top of page


To proceed with the project, BCHD needs approval of a conditional use permit and design review from the City of Redondo Beach. 
BCHD has submitted a pre-application to the Redondo Beach Planning Department (2/24/22), received initial feedback from staff (4/1/22) and is expected to submit its final application in next few months.
Keep apprised of important meetings to attend. Send comments. Voice your opposition!

1 - Write to your elected officials (click for email addresses)

Send a letter with your concerns to the Redondo Beach City Council and Planning Commission, and other local elected officials.

Copy elected officials on your public comments. See Reasons to Oppose here.


2 - Send a letter to the editor to the local publications

Keep the issues with BCHD at the forefront and counter the BCHD PR spin.

*Submit by noon on Monday for the following Thursday for Easy Reader and Beach Reporter.

See previously published letters to the editor about the BCHD project here.


3 - Share posts and information with local residents, friends, and family

Many residents who are impacted are still not aware of the massive, hazardous project and misguided use of taxpayer funds and public land.

Not sure what to say?

BCHD has not addressed critical issues, but has moved forward ignoring the hazardous project impacts to residents, use of public land for a private developer's profit, financial risk with taxpayer funds, and the permanent damage to the South Bay of a massive, incompatible structure.

A simple sentence opposing the project works!

Clearly INCOMPATIBLE with City of Redondo Beach municipal code, the RCFE structure:

  • At  6.5 stories high, sited on a 30 ft. bluff, it would rise110-feet above Beryl & Flagler and towering over single family homes and one-story Vons shopping center. 

  • Extreme mass and bulk of the nearly 800,000 sq. ft.,  city block long structure is situated on the edge of a 30-foot site, obliterates open views in all directions

  • Incompatible and inconsistent with neighborhood character, design, mass, and scale 

  • Invades neighborhood privacy with 24/7 housing

  • Does not comply with Redondo Beach residential design guidelines

5 years of Hazardous Noise during construction was cited as "un-mitigatible" due to the extreme height of the structure in BCHD's self-approved Environmental Impact Report. Other Alternatives that could avoid this harm to residents were rejected.  Due to its height, length, and position on the elevated site, noise barriers can only be built to 30 ft. height. The proposed structure is nearly 3x that height.

90% of the sq. ft. of the massive Phase 1 RCFE structure would be privately owned assisted living for 80% non-residents of the Beach Cities. 


Irresponsible, unethical for a public health district to approve the nearly half-billion dollar project to a private developer. No vote of the taxpayers of the beach cities residents was ever taken or proposed for this project. The only public vote ever taken was for the original South Bay Hospital in 1957. 


Risky venture - BCHD would have little to NO control over the RCFE.

BCHD is in the process of finding a private "developer, OWNER, operator" to turn ove public land in a  long-term lease for 50+ years, with no legal partnership for the high-risk project, allowing BCHD little to no control.

See more reasons to oppose here.



BCHD Board Meeting (virtual and in person)

Wed., 4/27 at 6:30 p.m.

See Agenda and Zoom link

From the CEO Report
A few updates:
  • The private developer/owner/operator is now planned to be selected in May with an agendized approval by the Board planned in June.

  • Planning staff from City of Redondo Beach provided some initial comments on BCHD's pre-application for the conditional use permit (CUP) 

  • BCHD additional input for CUP application expected in the late May/June timeframe

  • BCHD expects feedback of its pre-application for the conditional use permit (CUP) from the Redondo Beach Planning Department early Aoril and as soon as this week.  

  • The Design Package provided to City of Redondo Beach Planning provides NO realistic visualizations of the actual  282,000 sq. ft, RCFE structure proposed to be built, which was previously requested by responsible agencies, the City of Redondo Beach and the City of Torrance during the EIR process.


BCHD Board Meeting (virtual)

Wed., 3/23 at 6:30 p.m.

See Agenda and Zoom link

From the CEO Report
A few updates:
  • The private developer is now planned to be selected in April, with an agendized approval by the Board planned in May.

  • A pre-application for the conditional use permit (CUP) went to the Redondo Beach Planning Department on 2/24/22, with feedback from the Redondo Beach Planning Department expected in early April

BCHD's virtual "CUP" Open House presentation at its virtual meeting on 3/7/22 was nothing more than a promo video with almost no visual content of what is actually being proposed to be built - a towering, now 7-story wall of privately owned assisted living along the edge of the property. Non-transparency is what we've come to expect from the district. Avoiding any real content while spending public funds on PR is what they delivered.
3/4/22  - BCHD Update

BCHD is holding three "CUP" Open House events, designed to promote their project.

You can ask questions and provide comments at the meetings.

Things are rapidly evolving and we encourage you to stay informed. 

2/24/22 - BCHD submits their Conditional Use Permit (CUP) pre-application to the City of Redondo Beach.

See transmittal document here. See preliminary drawing set here

Materials presented obscure the impact to surrounding neighborhoods and schools.


