event a sold-out gala at the Comedy and Magic Club in Hermosa Beach.
Jan Rhees, chair, Magic in Giving, Manhattan Beach Rotary Club
Question: It appears that a referendum effort that would force the Hermosa Beach City Council to take a second look at its decision to allow Sharkeez to rebuild a much larger establishment has been successful. Approximately 1,283 Hermosa Beach registered voter signatures were needed and about 1,900 were turned in. If the requisite amount is verified and the referendum qualifies, the City Council can either rescind its decision or put the issue on the ballot and let the people decide. * Should businesses located at the pier plaza be allowed to expand?
from Archives: Letters To The Editor 
