Dining divide
Dear ER:
On behalf of my yuppie friends (I was 28 in 1982) I take mild umbrage at this sour grapes and condescending characterization: “South Bay people had neither the money nor sufficient interest in food to support a boundary pushing restaurant…” (Ultrafication Manhattan Beach: the Great dining divide,” ER January 19, 2016). We could and did eat wherever we wanted. (Okay, I had a friend drag me to Melrose for white Zin…). St Estephe was regarded as the patron saint of small portions. Maybe that’s why hungry Westsiders didn’t venture to Manhattan Beach. The CHP might find their bleached, starved bones somewhere around Venice. On the other hand, back then, Hill people were still going to the Westside. They needed someplace to eat besides the Velvet Turtle and Rive Gauche, which was still owned by Andre Martin. Even San Pedro offered alternatives. Ante’s, Cigo’s and Olsen’s (my father-in-law’s favorite) were relics but I still miss Nizetich’s and its view. San Pedro isn’t part of the South Bay, but half the South Bay still heads that way to eat. People with money didn’t get it by being frivolous with it. Real estate, cars, wine (wine before food), food; it’s all value for money. So, don’t cry for me St. Estephe.
Al Peña
Redondo Beach
Not done yet
Dear ER:
While the Gelson’s development project has been “off the radar” for awhile, I want to assure fellow Manhattan Beach residents that this is not a “done deal.” The plan has not yet been agendized for the Planning Commission. The developer has projected that “done deal” status by communicating a store opening by year end. Our group, Manhattan Beach Residents for Responsible Development (MBRRD), has spent a great deal of time and money independently evaluating the developer’s claims that there will be no significant traffic, parking, or noise impacts on our community from this very large (30,000 sq. ft.) business site. We cited numerous issues during the public comments period, including the developer’s request for a large reduction from city parking code, and have yet to see the response from the developer or the city to these comments. This proposed development is the first of what will be many Sepulveda corridor projects. If we residents don’t set the standards now, our town risks losing the remaining semblance of a lovely, beachside community, as Sepulveda Boulevard becomes an enclave of endless, soul-less retail chains. Please attend the planning commission meeting for this project in February, either the 8th or 22nd. The Downtown Residents group made a difference. We can here as well.
Eileen Neill
Manhattan Beach
Let the pups go
Dear ER:
Congratulations on your catch, that must have been exciting (“A little dab’ll do you, but a mako is better to barbecue,” ER January 19, 2016). But just so you know, the mako was just a pup, no more than a few months old. Adult mako sharks (right here in our waters) can grow to over 1,000 pounds. I know they’re great to eat (as are sand dabs), but please don’t kill the little ones.
Brian “White Boots” Hittelman
Galley cook
Redondo Beach
Brand backlash
Dear ER:
Shame on Redondo Beach Councilman Bill Brand and mayoral candidate for hijacking Saturday’s Women’s March. It’s clear he had zero interest in the reasons for the march. Rather than participate in the march, Brand positioned himself at the end of the route with campaign signs and banners. He then did what any grandstanding opportunistic politician would do, and turned the march for women’s rights, into the Bill Brand show. He snatched the megaphone and began campaigning for mayor. It is bad enough that women are fearful and feel threatened because of changes in the national political landscape. We now have to look over our shoulders for the local man-child politician that will exploit every opportunity to be seen. He is the exact reason we march — to stop men from silencing us and using us as disposable objects.
Adina Delgado
by email
Brand shows up
Dear ER:
I was at the Redondo Women’s March and heard Bill Brand state he supports the group and why the cause is so important. The crowd was cheering. All that was said after that was “by the way I’m running for mayor to keep supporting families, not developers like CenterCal who want to take away things families want in Redondo Beach.” The location of the march has been Brand’s district for the past eight years. It made sense for Brand to be in his own district, encouraging Redondo residents. Where were Mayor Steve Aspel and councilmember Emdee? Guess women’s issues don’t matter so much to them.
Lisa Youngworth
Facebook post
New thinking needed
Dear ER:
Yes, Redondo Beach Mayor Aspel is a seemingly friendly guy who used to coach soccer. He has ingratiated himself by attending community functions. But he is a career politician with two faces — the public persona, agreeable, glad-handed and the private “Let’s just get it done” temperament who curses and name calls. In contrast, his mayoral opponent Bill Brand works as a crew chief for American Airlines, actually uses, and so appreciates the beach and harbor, has worked diligently to analyze the health and safety environmental impacts of first AES and now Center Cal. Aspel overwhelmingly favors piecemeal development, defends himself with such inane comments as “We’re just people up here (on the dais), don’t be mean.” “The significant problems that we face today cannot be solved with the same level of thinking we were at when we created them,” does not penetrate his consciousness. He has contributed to so many of these problems, for example not funding the repairs at the underground parking structure. At the recent council meeting, Aspel said, “Who knows what will happen in 99 years?” AES has 52 acres for sale, something that Brand, and his supporters Jim Light, Nils Nehrenheim and Todd Lowenstein have been pushing for as the long-range thinkers. These are the prophets calling out the dangers of “no vision: Without a vision, the people perish.”