2/23/22 Board Meeting - BCHD eliminated a large portion of public input to their meetings by beginning a new policy of NOT reading of public written comments into the record. See link to read the written comments that were submitted.

BCHD Board Meeting (virtual and in-person)

Wed., 2/23 at 6:30 p.m.

See Agenda and Virtual Meeting link

Here’s a few BCHD project updates, reported in the 2/17/22 CEO Report (see the CBRE project management Status Report starting on p. 36).  


  • Proposals from commercial developers for the project were due Friday, 2/18/22.

  • The private developer is planned to be selected in March, with an approval by the Board planned in April.

  • A pre-application for the conditional use permit (CUP) is now planned to go to the Redondo Beach Planning Department on 2/25/22, officially starting the CUP process

  • BCHD will also hold three "open houses" in March to further promote their project. More info on the meetings later.


  • Mon., March 7, 6:30 p.m. (virtual)

  • Wed., March 9,  6:30 — 8:30 p.m. at the Joslyn Community Center in Manhattan Beach

  • Sat., March 12 - 10 a.m. — Noon on the BCHD Campus



Virtual BCHD Board Meeting
to Approve the HLC Project 
Wed. Oct. 27 at 6:30 p.m.

Important: The BCHD Board plans to approve project Alternative 3  at its Board meeting on Wed. Oct. 27 at 6:30 p.m. 

Join the meeting, send comments, ask questions

See the Staff Recommendations for agenda item X.B for “Approval of Alternative 3 in the Final EIR” -  BCHD's narrative for their project.

Key Points:

  • Alternative 3 is their full-scale project from the final EIR with Phases 1 and 2


  • They recommend that the Board “Direct Staff to prepare a resolution adopting CEQA Findings and a Statement of Overriding Consideration”, for “significant” impacts their FEIR considered “unavoidable”, e.g., construction noise over the FTA threshold for surrounding residents. 

  • They cite three BCHD consultant reports (presented in committee meetings in the last few days) that are interpreted to reach their own conclusions.

1. FM3 Survey - BCHD hired marketing firm FM3 to survey beach city residents on their awareness and opinion of the Healthy Living Campus.

Though BCHD claims it shows "public support" for its project, information was provided was limited. 

Out of 600 respondees (4% of the beach cities population):

  • 75% knew nothing or "very little" about the project

  • 60% knew nothing about the project

  • Only 9% knew "a lot" about the project

  • The need for Assisted Living ranked relatively LOW in value when given project attributes to rank. 

  • TOP priorities were:

    • Using recycled water for landscaping

    • Offering comprehensive, coordinated health and wellness services for seniors so they can get the care they need while staying at their homes for as long as possible instead of moving to nursing homes​

    • Offering Programs of All-Inclusive Care for the Elderly so they can get the care they need while staying at their homes instead of moving to nursing homes.

2. Seismic Report Additional Review - see video from the Properties Committee - 10/19/21 -Risk Analysis review of the Seismic report, at the Properties Committee meeting was challenged by several committee members as being biased to reach the conclusion BCHD wanted, and did not reflect what committee members had requested.

3. Cain Bros new financial projections - see video from the Finance Committee - 10/20/21

Cain Bros. now recommends a "land lease" only to avoid a large "financial risk" that would be moved over to the private developer. They also cite the "magnitude of risk for such a large project, relative to the other programs of the district and the mission of the organization."

BCHD consistently minimizes opposition to their project. Show elected officials that the unnecessary, hazardous project that will permanently change the South Bay is opposed by its citizens.

  1. The project alternatives do NOT consider many of the mitigatable impacts cited by the Responsible Agencies: the cities of Torrance and Redondo Beach, and the public including, increased setbacks, reduced height and compatibility with surrounding neighborhoods.

  2. Noise ABOVE the EIR thresholds are now NOT considered a factor in the project selection

  3. Extreme height and massing of RCFE is incompatible and a significant impact.

  4. Cost of project has inflated to $450M up 17% from the stated $374M

  5. They have already spent $8M+ of $16M in pre-development/PR public funds to move the project through.

Voice your opposition to the project.

Send public comments to: by 5:00 p.m. on Wed.,  Oct. 27, and copy or forward to elected officials.


You can speak or ask questions on any agenda item. Simply raise your hand to speak.

Not sure what to say?  See more Reasons to Oppose.


A simple statement of opposition works.





Strategic Planning Half-Day 1-5 p.m.

Friday, Oct. 15, 1-5 p.m. 


Virtual Meeting Link here.

BCHD will discuss their programs and the Alternatives Project options they have

identified to vote on at the next Board Meeting on Oct. 27.


Write to your City Council and City Officials Today!


The BCHD Board of Directors self-certified a FEIR that did not adequately address the comments of the Responsible Agencies, or the public.

Both the City of Redondo Beach and the City of Torrance cited major issues with the Draft EIR that were NOT addressed by BCHD's responses.


