Losing team
Dear ER:
Imposing a large fine on a property owner in Hermosa Beach for using the property as a short term rental is serious (Lawsuit targets Hermosa Beach’s Short Term Vacation rental ban,” ER March 13, 2025). Hermosa did this previously, and attorney Frank Angel was successful in appealing the fines. He was successful in challenging Manhattan Beach’s similar conduct. With similar cases, and with the same lawyer representing similarly situated property owners, why would Hermosa Beach allow a hearing officer with no legal training or law license to preside over the hearing?
Steve Colin
Redondo Beach
City defense fund
Dear ER:
At its March 18 meeting, the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission bravely stood up to a developer, declined to follow staff recommendations, and continued the public hearing for 60 days, until May 20, with respect to the proposed 53-foot tall, “Builder’s Remedy,” 5-unit apartment building in Hermosa Beach (“Where goes the neighborhood,” ER March 20, 2025). The Commissioners requested staff provide additional information including whether the fire department has apparatus to battle a 50-foot high fire, a shade study, a traffic study, a rendering showing how this proposed project compared to neighboring properties, and further investigation into CEQA. Commissioner Steve Izant also requested staff consult with an experienced land use attorney as to the status of the Builder’s Remedy law across the State.
The applicant’s attorney said several times this is a “one and done,” and would not set a precedent. That is wrong. Absent a change in law, this loophole could become available again in 2029, when the Hermosa Housing Element must be recertified. I don’t know for certain, but it could open up as early as 2027 if, as stated in the Housing Element, the State finds “[as of the end of 2025] the City is not making meaningful progress in its affordable housing goals.” If this project is allowed to proceed, it may make it more difficult for the City to find a future Builder’s Remedy application as being inconsistent with the neighborhood – that train will have left the station.
The applicant’s attorney said: “This project could have been 100 feet tall.” The next one might be.
Hermosa Beach spends hundreds of thousands of dollars a year on consultants who either are not needed, or are doing work staff should be doing. Council approves spending millions on vanity projects, such as our $2.4 million solar powered restrooms, and a $2 million “demonstration project” to repave a 22 space surface parking lot. Yet the City apparently has not consulted expert, outside counsel on this extraordinary application, which could forever change our community.
The City has fewer than 60 days to figure this out. According to the 2024-2025 Midyear Budget Review presented at the March 25 City Council Meeting, the City has $553,832 in unspent funds. Please reach out to City Council Members and “encourage” them to dedicate some of these funds to hire the best land use attorney out there, and find every legal means to deny this horrific application.
To the Hermosa Beach City Council — please support your Planning Commission by providing the expert legal advice they need to consider and deny this application. We need to deny this application and put a stake in the sand for when, not if, this Builder’s Remedy loophole opens back up.
To my fellow residents – continue to Show up, Stand up and Speak up!
Nancy Schwappach
Hermosa Beach
Stand firm
Dear ER:
Thank you to the Hermosa Beach Planning Commission for listening to the overwhelming opposition to the proposed 5-story apartment complex at 3415 Palm Drive – a structure that would tower 20 feet above every other building in town. This project threatens the very character of Hermosa Beach, and residents showed up in force on March 18 to voice their concerns.
Unlike other officials who have dismissed and belittled community voices, the planning commissioners treated residents with respect. They asked sharp, insightful questions of staff, demanded additional information, and, most importantly, refused to rubber stamp this ill-conceived project. They wisely postponed a decision, choosing to carefully review all materials before making a decision that impacts everyone. That is responsible governance.
Their willingness to stand firm instead of blindly following the city staff’s recommendations sends a clear message: The community’s voice matters, and the character of our beach town is worth saving.
We urge the Planning Commission to continue to stand firm. The future of Hermosa Beach should not be dictated by unchecked development. Thank you for showing leadership when it matters most.