Mary Ewell
Redondo Beach
Coney Island lesson
Dear ER:
When we took a walking tour of New York’s Coney Island recently I never expected to find so many parallels to our own planned Redondo Beach waterfront development. We learned that Donald Trump’s father destroyed Coney Island’s oldest, most beloved amusement park in order to build his project. After it was ruined he assumed the crooked mayor would rezone it for him, but New York elected an honest mayor instead. Today it stands empty. Redondo Beach also faces bulldozing of our parkland, due to years of neglect by the city. But we can do much better by electing our own honest mayor, Bill Brand, to preserve our parkland, and citizen’s rights to decide the best way to renew our pier, harbor, and parkland. If we elect an honest mayor it does not have to be too late for Redondo.
Barbara and Jack Epstein
Redondo Beach
Waterfront overkill
Dear ER:
Redondo Beach needs $40 million of harbor repairs so the city proposes giving 35 acres of public land to CenterCal for 99 years for their $400 million mall. A $40 million booboo doesn’t require a $400 million bandage. That’s bringing a tank to a gunfight – it gets the job done, but at what price? I have three areas of concern. First, the mall may fail – CenterCal established a shell company to protect against bankruptcy. They refuse to agree to a minimum ownership period, tenant rent increases from $2 to $11 a square foot per month, and no existing businesses have guaranteed space. Second, if the mall is successful it’s bad for residents – it doubles traffic, chokes parking, blocks views, impedes recreation, and threatens swimmer and boater safety. Third, we can do better – today’s harbor profit is healthy at $3 million annually. City reports show smaller revitalization is financially viable, and we need an integrated plan developing the powerplant and harbor in synchrony. Revitalize not supersize. Yes on C supports community, compromise, and harbor care. Yes on C resists city corruption, CenterCal greed, and Chamber of Commerce conflicts. Yes on C – keep our pier mall-free.
Martin Holmes
Redondo Beach
Slips slipping away
Dear ER:
The Guthrie Family has owned and operated King Harbor Marina, Redondo Beach for almost 50 years. At one time, we had a long waiting list of boaters wanting slips, but unfortunately those days are over. Over the last eight years, we have experienced vacancies of between 5 percent and 10 percent. Long Beach has 25 percent vacancy, San Pedro’s new marina almost 50 percent. How will marina operators attract millennials to boating and replace the aging Baby Boomer boating community, which is getting out of sailing? New boaters are attracted to larger boats and frequent marinas with lots of landside facilities, including restaurants, theaters, bars, cafes, hotels and walking promenades. The other end of the market includes boaters with a small boat who cannot afford slip fees. They are interested in launching a boat quickly and inexpensively. These market segments will be served with a renovated King Harbor Marina and the Center Cal Waterfront Project, which includes a new City Approved Public Boat Launch. We encourage Redondo Beach voters to support the Waterfront Project. This renaissance will bring $400 million dollars in private capital to rejuvenate our aging pier and infrastructure with a very attractive Harbor Village. It is a return to the way the Redondo Beach Waterfront was when it was built over 55 years ago through private investment from entrepreneurs who had a beautiful vision. A vision, that today returns millions of dollars in revenue to the city. Please support our Waterfront and Vote “NO” on Measure C.
Maryann Guthrie, The Guthrie Family
Marina Cove Ltd.
Redondo Beach
C for collapse
Dear ER:
Last October, the City Council approved the Waterfront plan. Based on the Measure G zoning changes approved by the voters in 2010, this will finally allow us to replace the aging infrastructure and refresh recreational opportunities in the harbor area. However, we now face a new challenge with Measure C. The additional restrictive and often contradictory requirements of this proposal will make it virtually impossible for any real harbor development now or in the foreseeable future. Its provisions do not solve problems, but instead put more roadblocks in the way of anyone trying to do so. It is so prescriptive that it will not allow much beyond piecemeal efforts for harbor redevelopment. Many of its provisions contradict themselves and some potentially conflict with existing laws and may not be enforceable. It pretty much guarantees no foreseeable changes to the harbor area for decades other than absolutely required maintenance. It also pretty much guarantees the cost of hundreds of millions in required repairs, legal fees and reduced city income, which residents will need to pay for years to come. Please, join me in voting No on Measure C.
David Goodman
Chairman
Redondo Beach Planning Commission
Opposite and equal
Dear ER:
History sometimes seems to have a way of balancing the world. The Trump administration comes dancing in just as Ringling Bros. Barnum & Bailey go dancing out. Coincidence?
Gary Hartzell
Manhattan Beach