The City of Torrance disputed BCHD's responses in the Public Hearing on Sept. 8. Urge your City Council and officials to take action against the faulty EIR before the time alloted to challenge the EIR is up.

For the City of Torrance:

In your e-mail, you can:

  • Encourage the City to protect Torrance residents from the significant and avoidable impacts of the BCHD project 

  • Urge the City to take legal action against the EIR within the time limit.

  • Ask them to deny BCHD access to any and all Torrance property – Flagler Lane and Flagler Alley and any associated land. 


Email to: the Mayor, City Council and City Officials (copy and paste): 

Individual emails below:,,,,,,,,,,

To mail all city council members:


Here is a sample message that can be personalized.

Sample Message: 


Honorable Mayor, City Council, and City Officials,

On Sept. 8, 2021, the Beach Cities Health District approved its final environmental impact report (FEIR) for its massive HLC project. BCHD certified the FEIR, though it did not adequately respond to numerous and extensive public comments objecting to it, including those of a designated responsible agency, the City of Torrance.

Today I ask that you continue to protect Torrance residents and exercise your right as a designated Responsible Agency to take legal action against BCHD’s final EIR.

As the City of Torrance stated in its comments at the public hearing, the FEIR "did not adequately respond to City of Torrance comments related to reducing significant and avoidable impacts to Torrance areas with respect to almost every CEQA category in the EIR, by incorporating modifications that would allow for the stated project objectives to still be achieved."

As a designated responsible party, the City of Torrance has the right to file a legal action in court to require BCHD to fulfill its responsibility as the lead agency.  If BCHD's project is not challenged in court, Torrance and its citizens will be deprived of the detailed analysis the EIR was required to provide.  Without a legally sufficient EIR, the City of Torrance and its citizens will be in a tenuous situation. How will the city and its citizens know, until it is too late, the real impacts and harms ignored in the EIR?

Please take action before the notice of determination deadline prevents Torrance from protecting its rights and its citizens health and safety. 



Why Act Now?


BCHD is moving quickly to finalize their massive development project.  The first step was the long-anticipated self-certification of their Environmental Impact Report ("EIR").


During the Sept. 8 certification meeting, the City of Torrance issued a strong statement about the Final EIR: 

"responses provided did not adequately respond to City of Torrance comments related to significant and avoidable impacts to Torrance areas with respect to aesthetics/visual resources, biological resources, geology and soils, hazards and hazardous materials, land use planning, noise/vibration, transportation/traffic, air quality and greenhouse gas emissions, by incorporating modifications that would allow for the stated project objectives to still be achieved."

Per CEQA, if the responsible agency believes that the environmental analyses is incorrect or inadequate, 14 CCR Section 15096(e)(1) provides that a responsible agency may “take the issue to court within 30 days after the lead agency files a notice of determination;” or within 180 days of the commitment to go ahead or approve the project where a notice of determination is not filed.

Read the the Cities' official comments and Wood/BCHD's responses here:

City of Torrance

City of Redondo Beach




Join the BCHD Virtual Public Hearing/Board Meeting to certify the EIR 
Wed., Sept. 8 at 6:00 p.m. 
Send comments, speak at the virtual meeting


Phone Conference:Dial In: (720) 707-2699

Webinar ID: 886 9494 4132

Send Written Comments to be read or speak at meeting



Send to: and, send to your City officials


Use form:
Send by 5:00 pm on Wed. Sept. 8.


Simply raise your hand during the Zoom Meeting 

Not sure what to say?

BCHD has NOT adequately addressed  deficiencies, omissions cited or requests from the Responsible Agencies: Cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance, or the public in the Final EIR.

Here's just a few of the deficiencies and issues

the cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance requested and BCHD has failed to address:

1. RCFE structure is incompatible with city municipal codes on scale, mass, compatibility with neighborhoods.


Reduce height of RCFE structure

Their response: height of the city blocks long structure remains 103 ft. on the edge of the 30 ft. bluff. It rises 133 ft. above surrounding homes. 


Move the RCFE structure to the west to provide setbacks away from homes to the east.


2. Mitigate noise, which is over CEQA thresholds which is cited as a "Significant and Unavoidable impact" to surrounding residents and on-site tenants and the public on all sides of the property both Phase 1 and Phase 2 construction


3. Provide additional visual aids/graphics, and photosimulations for Phase 1 and Phase 2 to make determinations. Visualizations are insufficient to make 


5. Phase 2 is vague and ill-defined.  structures or plan.

  • Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) now released 

  • Responses to Comments have been posted (see file)


Next Steps

  • BCHD will select a project option to approve and will apply for a conditional use permit (CUP) to Redondo Beach Planning Department and a Design Review.

  • BCHD will apply for permits from City of Torrance.


Make sure your concerns are heard by the Cities of Redondo Beach and Torrance, and other local elected officials.

Spread the word! Join coordinated efforts to make our collective opposition known. 


bottom of page