Elka Worner
Hermosa Beach
It’s complicated
Dear ER:
People don’t want rapid change so they block even incremental change. No new houses. Housing prices go up. So the state creates a punishment for blocking housing (builders remedy). I suspect this will not be Hermosa’s last Builder’s Remedy case unless the city changes its stance and embraces slow, incremental change so the General Plan Housing Element remains compliant. A few more people move in. It is not a disaster. The key is slow, incremental growth – not no growth. What is a disaster is when the City keeps doubling down on bad ideas, does not have a compliant Housing Element and the residents pay the price. Builder Remedy is a remedy to the builder, and a punishment to the City for breaking the law.
Jonathan David
Hermosa Beach
Malthusian housing
Dear ER:
A Hermosa Beach Builder’s Remedy lawsuit is absolutely not worth fighting. Other cities have tried and failed. Redondo is mired in litigation over a Builder’s Remedy lawsuit on the AES property. Huntington Beach and La Cañada have failed. The governor has doubled down. Just be thankful Hermosa’s Housing Element is now finally certified and a Builder’s Remedy can’t go through again. The Southern California Association of Governments (SCAG) is responsible for doling out the number of new housing units Hermosa needs. We are down for 558. Think about this: if a family was here in the 1960s, had two kids, and those kids had two kids, now grown, if everyone stayed local, that one household turned into seven. Zoning can be changed. But no one chooses change.
Elaine McIntyre Kim
Facebook Comment
Paying the price
Dear ER:
This is the backlash that results from totally unreasonable and restrictive building codes that are the result of selfish haughtiness over the years. Now we will all pay the price because we won’t have any control over what can be built and where.
Bob Atkins
Hermosa Beach
Sea Hawks flight
Dear ER:
Redondo Union High parents are upset with basketball coach Reggie Morris bringing in transfers once again. Meanwhile, the school appears more focused on the basketball team’s success than on ensuring local kids have a fair opportunity. As a result, many local Redondo students are either transferring to other schools, bypassing Redondo entirely, or leaving the program once they realize they aren’t being given the same opportunities as the incoming transfers.
JN
Redondo Beach
Elder care thanks
Dear ER:
Our family’s goal for our 88 year old mom has been for her to “age in place.” Widowed in 2018, she is comfortable living in the family our home purchased in 1969. Beach Cities Health District Care management has been instrumental in keeping my mom as independent as possible. Support and guidance through home assessments and frequent visits from a MSW Intern have been crucial. We have received recommendations and have been introduced to resources we never knew existed in the beach communities and beyond. The kindness and respect shown to my mom and the concern for her overall wellbeing is heartwarming. Thank you Beach Cities Health District Care Management Team. I appreciate everything you do for the elderly population and for the overwhelmed caregivers.
Lisa P
Manhattan Beach
Resident-only district
Dear ER:
After years of fiscal mismanagement, the Beach Cities Health District claims it is finally implementing charges for non-resident use. BCHD has been subsidizing non-residents with District taxpayer funds and continues to plan for an 80% to 95% non-resident commercial facility on District taxpayer-owned land. District residents and taxpayers need to keep the pressure on BCHD to stop giving away District resources to non-residents. At a minimum, BCHD must charge the full cost-of-service to non-residents so that District residents do not provide subsidies. A much easier solution would be to require District residency for all services.
Mark Nelson
Redondo Beach
Correction
Dear ER:
In the letter to the editor from Stephen Alexander, 2705 N. Sepulveda was listed as the former site of the Manhattan Beach Animal Hospital. Rest assured that our animal hospital is still at that location, serving clients as we have since 1991, and our lease extends, with our company’s option, until the year 2038.
Kirk Steinam, DVM
Manhattan Beach Animal Hospital
In regard to Hermosa Beach’s conversation about “Builders’ Remedy,” the very term, “Builder’s Remedy,” says it all.
The Builders have won.
The public has lost its rights.
That is the “Remedy” that developers have dreamed of.
Join
ourneighborhoodvoices.com